Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of the show.
Speaker 3: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 3: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 3: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 3: news media, and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 3: dot com. Let's move on, because there is a sheer
Speaker 3: level of stupidity that began with a doge but has
Speaker 3: now morphed into full fledge insult of people's intelligence. I
Speaker 3: think Signalgate was a major demarcation point where they were like,
Speaker 3: we're going to lie to you, and we are going
Speaker 3: to force MAGA to debase themselves to cover up somebody
Speaker 3: who's clearly leaking, somebody who ideologically and opponents are already
Speaker 3: good enough reason we shouldn't even be in the White
Speaker 3: House in the first place. And then also turn it
Speaker 3: into a thing where we're supposed to accept his explanation
Speaker 3: that this number got sucked into his phone and we're
Speaker 3: all just supposed to move past it, and that Elon's
Speaker 3: technical experts were on top of it. Then we have
Speaker 3: the formula where we take four and we multiply it
Speaker 3: by one fourth.
Speaker 1: Okay, you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: There are teachers of grade school math saying what the
Speaker 3: fuck is going on here?
Speaker 1: And we have a week of a tariffs.
Speaker 2: Three of my kids, including the eight year old, could
Speaker 2: do that.
Speaker 1: No literally, by the way.
Speaker 3: So then we have a week of tariffs, tariffs that
Speaker 3: are not negotiating. We're manufacturer crashing the stock market. There's
Speaker 3: no exclusions, and now.
Speaker 1: Tariffs are off. It's our of the deal.
Speaker 3: Except he says he did it because he got spooked.
Speaker 3: It's the same thing. And this is a transition to
Speaker 3: the cope thing where they demand that you debase yourself
Speaker 3: to the point where there's always logic. It's not stupidity
Speaker 3: that you must accept their word that you yourself can
Speaker 3: never put yourself in the mind space of Donald J.
Speaker 1: Trump.
Speaker 3: And I mean, look, I think they're losing a lot
Speaker 3: of people, first of all, and second, it's just for
Speaker 3: anyone out there, like, please, I'm pleading with you to
Speaker 3: like think for yourself.
Speaker 1: I don't know why it's so difficult.
Speaker 3: You'd be amazed if you look at comments and all
Speaker 3: these other people are anybody who is willing to call
Speaker 3: this out for what it is. They're just like, oh,
Speaker 3: you know you this was part of the strategy all along.
Speaker 3: It's like he said, it's because he got afraid. Yeah,
Speaker 3: and they're like, yeah, but it's not mutually exclusive.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 3: Trump yesterday said that he makes decisions based on he said,
Speaker 3: flexibility and his gut. And it reminded me that we've
Speaker 3: moved so far as a country that it used to
Speaker 3: be a joke.
Speaker 1: Do you remember in two.
Speaker 3: Thousand and two when Bush said I make decisions from
Speaker 3: my gut. He was ridiculed by the American people.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 3: I actually tweeted that yesterday. I tweeted the Bush quote.
Speaker 3: Nobody even got the reference. This was once this was
Speaker 3: a scandal that this guy's decisions from a gut about
Speaker 3: who we're gonna bomb. So that's the level of where
Speaker 3: we're at now, Yeah, that's the level.
Speaker 2: Indeed, indeed, it is literally so just think about this.
Speaker 2: How many people were out two days ago saying that
Speaker 2: the specific terraf regime that Trump had imposed, including the
Speaker 2: absurd four times point two five formula that has no
Speaker 2: basis than anything, that this was genius, that this was
Speaker 2: going to lead to a golden age of America, that
Speaker 2: we were going to have this manufacturing revival, that Trump
Speaker 2: was so strong because he was doing this in the face.
Speaker 4: Of market turmoil. He wasn't going to be a Panican.
Speaker 4: They were arguing in.
Speaker 2: Favor of a very specific terror regime and saying that
Speaker 2: it was brilliant and great and wonderful and going to
Speaker 2: do all sorts of great things for the country. And
Speaker 2: then on a dime, when he backs off of it,
Speaker 2: they go from what is money anyway, and who cares
Speaker 2: about the stock market? To like, oh my god, the
Speaker 2: greatest stock market gains in history.
Speaker 4: Art of the Deal. It literally is.
Speaker 2: That meme come to life where he puts the tariffs
Speaker 2: on and they say this will create jobs. And then
Speaker 2: he takes it off and they say art of the deal,
Speaker 2: and then he puts them on and they say this.
Speaker 1: Will create jobs.
Speaker 2: Literally that so our producers put together a little mashup
Speaker 2: of some of the things that Republicans have been saying,
Speaker 2: starting with Caroline Levitt, who actually does the meme herself,
Speaker 2: where they were all insisting this isn't a negotiating tool.
Speaker 2: This is what's happening. These are in place, it's bold,
Speaker 2: it's brilliant, etc. Right up to the moment that Trump
Speaker 2: decides to change, and then he's a masterful economic genius.
Speaker 4: Art of the deal. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: The President was asked to answer this yesterday. He said
Speaker 5: he's not considering an extension or delay. I spoke to
Speaker 5: him before this briefing. That was not his mind's He
Speaker 5: expects that these tariffs are going to go into effect
Speaker 5: and there will be a ninety day pause on the
Speaker 5: reciprocal tariffs as these negotiations are ongoing, and the tariff
Speaker 5: level will be brought down to a universal ten percent tariff.
Speaker 5: Many of you in the media clearly missed the art
Speaker 5: of the deal. You clearly failed to see what President
Speaker 5: Trump is doing here.
Speaker 6: Would you be open to a pause in tariffs to
Speaker 6: allow for negotiation, Well, we'll look into that.
Speaker 1: Will you do a ninety day pause in which you consider.
Speaker 7: That or built?
Speaker 8: Yeah, you know, I think that the President is going
Speaker 8: to decide what the President's going to decide.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing, this is not a negotiation.
Speaker 4: There is no postponing.
Speaker 6: They are definitely going to stay in place for days
Speaker 6: and weeks.
Speaker 1: That is sort of obvious.
Speaker 9: What I find so frustrating about the conversation around tariffs
Speaker 9: is that we all agree on the problem. We all
Speaker 9: agree that the de industrialization of America led to the
Speaker 9: downward mobility of the American working class, deaths of despair,
Speaker 9: people working multiple jobs and not being able to afford
Speaker 9: the American dream. We all agree that it is deeply
Speaker 9: unfair for the American middle class to be bearing the
Speaker 9: burden of unfair tariffs from other countries. We all agree
Speaker 9: that it is great for the.
Speaker 6: President to have leverage in order to demand reasonable things
Speaker 6: like that country stop allowing fentanyl to murder one hundred
Speaker 6: thousand Americans every year, and that Mexico do its part
Speaker 6: to police its own border. And yet when somebody has
Speaker 6: the courage to show up and stay at Wall Street,
Speaker 6: screw you.
Speaker 9: I am waging war.
Speaker 6: I'm waging class warfare on behalf of the American working class.
Speaker 6: And you elites and Wall Street, you do what you
Speaker 6: need to do because I'm not going to stop fighting
Speaker 6: for the American working class.
Speaker 2: So did the did the elites on Wall Street win?
Speaker 2: Now that he's back to the way it's Scott Besson
Speaker 2: said something, so where I can put this up on
Speaker 2: the screen D two. This quote from him had gone
Speaker 2: sort of virally. Says, for the last four decades, Wall
Speaker 2: Street has grown wealthier than ever before. But for the
Speaker 2: next four years, it's Main Street's turn. I guess it
Speaker 2: is once again Wall Street's turn.
Speaker 1: Soccer, Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 3: One of my friends trung Fawn on Twitter, he was like,
Speaker 3: it was Wall Street's turn April twenty twenty five to
Speaker 3: April twenty five. Listen, it just demands too much stupidity.
Speaker 3: If you have an ounce of self respect, you have
Speaker 3: to understand this for what it is.
Speaker 1: Put the Trump truth up there on the screen. D three.
Speaker 3: The United States has a chance to do something that
Speaker 3: should have been done decades ago.
Speaker 1: Don't be weak, don't be.
Speaker 3: Stupid, don't be a panic in a new party based
Speaker 3: on weak and stupid people. And then he can't come
Speaker 3: out two days later and he says, I'm doing this
Speaker 3: because people are afraid, and you know there's other flashing
Speaker 3: signs that anybody with a fucking brain knows is dumb.
Speaker 1: JD. He hasn't tweeted in like.
Speaker 3: Five or six days, all right, he re emerged to
Speaker 3: tweet about.
Speaker 1: I mean he's been like retweeting. Yeah, yeah, you know.
Speaker 1: Usually when they go hard in the paint.
Speaker 3: It's on something that they know is politically palatable and
Speaker 3: or good for them.
Speaker 1: Silence, all right.
Speaker 3: Same with the many of the I mean even the best,
Speaker 3: with like MAGA influencers and all these other folks. He
Speaker 3: looks so stupid. They spent an entire week justifying this.
Speaker 3: I mean, I can tell you this, you know, for me,
Speaker 3: as people know, I'm pro tariff, even a ten percent tariff.
Speaker 3: I'll give you an argument for it later if we
Speaker 3: want to talk about it in terms of if we
Speaker 3: want to talk about how it actually prevents transhipment, et cetera.
Speaker 3: But at a certain point it feels foolish to dignify
Speaker 3: it with the justification and response whenever it is so
Speaker 3: ad hoc and unrooted in any seriousness that we just
Speaker 3: have to sit here and be like, what are we doing?
Speaker 3: What are we all doing here? You know, we're just
Speaker 3: and you know, lost in the hilarity because it is funny.
Speaker 3: At some level, is people's lives, people's businesses. You know,
Speaker 3: maybe we'll ask Ryan about this, but he elevated a
Speaker 3: post yesterday, and this is an actual business who has
Speaker 3: a question here. Our customers pre ordered our product for
Speaker 3: as low as fifty nine dollars.
Speaker 1: We have a product that is ready to ship.
Speaker 3: The tariffs will now cost US one hundred and eighty
Speaker 3: nine dollars per unit. Should we Number one wait until
Speaker 3: it gets better? Number two ship now and eat the
Speaker 3: tariff costs. Three cancel the order and eat the manufacturing costs.
Speaker 1: What does he do? What? What would you do? I
Speaker 1: don't know what I would do. Maybe I would wait.
Speaker 1: Hope I can.
Speaker 3: Hope I'm in a financial position where I can wait
Speaker 3: ninety days to make sure I don't have to book
Speaker 3: any revenue. Hope I'm in Or maybe I'm in a
Speaker 3: financial position where I have to eat back of the napkin.
Speaker 3: Math one hundred and twenty dollars costs on a product
Speaker 3: where maybe my margin was ten percent, you know, to
Speaker 3: start off with or three, cancel the order and then.
Speaker 1: Eat the cost of having produced the damn thing in
Speaker 1: the first place.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 3: Take that and multiply it by I don't know, twelve
Speaker 3: percent of all US trade. The US economy's worth roughly
Speaker 3: fifteen trillion, So okay, I mean you can do math.
Speaker 3: That's over trillion dollars.
Speaker 1: It's been infected.
Speaker 4: And here's the thing.
Speaker 2: If you're Jeff Bezos, you could get an audience with
Speaker 2: the president.
Speaker 4: You can make your case.
Speaker 1: Actually, I will let me return to that, because there's
Speaker 1: a story I want to.
Speaker 2: Okay, Yeah, if you're you know, if you're Jeff Bezos,
Speaker 2: if you're the Walmart CEO, whoever that is. Now, you know,
Speaker 2: if you're one of the big guys, you can get
Speaker 2: on the phone with him.
Speaker 4: You can make your little trek tomorrow lago.
Speaker 2: You can plunk down he's you know, you can get
Speaker 2: a private audience for him for five million dollars. The
Speaker 2: price is right there, very easy to make that transaction.
Speaker 2: If you are any number of small to medium businesses
Speaker 2: across the country, you don't have that opportunity. And Trump
Speaker 2: himself has said I'm going to be open to giving
Speaker 2: some companies carve outs, which goes back to like part
Speaker 2: of maybe the whole part of what he really likes
Speaker 2: about this is he loves being in that position. He
Speaker 2: loves the CEOs calling him, flattering him and buttering him
Speaker 2: up and begging on bend Adney for their little carve
Speaker 2: out for the thing that they need for their business
Speaker 2: to survive.
Speaker 4: He loves the heads of state.
Speaker 2: Coming to call and paying homage to him, and you know,
Speaker 2: having to having to grovel for some little exception or whatever.
Speaker 2: And so you know, if you're one of the big guys,
Speaker 2: you may be able to successfully do that, but if
Speaker 2: you are the vast majority of businesses, that option is
Speaker 2: not going to be available to you. So you're just
Speaker 2: going to have to deal with whatever the hell his
Speaker 2: gut decides that day is going to be the global
Speaker 2: economic regime.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so stories, this is the problem with all this
Speaker 3: news is that I'm not actually we're not able to
Speaker 3: really dig into anything. So literally, this just happened buried
Speaker 3: in all the tariff news. If you'll remember all that
Speaker 3: talk about Nvidia H one hundred chips was highly advanced chips. Well,
Speaker 3: it turns out, and this was publishing a trade publication
Speaker 3: that the Trump administration is likely to drop the export
Speaker 3: control on Nvidia's most highly advanced chips.
Speaker 1: To China.
Speaker 3: Now, how exactly did that come up? That's a massive reversal.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, and semiconductor and chip policy. It turns out
Speaker 3: that Jensen Wang, the CEO of Nvidia, bought the one
Speaker 3: of those five million dollar things where he was wanted
Speaker 3: to go and have dinner with Trump, And in his
Speaker 3: dinner with Trump, it was like, listen, there's no reason
Speaker 3: to do this.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: Five million is nothing compared to the market cap of Nvidia,
Speaker 3: one of the most valuable companies in the entire world,
Speaker 3: and he probably just saved himself literally hundreds of billions
Speaker 3: of dollars on their bottom line over the next decade.
Speaker 3: But look, agree or disagree on the China on the
Speaker 3: chip thing. I happen to think there's no reason at
Speaker 3: all that we should be exporting them. Maybe you're in support.
Speaker 3: Do you think that's the process which we should go
Speaker 3: about exactly. It's it's ridiculous. And that is the ultimate
Speaker 3: issue with all of this, you know, and even even
Speaker 3: his treasury and his Commerce secretary, they had some lines
Speaker 3: which theoretically I would even be in agreement with. They're like,
Speaker 3: no exceptions and no exclusions.
Speaker 1: Why is that good?
Speaker 3: No lobbying that means that no, you know, special cases,
Speaker 3: winners and losers at least theoretically will.
Speaker 1: Apply to everybody.
Speaker 2: Yep.
Speaker 3: But now Trump actually just yesterday said that maybe we
Speaker 3: will have exclusions because why because of stuff like this?
Speaker 1: And you know, I mean just again, at a.
Speaker 3: Basic level, this Art of the Deal and all of
Speaker 3: a sudden sense, it's like, I just don't know what
Speaker 3: he needs to do to push some of these folks
Speaker 3: into reality. I there's the mindlessness and the team instinct
Speaker 3: on all of this. It's like, what what does he
Speaker 3: need to do, like literally make you poor? Even at
Speaker 3: that point, I'm not so sure. I honestly I'm not sure.
Speaker 3: I don't think it would do anything.
Speaker 2: Favrou Actually at a to read, he said, art of
Speaker 2: the Deal. Number one, impose massive tariffs on nearly every
Speaker 2: country that crash the markets, create the conditions for global
Speaker 2: economic collapse. Number two, make zero deals with zero countries.
Speaker 2: Number three pause tariff's Number four to clare victory.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 3: Also not to me mean how many people who are
Speaker 3: posting art of the Deal have negotiated like their W
Speaker 3: two income by like five percent.
Speaker 1: It's like, what do you know about art of the deals? Oh?
Speaker 1: You got your realtor to put in a counteroffer. It's like,
Speaker 1: what the fuck do you know about negotiation?
Speaker 3: No again, listen, I mean, or you want to take
Speaker 3: it from a business owner who somebody who actually respect
Speaker 3: We've negotiated deals with some of the biggest companies in
Speaker 3: the world. Okay, maybe you should listen to me by
Speaker 3: that logic, but just.
Speaker 2: The bottom Let look, I could respect someone more. I
Speaker 2: actually I don't know if you have. I haven't seen
Speaker 2: a single person who was previously like, these tariffs are amazing.
Speaker 2: This is brilliant, delivering for the working classes, telling Wall's
Speaker 2: dream of the defending the tariff regime as it was,
Speaker 2: and saying this is glorious for our future. I have
Speaker 2: not seen one of those people be disappointed that those
Speaker 2: tariffs are no longer.
Speaker 1: Please point not one.
Speaker 4: So I could actually respect.
Speaker 2: Sort of someone who at least had a consistent position
Speaker 2: of like, ah, man, I really wish they would have
Speaker 2: kept those fifty percent tariffs on the SOTHO that would
Speaker 2: have That was great when that was in place, and
Speaker 2: I'm sad to see that go. I don't see a
Speaker 2: sing not one. I have not seen one person say that. Instead,
Speaker 2: what I see is art of the deal. Like I
Speaker 2: was two days ago. I was in favor of the
Speaker 2: crazy formula and the penguins getting tariffs, and I.
Speaker 4: Was justifying it all. And who even needs the iPad?
Speaker 4: You just want that? What is money? Like we all
Speaker 4: need to pair back.
Speaker 2: And then the stock market jumps and he makes this
Speaker 2: announcement and oh he's so brilliant, he's a genius, this
Speaker 2: is amazing, etc. Like you should just not You just
Speaker 2: can't take these people seriously. Just don't take them seriously
Speaker 2: because they will debase themselves every single time. And if
Speaker 2: he does something different next week, they'll justify that. And
Speaker 2: it doesn't matter what it is, does not matter the.
Speaker 4: Details of it.
Speaker 2: They will work backwards from whatever it is that Donald
Speaker 2: Trump is doing to their conclusions.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's absolutely correct. Let's go ahead and get to
Speaker 3: Ryan Peterson. He is the CEO of Flexport. He's the
Speaker 3: one who really broke the news about that one point
Speaker 3: five million dollar port call stuff that's about to go
Speaker 3: into play. He is also such an excellent guest for
Speaker 3: years now, who is somebody who has broke down all
Speaker 3: of the supply chain problems with the ports? Remember when
Speaker 3: what was the Suez Canal was all blocked up like
Speaker 3: he is a go to source, an odd guest.
Speaker 1: He's an odd lots guest.
Speaker 3: And the thing is about Ryan is he has such
Speaker 3: intricate data because he helps all of these global shipping
Speaker 3: customers that he actually can tell you about the real
Speaker 3: time impact that he is seeing. We are going to
Speaker 3: get into the shipbuilding problems and stuff that we've seen,
Speaker 3: and how somebody who actually has to grapple with this stuff,
Speaker 3: like for real, moving trillions of dollars of goods all
Speaker 3: across the world, what this means for them. So let's
Speaker 3: go ahead and get to him. Joining us now is
Speaker 3: Ryan Peterson. He's the CEO of Flexport, as I said,
Speaker 3: an absolute go to resource of mind for anything concerning
Speaker 3: global shipping. He really set DC ablaze after he realized
Speaker 3: and noticed what it's not some sort of terraff regime
Speaker 3: that is coming in for fine or for customs duties
Speaker 3: at ports. Let's go and put this up there on
Speaker 3: the screen because I want him to break it down
Speaker 3: for all of us, he says. On April seventeenth, the
Speaker 3: US Trade Representative's Office is expected to impose fees of
Speaker 3: up to one point five million per port call for
Speaker 3: ships made in China and for five hundred thousand to
Speaker 3: one million dollars if the ocean carrier owns a single
Speaker 3: ship made in China or even has one on order
Speaker 3: from a Chinese shipyard. So Ryan, can you break down
Speaker 3: just how extraordinary of an imposition that would be and
Speaker 3: what some of the numbers behind these global shipping companies
Speaker 3: are with respect to Chinese made ships.
Speaker 8: Yeah, and to be close, it's a fee on the
Speaker 8: owner of the ship or the operator of the ship rather,
Speaker 8: but obviously they got to pass it through to the
Speaker 8: people shipping cargo on that boat.
Speaker 7: And yeah, well, first off, there's not a single.
Speaker 8: Ocean carrier that comes to the United States that I
Speaker 8: can find that doesn't meet these qualifications that doesn't have
Speaker 8: at least one ship made in China or one on
Speaker 8: order from a Chinese shipyard. Chinese shipyards have been dominating
Speaker 8: recent years. I think they're producing between sixty and seventy
Speaker 8: percent of the world's container ships and that number keeps growing.
Speaker 8: They've been and there's almost none made. There were none
Speaker 8: made in America last year, no container ships. It's Korea
Speaker 8: and Japan that they're taking market share originally was Japan.
Speaker 7: Korea.
Speaker 8: Hyundai built big shipyards back in the nineteen seventies and
Speaker 8: has been taking first took market share from them, and
Speaker 8: now it's China leap frogging Korea as a big deal.
Speaker 8: First off, the obvious trick to avoid paying because it
Speaker 8: is per port call. And what the obvious trick here
Speaker 8: is for the ocean carriers to just make fewer port calls.
Speaker 8: And so instead of stopping it Seattle than Oakland, then La,
Speaker 8: you just skip the small ports and go straight to
Speaker 8: LA because you'll save three million bucks by doing so.
Speaker 7: And so that's a really bad deal.
Speaker 8: I mean, Oakland's a major export hub for all the
Speaker 8: agricultural products coming out of the Central Valley Seattle. I
Speaker 8: mean these are just major hubs, and there's a lot
Speaker 8: of exports going out, and so if the ships aren't
Speaker 8: stomping there, it means you got to run trucks or
Speaker 8: trains all the way to southern California hugely inefficient, costly,
Speaker 8: and it's hurting American exporters, which is sort of like
Speaker 8: the exact opposite of the stated goals of administration.
Speaker 2: That's right, how likely is this to go into effect?
Speaker 2: And then also to the extent that you can say.
Speaker 2: And then also even for these larger ports like we
Speaker 2: all saw in COVID, there was a huge backup and
Speaker 2: this was part of what crippled the supply chain, and
Speaker 2: that's part of what fueled inflation that became, you know,
Speaker 2: the number one political issue and in many ways is
Speaker 2: responsible for for Trump ultimately getting re elected. So help
Speaker 2: us understand some of these pieces of how this will
Speaker 2: actually all work in practice.
Speaker 7: Yeah, it's hard to say how likely it is.
Speaker 8: I think in the in the form that was proposed
Speaker 8: a month ago, they've already started. You know, I did
Speaker 8: that sweetstorm, and then the next day I heard I
Speaker 8: got a couple of texts like, hey, people are talking
Speaker 8: about this in Washington.
Speaker 7: And then the next day.
Speaker 8: The Wall Street turnal reported that they're considering revising it.
Speaker 8: I'm not taking credit for that, but it's possible that
Speaker 8: they are. They've been pretty reasonable about taking feedback from
Speaker 8: the from I mean, they took feedback from the market
Speaker 8: yesterday and uh kind of put paused on the Southeast
Speaker 8: Asia and other pariffs.
Speaker 7: So it's possible to build be talking about Ryan.
Speaker 2: And that was just art of the deal. That was
Speaker 2: the plan the whole time. I don't know it's now
Speaker 2: market anyway.
Speaker 8: The heart of the deal, it is like do something
Speaker 8: crazy and wait, everybody think there's no you know, no hope,
Speaker 8: and then switcher through at the end. So and the
Speaker 8: April seventeenth date, I don't think it's set in stone.
Speaker 8: It's very possible that there's flexibility and that you know,
Speaker 8: I just said, we can't really say what will happen.
Speaker 8: The biggest clause in fact in this you mentioned, yeah,
Speaker 8: there is a there is a what will happen in
Speaker 8: LA would.
Speaker 7: Be congestion like we saw in COVID.
Speaker 8: I mean, if all the ships go there at LA
Speaker 8: or at Long Beach Port just can't keep up. They
Speaker 8: barely kept up with a twenty percent increase, which is
Speaker 8: what you saw during COVID. But if you know, all
Speaker 8: the ships only went there, it would be a massive surge.
Speaker 8: So but actually there's another clause in here, and this
Speaker 8: one I think is almost certain to go away because
Speaker 8: it's just too bad for American exporters. The other closet
Speaker 8: that within seven years, fifteen percent of exports from the
Speaker 8: United States must travel on American made ship crewed by
Speaker 8: American citizens and there's only twenty three of those container
Speaker 8: ships in the world.
Speaker 7: Today, and none of them go where our exports are going.
Speaker 8: These are ships that are serving the domestic ocean freight market,
Speaker 8: meaning traveling to Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, and Puerto.
Speaker 7: Rico as well as you know.
Speaker 8: This is called the Jones Act, so you have to
Speaker 8: in order to travel domestically, you have to be made
Speaker 8: in America. So it's kind of a Jones Act on steroids.
Speaker 8: And the Jones Act is I think you can very
Speaker 8: clearly say Jones Acts of failure.
Speaker 7: It was.
Speaker 8: It was designed to promote American shipbuilding, and we didn't
Speaker 8: make any container ships last year, so like we've got
Speaker 8: to try something else.
Speaker 3: That's why I really want to stick to that point
Speaker 3: because this is very important.
Speaker 1: Let's put this one up on the screen, guys.
Speaker 3: The next one, which really underscores Ryan's point about the
Speaker 3: number of ships that were actually built in the United
Speaker 3: States compared to China. What's the statistic is that China
Speaker 3: produced more ships in twenty twenty four than all of
Speaker 3: the United States since post World War two era. Just
Speaker 3: to give people an idea, as you said, we have
Speaker 3: not We did not build a single ship in twenty
Speaker 3: twenty four. The Jones Act thing that you just brought
Speaker 3: up reminds me of the tariff discussion, where we have
Speaker 3: in a regulatory regime which is designed to quote unquote
Speaker 3: promote shipbuilding by creating a ring around the industry, but
Speaker 3: simultaneously we give no money to the shipbuilding industry, incentives
Speaker 3: supply chain all of the industrial production that the Chinese offer.
Speaker 3: And so what happens you both have a regulatory thing
Speaker 3: that increases costs while also not building anymore ship So
Speaker 3: you have the worst of both of those things. So
Speaker 3: I'm curious for your reflection based upon that, that policy
Speaker 3: that they're putting into place, and also the lack of
Speaker 3: investment right now coming from the White House on any
Speaker 3: of this.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 8: Actually, well we should know. There was an executive work
Speaker 8: right last night, and it does.
Speaker 7: It does.
Speaker 8: It's not clear enough about like what benefits there will be,
Speaker 8: but a very clearly states hey, we're gonna we're gonna
Speaker 8: The biggest probably barrier to ship building the United States,
Speaker 8: by the way, is things like the California Coastal Commission.
Speaker 8: I mean, good luck trying to make a shipyard on
Speaker 8: the West coast of the United states.
Speaker 7: These guys won't let you.
Speaker 8: You know, you can't have a beach hut, like you're
Speaker 8: not building a ship yard, and so there's it's regulatory.
Speaker 8: Can you get red tape out of the way. Can
Speaker 8: you actually allow these things to get built? The model
Speaker 8: here the real thing that really danger here, And actually
Speaker 8: I would look at it the same way we're looking
Speaker 8: I look at these tariffs is if you're just putting
Speaker 8: up protective barriers and protecting US industry and sort of
Speaker 8: coddling our industry. Yes, you might actually make some companies
Speaker 8: out of that, but what would they be good companies?
Speaker 5: Like?
Speaker 7: Would they are?
Speaker 2: You?
Speaker 8: Just because if you just make crappy products and the
Speaker 8: only reason those can survive is because there's no competition
Speaker 8: from abroad. All you've done is like hurt the American
Speaker 8: people on a net basis. What the lesson to learn
Speaker 8: here is from East Asia where they went and industrialized,
Speaker 8: and the key requirement of the successful countries that industrialized
Speaker 8: was that you must export. Your products must be good
Speaker 8: enough that people in other countries want. So you don't
Speaker 8: just give them money, but you give them benefits when
Speaker 8: they export. You give them encouragement to go and export.
Speaker 8: And you require it in order to hit subsidies, you
Speaker 8: must be able to win export markets, and so you
Speaker 8: actually see advantage Like India tried to make their car
Speaker 8: companies in India that only serve domestic and were protected
Speaker 8: from foreign automakers, and their cars didn't improve from.
Speaker 7: Like the nineteen fifty to the nineteen nineties.
Speaker 6: Malaysia as well, Yeah.
Speaker 8: Whereas Japan and Korea actually focused on export markets and
Speaker 8: made great cars and great companies and kind of took
Speaker 8: over the world. So if we're going to rein industrialize,
Speaker 8: it really has to be export oriented. And that's what's
Speaker 8: so dumb about this policy is like you're going to
Speaker 8: cap American exporters and decap them and say, hey, you
Speaker 8: gotta you have to travel on American made ships. Oops,
Speaker 8: there are none like good luck exporters.
Speaker 7: You know, it's like it's really bad policy.
Speaker 2: Give us some sense of what you're seeing, you know,
Speaker 2: from your vantage point economically and how you think you
Speaker 2: there's sort of like a reaction like Trump's rolled back
Speaker 2: all the teriffs.
Speaker 4: Of course he hasn't.
Speaker 2: There's still massive teriffs on China, well over one hundred
Speaker 2: percent ten percent tariffs almost across the board around the world.
Speaker 2: So you know, what are you seeing in terms of
Speaker 2: what the fallout from that could be? When indicate early
Speaker 2: indications do you have?
Speaker 7: Yeah?
Speaker 8: So when it was the big reciprocal tariffs on everybody,
Speaker 8: I mean that was sort of nuclear winter for the
Speaker 8: international trade community. People were really it was really scary
Speaker 8: couple of days. We uh for our customers. You know,
Speaker 8: flex sports designed to ride out anything. We have a
Speaker 8: really strong balance sheet and we believe deeply that like
Speaker 8: the technology we're building and over the long run here
Speaker 8: is just going to be like people will want it,
Speaker 8: regardless of how much trade there is.
Speaker 7: But we're very word for our customers.
Speaker 8: In fact, we saw that twenty eight percent of all
Speaker 8: the ocean of all of our customers that we surveyed,
Speaker 8: said that they would cancel all ocean freight bookings entering
Speaker 8: the United States as soon as went into effect. Wow,
Speaker 8: that we didn't actually see that yet, but that's what
Speaker 8: they told us they were planning to do. Now, obviously,
Speaker 8: the ones that aren't China have now said okay, the
Speaker 8: ten percent week is business as usual basically, and then
Speaker 8: China re entered. Ones just got hit with a much
Speaker 8: bigger tariff and I think a lot of folks are
Speaker 8: going to be in a world of pain. This is
Speaker 8: this is really ugly if you're if you're and it's
Speaker 8: just a huge number of companies, I think you're gonna
Speaker 8: have mass bankruptcies of companies in the United States if
Speaker 8: this goes through.
Speaker 7: And I don't I.
Speaker 8: Personally predict there will be another deal to get done
Speaker 8: with China. I don't think Trump wants that to be
Speaker 8: his legacy. Is just like central planning of the economy
Speaker 8: that puts tons of companies out of you know, overnight
Speaker 8: out of business and creates unemployment in our country.
Speaker 3: Ryan, So there's a ninety day pause, et cetera. Ten
Speaker 3: percent tariff, but as you just alluded to one hundred
Speaker 3: and twenty five percent or maybe one hundred and fifty percent,
Speaker 3: no one is actually clear on that.
Speaker 1: What the tariff rate there is.
Speaker 3: I believe it's about twelve percent of US What is
Speaker 3: it twelve percent of trade there? Stands with in terms
Speaker 3: of goods with China? Since you have some insight into this,
Speaker 3: what are the categories of goods that are coming over
Speaker 3: on these ships? Like is it everything furniture? You know,
Speaker 3: what type of inputs and others. Can we expect to
Speaker 3: see immediate price hikes, consumer hikes and bankruptcies?
Speaker 1: What industry should we be looking at.
Speaker 8: Certainly the stuff that's been the hardest to move out
Speaker 8: of China has been consumer electronics. There's just this whole
Speaker 8: ecosystem of subcomponent manufacturers that you just can't lift and
Speaker 8: shift it. So, I mean apparel, things that are were
Speaker 8: the main input is just cheap labor that largely left
Speaker 8: China over the last fifteen years are ready because China
Speaker 8: is no longer the low cost labor provider for the world.
Speaker 8: It's actually the high skilled manufacturing center, and so it's higher.
Speaker 8: It's things that are more intricate that are that then
Speaker 8: that require lots of subcomponents. So yeah, consumer electronics is
Speaker 8: the big one. Your iPhone's made in China, you know.
Speaker 8: So they've got some production and they're shifting more, but
Speaker 8: it's most of that those things are made in China, computers,
Speaker 8: TVs and and a broad range of stuff, you know.
Speaker 8: But there is some furniture from there. A lot of
Speaker 8: furniture has already moved to Indonesia and Vietnam, but we
Speaker 8: have some the Terrafona sofa from China is going to
Speaker 8: be one hundred and fifty nine percent if I'm doing
Speaker 8: the math right in my head, or one hundred and
Speaker 8: fifty four percent. Excuse me, Yeah, it's it's ugly out there.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 4: Well, thank you so much. Ryan.
Speaker 2: It's really just so useful to get your perspective since
Speaker 2: you deal with like the nuts and bolts of how
Speaker 2: this will actually work.
Speaker 4: So thank you for taking the time. I know you're
Speaker 4: extremely busy guy.
Speaker 3: That's right, Thank you, Ryan. We appreciate you. Everybody, go
Speaker 3: follow them on Twitter. The best insights out of anybody
Speaker 3: out there. Somebody actually does the work.
Speaker 1: Thanks dude, Thank you our pleasure.
Speaker 2: So we have a few major updates for you with
Speaker 2: regard to the Trump administration's immigration policy. And let's start
Speaker 2: specifically with the big anti Semitism crack down, the whole
Speaker 2: of government, whole of society, anti semitism crackdown, and can
Speaker 2: put this up on the screen. So the US Citizenship
Speaker 2: and Immigration Services they're announcing that they will begin considering
Speaker 2: alien's quote anti Semitic activity on social media and physical
Speaker 2: harassment of Jews as grounds to deny immigration benefit requests,
Speaker 2: including applications for lawful permanent residence status and foreign student
Speaker 2: visas per USCIS. Under this guidance, we will consider social
Speaker 2: media content that indicates an alien endorsing, espousing, promoting, or
Speaker 2: supporting anti Semitic terrorism, anti Semitic organizations, or other antisemitic
Speaker 2: activity as a negative factor in any discretionary analysis when
Speaker 2: adjusting immigration benefit requests. This guidance is effective immediately. So,
Speaker 2: first of all, as you guys likely know, when they
Speaker 2: say anti semitism, sure they mean actual antise, but they
Speaker 2: also just really mean any criticism of Israel.
Speaker 4: And this is.
Speaker 2: Abundantly clear if you look at the students that they've
Speaker 2: gone after, not for any sort of criminal activity, but
Speaker 2: literally for things like writing an op ed, sharing things
Speaker 2: on social media, or being married, being married to the
Speaker 2: wrong person, thank you, or in some instances there's no
Speaker 2: indication that they were even involved with the protest whatsoever.
Speaker 4: So it truly is now.
Speaker 2: And here's the thing again, Sager kind of goes back
Speaker 2: to our Cokee bloc. Like all of the people who
Speaker 2: were concerned about social media censorship and cancel culture and
Speaker 2: weaponization of government against certain viewpoints, etc.
Speaker 4: There are few who have been consistent.
Speaker 2: The vast majority have nothing to say about every part
Speaker 2: of the state being used to ban criticism of a
Speaker 2: specific foreign country, including denying you know, foreign student visas,
Speaker 2: including denying Okay, you're here, you want to marry an
Speaker 2: American citizen, you are applying for a green card, all
Speaker 2: of those sorts of things.
Speaker 4: If you have said the wrong thing with.
Speaker 2: Regard to Israel Palestine, it is really outrageous. And of
Speaker 2: course does not just stop with immigrants or permanent residents,
Speaker 2: mass crackdown across the board on anything that would be
Speaker 2: critical of Israel.
Speaker 3: Well with the anti Semitism and activity, what does it mean?
Speaker 3: I mean, you know, these terms are supposed to have meaning. Well,
Speaker 3: if we're going off of what the holocau ihr A definition,
Speaker 3: then we are literally talking about criticism of a foreign government.
Speaker 3: And I mean that's part of what is just so sickening.
Speaker 3: We're talking about subjecting this standard to any potential resident
Speaker 3: or imigrant to the United States of America based upon
Speaker 3: their views of a foreign government. And what's even crazier,
Speaker 3: and I don't see a lot of the right wingers
Speaker 3: doing this, is is there like, hey, so it's just
Speaker 3: it's not any other religion. So you could be anti
Speaker 3: Christian or anti Muslim or anti Hindu or anti what else?
Speaker 1: Am I missing seek sickism for any of these?
Speaker 3: And that would be fine, But this is actually that's
Speaker 3: the problem with these types of exclusions. It also is
Speaker 3: just genuinely like unskilled based and ideological, which is just
Speaker 3: as bad as any sort of This is literally just
Speaker 3: as bad as like a racial quota. We need racial
Speaker 3: quotas of x amount of black people to come. Can
Speaker 3: you imagine what people would do. It wouldn't even matter
Speaker 3: who they are, It's just based on the color of
Speaker 3: their skin.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well we're talking about okay, so freedom speech, freedom
Speaker 2: and religion famously in the same amendment first Amendment, and
Speaker 2: so yeah, I mean this is the equal and being
Speaker 2: like we're just not allowing any Christians that, we're just
Speaker 2: not allowing any Muslims in, We're just not allowing any Jews.
Speaker 2: I mean, if you are basing entry based solely on
Speaker 2: speech and in particular I mean, listen, I would object
Speaker 2: on really on the grounds of a wide range of speech,
Speaker 2: but if you are focused in particular on you are
Speaker 2: not allowed to have a particular view of our foreign
Speaker 2: policy of a particular foreign nation.
Speaker 4: Like this is just complete insanity. You could not.
Speaker 2: The turnaround between basing an entire movement on being anti
Speaker 2: woke and embracing the most authoritarian woke elements and embodying
Speaker 2: the state and using all of the levers of the state,
Speaker 2: including things like.
Speaker 4: The HHS, to effectuate your goals.
Speaker 2: Like the fact that so few have anything to say
Speaker 2: about this again tells you how seriously you should take
Speaker 2: their commitment to literally anything, because this was so central,
Speaker 2: The anti woke backlash was so so it really was
Speaker 2: for a time the thing that was holding the Republican
Speaker 2: Party together. And now they just turn on a dime
Speaker 2: and are like, oh, they need safe spaces, and you know,
Speaker 2: this is a microaggression. And here's a college student who
Speaker 2: felt bad on campus because of a slogan. So we
Speaker 2: need to you know, we need to crack down and
Speaker 2: have arrests and deport people and hold them into detention,
Speaker 2: et cetera.
Speaker 4: It is wild.
Speaker 3: This is the worst nightmare of any sort of woke
Speaker 3: style revolution about the are using the federal government and
Speaker 3: subjecting it to people, and even for those who are
Speaker 3: you know like, oh, it's only just immigration. Well, we've
Speaker 3: already had several US citizens who have literally had their
Speaker 3: rights denied and been expelled from college as a result
Speaker 3: of demands from the United States federal government. These are
Speaker 3: US citizens who have attended and paid for a full year,
Speaker 3: four year college degree, who violated no university or no
Speaker 3: university rules and are being forced out by the government
Speaker 3: for their attendance to this place. So that in and
Speaker 3: of itself is professors have also been fired. And again
Speaker 3: this is not the government, They're not government employees. We're
Speaker 3: talking about leveraging the government power of funding or whatever
Speaker 3: demands and taking over the Middle Eastern Studies department at
Speaker 3: Columbia University. That is literally out of the anti racist playbook.
Speaker 3: If you guys have ever had the misfortune the.
Speaker 4: Wildest dreams, they could not have achieved this level.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 3: As I actually read the anti racism book by I've
Speaker 3: read them both by I Bringing Kenny, he actually proposes
Speaker 3: similar things to what they are doing now for anti Semitism,
Speaker 3: going in leveraging the government demand, you know, implementing quotas.
Speaker 3: I mean, can you imagine if they took over the
Speaker 3: history department or whatever at the United at at the
Speaker 3: University of Alabama, that would be insane, that.
Speaker 1: Is what they are doing.
Speaker 4: Now, that's right, what are we doing here?
Speaker 2: And for all of you people like Soccer who are
Speaker 2: who are here for the mass deportation? Okay, is it
Speaker 2: really your priority to have huge numbers of ICE agents
Speaker 2: tracking down some student who posted an op ed who
Speaker 2: is here legally, by the way, lawfully you know, on
Speaker 2: a either student visa or legal permanent resident, Like is
Speaker 2: that your priority? Because there are finite resources here. So
Speaker 2: instead of getting the you know, we're going to round
Speaker 2: up the criminals and the terrorists, instead you're getting like,
Speaker 2: you know, Mackmood Khalil, who dared participate in some protests,
Speaker 2: or you're getting the girl who was vanished on the street,
Speaker 2: disappeared because she dared publish the student newspaper op ed
Speaker 2: calling for her university to divest from Israel. Like, it's
Speaker 2: just it's just insanity and hypocrisy all the way around.
Speaker 2: And as Sager said, if you think this is just
Speaker 2: about immigrants, it's not. It's not even close to that,
Speaker 2: because you already have students who are being punished US
Speaker 2: citizens students. You already have them calling these protests, investigating
Speaker 2: these protests as quote unquote terrorism. There is going to
Speaker 2: be a huge there already is a huge crackdown against
Speaker 2: any of the speci It comes at a time too,
Speaker 2: where they've basically, i mean, Israel has lost effectively the
Speaker 2: entire American population outside of like Republican boomers.
Speaker 4: That's the only there's new polling that came out.
Speaker 2: Asking about people's opinions on the state of Israel, and
Speaker 2: the only demographic group that hadn't really moved and still
Speaker 2: had a positive opinion of Israel was literally like older Republicans,
Speaker 2: not even young Republicans. Young Republicans, and I'm talking like
Speaker 2: under fifty Republicans under fifty. Now Israel is underwater with
Speaker 2: their opinion. It's only older Republicans are the only ones
Speaker 2: who still hold on to this view. So, you know,
Speaker 2: Ryan said this, and I think it is it offers
Speaker 2: a little bit of hope, even as it's a very
Speaker 2: hopeless situation. The Washington politicians had no limit for the
Speaker 2: amount of slaughter that they would allow Israel and support
Speaker 2: Israel and ship the bombs for Israel to commit, But
Speaker 2: the American people did have a limit, of course. It's
Speaker 2: you know, they like have completely turned on what has
Speaker 2: been a multi multi decade long project and really glowing
Speaker 2: sent bipartisan glowing sentiment around this country.
Speaker 3: At a basic level, they are bombarded with propaganda and
Speaker 3: told that all of these images, which are uncensored and
Speaker 3: coming out of Gaza are necessary to accomplish an end.
Speaker 3: And actually even if you look at polling or whatever,
Speaker 3: they would buy that in the interim. But now after
Speaker 3: what is it's April tenth, so eighteen months or so,
Speaker 3: people are like, yeah, I'm just not buying this anymore, right,
Speaker 3: you know, I mean, how exactly what these people are
Speaker 3: paying attention even if you're tangentially paying attention, and the
Speaker 3: entire podcast ecosystem is moving against them. We had Tim
Speaker 3: Dillon being like, as America just working for Israel. THEO
Speaker 3: Vaughn just yesterday is like, I feel like we're owned
Speaker 3: by Israel. We didn't even know about it. I mean,
Speaker 3: you can see this stuff pervading into the public sphere.
Speaker 3: Even Rogan has said a few things you know about Israel.
Speaker 3: So look, it's it's getting pumped into the bloodstream in
Speaker 3: a way that is not it is. You know, it's
Speaker 3: not explicitly leftists or anything like that, but people are noticing,
Speaker 3: People are noticing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and having our government seem to bend to the
Speaker 2: will of Israel is not doing anything in terms of
Speaker 2: some of the tropes like this is only furthering to
Speaker 2: fuel the very anti Semitism that you purport to be
Speaker 2: concerned about. I just want to let me give a
Speaker 2: quick court update here, because this is really significant. We
Speaker 2: covered earlier this week Supreme Court siding with the Trump
Speaker 2: administration on the Alien Enemies Act. That is, of course
Speaker 2: the justification the law that was invoked that Trump used
Speaker 2: to ship hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to this dungeon on
Speaker 2: Bukelly's Dungeon down in El Salvador with zero due process.
Speaker 2: Supreme Court says, okay, you can, We're going to lift
Speaker 2: the temporary restraining order. You can go forward with these
Speaker 2: but they say you have to provide reasonable notice to
Speaker 2: people who you are going to deport under this provision. Now,
Speaker 2: they didn't define what reasonable notice was, so you know,
Speaker 2: that left a lot of questions. They also said it
Speaker 2: can't be done as sort of like a class You
Speaker 2: have to file these individual habeas petitions in the district
Speaker 2: where those migrants are being held. So most of the
Speaker 2: migrants have been moved to Texas and Louisiana. These are
Speaker 2: districts that are seemed to be more sympathetic to Trump. However,
Speaker 2: now the Trump administration has just received two pretty significant
Speaker 2: court defeats in the wake of that Supreme Court decision.
Speaker 2: So let's put this up on the screen from Politico.
Speaker 2: You had two different judges, one in New York and
Speaker 2: one in Texas, who have now both limited Trump's bid
Speaker 2: to deport alien enemies. Back to back rulings. Somebody go
Speaker 2: ahead and read you the details here. You had one
Speaker 2: federal judge in Texas on Wednesday, who was a Trump appointee,
Speaker 2: block the Trump administration from deporting people designated as alien enemies,
Speaker 2: citing that Supreme Court ruling and warning of the potential
Speaker 2: for irreparable mistakes. You had another Manhattan District judge who
Speaker 2: came out with a very similar ruling. This was a
Speaker 2: Clinton appointed federal judge. Now, because of what the Supreme
Speaker 2: Court did, this doesn't mean a blanket restraining order on
Speaker 2: all deportations. They only apply for those districts, But the
Speaker 2: Texas one in particular is significant because so many of
Speaker 2: these migrants are being held in Texas in preparation for
Speaker 2: these type of flights, and also indicate that you know,
Speaker 2: the federal judges, whether they're appointed by Democrats or Republicans,
Speaker 2: have a lot of deep concerns.
Speaker 4: Both about there.
Speaker 2: There's two pieces here that still have to be determined
Speaker 2: whether these individuals even qualify as Alien enemies under this
Speaker 2: act because they have to be proven to be Trended
Speaker 2: Aragua gang members. We know it can put this next
Speaker 2: piece up on the screen. We had previous reportings saying, hey,
Speaker 2: seventy five percent of these people that you shipped off
Speaker 2: had zero criminal record. Bloomberg did analysis. They found ninety
Speaker 2: percent of migrants deported to El Salvador had no US
Speaker 2: criminal record. So question number one is, okay, is it
Speaker 2: just they have a tattoo to you you don't like
Speaker 2: like you are they actually in trend To Aragua?
Speaker 4: And question number two.
Speaker 2: Is whether this was a lawful invocation of the Alien
Speaker 2: Enemies Act to begin with, because they're using this, you know,
Speaker 2: claim that Venezuela has invaded the country by their proxies
Speaker 2: in Trendo Aragua. Previously, Alien Enemies Act has only been
Speaker 2: used in like real wartime, like World War One, World
Speaker 2: War two, that sort of thing. And so this is,
Speaker 2: to say the least, an extraordinary interpretation that the Trump
Speaker 2: administration has gone with. But it seems like even that
Speaker 2: little opening that the Supreme Court gave of you have
Speaker 2: to give reasonable notice and there has to be some
Speaker 2: ability for these migrants to be able to pursue their claims.
Speaker 2: That seems to have provided the window for these two
Speaker 2: federal judges to be.
Speaker 1: Able to push back. You have two interesting tros.
Speaker 3: Were waiting to see what that is as you also,
Speaker 3: Piasco told us about there's been no merit ruling yet
Speaker 3: based on that basis, and could be rolled up over
Speaker 3: to the Supreme Court. Okay, I think that's it for today.
Speaker 1: Guys.
Speaker 3: Do you have anything else you want to go into? Okay,
Speaker 3: very good, all right, we got to get we're filming
Speaker 3: this out of order. We were guest standing by That's
Speaker 3: why I'm doing this.
Speaker 1: All right. We will see you guys later.
Speaker 7: Would ta