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 2: coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about,
Speaker 2: it just means the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 2: But enough with that, let's get to the show. Let's
Speaker 2: go to polymarket. I've been wanting to cover this for
Speaker 2: a long time, and of course, like everybody I think
Speaker 2: who's online, they see these polymarket odds, and in particular
Speaker 2: lately they have seen Trump just absolutely blow away Kamala
Speaker 2: in the polymarket odds. And there's been a lot of
Speaker 2: discussion what's going on here Because if you look at
Speaker 2: a polling analysis, if you look at even the average
Speaker 2: of all of the models that are out there, in
Speaker 2: terms of the reliable ones, the average I checked yesterday
Speaker 2: is fifty percent. So if the average is there and
Speaker 2: the Betty market is different, well what do we know.
Speaker 2: Usually when you see a bit different between that, somebody
Speaker 2: would think potentially have inside information. But then one of
Speaker 2: my friends pointed this out, there's no such thing as
Speaker 2: inside information in an election, because it's like, what do
Speaker 2: they know? How undecided voters in Pennsylvania are the telefuture?
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, they literally forecast the future. If not, you
Speaker 3: don't have any inside information. So what is happening?
Speaker 2: Why is Polymarket, which is roughly a billion dollar market
Speaker 2: from the election, just on that question of who is
Speaker 2: going to win? How did it become so different than
Speaker 2: all their models? Was put this on the screen? The
Speaker 2: Wall Street Journal did an investigation. It's actually super interesting. Effectively,
Speaker 2: what has happened is that four separate accounts, potentially all
Speaker 2: belonging to the same person, have bet some thirty million
Speaker 2: dollars to thirty million dollars on the Donald Trump winning
Speaker 2: the presidential election. And those four separate, massive size bets
Speaker 2: were enough to push the average for the Trump question
Speaker 2: of whether he's going to win up to some sixty
Speaker 2: percent and push Kamos down to now Again. What's interesting,
Speaker 2: too is that this actually happened after Elon Musk tweeted
Speaker 2: about Polymarket on October six, So we.
Speaker 3: Have one of those tweets. Can we put that on
Speaker 3: the screen please?
Speaker 2: This seems to be one of the original ones where
Speaker 2: Trump where Elon tweeted about this prediction market where he
Speaker 2: said Trump is not leading Kama by three percent. Betting
Speaker 2: markets more accurate than polls as actual money is on
Speaker 2: the line. That was the demarcation point. Prior to that,
Speaker 2: I've been tracking poly market almost every single day. It
Speaker 2: was roughly in line within Nate Silver consensus, but it
Speaker 2: has now completely split again. You can take two different
Speaker 2: parts of that for what you want as to whether
Speaker 2: it is more predictive or not. If you ask me,
Speaker 2: and you know, we do this for a living, not
Speaker 2: that I guess it makes me all that much of
Speaker 2: an expert. But right now they have Comma only has
Speaker 2: thirty six point two percent chance of winning. That, in
Speaker 2: my opinion, is crazy considering the amount of caveats and
Speaker 2: all the things we've had to drop on the show.
Speaker 3: That is like, it's so bullish. They have her right.
Speaker 2: Now sixty one percent chance for Trump in the state
Speaker 2: of Pennsylvania. In Wisconsin, fifty eight percent Trump, fifty nine
Speaker 2: percent Trump in Michigan, Each one of those Blue Wall
Speaker 2: states totally miss priced if you ask me so. If
Speaker 2: you're a line shopper out there, in the words of
Speaker 2: sports betters, you may want to get out on the action.
Speaker 2: And I don't even think that Comma is going to win.
Speaker 2: But if you were like, oh, i'll give you two
Speaker 2: to one odds that Comma would win when she's got
Speaker 2: a fifty to fifty shot, anybody out there who bets sports.
Speaker 3: For a living, that's usually you should take that bet.
Speaker 2: And a lot of people made a ton of money
Speaker 2: doing exactly this betting on Trump back in two thousand
Speaker 2: and sixteen. When I show you, guys at twenty sixteen odds,
Speaker 2: you're going to be blown away from what betting markets were.
Speaker 1: So just to recap, there's four accounts that about thirty
Speaker 1: million dollars that are basically responsible for this huge surge
Speaker 1: for Trump, and all of those accounts are behaving in
Speaker 1: a very similar fashion, raising the possibility that is actually
Speaker 1: one individual who is gaming this market and pushing up
Speaker 1: the odds in favor of Trump.
Speaker 4: And it just so happens that.
Speaker 1: It comes immediately after Elon Musk tweets about how accurate
Speaker 1: polymarket is and how we should all be looking at
Speaker 1: to understand the real odds going on in this election.
Speaker 1: It also was a Peter teelback platform Worth noting that
Speaker 1: as well. But yeah, the big question mark has been
Speaker 1: whether there was you know, some organic something going on there.
Speaker 1: Like my initial thought was once Elon Musk tweeted that
Speaker 1: that there were a bunch of like Elon Musk bros.
Speaker 4: Really cool, I got to get in on this, But
Speaker 4: it looks like it was much more it was you.
Speaker 1: Know, one whale or a number of them who decided
Speaker 1: they wanted to push up the odds. And this is
Speaker 1: significant also because we know that part of how uh
Speaker 1: Trump last time justified his stop this Deal lies was
Speaker 1: by claiming that Republicans had you know, an insturmountable lead
Speaker 1: on election night and it was you know, preposterous to
Speaker 1: imagine that they were going to lose. And so this
Speaker 1: also very much seems like and Trump has leaned into
Speaker 1: this too, setting the expectation that Trump is one hundred
Speaker 1: percent going to win and so if he doesn't, there
Speaker 1: must have been something nefarious. So I think that's part
Speaker 1: of what's going on here. By the way, Elon didn't
Speaker 1: just promote this one the polymarket one time. He's tweeted
Speaker 1: like twenty different times about polymarket, all of a bunch
Speaker 1: of the right wing influencer accounts on Twitter have picked
Speaker 1: up this same approach and have been pumping the polymarket
Speaker 1: odds and you, claiming that this shows the real truth
Speaker 1: of how likely Donald Trump is to win. And again,
Speaker 1: I think it's for some of these people it's just
Speaker 1: about clout and whatever. But I think for Trump specifically
Speaker 1: and potentially for Elon Musk, it's also about trying to
Speaker 1: lay the groundwork to claim that the election is stolen
Speaker 1: if he ends up not winning.
Speaker 3: It's certainly possible.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's just one of those where everyone always
Speaker 2: likes to say, like, oh, when money is on the line,
Speaker 2: it's more accurate.
Speaker 3: But okay, I don't watch sports.
Speaker 2: I'm friends with a lot of people who are obsessed
Speaker 2: with sports betting and the general consensus around sports and
Speaker 2: even the line like what Vegas and all those come
Speaker 2: up with. They take all the information, they try and
Speaker 2: distill it into a number. That number. It's not bad,
Speaker 2: it can sometimes be accurate. But then how often are
Speaker 2: you watching a game where there's a spread that we
Speaker 2: think is quite reasonable and then something happens at the
Speaker 2: very last minute and everybody loses. So even though the
Speaker 2: team that you bet on might win, they may not
Speaker 2: cover the spread, or how often does somebody get hurt
Speaker 2: or one thing goes a different way and then the
Speaker 2: entire thing shifts in a different direction. If you don't
Speaker 2: believe me, you know, for the first three weeks of
Speaker 2: the NFL season, I believe the public was on the
Speaker 2: wrong side of the bet for some eighty percent. So
Speaker 2: if you look at how good sports betters actually are,
Speaker 2: separate conversation that I do want to save for later.
Speaker 3: Similarly, it's like exuberant.
Speaker 2: So whether it's a whale or it's dumb, or it's
Speaker 2: just like Elon Bros.
Speaker 3: And dumb money.
Speaker 2: Like you know, irrational exuberance is a tale as old
Speaker 2: as time in the stock market. And this idea that, oh,
Speaker 2: just because people are willing to put millions of dollars
Speaker 2: behind something that they may not be totally wrong is
Speaker 2: also completely inaccurate. So let's, for example, put C three
Speaker 2: up on the screen. I had no idea about this actually,
Speaker 2: and it was raised in this Wall Treat journal piece.
Speaker 2: A single trader lost between four and seven million dollars
Speaker 2: exactly twelve years ago betting on Mitt Romney.
Speaker 3: To win the election four to seven million.
Speaker 2: All of the money from the single trader were placed
Speaker 2: exactly two weeks before the overall presidential election in twenty twelve.
Speaker 2: They believed wholeheartedly there was a similar thing, miss priced trade.
Speaker 3: They thought he was totally.
Speaker 2: They were watching way too much television, watching Fox News,
Speaker 2: and they were out there and bet four to seven
Speaker 2: million that they ended up losing that Mitt Romney would
Speaker 2: win the presidential election. Similarly, in twenty sixteen, could we
Speaker 2: put this up there please, because this is crazy. These
Speaker 2: are the live betting odds from OURCP average that were
Speaker 2: of the prediction markets at the time. On the day
Speaker 2: of the presidential election November in twenty sixteen, Donald Trump
Speaker 2: had a thirteen percent chance of winning according to the
Speaker 2: betting markets at that time, thirteen percent, Clinton at eighty eight.
Speaker 2: And as after the wisdom of the market, yes exactly.
Speaker 2: This is what I'm trying to really like underscore for everybody.
Speaker 2: And in fact, one of the things that Nate talks
Speaker 2: about in his book is that there are a ton
Speaker 2: of gamblers who love Nate Silver, and they were looking
Speaker 2: at Nate Silver's odds on the day of the election.
Speaker 2: He gave Donald Trump a twenty eight percent chance of
Speaker 2: winning or something like that. And they're like, hey, twenty
Speaker 2: eight percent chance twelve percent that the market's giving me
Speaker 2: mispriced line. They didn't even think Trump was going to win.
Speaker 2: They put one thousand dollars or something like that.
Speaker 3: They got like nine to one odds.
Speaker 2: In terms of the payout that they received. He said,
Speaker 2: to this day, whatever he goes out to eat, people
Speaker 2: still buying dinner because they've won so much money betting
Speaker 2: on Donald Trump to win the election because of Nate
Speaker 2: Silver's forecast. So that's my point is that if you
Speaker 2: look at these markets and especially where they are right
Speaker 2: now on top of with crypto, I mean, look, I'm
Speaker 2: pro crypto and all that, but with polymarket, we have
Speaker 2: very little insight into what this is. And too even
Speaker 2: we have very little insight into like who these traders are,
Speaker 2: for example, who are moving these big bets. They're not
Speaker 2: probably as used to having to deal with like literal
Speaker 2: massive whales. Never before seen situation with such a large
Speaker 2: marketplace on the issue of the presidential election. So if
Speaker 2: you just think that this is a correct and accurate reflection,
Speaker 2: I mean, again, we don't even have that in the
Speaker 2: most well regulated market in our stock market.
Speaker 3: As opposed to what's going on on poly Market.
Speaker 1: I am also highly suspicious that this is actually one
Speaker 1: individual because not only are they behaving in a very
Speaker 1: similar fashion, they also were all funded by deposits from Kraken,
Speaker 1: a US based crypto exchange. So is highly suspicious that
Speaker 1: this is all one individual. So it's trying to create
Speaker 1: a portrait of you know, this being in the bag
Speaker 1: for Donald Trump and you know, using that to create
Speaker 1: a sense, a psychological sense of imminent victory on the
Speaker 1: Trump side. And Polymarket themselves said that they are actually
Speaker 1: investigating what is going on here too. So even to
Speaker 1: your point, Sager, even if it wasn't for this, you know,
Speaker 1: one or four individuals putting in thirty million dollars to
Speaker 1: get this to look the way that they wanted to look,
Speaker 1: even if it was just you know, a bunch of people,
Speaker 1: wisdom of the crowd or whatever, you still should not
Speaker 1: put a lot of stock in these betting odds because
Speaker 1: people can very eat on markets can very very.
Speaker 4: Easily be wrong.
Speaker 1: But you know, part of what I was getting at
Speaker 1: and why, you know, I do think that this is
Speaker 1: potentially on the part of some sort of ominous and
Speaker 1: nefarious is we also have people like Marjorie Taylor Green
Speaker 1: now floating new dominion voter conspiracies, claiming that she saw
Speaker 1: a Facebook post that said that some Dominion voting machine
Speaker 1: was flipping votes. Elon Musk has also gotten in on
Speaker 1: this dominion voting like, you know, a ledging that they
Speaker 1: there could be some fraud afoot with where there are
Speaker 1: dominion voting machines. We can go ahead. Let's go ahead
Speaker 1: and play for you. Marjorie Taylor Green's comments, that's see
Speaker 1: six guys.
Speaker 5: So they went up to one of the election workers
Speaker 5: and they said, here's the problem. The machine switched it
Speaker 5: and the printed my printed ballot. I did not vote
Speaker 5: for these people. So they had to start over, and
Speaker 5: they went through it several times, and it kept on
Speaker 5: making the same error, kept on switching the boat.
Speaker 1: So you know, once again back to the dominion voting machines.
Speaker 1: These people also never learned because Dominion sued a bunch
Speaker 1: of the news networks for all they were worth when
Speaker 1: they were spreading lies about the operations of their machines.
Speaker 1: We can put see five excuse me up on the
Speaker 1: screen with the Elon Musk details here he said at
Speaker 1: one of these town halls he did in Pennsylvania. He says,
Speaker 1: when you have mail in ballots and no proof of citizenship,
Speaker 1: it's almost impossible to prove cheating. Statistically, there are some
Speaker 1: very strange things that happened that are statistically incredibly likely.
Speaker 1: There's also this question of, say, the dominion voting machines.
Speaker 1: It is weird that I think they were used in
Speaker 1: Philadelphia and Maricopa County, Arizona, but not in a lot
Speaker 1: of other places. Doesn't that seem like a heck of
Speaker 1: a coincidence?
Speaker 4: He added? The last thing I would do is trust
Speaker 4: a computer program. And apparently, sorry, he was not even.
Speaker 1: Correct about how and where and when the dominion voting
Speaker 1: machines were being used.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm just like, Okay, here we go again. You
Speaker 2: really want to do this, even for you know, list
Speaker 2: Elon is rich. He can defend himself in court and
Speaker 2: decide you can hire a lawyer, Marjorie the rest of
Speaker 2: these other folks who want to toy with this stuff.
Speaker 2: Look how it worked out for everybody in the state
Speaker 2: of Georgia who's under indictment, ends up pleading guilty, giving
Speaker 2: up their law license, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars
Speaker 2: on lawyers. So if they want to do that again,
Speaker 2: go for it. Yeah, and see how it works out
Speaker 2: for you.
Speaker 1: Well, you remember what Trump said at McDonald's when he
Speaker 1: had asked about it. He said, you know, something very
Speaker 1: He was like, he didn't say dominion votingstudents, but he
Speaker 1: was like, if it's very I'll accept the results. And
Speaker 1: by the way, you know, the predictions say that I
Speaker 1: have a ninety three percent chance of winning, so of
Speaker 1: course we're going to win. So that's how all of
Speaker 1: this plays into, you know, what they have planned post
Speaker 1: election day, And it's not just this. They've already filed
Speaker 1: a range of lawsuits in battleground states to try to challenge,
Speaker 1: you know, the voter's eligibility. They've stacked a lot of
Speaker 1: the election boards with people who are like pro Trump,
Speaker 1: MAGA loyalists. And then there's this sort of like PSI
Speaker 1: op to create an impression that Trump is a sure thing.
Speaker 1: And listen, he may well win on his own, in
Speaker 1: which case all of this ends up being moot. But
Speaker 1: that's why the polymarket piece fits in together with what
Speaker 1: Elon is saying about dominion. Marjorie Taylor Green is saying
Speaker 1: about dominion Trump is saying about whether or not he'll
Speaker 1: accept the election results, all these lawsuits being filed and
Speaker 1: all of the state boards of elections being stocked with
Speaker 1: these MAGA loyalists.
Speaker 3: Yeah, on that ladder part. And just because the price
Speaker 3: was wrong.
Speaker 2: I mean, imagine a company is saying we shouldn't have
Speaker 2: gone bankrupt because our stock price was x, L and
Speaker 2: z before that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, the market was saying that it was going
Speaker 3: to work.
Speaker 2: It's like, okay, but that doesn't predict the actual results, Bob,
Speaker 2: you know, yeah, we say it's ridiculous.
Speaker 4: Yeah, very true, very true.
Speaker 1: All right, let's move on to some strange campaign doings
Speaker 1: from Kamala Harris. They clearly, you know, she's been She
Speaker 1: went on with Reverend Sharpton. We showed you that interview,
Speaker 1: went on the Shade Room, had Barack Obama go out
Speaker 1: and lecture black men for some reason that was very
Speaker 1: disturbing and uncomfortable. They clearly realized that they need to
Speaker 1: shore up their support with what is a key voting
Speaker 1: demographic for the Democratic Party, and it's been consistently very supportive.
Speaker 1: So one of the efforts they put out was the
Speaker 1: following ad take a look.
Speaker 3: He little ladies entre.
Speaker 2: It's good to be here.
Speaker 3: He So, what do you do and how much do
Speaker 3: you work in finance? Making six figures?
Speaker 4: How tall are you?
Speaker 3: Six wives?
Speaker 4: Okay, do you work out?
Speaker 3: I like to stay active for you. Do you have
Speaker 3: a plan to vote? I didn't plan on it.
Speaker 1: So basically the message here is guys, if you don't
Speaker 1: vote and vote for Kamala Harris, then you're.
Speaker 4: Not going to get any dates.
Speaker 2: Pretty while okay, so shocking, crazy, also indicative of a
Speaker 2: real phenomenon. I mean, if we're going to be real
Speaker 2: and let's put this up there on the screen, this
Speaker 2: has been I mean, you know how many monologues have
Speaker 2: we done about this now at this point? How many
Speaker 2: times have I talked about it here in the show.
Speaker 2: Gender is going to be a huge factor in this election.
Speaker 2: Here's what the data shows. What they shay is that
Speaker 2: we're on track for one of the largest gender gaps
Speaker 2: in modern American history.
Speaker 3: Quote.
Speaker 2: Younger women are registering to vote at record rates. They
Speaker 2: tell abortion polsters abortion rights are their most crucial voting concern.
Speaker 2: If you look at the gender gap, which has been
Speaker 2: in every election since nineteen eighty, it is at a
Speaker 2: record high that is the gap specifically between men and
Speaker 2: women and what they're voting on. If we look at
Speaker 2: the Georgia poll that I just referenced that dropped this
Speaker 2: morning from the Atlanta Journal Constitution, you see a massive
Speaker 2: fifty points spread between men and women on the question
Speaker 2: of who you're going to support for president. And actually
Speaker 2: when we dig into young men, that is even more interesting.
Speaker 2: So let's put this up there on the screen Wall
Speaker 2: Street Journal.
Speaker 3: Same phenomenon.
Speaker 2: Gender gap is defining feature of the deadlocked Trump Harris race. Now,
Speaker 2: as we have seen racial de alignment in the US,
Speaker 2: a lot of it is polarizing amongst gender lines. Now
Speaker 2: still the most polarizing thing in America is education. But
Speaker 2: education is also polarizing amongst gender lines. We've had now
Speaker 2: some four years of massive female enrollment in colleges relative
Speaker 2: to men, huge numbers of young men gen Z men
Speaker 2: specifically dropping out of college and or not even attending
Speaker 2: college in the first place, pursuing a different career path.
Speaker 2: I think that's great, but culturally sets people up for
Speaker 2: a lot of divisions whenever it comes to the dating
Speaker 2: market in terms of wages, where you move. I've talked
Speaker 2: about this a lot it really determines like who you
Speaker 2: are and like what you do. Now, based on that,
Speaker 2: what we see is this dating thing is a real
Speaker 2: phenomenon which you actually pull. This is fantastic. Let's put
Speaker 2: it up there on the screen. Some three quarters of
Speaker 2: college educated young women are less likely to date a
Speaker 2: Trump supporter. So here we have all young women people
Speaker 2: who say that they are a lot less likely to
Speaker 2: date a Trump support some fifty five percent. Somewhat less
Speaker 2: likely is actually still more amongst Republicans.
Speaker 3: It's a little bit different.
Speaker 4: Republican women are like, that's.
Speaker 2: Why I'm like, it's no true, you know, I mean,
Speaker 2: but this is the survey of American life.
Speaker 3: It's actually a pretty rock solid survey.
Speaker 2: Now, it says young women with a college degree, some
Speaker 2: seventy six percent say that they are less likely to
Speaker 2: date someone who is a Trump support some fifty two
Speaker 2: percent say Republican. And then young women with the high
Speaker 2: school education it's still some thirty eight percent and thirty
Speaker 2: percent on if they're the question of a Republican or not.
Speaker 2: So that ad kind of hits at something. And I mean,
Speaker 2: I think it's very unfortunate, you know, given them the
Speaker 2: way politics are and just sociologically and like what that
Speaker 2: means for the country. But that's what the AD, I guess,
Speaker 2: is trying to capitalize on.
Speaker 4: Especially interesting they're going right at it. Huh, Well, what I.
Speaker 3: Think they're really going on is, I don't think it's
Speaker 3: a coincidence.
Speaker 2: There was a black guy, a young black guy who
Speaker 2: was in there, and because it's part of the blackmail strategy.
Speaker 2: So first we lecture, then we shame about Oh what
Speaker 2: Obama said, I need to speak to the brothers, you know.
Speaker 2: So now they're like, oh, well, now we need to
Speaker 2: make sure that they know that these black women, they're
Speaker 2: not going to want to get with you if you
Speaker 2: don't vote for Kamala Harris. I don't think it, frankly
Speaker 2: think is disgusting, but it is a real phenomenon.
Speaker 4: So there you go.
Speaker 1: Yeah, if you dig into the numbers also of what
Speaker 1: issues men versus women say are their top priorities. And again,
Speaker 1: as you're reporting before, like I think it's difficult for
Speaker 1: people to actually say, like this is my top issue
Speaker 1: and this is how I'm ranking things. But anyway, it's
Speaker 1: interesting to look at the numbers. In August, the economy
Speaker 1: and inflation were men's most important issues and decide their vote.
Speaker 1: For women, abortion and the economy and inflation are all
Speaker 1: tied as the most important issues, and for women under
Speaker 1: age forty five, abortion is the single most important voting issue.
Speaker 1: Similar findings. You know, in that Wall Street Journal piece,
Speaker 1: we had up as well, twenty seven percent of women
Speaker 1: but only eight percent of men list abortion as the
Speaker 1: top issue motivating their vote for president. And you know,
Speaker 1: you see, like we have long seen how the gender
Speaker 1: gap is probably going to be the defining issue of
Speaker 1: this election. I mean, there are a lot of different
Speaker 1: ways that the electric demo electorate demographically is divided, but
Speaker 1: in this one we are likely to see if the
Speaker 1: polls bear out the largest gender gap in modern American history.
Speaker 1: The gender gap emerged basically in nineteen eighty and women
Speaker 1: have tended to be more democratic and men more Republican
Speaker 1: for you know, our entire lives, certainly, but we're getting
Speaker 1: too new and extraordinary levels of divergence between the two sexes.
Speaker 1: And you also saw this even in the strategy of
Speaker 1: like Republicans at the RNC. It was this very like
Speaker 1: you know, hul Cogan and Dana White and this very
Speaker 1: like campy kind of masculinity, and you know the women
Speaker 1: tend to vote at slightly higher rates than men, so
Speaker 1: you know, in some ways you would rather be on
Speaker 1: the female side of that gender divide. But it just
Speaker 1: all depends on how large the gap is in which.
Speaker 3: Direction, It all depends on the gap.
Speaker 2: There's also a lot of If you look at married women,
Speaker 2: they actually end up voting Republican a little bit more
Speaker 2: than unmarried women. But again, marriage rates are declining, so
Speaker 2: it's not necessarily I bet that you want to be on.
Speaker 3: So overall it is.
Speaker 2: It is clearly part of a major sociological phenomenon. It
Speaker 2: is not one that I think the campaign should be
Speaker 2: getting into because it probably exacerbates and makes it worse,
Speaker 2: especially once people dig into all this, but it is
Speaker 2: one that we are likely going to have to live with.
Speaker 4: All right.
Speaker 1: We wanted to give you an update on the latest
Speaker 1: allegations surrounding Ditty. We have a new flood of lawsuits
Speaker 1: that raise additional allegations against him. We can put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen from who Else dmz. They say
Speaker 1: Ditty was slapped with a flood of new lawsuits sites
Speaker 1: other celebrities involved. That's probably the most noteworthy and also
Speaker 1: potentially salacious part of this. We read a little bit
Speaker 1: of this article from TMZ. They say Diddy's been hit
Speaker 1: with a flood of new lawsuits, including one brought by
Speaker 1: a girl who referenced unnamed celebrities and was just thirteen
Speaker 1: years old when she says the music mobil drugged and
Speaker 1: raped her at a house party. I'll go ahead and
Speaker 1: say Ditty's lawyers deny all of these allegations. In total,
Speaker 1: he is now facing five additional federal suits. All of
Speaker 1: them were filed by this one Texas attorney on behalf
Speaker 1: of his clients. They all claim that Ditty sexually assaulted
Speaker 1: them and separate attacks between two thousand and twenty twenty two,
Speaker 1: and additional two lawsuits were filed Sunday night in state
Speaker 1: court in New York, so total of seven lawsuits from
Speaker 1: a number of accusers. As TMC details, they say, perhaps
Speaker 1: the most disturbing allegations were levied by this woman who
Speaker 1: was thirteen at the time when she was dropped off
Speaker 1: by a friend at Radio City Music Hall in New
Speaker 1: York City to attend MTV's Video Music Awards. She says
Speaker 1: that she sort of waited outside, you know, she wanted
Speaker 1: to get a look at Ditty.
Speaker 4: She wanted to be able to go.
Speaker 1: To the party and you know, have her moment of
Speaker 1: celebrity interaction encounter. But what she alleges happens is she
Speaker 1: got picked up by a driver said effectively, yeah, I
Speaker 1: think you're his type, gets into the party, is immediately
Speaker 1: drugged with some sort of you know, Cocktail has to
Speaker 1: lie down because she's so dizzy. And then she says
Speaker 1: that Ditty eventually entered that bedroom where she was lying
Speaker 1: down after likely being drugged, with two other celebrities, a
Speaker 1: male and a female, both of whom are unnamed in
Speaker 1: the suit. The accuser says the male celebrity ripped off
Speaker 1: her clothes and raped her while the female celebrity watched.
Speaker 1: Didty also allegedly violently sexually assaulted her while the celebrities watched.
Speaker 1: She says she was able to escape the bedroom stagger
Speaker 1: out of the house to a gas station nearby, where
Speaker 1: she received some help. And as I said before, the
Speaker 1: legal team on Didty side says in court, the truth
Speaker 1: will prevail. Mister Colmbs has never sexually assaulted anyone adult
Speaker 1: or minor man or woman. But saga, of course you know,
Speaker 1: these allegations come on the heels of federal criminal charges
Speaker 1: filed against Ditty for things like sex trafficking. We've seen
Speaker 1: that horrific video of him assaulting R and B singer
Speaker 1: Cassie in a hotel hallway and then dragging her back
Speaker 1: into a hotel room. She really is the person who
Speaker 1: kicked off all of this investigation and really opened the
Speaker 1: floodgates viz Avi Diddy, and you know this new allegations
Speaker 1: involving two other celebrities really does raise the question of
Speaker 1: who else was involved, who else knew, and who else
Speaker 1: should also be having their day in court facing similar
Speaker 1: criminal criminal charges as Diddy himself.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, for example, it's very like the Weinstein
Speaker 2: case where it was an open secret. So, for example,
Speaker 2: fifty Cent was asked about this in a new interview.
Speaker 2: Let's put this on the screen, and he said that
Speaker 2: He's like, look, it seems like I've been doing some
Speaker 2: like I've been saying some extremely outrageous things, but it's
Speaker 2: just me saying what I've been saying for ten years now.
Speaker 2: It's becoming more full facing in the news about the
Speaker 2: puppy stuff. But away from that, I'm like it's just
Speaker 2: my perspective because I stayed away from that stuff the
Speaker 2: entire time.
Speaker 3: That is not my style.
Speaker 2: And I think what he's trying to get at here
Speaker 2: is obviously he's been in the news because he was
Speaker 2: one of the people who would very often bring this
Speaker 2: up in public, one of the few actually in the
Speaker 2: industry that would openly talk about it. It's in the
Speaker 2: same way that I remember looking at videos like from
Speaker 2: the Oscars from like twenty five. I think it was
Speaker 2: Seth MacFarland who made a joke about women having to
Speaker 2: be with Harvey Weinstein. Everybody looks kind of uncomfortable, but
Speaker 2: there was a light laugh in the room. But it's
Speaker 2: like they're joking about it at the Oscars, like a
Speaker 2: decade before the whole me too situation.
Speaker 3: So how does that work?
Speaker 6: You know?
Speaker 3: Exactly same here.
Speaker 2: It was enough of an open secret to be able
Speaker 2: to be talked about basically everywhere, for rumors, for somebody
Speaker 2: very powerful like fifty cent to be able to speak
Speaker 2: about it, and then the actual lawsuits. I mean eventually,
Speaker 2: if you even look at the lead up to this
Speaker 2: whole thing, it's crazy that it took that initial lawsuit
Speaker 2: to even lead to that HSI investigation and now they're
Speaker 2: looking back some thirty years. It's like the Epstein case,
Speaker 2: like the Weinstein case, they're both very similar. Yeah, and
Speaker 2: how they actually broke into the public.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's exactly right. And how widespread, potentially the web
Speaker 1: of abuse was here. And you know, again just based
Speaker 1: on what the federal indictment criminal indictment says.
Speaker 4: They alleged that his.
Speaker 1: Business was effectively criminal enterprise and that many of the
Speaker 1: people involved were directly involved in facilitating this criminal behavior.
Speaker 1: So you know, I suspect some of those people already flipped.
Speaker 1: That's probably how they had the level of insight and
Speaker 1: knowledge that they had. There's also allegations that, in addition
Speaker 1: to the Cassie video, which was horrific, where I mean
Speaker 1: you can't look at it and come to any conclusion
Speaker 1: other than this man as a monster, that there are
Speaker 1: many other videotapes is another thing that has been alleged
Speaker 1: because many of these encounters were apparently recorded. So in
Speaker 1: any case, there's a lot more that's likely to come out,
Speaker 1: but we wanted to give you the very latest about
Speaker 1: the allegations being raised. Let's turn to what is going
Speaker 1: on in the Middle East, and in particular a kind
Speaker 1: of a noteworthy moment on the podcast of comedian Theo Vaughn.
Speaker 1: He had on doctor Gibor Mate, who is an expert
Speaker 1: on emotional distress and trauma, and he was talking to
Speaker 1: Theo about what Palestinian children are going through and what
Speaker 1: impact that is having on them psychologically, and it really
Speaker 1: got to THEO.
Speaker 4: You saw him breaking down in real time. Let's take
Speaker 4: a listen to that.
Speaker 7: Such terrible things as the children and Guds are experiencing
Speaker 7: right now, with the daily bombings and all this kind
Speaker 7: of stuff, What can they think that there's something wrong
Speaker 7: with me?
Speaker 6: Oh imagine some kid over there and gods are looking
Speaker 6: up and there's a bomb and they think, Man, I'm
Speaker 6: so horrible. I deserve to be bombed.
Speaker 7: Well, you know what, there was a study done of
Speaker 7: guds and children.
Speaker 6: Man, that's crazy. I hadn't thought about that. Like, really,
Speaker 6: look imagine that though.
Speaker 7: There was a study done of children in Palestine, can
Speaker 7: you imagine what's going to happen to that generation years
Speaker 7: from now, years from now? I mean, it just breaks
Speaker 7: my heart every day when I think about it. And
Speaker 7: I know I know a lot of my fellow Jews
Speaker 7: don't agree with me, but as the Jewish person, I'm
Speaker 7: not the only one feels that way. It especially breaks
Speaker 7: my heart.
Speaker 6: Yeah, well when you put it in that sense and
Speaker 6: a kid, imagine a kid like you know, yeah, because
Speaker 6: what are they going to think? They don't know, They
Speaker 6: just think, Man, something's so wrong with me. I deserve
Speaker 6: to be killed, yeah, you know, or something I don't.
Speaker 6: I don't know. It's just a terrible no, it's heartbreaking.
Speaker 6: I mean, it feels like a genocide is going on
Speaker 6: over there and you don't know what to do, you know.
Speaker 6: For me, it's like you know, I mean, you can pray,
Speaker 6: you can speak up about it, and I know that
Speaker 6: there's like a more political aspects of it. And we've
Speaker 6: had different people come on to talk about Israel and
Speaker 6: Palestine on here, and it was very knowledgeable for a
Speaker 6: lot of our listeners because you hear about it a lot,
Speaker 6: but you don't know the history and everything.
Speaker 7: But well, I've been there. I went there two and
Speaker 7: a half years ago to work with the Palestine Women
Speaker 7: Torture than Israeli jails. Wow, and they had posted my
Speaker 7: extress disorder. I've seen it with my own eyes.
Speaker 1: Soccer I honestly haven't really you know, watched much of
Speaker 1: THEO Vonn's podcast.
Speaker 4: What did you make of this moment? Because I think
Speaker 4: you're more familiar with.
Speaker 2: I mean, THEO is is a very open minded guy.
Speaker 2: He's I think it actually excels at the podcast format
Speaker 2: and in I don't think it's a surprise that Trump
Speaker 2: was the first person. He was the first person to
Speaker 2: have Trump on the Big Comedy podcast. And I mean
Speaker 2: he's had Kennedy on in the past. He's had actually
Speaker 2: a lot of intellectuals. He's not He's not a dummy
Speaker 2: in the caricature that a lot of people like to
Speaker 2: put him. He's very aware, I think of what everything
Speaker 2: that is going on, and so for him, yeah, I
Speaker 2: think they all do which which you look, you know,
Speaker 2: and having spent some time around these folks, you cannot
Speaker 2: get up there sell tickets to thousands of people and
Speaker 2: be stupid. It's it's almost impossible. Some limited cases, but
Speaker 2: they're Kevin Hart. But what we see with THEO, and
Speaker 2: specifically he is big on addiction and he talks a
Speaker 2: lot about that. He talked about that with Trump and
Speaker 2: Doctor Monte also has talked quite a bit about trauma,
Speaker 2: an addiction how to get past that. So that was
Speaker 2: where a lot of the bonding happened with them. But
Speaker 2: you know what, some of the something that Matte in particular,
Speaker 2: doctor Monte excels at is this description of the horror
Speaker 2: of like childhood trauma and his own experiences of his
Speaker 2: mother escaping the Holocaust and how it internalized for him.
Speaker 2: And he talks a lot about parenthood. I highly recommend
Speaker 2: if you have not listened to any episodes or really
Speaker 2: any of his discussions books, et cetera, I really think
Speaker 2: you should check it out. It will help you really
Speaker 2: change my perception actually of internalized trauma for children and
Speaker 2: how that can be you know, how that can materialize
Speaker 2: over years, even for someone like him who experienced these
Speaker 2: things when he was just a little baby. So in
Speaker 2: that context as well, I thought it was pretty powerful.
Speaker 3: I mean for someone like the O two.
Speaker 2: Look, let's be honest, like the vast majority of the
Speaker 2: old audience probably codes right wing. A lot of dudes,
Speaker 2: people who were young you don't think about this type
Speaker 2: of stuff, especially in this context for a while. So
Speaker 2: for someone like THEO to break down, I mean he
Speaker 2: even used the genocide word, right I think that's pretty crazy.
Speaker 2: Those two things together. That's got to have some impact.
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, I mean, I think there's just a
Speaker 1: basic human moment here where if your heart is at
Speaker 1: all open to what is being done to these children
Speaker 1: in particular, you can't help but be, you know, be
Speaker 1: heartbroken about it. And I read an article yesterday about
Speaker 1: we can put this up on the screen, this image.
Speaker 1: It's very hard to watch this little girl, I don't know,
Speaker 1: maybe she's seven years old, who is carrying her injured
Speaker 1: sister through the streets, who's just you know, maybe a toddler,
Speaker 1: maybe a little bit older, likely orphaned. I I was
Speaker 1: just saying, I was reading this article yesterday. There's nobody
Speaker 1: knows how many orphans now in Gaza, but it's at
Speaker 1: least in the tens of thousands. And just imagine, like,
Speaker 1: you know, her little sister is injured, and I guess
Speaker 1: she's lucky that she at least has a big sister
Speaker 1: who's there to hold her hand and try her best
Speaker 1: to care for her. Imagine that these doctors are talking
Speaker 1: about little kids in the hospital undergoing amputations with literally
Speaker 1: not a soul there to hold their hand, to comfort them,
Speaker 1: to help them get through the pain and the trauma.
Speaker 1: And I mean, it's just unimaginable what we are doing
Speaker 1: to these kids, in particular in Gaza, who did absolutely
Speaker 1: nothing wrong.
Speaker 4: And you know, I actually didn't.
Speaker 1: I didn't really know that kids tend to blame themselves
Speaker 1: for whatever trauma they're experiencing, and their interpretation of the
Speaker 1: world is like, well, if this bad thing is happening
Speaker 1: to me, I must have somehow deserved it. But I mean,
Speaker 1: that is it's unspeakably awful to contemplate. Some of these
Speaker 1: kids have been through so much that they've literally gone mute,
Speaker 1: so they'll you know, arrive at the hospital, they'll be
Speaker 1: they brought to the hospital after perhaps all of their
Speaker 1: family has been killed, that they're alone. They are so
Speaker 1: traumatized that they literally lose the ability to speak, so
Speaker 1: they can't give doctors and other social workers even their
Speaker 1: name to try to find if they have any relatives
Speaker 1: who might be able to care for them. It's just,
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know what you say about it.
Speaker 1: And this is the latest, you know, whore that's unfolding here.
Speaker 1: We can put this up on the screen. These are
Speaker 1: people who are once again being forcibly displaced from Northern Gaza.
Speaker 1: The Israelis have said, effectively, if you don't leave Northern Gaza,
Speaker 1: which as you can see, is already basically reduced to rubble,
Speaker 1: then you will be considered a terrorist.
Speaker 4: You will be considered fair game.
Speaker 1: So, you know, for God knows how many times these
Speaker 1: people have moved, They've been living in tents. There's little food,
Speaker 1: there's a little aid, there's next to no sanitation, communicable
Speaker 1: diseases they're spreading. Almost everybody in the godsas Strip at
Speaker 1: this point is sick or injured. And yet here they are,
Speaker 1: once again, you know, trying to flee to somewhere that
Speaker 1: will be slightly safer. And as this is going on,
Speaker 1: the journalistic angle that CNN decided to take is, Oh
Speaker 1: my goodness, isn't it so terrible for the idea of
Speaker 1: soldiers who are inflicting these atrocities and horrors on the
Speaker 1: Palestinian people. I literally cannot believe this article. As I write,
Speaker 1: we can put this up on the screen. Their headline
Speaker 1: is Israeli soldiers returning from war struggle with trauma and suicide.
Speaker 1: They have a trigger warning at the beginning of this article,
Speaker 1: warning readers about you know if their sensitivity because one
Speaker 1: of the individuals here pictured ends up taking his own
Speaker 1: life not a trigger warning, because they describe how this
Speaker 1: individual and some of the others that they profile talk
Speaker 1: about running bulldozers over hundreds of Palestinians, and the take
Speaker 1: on that is not my god, the atrocities that are
Speaker 1: being committed. The take on this is, oh, these poor
Speaker 1: IDF soldiers are coming back with PTSD. I mean, you
Speaker 1: can't even you can't even make it up, they write here.
Speaker 1: For many soldiers, the war in Gaza is a fight
Speaker 1: for Israel's survival must be won by any means, but
Speaker 1: the battle is also taking a mental toll that, due
Speaker 1: to stigma, is largely hidden from view. Interviews with Israeli soldiers,
Speaker 1: a medic, and the family of Mizrahi, the reservists who
Speaker 1: took his own life, provide a window into the psychological
Speaker 1: burden the war is casting on Israeli society unbelievable. They
Speaker 1: profile one guy who, like I said, talked about how
Speaker 1: he's a vegan now because he had to run over
Speaker 1: so many hundreds of Palestinians and see their insides squired
Speaker 1: out that he can no longer eat meat. And the
Speaker 1: person we're supposed to be sympathetic for is not the
Speaker 1: Palestinians who are being murdered, but for the soldier who's
Speaker 1: traumatized by doing the murdering.
Speaker 3: Like what are we well, that was the wild part
Speaker 3: to me.
Speaker 2: I was like, Okay, look, I could get you know,
Speaker 2: this idea that young people sent off the war that
Speaker 2: they didn't even necessarily choose and all of that, But
Speaker 2: you're like, they're profiling PTSD about people having to run
Speaker 2: over bodies, and You're like, you don't see a little
Speaker 2: bit of the Like you don't see the difference between
Speaker 2: this or how it would be equally applicable maybe for
Speaker 2: the people.
Speaker 3: Getting run over or also have to watch other people
Speaker 3: run over them.
Speaker 2: That's where it all just looks ridiculous, you know, especially
Speaker 2: with that CNN angle. But I mean in general, that's
Speaker 2: really the That's what the West like wants to look
Speaker 2: at it, right, They would just want they It's very
Speaker 2: simplistic for them. It's like this is you know, Nazi Germany.
Speaker 2: So yes, it's very sad what happened to the German people,
Speaker 2: but at the end of the day, it was worth it,
Speaker 2: and that's what it all is. But the problem for that,
Speaker 2: obviously is not only is it much more deeply complex
Speaker 2: or whatever than that, but they also refuse to see
Speaker 2: the pushback that this is leading to the US itself,
Speaker 2: which we talked about yesterday with sinwar and with how
Speaker 2: we basically is like a hero amongst a lot of
Speaker 2: people inside the Middle East. Now, but now by enabling
Speaker 2: a lot of this, we have this war in Lebanon
Speaker 2: where when you start to look at the demands for
Speaker 2: what the end of that war is, you're actually looking
Speaker 2: at the same reason for why we're spending one hundred
Speaker 2: billion dollars to support Ukraine. So how does that work?
Speaker 2: We're talking about Israeli basically demanding territory in Lebanon. Okay, fine,
Speaker 2: but then don't tell me that we need to support
Speaker 2: Ukraine because of an unjustified illegal invasion, as if what
Speaker 2: the un sanctity of borders is so important for one
Speaker 2: client state but then not for another.
Speaker 3: It just doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, that's exactly right. And just to go back
Speaker 1: because I relate the CNN article really floored me. Other
Speaker 1: people like I'm not the first one to say this,
Speaker 1: but imagine during World War two, a profile, and like,
Speaker 1: you know, I switch prison guards and the trauma that
Speaker 1: their experience from the horror of their job. I don't
Speaker 1: see this as any different. Sorry, I don't one of
Speaker 1: the people they are profiling here as so traumatized. Was
Speaker 1: you know, one of the idea of soldiers like posting
Speaker 1: his war crimes on TikTok for the world, is proud
Speaker 1: of proud of what he's doing. It's proud of what
Speaker 1: he's doing there, he's posting it for the world. So
Speaker 1: I don't know's it is a sick, sick view that
Speaker 1: you look at these kids who are orphaned, who are amputu,
Speaker 1: will spend the rest of their life without a parent,
Speaker 1: without family, if they even escape with their life, who
Speaker 1: will deal with this trauma for the entire rest of
Speaker 1: their days? And this is the profile that you decide
Speaker 1: to write. But you know, to get to the larger
Speaker 1: geopolitical situation here, I can put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: Israel has issued to the US their demands for ending
Speaker 1: the war in Lebanon. Was in Bill Clinton who said,
Speaker 1: who was the fucking superpower here? Apparently Israel? Apparently we're
Speaker 1: the client state. And I'm not even joking about that,
Speaker 1: because how else can you read the situation at this point.
Speaker 1: Israel gave the US document last week with its conditions
Speaker 1: for a diplomatic solution and the war in Lebanon. Israel's
Speaker 1: demanded its Ida forces be allowed to engage in active
Speaker 1: enforcement to make sure Haswala doesn't rearm and rebuild its
Speaker 1: military infrastructure close to the border. Israel also demanded its
Speaker 1: air force have freedom of operation in Lebanese airspace. Now,
Speaker 1: I want you to imagine from an American perspective. Let's say
Speaker 1: that Canada was some you know, client state of global
Speaker 1: sup of China, global superpower. Right, But let's say that
Speaker 1: there were the client state of of China, and they
Speaker 1: wanted the ability to have access, unlimited access with their
Speaker 1: air force to our airspace, and they wanted to be
Speaker 1: able to conduct military operations in some significant part of
Speaker 1: our country whenever and however they placed. There is no
Speaker 1: country on Earth that would accept this type of not
Speaker 1: just breach of their sovereignty, but this is an all
Speaker 1: assault on Lebanese sovereignty. And you know they've already talked
Speaker 1: about effectively annexing Lebanese land, creating this quote unquote buffer
Speaker 1: zones exactly what they were talking about with regard to Gaza.
Speaker 1: Now they're talking about just one of the party coalition
Speaker 1: partners was just at a conference talking about how we
Speaker 1: need to push out all Palacinaians from Gaza and just
Speaker 1: resettle all of this because quote, the land is ours. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's been the trajectory in Gaza. We also see now
Speaker 1: they're putting out these propaganda videos exactly like the ones
Speaker 1: that they used in Gaza, claiming that there's Hezbolah money
Speaker 1: underneath of a hospital in Lebanon to lay the groundwork
Speaker 1: to justifying an assault on the Lebanese health system and
Speaker 1: hospital system, just as they did in the Gazas trip.
Speaker 1: So you needless to say, this is not a serious
Speaker 1: proposal for any sort of peace or cessation of hostilities.
Speaker 1: There is no way that anyone is going to accept
Speaker 1: these kind of conditions, which is basically are like, we
Speaker 1: want to be able to do whatever the hell we want,
Speaker 1: whatever and however we want to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's basically right. All right, Thank you so much
Speaker 2: for watching, guys, We appreciate you. There'll be a great
Speaker 2: counterpoints show for everyone tomorrow. We'll see you all on Thursday.