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 this show.
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 1: 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 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 1: news media, and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: Republicans are putting together their budget proposal referred to this earlier,
Speaker 2: and you know, it looks like giant tax cuts for
Speaker 2: the rich and a bunch of cuts to programs that
Speaker 2: benefit the poor and working poor, And in particular, they're
Speaker 2: taking a giant hatchet to medicaid.
Speaker 3: So Trump and his.
Speaker 2: Little you know, dual interview with Elon sitting next to him,
Speaker 2: was asked about whether there would be cuts to Social Security, Medicare,
Speaker 2: and Medicaid quote unquote entitlement programs.
Speaker 3: Take a listen to what he had to say.
Speaker 4: We don't need a Department of Education, okay, And what
Speaker 4: some people are trying to do is stoke fears that
Speaker 4: oh my gosh, my kid's not going to get the
Speaker 4: money for education or grandma. Social Security and Medicare. This
Speaker 4: is a big promise of yours on the campaign trail.
Speaker 4: So I really want to give you both an opportunity
Speaker 4: to assure the American people you will keep money will
Speaker 4: be allocated for students, but with higher standards. For example,
Speaker 4: I would assume associated with money is given.
Speaker 5: Or just so much. And then Elon goes, but look,
Speaker 5: social Security won't be touched other than it be fraud
Speaker 5: or something we're going to find. It's going to be strengthened,
Speaker 5: but won't be touched. Medicare, Medicaid, none of that stuff
Speaker 5: is going to be touched.
Speaker 6: Nothing.
Speaker 5: I want you to have to now, if there are illegal
Speaker 5: migrants in the system, we're going to get them out
Speaker 5: of the system and all of that fraud, but it's
Speaker 5: not going to be touching.
Speaker 2: So no cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
Speaker 3: He says.
Speaker 2: Then the very next day put this up on the screen.
Speaker 2: He goes out and backs the House budget proposal, which
Speaker 2: dramatically cuts Medicaid, the program in Sanstein points out Trump
Speaker 2: said last night he would not touch Here's the truth
Speaker 2: social that he posts the House and Center doing a
Speaker 2: spectacular job of working together as when unified, an unbeatable
Speaker 2: team in all caps. However, unlike the Lindsey Graham version
Speaker 2: of the very important legislation currently being discussed, the House
Speaker 2: resolution implements my full America First Agenda everything, not just
Speaker 2: parts of it. We need both chambers to pass the
Speaker 2: House budget to kickstart the reconciliation process, move all our
Speaker 2: priorities to the concept of one big, beautiful bill will
Speaker 2: without question make America great again. So you also, you know,
Speaker 2: I mean Trump has built and this is one of
Speaker 2: the divergences of Trump two point zero versus Trump one
Speaker 2: point zero. He really built a lot of his stance
Speaker 2: in the Republican Party and a lot of his credibility
Speaker 2: with regular people off of this repeated promise he was
Speaker 2: not going to touch Social Security and Medicare. And then
Speaker 2: in that statement he also had originally expanded it, which
Speaker 2: on Hannity, to Medicaid. But Elon thinks all of these
Speaker 2: programs should go and makes that quite clear on a
Speaker 2: regular basis, he's always retweeting Mike leasing Social securities of
Speaker 2: Ponzi scheme and it would be better if everybody was
Speaker 2: in private retirement accounts, et cetera, et cetera. He also
Speaker 2: has gone out of his way to fraudulently claim that
Speaker 2: Social Security is sending out all.
Speaker 3: Of these proper payments, you know.
Speaker 2: To people who are three hundred years old or whatever,
Speaker 2: which is total, incomplete nonsense. Saga and I talked about
Speaker 2: this earlier in the week. You can go check out
Speaker 2: that segment for the details and the receipts there. So
Speaker 2: clearly Elon wants to dismantle these programs, and it's trying
Speaker 2: to frame it as like, oh, we're just going after
Speaker 2: the fraud, we're not actually cutting benefits. But you know,
Speaker 2: if you're backing the House Republican bill that takes that's
Speaker 2: cutting some what eight hundred billion dollars from medicaid, you
Speaker 2: are going to hit benefits for a lot of people.
Speaker 2: And also if you're serious about you know, Elon talks
Speaker 2: about cutting two trillion dollars in discretionary spending from the
Speaker 2: federal budget. If seventy percent of discretionary spending is Social Security, Medicare,
Speaker 2: and Medicaid. So these programs are very much on the
Speaker 2: shopping block. And Trump admitting here, you know, backing the
Speaker 2: House bill and you know, aggressively and saying it's my
Speaker 2: full agenda and it's spectacular. It's that it's one big
Speaker 2: beautiful bill, you know, makes it pretty plain that he's
Speaker 2: not going to stand on the way of these kind
Speaker 2: of cuts.
Speaker 7: So to play Trump's advocate here, well, not advocate, but
Speaker 7: a potential defense of what Trump is doing here. If
Speaker 7: you notice in his comment what he says is all
Speaker 7: caps everything, not just parts of it.
Speaker 6: Is what we need.
Speaker 7: We need both chambers to pass the House budget to kickstart.
Speaker 7: And he puts that in quotes the reconciliation process and
Speaker 7: move all of our priorities to the concept of one
Speaker 7: big beautiful bill.
Speaker 6: It will without question make America great again.
Speaker 7: So what you could believe, and this is what you know,
Speaker 7: the people who are hopeful that Trump is actually going
Speaker 7: to stick by what he said about medicaid, what you
Speaker 7: could believe is that he's saying the House process of
Speaker 7: doing the tax cuts and all the spending cuts in
Speaker 7: the same reconciliation bill and reconciliation just means that you
Speaker 7: can pass it with fifty votes in the Senate. Is
Speaker 7: superior to the Senate approach, which is to do separate
Speaker 7: reconciliation bills, where you're going to do the reforms here
Speaker 7: and do the budget with the Medicaid and America cuts
Speaker 7: and all this, and then you're going to do the
Speaker 7: tax cuts. There are a lot of mega people who
Speaker 7: are arguing, if you do that, you will fail, Like,
Speaker 7: we have one shot. We being maga, we have one
Speaker 7: shot to do this all at once at the beginning
Speaker 7: of the year.
Speaker 6: We got to do it immediately so that it all.
Speaker 7: Takes effect because they've seen Obama and Biden fail because
Speaker 7: they pass all these good things and all they get
Speaker 7: is the bad press and the taxes, and then the
Speaker 7: actual spending comes too late to be politically beneficial.
Speaker 6: And so these republicshers don't be idiots. Do this now so.
Speaker 7: That by the time the midterms come around, people are
Speaker 7: feeling the benefits of all those wonderful things we did.
Speaker 7: So the argument would be Trump's only endorsing the House
Speaker 7: process of doing, of putting them all together, and that
Speaker 7: he's still going to stop fight them on Medicaid.
Speaker 6: The counter to that is, good luck, you can't.
Speaker 7: The numbers don't work out exactly, so you're going to
Speaker 7: have to But the way that Trump will could ultimately
Speaker 7: make the numbers work out is just blow the depth
Speaker 7: sit up much further. Right, Okay, we're going to do
Speaker 7: the tax cuts and we're gonna preserve Medicaid and Medicare
Speaker 7: and solid security, which is what I think they will
Speaker 7: actually end up doing.
Speaker 6: And then when we're like.
Speaker 7: Hey, you said you cared about the deficit, they'll be like, wow,
Speaker 7: we didn't, and neither do you.
Speaker 2: Do you think that there are because the other thing
Speaker 2: they have to deal with is they have a what
Speaker 2: three vote region in the House, so they have to
Speaker 2: get every Republican unless there are a few Democrats that
Speaker 2: might vote along with them, which you know it's possible.
Speaker 3: These are very weak people who are you know, some
Speaker 3: of them.
Speaker 2: Desperate to appear like, oh, we're bipartisan blah blah blah.
Speaker 2: And you know some of them are have positioned themselves
Speaker 2: as these sort of like austerity deficit hawk tea party types,
Speaker 2: the chip Roys of the world and whatever, and so
Speaker 2: that is the reason why you know they're desperate, they're
Speaker 2: definitely going to have in there. They're four trillion dollar
Speaker 2: extension of tax cuts for the rich. That's the Tax
Speaker 2: Cuts and Jobs Act that you originally pass, and now
Speaker 2: it has to be extended. That's a huge price tag,
Speaker 2: four trillion dollars over what ten year period. And so
Speaker 2: if you're going to even and fudge the numbers to
Speaker 2: make it look like you're not adding to the deficit,
Speaker 2: which they're already saying, like, we're going to fudge the numbers.
Speaker 2: We're going to pretend like we're going to get all
Speaker 2: this growth that you know, doesn't really Maybe they will,
Speaker 2: but it's unlikely. It's not the way they normally do
Speaker 2: normally do scoring. But whatever, they're already saying, Okay, we're
Speaker 2: going to fudge the numbers in this particular way, it's
Speaker 2: still is going to require a lot of cuts from somewhere,
Speaker 2: and especially if you're going to add on top of
Speaker 2: that any of the tax related promises that Trump made
Speaker 2: to working class people, let alone the whole salt tax situation,
Speaker 2: which also would be a very expensive add on. So
Speaker 2: how are you going to you know, how are you
Speaker 2: going to compensate for all of that? On the other side.
Speaker 2: And as if you're digging into these numbers on DOGE,
Speaker 2: you're quickly learning there are just a few buckets in
Speaker 2: the federal budget that really make up the bulk of
Speaker 2: the spending. It's the military, and it is the and
Speaker 2: it is healthcare, Medicare and Medicaid, and it is Social Security.
Speaker 2: And if you aren't those things like you are nibbling around.
Speaker 3: The edges, that's just the reality.
Speaker 2: Right now, you can put this next piece up on
Speaker 2: the screen because this also gets to the same dynamic.
Speaker 2: So the House Republican budget also calls for an increase
Speaker 2: in defense spending, one hundred billion dollar increase in defense spending.
Speaker 2: This is the plan again that Trump just endorsed, as
Speaker 2: prem Dogger is pointing out here, at the very same
Speaker 2: time that he has asked the Pentagon for a plan
Speaker 2: to implement sweeping budget cuts, slashing eight percent from the
Speaker 2: defense budget in each of the next five years, per
Speaker 2: amendment that was obtained by the Washington Post. Apparently Pete
Speaker 2: Hegseth has directed the agency to go out and look
Speaker 2: for how they would accomplish these cuts, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2: So again you have Trump endorsing an increase of one
Speaker 2: hundred billion dollars in the defense budget at the same
Speaker 2: time that he's signaling an interest in another direction.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 7: So when you listen to a lot of the House
Speaker 7: Republicans and Senate republic Cans talk about Doge and talk
Speaker 7: about Trump's talking about Trump rolling back the empire and
Speaker 7: going doing spending cuts, they very quickly.
Speaker 6: Get uncomfortable as soon as the Pentagon comes up.
Speaker 7: That's right, It's it's wild, like they're the The number
Speaker 7: of people within the MAGA coalition at the top willing
Speaker 7: to take on the Pentagon is minuscule.
Speaker 3: Well, and there's a reason why the.
Speaker 7: Base they're there ish for it as long as it
Speaker 7: goes after the I think they're willing to go after
Speaker 7: the weapons makers, the military industrial complex. A huge portion
Speaker 7: of our spending is you know, veterans affairs and and
Speaker 7: salaries of active duty enlisted people.
Speaker 8: Uh.
Speaker 6: And there were there who.
Speaker 7: Are already struggling on food stamps and like, you know,
Speaker 7: so that gets interesting too.
Speaker 6: You ut the military budget too far, you're now you're
Speaker 6: coming out getting into backshits humans.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, and actually, if you look at the polling, if
Speaker 2: you ask people where you would most.
Speaker 3: Want things cut. It is the military, right, you know, they.
Speaker 2: Don't they don't want people like the idea. Like if
Speaker 2: you ask, okay, should federal garnment spending be cut? Of
Speaker 2: course they you know, yes, we should be more efficient,
Speaker 2: We should have you know, cut out the fat blah
Speaker 2: blah blah. If you ask them, okay, well, should we
Speaker 2: cut programs for poor people?
Speaker 9: No?
Speaker 2: Should we cut education no? Should we cut so scurity
Speaker 2: absolutely not. Should we cut metagear absolutely not. Should we
Speaker 2: cut defense mending, yes, yes, yes we should.
Speaker 6: But you know this from where you live.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 7: If you ask anybody there if they should close the base, Oh,
Speaker 7: that's that they want to close the base.
Speaker 2: That would be devastating, would be a death blow for
Speaker 2: the particular town that I live in, and that is.
Speaker 6: Part of why you're not at all alone.
Speaker 3: That's exactly right, right.
Speaker 6: The people watching this.
Speaker 7: Program right now live in an area that would be
Speaker 7: hurt very badly.
Speaker 2: And that is part of why so, I mean, part
Speaker 2: of why the military budget always escalates is because you
Speaker 2: have these defense manufacturer then you know, military industrial complex
Speaker 2: that spends a lot of money in Congress and make
Speaker 2: sure they get their you know, fat subsidies and their
Speaker 2: budgets and their like boot and doggle weapons systems that
Speaker 2: costs have massive cost overruns and are totally unaccountable and
Speaker 2: an audit.
Speaker 3: And all that stuff.
Speaker 2: Right, that is a big that is a significant chunk
Speaker 2: of it. But also these military expenditures go into almost
Speaker 2: every district congressional district in the probably everyone actually in
Speaker 2: the entire country. And purpose that's that is on purpose.
Speaker 2: It is a sort of jobs program. And so you know,
Speaker 2: you once you start to actually threaten that, then you
Speaker 2: get a lot of members on both both parties. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is part of what creates that unit party consensus
Speaker 2: who start to get very upset about the you know,
Speaker 2: the bases or the manufacturers or whatever it is in
Speaker 2: their district that is important to the economy and the
Speaker 2: people there.
Speaker 6: No, there was even that wild moment Whereie Bernie was like,
Speaker 6: you sure we want to cut this f whatever?
Speaker 7: Like there was some some like I forget exactly what
Speaker 7: weapon system they were making in Vermont, but Bernie is like,
Speaker 7: is that really where we need to cut?
Speaker 6: They know what they're doing when they built this system.
Speaker 2: Suddenly suddenly it's a little different when it's your state
Speaker 2: or your treasured priority. So we'll see how all that
Speaker 2: shakes out. But very interesting stuff. So we have some
Speaker 2: significant court developments that we wanted.
Speaker 3: To go through for you.
Speaker 2: So one of the big questions is, okay, so some
Speaker 2: of these temporary restraining orders injunctions are coming down against
Speaker 2: the Trump administration and some of the efforts under doge.
Speaker 2: Are they going to listen or are they going to
Speaker 2: do what Jade Vance and others have suggested of just
Speaker 2: saying hey, like you and what army are going to
Speaker 2: enforce this court injunction? And we have another troubling indication
Speaker 2: in terms of the approach that the Trump administration is
Speaker 2: going to take to go and put this up on
Speaker 2: the screen from Reuters. So nonprofits have now asked a
Speaker 2: judge to hold US officials in contempt for defying an
Speaker 2: order with regard to specifically USAID.
Speaker 3: So the way was all pause on.
Speaker 6: That's just for one throwback.
Speaker 7: One of the nonprofits here is the AIDS Vaccine Program.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 7: The other one is the Journalism Development Network, which is
Speaker 7: the business name of the O C c.
Speaker 6: RP which we wrote about.
Speaker 7: That's the one you that's the USAID funded news organization
Speaker 7: that was.
Speaker 6: The just you can go read our story and look.
Speaker 2: At it doing like US propaganda basically deep States.
Speaker 7: From they they very strongly will say that there is
Speaker 7: no influence from the US of their funding, but it
Speaker 7: was funded. You know, a lot of their funding comes
Speaker 7: through Russian you know, countering Russian disinformation, was.
Speaker 3: Involved in the Romania situation.
Speaker 7: There's there's deaths there, there's involvement with the Romanian situation.
Speaker 7: It's so, yeah, it's US funding for overseas journalism. That is, uh,
Speaker 7: that is controversial because taking government money directly to fund
Speaker 7: journalisms is just in the journalism world, extremely controversial.
Speaker 6: Yes, like we wouldn't do it for instance.
Speaker 7: Yes, exactly right, exactly, that's what that they Coincidentally, they
Speaker 7: happened to.
Speaker 3: Be one one of the groups that's doing Yeah.
Speaker 2: So the way this went down is, you guys will
Speaker 2: recall there was this There were a couple of executive
Speaker 2: orders that were well some of our executive orders, some
Speaker 2: of them were just memorandoms that were issued by the
Speaker 2: Office of Management and Budget, but in any case said directly,
Speaker 2: you have to we're freezing all foreign aid spending. We're
Speaker 2: freezing anything that has to do with you know DEI
Speaker 2: or quote unquote green new deal led to this huge
Speaker 2: amount of confusion. Medicaid portals were shut down for a while,
Speaker 2: and you know, it's still has been the case that
Speaker 2: some things have continued to be frozen. While a judge
Speaker 2: looked at this and said, you have to unfreeze the funds,
Speaker 2: and that has led to this sort of court battle
Speaker 2: with the Trump administration arguing that while the funds you're
Speaker 2: telling us to unfreeze, like that doesn't really apply to
Speaker 2: some of these other executive orders that we issued, and
Speaker 2: USAID is really at the center of it. But in
Speaker 2: this dispute, the judge came back and said, no, when
Speaker 2: I said unfreeze the funds, I meant unfreeze all the funds,
Speaker 2: including funds at USAI D Trump administration has continued to
Speaker 2: resist that order and put in a court filing offering
Speaker 2: some new sort of convoluted rationale for why those don't
Speaker 2: funds don't apply. When the judge, immy I read the
Speaker 2: order was quite clear like no, no, no, I meant
Speaker 2: all the funds have to be here unfrozen. So these
Speaker 2: nonprofits that are suing, they said the court shoand not
Speaker 2: brook such brazen defiance of the express terms of its order,
Speaker 2: and they're asking specifically for Secretary of State Marco Rubio
Speaker 2: and USAID Deputy Administrator Pete Morocco and the OMB director
Speaker 2: Russ Vote, who is one of the real ideological architects
Speaker 2: behind this whole thing, to be held in civil contempt.
Speaker 2: It could put this next piece up on the screen.
Speaker 2: This is just the court filing here, Kyle Cheney, who's
Speaker 2: a good followist in terms of just like the legal
Speaker 2: you know, all the back and forth legal pieces that
Speaker 2: are many and varied. At this point, breaking USAID contractors,
Speaker 2: AID recipients say Rubio and USAD leaders should be held
Speaker 2: in civil can have reviolating a court order to lift
Speaker 2: spending freeze. So you can see that there on the side.
Speaker 2: So we still have not I think Ryan reached the
Speaker 2: point where they're just saying, now we're just not going
Speaker 2: to listen, right, They're still cloaking it in. We have
Speaker 2: some convoluted legal rationale for why this isn't directly in
Speaker 2: defiance of your court order. But we are inching closer
Speaker 2: to that level of just like you told us to
Speaker 2: unfreeze the funds, and we're just not.
Speaker 3: Going to do that.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and to put Trump's argument legal argument here in
Speaker 7: its best light, what he's What they're saying is, Okay,
Speaker 7: you're right. The freeze that we did that was that
Speaker 7: was wrong. You've told us to lift the freeze. Boom.
Speaker 7: We have lifted the freeze. However, we still have discretion
Speaker 7: on a case by case basis to not pay out
Speaker 7: these particular grants because within the grants they're at each
Speaker 7: contract has language that if the you know us to
Speaker 7: size it is no longer in the interest of the
Speaker 7: US to continue with this grant, that the US can
Speaker 7: stop the grant, and the President is deciding that it's
Speaker 7: not in his.
Speaker 6: Interest and we're not.
Speaker 7: And so therefore we're not saying that we're never going
Speaker 7: to spend the congressionally mandated appropriations, so we're not impounding
Speaker 7: the money. We're just pausing this particular contract because we
Speaker 7: feel like this particular contract is not in our national
Speaker 7: interest and not in accordance with the executive order at
Speaker 7: this moment, which I think actually would be a completely
Speaker 7: fair argument if not for everything else they're saying, which
Speaker 7: which goes to a broader read, which is they are
Speaker 7: actually freezing everything. Have no intention of spending it right,
Speaker 7: and are trying to impound it, but just not say
Speaker 7: yet that they're impounding it there is or not, because
Speaker 7: they're they're gearing up toward that fight, but they're not
Speaker 7: having it yet. So but this this particular argument, yeah,
Speaker 7: of course, Like on an individual level, if a state,
Speaker 7: if the USA IDEA or state department says, you know,
Speaker 7: actually we don't like the way that they handled this
Speaker 7: Romania situation, so we're cutting their contract. You can do that, sure,
Speaker 7: But so the question is that really what they're doing.
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, And I mean this kind of relates what
Speaker 2: you're describing here to They made a court filing saying
Speaker 2: Elon is not actually the head of DOGE, Like he's
Speaker 2: just some guy.
Speaker 3: Like he's kind of like Anita Dunn.
Speaker 2: You know, he works in the White House, he works
Speaker 2: with Trump, he's an advisor, but he's not in charge
Speaker 2: of DOGE. He doesn't have anything really directly to do
Speaker 2: with DOGE. Even as Trump is out there being like
Speaker 2: Elon's in charge of DOGE.
Speaker 3: He's doing a great job.
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course, I mean this is obvious, right, and
Speaker 2: they haven't hit it whatsoever. But because it creates some
Speaker 2: legal complexities for them. In particular, one of the lawsuits
Speaker 2: is about the appointment's clause of the Constitution, where if
Speaker 2: you're going to have I don't know what the legal
Speaker 2: language is, but if you're going to have the significant role,
Speaker 2: you have to have a Senate confirmation. And so so
Speaker 2: they want to downplay in the context of that lawsuit
Speaker 2: Elon's involvement. So they're denying what was like plainly obvious
Speaker 2: and what they admit to and the way they talk
Speaker 2: about Elon and his relationship to DOGE all the time.
Speaker 2: And by the way, if you ask Trump, okay, well,
Speaker 2: if Elon isn't in charge of DOGE, who is, he
Speaker 2: has no answer because Elon is obviously in.
Speaker 3: Charge of Dose.
Speaker 2: So this kind of you know, ties into that, denying
Speaker 2: the reality that is in front of us with some
Speaker 2: you know, uh, sort of convoluted legal argument, ties into
Speaker 2: that whole thing. There have been a few other developments
Speaker 2: here that I think are worth just running through quickly.
Speaker 2: So there was another executive order that was signed by
Speaker 2: Trump that does a variety of things, but in particular
Speaker 2: is really trying to undercut the independence of some key agencies,
Speaker 2: normally namely the FDC, the FCC and the sec which
Speaker 2: is the Securities Exchange Commission, which you know, they were
Speaker 2: upset that the Securities Exchange Commission was actually doing his
Speaker 2: job somewhat under Biden, and like lots with regard to
Speaker 2: CORCT now, so they're trying to get them.
Speaker 3: Under control over there.
Speaker 2: But really extraordinary also legal positioning and framing here that
Speaker 2: really ties into Trump's comments about how you can't violate
Speaker 2: the law if you are saving the state, and some
Speaker 2: of the other more dictatorial positions that he has taken,
Speaker 2: which is that listen, only the President and the Attorney
Speaker 2: General can speak for quote, what the law is.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 10: Lastly, we have another executive order the President Trump signed
Speaker 10: relating to independent agencies. This executive order would establish important
Speaker 10: oversight functions in the Office of Management and Budget and
Speaker 10: its subsidiary office OHIRA, supervising independent agencies and many of
Speaker 10: their actions, and also re establishes the longstanding norm that
Speaker 10: only the President or the Attorney General can speak for
Speaker 10: the United States when stating an opinion as to what
Speaker 10: the law is.
Speaker 2: So this fits with also the way that Elon has
Speaker 2: been describing the workings of our government.
Speaker 3: Which is basically like.
Speaker 2: Trump is the only true representative of the people. So
Speaker 2: if you're standing in the way of what Trump wants
Speaker 2: to do, then you are anti democratic. You are trying
Speaker 2: to thwart the will of the people. And as you
Speaker 2: pointed out many times, Ryan, that is not the way
Speaker 2: that our system works. In fact, the House of Representatives
Speaker 2: is specifically set up to be a more representative body
Speaker 2: and to reflect the individual proclivities regional proclivities of all
Speaker 2: the different districts and varied constituencies within the country. We
Speaker 2: don't have a system where the president is basically like
Speaker 2: king and gets to wipe the slate clean and implement
Speaker 2: his entire agenda. But that is the way that they're
Speaker 2: trying to position and explain their philosophy about.
Speaker 3: All of this.
Speaker 7: And if he's restricting when he says the US, if
Speaker 7: he just means the executive because sometimes that's what that's
Speaker 7: how you refer to the executive. You know, it's the
Speaker 7: US if you go to civil court or criminal court
Speaker 7: to US versus you know, Whoever, if.
Speaker 6: That's what you mean, I could, I could.
Speaker 7: There's an argument to be made that the president wins,
Speaker 7: he should be able to tell the SEC what its
Speaker 7: priorities should be, and if the SEC is not abiding
Speaker 7: by those priorities, he should be able to change, you know,
Speaker 7: change out you know who the leaders of the SEC are,
Speaker 7: or the CFP B or FTC or any of these
Speaker 7: other agencies. Like you have an election, you run on
Speaker 7: saying you're going to do something through the FTC.
Speaker 6: It would be.
Speaker 7: Messed up if Trump wanted to do anti monopoly stuff
Speaker 7: and he's got Wall Street guys over it em and
Speaker 7: a guys.
Speaker 6: Over at FTC, and they're like, no, we're not doing that.
Speaker 7: But what you can't do is just dismantle them with
Speaker 7: like he's doing with CFP Bright Because I'm actually okay
Speaker 7: with a president within the laws created by Congress having
Speaker 7: having a direction direct you know, having direction.
Speaker 6: Over these agencies. I think that's fine.
Speaker 7: But you can't just get rid of him, right, which
Speaker 7: he's which look, with several of them, he's just saying like, oh,
Speaker 7: this doesn't exist anymore. We're putting putting it in either
Speaker 7: in the wood chipper or r A p C, CFPB
Speaker 7: like you have to Congress has to be involved in that.
Speaker 6: That's our system.
Speaker 2: Yeah, very well said, All right, let's go ahead and
Speaker 2: move on to this congestion pricing piece, which kind of
Speaker 2: fits into the whole, like Trump acting like a dictator,
Speaker 2: or Eline acting like a dictator, et cetera.
Speaker 7: President Donald Trump has weighed in on New York City's
Speaker 7: congestion pricing, put this element on the screen saying that
Speaker 7: it's dead. He's going to kill it. Congestion pricing is dead.
Speaker 7: Manhattan and all of New York is saved. Long Live
Speaker 7: the King. That posted Donald J. Trump to his truth
Speaker 7: social This was curiously a significant amount of leverage that
Speaker 7: Trump had over Governor Hockel, who is now under pressure
Speaker 7: to remove Eric Adams from office.
Speaker 6: There was some there was.
Speaker 7: Some sense that one that you didn't want to cross
Speaker 7: Trump because she didn't want the congestion pricing to be nuked.
Speaker 6: That leverage is is now gone.
Speaker 7: Trump really leaning into this, uh you know King Donald
Speaker 7: routine that he that he started here.
Speaker 6: He also the White House posted this.
Speaker 7: We can put his next element up a mock up
Speaker 7: of a fake Time magazine with that's Trump with wearing
Speaker 7: a crown with long Live the King written under it.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 7: Congestion pricing is only about a month old at this point.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 7: And Governor Hockle came out with a statement, uh urging
Speaker 7: Trump to you know, back off of this effort to
Speaker 7: kill it.
Speaker 6: We can put this next element up here. This is
Speaker 6: statement from Governor Katy the Hogle.
Speaker 7: She says, public transit is the lifeblood of New York
Speaker 7: City and critical to our economic future. As a New Yorker,
Speaker 7: like President Trump knows very well. Since this first in
Speaker 7: the nation program took effect last month, congestion has dropped
Speaker 7: dramatically and commuters are getting to work faster than ever.
Speaker 7: Broadway shows are selling out, and foot traffic to local
Speaker 7: businesses is spiking. School buses are getting kids to class
Speaker 7: on time, and yellow cab trips increased by ten percent.
Speaker 7: Transit ridership is up, drivers are having a better experience,
Speaker 7: and support for this program is growing every day. We
Speaker 7: are a nation of laws, not ruled by a king.
Speaker 7: The MTA has initiated legal proceedings in the Southern District
Speaker 7: of New York to preserve this critical program. We'll see
Speaker 7: you in court, she says. And you know, key to
Speaker 7: this is that question of I mean, aside from whether
Speaker 7: or not we're ruled by a king or not. We'll
Speaker 7: figure that out over the next couple of years, the
Speaker 7: question of whether or not this is popular. I can
Speaker 7: put this next element up on the screen, a poll
Speaker 7: about six and ten saying they want New York City
Speaker 7: congestion pricing to continue. If you dive deeper into the pole,
Speaker 7: the support is quite strong for this new program, Stronger
Speaker 7: than it was, I would say when it was launched.
Speaker 3: Yes, that was what I found as well.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and the advocates of it argued that it is
Speaker 7: one of those government programs that doesn't feel right out
Speaker 7: of the gate. You're like, I got to pay for
Speaker 7: something I didn't have to pay for before, which, by
Speaker 7: the way, streets are the only thing that we think
Speaker 7: should be free. Like if you ever suggest that riding
Speaker 7: the bus should be free or riding the subway should
Speaker 7: be free, which I'd be cool with, Yeah, you sound
Speaker 7: like a radical commy socialist.
Speaker 6: And they're like, what are you crazy?
Speaker 7: But why Like, that's the public built the bus list
Speaker 7: and the public built the subway, and the public built
Speaker 7: the roads.
Speaker 6: It's the roads that people feel like they have this
Speaker 6: right to.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 6: So when it comes to the congestion pricings, I put up.
Speaker 7: On my feed last night, I was curious for my
Speaker 7: own followers how they were liking it. And you know,
Speaker 7: I think universally everyone who responded, at least to me.
Speaker 7: Obviously it is not a scientific poll, you know, but
Speaker 7: Twitter is filled with you know, cranky conservative people who
Speaker 7: don't like and they have they are not shy about
Speaker 7: sharing their opinions with me. As you can just scroll
Speaker 7: through my feed and see everyone is like, the streets
Speaker 7: are it's the commutes are less. I'm shaving a half
Speaker 7: an hour to an hour off my commute. You can
Speaker 7: walk around the city better. Public transmission ridership is up
Speaker 7: and money is flowing in to the city that is
Speaker 7: supposed to be earmarked to upgrade the subways. And the
Speaker 7: bus is as somebody pointed out, the buses from New
Speaker 7: Jersey are making it through the tunnels much more smoothly,
Speaker 7: which then makes being able to take the bus much
Speaker 7: more feasible. Thing before, like, I'm not going to take
Speaker 7: the bus and sit for thirty minutes inside this tunnel. Yeah,
Speaker 7: but now if it's going to move through, and if
Speaker 7: the bus is if you're taking the bus from Harlem
Speaker 7: all the way down and it's moving much quicker, and
Speaker 7: all of a sudden, a bus trip which previously was
Speaker 7: not even something that you would consider doing because once
Speaker 7: it's in a bus for an hour and a half,
Speaker 7: now all of a sudden, it's reasonable. And now your
Speaker 7: uber and your taxi rides are much much quicker too.
Speaker 7: So everyone seems happy, obviously except for people who are
Speaker 7: getting hit with the with toll. But a lot of
Speaker 7: the people who are paying the toll are like, it's
Speaker 7: taking me an hour less and I'm and time is
Speaker 7: valuable and I will spend that.
Speaker 3: That's a great point too.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I actually have taken a bunch of those express
Speaker 2: buses from New Jersey into the city. And if you
Speaker 2: haven't lived there or done that, like, you may not
Speaker 2: know that they come, like if you are in a
Speaker 2: certain they'll come like every ten minutes.
Speaker 3: It's actually very practical.
Speaker 2: It's it's not a hardship to walk out one block,
Speaker 2: wait for this bus for five minutes, and if you
Speaker 2: miss it, get the next one ten minutes later, and
Speaker 2: you know, zoom into the city and can help with commute.
Speaker 7: To so working class people are commuting into Manhattan. Well
Speaker 7: working class people can commute to somewhere else and then
Speaker 7: take public trade, take the.
Speaker 3: Public transit in Yeah, you know, I saw.
Speaker 2: I talked to some friends who live in the city
Speaker 2: who were very upset about this because they feel like,
Speaker 2: for once there was something that was done that immediately
Speaker 2: actually improved their lives. And imagine that made life easier.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, I lived in Manhattan for a
Speaker 2: number of years, and the nightmare of trying to get
Speaker 2: from one side down to the other, or get down
Speaker 2: down or update and not know. And that's the thing too,
Speaker 2: is like not no wing, is this going to be
Speaker 2: a day where it's going to take thirty minutes? Is
Speaker 2: it going to be a day where it takes an hour?
Speaker 2: And ultimately I just like bail out of bail out
Speaker 2: and walk the last or whatever, you know. And to
Speaker 2: have that level of predictability and just ease of movement,
Speaker 2: it really is like a freeing, a sense of freedom
Speaker 2: that people had gained with this congestion pricing because it
Speaker 2: had made such an improvement, and then to have Trump
Speaker 2: just come in out of spite effectively and totally reverse it. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I think that this is this was a material improvement
Speaker 2: for people who live in New York City. The other
Speaker 2: piece here with the like long lived the King part
Speaker 2: is I feel a little bit like you know, gas
Speaker 2: lit in the same way with Elon Musk's like Kyle
Speaker 2: Hitler thing like we're supposed to pretend like that you
Speaker 2: didn't just do the thing that we saw you do. Like,
Speaker 2: don't get mad about us calling you a dictator when
Speaker 2: you're calling yourself a king and a dictator and sharing
Speaker 2: this Time magazine, fake Time magazine of you as a
Speaker 2: king on you know, on from the official White House
Speaker 2: Twitter account. Also, this wasn't some rando, but you know
Speaker 2: I was saying to you earlier. I also think it
Speaker 2: is a little bit of him trying to claim as power,
Speaker 2: because it is true that Elon, of the two of them,
Speaker 2: seems like the much more powerful entity. Now Trump is
Speaker 2: mostly out playing golf. The number of Daisies played golf
Speaker 2: already in this administration is quite extraordinary. He wants to
Speaker 2: do the pieces he wants to do, and a lot
Speaker 2: of it does feel like it's been sort of like
Speaker 2: handed over an outsource to Elon. So I think he
Speaker 2: also wanted to reassert himself a little bit here. The
Speaker 2: Eric Adams dynamic is interesting to me. And by the way,
Speaker 2: you know that this is really popular because Kathy Hochel
Speaker 2: is actually taking a stand in right in favor of it.
Speaker 2: And this is the most like weak, need pathetic democratic leader.
Speaker 6: You can imagine to the suburbs.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: And so the fact that she is stridently and in
Speaker 2: multiple posts aggressively defending congestion pricing tells you just how
Speaker 2: popular it is with New york Er. It's not just
Speaker 2: like some tiny sliver of lefties in Brooklyn or whatever.
Speaker 2: And I do think that it probably makes her more
Speaker 2: likely to exercise the power she does have to remove
Speaker 2: Eric Adams from office. But you know, she's been meeting
Speaker 2: with a variety of leaders getting their opinions on that.
Speaker 2: Apparently there's some concern. I don't know what his numbers
Speaker 2: are at this point. They can't be good. There's this
Speaker 2: a knee jerk assumption that he still has strong support
Speaker 2: among black voters in the city and in the state.
Speaker 2: I just maybe, but I haven't seen the polling to
Speaker 2: justify that. I would think that they would be disgusted
Speaker 2: with the you know, corruption and self dealing and cozying
Speaker 2: up to Trump as much as or more than anybody else.
Speaker 7: Yesterday, you had a significant number of black elected officials
Speaker 7: coming out and supporting Eric Adams as but black elected officials,
Speaker 7: like they were saying, as a black elected official, we
Speaker 7: oppose Kathy Hokal removing Eric Adams. So there is at
Speaker 7: least on the elected level, that kind of pushback being organized.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they speak really
Speaker 2: for anybody but themselves.
Speaker 3: And also there are.
Speaker 2: Other black elected officials that you could have in that
Speaker 2: office who are interested in the seat as well.
Speaker 7: So it would be Annie Williams who would become there, right, Yeah,
Speaker 7: that's right, which which would be kind of amazing because
Speaker 7: he's kind of a radical lefty working families party guy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it would be a pretty dramatic ideological sit shift
Speaker 2: from fact yes, from Trump de facto running New York
Speaker 2: City as he apparently does now to having a working
Speaker 2: families party.
Speaker 6: Trump should go spend some time in New York.
Speaker 7: He hasn't been there the last month, but traffic in
Speaker 7: front of the Trump Tower it's just constant fumes and
Speaker 7: like you can't move.
Speaker 6: He should go check it out. Maybe you'll like it.
Speaker 6: I mean, if it's all at the whim of the king,
Speaker 6: then the king needs to chariot and go to New
Speaker 6: York City.
Speaker 2: Increasing the value of his properties within Manhattan.
Speaker 6: It absolutely would.
Speaker 3: That's that's the appeal to make there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, let's go ahead and get to our
Speaker 2: guest who's been directly impacted by some of the federal
Speaker 2: freezes and.
Speaker 3: Hear his story.
Speaker 2: We're really fortunate to be joined this morning by someone
Speaker 2: who has been impacted by some of these across the
Speaker 2: board spending freezes. Bob Blake is the founder of Solar
Speaker 2: Bear Full Service solar installation company and also Native Sun
Speaker 2: Community Power Development, a Native led nonprofit that promotes renewable
Speaker 2: energy and energy efficiency.
Speaker 3: Great to meet you, Bob. Thank you so much for
Speaker 3: joining us.
Speaker 8: Thank you for having me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so you got this notification like a letter from
Speaker 2: the federal government on January twenty eighth. Give us a
Speaker 2: sense of what you were up to and how this
Speaker 2: has impacted you.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 11: Well, we had a number of projects that we were
Speaker 11: working on between electric vehicles and also solar projects, battery
Speaker 11: projects through the Department of Energy and other agencies, and
Speaker 11: we got this letter saying to essentially stop that.
Speaker 8: In all these different projects.
Speaker 11: And so we adhere to the letter because it did
Speaker 11: come down from this particular our administration, and so we're
Speaker 11: kind of sitting in a spot where we're kind of
Speaker 11: in limble right now, trying to figure out exactly what
Speaker 11: our next moves are going to be.
Speaker 7: So if you're trying to talk to somebody, Let's say
Speaker 7: somebody is watching this and their number one concern is
Speaker 7: they want to cut the deficit, cut government spending, make
Speaker 7: and make things more affordable for people here.
Speaker 6: In the United States.
Speaker 7: What would you say to them about this spending and
Speaker 7: whether that's actually going to accomplish that long term?
Speaker 8: Yeah, great question.
Speaker 11: You know, a lot of these projects are around and
Speaker 11: focusing on renewable energy, and we know that that is
Speaker 11: one of the cheapest sources of energy that we can
Speaker 11: you know, use. The other part about this is a
Speaker 11: lot of these projects are out in rural communities where,
Speaker 11: you know, because of the weather patterns, because of what's
Speaker 11: currently happening with climate change, you know.
Speaker 8: A lot of the.
Speaker 11: Savings are going to go into these communities, and not
Speaker 11: only that, but hire these individuals to be able to
Speaker 11: you know, work in this industry, so you know, this
Speaker 11: is really going to affect you know, a lot of
Speaker 11: these most vulnerable communities, especially in rural America, where a
Speaker 11: lot of this funding, and a lot of this money
Speaker 11: is concentrated at.
Speaker 2: And so tell us specifically about the programs you were
Speaker 2: working on. I know one was for building out electric
Speaker 2: vehicle chargers, and now there was a solar installation project. Like,
Speaker 2: give us a little bit of nitty gritty about why
Speaker 2: these particular projects were important for these particular communities.
Speaker 11: Yes, well, they were going to save the average American
Speaker 11: right fuel savings. You know, we deal with energy poverty
Speaker 11: in these areas. They were going to be able to
Speaker 11: save them on their electricity bill. We know that a
Speaker 11: lot of folks that you know, lose their homes, one
Speaker 11: of the first things they can't do.
Speaker 8: Is pay their electricity bill.
Speaker 11: So it's kind of of, you know, a way for
Speaker 11: us to be able to you know, keep people in
Speaker 11: their homes, h the jobs, the operations and maintenance that
Speaker 11: we're going to be happening from from these particular projects.
Speaker 11: You know, we can the workforce development opportunities that we're
Speaker 11: going to be happening from this. Also, just the opportunity
Speaker 11: that one of the battery projects was actually going to
Speaker 11: be backing up a criminal justice complex, so you know,
Speaker 11: and those extra savings could have went into rehabilitation programs,
Speaker 11: being able to offer you know, folks, the ability to
Speaker 11: get a job when released. So there's a lot of
Speaker 11: things here that I believe that you know, that these
Speaker 11: savings could have helped these communities by by implementing them.
Speaker 6: So what's going to happen without this federal money?
Speaker 11: Well, currently, right now these projects are on hold.
Speaker 8: I we I hope that.
Speaker 11: This administration reconsiders because investment into Rule America is an
Speaker 11: investment into this country. Investment into UH to energy sovereignty
Speaker 11: is an investment UH into this country. So I hope
Speaker 11: that this that this UH, this administration reconsiders their actions
Speaker 11: and then we can continue forward UH with these great
Speaker 11: projects that you know that the past administration felt like
Speaker 11: were needed.
Speaker 6: It just occurred to me, By the way.
Speaker 7: Are the workers who are being furloughed as a result
Speaker 7: of these projects being shut down applying for unemployment benefits
Speaker 7: as we speak?
Speaker 11: You know, I I can't speak for every UH subcontractor,
Speaker 11: but you know what happens a lot of times in
Speaker 11: these situations is that they do have to apply for
Speaker 11: you know, benefits.
Speaker 7: Which you can imagine why I'm asking that question, because
Speaker 7: the person who is eyeing this from the perspective of
Speaker 7: trying to save taxpayer money. Has to realize that what
Speaker 7: they just did is they're still paying people tax payer money,
Speaker 7: except now they're paying them to sit at home in
Speaker 7: homes powered by you know, fossil fuels, right that are
Speaker 7: more expensive, instead of paying them to go out and
Speaker 7: develop renewable energy.
Speaker 8: Right.
Speaker 11: And and and I think, and I think you get
Speaker 11: to a much bigger picture, right, is you know, the
Speaker 11: purpose that these folks get from doing this, doing this
Speaker 11: kind of work, right, and this is how we battle
Speaker 11: the social ills that are plague in our community, like
Speaker 11: drug addictions, alcoholism.
Speaker 8: You know, we can go down.
Speaker 11: Down the list, but you give these folks the purpose
Speaker 11: and you know, the opportunity you get up every morning
Speaker 11: and serve their communities. You know, there's other ways that
Speaker 11: you know, and if you don't do that, they're going
Speaker 11: to fall into these other traps. And that's one of
Speaker 11: the things that I'm concerned about and and that that
Speaker 11: I worry about because you know, we we all love
Speaker 11: our communities and we just want the best for them.
Speaker 2: And of course it's also just one more broken promise
Speaker 2: between the federal government and these tribal nations also that
Speaker 2: you're working in. That has to fuel a long and
Speaker 2: very justified sentiment of you know, you can't you can't
Speaker 2: trust these people. They're not going to be there for
Speaker 2: us when we need them.
Speaker 8: Great point, you know that. That's another thing here.
Speaker 11: A lot of my projects are in tribal communities, and
Speaker 11: there's been a lot of broken promises between the United
Speaker 11: States government and tribal nations. There is a nation to
Speaker 11: nation trust responsibility that I believe that the United States
Speaker 11: government needs to fulfill that There Supreme Court Neil Gorsicic
Speaker 11: did point out that treaties are the supreme law of
Speaker 11: the land. I hope that you know, this president and
Speaker 11: this administration adheres to that.
Speaker 8: So you're absolutely correct.
Speaker 11: This is just another and a long list of broken
Speaker 11: promises that that are happening in Native country.
Speaker 2: My last question for you, Bob and Ryan may have
Speaker 2: one as well, but what what what do you do next?
Speaker 2: What's your plan from here?
Speaker 6: That's what I was gonna ask.
Speaker 11: Yeah, well, you know, I I will continue to advocate
Speaker 11: for you know, uh, a greener, cleaner future for for all,
Speaker 11: for for all, and and we will try to get
Speaker 11: these uh these projects uh financed some way, somehow, And
Speaker 11: you know, the bottom line is is that a lot
Speaker 11: of people are counting on us and and we want
Speaker 11: to we want to come through. So that's gonna be
Speaker 11: my next job and and I hope that we can
Speaker 11: continue to fulfill our at least our promise to these communities.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you, Bob.
Speaker 2: It's a pleasure to meet you, and we're really grateful
Speaker 2: for you sharing your story.
Speaker 8: Thank you for having me.
Speaker 3: It's our pleasure.
Speaker 2: As we discussed earlier this week, Argentina's president just hyped
Speaker 2: a massive crypto shit coin pump and dump, which effectively
Speaker 2: robbed his own biggest supporters. The whole thing was ultimately
Speaker 2: quite similar to the scheme Trump also pulled, and behold,
Speaker 2: some of the same people were involved in this Argentina
Speaker 2: Libra rug pole as we're involved in the Milania rug
Speaker 2: Pole YouTube scam. Investigator coffee Zilla managed to score an
Speaker 2: interview with one of these fraudsters, and there was a
Speaker 2: particular part that helped me put together something I've been
Speaker 2: trying to articulate since the beginning of Trump two point zero,
Speaker 2: whether with regard to Doge Maha or the new return
Speaker 2: to outright colonialism and imperialism. The moment came towards the
Speaker 2: end of the interview, after this scammer his name is
Speaker 2: Hayden Davis admits that.
Speaker 3: All crypto is quote dogshit.
Speaker 2: How then does he justify his role in massive, repeated
Speaker 2: scams of people using this quote unquote dogshit.
Speaker 3: Take a list on what he had to say.
Speaker 6: I'm very pro.
Speaker 9: Getting everything away from regulated markets, but I'm now recognized
Speaker 9: because I think that that's another game. I think that's
Speaker 9: an insider game, right, whether it's the pelosis of the
Speaker 9: world or the stock game, that's an insider game too.
Speaker 9: It's just a different type and people have to be
Speaker 9: more careful. But capital markets are an insider game. The
Speaker 9: whole thing is like, I'm never nobody's ever gonna convince
Speaker 9: me that it's not rigged. Banks pay hundreds of millions
Speaker 9: of dollars a year to do illegal shit because they
Speaker 9: can make more money other ways. Like I could keep
Speaker 9: going on with with bullshit after bullshit after bullshit. I
Speaker 9: think if you're gonna die on the sword of meme coins,
Speaker 9: being you know, insideer this or sniping that, like you're
Speaker 9: full of shit because there's every market in the world
Speaker 9: is like that that makes a shitload of money.
Speaker 12: Well yeah, I just I just want I just want
Speaker 12: to put a note in that if your argument for
Speaker 12: capital markets is you know they they are rigged, that's
Speaker 12: actually an argument for more regulation against rigging than it
Speaker 12: is for less.
Speaker 13: Like you wouldn't look at a rigged game and go, hey, guys,
Speaker 13: let's take away all the rules we had in place
Speaker 13: anyway to try to stop it getting rigged.
Speaker 9: Right, But then I have to trust Then you have
Speaker 9: to trust the regulators, and most of them are being
Speaker 9: paid off.
Speaker 6: And that's been proven time and time forever, because.
Speaker 14: Hum yeah, yeah, but but but once again, the conclusion
Speaker 14: to like seeing problems in the world is not like
Speaker 14: you realize, like your brakes aren't working correctly.
Speaker 13: It's not to go like, hey, the brake manufacturers paid off,
Speaker 13: so let's just not have breaks at all. It's going
Speaker 13: it's methodically approaching it and going, Okay, we need to
Speaker 13: advocate for more regulation here, we need to advocate for
Speaker 13: more rules here, saying like, oh, yeah, it's all rigged.
Speaker 13: Isn't the dunk that people think it is on rules
Speaker 13: in general?
Speaker 8: Does that make sense? Sure?
Speaker 9: But it's it doesn't matter like that to me like that,
Speaker 9: to me is kind of a mute a little bit
Speaker 9: of a mute point, because it's like, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 9: The people that have the most money, the most access,
Speaker 9: and the most control, which is insiders, and any market
Speaker 9: in the world always win.
Speaker 2: So Hayden basically says, well, mainstream financial markets are scamming
Speaker 2: to so I'm going to get mine with an even
Speaker 2: more brazen scam. Coffee, of course, correctly points out the
Speaker 2: answer of financial for is better laws, enforcement, less corruption,
Speaker 2: But Hayden's already made up his mind. Since the big
Speaker 2: banks are imperfect, we should just give up on policing
Speaker 2: things like rug poles, insider training, and outright theft. Now
Speaker 2: that philosophy actually seems to me to be pretty core
Speaker 2: to the ethos of Trump two point zero. It's a
Speaker 2: dark nihilism that effectively says, look, everything's bad, so let's
Speaker 2: just make it worse. Since the financial system is gained
Speaker 2: by insiders, let's just go full open scam. Since money
Speaker 2: has infected politics, let's just take open bribes. Since we've
Speaker 2: been hypocritical about international law, let's just revert to pure barbarism.
Speaker 2: It's an ethos that I think is very much at
Speaker 2: the core of the anarcho capitalist ideology that Elon and
Speaker 2: Project twenty five architect Russ Vote have infused the second
Speaker 2: Trump administration with. Since governments can't fully check corporate power,
Speaker 2: just disband the government, privatize all functions, and let the
Speaker 2: oligarch's CEO dictators run wild. Don't believe me, Just listen
Speaker 2: to Mark Andresen, as influential a person as any in
Speaker 2: this administration, explain how, since democracy will always be flawed,
Speaker 2: we should just openly embrace oligarchy.
Speaker 15: So the Iron Love oligarchy basically says democracy is fake.
Speaker 15: There's always a ruling class, there's always a ruling elite structurally,
Speaker 15: and so the reason for that is because the masses
Speaker 15: can't organize. Right, what's the fundamental problem that, whether the
Speaker 15: mass is twenty five thousand people in Union or two
Speaker 15: hundred and fifty million people in a country, the masses
Speaker 15: can't organize. The majority cannot organize. Only a minority can organize.
Speaker 15: And to be effective in politics, you must organize. And therefore,
Speaker 15: every political structure in human history has been some form
Speaker 15: of a small organized elite ruling a large and dispersed majority.
Speaker 15: Every single one and so basically, basically the presumption that
Speaker 15: we are in a democracy is just sort of by
Speaker 15: definition fake. Now good news for the US. It turns
Speaker 15: out the founders understood this, and so of course they
Speaker 15: didn't give us a direct democracy. They gave us a
Speaker 15: representative democracy, right, and so they built the oligarchy into
Speaker 15: the system in the form of Congress, in the executive
Speaker 15: branch and the judicial branch. But so anyway, so as
Speaker 15: a consequence, democracy is always everywhere fake. There is always
Speaker 15: a ruling elite. And basically the lesson the Machabelians is
Speaker 15: you can deny that if you want, you're fooling yourself.
Speaker 15: The way to actually think about how to make a
Speaker 15: system work and maintain any sort of shred of freedom
Speaker 15: is to actually understand that is actually what's happening.
Speaker 2: So the basic message here is democracy is fake, so
Speaker 2: just give up on letting people have a say and
Speaker 2: embrace your billionaire overlords.
Speaker 3: You can see how this.
Speaker 2: Ideology also tied to the ideas of Nick Land and
Speaker 2: Curtis Jarvin, the so called Dark Enlightenment or neo reactionary movements.
Speaker 2: How this provides a very convenient philosophical backdrop for Elon
Speaker 2: to execute on his own plans and personally selected goals
Speaker 2: for humanity. Elon he wants total power, and this ideology
Speaker 2: provides him a pathway to exactly that. I've been reading
Speaker 2: Walter Isaacson's biography on Elon. One thing you really get
Speaker 2: is how he has personally cast himself as the savior
Speaker 2: of humanity launches SpaceX. That's a sort of insane boondoggle.
Speaker 2: At the start, he believes he must personally guarantee humanity's
Speaker 2: future as a multiplanetary species.
Speaker 3: Never mind that none of us.
Speaker 2: Voted for the CEO dictator king to destroy the lives
Speaker 2: of working class people in order to chase his martian dream.
Speaker 2: If Elon's multiplanetary goal takes shredding the Constitution, so be it.
Speaker 2: If it takes sentencing kids with HIV in Africa to death,
Speaker 2: so be it. If it takes hijacking the entire resources
Speaker 2: of the United States government to funnel into SpaceX, so
Speaker 2: be it. But in order for the public to just
Speaker 2: sit back and watch their data and their tax dollars
Speaker 2: and their voice in our government all plundered by the
Speaker 2: richest man on Earth, some critical mass has to be
Speaker 2: convinced that the government wasn't really worth saving anyway, that
Speaker 2: their voice in our government and their rights that are
Speaker 2: protected by that government were not really worth preserving after all,
Speaker 2: that perhaps all those things were faked to begin with,
Speaker 2: as Andresen wants them to believe. And the role of
Speaker 2: this ideology of nihilism is to persuade Americans of exactly that.
Speaker 2: And look, I actually understand some of the appeal. There's
Speaker 2: a feel of honesty to this level of nihilism, to saying,
Speaker 2: as Hayden Davis did, well, the insiders always come out
Speaker 2: on top, so why not just celebrate it? Or democracy
Speaker 2: never can be perfected, so let's just embrace our oligarchs.
Speaker 2: It's an appeal that has kind of always been at
Speaker 2: the core of Trump. Helps to explain why, even though
Speaker 2: he lies more than probably any person I've ever known
Speaker 2: outside of Elon, why so many people continue to view
Speaker 2: him as an exceptionally honest politician. He doesn't bother to
Speaker 2: hide his schemes, doesn't bother to hide his crimes. He
Speaker 2: will just say we want Ukraine for the rare earths,
Speaker 2: rather than dressing it up in democracy language. He will
Speaker 2: just say we're going to permanently remove every Palestinian from Gaza,
Speaker 2: rather than pretending that some sovereign state for Palestinians is
Speaker 2: just around the corner. Rather than doing a little insider
Speaker 2: trading out allow on most of Congress, he will just
Speaker 2: launch his own shit coin to openly scan his own
Speaker 2: people to the tune of billions of dollars. Rather than
Speaker 2: spin the truth in a way that's shady but still
Speaker 2: has some connection to reality, He'll just make shit up
Speaker 2: out of thin air and really doesn't care if you
Speaker 2: know it that it's an out and out lie. This
Speaker 2: brazenness gives his lies somehow the vibe of honesty. Everything
Speaker 2: is bad, let's make it worse. Nihilism also provides another
Speaker 2: kind of psychological reward, because it prizes a total lack
Speaker 2: of self restraint. If big banks are reading the system,
Speaker 2: why should he Aiden Davis restrain himself from running mass gams.
Speaker 2: If politicians spin an office skate, why shouldn't you lie
Speaker 2: and cheat to get ahead? And what fun really ultimately
Speaker 2: is self restraint feels good to let loose, say and
Speaker 2: do whatever you want to do.
Speaker 3: That removal of.
Speaker 2: The burden of self restraint was experienced as a sort
Speaker 2: of liberation for plenty after Trump won. In the immediate
Speaker 2: aftermath of Trump's victory, a top banker delightedly told the
Speaker 2: Financial Times how happy he was that he could use
Speaker 2: slurs in the workplace again.
Speaker 3: Quote.
Speaker 2: I feel liberated when top banker told the paper, we
Speaker 2: can say that our word and the P word without
Speaker 2: the fear of getting canceled. Except he actually said them.
Speaker 2: It's a new dawn. In fact, the most celebrated quality
Speaker 2: in Trump world is shamelessness. The more you're willing to
Speaker 2: openly contradict previously held beliefs, operate with total and complete hypocrisy,
Speaker 2: the more successful you're going to be, The more you
Speaker 2: can turn off your feelings of empathy concern for others,
Speaker 2: the more based you are, so you can, as Elon
Speaker 2: has brand yourself is the ultimate guaranteur of free speech.
Speaker 2: In one breath and in the very next call for
Speaker 2: journal at a troublesome media outlet to be jailed. You can,
Speaker 2: as Trump did, position yourself as the Party of Workers,
Speaker 2: as you gut every aspect of worker rights. You can,
Speaker 2: as RFK Junior did, claim you're on a mission to
Speaker 2: make America health again and then say absolutely nothing as
Speaker 2: a seed oil lobbyist is installed at the USDA, and
Speaker 2: life saving disease research is gutted. You can compile an
Speaker 2: ASMR video of migrants being deported, so your most drained
Speaker 2: supporters can be stimulated by the visuals of human beings
Speaker 2: treated as animals.
Speaker 3: So based Elon.
Speaker 2: Replied, these lies, cruelties, and hypocrisy, they all trigger outrage,
Speaker 2: and outrage generation is the most valuable currency in Trump world.
Speaker 2: Those with the shamelessness to trigger the most of it
Speaker 2: rise the highest. But at the core of all of
Speaker 2: this is that ethos that since the institutions let you down,
Speaker 2: you may as well have a bacchan al burning it
Speaker 2: all to the ground, letting your own worst impulses and
Speaker 2: those of the society and human nature itself run wild.
Speaker 2: It's what about isn't brought to its logical conclusion? Since
Speaker 2: Hillary sent emails on a private server, how can anyone
Speaker 2: complain about Elon and his hackers downloading all the data
Speaker 2: of the entire federal government. Since the insiders always come
Speaker 2: out on top, why not just give the insiders everything
Speaker 2: upfront to begin with, Since the voices of the masses
Speaker 2: were being drown out by the wealthy, just hand over
Speaker 2: all the keys to the wealthiest person on the entire planet.
Speaker 2: To borrow Coffee Zilla's analogy here, their answer to the
Speaker 2: brakes failing is to rip the braks down entirely and
Speaker 2: send the car careening towards a cliff.
Speaker 3: Listen.
Speaker 2: It's a fun and easy solution, right up until the crash.
Speaker 2: Much harder, of course, is the work of building up institutions,
Speaker 2: making them strong, making them credible. Much harder is checking
Speaker 2: the rich and the powerful, bringing back a balance of
Speaker 2: power to working people. Much harder is checking imperial power
Speaker 2: and restoring as semblance of global cooperation and respect. But
Speaker 2: to use an Elon phrase here, society is that a
Speaker 2: fork in the road. On one path lies a rebuilt
Speaker 2: new deals with capital check to government unafraid of standing
Speaker 2: up to the wealthy social contract that provides stability prosperity
Speaker 2: for everyone. On the other path lies the societal equivalent
Speaker 2: of a crypto pump and dump scheme. For a brief moment,
Speaker 2: you might actually feel like you're winning, right before the
Speaker 2: rug is pulled and insiders like Elon and Dreson, Peter Tiel,
Speaker 2: the Trump's the rest of the billionaire and class rob
Speaker 2: you blind. To be honest, we might already be set
Speaker 2: irrevocably on.
Speaker 3: That bump and dump path.
Speaker 2: But it is our responsibility to our loved ones, our kids'
Speaker 2: future generations, to never stop fighting and to never stop
Speaker 2: believing fundamentally that humans are capable of more than just
Speaker 2: burning it all down. And Ryan, I was curious in
Speaker 2: particular your thoughts on that, and if.
Speaker 1: You want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become
Speaker 1: a premium subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot Com.
Speaker 2: Been fun chatting with you today, use as always, was
Speaker 2: a grim takeover this week.
Speaker 3: I was saying, that's.
Speaker 7: Right, yes, right, and hopefully Sager's back next week.
Speaker 6: That this like we were saying this fluid this.
Speaker 2: Season has been brutal, and I was reading, I should
Speaker 2: get the flu shot. But I was looking at it
Speaker 2: and it's apparently not that great a match either for
Speaker 2: the like some years, I know, I didn't tell you
Speaker 2: why you were getting it, but apparently some years it's
Speaker 2: like a really good match. It provides a lot of
Speaker 2: like you know, preventative and lessons that whatever lessonsvill it
Speaker 2: is a lot more.
Speaker 3: And this year it's like not.
Speaker 6: It's a bit of a crap, It's a bit of
Speaker 6: a crap. Shoot. Yeah, they do their best. Then they
Speaker 6: try to see, like what was last year? How do
Speaker 6: we well?
Speaker 2: And I guess maybe that's one of the things the
Speaker 2: potential promises of the like mRNA vaccine is because they
Speaker 2: can develop it more quickly, maybe they can make it
Speaker 2: a better match. But in any case, we hope Soger
Speaker 2: feels better. We hope you guys have a great weekend.
Speaker 2: If there's breaking news, we'll make sure to jump on
Speaker 2: and cover it for you.
Speaker 6: You're going to be here tomorrow, what do you think?
Speaker 6: Not here, but uh, we'll chat.
Speaker 2: We'll chat the Yeah, we're a little short handed this week,
Speaker 2: so we'll try to do a thing tomorrow. We've got
Speaker 2: to see if we get the resources, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2: So any case, if we don't see you tomorrow and
Speaker 2: enjoy your weekend, we'll see you back here on Monday.
Speaker 8: The PA