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 3: Hey guys, welcome to the Friday Show. Ryanan, Emily, great
Speaker 3: to see you. Guys.
Speaker 4: Nice to see you.
Speaker 2: So now that we have officially codified the Friday Show,
Speaker 2: I guess it's no longer a mini show, and we
Speaker 2: also are recording some bonus content that is for premium
Speaker 2: subscribers only, So if you guys want everything that we're
Speaker 2: doing today, make sure you sign up at Breakingpoints dot com.
Speaker 3: We're going to roll through.
Speaker 2: We've got stuff on tariffs, Trump can ask questions about Russia, Ukraine.
Speaker 2: We got huge moves in the courts in terms of deportations,
Speaker 2: a bunch of interesting stuff going on the Democratic side,
Speaker 2: and also some Steve Bannon like Elon Musk drama which
Speaker 2: is always interesting to take a look at. And some
Speaker 2: updates with regard to Israel. So a lot to get
Speaker 2: through this morning, guys and.
Speaker 5: Ryan, everything good on your end, Yeah, everything's everything's going
Speaker 5: really well, and you know, thanks everybody for all the
Speaker 5: kind wishes, the you know, for people just tuning in.
Speaker 5: Me and my wife got surgery on Tuesday to get
Speaker 5: the to and removed, and they went in there and
Speaker 5: they could basically couldn't even find it. These this antibody
Speaker 5: called her septin, developed in the ninety nineties and two thousands,
Speaker 5: is just an absolute miracle drug for her two positive cancer.
Speaker 5: It was also in the lymph nose, and they were
Speaker 5: worried and they were going to have to pull a
Speaker 5: whole bunch of lymph nos. But they went in and
Speaker 5: the first two that they took out, which were not systematic,
Speaker 5: were tested negative, and they're like, all right, let's let's
Speaker 5: wrap this up. Let's sew this thing up and move on.
Speaker 5: So we'll find out next week if she's cancer free. Obviously,
Speaker 5: none of this is ever over. You know, then there's
Speaker 5: radiation and then there's antibodies continue, and then you got
Speaker 5: to continue testing because you never know when it's going
Speaker 5: to come back. But this is what one of the
Speaker 5: doctors called like a best case scenario. So things things
Speaker 5: are going well, so so good, covering for about another
Speaker 5: week or two and then yeah, then start the radiation.
Speaker 3: That is awesome, That is so incredibly good to hear Ryan.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, yeah, this stuff can go lots of different ways.
Speaker 5: And oh yeah, you know, as as everybody watching.
Speaker 2: Those, is this the drug you were talking to Saga
Speaker 2: about a while back that it was like two researchers
Speaker 2: at a conference had like shared ideas and that's how
Speaker 2: you end it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, it's it's called her sept And the story
Speaker 5: is remarkable. It was this guy who was at a
Speaker 5: conference and heard a lecture by somebody not in the
Speaker 5: oncology field, and he was like, you know what, I
Speaker 5: think that has implications for cancer treatment. And the UCLA
Speaker 5: doctor he now runs their cancer clinic, their cancer situation
Speaker 5: whenever they have at UCLA and genin Tech was the
Speaker 5: one that had come up with the initial advances and
Speaker 5: research but didn't want to do anything with it because
Speaker 5: cancer drugs at the time were considered to be financial losers.
Speaker 5: They kept going through FDA trials and finding that they
Speaker 5: weren't actually more effective than anything else because cancer is
Speaker 5: so awful, and so they'd failed FDI trial and gen
Speaker 5: and Tech was like, no, if we go in through
Speaker 5: another FDA trial and fail, it like it's it's going
Speaker 5: to be brutal for our stock price.
Speaker 4: So they're like, I don't care. We don't really care
Speaker 4: about this.
Speaker 5: And so he went out and got you know, NIH
Speaker 5: funding and and other grants and did the work kind
Speaker 5: of on his own and then proved that it actually worked,
Speaker 5: and it turns out to be one of the most effective.
Speaker 5: It's the reason that breast cancer has gone from a
Speaker 5: death sentence to so many people to now something that
Speaker 5: you can say that this was a rough experience and
Speaker 5: now I'm moving on with my life. Yeah, thank you
Speaker 5: to the NIH, and thanks a lot RFK Junior Fort
Speaker 5: and burning your way through that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Elon has to say in that as well. But
Speaker 2: you know, I wanted you to share that again because
Speaker 2: sometimes these things can feel very abstract, but you know,
Speaker 2: cuts to medical research it's going to have a huge
Speaker 2: impact because all of the new drug molecules that have
Speaker 2: been developed over the past couple of decades, it's been
Speaker 2: with public funding because of exactly the reason you talk
Speaker 2: about what the drug company is, what they spend most
Speaker 2: of their like research and development on, is like how
Speaker 2: do I game the patent system? How do I do
Speaker 2: a new formulation of viagra or ozebic or whatever is
Speaker 2: their hot selling drugs, so that I can You're looking good.
Speaker 3: You're hanging in there, Ryan, You're hanging.
Speaker 4: In there, hanging in for now.
Speaker 5: And the other thing that the dose folks are so
Speaker 5: upset about is what they call overhead and these NIH grants, right,
Speaker 5: and a conference or you know, a conference is the
Speaker 5: definition of overhead. But differences are where into intellectual capacity
Speaker 5: is exchanged.
Speaker 2: The guy was sort of research is not alwaysquote unquote efficient, Right.
Speaker 2: It requires sort of like you know, creative, haphazard process
Speaker 2: that isn't going to necessarily be linear.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I've seen people say I only want to fund the
Speaker 5: effective research. It's like, how do you know ahead of time? Like, yeah,
Speaker 5: obviously scientists don't want to like spend years doing research
Speaker 5: into something that turns out to be a whole hypothesis.
Speaker 5: But another another example of overhead would be this guy
Speaker 5: who he was apparently or is still to this day,
Speaker 5: a hoarder of biopsy samples, like at UCLA had this
Speaker 5: like absolutely massive freezer of biopsy samples from like years
Speaker 5: and years and years, and that's overhead, Like that's expensive
Speaker 5: to maintain, and there was it wasn't obvious that it
Speaker 5: was going to necessarily yield a whole lot. But when
Speaker 5: this new breakthrough came came around, he was then able
Speaker 5: to test this against all of his old biopsies that
Speaker 5: he had and get his graduate students working on it.
Speaker 5: And that's how he was able to initially prove, without
Speaker 5: a huge influx of money, that there was actually a
Speaker 5: lot to this. So all of that would have been
Speaker 5: they'd be like, you know, you'd have a you'd have
Speaker 5: a twenty two.
Speaker 4: Year old with a doge like little.
Speaker 5: Lanyard saying why do you need to freeze all these biopsies?
Speaker 5: Like this is this is done? Pull the plug on
Speaker 5: this stuff.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, we are all really really happy for you and
Speaker 2: your family and very relieved alongside you, so and thank
Speaker 2: you for keeping everybody updated because I know, people were
Speaker 2: definitely concerned and thinking.
Speaker 3: About you guys.
Speaker 4: Yeah, very relieving.
Speaker 3: All right, let's check in with the Marcus this morning,
Speaker 3: and what the hell is going on?
Speaker 2: Latest in terrors. Apparently futures are down. It's nine thirteen,
Speaker 2: so Marcus haven't opened yet. But I saw an article
Speaker 2: on the CNBC website that Amazon sellers are starting to
Speaker 2: hike their prices. And you know, that is kind of
Speaker 2: where we are in the whole trade war situation. Is
Speaker 2: we know, even if Trump wacks away from everything now,
Speaker 2: there's still going to be pain and disruption that is coming.
Speaker 2: What we don't know is the size and the scope
Speaker 2: of that, And I don't think anyone really knows, but
Speaker 2: we have a lot of indications that should be very
Speaker 2: worrying to people. At the same time, you know, Trump
Speaker 2: had backed off this Maximus China position, saying one hundred
Speaker 2: and forty five percent tariffs. No one thinks that that
Speaker 2: is going to last. He also indicated that there were
Speaker 2: ongoing talks with China, to which China is saying, I
Speaker 2: don't know what you're talking about. There are no ongoing talks.
Speaker 2: So Trump got asked about this yesterday. Let's go ahead
Speaker 2: and take a listen to what he had to say.
Speaker 7: Yeah, please questions.
Speaker 5: They're saying they.
Speaker 8: Had a meeting this morning, so I can't tell you.
Speaker 9: It doesn't matter who they is.
Speaker 8: Later, but they had meetings this morning, and we've been
Speaker 8: meeting with China, and so I think we have Jeff
Speaker 8: as usual.
Speaker 7: I think you have your reporting.
Speaker 9: Well, thank you very much.
Speaker 2: So there you go your thoughts. It doesn't matter they
Speaker 2: are It's fine.
Speaker 10: Yeah, this is their big I mean, listen, like, if
Speaker 10: you are making deals, there's a way in which this
Speaker 10: scenario is so much better for the Trump administration. If
Speaker 10: you're like actually inking deals, countries are coming to you,
Speaker 10: you have something on the table with China, and there's
Speaker 10: a light at the end of the tunnel for people
Speaker 10: who are looking for certainty in the American market, then
Speaker 10: there's a world of which again like this, there's a
Speaker 10: scenario in which this can the sort of bleeding can
Speaker 10: be staunched.
Speaker 7: And that's why where I don't know.
Speaker 10: What you guys think, but for me, it seems like
Speaker 10: there's increasing desperation to project that and maybe to use
Speaker 10: it as a strategy to bring other people into deals
Speaker 10: by publicly being like, yes, we're doing X, Y and Z,
Speaker 10: and then there's not a ton of evidence of that.
Speaker 10: The Japan does aster that Soccer and I covered earlier
Speaker 10: in the week. I think probably rattled them a lot,
Speaker 10: because this is not I don't I mean, I don't
Speaker 10: want to say that they thought it was easy, because
Speaker 10: I don't think anybody thought that this was easy. But
Speaker 10: it's proving to be a lot harder than My guess
Speaker 10: is that then they anticipated. And part of that is
Speaker 10: probably because you guys have made this point the.
Speaker 7: Way allies were roped in.
Speaker 10: I think maybe that just people have lost trust, and
Speaker 10: so it makes the deal making, the art of the
Speaker 10: deal becomes a lot more difficult.
Speaker 5: Well, it's it's really embarrassing for Trump here, and it's
Speaker 5: almost rude now on the part of the press corps,
Speaker 5: because this is like a situation where you've got some
Speaker 5: guy who keeps telling everybody that he has that he
Speaker 5: has a girlfriend in Canada. Everybody knows he has no
Speaker 5: girlfriend in Canada, and the press is now being these
Speaker 5: like jerks who like, actually investigate.
Speaker 3: Is shan in Montreal?
Speaker 4: What's the name of your girlfriend?
Speaker 5: Scapschat Like look, it's like just just leave it alone,
Speaker 5: Like he doesn't have a girlfriend.
Speaker 4: There's no negotiations going on with China.
Speaker 5: Like it's super embarrassing, Like, just leave this, Leave the
Speaker 5: guy alone. The whole thing has been a total humiliation.
Speaker 5: Just let him come to terms with it on his own.
Speaker 5: But yes, your point is exactly right. He had he
Speaker 5: had one play. His play was, I'm going to do
Speaker 5: this thing, and China is going to cave to me.
Speaker 5: You know what they're going to capitulate to. I'm not
Speaker 5: sure because I don't even know what I'm necessarily asking for,
Speaker 5: but they're going to cave and our allies are going
Speaker 5: to stand with us. Instead, the allies shockingly got upset
Speaker 5: that they were also attacked by Trump. They did not
Speaker 5: stand with us, and China did not cave, and so
Speaker 5: he has no Plan B.
Speaker 4: Plan B is tanked the economy.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, and here's the thing is, like, even putting the
Speaker 2: terriffs aside, this administration had gone out of its way
Speaker 2: to be, you know, to piss off the Europeans, sending
Speaker 2: jd Vance over there to like a to them about
Speaker 2: their free speech, which you know they'll look, there are
Speaker 2: some valid points there, but hey, buddy, have you seen
Speaker 2: what your own administration is doing here at home.
Speaker 5: We let people say whatever they want inside the van
Speaker 5: on the way to the detention center that they're being right,
Speaker 5: that's right against Israel. But inside that van they're free
Speaker 5: to say whatever they want.
Speaker 3: Let it fly, Let it fly. Yeah, and listen.
Speaker 2: It's okay if you know you mostly okay if you
Speaker 2: criticize our own government. Just god forbid you say anything
Speaker 2: negative about Israel. But yeah, so you know, they they
Speaker 2: went on like a world tour making it clear that
Speaker 2: you can't rely on us and basically like we don't
Speaker 2: like you, and piss off and then launch this trade
Speaker 2: war against the entire world and are surprised when countries
Speaker 2: are like, you know, if you're making me pick between
Speaker 2: you guys in China. Number one, we get a lot
Speaker 2: more stuff from China at this point than we give
Speaker 2: from you.
Speaker 3: And number two, you.
Speaker 2: Made a crystal clear that you are not a good
Speaker 2: and reliable partner and that you have nothing but utter
Speaker 2: contempt and disdain for us. So perhaps there's another direction
Speaker 2: that we should go in here. And then also this
Speaker 2: is astonishing reporting from Jeff Stein, who just is you know,
Speaker 2: incredible on all of these things. Apparently, you know, one
Speaker 2: of the first moves that China made in retaliation was
Speaker 2: to say, Okay, well, we've been spending all these years
Speaker 2: locking up these rare earth supplies and you're not going
Speaker 2: to get access to them anymore. You know, We've all like,
Speaker 2: I don't really understand what these things are, but apparently
Speaker 2: they're really important and you know, go into evs and
Speaker 2: important for defense and all of these different things. And
Speaker 2: this has been discussed for years and years, and yet
Speaker 2: the Trump administration are only now holding these high level
Speaker 2: meetings to try to figure out what to do about
Speaker 2: the fact that China made the most obvious chess move
Speaker 2: on the board out of the gates, which was to
Speaker 2: block our access to this. Jeff Here says Beijing does
Speaker 2: not feel like it is going to back down, and
Speaker 2: that the US is in no position to dictate terms.
Speaker 2: A bit big part of that is where Earth where
Speaker 2: they feel they have the capacity to do significant harm
Speaker 2: to American manufacturers. And they talk to people in this piece,
Speaker 2: companies that rely on these and they're saying, you know,
Speaker 2: they're already really drawing down their stock files and are
Speaker 2: going to be in a very difficult situation if this
Speaker 2: isn't resolved quickly. Meetings have involved White House, National Security Council,
Speaker 2: National Economic Council, Council of Economic Advisor's, Commerce Department, Energy Department,
Speaker 2: Office of the Trade rep among several other agencies. Financing,
Speaker 2: capital financing, permitting, and other ideas kicked around, but timeline
Speaker 2: for scaling up domestic capacity uncertain.
Speaker 4: So apparently when you do that first.
Speaker 3: You would think that you would have your in your
Speaker 3: four deals.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you might have.
Speaker 2: Considered the most obvious thing that China could possibly do
Speaker 2: to like hit you the hardest down of the gates.
Speaker 5: Trump Trump brought his queen out on this like the
Speaker 5: second move, Like that's that's what This.
Speaker 10: Is not a kind way to refer to Peter Navarro.
Speaker 5: Yes, actually yes, Peter navav is Trump queen. Trump brought
Speaker 5: him out on his second move, and the queen is
Speaker 5: now just dancing around the board. Anybody who plays chess
Speaker 5: nos like one of the first things that a rookie
Speaker 5: player does.
Speaker 4: The queen is such a cool player.
Speaker 10: It's an online chess obsessive by the way.
Speaker 4: You bring it out right away.
Speaker 5: But if you bring your queen out and there's and
Speaker 5: you haven't done any prep for it, your Queen is
Speaker 5: just going to get chased around the board while they
Speaker 5: set up their positioning. Eventually it's going to get trapped
Speaker 5: and killed, and then you're gonna get mauled. And that's
Speaker 5: where he's in. The He's in the queen is trapped
Speaker 5: position right now and next is us getting mauled.
Speaker 7: The Libs won't let us mind the rarest.
Speaker 5: Just you just tip your thing over and you give up.
Speaker 5: Like so they just need somebody put needs to put
Speaker 5: the finger on the top of Trump's orange head and
Speaker 5: just tip it's over.
Speaker 10: But he, I mean, he does have an uphill battle
Speaker 10: to get the rarest mineral mining domestically done because that
Speaker 10: has been and Ryan, you and I have talked about
Speaker 10: that they're like all kinds of environmental obstacles to sing
Speaker 10: that political and environmental obstacles to achieving them.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and also manpower and industrial and yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, but we also don't have a stockpile of
Speaker 2: everything that we would need, Like, we don't have everything
Speaker 2: that we would need here. And you know my understanding
Speaker 2: is and this is also part of you know what USAI.
Speaker 2: Do you remember when Chris Murphy like accidentally told the
Speaker 2: truth about what usaidea is about it's like, well, we
Speaker 2: do a little bit of healthcare and then we get
Speaker 2: access to like these minerals that we need, you know.
Speaker 2: So we've been going in the opposite direction of securing
Speaker 2: the lithium or whatever it is that is critical and
Speaker 2: that we don't have sufficient quantities of. And apparently this
Speaker 2: didn't really occur to the Trump administration until now. There's
Speaker 2: one other piece of this that I wanted to touch on,
Speaker 2: which I just think is extraordinary. So Charles Gasparta with
Speaker 2: Fox News reports this. He says, scoop people inside the
Speaker 2: Trump White House are alerting Wall Street executives that they
Speaker 2: are nearing an agreement in principle on trade with India.
Speaker 2: According to my sources who are senior Wall Street, which
Speaker 2: ties to the White House, no details on timing, and
Speaker 2: recall that we have been here before with Japan, only
Speaker 2: to have the goal post change in terms renegotiated. But
Speaker 2: if this holds, the India deal being in vision will
Speaker 2: include agreed upon.
Speaker 3: Goals and issues blah blah blah.
Speaker 2: So and they think it could be potentially a template
Speaker 2: for a deal with Japan, South Korean on Australia. So,
Speaker 2: you know, The sub story here is that the administration,
Speaker 2: as Emily was saying, seems kind of desperate to say, hey, there,
Speaker 2: you know, I promise there are going to be deals
Speaker 2: and we're really close with India, and that's that's going
Speaker 2: to set off this you know, firestorm of deal making,
Speaker 2: et cetera. But the headline here, which guess Brino seems
Speaker 2: to not really notice, is wait a second, you're giving
Speaker 2: Wall Street executives knowledge on things that are going to
Speaker 2: be incredibly market moving at a time when we've seen
Speaker 2: extraordinary volatility. And I mean, it's just like it's just
Speaker 2: classic from this administration. It's it reminds once again of
Speaker 2: Charles Schwab being in the White House and Trump bragging
Speaker 2: about him making two point five billion dollars in a
Speaker 2: single day based on Trump's moves to you know, roll
Speaker 2: back some of the initial quote unquote reciprocal tariffs. So
Speaker 2: now here you have this you know, administration aligned reporter.
Speaker 2: It's like bragging about the fact that they're giving out
Speaker 2: inside information to Wall Street executives so they can front
Speaker 2: run Trump's announcements.
Speaker 7: Here.
Speaker 10: Well, and if this is real, I'd like to hear
Speaker 10: more publicly about what that is not through leaks to reporters.
Speaker 10: I would like to see, you know, if that's true.
Speaker 10: It's obviously significant, which is why they're using it to ease.
Speaker 7: Concerns on Wall Street.
Speaker 10: But if it's true, they should be very public about
Speaker 10: the details because I just I mean, that could go
Speaker 10: in a lot of different directions and just vaguely gesturing
Speaker 10: at it behind closed doors to Wall Street executives, I mean,
Speaker 10: maybe it's not even insider trading. Maybe it's actually them
Speaker 10: just trying to ease the markets without having anything to
Speaker 10: back it up.
Speaker 4: Actually, it could be, and that's an interesting point.
Speaker 5: And I actually think in gas Reno's defense that he
Speaker 5: did recognize what he was reporting and he phrased it
Speaker 5: that way so that everybody else would see what was
Speaker 5: going on, but that he'd maintained.
Speaker 3: I don't think so.
Speaker 2: Right, he's going back and forth with Wisenthal and a
Speaker 2: bunch of other people on Twitter about how this is
Speaker 2: not there's nothing to see here and it's no problem
Speaker 2: and it's not insider trading.
Speaker 5: Well, the separate reason it might not be undercider trading
Speaker 5: is insider trading is when you get credible information that
Speaker 5: you can act on what if this White House indible
Speaker 5: not credible all, Like, okay, you talked to them. Like
Speaker 5: when I dropped to L's an officer first appointment on Tuesday,
Speaker 5: I saw Peter Navarro. I talked to him briefly. He's
Speaker 5: not credible. I don't like, I don't care what he says,
Speaker 5: like you can't you can't trade on that. And also
Speaker 5: Trump is such an idiot that it gives other countries
Speaker 5: huge advantages in these negotiations. Like if he had somebody
Speaker 5: like Lightheiser in here telling him, here's what we need
Speaker 5: from India from a strategic perspective from the United States,
Speaker 5: then they could make an interesting deal with India that
Speaker 5: might be useful to us.
Speaker 4: He doesn't.
Speaker 5: He's got Navarro and he's got his own adult mind,
Speaker 5: and so he's like, they don't we don't have enough
Speaker 5: Fords on the roads in India. And so India knows
Speaker 5: that he's such a moron that all he wants is
Speaker 5: like to reduce the tariffs on American cars going into
Speaker 5: India without understanding that you can do that, and we're
Speaker 5: still not going to sell, you know, more than a
Speaker 5: trivial number of American cars inside India for lots of
Speaker 5: different reasons, and so they'll like be like, yeah, sure,
Speaker 5: we'll lower our tariffs on your American cars. Uaw is happy,
Speaker 5: he gets because he's a moron and it's the only
Speaker 5: thing he understands. He's like, great, we won this. And
Speaker 5: and in the end, you're barely going to sell any
Speaker 5: extra cars into India. So can you trade on that? Like,
Speaker 5: I guess you can try.
Speaker 2: I mean sort of, since so much of the market
Speaker 2: is just like vibes vies, you know, Like I do
Speaker 2: think if they announced even something that was sort of
Speaker 2: pathetic with India, there would be a big market spike
Speaker 2: and they'd get all excited about the deals are coming,
Speaker 2: et cetera, et cetera, a.
Speaker 5: Short Indian car company and then you know, buy it
Speaker 5: back in like twenty minutes and yeah, take some money.
Speaker 3: Exactly, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: All right, let's go ahead and move on to some
Speaker 2: of the comments Trump made about Russia yesterday. I'm sure
Speaker 2: you guys saw his Vladimir Stop truth social that you
Speaker 2: put out, which is just incredible.
Speaker 3: It really was giving for me.
Speaker 2: Remember when Hillary said that she went to Wall Street
Speaker 2: and told them to cut it out.
Speaker 5: That's what it was.
Speaker 3: That's what that tweet was giving for me.
Speaker 5: Do not come, Vladimir, do not come right.
Speaker 3: That's right, Kamala, that was her right.
Speaker 10: No, it's giving Jersey shore Ron stop because Ryan gets it.
Speaker 3: Ryan gets I'm.
Speaker 7: Sorry, Crystal serious.
Speaker 4: Oh you lost me?
Speaker 3: All right?
Speaker 2: So he gets asked about, you know, how he feels
Speaker 2: about because Russia genuinely opened up, you know, a series
Speaker 2: of new brutal strikes, including on Kiev, and so he
Speaker 2: got asked about, Hey, I thought you were working with
Speaker 2: these Russians. What's going on here with your buddy, with
Speaker 2: your body, vlad Let's take a listener what he had
Speaker 2: to say social post.
Speaker 11: Use the words Vladimir stop. That seemed like a slightly
Speaker 11: different message of personal message. What is your level of
Speaker 11: frustration with President?
Speaker 8: I didn't I wasn't happy with it, and we're in
Speaker 8: the midst of talken peace and missiles were fired and
Speaker 8: I was not happy with it. That's what I meant,
Speaker 8: and that's you know, I assume that.
Speaker 11: Sorry that if the bombs keep falling, will you consider
Speaker 11: additional sanctions toward Russia? Or what will you do if
Speaker 11: President Putin does.
Speaker 8: Not question in a week, I want to see if
Speaker 8: we can have a deal. No reason to answer it that,
Speaker 8: but I won't be happy.
Speaker 10: Let me put it that way.
Speaker 11: Things things will happen.
Speaker 10: You're not putting more pressure on Russia.
Speaker 11: I know a lot of.
Speaker 4: Europeans would like to see that.
Speaker 8: You know what pressure I'm putting on Russia?
Speaker 9: They're dealing.
Speaker 8: You have no idea what pressure I'm putting around. You're
Speaker 8: putting a lot of.
Speaker 9: Pressure, I'm sure are you putting on the Russia in Russia?
Speaker 8: And Russia knows and some people that are close to
Speaker 8: would know, or he wouldn't be talking right now. The
Speaker 8: Prime Minister understands that better than anybody. He wouldn't be
Speaker 8: talking right now. He's talking, and we're putting a lot
Speaker 8: of pressure. I think he wants to make a deal.
Speaker 8: We're going to find out very soon. But it takes
Speaker 8: two to tango, and you have to have Ukraine want
Speaker 8: to make a deal too, and they're being hit very hard,
Speaker 8: and I do believe they want to make a deal.
Speaker 2: So and this turns out to be the longest twenty
Speaker 2: four hours in history, since he said he was going
Speaker 2: to get this deal in twenty four hours from the
Speaker 2: time that he's inaugurated and By the way, I just
Speaker 2: got a news alert on my phone that a senior
Speaker 2: Russian officer was killed in a car explosion near Moscow.
Speaker 2: So almost certainly you know Ukrainian ops going on, and
Speaker 2: this is a pattern we've seen from them before, sort
Speaker 2: of potential retaliation for what for these strikes within Ukraine.
Speaker 7: And let's just pull those social post up. This was
Speaker 7: from Thursday.
Speaker 10: I'm not happy with Russian strikes and Kiev not necessary
Speaker 10: and very bad timing. Vladimir stop five thousand shoulders a
Speaker 10: week or dying, let the peace deal get done.
Speaker 7: So that's what he was being asked about.
Speaker 10: And I mean he Another interesting thing about Trump is
Speaker 10: what we just saw him being like, you have no
Speaker 10: idea what's happening behind the scenes, which of course is
Speaker 10: why the press is there to kind of sus some
Speaker 10: of that out. But it's just his This is why
Speaker 10: he thought he could end it in twenty four hours,
Speaker 10: because maybe he'll land the plane, Like maybe he'll be
Speaker 10: able to land the plane in a couple of days.
Speaker 10: And I think the outlines of the peace plan look
Speaker 10: like pretty legitimate that we've seen and look like they
Speaker 10: can be worked with. But all along everyone has said
Speaker 10: Putin will gesture at this and not ultimately be serious
Speaker 10: about any of it.
Speaker 7: And does Trump end up I don't.
Speaker 10: Want to use the phrase taking that bait, but does
Speaker 10: does he end up just with egg on his face
Speaker 10: and Putin just walking away? It seems like that's what's
Speaker 10: inching closer and closer to the reality.
Speaker 2: I mean, Ryan, when jd Vance and then Trump like
Speaker 2: exploded on Zelensky in the Oval office, that was basically
Speaker 2: what he was trying to say. It's like, you can't
Speaker 2: you know, it's very hard to negotiate with these people.
Speaker 2: And I mean in a sense, I'm somewhat sympathetic because
Speaker 2: I just don't think there are any easier answers at
Speaker 2: this point.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 2: The time to deal really ideally was at the beginning
Speaker 2: of this war, with the peace negotiations that Biden intentionally
Speaker 2: blew up because they thought they could play regime change.
Speaker 3: You know games.
Speaker 2: And now here we are in a situation where Zolensky
Speaker 2: does not want to give up anything, including CRIMEA, and
Speaker 2: the Russians are like, why should we deal?
Speaker 3: Like we're in a strong position. We can just lock
Speaker 3: in here for the long term.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And the Trump administration is trying to give them
Speaker 5: as much as they can think of. It seems like
Speaker 5: he's you know, they're offering recognition of Crimea as Russian territory,
Speaker 5: and they're offering you know, significant amounts of Ukrainian territory
Speaker 5: as recognized you know, Russian territory. And the thing that
Speaker 5: Trump says, he's uh that he's that that Putin is
Speaker 5: conceding in exchange is not taking over the entire country, which,
Speaker 5: unfortunately for the Ukrainians at this point, does appear to
Speaker 5: be an actual concession because you know, the Russians, you know,
Speaker 5: have the industrial capacity and the manpower capacity to to
Speaker 5: continue this war. Now, if they did try to take
Speaker 5: over all of Ukraine, they would face a decades long
Speaker 5: kind of insurgency funded by the United States. Victoria Neulan
Speaker 5: said that like out loud.
Speaker 4: I think it was on.
Speaker 5: NPR, or maybe she said it in congressional testimony. She said,
Speaker 5: you know, if when it when it looked like Russia
Speaker 5: was going to like roll in to keieve and take it,
Speaker 5: she was saying, well, you know, look out, because we're
Speaker 5: going to fund a guerrilla campaign against you and and
Speaker 5: just bleed you for for decades to come.
Speaker 3: Wow.
Speaker 5: And in some ways US would almost prefer that from
Speaker 5: a strategic perspective, because then they get to you know,
Speaker 5: fund their guerrilla campaign and cause lots of problems for Russia. So,
Speaker 5: you know, so Putin has to look at that as
Speaker 5: a cost of doing business there, Like does he just
Speaker 5: want to take them take a massive win here sees
Speaker 5: enormous amounts of Ukrainian It seems like he wants to
Speaker 5: you know, push you know deeper into the Black Sea
Speaker 5: and fully turn Ukraine into a you know, complete rump country.
Speaker 5: That that then he can he can go back to
Speaker 5: the original Russian plan for Ukraine, which was to have
Speaker 5: of the Ukrainian friendly you know, proxy government now in
Speaker 5: place in Kiev. It would be a nominally sovereign country,
Speaker 5: but effectively kind of under the sway of Russia.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think the the you know, this is in
Speaker 2: some ways the least important part. But I think the
Speaker 2: politics here are difficult for Trump too. Like everybody likes
Speaker 2: the idea of him coming to the table and trying
Speaker 2: to get some sort of a peace deal and end
Speaker 2: this conflict, but the public is very negative on the
Speaker 2: idea of Russia being able to annex Ukrainian territory. And
Speaker 2: you know, I think we obviously saw with the end
Speaker 2: of the Afghanistan war, the way that winding these conflicts down,
Speaker 2: when you have to actually deal with the reality of
Speaker 2: where things are, you know, it can be very ugly. So,
Speaker 2: you know, I when you're looking at we've been covering
Speaker 2: this week some of the you know, the polls in
Speaker 2: the fall and approval rating and where Trump is on
Speaker 2: various issues. His foreign policy is now one of his
Speaker 2: lowest rated issue areas when you ask, you know, how
Speaker 2: do you think he's doing? And I do think that
Speaker 2: this is part of it because you know, and this
Speaker 2: part I'm not sympathetic too. He said We're going to
Speaker 2: have a deal in twenty four hours. He made it
Speaker 2: seem like this would be easy. Psy, I've got a plan,
Speaker 2: don't worry, We're going to get it done. And that
Speaker 2: was just not honest, Like, it just wasn't either He's
Speaker 2: a complete fool, I mean fully and a liar. But yeah,
Speaker 2: so I think it could be all of the above.
Speaker 10: And you know, honestly, again, like I didn't think that
Speaker 10: was completely insane because well, first of all, what they
Speaker 10: did with the ceasefire, the first ceasefire all apart was
Speaker 10: start working with the Biden administration and pressuring the Biden administration,
Speaker 10: and they were able to just sort of make something work. Now,
Speaker 10: U can I think is you know, obviously, because it's
Speaker 10: it's they're looking to something very very long term, like
Speaker 10: a demilitarized zone, like conversations about those types of things
Speaker 10: is going to be a very very heavy lift. But
Speaker 10: at least having like a significant breakthrough in the first
Speaker 10: twenty four hours didn't seem completely insane.
Speaker 7: But I'd prove me wrong.
Speaker 10: It really proved me wrong because it just hasn't the
Speaker 10: the attempts so far to operate, like to do an
Speaker 10: art of the deal on Putin. Uh, it's that's not
Speaker 10: Trump one point zero anymore. It's it's not quite the same.
Speaker 10: So we'll see if you can land the plane. I mean,
Speaker 10: it's possible, And this is actually I mean, it would
Speaker 10: be a good thing. It would be a good thing
Speaker 10: if he could land the plane. Yeah, land the plane
Speaker 10: on the road. But that's not like I'm genuinely cheering
Speaker 10: for them to land this plane. Because this absolutely looks
Speaker 10: like something that could have been negotiated by the Biden
Speaker 10: administration a year plus ago and at the time, every
Speaker 10: single Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4: That's update on our first segment.
Speaker 5: By the way, on China, producer Griffin sent this to
Speaker 5: our chat. Trump told Time Magazine that she called him
Speaker 5: and the Chinese embassy is denying it.
Speaker 4: Like, so, not only is he claiming that there are non.
Speaker 5: Existent talks that are happening between they, he said his
Speaker 5: Canadian girlfriend like visited him over the weekend, and the
Speaker 5: Canadian girlfriend is like, no, we're not.
Speaker 3: We're not We're not together. No, I've never seen I
Speaker 3: don't even know what.
Speaker 4: This person is, not even not even unofficial.
Speaker 7: He's just talking to.
Speaker 10: Like a Chinese businessman or something.
Speaker 2: Yeah, somebody called him and was like, hey, Howard Stern
Speaker 2: pranked him.
Speaker 5: Like He's like, I have three trillion dollars in trade
Speaker 5: locked up in an account. If you send a billion
Speaker 5: dollars to this account, I can unlock it.
Speaker 3: And show your Social Security number.
Speaker 5: And for some reason it has to be it has
Speaker 5: to be in crypto, has to be in Trump coin.
Speaker 2: This is one of the interesting Like he does seem
Speaker 2: like so desperate for this conversation, keeps asking for it,
Speaker 2: keeps doing I mean, they.
Speaker 7: Have to the inauguration, that's right, Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 5: And also, if he wanted to meet with she, all
Speaker 5: he had to do was send out a polite request,
Speaker 5: like She's entire thing is China is not going to
Speaker 5: be bullied and humiliated. And that's been his thing since
Speaker 5: he became premiere. Right, That's all he wants is to
Speaker 5: be treated with respect, and it's the only thing Trump
Speaker 5: won't do, so weird.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, no understanding of the psychology.
Speaker 4: There, ask him anything to be nice.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And the other thing that's funny, just as a side note, is,
Speaker 2: you know, the Canadians have their elections next week, and
Speaker 2: the way that Trump has like rallied liberals around Canadian
Speaker 2: patriotism and opposition to him is truly extraordinary. And you
Speaker 2: know he's sort of having that effect of like unifying
Speaker 2: the world against us and bolstering some of the like
Speaker 2: sort of liberal internationalist forces that he's ideologically most opposed to.
Speaker 5: This is like James Uchanon level like incompetence, Like it's
Speaker 5: it's incredible. None of this had to ask that every
Speaker 5: other tongue, but every other crisis that a president has
Speaker 5: faced has had some external element to it, right, that
Speaker 5: was out of their control. Right, And then they screwed
Speaker 5: it up or they responded well to it. He created
Speaker 5: this and then responded terribly to it. Yeah, it's utterly incredible.
Speaker 2: I mean, if you're going to take if you're going
Speaker 2: to try to do some global economic reordering, right, like
Speaker 2: you know, we're going to get rid of the Breton
Speaker 2: Woods system and we're going to figure out this, you know,
Speaker 2: like the thing that Janis Verifac has laid out that
Speaker 2: he thought the dambit was here, Like we're gonna maintain
Speaker 2: the dollars reserve currency, and we're going to get the
Speaker 2: Treasury bond yields down, and we're gonna use these stable
Speaker 2: coins to force people to stay on the dollar. But
Speaker 2: we're going to reduce the trade and balances so that
Speaker 2: we can reindustrialize. Like, if you're going to do this giant,
Speaker 2: extremely risky, massive gambit, like there needs to be some
Speaker 2: thought in preparation put into into this. And I mean,
Speaker 2: I don't even know if I buy that that was
Speaker 2: the level of you know, maybe some people had some
Speaker 2: ideas about that. Maybe you know, to me, for Trump,
Speaker 2: he just likes terrists because it gives him power and
Speaker 2: control and you know, puts him in the position of
Speaker 2: being this ultimate deal maker, and I think he likes that.
Speaker 2: I don't know that he was doing all the like, oh,
Speaker 2: the dollar will do this, and the reserve, you know,
Speaker 2: the bonds will do that, and here's how we'll rectify
Speaker 2: the trade ballot, and here's why we're getting right. Like,
Speaker 2: I'm not sure that he was operating on that level.
Speaker 2: I think he just instinctively likes terraces because he likes
Speaker 2: the feeling of being in that position. But if you're
Speaker 2: going to go for it like this, you have to
Speaker 2: have thought through. Okay, here's how the world's going to respond,
Speaker 2: here's how China's responded, here's how we're going to support
Speaker 2: our small businesses. Here's how we're going to lock down
Speaker 2: our rare earth mineral supplies. And none of that happened. Yeah,
Speaker 2: And that was never more clear than when we learned
Speaker 2: that the way that the terrorists got rolled back was
Speaker 2: because Peter Navarro was tricked into going to some meeting
Speaker 2: on the other side of the White House and Bessett
Speaker 2: and Lutnick are able to sweep in and force Trump
Speaker 2: to type out the tweet in real time while they're
Speaker 2: sitting right there.
Speaker 5: And I think Trump one was able successfully to jawbone
Speaker 5: Mohammed bin Salmon twice into making moves on oil prices
Speaker 5: that he wanted, which changed changed the global economy in
Speaker 5: directions that were favorable in each case to Trump. And
Speaker 5: he was also able to jawbone Powell into lowering interest
Speaker 5: rates twenty nineteen and twenty twenty, and Janet Yellen is
Speaker 5: as well in the early days. And so I think
Speaker 5: that like he took that experience away. It's like, oh,
Speaker 5: I could like tweet at these people and use American
Speaker 5: power and they will do these things for me, and
Speaker 5: then he extended it to the entire world.
Speaker 2: I also think they live in the sense of unreality
Speaker 2: and because genuinely, like you know and Trump one point zero,
Speaker 2: they did some tariffs, like there was some protectionist policy.
Speaker 2: There was a lot of economists freak out about prices
Speaker 2: are going to go up and it's going to escalate,
Speaker 2: and it's going to be tit for tat, and that
Speaker 2: you know, there were not no impacts. There were impacts,
Speaker 2: but it was not this sort of more catastrophic scenario
Speaker 2: that some had sketched out. And so I don't know,
Speaker 2: I just I also feel like there's an element of
Speaker 2: their brains are so cooked by being online all the
Speaker 2: time where nothing ever feels like it's real. Everything exists
Speaker 2: in this state of like suspended or mirror reality that
Speaker 2: they can't really comprehend that what you're doing is going
Speaker 2: to have these like real, massive, reverberating, terrible impacts with
Speaker 2: no real compensating upside on the other side of it.
Speaker 7: I think it's their brains are like that.
Speaker 10: It's this on the LIBS reflex and the idea, it's
Speaker 10: it's in a way, but the idea was just basically
Speaker 10: to give a middle finger to the global financial system
Speaker 10: and say, because the chips are in the US hand,
Speaker 10: that it'll be the shock to the global financial system
Speaker 10: automatically will reward the United States in the long term
Speaker 10: because just giving the giving everyone else the middle finger
Speaker 10: and exploding the foundation of the global financial system, that
Speaker 10: will just people will have to come to United States.
Speaker 10: And you can see the kind of like logic behind
Speaker 10: that argument. But what happens in the immediate aftermath of
Speaker 10: you have to like if you if you buy that,
Speaker 10: and that's your philosophy, you have to manage really carefully,
Speaker 10: even by your own even by your own argument and
Speaker 10: your own strategy, which is told, just blow things up,
Speaker 10: you have to then augment it with all kinds of
Speaker 10: different policies. The chips are not just going to fall
Speaker 10: in a way that's automatically better for the United States
Speaker 10: when you also have China on the other side offering
Speaker 10: all of these other alternatives. So I think a lot
Speaker 10: of it was just screw everyone. They will come crawling
Speaker 10: back to us. And that's where the details got completely
Speaker 10: I don't want to say like overlooked or lost. I
Speaker 10: think the details were like intentionally not ironed out by
Speaker 10: the President's inner circle and the President himself because it
Speaker 10: was like that'll be fine.
Speaker 2: It was just like a gut instinctive, which I mean
Speaker 2: even Trump said like I'm just doing this by my gut,
Speaker 2: Like that's insane. We're going to talk more about the
Speaker 2: some of the stuff going on with the Democrats in
Speaker 2: the premium portion of the show, but I did want
Speaker 2: to ask you guys. Did you guys see Hennania's tweet
Speaker 2: where he was like, AOC is going to be the
Speaker 2: Democratic nominee and these people are going to make me
Speaker 2: like have to vote for her.
Speaker 3: And I've something to us. I don't know that you
Speaker 3: read everything. I said them, Oh, I do.
Speaker 2: But but I was thinking about that, and also I
Speaker 2: was thinking about I think it was Wisenthal who tweeted out,
Speaker 2: you know, Trump just recently came out and said that
Speaker 2: they're not going to do a tax on millionaires because it'd.
Speaker 3: Be too disruptive, too disruptive.
Speaker 2: Imagine this guy saying something is too disruptive and that
Speaker 2: millionaires would leave the country or whatever. And he said,
Speaker 2: if you pulled millionaires, the choice between like I'm going
Speaker 2: to have to pay a little more in taxes and
Speaker 2: this whatever this is, they would overwhelmingly be like, I'll
Speaker 2: just pay a little bit more in taxes, It's fine.
Speaker 2: And so it did make me think of you know, now,
Speaker 2: I'm like going back in history, and the way that
Speaker 2: FDR was able to forge this New Deal coalition is
Speaker 2: that there was a threat of something that was much
Speaker 2: worse for capital on the other side.
Speaker 3: At the time.
Speaker 2: It was communism, right. It was like, listen, you're going
Speaker 2: to pay more in taxes, you're gonna have to fund
Speaker 2: the government, you're going to set up social safety debt,
Speaker 2: we're going to have labor regulations. That's happening, or those
Speaker 2: people over there can just totally take your shit, like
Speaker 2: which one do you want? And I almost feel like
Speaker 2: this Trump maw kind of approach is setting up a
Speaker 2: similar dynamic where this has been so destructive and so
Speaker 2: terrible for corporate America unless you're one of the Wall
Speaker 2: Street executives that gets the like insider trading info that
Speaker 2: when you compare on the other hand, like oh, or
Speaker 2: we could just like pay a little more in taxes
Speaker 2: than people get healthcare, like that doesn't seem so bad
Speaker 2: and so crazy in comparison to what's being done right now.
Speaker 10: Well, this is the argument that Bannon kind of made
Speaker 10: yesterday about how it was like do you see Luigi Mangioni?
Speaker 10: Do you do you see that people genuinely really like him?
Speaker 10: And he's like looking out in this crowd of elites
Speaker 10: saying the reason people like him is because they don't
Speaker 10: have healthcare, Like people are not doing well, and so
Speaker 10: you have to like, if your alternative is paying a
Speaker 10: little bit of higher taxes, you know, that's probably better
Speaker 10: than continuing to let the world burn. And that's a
Speaker 10: different version of the argument that you made, Crystal, But
Speaker 10: it's Bannon. I think maybe he's even drawing on that
Speaker 10: exact example, saying, you know, the pitch to the elites
Speaker 10: right now is that this, this populism is your better
Speaker 10: alternative to what comes after if the populism isn't sort
Speaker 10: of dealt with through policy. Yeah.
Speaker 5: I saw I saw Mike Cernovich saying that too. Oh
Speaker 5: really yeah, yeah, that And he was saying, look, we're
Speaker 5: trying to take our country back. And if if you oligarchs,
Speaker 5: I don't know if you use the word oligarchs, but
Speaker 5: if you oligarchs screw this up and and don't allow
Speaker 5: us to successfully you know, implement our populist revolution here
Speaker 5: and you get AOC instead, do not come to us
Speaker 5: asking for help. We're stepping aside that do not come.
Speaker 5: So's he said, We're gonna step aside.
Speaker 4: We tried.
Speaker 5: We're not fighting for you, We're fighting for us. And
Speaker 5: if you, if you screw this up, we're just gonna
Speaker 5: let let AOC run her communist you know, tyrannical empire
Speaker 5: or whatever whatever you deserve. Because he he was like,
Speaker 5: his argument was like, Magga, is the compromise right the
Speaker 5: same way that you know FDR, you know, was the
Speaker 5: and the New Deal with a compromise stopping either a
Speaker 5: communist revolution or a fascist revolution like that.
Speaker 4: That's kind of the argument being made.
Speaker 2: Let me go ahead and jump forward then too. I
Speaker 2: have some of the banning comments about both him saying
Speaker 2: like we need to tax millionaires more and also really
Speaker 2: taking the moment where Elon seems to be able down
Speaker 2: and out to to really go after him as well.
Speaker 3: Let's go ahead and take a listen to this.
Speaker 9: So the day of reckonings here, folks. The simple math
Speaker 9: is unless you raise the taxes at the upper bracket,
Speaker 9: the math doesn't work. The math ain't that great with
Speaker 9: doing that. But that's kind of a starter.
Speaker 6: And so anybody wants to show the come back with
Speaker 6: the math, and you know what they're gonna say is
Speaker 6: like what Elon said, it was gonna be a five
Speaker 6: percent growth rate. What Elon said a lot of stuff,
Speaker 6: and none of it's turned out to be accurate. Like
Speaker 6: where's my two training cuts, where's my one training cuts?
Speaker 9: Where's my one fifty billion cuts?
Speaker 6: You just show me any cut that's not programmatic because
Speaker 6: the programmatic.
Speaker 9: Were being done by other people. Show me waste, fraud
Speaker 9: and abuse.
Speaker 6: You've been over the Pentagon for two months, bro, that's
Speaker 6: a Viper's nest of wait for it, hang on, wait wait, waste,
Speaker 6: fraud and abuse.
Speaker 9: Yeah, nothing, and you're gonna have to cut the defense budget.
Speaker 6: All these fantasies people got fan people running read they
Speaker 6: got fantasies.
Speaker 9: They're fantasizing. Now the global bomb market gets a vote here.
Speaker 6: Don't forget the equity market, right, that's just long a
Speaker 6: the cost of equity capital for the the companies.
Speaker 9: It's important, it's very important, but it ain't the main thing.
Speaker 6: The main thing is the bond market because the world's
Speaker 6: got three hundred trillion dollars of debt at every level.
Speaker 9: And guess what, we're having a margin call there.
Speaker 2: You got a lot packed in there, Ryan, You got
Speaker 2: the taxes on the Rits, you got the like Elon failed,
Speaker 2: he didn't even touch the Pentagon. What's going on here? Bro,
Speaker 2: show me even a single cut that you made. And
Speaker 2: then the reference to basically, you know, bond market being
Speaker 2: the real deep state.
Speaker 5: Yeah no, no, lives detected there. I've told this anecdote before,
Speaker 5: but you know James Carville, when he was Clinton's top
Speaker 5: advisor that you know, they ran on this big agenda
Speaker 5: that they were going to launch after winning in nineteen
Speaker 5: ninety two, and the economists, their economists came to them
Speaker 5: and said, if you do this, the bond markets are
Speaker 5: going to freak out. Interest rates are going to spike,
Speaker 5: and here's what will happen to the economy, to mortgage rates,
Speaker 5: to unemployment. And James Carville later said, you know, when
Speaker 5: when he dies and gets reincarnated, he wants to come
Speaker 5: back as the bond market because it's the most powerful
Speaker 5: thing in the world.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 5: He understood that at the time, and unfortunately it is true,
Speaker 5: and now Trump is finding out. It's it's kind of
Speaker 5: shocking that Trump didn't know that because one of the
Speaker 5: only things he does understand is interest rates is debt. Yeah,
Speaker 5: interest rates and debt. Because his entire real estate stick
Speaker 5: was basically a cash flow play using an arbitrage between
Speaker 5: the money coming in and the and his and his
Speaker 5: refise and is different and and the way that he
Speaker 5: was playing with you know, different interest rate movie.
Speaker 10: He's basically said that by the way he's he's come
Speaker 10: out and basically he's not like ashamed of that. Mostly
Speaker 10: this is like very trumpy and most people would see
Speaker 10: that as like a very shameful predicate for wealth.
Speaker 5: But yeah, no, he get but he so he he
Speaker 5: completely understands the role of debt and interest rates in
Speaker 5: the there's and their centrality to our economy. So for
Speaker 5: him to make this fundamental mistake is just comically inept.
Speaker 5: But yeah, so Bannon's right about everything there.
Speaker 2: Emily, how are magotypes feeling about Elon these days? Because
Speaker 2: I thought it was interesting, you know, Bannon initially was
Speaker 2: taking some shots at him H one B. By the way,
Speaker 2: New York Times had a fascinating analysis of how Laura
Speaker 2: Lumer and all of those like aligned accounts who were
Speaker 2: going after Elon over H one b they got crushed
Speaker 2: in Elon's Twitter algorithm, which interesting side note here. But
Speaker 2: Bannon kind of laid off for a little while when
Speaker 2: Elon seemed to be writing a little bit higher in
Speaker 2: the President's esteem, and now that he's relegated to like
Speaker 2: meekly being at a cabinet meeting, like well, actually, maybe
Speaker 2: the cuts are more like one hundred and fifty billion.
Speaker 2: And by the way, I'm on my way on a here,
Speaker 2: and Tesla's stock is.
Speaker 5: Greater as like, let me see one hundred fifty billion.
Speaker 3: It's like I gotta go yeah, right, exactly.
Speaker 2: Now, Bannon is coming back at Elon in those comments,
Speaker 2: and also he said something at a conference where he
Speaker 2: was like, you know, Elon's looking out for his own interest,
Speaker 2: not the nations.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 10: So this is what I mean we predicted on this
Speaker 10: show is that there wouldn't ever be like a big
Speaker 10: kinetic blow up between Trump and Elon Musk. But what
Speaker 10: would happen would be the sort of quiet quitting, the
Speaker 10: conscious uncoupling of the relationship, that it would gradually wind
Speaker 10: down in a way that saves face for both parties.
Speaker 10: And I think Elon is throwing in the towel. Clearly
Speaker 10: he's throwing in the towel a little bit early.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 10: Again, there are limitations on the special government employee status
Speaker 10: that he has, but.
Speaker 2: And we know they're all very you know, get sure
Speaker 2: not to exceed the proper time period of the special
Speaker 2: government employee status.
Speaker 3: That would be important to them.
Speaker 10: He's also supposed to be delivering regular like getting exceptions
Speaker 10: for conflicts of interest according to the statute.
Speaker 3: So right, yeah, sure, what's that going?
Speaker 7: Yeah, So, but.
Speaker 10: Yeah, that's what I'm saying, Like, I don't think that
Speaker 10: they particularly could have come up with a different role.
Speaker 10: Maybe he could have been an advisor to the campaign,
Speaker 10: or they could have actually created Doge as like an
Speaker 10: outside group, which it was originally intended to be to
Speaker 10: avoid any of these problems, and Elon could just indefinitely be,
Speaker 10: you know, an advisor to this outside group. And if
Speaker 10: he had a lot of momentum, I think that obviously
Speaker 10: would have been the case if he had this like
Speaker 10: big political capital behind him that was growing. But that
Speaker 10: is not where he is right now. And because he's said,
Speaker 10: especially on that Tesla investor's call Crystal that we covered Wednesday,
Speaker 10: that was a Tuesday call, nobody is even like, at
Speaker 10: least that I can see. Nobody's even really fighting bitterly
Speaker 10: about Elon anymore because he's fading into irrelevance. And that
Speaker 10: doesn't mean he's not going to be powerful. It just
Speaker 10: means he's not going to be running the show. So
Speaker 10: it's like, why are people, why would you at this
Speaker 10: point waste your own political capital getting over getting in
Speaker 10: a fight over someone who is giving a bunch of money.
Speaker 10: The Republican Party is still going to be a powerful
Speaker 10: backer of Trump, but is not going to be at
Speaker 10: the center of the action and the administration in Washington,
Speaker 10: d C.
Speaker 7: It's almost not worth it for people.
Speaker 5: But but his stench is going to linger, and as
Speaker 5: crises pop up over the next three years, people and
Speaker 5: we are unable to respond to them effectively, which always
Speaker 5: happens uh with with government. Uh, people are going to
Speaker 5: be able to point back to what he did to
Speaker 5: the government. Already You've got you know, bird flu ripping
Speaker 5: through everything, and you have the FDA saying that it
Speaker 5: can't actually you know, keep up with the different you
Speaker 5: know you cole I inspections and then and they can't
Speaker 5: really inspect milk like they would like to.
Speaker 4: You can't do the same kind of quality control.
Speaker 5: You got the measles outbreak, you got like uh, you know,
Speaker 5: Arkansas is being told it can't have emergency.
Speaker 4: Declaration Kentucky to.
Speaker 5: Kentucky like and all of these things are then going
Speaker 5: to go back to the stench of elon. And so
Speaker 5: right now, bird flu is like, you know, somewhat contained,
Speaker 5: and people aren't like it's it's not having the it's
Speaker 5: not contained. It's contained as a story. But that might
Speaker 5: not always be the case. And when if that is
Speaker 5: not the case, people are gonna be like, oh yeah,
Speaker 5: that guy came in and destroyed everything out of spite
Speaker 5: to own lives and arrows.
Speaker 4: Yeah right.
Speaker 3: Government spend.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, I never thought this was about
Speaker 2: government spending, as you guys know, but government spending is
Speaker 2: higher than it has ever been. They're doing a trillion
Speaker 2: dollar budget, Pentagon budget. They're giving massive taxes for the rich,
Speaker 2: and even Steve bann Is out here like, show me
Speaker 2: any of you, like, show me a single cut that
Speaker 2: you made, just one, so you know the in terms
Speaker 2: of the numbers, it's gotten to a point where you
Speaker 2: either just have to blatantly close your eyes or it
Speaker 2: is clearly obvious that they either failed or in my opinion,
Speaker 2: that was never the real goal to start with. But
Speaker 2: to Ryan's point, that doesn't mean that their actions didn't
Speaker 2: have extraordinary impact and won't have extraordinary consequences, some of
Speaker 2: which I think will be really unpredictable going forward.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 2: It could be something that's on our radar, like bird
Speaker 2: flu or like you know, airline safety or something like that.
Speaker 2: It could be something that we're not even aware of
Speaker 2: or thinking about that got slashed in the melee that
Speaker 2: turns out to be really critical and really important and
Speaker 2: you know, the other thing I was thinking about politically
Speaker 2: is like, first of all, I think that Supreme Court
Speaker 2: race genuinely was a turning point for Elon's power. That
Speaker 2: really seems to have been the moment when it was like, Okay,
Speaker 2: well this guy doesn't have.
Speaker 3: The juice, so goodbye.
Speaker 2: And number two, you know, the two big stories now
Speaker 2: that are dominating the news are deportations and tariffs and Elon,
Speaker 2: I mean, Elon's actively opposed to the tariffs and told
Speaker 2: his has said that before and ideologically been very clear
Speaker 2: and also reiterated that on his Tesla investor call. He
Speaker 2: has apparently been trying to lobby Trump behind the scenes
Speaker 2: to back away from this, and there's no indication that
Speaker 2: his entreaties had any impact on Trump whatsoever. So he's
Speaker 2: irrelevant effectively to the terror story. Is also irrelevant effectively
Speaker 2: to the deportation story. So you know, in a cultural
Speaker 2: in a culture within the Trump administration that values who's
Speaker 2: able to trigger the libs and who's able to grab
Speaker 2: attention and hold on to it, his currency in that
Speaker 2: regard is also really diminished at this point.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think that's a good point.
Speaker 10: I wonder actually if his lobbying on terraces behind closed
Speaker 10: doors maybe diminished him in Trump's esteem, because Trump is
Speaker 10: an ideological protectionist, and he does have this like bitter
Speaker 10: hostility towards people who are you know, what he sees
Speaker 10: as like not America first. And that's where Elin got
Speaker 10: really offended by Peter Navarro saying that, because he's like,
Speaker 10: and his supporters are like, look, we're doing so much
Speaker 10: more in the United States than a lot of other
Speaker 10: auto manufacturers.
Speaker 7: Like what are you talking about.
Speaker 2: That they're actually the most American car in terms of
Speaker 2: the parts and the assembly taking place to the largest
Speaker 2: extent in America.
Speaker 10: Yeah, Peter Novara is an auto assembler, not a manufacturer.
Speaker 10: But I think that's a I think Trump will probab
Speaker 10: we agree with that seriously, and I think he's he's
Speaker 10: much more in the Navarro camp. So I wonder if
Speaker 10: that also he found He was apparently really upset when
Speaker 10: he that leak happened about Elon potentially getting briefed at
Speaker 10: the Pentagon on China.
Speaker 7: The leak suggested that Trump was actually furious.
Speaker 10: About that, probably whatever, probably because he sees it as
Speaker 10: something that's really damaging to him. He knows that his
Speaker 10: grassroots is more aligned with the Bandon wing, and it
Speaker 10: sounds like he was furious about that. So it's possible
Speaker 10: that Elon started greeting on him from those sorts of
Speaker 10: things too.
Speaker 2: Well, it's not a people person either. He doesn't know
Speaker 2: how to you know, Trump requires a lot of massaging
Speaker 2: and like tiptoeing and jiu jitsu to try to make
Speaker 2: your point, and Elon is not. Really that's not really
Speaker 2: his particular skill set. Quite the opposite, Ryan, I wanted
Speaker 2: to get you in particular way, and just quickly on
Speaker 2: this piece, this Trump targeting apt lou in this presidential
Speaker 2: memorandum basically directing the Justice Department to investigate them. Your
Speaker 2: Republicans have this. They've really just completely lied about what
Speaker 2: ACTBLU even is. Act BLU is just this payment platform
Speaker 2: so that democratic candidates are causes can raise grassroots dollars.
Speaker 2: They're framing this as being some you know that ACTBLU
Speaker 2: is some way that George Soros can nefariously funnel foreign
Speaker 2: contributions into democratic causes. And then of course that's before
Speaker 2: we even talk about the fact that, you know, one
Speaker 2: administration ago, it would have been absolutely blockbuster news for
Speaker 2: the President to direct the DOJ to investigate the you know,
Speaker 2: anything to do with his political rivals. So just wondered
Speaker 2: your reaction to that executive order, which has been rumored
Speaker 2: for a while.
Speaker 5: And I've argued with a bunch of people on the
Speaker 5: right about this. But you know Act Blue who think
Speaker 5: that ACTBLU is this giant scam that allows billionaires and
Speaker 5: people from overseas, you know, to funnel you know, hard dollar,
Speaker 5: small contribution to Democratic candidates and organizations. And that misunderstanding
Speaker 5: about what Act Blue is flows from the same mistake
Speaker 5: that Democrats and on the left sometimes make about Republicans,
Speaker 5: just not believing that their opponents are real people. Like
Speaker 5: they saw Kamala Harris raise hundreds of millions of dollars
Speaker 5: in the first day and then like a billion within
Speaker 5: the first month or whatever, and they're like, that's impossible,
Speaker 5: Like nobody likes Kamala Harris. This must be like George
Speaker 5: Soros money that's being secretly funded to her, funneled to her.
Speaker 5: It's like no, Actually, you know a lot of people
Speaker 5: do like Kamala Harris, like a decent number of like countries,
Speaker 5: middle class people do like her. And also they really
Speaker 5: hate you, yes, like they hate you so much.
Speaker 4: Think about that.
Speaker 5: They don't like her at all, but they despise you
Speaker 5: with enough of a passion that they will send fifty
Speaker 5: dollars in there. What and so when Red does the
Speaker 5: basically exact same thing as Act Blue on the Republican side.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was modeled on Blue technology.
Speaker 5: It totally and Trump is not acting asking the dj
Speaker 5: to go after when read what he's saying is that
Speaker 5: and what the EO points to are instances of fraud
Speaker 5: that Act Blue itself identified and publicized and then kicked
Speaker 5: off of their platform. Act Blue will allow you to
Speaker 5: like keep your information saved, just like say Stripe or
Speaker 5: something like that. So it's easier than when you get
Speaker 5: another email or to see a tweet or a Facebook
Speaker 5: post to then donate to this person because you're mad.
Speaker 5: And what the Trump administration wants to do is put
Speaker 5: more obstacles in the way of people and basically make them,
Speaker 5: you know, re enter all of their card info and
Speaker 5: all of their you know, their occupation data and everything
Speaker 5: each time they make a contribution. Because the data analysts
Speaker 5: know that, you know, every hurdle that you put in
Speaker 5: front of somebody is going to make it less likely
Speaker 5: that they convert all the way. And we understand that
Speaker 5: over here at breaking points, you know, you go to
Speaker 5: break point dot com, and that the more complicated that
Speaker 5: it is made for people to subscribe, the fewer number
Speaker 5: of people are going to subscribe by the time they
Speaker 5: get through the maze and their entire you know, business
Speaker 5: models built around making it easy, because there's nothing more
Speaker 5: frustrating in this world than when you're trying to like
Speaker 5: donate your money to something or give your you know,
Speaker 5: subscribe to something and you keep running up against error
Speaker 5: messages or like oh you didn't fill in this thing,
Speaker 5: and then so you're like, you know what, I'm out
Speaker 5: of here.
Speaker 4: I don't have time for this.
Speaker 2: The one that drives me crazy is when I'm trying
Speaker 2: to pay a bill and it's like that, I'm like.
Speaker 3: You're money, really trying my best here, you know, take take.
Speaker 5: My money, Jesus Christ, what's wrong with you?
Speaker 4: Now? ActBlue.
Speaker 5: What ActBlue is telling people in the democratic space is
Speaker 5: that this is gross and the threat and all that,
Speaker 5: but that they're not.
Speaker 3: They're not worried, scared, worried.
Speaker 5: You know, it's going to cost some money, but they
Speaker 5: said they're not shutting down, they're not changing anything. They're
Speaker 5: going to sue, They're going to counter sue. They're going
Speaker 5: to fight this in court, and they think that they
Speaker 5: will win, Like it is flagrantly criminal what Trump is
Speaker 5: trying to do here, and they don't and they and
Speaker 5: they're confident. Maybe this is naive, but they're confident that
Speaker 5: the courts are not going to not going.
Speaker 4: To allow this.
Speaker 2: Okay, interesting, Yeah, And I mean I do think there's
Speaker 2: an element here too. Obviously it's aimed at Democrats, but also,
Speaker 2: you know, the more difficult you make it for grassroots
Speaker 2: donors to contribute, the more important the big donors, the
Speaker 2: people like Elon Musk are to, you know, to campaigns.
Speaker 2: So I think there's an element of that as well,
Speaker 2: of like, let's get these small dollar donors out of
Speaker 2: here and just make sure it's us, you know, the
Speaker 2: people are able to stroke the big checks who really.
Speaker 3: Have all the power.
Speaker 5: Democrats themselves have been trying to get the small small dog.
Speaker 3: I think it's just like true.
Speaker 10: I think it's just like mob mentality, Like that's how
Speaker 10: Trump thinks it's okay to run politics, and it was
Speaker 10: just fueled by the way the like Russian investigent, Like,
Speaker 10: this is all downstream of right and this was.
Speaker 5: Sparked by this Jack Pasoviac, Right, didn't Jack pasbec Jack
Speaker 5: Pisobiac pulled like some data from the FEC and like
Speaker 5: posted it and went viral on the right. Oh really,
Speaker 5: and it was like you totally read this wrong. It's
Speaker 5: like it was like literal fake news and they're now
Speaker 5: they're doing an EO based on it.
Speaker 10: But no, yeah, I mean, it's it's all downstream of
Speaker 10: the this correct upset about what happened with the FBI
Speaker 10: and what happened with these law firms, and it's all
Speaker 10: saying this is the this is fighting the fire with
Speaker 10: the fire. And again my argument is not that makes
Speaker 10: it right, but that's the mentality that I think is
Speaker 10: behind it. It's just we're we're doing this, We're we're
Speaker 10: roy coning it now.
Speaker 6: Hmm.
Speaker 2: I want to get you, guys reaction to one more
Speaker 2: thing on the Democratic Party side. All right, guys, thank
Speaker 2: you so much for watching the free portion of the
Speaker 2: Friday show. We're going to move into some premium bonus content,
Speaker 2: so if you want to watch that as well, make
Speaker 2: sure to go and subscribe at breakingpoints dot com, and
Speaker 2: for all of you guys who are already premium subscribers,
Speaker 2: that portion is going to start right now.