Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Coverage that is possible.
If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today.
What do we have, Crystal, indeed, we do Lot's to get to this morning.
Breaking news last night Henry Kissinger is dead at one hundred, so we'll talk a little bit about that to begin the show. We also have updates for you out of Israel in terms of the current ceasefire negotiations, temporary cease fire negotiation, and what comes next. Also some pretty uh noteworthy comments from Elon Musk yesterday in a New York Times event, telling advertisers, GF Y, go f yourself. So we've got those comments for you. What it means all
of that? Very interesting Mark Cubans sparking rumors that maybe he's going to run for president because.
I think you think so, I think so. Yeah, we'll talk about it.
He denies it pretty strenuously. I don't know, but anyway, it's interesting. We'll tell you the signs there. We also have a massive announcement from the United Auto Workers. They are launching the largest organizing effort perhaps in history at basically every carmaker with factories here in the US. So that is a big deal. And SAGRESC got a big UFO report for us and also a fantastic monologue for us today.
Yes, I'm back, I'm back. We have a couple of things that we wanted to mention. First and foremost is we got some data. I know a lot of you are personing, you posting your personal Spotify raps, many of which showed us at number one, so we thank you. But we also got our own here for breaking points with some incredible that we wanted to share with all of you.
Let's put this up there on the screen.
So forty five percent of the people who are listening right now actually discovered this podcast in twenty twenty three, which is astounding when you think about it, because that's nearly half and Crystal, you and I also know from our last year Spotify wrapped that at that point fifty five percent of people had joined us in twenty twenty two, and we started this only in June of twenty twenty one,
so that's over one hundred percent growth in audience. It shows that we had huge spikes anytime that we had major news events from the midterms more recently in Israel. We also learned something about the way that you guys share the show. Predominantly people who did share it shared it by a text message. So we have a couple of asked of you, but the main one today is
for the future and ongoing. If you like an episode and you think it could help a friend of yours, send it via text to a friend, because clearly from what we are seeing, thousands and tens of thousands of you have done that now over the last year and it's actually dramatically helped our growth, So we appreciate you.
And then of course our premium subscribers as well, who we can also see in the data have been some of the super users and share So if you want to sign up Breakingpoints dot com but incredible data and you know what, we can't help, but thank you. All so much, because, yeah, that's what helps keep our business I think, really different than a lot of other people.
We don't have to rely on a single source of revenue.
We have a huge podcast, we have a big YouTube show as well, and of course we have our premium subscriptions. So you guys keep us anti fragile. And you know, anytime I see data like that, it's stunning.
It really is great.
Thank you for keeping us anti fragile. I like that. Yeah.
And one of the things too, that was amazing to me looking at that data, which I mean, first of all, just thank you guys. It's amazing and it's exciting to have new people still joining the show and you know tuning in to hear our analysis of what's going on in Israel and Gaza.
So thank you for that.
And one of the shows that really brought people in was one of the shows with regards to you know, focus on Israel, and of the new listeners and overwhelming majority have actually joined just in the past couple months. With regards to our Israel coverage, So, as we've said many times in the past, especially with regard to coverage of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the fact that you guys trust us to cover these big, significant, fraught, difficult news events.
It really means a lot to us.
We take it really seriously, and you know, it really sort of fuels us and helps us remain committed to doing the best job we possibly can on these complex news events. So thank you, thank you, thank you. We love you guys, We appreciate you.
Guys.
Let's go and jump in with the big breaking news. Put this up on the screen. From the intercept, there were many ways of leading these obits for Henry Kissinger. The intercept goes with top US diplomat responsible for millions of deaths dies at one hundred. Let me read you a little bit of this.
They say.
Few people have had a hand and as much death and destruction, as much human suffering in so many places around the world as Henry Kissinger. This was written by journalist Nick Churse, who we actually had on the show. I believe in the past year was Emily and I were on. He had uncovered new deaths tributable to Kissinger,
even in the past couple of years in Cambodia. He goes on to write, Henry Kissinger, national Security Advisor, Secretary of State under two presidents and longtime eminence Grise of the US foreign policy establishment, died on November twenty ninth
at his home in Connecticut, one hundred years old. He helped to prolong the Vietnam War, expand that conflict into neutral Cambodia, facilitated genocides in Cambodia, East Timor in Bangladesh, accelerated civil wars in Southern Africa, and supported coups and
death squads throughout Latin America. He had the blood of at least three million people on his hands, according to his biographer Greg Greg Grandon goes on to quote, there were few people who have had as much a hand in death and destruction as much human suffering in so many places around the world as Henry Kissinger. According to veteran War crimes prosecutor Read Brody So one hundred years lived a long time, advised literally every president and hopeful
presidents like Hillary Clinton. Was a symbol of both the sort of arrogance and casual disregard for human life using the entire world as a chess board and human beings as pawns and playthings on that chess board. The sort of arrogance that precipitated the War on Terror and our misadventures Neocon misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And he is a long last augur.
Dad, Well, I'll give my hottest take is I don't think Kissinger was uniquely bad in any respect. If anything, I think he was actually much better than many of the people who occupied top charges in American foreign policy. On Vietnam, I'm not really I've never understood, and I was telling you this earlier why people like McGeorge, Mundy and Robert McNamara were not nearly as reviled as Kissinger.
I mean Kissinger, sure, you know he expanded the secret bombing in Cambodia, but him and Nixon got signed the Treaty of Paris, and they got us the hell out of Vietnam. They had the Vietnamization process. Dayton was one of the most successful foreign policy things that we needed at the time. The Salt One Treaty froze the insane missile spending that the LBJ and Kennedy.
Johnson administration we're doing.
The Opening of China remains one of the great master classes in American foreign policy. And I look, and my big meta kind of take on why I get annoyed with some of the criticism of Kissinger is the reason why the left hates Kissinger are the reasons that the neo cons hated him too, because he refused to incorporate
quote unquote morality into his foreign policy. Now, I know that that sounds bad, but you know, one of the reasons why I've been so against like moralistic campaigns around Israel, around Ukraine is that weaponized empathy is a bad way to conduct relations between states. Kissinger disregarded that along with Nixon and pursued in most cases a pretty realist policy and was confined by some difficult political circumstances at the time.
So I think people like Rumsfeldt, who by the way, is the person who eventually defeated Kissinger, and bureaucratic combat people like McGeorge Bundy, people like macnamara, many of the Sea I forget the CIA director's name for Ronald Reagan them, they're far worse in terms of Georgia. But sure, well, but he's the president. And that actually brings it back to Kissinger was not the decider. It was Nixon, it was Ford, it was Kennedy, it.
Was Kissinger was incredibly influenced over a long period of time, Kissinger was literally picking out police's on the map to bomb.
It was nally bombed.
And so you and I have a fundamental difference of opinion, philosophical difference in terms of conduct and morality.
And you know, I'm.
Opposed to genocide, I'm opposed to war crimes. This man was a war criminal. There's no two ways about it. Read Christopher Hutchin's book on it if you want to know all the details. But I mean, even just with regard to Vietnam, he intentionally blew up peace talks in an attempt to try to get Nixon into the White House.
Then he's rewarded with the National Security Advisor's job. So even if you're just talking about Vietnam, he prolongs this conflict for years and expands it into Cambodia and Laos. The US drop five hundred and forty thousand bombs on those places, one hundred and fifty to five hundred thousand Cambodian civilians. So you know, I can't really just look
past that. And the other piece I would say, even if you don't care about genocide, you know the backing Pinochet in Chile, these brutal military dictatorships, even if you're like, yeah, I don't really care if it if it serves American interests.
The other piece of it and why it is so consistent and why he's like the grandfather of neocons, is because there's such a level of arrogance thinking that we can just move these pieces on the chessboard around, not care about any of the humanity involved, and not experience any sort of fallout or blowback from those sort of adventures. So he did support the war in Iraq. It's not like he was opposed to it, because this is completely
consistent with his ideology. Now, the neocons may have tried to wrap their ideology in idealism, but the reality is that they were very much consistently trying to pursue their own version of Kissinger strategy, which is again why, in spite of all of his various record of criminality over many decades, he still was fetted by elites from both
parties consistently. And you know, we're talking a lot about the loss of US credibility and how can they ever say anything with a straight face about care of democracy, human rights.
Et cetera.
Given the support of Netanyahuo's you know, indiscriminate bombing in Gaza right now. You know, Kissinger really is like the grandfather of that too. It can point to the Iraq War and the loss of US credibility, but it really goes back to him and the total disregard for law, constitutionality, in any sort of care and concern for.
Human I understand.
I just don't think human rights or morality or any of these things really have anything to play whenever it comes to how you should conduct yourself, because ultimately you find you find yourselves like the Biden administration and all the governments before them, backing places like Saudi Arabia and then talking about other things in Ukraine. It's like it's never going to be consistent. Whenever you live in a messy world, it's going to be messy. So you might
as well disregard the pretense. I remember, I think he was caught on one of the Nixon tapes basically saying exactly this.
I would say.
Again, I don't think he's uniquely bad in that period of America.
I could buy that there.
I think part of why he stands out for people as such a uniquely evil figure is because he is this sort of symbol of the banality of evil that was embraced by presidents of both parties over such a long period of time. Maybe, And so yeah, to say, like, oh, well, other American like foreign policy advisors did bad things is like,
obviously to me worse he's he. I mean, I don't know how you get worse than being responsible for like millions of people's debts and backing genocides in various places, in military cups, et cetera, et cetera.
But this is my point is that this by this regard, I mean Fdr.
FDR heavily supported Joseph Stalin, he bailed him out in many respects, and Stalin is responsible for many in many cases. That's my point is that you live in a massy world. It's like not sometimes we have to make choices about who we support and who we work with.
And at the end of the day.
And also on sixty eight, it's not one hundred percent confirmed that they blew up those talks.
Although it is controversial.
I actually would still love if anybody who's alive who was president at that time. We're still looking for total confirmation. I was just I think Dayton was a great policy. I think Salt one was what his country needed at the time. He bought us a long time before Afghanistan and the eventual rollback people who came under Reagan.
I mean he within.
The political confines at the time, pursued Vietnamization, signed the Treaty of Paris. He got our POWs out with the I think it was part of the negotiation with the eventual Vietcong Under him and Ford, they did not strike back against the fall a Saigon, which was the correct and unpopular policy at the time. So there were a lot of things that they did which I support, and
I think we're on balance really good for America. Now, did he have a lot of mistakes and did he make a lot of dumb calls like supporting the war in Iraq? Yes, he also opposed NATO expansion, spoke out for not interfering in Ukraine. He believed very strongly as I do, and the spheres of influence ideology.
So out look, I don't think he is.
Nearly as bad as many of the people who were dominant foreign policy figures at the time. And I think most of the reasons people hate him is because the resurgence. He became the icon of the UH like the anti the devil during the New Left, which is what most of the modern Left is like a descendant of well because of the expansion of the bombing.
It's that, But that was also the long standing influence, I mean slaughter and Laos slaughter and Cambodia slaughter in Vietnam, slaughter in East Timore backing Suharto that caused the death two hundred thousand deaths just right there. We were their number one supplier of weapons, backing the coup of Ellende and you know, putting in place Pinochet and the brutal deaths that that resulted in. So I can't just look at that and be like, yeah, but you know China, like oopsie genocide.
What can you do?
But that's my only point is how many civilians at LBJ McNamara and McGeorge Bundy killers.
Oaks that times say there was lots of other evil done by other presidents and other national security advisors, but in any case, not going to warn this man's death after one hundred long years of causing death and destruction.
I'll give a book recommendation people should read it. We'll put the book jacket up there on the screen. It's his early years, which is very instructive, not about Kissinger. Great biographies are about the people, their times, and what the foreign policy conversation look like. It's by Nile Ferguson, or maybe it's Neil. I never know how to say his name. I recommend that people read it. Do not read the Walter Isaacson biography because it's a joke.
I believe.
The only other credible one, if you want from a lefty perspective, is the one that.
Mile of Henry Kissinger.
Well that's the cure.
But there's the one that the Yale historian wrote that you quoted him. I forget what it's called that you just read in the intership biography that one. Also, if you want to hear more of a critical perspective, you should.
Also you could also hear from Anthony Bourdain in his book, who said, and I quote, You'll never stop wanting to beat Henry Kissinger to death with your bare hands after visiting Cambodia.
So there you go.
Bordain, as usual, had some good takes. He also was a cringe boomer left this in it.
It is worse. So I'll leave it at that too. How about that?
All right, let's go ahead and dive into the very latest that is happening in Israel. Put this up on the screen, some great reporting from our friend Ken Clippenstein over at the Intercept. So apparently the Israeli military has launched a full court press, closed door PR blitz on Capitol Hill as you have had some calls for a ceasefire growing. Let me read you a little bit from
Ken's report. So, high level Israeli military officers are conducting private briefings right now from members of Congress on Israel's war on Gaza. That's according to documents that the Intercept was able to get their hands on. Those briefings have ramped up as questions emerge on Capitol Hill about Israel's conduct in the war and ceasefire calls gain steam. This is from a source, they say, quote, there's an Israel pr blitz happening this week, facilitated by a handful of senators.
Practically all of the briefings on this issue these last few weeks have been members only. One briefing exclusive to members of the Senate, scheduled on Monday and organized by Center Tammy Duckworth involved three senior IDF officers stationed at the Israeli embassy. So Sagre, you have a major pr offensive here to try to make sure because Israel is long enjoyed bipartisan backing and support. The Biden administration, of course, thus far in this war, has given them everything they wanted,
no strings attached. But now you're coming down to the wire where there is fourteen billion dollars in additional aid that is supposed to be part of a package that could be passed or voted on as early as next week, and you have growing calls for a ceasefire, including you know, Biden's tone shifting a little bit again. The actions have continued to be hey, unconditional support, no red lines, et cetera. But you do have a little bit of a different
tone being struck by Biden. So they are getting nervous that that aid could be conditioned. They are getting nervous that the US could, at some point, under pressure from the domestic populace, which is overwhelmingly in favor of a ceasefire, push their congressional members to stop giving them that fulsome unconditional support that they are so used to.
Yeah, the APEC meeting is pretty significant because it really comes at a pivotal moment here in Washington around all the debates with ceasefire, about the extension, about and we'll talk about this in a little bit, the possible conditioning of aid. But as hostages began to come out, Oh and we have a good update here that we can deliver on the show. Yar Dan, who is the sister of Gilly Roman, who we had here, who was one of the Israeli hostages, or we had in some case
nobody knew if she was alive or not. We had a great interview with her brother was actually released earlier today, So we're very very happy about that.
Gilly, who we had.
On the show, was you know, obviously very emotional distraught around the situation. We hope she's okay and there's happiness there. But that's my point also is that as you have more people inside of Israel who are watching is hostages come home, there's going to be growing pressure in order to continue those deals, especially with Hamas, to be on the page where they'll release something like ten hostages or
so per day. Right the same time, though, Crystal, there are people inside the Netanyahu coalition who are very against continuing this and actually could bring down his entire government.
Yeah, so, first of all, just to show you how influential some of the American Israel lobby groups are, put this up on the screen Natanyahu met. You've got a picture here with APAC leadership in Jerusalem, and you know, read Ryan's book if you want to know how influential APAK is, how much they're able to throw their weight around, how crucial they have been in keeping uniformity of opinion with regard to Israel, and you know, not brooking any
criticism of the Israeli government whatsoever. Now because you have this rise of grassroots fundraising able to lift you know, people like aoc Rashida to leave ilhan Omar into office. They have not been able to keep that absolute lock grip. But they are saying they're going to spend millions and millions to try to feed anyone who is you know, called for a ceasefire or dissented on the issue of Israel and Palestine. Here in the case of Israel's war
on Paleside, so war on Gaza. So you can see there, you know, how important net Yahoo finds them in terms of keeping American public opinion on his side. We reported just days ago that Netanyahu, and making his case to stay leader of LACUD party and stay the Prime Minister of Israel, is saying, hey, I know how to manage American public opinion.
I know how to deal with Jo Biden. I known him for forty years.
And by the way, I'm the guy who will make sure there will never be a Palestinian state. So makes all the sense in the world that APAC officials when they go to Israel, you know, they get the royal treatment and get to meet with the big guy right away. Put this next piece up on the screen. They've taken all of these, you know, various resolutions to just prove how pro Israel everybody is and get people on the record, et cetera. We have this new one about quote reaffirming
the state of Israel's right to exist. We had one no vote here and we wanted to give shout out to Republican Thomas Massey has been very consistent. I mean this sixscourage. Apak has already said they're coming for him too. He says much of the language in this I'm voting no on I actually agree with and I agree with the title, but it equates anti Zionism with anti Semitism. Anti Semitism is deplorable, but expanding it to include criticism
of Israel is not helpful. And this has long been the goal of groups like ADL to make it so that criticism of the Israeli government, which Israelis do all the time Natan Yahoo has like an literally an eight percent approval rating in the State of Israel right now, is completely off limits. Is considered anti anti semitic, and certainly any criticism of the political ideology of Zionism is
also considered anti semitic, which is outrageous. You have to be able to critique any sort of political ideology, and that's what this resolution seeks to and force Rashida's to leave, I mean sort of surprisingly since Thomas Massey was the only no vote, she voted present, so she didn't vote for it, but in orderd she vote against it.
Yeah, I think it's really significant in order to actually think about where we stand in a domestic political level, because, as you said, for all of the outspoken talk of the Squad and all these other people, why did they vote for this resolution?
Crystal? And it seems clear.
I think they're obviously cowed by some of the criticism, Massy being the only one to stand up. And let's not whitewash this either. They are running a millions of dollars of ads against him in his state of Kentucky. He's actually tweeted out some of them if people are interested to go and watch, and they directly target it. But his point is I vote this way on all
four and eid of all kinds. He's like, I've been doing this for my entire tenure in all of Congress, So this is just a matter of principles and consistency. But they want to use the conflation of anti Zionism equals anti Semitism. It's also very interesting because this is why I don't get Nikki Haley was rightfully mocked for saying anti Zionism equals anti Semitism right where by many Democrats,
that's influential commentators and others. And yet when the exact same resolution comes to the floor of the House, why is it passing with the only single no vote?
What does that? What does that show us?
And I think it shows us the power of a pack and of what they can deliver and look you, Michael Tracy made this point actually this morning, which I do agree is completely absurd, is that APAC now for decades, has been exempt from the Foreign Agent Registration Act, which applies to quote individuals and entities acting with the US on behalf of foreign interests, despite literally dedicating its entire existence to furthering the interests of Israel, including meetings with
the Prime Minister of that nation, and including often using their power directly to lobby American foreign policy for interests that are only aligned with Israel and then shrouded in supposedly this is.
Better for America.
So I think there's a there's an America first case to be made against an organization like this having such incredible power here in Washington. Again, I recommend the book Israel Lobby by John Meersheimer, which at the time was also smeared as anti Semitic. It's been a tactic of Theirs, unfortunately for quite a long time.
But the outcome of that vote just shows us how influential they remain to be.
I still, though, believe that we are at probably the apex of apex apax power and apex of a hardy apex of apax power because they have used so much political capital, first on the Iran Deal and second on here in American politics, that in the future, future democratic lawmakers and others are going to feel I think more comfortable speaking out against the consensus.
I could be wrong.
I mean, just look at the generational de exactly. You know, as millennials agen Z become a majority of the American voting public, there's no doubt that the U just you know, blanket unconditional support for Israel begins to erode, and you know they're they're going down, kicking, screaming right now. They're gonna It's very possible that some of the squad members who have been courageous and outspoken against Democratic leaders on this issue, that they could lose in primaries. That is
absolutely on the table. It's very much on the table that you could have less support for dissent going forward
after this Congress. But you know, the other piece of it, saga, is just the Israeli political sphere has moved so far and hard to the right that there's just no I mean, I have a list, there's a website now that's tracking like all of the just overtly genocidal quotes and advocating for ethnic cleansing coming from current Israeli government officials and look Fud party members and whatever, and that just becomes undeniable at a certain point where you can no longer
pretend like, oh, we're in this peace process and everybody wants a two state solution, when you've got Nan Yahoo arguing the reason I should stay in power is because I will make damn sure there is never a two
state solution. So some of the reality over time, especially with the images that we've seen in Gaza, becomes undeniable not only to members of Congress, but more critically to you know, the American public, whose grassroots pressure is responsible for any of the even tone shift coming from the ministry. Right now, there's a fantastic piece in Haretz. Let's put this up on the screen about the dynamics and the pressures,
competing pressures that are facing that Yahoo currently. Obviously, as we've said a million times, politically, he is I mean, he's hated anytime. I don't know if you guys have ever looked at the replies to any of his tweets on Twitter, but if you look at the Hebrew replies from the right and the left. They all are like, resign, we hate you, You're horrible, evil, get out of here. And the latest pull I saw has like eight percent of people who think he should still be in charge
of this country. So he has some political pressures, you might say. But what I found really remarkable and different than the way that the US press presents the American side of things is they make it so clear how influential we are and how we really hold all the cards. It's only a question of whether we feel like using them or not. So they say here, Israel cannot determine its course alone. It depends on multi layers American support.
First in renewal of the munition stores to replace the many bombs, missiles, and artillery shells fired at and dropped on the strip. Second in warning of distant launches through the radar and warning network shared by Israel in the US military Sentcom. Third in securing Israeli freedom of shipping to and from Islet Port in the face of the naval blockade imposed by the Huthis who control the straits
in the Red Sea. Fourth in deterring Iran and hasblaf from opening for their fronts in Lebanon and prop Syria and Iraq as well. Fifth, the US holds veto power at the UN Security Council and may thwart or allow a resolution calling for a ceasefire. They go on to say, and I found this extraordinary. Again, this is not something
you ever hear in the American press. The Americans are closely involved in all levels of managing the war, from operational coordination in the war rooms, to the conversations of US President Joe Biden and senior emissaries and officers with Netanyahoo, Minister Galan IDF Chief of Staff Haleevi, and the heads of the Military Intelligence director and the Air Force. They go on to say, the American position is shaping up.
Thus Biden will agree to the opening of a second phase in the Gaza Strip campaign, but not to escalation as a result of Israeli initiatives in the North.
In return, Israel be required.
To expand the humanitarian aid to the Gazas and to produce an outline for the day after toppling Hamas with a preferred Saurnaro and Washington being the PA's returned to the Strip and the opening of negotiations for the two state solution.
So in Israel.
There is basically no public sentiment in favor of wrapping up this war, securing some sort of a lasting truce or ceasefire, very little sentiment in favor of that, virtually zero. And so the US and these outside pressures are really the only ones that could push Israel to at any point in the near future. And their indiscriminate bombing campaign that has been so devastating for the civilians in Gaza.
Yeah, and the thing is that the US policy really doesn't know where it stands right now.
Let's put this up there.
For example, with Joe Biden, he's continuing to try and have it both ways. He says this quote Hamas unleashed a terrorist attack because they fear nothing more than Israelis and Palsuenians living side by side in peace. We continue down the path of terror, violence, killing, and war is to give Hamas what they seek. We can't do that. So that seemed to be a call for a permanent
cease fire. And yet at the same time they put out a statement clarifying the tweets, saying, quote, he meant that we can't lose hope for.
Peace ultimately in the region.
It's incredibly important that we consider to lay the groundwork for create the conditions for a lasting piece that involves a two state solution.
Whatever the hell.
That's yeah, it's not a change in policy.
Continues to believe that Israel's a right to defend itself, blah blah blah.
At the same time, we have this we can put there.
The Kataris are at least optimistic in the short term that there will be an extension of the truth.
They said, cool.
They are very optimistic as long as they coast as how long as Hamas agrees to the Israeli conditions of continuing to release ten hostages per day, as long as the continuation of the negotiations are there. The problem though, is that eventually, of course, you will run out of hostages, and then the eventual question arises, what are you going to do? I'm not sure honestly where things will stand. At the same time, Netsa Yahu and all of them are not idiots. They understand us public opinion to a
certain extent. They can see polling on cease fire, and they also know that they've burned a lot of their credibility with a lot of their Western allies who are at this point, facing a deluge of calls within their own coalitions it's to condition aid to Israel or at the very least they're seeing demonstrations. So will they conduct themselves in the South and the military operation in the same way. Apparently Biden behind the scenes has made it
clear to net Ninity's like, you can't do that. You're gonna have to change things up. Are they going to listen?
I don't know.
I mean, this actually comes to the question of the Israeli military and what orders they're receiving. Will they be given differing in separate orders to stop or to not reignite a similar pre bombing campaign that we saw in Gaza before the ground operations today, or are they going to do things exactly the same. If I had to guess, I think it's probably going to be somewhere in the
middle ground. But the initial response of October seventh, you know, with the bombing campaign that began really October fourteenth, really and onward. I don't I don't think they could get away with that. Now it's possible. I could be totally wrong, But when you've got thirty some senators who are saying we should condition military aid, I mean you can only stand against that for so long.
If it's somebody like Joe Biden.
I mean, that is the question.
Yeah, because we've been getting all these you know, strategic leaks to the wash Up Post New York.
Times this whole time, like, oh, b Yeah.
Publicly they're saying no ride lines, but behind the scenes, Biden's been really tough. Well, it doesn't matter. I mean, that's really clear at this point. Even if that is true, which maybe it is, maybe it is not, It clearly doesn't matter unless you're actually going to back it up with conditioning aid or pulling support at the UN, or
you know, some other actual use of our leverage. They clearly don't care because again Netanyahu, from a domestic perspective, all the pressure is on the other side to bomb the hell on the south of the Gaza Strip in the same way that they did the north. So if you don't have the US actually willing to use the cards that we have, then he's just going to continue doing whatever the hell he wants to do and what and you know, satiating the desire for revenge among the
Israeli public. And by the way, you know, his far right coalition they've already said that if we continue these truces and if we don't go back to bombing the strip the way that we were before, we're out of the government. He has a very narrow coalition to work with. So if you have a few of these keys players out, that's it. Then you've got to call for new elections, and no way in hell and now he was winning
new elections today, not a chance. So that's why, you know, when you can put it in kind of the American political you know, context of when you have this like narrow margin in the House, then it gives you know, whoever is like the craziest, gives them the most leverage if they want to use it.
It's the same thing in Israel.
That's why these quote unquote fringe figures have so much power in terms of the execution of this campaign, because he has to have them to hold on to his grip on power. So as Sogerman before, we do have this is really different. It used to be a really fringe position held by basically Bernie Sanders and no one else that we should condition aid to Israel, and this
is becoming a mainstream thought among Democratic senators. Put this up on the screen, so Schumer announced that they planned to hold the vote for that fourteen billion dollars in emergency aid to Israel as soon as next week. Sanders had previously called to condition aid. He reintroduced that call
on November eighteenth. But you have additional people who are joining those calls, Senator Chris van Holland, Brian Shatz and dak Reid, they said, and these are again really like middle of the road kind of Democrats, standard issue Democrats. We continue to support additional assistants to Israel, but we are all in agreement that this assistance must be consistent with our interest and values and used in a manner that adheres to international humanitarian law, the law of armed conflicts.
You also had Peter Welsh, Bernie Sanders colleague there in Vermont, saying something similar. Israel can't meet the standard of place in the highest priority on civilian life. He says, the US must give serious consideration to the type of aid that Congress provides in any national security supplemental package.
And we had.
Senator Chris Murphy saying very similar things in a recent interview.
Let's take a listen.
Well, I stand by what I said. I do believe that the level of civilian harm inside Gaza has been unacceptable and is unsustainable. I think there's both a moral cost to this, many civilians, innocent civilians, children often losing their life, but I think there's a strategic cost. Ultimately, Hamas will get stronger, not weaker, in the long run, if all of this civilian death allows them to recruit
more effectively enably inside Gaza. Listen, we regularly condition our aid to allies based upon compliance with US law and international law, and so I think it's very consistent with the ways in which we have dispensed aid, especially during wartime, to allies, for US to talk about making sure that the aid we give Ukraine or the aid we give Israel is used in accordance with human rights laws.
So Socger Again, these are not radicals. This is like, you know, mainstream democratic sentiment, and you know, this is very different conversation that was having happening previously. And the other thing that people are pointing to is there's something called the Lahy Law, which is supposed to be you're supposed to make sure that any sort of weapons that you're providing to foreign governments that they're not going to
be used for war crimes or against civilians. And with Israel, we've long just like ignored that outright waived it, and so there are now growing calls of also applying the Leaky Act to any of our military aid to Israel as well.
I have a long history with the Lady Law contell oh really yeah. One of the first biggest stories I ever worked on was if people will remember sexual abuse within the Afghan forces that was covered up that was basically covered up by the pentagona by the US military, including literal pedophilia that the Pentagon didn't want to come to the light and in some cases punished US forces.
Well.
The evidence behind a lot of the pedophilia that pervaded a lot of the Afghan national security forces was hidden by the Pentagon and classified specifically so that we would not violate the Lahy Law in our aid to Afghanistans.
This is one of the biggest stories I worked.
On a lot at the time, and unfortunately, I think that's part of why I almost grinned when you said it, because here's the truth. If they don't want you to know, they'll just classify it, or they will they will drag along the process such that on the letter.
Of the law, you're not violating the Lay law.
And you just continue the weapons. It's a joke, and it's a very well intentioned law. It's actually a good law, but it's one that needs real more teeth. Patrick Lay himself always tried to advance that. But the truth is is that when the American military industrial complex wants something, they will usually get it.
So, you know, Lay was that interviewed about this by a Vermont community news over group, which is adorable, and herrets quoted from this piece that they were able to find that he said, appears to me that shooting civilians and targeting civilian infrastructure when you can't prove it is being used by Jimas, would be a violation of human rights.
The US is urging the Israelis to protect civilians, and of course the Israelis face a terrible terrorist attacked by Hamas, which is a violation of every norm of international law. But he added, what is being done to apply the Lahy law?
Now, I don't know.
I know passive administrations have been too concerned to do it.
I should apply.
It should apply to the IDF unless the administration, as many have has waived it. So in any case, those are some of the bubbling pressures that are being brought to bear, which again I think is wholly due to the pressure that has been enforced by the grassroots, these protests and demonstrations all across the country. There are all kinds of reports about how senators and members of Congress
are just flooded with in favor of a ceasefire. You know, the horror of the images that are coming out on TikTok and even in some mainstream press at this point is creating so much pressure that even the United States Congress, at least on the Democratic side, is feeling some of that heat and feeling like they need to do something. So that's part of what's shaping whatever is going to connect with regards to this war. We also wanted to cover for you, you know, as part of these ongoing hostage
release deals, put this up on the screen. Some really troubling potential news. Hamas is claiming that the youngest hostage and three family members were actually killed in Israeli bombing. Of course, this is coming from Hamas, it has not been confirmed, so we don't know for sure. But this report from NBC News says. Fears were raised Wednesday for the youngest hostage held in the Gaza Strip after Hamas claimed that ten month old Kafir b Bus had been
killed along with his brother and mother. Israel's military says they are assessing the claim. Relatives said they were waiting for the news to be confirmed or hopefully refuted soon. About the family members who become leading faces of the hostage crisis, you know, it's these two adorable little red haired babies who you know, have really captured the hearts and concerns of the Israeli public and many other people
around the world. And you know, Sagar, this is one of the reasons why a lot of the family members of the hostages have been pushing so stridently from the beginning and protesting vehemently against an Ett Yahun, pushing for some sort of a deal to be struck, because they were saying, listen, our family members are in Gaza too. Now, again, this isn't confirmed, but to be honest with you, it would be extraordinary if none of the hostages were injured
by this bombing campaign because it was so widespread. I mean, most of northern Gaza is completely destroyed. So this is you know, horrible possible dues as I.
Said, Gah and look hamas. Also they need to release evidence of this because it's also equally possible that these kids died of dehydration or you know, who knows in terms of the conditions that they were being held. Also, I mean there's small children and family like you never know, weality.
Allowed.
There's a lot of reasons why Obviously you know that something like this could happen. So if this is true, like they need to literally release all the evidence. I know that they're not going to The Israelies also, as far as I understand it, have not acknowledged the claim or they claim that they're investigating the families themselves, just says our family is updated on the latest publication. We are waiting for the news to be confirmed or hopefully
refuted soon by military officials. So the family itself remains in limbo. But it is actually I think highlights and one of the reasons we wanted to cover it is some of the complex nature in which Israeli society is grappling with us, because you're right, there is no organic like we need to cease fire pushback, but there is a lot of sympathy around the hostages and conducting the military operations visa protecting the actual hostages is a big
cause of concern with the families. We saw it when we interviewed Gilly Roman, the family of a hostage here. As I mentioned our previously, she was released, thank god
earlier today. But you know, you could see the concern on his face and amongst a lot of others around are these people going to be safe, especially when we know from the hostages who've been released so far, they did say many of them were held in Gaza City in the north, and many of them were actually released in the zone of control supposedly by the IDF, showing again also know their control is not as an ironclad as one may think. So we wanted to give everybody
that update. Obviously we don't know any of the details or all of that on it, but it does relate to a big question around it and also to the possible temporary extension about what might happen here.
So the last thing we have for you on that put this up on the screen is there are additional extension talks which are ongoing. The headline here from the Times some officials hope that brief pauses will pave the way to talks on ending the war. International mediators were pushing on Wednesday to lock in another temporary extension of that cease firing. You guys will remember the deal was basically, for every ten additional hostages released by Hamas, there'd be
additional day of the ceasefire. However, the original deal only dealt with women and children, so obviously you also have men and you have military who were not covered by that original deal. There have been some indications that Hamas would like to expand the deal to also talk about soldiers and men who are civilians, and no indication that Israelis are interested in that at this point, but we
don't really know. Officials with knowledge of the talks that they also hope the succession of short term pauses would pave the way toward a larger goal negotiations over a longer term ceasefire to bring the war to a close. Speaking on condition of anonymity, senior Israeli officials said ninety seven women and children had been taken hostage, and that after Wednesday's released, some two dozen remains. So that means if you're just keeping it with women and children, the
extent of the pause that's possible is very limited. And that's again assuming that all of those individuals are still alive. It's assuming they can be located by hamas, which you may think sounds ridiculous, but they were being held by a variety of groups, you know, in a tear a small enclave which is under complete siege, where communications are frequently cut, so the process of actually locating these individuals
is not necessarily straightforward. And they said there are currently no negotiations aimed at a longer term ceasefire or in exchange involving all the remaining hostages, for all the remaining Palestinian prisoners. So, you know, Netnyahu, we've covered some of these comments and his defense Minister Galant, they have been very clear that after this temporary pause, we're going right back at it. There were comments that were made that were, like I think by Galant that it's going to be
stronger than ever. It's been, going to be more aggressive than ever throughout the entire strip, and just remind.
People of where we are. Obviously, they already.
Bombed the hell on a northern Gaza that's basically completely uninhabitable, especially Gaza City, they told everybody to move to the south, so you know, all two point two million are close to it. Lstinians have been clustered now in the south, including in cities like Communis, where they're now saying they're
going to center the new bombing campaign. So as brutal as what is already unfolded has been, the level of brutality possible going forward is even greater since you have all of these civilians now clustered into an even smaller area than before.
That's why I just simply don't think that the similar situation will unfold. It's possible, it certainly is. It's not like they It's not like I would put it past them, and just think that there's a lot of geopolitical realities that could constrain it, including the hostage situation. One thing to not forget also is that all the hostage released so far, there are many IDF soldiers who are also being held as hostages Baiamas who are kidnapped on October seventh.
You should not forget that they too have quite a bit of sympathy. So they are actually not even really on the table in terms of exchange right now because they're seen in and operating in a different place.
But don't forget also that this will remain.
An issue, I think in Israeli society for some time to come, especially given the past hostage exchanges that Nattaniahu himself, Pat j Aquies too. We'll see how it all plays up, but we definitely want to give everybody that update.
Okay, let's switch.
Gears to Elon Musk, who yesterday gave an extraordinary.
Interview and I think that's the only way to describe it.
With Andrew Ross Sorkin of CNBC and of Deal Book over at the New York Times, he was asked Andrew ros of Elon, He was like, Okay, what is your message to advertisers who pulled their advertisers after one of the controversial tweets Elon sent around immigration, anti Semitism, and more, which precipitated his eventual trip to Israel. Here was his message to advertisers who pulled their dollars, including Disney CEO Bob Iiger.
Let's take a listen. Now.
Obviously you know that there's a public perception that you're clarifying this now, but there's a public perception that that was part of a apology tour if you will. This had been said online, there was all of the criticism, There was advertisers leaving.
We talked to I hope they stop. You don't advertise, you don't want them to advertise.
What do you mean.
If somebody's going to try to blackmail me with advertising, blackmailing with money, go fuck yourself, but go fuck yourself? Is that clear?
I hope it is. Hey, Bob here in the audience, Well, well let me ask you. Then that's how I feel. Don't advertise?
How do you think that about the economics of X if part of the underlying model at least today, and maybe it needs to shift, maybe the answers it needs to shift away from advertising. If you believe that this is the one part of your business where you will be beholden to those.
Who have this view, what do you do.
Why? I understand that.
But there's a reality too, right Yes, no, no, I mean know Yakarino's right here and she's got to sell advertiser.
Absolutely so no, no, tell you so. No, Actually, what what this advertising boycott is is going to do it.
It's going to kill a company.
And you think that and the whole world, Well, no, that those advertisers killed the company, and we will document it in great detail.
But there are those advertisers, I imagine, are going to say, they're going to say, we didn't kill the company.
Oh yeah, they're going to say to tell it to Earth.
But they're going to say that. They're going to say Elon that you killed the company because you said these things and that they were inappropriate things and that they didn't feel comfortable on the platform.
Right, That's that's what I say. And let's see how Earth responds to that.
Okay, little live and odd interview that was there, but we weren't anything non old.
Yeah, fair point.
The reason we wanted to play the full clip there is it makes a couple of things clear. He was speaking basically directly to Bob Eiger when he was like, hey Bob, who Disney ceo? Who specifically pulled some of the advertising that they had there? But I think he was setting it up for an eventual bankruptcy lawsuit. That's how I read his comments when he said, well, they'll call the company and this is frankly a major and
it's complicated for me. I have sympathy for the idea since we build this business to be anti fragile against advertising and boycott's and all these other things based upon a subscription model. The problem is the subscription model that came up with is just not very good. Twitter Blue has no real compelling reason to sign up for it and has been a tremendous failure in terms of replacing
advertising revenue with the company. Twitter itself is so massively reliant on Fortune five hundred companies to advertise on the platform because some five billion dollars of their revenue, nearly ninety percent of it came from those companies in year before it sold to Elon, and a huge portion of them have canceled either through management of the platform and even this particular boycott, which this is the other part where I agree Media Matters and all these other people.
These are heinous and annoying people that said, you know, you shouldn't give them ammunition to work with to then facilitate boycotts against your company. You don't have a right to advertise, right, And this is where you know, much of their rhetoric around this is so complicated, Like I hate the ADL, I hate Media Matters, I hate all these people who are I think dishonest and bad faith
and the way that they encourage all this. But you know, you also, if you're in a business relationship with Disney and with all these other people where you do literally rely on them for the bulk of your revenue, you're kind of in a rock and a hard place unless you're going to develop a much much better subscription based revenue model, which they frankly just have not done with the Twitter Blue program. There's not a compelling reason honestly to sign up for for the vast majority of people,
and especially to replace five billion dollars of revenue. So I think Elon is in a tough spot, and it's very likely that he has just resigned himself to like, this company's going bankrupt. Yeah, and he's already said it's worth half what I've bought it for. But I mean a lot of people are interpreting in that as the definition of fu money. They're like, well, you can say f you to your biggest advertiser, But the big question is, like, Hey, who the hell's going to own this site in a year?
Is it going to be Elon or is it the bankers. I'm increasingly coming on the side of the bank Yeah.
I thought it the same way as you did as like a pre story and like prebuddle and cope in cope and advance of the failure of Twitter, of like, well, it's not my fault, it's these advertisers you're a boycotting And to your point, listen, I would love nothing more than to be able to be like go off King when you're telling advertisers to.
Go through himself.
I would love that.
But it's not like it's been used in service of some sort of consistent principle. You know, and claims to be the free speech guy, just ban saying decolonization on his platform or from the River to the sea, which by the way, is in Lukud's charter as much as it's in Hamas's charter. So it's not like his principles about free speech have been consistent botely at all. In fact, in some ways he's been more censorious than the previous Twitter regime. So again, it's not like this has been
in service of any sort of a principle. And no advertiser.
Owes you their dollars.
It's up to you, mister genius businessman, to figure out a business plan that's going to work without depending on the advertisers. So yeah, that's capitalism. You're the uber capitalist.
You should understand this more than anyone. And if we can figure out a business model that could be impervious to Boycott's and you know, anticipate the fact that we say things that are controversial and piss people off and could rub people the wrong way and lead to those sorts of things, Like if we can figure that out,
you can't figure that out for Twitter. So I think it's preposterous that the world would blame the advertisers for leaving a platform that, you know, putting aside his like crazy tweets and the anti submitic, conspiracy theories, endorsment, whatever, has just been like horrifically mismanaged throughout this entire time. From a business perspective person, I was thinking about Tea shouts out Bob Eiger, who's sitting in the audience, which
is kind of incredible. But also I'm thinking about Linda Yakarina Yagarina.
Who was brought in.
She has like the head of advertising at NBC. She's brought in to be the CEO specifically because she has all these cozy relationships with you know, blue chip brands, and all of these advertisers that you'd want to be bringing in. I know she put out some kind of a statement this morning. I don't know if you haven't called. I can only imagine this has to be one of
the worst days of her life. Like how humiliating for her that the very thing she was brought in to try to accomplish, like working these relationships and try to convince people it's fine to be back on the platform. In three words, gf y, he's able to completely blow any and all of that up. And I cannot but imagine that there's going to be additional fallout. You know, we'll get the numbers a month from now of how many additional advertisers are like, all right, screw you.
Then I'm gone.
So I have the tweet that she post. I'm sorry that Elis, this is no longer a tweet.
He says.
Today, Elon Musk gave a wide ranging and candid interview with deal Book twenty twenty three. He also offered an apology, an explanation, explicit point of view about our position. X is enabling an information independence is uncomfortable for some people, or a platform that allows people to make their own decisions. And here's my perspective when it comes to advertising X is unique standing it a unique and amazing intersection of free speech and main street.
The ex community is powerful.
Is here to welcome you to our partners who believe in our meaningful work.
Thank you.
Wow.
Okay, certainly something in terms of spinning that one.
If anything, I just appreciate Elon's You know, he thinks this is all a game. He thinks that at the end of the day, it seems very very comfortable with it going bankrupt. I think it's clear that I don't. I think he probably.
Wishes that he didn't buy it in the long run. And I guess I mean.
Listen, as a guy supports Tesla and SpaceX and Starlink and all that, I would love nothing more than for to him fulfill his actual promise that he made a long time ago, which is to step back and focus on these companies like the cyber truck looks awesome. Personally, I'd be happy to get one as soon as it's
actually available. I think that those companies are far better validation of his legacy and all that, and he should probably move in that direction if he wants to remain a historical figure, but at the end of the day, I guess he can afford it.
He doesn't particularly care we should.
Also, it's clear too that that tweet that he sent that sparked all of his Israel trip and all this overtime.
The trip was already planned.
Yeah, okay, sure.
Anyway, he claimed also in that interview, is the most foolish tweet that he's ever sent.
Let's take a listen.
When you see all this happening, I think, are you sitting there going, oh my god, I stepped in and I wish I didn't do that. Are you saying shit threw them? I hate these people one day after me?
But all of that, yeah, all of that, I mean, I mean, look, I'm sorry for that that tweed or post. It was foolish of me. Of the thirty thousands, it might be literally the worst and dumbest post that I've ever done. And I try my best to clarify six racist Sunday. But you know, at least I think over time it will be obvious that, in fact, far from being anti Semitic, I'm in fact filo Semitic, and all the evidence in my track record would support that there.
Are people who say crazy things on x as. You know, maybe you think they're crazy, maybe they're not.
The aspiration FRACS is to be the global town square. Now, if you were to walk down to let's say Times Square, right, do you occasionally hear people saying crazy things?
Yes, but they're not. They don't have the megaphone, right, and that's that's the conundrum. But they can only say it to the fifty one hundred people that are that are sitting standing there in Times Square.
They don't have a mega. I mean, look, the joke I used to make about old Twitter was it was like giving everyone in the psych ward a megaphone.
So there you go, Crystal.
He said, this is the most foolish thing that he's ever done, which I don't think is true. I think the worst to way you ever sent is whenever he claimed that Tesla was going to go private and he ended up getting fine millions of dollars.
That was a bad one too. There are many issues from ye.
Just as a reminder for people who didn't follow this story closely, what he replied to a tweet that said, okay, Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them. I'm deeply disinterested in giving the tiniest shit now about Western Jewish populations, coming to the disturbing realization that those hordes of minorities that support flooding their country don't exactly like them too much. You want
truth said to your face? There it is, to which Elon replies you have said the actual truth. It took me a while to actually parse what the hell this original person was saying, but basically the idea is Jews deserve what they get on October seventh because they vote bad in democratic politics.
It is effectively the.
Essence of what's going on, not really something you want to co sign.
Necessarily, I would not cosign that if I see you on So go back to Tesla.
We will all be much better off.
Some more billionaire news for you today, Mark Cuban put this up on the screen, some interesting moves that are sparking twenty twenty four shatter for mister businessman Mark Cuban. He says he's leaving Shark Tank after another season, but in addition, put this up on the screen.
This maybe even warned. Note where I don't know.
Dallas Maverick's owner Mark Cuban, has also entered into an agreement to sell a majority steak in the NBA franchise to the family that runs the Las Vegas Hans Casino company. It was announced Wednesday that deal could be completed in the coming weeks with evaluation in the range of three point five billion.
So he's leaving Shark.
Tank and he's selling off his steak in the Dallas Mavericks. Gee, wonder what he could be planning on doing. So, of course everybody's minds went to, maybe this dude is going to run for president. I mean, he's flirted with it before. He's obviously very politically interested. We pulled an interview with him that I'll get to it a little bit of where exactly his politics are act. I think it's fair to say a little hard to define at times. But you've got the specter of these two old men that
everybody hates being the Democratic and the Republican nominee. Again, people desperately looking for some kind of an alternative. RFK Junior jumping in the race and instantly jump into like twenty percent of the vote just because he's not Biden or Trump, and because he's got a famous last name, so you know, it's not crazy for him to look at it and go basically like, you probably only need like thirty percent of the vote to maybe win this
thing and have a real shot at it. And with all the money in the world that I've got and famous name that I've gotten, influence, and you know, relatively well liked, et cetera, maybe I should give it a go.
Yeah, I mean, I think he should run, especially in this crazy time.
I'm for it. Yeah, I'm pro. I've always been pro Mark Cuban.
I like Mark Cuban, although he has some very cringe boomer beliefs on many things. But when you've got the array of options we have, you know, in front of us, each one of them has to be a very plus or minus situation.
And we were able to unite you and I.
Sagar on over pro Mark Cuban.
Yeah, listen, He's not my number one choice, but if my choices are him and Biden and Trump, I think he's got pretty good.
Sh I'm not sure.
I say I'm an accelerationist now at this point where I really see both of them die. So if it comes down to it. We'll see it. I'll tease you for you, especially when are you and her in the race, but I'll leave it and I'll try and analyze it without it. In terms of Cuban from a personal level, what we all know is he loves the Mavericks. Why is he selling the Mavericks right now? Oh, he's just dying to sell it to Sheldon Agelson. He's not too he's not old enough to actually be retiring. He's only
sixty five years old. His two kids are not I mean, they're young ish, I believe like one of them is in college.
I'm not sure about the other one. So hits.
He still has a place to be, you know, he's in a place where he can keep working and he's not like sacrificing something necessarily at home from Shark Tank, it's like Trump in the level of normy fame that he has. He's literally a household name. It has been for decads. Remember, like he was one of the first famous dot com billionaires who parlayed it, you know, into lasting fame and to television, to interviews. He's always kind of been all over the map. His prescription drug company
is genuinely capital g good, like a great thing. It is that a lot of people use and people rightfully admire.
So I put it all together.
He's got the sports fame, he's got Shark Tank, he's got this prescription drug thing, very into.
Yeah, he's charismatic, he's.
Well spoken, he loves the media, loves it's famous. Everybody in Washington has the guy's email address because he actually replies and he doesn't even have an assistance. Sometimes he'll give his thoughts and he happily. He will accept interviews like with whomever people are asking. He'll appine on politics, economics and all. He's got the right Yeah, we interviewed him once. He's got the right temperament. He's got the
right love of the game. He's got enough money, and I think he could thread the needle, especially in such a divideided race, to come forward.
So if you want to get into.
Something, he'd be for.
I mean he would. I think he'd be formidable. I think he would be formidable. And you know his politics. I think he's sort of libertarian ish. Now we should go ahead.
And say he's all over the map.
We should go ahead and say he vehemently denies that this is the work. Put this stuff on the screen. This is NBC News. Mark Cuban says he has no plans to run for the White House in twenty twenty four.
No plans doesn't mean that you're not going to do it.
He can always make those plans socc Exactly, it's not too late to make the plans.
So.
In July, Cuban had said he was not considering in twenty twenty four presidential bid as a third party candidate no labels, was trying to still trying to.
Form a presidential ticket.
He said at that time, my family would disown me if he ran for president. He was asked by NBC on Wednesday if there had been any change in his considerations on whether to run. Cuban said, in an email to NBC News quote, no plans to run. So he officially denies that he's any interest in this. No plans currently at least to run. So's that's where the stay
of the speculation is in terms of politics. I just pulled this from this New York Times interview that he gave not too long ago, where he was goinging asked questions about, you know, I felt about Biden and what his approach to government spending, etc. Would be and put this up on the screen.
Guy.
So he was talking about his libertarian ish views and if he's evolved over the years, basically comes down on the side of he doesn't want a lot of new quote unquote programs. He prefers, He says, bigger government checks written to people and more jobs created than more programs created. Whether that's progressive or conservative, I don't know or care. He goes on to say it another point has to
be direct compensation via jobs and stimulus programs. That has got to be the foundation of everything he talking about. Joe Biden does yeah, and he's I mean in terms of cultural issues, he's more or less like on the liberal side of the equation.
Tends to be.
Yeah, I mean he's liberal socially, he's also kind of terran. I mean, the reason I'm pro Cuban is just again, I'm really accelerations at this point where I want to see it all blow up. And I think he's a formidable enough name to be able to pierce through, especially when you've got RFK and Trump and Biden all coming within twenty thirty points of the vote. He actually could get himself to a point where it would either be a split election and it could be thrown to the House of Representatives.
No, I have been trying to wrap my head around it.
Me and you and the whole team spent some time thinking about contingent elections and what it would look like. We have not had a contingent election in the United States since.
Eighteen thirty seven.
That's when the House of Representatives decides the vote whenever not enough people get enough votes in the Electoral College. We came relatively close during the Corrupt Bargain in eighteen seventy six with Tilden and with Rutherford B. Hayes, and that was the whole Electoral Commission, and they eventually swung it in his direction. But I'm pro chaos in general, and I think maybe we're you know, we could be at a time like this, so we'll certainly see.
Yeah, so I mean a contingent election.
What that means is nobody gets the requisite number of Electoral College and it's like, let me now, and the basic ideas that gets kicked to the House of Representatives. So then you would assume that whatever the partisan makeup is of the House is what rules the day.
But yeah, it.
Hasn't been done in a really long time. So you know, it's not super clear cut exactly how this would all go down. But we're a long way from there, you know, we're way down the speculation train at this point. But interesting moves from our cuban. Nonetheless, it'd be fun. Also some interesting moves being made over at GM. Of course, in the wake of the UAW strike, which led to significant gains for their membership, GM is now making some
really extraordinary decisions with regards to their money. Put this up on the screen from the Wall Street Journal. So they have just announced. Remember this company goes, oh, we can't afford all these pay raises for workers, et cetera. Well, now they've announced a ten billion dollar stock buyback in a bid to assuage investors. The automaker plans the stock buyback and dividend increase amid reduced spending on electric and
driverless cars. So basically there's been a pullback, partly I think because gas price has gone down, partly because you know, consumers are just not doing all that well. There's been a pullback and spending on autonomous vehicles. The GM crews autonomous vehicles run into some issues too, and it's rollout and on electric vehicles. So in an effort to like you know, sort of like keep their investors fat and happy,
they've announced this ten billion dollar share repurchase. The funny thing about this is that you'll recall, the labor additional labor costs from the new gm UAW contract is in roughly the same ballpark nine point three billion dollars. So they were crying poor over that. But then they're just like, oh, yeah, we can just you know, give ten billion dollars to
our investors and do this big stock buy back. They're saying they're going to find the money for the additional labor costs by cutting back on effectively research and development of evs and of autonomous vehicles, so prioritizing the desires of their shareholders over like the future of the company, let alone their workforce.
Yes, I wanted there's actually a lot to say about this. First and foremost, let's put the next one please up there on the screen, because it does show you how full of it they were during those negotiations, because they said that the idea that they could afford the nine point three billion in additional labor costs was ludicrous when they turn around immediately and spend ten billion dollars this year, just in one year, buying back their own stock to
juice the value. The big other substory to this, though, is a middle finger to the Biden administration. Joe Biden stood up there with the CEO of GM and said that GM was the leader in the electric car revolution. This is something actually Elon talked about yesterday, which is insane because they made like twenty something cars in the same year that Tesla made three hundred thousand. That Tesla model, Why, as Elon said yesterday, will be the best selling car
on Earth of this year. So to prop up GM, the Big Three and all those relative to Tassel right
now is absurd. But the big thing that this really calls into question is the internal dedication that the Big three have cleaned to have on electric cars and the revolution, and then now where they're actually putting their money, because what remains dramatically profitable for them are big ass trucks and SUVs for Ford, for GM, that's really the only place in America remains competitive in cars, and they're basically doubling down on that, rejecting a lot of the federal
dollars and others that the Inflation Reduction Act supposedly was going to try and to fix, and they're going right back to stock buy back. I have always been for a total ban on stock buybacks for the fortune five hundred, especially when they're the recipients of the incredible amount of corporate welfare. People like GM and all of them are do we save GM? America did and then infuse them with billions more for electric cars, and then they turn
around and then buy back their own stock. So this is a major indictment of Joe Biden that it hasn't been interpret did get that way?
He deserves it.
That's a good point.
And in that op bad that Mary Barrow wrote during the union negotiations, she described the uaw's demands as quote unquote untenable because they were, Oh, they're so outrageous, there's no way we can afford it. The other piece that is remarkable to me is she said that one of the myths of this misinformation that was being spread during
the strike was that record profits go toward fueling corporate greed. No, she says, those record profits are reinvested in our company and our people as they do a ten billion dollar stock buyback in lieu of investment, research and development for the future of the company. More perfect union had, you know, the very clear cut take of they know where to get that ten billion dollars for the additional labor costs from Put this up on the screen. Guys, they've got
side by side here. GM says union labor deals are going to increase cost by nine point three billion, and then next to a Bloomberg GM to hike dividend, buy back ten billion dollars of slumping stuff. So that's that
piece of it. But there's another extraordinary thing happening in the labor world and in the auto worker world, which is when the UAW was able to secure and negotiate those new contracts with the Big three, they said, hey, we're coming for additional carmakers next Next time, it's not gonna be the Big three, it's going to be the
Big five or six. Sean Fain just announced perhaps the largest organizing effort maybe in US history, going after one hundred and fifty thousand workers at a variety of automakers and what is just an extraordinary effort to unionize foreign automakers and also Tesla in the wake of their incredible success with this stand up strike. Let's take a listen to a little bit of the video that they used to announce this effort.
Across the country from the West to the Midwest, and especially in the South, are reaching out to join our movement and to join the UAW. So go to UAW dot org slash join The money is there, the time is right, and the answer is simple. You don't have to live paycheck to paycheck. You don't have to worry about and how you're going to pay your inn or feed your family while the company makes billions. A better life is out there. It starts with you UAW.
The bottom line here auto workers are more than a dozen non union companies simultaneously announcing campaigns to try to unionize.
And you know, it makes all the sense in the world, because, yeah, we all just watched this play out and it was so clear the games that they were able to achieve, and so we set this at the time, like if you're working on Tesla, if you're working on Toyota, if you're working on Hyundai, you can see what they're set to make and what their benefits look like, and what their retirement package looks like versus what you are making, and you go, the only difference here, I'm doing the
same job. The only difference is they have a union and I don't. This is totally different from you know, recent track record in terms of labor history, even just if you consider the UAW. You know, their previous leadership was taking these concessionary contracts. They're incredibly cozy with the business class, and so what case do they have to make to autoworkers that it's worth taking the risk to
unionize when they're not delivering for their membership. So it's going to be, you know, it'll be something to watch this in how it unfolds and see if they're able to achieve success.
I'm regardless of whether they win or not.
Actually it doesn't really matter because it had such massive increases at Toyota and many of these other companies already as a results pay raise that we had to give a pay raise and they will remain so especially if the cyber truck is success that we all think it is going to be for the company, I mean the margins on that and given there the extraordinary sales of that company or something that again people do not grapple with like Tasla is out selling freaking Toyota in the
state of California. That is insane for an American car company. They're going to sell several hundred thousand vehicles in the US and across the world in a single year, brand new vehicles, and probably going to do it all again the next year with brand new manufacturing technology a full electric car. Elon even said this yesterday, and I thought
it was particularly insightful. The supercharging network itself inside of Tesla, if it was spun off like AWS would be from Amazon, would be a fortune five hundred companies, just the fortune, just the supercharging. It remains one of probably the largest private infrastructure projects in the modern history of the United States. So anyway, all of this is just a way of showing that American car manufacturing.
We genuinely could be re entering a golden age.
If we cracked down on corporate irresponsibility, outsourcing in stock buybacks, which got the US companies to where they are today. They basically sold us all out in the seventies and eighties. They decided not to innovate. They let Japan come in and basically eat their lunch completely they refused to actually negotiate a think properly with the unions until it was too late, and then they went bust in two thousand
and eight. So if they can stop a lot of that, and this is going to require like some responsible federal policy, we you know, ten twenty years from now could be living in a much much better off as for a US car company.
Yes, and it's remarkable to think back on the history too, because I mean, you know, the big three of these are iconic American brands. They're synonymous with the American middle class. You know, there were an important part of the growth of you know, the early labor movement in the United States.
And so if these auto workers and car companies once again are part of rebuilding the American middle class and re sparking resurgence of a new labor movement, I mean, that would just be you know, an extraordinary moment in terms of American labor history.
Yeah. I would absolutely love to see it. I'd love to see it for America. I would love for the majority here and you know, again to bring it back elon again. Saying this yesterday was actually again the more interesting part of the interview beyond Twitter was a lot of his thoughts on China is it's very possible in the future if they don't get there act together, the top ten car companies in the world twenty years from now will be Tesla and then nine other Chinese companies.
We don't want that for a variety of reasons, from supply chain and more especially if things go more electric and they become more consumer friendly, because they'll basically control the inputs for everything. So yeah, if we want to remain competitive and to control the jobs, not even just of the future, but really of the entire world and what they want to consume, then we have to got to rely on it. Right now, A lot of people don't realize a ton of Europeans drive forward and drive
chef like when you go over there, you see them everywhere. Yeah, and if we want to retain that market share and not let bid come in and just destroy it, like, we've got to remain competitive here and to continue to actually make decent products.
Yeah, because I mean, the benefits of electric vehicles over gas power vehicles are only going to grow as the charging infrastructure is built out, as the battery life becomes longer. You know, these things that remain barriers for people in terms of buying cars, and of course as the price comes down with mass production. You know, I don't think there's any doubt that there's going to be a switch over.
And then there's just a question of whether it's going to be automakers based here or in China that are the ones that win the day.
Yes, that's the big question is And people know I'm not, you know, supportive of one hundred percent electric.
If we will drive gas, go for it.
I am supportive of the option and of building the infrastructure and all of that. So we want to make it actually competitive, and I think that's something again in America could do because China is much more of a mandating society. But there's a lot of stuff that goes into it, and it's a very interesting conversation. Let's move on to the next part here. This is just an amazing story from the Daily.
Can't help but grin.
I mean, it's a big day for UFOs actually here in Washington, and we're going to peg it to this story from the Daily Mail. Now, before you say, oh, it's the Daily Mail, how can you believe it? Many of the people who wrote it have been a long time researched, very well respected in the community. And furthermore, there's been a real mainstream media blackout on the story very recently. Don't forget that the whistleblower complaint from Dave Grush and others was rejected from The New York Times,
Washington Post, from many other major outlets. So in some cases this really comes down to who's willing to publish what seems to be a highly legitimate story. Let's put it up there, then on the screen, this says that the CIA Secret Office, the Office of Global Access, which apparently is based here in the United States, a wing of the CIA, has played a central role in collecting alleged nine alien spacecraft crash sites from around the world.
This is since two thousand and three. Not necessarily that these have crashed in two thousand and three, but they have played a role since two thousand and three quote
in orchestrating these collection. The three sources, who spoke on condition of anonymities to avoid reprisals, have been briefed by individuals involved in these alleged UFO retrieval missions and the claims though as I'm reading from them, though they sound like they're come from a science fiction novel, are part of a growing body of evidence suggesting that the government could indeed be hiding advanced vehicles that were not made
by humans. They peg it to a major fight that remains going on here in Washington around the UFO transparency legislation. A lot of this is actually coming to head today while we are filming this. It won't be clear until the end the TLDR really is this. The Senate passed a piece of legislation inside the NDAA, which is the National Defense Authorization Act, includes all the funding for the Pentagon, which included an amendment that required transparency from the government.
It was very specifically worded around what the government has knowledge wise around UFOs. There has now been an effort inside the House of Representatives to try and kill that effort. Representative Tim Burchett, who's been a real leader for transparency, spoke with Tucker Carlson just yesterday about the cover up.
Here Here's what he had to say.
That's really all I want is transparency. Where where we're spending all this money on something and where's it going? And why do they not trust the American public? Those are the things that people need to ask you can you know, as I said at the hearing, I said, we're not going to bring in a UFO, We're not going to bring in little Green Man. But what we want is transparency. And unfortunately we don't have much of that in the United States Congress because they, oh, look
there's another shiny object over here. They'll misdirect us over here, they'll misdirect us over there. But I believe this community is very, very in tune to what's going on and the cover up that's been going on.
So obviously Burchett, he is on the committee.
He also has been denied multiple classified briefing rooms in order to get classified information from the UFO, which the blower Dave Grush, and the chief opponent of this legislation has been one of his colleagues who is very very influential on the committee. Here is what Representative Mike Turner, who has been that opponent, He was actually caught in the hallways of Congress yesterday. Here is what he claims is why he has opposition to the legislation.
Let's take a listen.
We have heard that you had some opposition to that language. Is that true and if it is, what are your objections to it?
Sure, well, I've spoke to Center Rounds about this directly, and I'm not holding up his provision at all. I think it's a poorly drafted piece of legislation. Also, what really find interesting about what I call the pro alien caucus over here in the House, Unlike you, not one of them has ever spoken to me about any of
these issues. I mean you and I are speaking. You would think that if this is that important of an issue to them, at least one member of the House who's advancing this cause would actually come up and substantively talk to me about this issue.
No one has even raised it.
Perhaps you might want to ask them why they have it.
As I understand that that is not one hundred percent true in terms of the people like Anna, Paulina Luna and even Democrats jere At Moscowitz others who have had objections. But Crystal, a lot of people are pointing to the fact that that congressman has some of the biggest donations from military industrial companies and others in a long relationship with the intelligence community. I am told and I can only tell you this on background from people who are involved.
Just got an update from people intimately involved this morning, and here's what they had to say. They said that there's a lot of move parts on the situation. If in terms of what we're going on, they believe that they will overcome the hurdle on actually getting the legislation attached, but they're not one hundred percent sure.
So lots of stuff going on behind the scenes.
It could be that the congressman's objections are legitimate, but from everyone I know is involved behind the scenes in the process, he really has been doing this at the behest of the intelligence community.
Another reason why he doesn't.
Really reason the objection exactly. He's just like, well, it's poorly crafton. By the way, why don't they talk to me. It's not really like a reason.
So more inside baseball.
One of the reasons why the intel community wanted to nuke this in the House and not in the Senate is because this was a priority for Senator Schumer, who's the majority leader. So CIA and all these others didn't want to piss off Schumer by going after what he was doing in the Senate. And they're like, well, we have the Republicans in the House, we'll just use our stooges who are there to try and kill the legislation.
But there's enough actually public I would say, not outrage per se, but enough people who are obsessed with this topic like me, who have been monitoring all of this and who have been called and bringing attention. So it is certainly possible that we could prevail with this legislation to actually get transparency.
So that's the subject of it all.
Tell me more about what you thought about this Daily Mail report. I found it interesting. You know, they go into the description of what this office is supposed to be, the OGA. They talk about one of the guys who supposedly set up the office how he described his job.
He said he was responsible for leading and managing strategic unwarned access programs that deliver intelligence from the most challenging denied areas and served as program manager with responsibility for the end to end system acquisition of an innovative news source and method for the intelligence community, which I enjoyed, like the gooul speak number one.
But yeah, what do you make of this report?
I mean, again, like Daily Mail, You're like, I don't know, question marks, the eyebrowsreies, but they have a lot of sources and the thing that made me the most I guess optical of the CIA's story on this, or the fact that they deny that this is really going on. Was some of that goal speak covering up what seems to be whatever is going on.
I'm glad you read that.
That's exactly what I was going to point to Wit to me and tell me that's not the shadiest thing you've ever heard. And again it raises the thing a question of we're entering a binary world. It's like they're either involved in crashed retrieval for foreign objects China, Russia, India. Who knows, one of the world's most advanced countries has developed something which we allegedly had never heard of. It's never even showed up in research or any of these things,
and the CIA is covering that up. That in itself is a scandal. You know, it's a secret US government program. I've said this too, Then sure release it, you know why, because it would obviously have an incredible commercial application and we would all have to stop getting stop having to be on sixteen seventeen hour flights if you want to go to Asia or it is extraterrestrial. Now, of course,
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. All of this is just even more three whistle lower say, and enough people in the comments are going to be like, just show me the damn crap.
I agree with you, Phil, That's why I support the.
Legislation because if that is going to lead to any sort of disclosure. The other point though, that I would say is after the JFK movie by Oliver Stone, incredible movie came out in nineteen ninety one. It led to the nineteen ninety two JFK Assassination Records Act, which required release over the next twenty years. And guess what, it's
still twenty twenty three and we don't have it. And the reason why is because there are very substantial interests in Washington, in every White House since in Congress, and within the CIA who don't want us to know that they were deeply involved in the assassination plot to kill Kennedy. So it's not like this is a perfect catch all. I think this is actually equivalent really to that, which is another step.
It's a tool well, And because that because that is a law on the books, then people like Jefferson Morley, who's a researcher and affiliated organizations can go and say you are in breach of the law you pass of your congressionally mandated responsibilities, so they can use that as a cudge then to try to secure a different additional documents. And you know, they have not gotten everything, but they have been able to, you know, secure additional information that
has been revelatory in terms of JFK's assassination. So you know, without really having a dog in this fight, I'm just for transparency and let's learn whatever we can about whatever the hell is going.
Yes, thank you, and I appreciate always a neutral observer of the story.
So well, continue to keep everybody updated.
There's allegedly going to be a press conference sometime today. If it's big or anything like that, I'll give everybody an update. But I'm watching it closely. I'm talking a lot with the people who are involved on this. It's not actually that big of a circle. Wasn't that hard to find them in terms of some of the advocates and all. So we'll well, we'll keep track and we'll let you.
Guys know, all right, Sachery Looking at.
When I was in college in the twenty tens, nearly every shirt I remember seeing said some variation of the future is female. Cheryl Sandberg's book Lean In hit the stands to great acclaim, and the early days of Instagram activism at that time was populated almost entirely by graffics about how women don't make as much as men in the workplace. Female empowerment and equality in the workplace was genuinely considered one of the most important elite issues.
Of the time.
I have no problem with the ideas behind that per se, but what has enraged me now for years is the prevalence of this outdated mode of thinking and refusal to admit that in an incredibly short period of time, the story has actually flipped completely. Not only are women doing better in the workplace than ever, it appears that their ascendance has masked the rapid decline of men, leading to a genuine crisis. Nearly every piece of economic data that
we have confirms this. Just yesterday, the Washington Post triumphantly published a new op ed that reflects this reality. Will the spectacular she covery last, they ask, which includes a chart showing a massive spike in employment for college educated women with child under ten, now coupled with the other chart. Though in the story, the data is truly remarkable, it shows seventy five point three percent of prime aged women in the workplace, in all time high in American history.
What they fail to mention is that this is a one track story. College educated women are doing better than ever, everyone else is suffering, and especially men. Employment rates for prime age males between twenty five and fifty four is actually at a historic low, only eclipsed by twenty twenty
when people were forcibly held at home. The eighty five percent of prime age males who are working today is down by eight percent from the nineteen fifties, and much of it can actually be explained where value is allocated in society Today, the vast majority of employment gains in the modern US economy are being captured by the college
educated elite. As you can see even the female employment statistics for those women with no college degree and with a child under ten are less employed today than they were in two thousand and three. This fits directly with male employment statistics and wage data that shows that declining male participation in higher education is heavily responsible for this. Female participation in higher education has exploded in recent years
and amplified even more by the pandemic. A historic share of men are not only dropping out of college, simply not even applying in the first place, for a variety of reasons. One is cultural the perception of male hostility on campus. Two is obviously just exploding costs, with many considering it's not worth the wage premium to attend in the future. And while that may be true as the economy shifts, the lingering effects of the college premium are
still showing us clearly. Women not only have leaned in, but men are leaning out. Young women are not only out earning young men in almost every major metro area in the US, but especially so in the top dollar markets like New York, Washington, DC, and Los Angeles. The long term effects of women not only starting out higher wages but earning more over time will have a profound impact on US society. It is leading to major demographic problems in the future. College is a lot more than
just education. You can almost think of it as a quasi caste system. Whether you attended a four year college degree or not indicates a lot about what type of books that you like, what type of alcohol that you drink, where you like to hang out, where you live, what TV shows you like, and much more. It's a very common bond that many share, and it is one of
the largest cultural divides that we have today. Furthermore, reams of data indicates now the women who go to college are very unlikely to consider a mate who has not similarly attended. Again, there is nothing wrong with this, it's just understandable because of the common cultural bond that they may share. But at scale, it is leading to probably the highest single rate amongst young men we've ever seen
in American history. Now, how does this work, you may ask, But it's because many of these newly successful women are not dating men in their traditional age bracket. They are dating older men who have achieved more financial success, and we're seen as more desirable mates. And as we all might want to deny it, most of this comes back to money and is downstream of education. College educated women have triumphed in the new economy men and non college
educated women are significantly held back. This, by all accounts, is one of the most profound shifts in US employment in all of American history, and yet it is mostly ignored. The reason why is that most people just don't want to talk about male wages or male loneliness because they think it validates tropes about toxic masculinity.
I actually think it's the opposite.
If the only people talking about this crisis of men are those figures, then they will of course get even more attention. The longer and more that this is ignored by the top leaders, the worst that the crisis will get, and the attendant eventual release of all of this rage will be historic. So Crystal, there's a lot to say about.
That, And if you want to hear my reaction to Cyber's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot com.
We have a lot to on the show to cover next week.
I'm sure we'll standing by for anything that's going to be happening breaking over the weekend. We appreciate, we love all of you, thinking all of you for our Spotify help. So to reiterate that call, if you can text the episode to your friend, it really does help us out in terms of our growth, or become a premium member. Yeah, just like I guess that's going to be a new call of for us. Otherwise, we'll see you all on Monday,