Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show.
This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.
So if that is something that's important to you, please go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints dot com. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have Crystal? Its great to have you back.
Nice to be back in the studio here.
Lots of talk about of course, Wednesday is Liberation Day, elderbas I'm personally calling it, but well.
It will be for a lot of hedge funds, yes.
At anyone who has anything in the stock market most likely. So we're taking a look at what the plan is even likely to be with regard to additional tariffs and how the markets are reacting and all of that good stuff. Also some new poll numbers with regards to how people feel about Trump and Trump's handling of the economy. We're looking at the very latest, of course, from the signal Gate fallout, which just continues.
Now.
Waltz is apparently on thinner ice, so we'll see what's going on there. Trump says that he's going to run for another term that is blatantly unconstitutional, but he says he's going to figure it out and he's going to try, so we'll see how that's going to work out. I'm taking a look at how Zionism has been used to usher in an authoritarian crackdown. Jonathan Allen and Amy Parns are joining us to talk about their new book. I'm
very excited about this. So they've got all the inside scoop about Biden dropping out, about Kamala switching in, about Obama's role, about Trump's campaign, all of the things. So they're going to be spilling the tea from their new book. We also have Ben Wickler, who is the chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, big Supreme Court race in that state. Elon Musk was there last night trying to gen up
support for his preferred candidates. So we're going to get a look from Ben Wickler there in the state and what that all means.
So lots to get to this mark.
Yeah, it's exciting, and Emily's actually down in Wisconsin right now. You'll have some on the ground reporting for that on Wednesday show, which we're excited.
Wisconsin native, Yeah, Wisconsin native.
I've never I still am wrapping my head around the like almost one hundred million dollars or so that I can spend on a Wisconsin Supreme Court race. It's completely outwright Elon.
Put in twenty million dollars.
To this Supreme He personally put in twenty million, and then on the Democratic site it's like twenty six million. I'm like, this is insane. Is there really that much at risk? Apparently yes, So we'll get to it. Yeah, it's a.
Real sort of referendum moment, bell Weather of where things stand politically, So a lot of eyes on Wisconsin.
R Let's start with the tariffs, as Crystal said, Liberation Day it's coming, and let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen. Trump is, in his masterful communication strategy, says this, I couldn't care less if foreign autoworkers raise price is due to tariffs. So this is a phone interview yesterday with NBC News. He was asked specifically about potential price increases the present and said he could not care less if automakers raised prices after he
announced twenty five percent tariff on foreign made automobiles. Asked what his recent message was to motor industry CEOs and whether he had warned them against raising prices, Trump said the messages congratulations. If you make your car in the United States, you're going to make a lot of money. If you don't, you're probably going to have to come to the United States, because if you don't make your car in the US, there is no tariffs. When pressed to see if he told the CEOs not to raise prices,
he said no, I never said that. I couldn't care less if they raise prices, because people are going to start buying American cars. I couldn't care less. I hope they raise their prices because if they do, people are going to buy American made cars. We have plenty. Asked if he was then concerned about overall prices growing up, Trump said no, again, I couldn't care less because if prices go up, they're going to buy American cars. So
he said it like four times. Not necessarily the strategy I would use whenever we're talking about car tariffs and all of that. I mean, a guess, to be fair, we are talking about foreign vehicles. But the problem is, of course, that we've talked here about is that many of the inputs, even to our so called American cars are either from Mexico and or Canada. I mean, you know, the modern car industry, and this is something even the UAW and all of them will admit is completely globalized,
I think, to our detriment. But that's a you know, much longer discussion. I think at this point, the problem is is that if you are going to have such a massive shock to the overall to the overall supply chain and tariffs do increase you, if you don't see some commensurate policy on the other side of that, well I think people are going to get very upset. Don't forget, you know, a huge part of inflation and the way that people experience inflation over the last four years, it
was eggs and it was gas. But we also don't seem to remember that twenty twenty two spike of overall used car market. And so if we think about it, you know, if we do have a situation where the overall aggregate price of cars does tend to increase, we will see a similar ride in the value of the
used car, which is actually very difficult. That's almost seventy percent of the entire use of the entire car industry in the United States, and of course it just makes it even more inaccessible parts and all of that could become more expensive, So bad for manufacturing possibly if we do see overall price increase, of course, very important for our manufacturing supply chain, and then huge consumer problem as well.
Yeah, I mean, there's a lot to unpack here. I mean, first of all, obviously this is not how the teriff program was sold. On the campaign trail. Trump was definitely not running around going like, your prices are going to increase. Yeah, I mean, he was pledging inflation. We all know it was a big political problem, big reality problem for the Biden administration. So he was promising to lower prices. Now that he's one office, he's like, I don't care if prices go up. I don't care if they go up
on cars or go up on anything else. So obviously directly contradictory to what they were selling on the campaign trial, which was always preposterous. I mean, you know, Soccer was always honest even as he was supporting some of the terraff regime that like, yeah, prices are going to go up, but they tried to pretend like, oh no, that's not really going to happen, and that's not how.
It works, blah blah blah. Obviously that was a lie.
And now we're getting the truth from Trump here with regard to how this is going to be put into place. The auto tariffs are the sort of thing, if you're just focused in on that that I could theoretically support if it was focused on the auto industry, if it was done in an intelligent way, if it was paired with industrial policy that would actually be targeted and aimed at building up our domestic auto manufacturing industry. That is
not what's happening here. That's not happening with cars. At the same time that they're instituting these tariffs, they're of course taking hatchet to the federal government. They're going the opposite direction of having any sort of industrial policy. They're going back to austerity to deregulation, all those sorts of things. And then of course we're not just talking about auto tariffs. Actually we don't really even know what the tariff regime,
nor does anyone else in the administration. Apparently that's going to be instituted this week. But the indications are from Jeff Stein and other reporters and from what Peter Davarro and other White House aids are saying that Trump wants to go really big, and he wants to go basically across the board.
So this is going to be if.
He moves forward and actually implements these tariffs and actually sticks with them, it is going to be a massive, massive disruption. There's just no doubt about that whatsoever. And Jeff made a good point about how you know, this sort of conversation about tariffs and what purpose they even
actually serve for Trump in this administration. It's kind of coming to a head this week because one theory from the business community and from Republicans who are more uncomfortable with arriffs is, oh, he's just using these as a negotiating tactic. Okay, So oh, he threatened Mexico with tariffs and then he got some concession from them. And he's just using them as a negotiating tactic. Okay, that's one theory. Another theory is, no, he's using these to totally upend
the current economic system. They're going to be put in place, they're going to be permanent, and it is going to cause a massive reorientation. And you know, also, look when you're t talking about putting tariffs on goods that are food and all sorts of things that working class people need to make ends meet, it's effectively attacked on working class people. So the other theory of the case is this is short term pain for long term gain in
terms of theoretical increased industrialization within the US. Sure, there are some other theories down there as to what's going on, but those are sort of the two competing possibilities of what Trump is doing here. And this week we will get a sense of which one is actually correct. And this morning, you know, if you look at about eight am right now, the futures are down in the stock market.
The stock mark was down last week. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of fallout from whatever happens to be annouced on line.
Well, there's no question about it. On the strategy front. I still don't think we can really read anything into it, because originally we were doing Canada tariffs with Mexico, then we weren't, and then we were, and then we weren't again. And then even on the reciprocal tariffs, the way that he sold it at the State of the Union is we're going to do a reciprocal tariff with every other country. Again. I actually think reciprocal tariffs is not a terrible idea.
Reciprocal tariff is the idea that if if you have a country has a tariff on our goods, then we are just going to simply have the same one. Okay, I mean, you know, it doesn't seem so unreasonable. But then he was like, well, actually, what we're gonna do is narrow the tariffs to ten or fifteen countries. They're like, okay, so now we're moving away from that. And now the latest is actually we're going back to a twenty percent ring around the United States triff. And you're like, huh,
all right. So my point is not only can I not keep track, I don't even think anybody in the White House knows, which is obvious right here is Pete Ert Navarro he is the advisor to President Trump on trade. He's been kind of a longtime trade guru. Fought a lot with the more anti tariff people in the first term. Here he was on television immediately after that Couldn't care Less interview came out. Here's what he had to say.
You heard Lucas's reporting there where the President says he doesn't care if the prices go up on US cars.
So what's the message to the US.
Consumer Messages that tariffs are axe cuts, Tariffs are jobs, tariffs are national security, tariffs are great for America, Tariffs who will make America great again?
Okay, I mean, you know, it's not a lot going on there. Let's go ahead and see how this is working out at a polling level, and it doesn't. This does not shock me at all. I don't.
I just have to say, coming on the heels of Trump being like I don't care if ices go up, for him to be like, oh, it's a tax cut, I mean.
It's just preposterous. Yeah, well, hotally preposterous.
This is this is why messaging and all this stuff matters, because what people can really pick up. Most Americans do support tariffs in principle, as long as they are correct, targeted, made in a certain way. I support tariffs and principle, the UAW, let's be clear here is openly supportive of all of these auto tariffs. So just to be one hundred percent clear about what it means. The problem is always the back and the fourth, the chaos, the lack
of the process. And it's not just me who is saying this, It's not really just nerds political nerds who read the news. What do people what are people the most sensitive about? Price? Now, let's put this up there on the screen. Here is from the CBS News you gov latest expectations versus now Trump's policies are making you financially okay, So in January they expected forty two percent set better off views now twenty three percent better off.
In January worse off was only twenty eight percent. Views now is forty five or forty two, and then the same is thirty to thirty five. So there's been a massive drop off, basically a flip from the better off to the worse off, with the plurality there now saying that they believe that the policies are going to make them worse off. Let's go to the next part. And this is actually the single most dangerous thing right here.
Who is more responsible for today's inflation? Thirty eight percent say Biden's policies, thirty four say Trump's policies both equally is nineteen and nine percent. You are some fifty so days are into your administration. You've been approximately in power for ten weeks. People are going to cut you a brake. People cut Biden a break for nine months. Please do not forget that. But the more that you have this
and you can speed it up yourself. If you, let's say, have yo yo tariffs that are in place and not in place and constantly back and forth and oh, I don't know. The S and P is currently on track for its single worst quarter in the last three years since COVID adds some more on top of that, and you see an overall drop and your four to oh one K. Let's say that you begin to see stagflation. You have high inflation, unemployment begin to tick up. You
have consumer demand that begins to drop. You have a home price which is in budging. You have the Federal Reserve, let's say, which has already said they're like, oh, well, we're going to keep things kind of where they are right now. You're in a bad situation. You're gonna have high interest rates, you're gonna have very sticky inflation with tariffs, and you're gonna have chaos and the government people are not going to feel a lot of confidence. They will
ditch you very very quickly. And I think that they are on track for that, right well.
I mean think about it, like, he makes it impossible for people who even want to defend me.
Well, I'm like, listen, I'm ready, I'm ready for a real terrifyah, ready to golop thing.
Yeah, you know made sense to you you would be here defending it. But how can you because you don't even know what you would be defending, right, you can't. And you know that goes for all of his White House officials too, who have to make up preposterous things like, oh, this is a tax cut, when it's the polar opposite of that.
I mean, this is you know.
Peter Navarro in that same interview, he claimed that Trump's terarifts are going to raise six hundred billion dollars per year, six trillion dollars over a ten year period. This is what Jeff Stein is saying seems to reflect our reporting that Trump wants to go absolutely enormous on the terifts, regardless of short term economic consequences. Hard to overstate how big six hundred billion dollars per year is. Would this
be the biggest tax hike in US history? Jeff Steine is asking at the same time to your point about stagflation saga. Here is a headline from CNBC this morning. First quarter GDP growth will be just zero point three percent as Tariff's stoke stagflation conditions. So stagflation is low or low economic growth and high inflation, and that very much seems to be the trend that we are headed in.
You know, economists are increasingly saying that there are more and more warning signs of recession, not because any of it is inevitable, but as a direct consequence of the policies that are put being put in place from Trump. You know, when we looked at that jail partner's word cloud when they ask people and jail partners like right leaning firm, when they ask people, hey, what's.
The biggest grew up from Trump?
So far?
Overwhelmingly the word that jumped down at you was terrifs. Because you're right if they are sold correctly and if they are applied like for example, people are pretty supportive of arras on China. Okay, China. You know, we lost a lot of our industrial base. There put some tarifts on China. If people see it as like a global competitor, try to reindustrialize, get some of those manufacturing jobs back.
People can be brought on board with that, even though it's still not an overwhelming support, but it's you know, you can be sold on something like that. This How can you even sell people on some that is so chaotic and so nonsensical, and especially at a time when the landscape, the economic landscape is very different from twenty sixteen.
The number one concern now is inflation. That is very different from how things were at the beginning of the Biden administration or certainly at the beginning of the first Trump administration.
And so it is remarkable, you know.
Politically, to see the way that Trump is taking on so much water with regard to his economic handling, which again is very different from how people have felt about him this entire time.
So it's going to be this is.
Going to be a very interesting week on the economic front, as maybe we finally get some sense.
Of is this just a threat?
Is a negotiating tactic as many people on Wall Street are hoping in spite of what Trump has very consistently said, and his you know, consistent talk about how much he loves tarifs and how big he wants to go, and all of the leaks from internally about how he's pushing aims to go.
Bigger and bigger and bigger.
Is this negotiating tactic or is he serious about implementing this massive tariff regime which will have immediate, very significant consequences.
That's right, Well, let's let's put the counter up there, because this is the one where you know you always got to stick. Let's put it up there on the screen from CBS. Overall job approval fifty percent, I mean, that's high for Trump. For Trump, that's the highest it's ever been. Fifty percent approval, fifty percent disapprove. He was underwater for basically his entire first term. So you know,
you really got to keep that in mind. And you know, Andy Kaczinski keeps flags this while he continues to not only have higher approval at any point, and even if Americans are souring their Americans continue to approve of his immigration policy. Immigration is probably the only thing that's really saving him right now. And if you think about it too, what you are watching is you are watching them try and do these wild experiments economically as things become more real.
Let's say that they do continue this strategy, and let's say the S and P is down. Let's say I don't know twenty percent on the year, and then you start to do a tax cut, which we'll talk about it probably tomorrow at some point, but there is beginning
to be an internal realization in the White House. They're like, hey, we got to do something over here, because if we not only hurt the economy but then extend massive tax cuts for corporations and for the rich at all while we don't let's say, or all while perhaps like making more stringent work requirements or something for medicare good luck.
Now that's in a nine month situation, you could easily be in your thirtieth percentile of approval because you would not only have a tax bill, you would have a lower econ, so you would have people who would have higher prices and a tax extension of lower tax cuts. Now they're possibly floating something about higher taxes on the highest income Americans. We'll see. I'm not going to hold my breath, but it is interesting at least that they're
considering something like that. The point is is that the landscape for them in the future it's not good, especially if there is a low, if there is a major drop in the overall stock market. Because we already know that they have a nine month to one year deadline. The tax bill has to be extended by the twenty twenty five calendar year. There's no option that tax bill is going to be unpopular, no ifens or butts around it.
And so with this, what I would want, if I'm going to extend a massive tax cut, would be what I'd be like. I need boom in stock markets. I need twenty five percent. I need low employment, I need low inflation. Don't worry, people are not going to care as much, right if things are all good, but when things are bad. And now people are starting to tune
in more to the economic news, which they do. They certainly are maybe not in the ways that everybody may want, but people are paying attention, I think, especially to this, and that is where I could see. I mean, look, it's not only blowout midterm territory. That's where you start to deal with like real threats to our overall agenda and presidency just for the next three years after that.
I mean, we're going to get a lot of political intel this week because you have not only this Wisconsin Supreme Court race that we're going to talk to Ben Wickler about, which right now polymarket has what the liberal had like an eighty six percent chance of when it's not that big of market.
Let's let's be clear, it's only like four hundred and fifty thousand dollars or something. I mean that the presidential markets was like hundreds of millions, so it was much more efficient. Yeah, so it could be wrong.
I'm just saying, right, yeah, yeah, sure, fair absolutely fair enough, but not looking great for Republicans in the state of Wisconsin. Swie Elan went there yesterday to try to do this rescue effort and giving out his million dollar checks whatever. You also have this these two special elections in Florida, one of which is apparently uncomfortably close in the seat that Mike Walls, who's now you know, obviously no.
Security advisor he is. He vacated that seat.
He had won that seat by thirty eight points, Yes, thirty eight points, and they are worried about that seat. Like that alone tells you everything. Now, expectations. Listen, this is a very red part of Florida that the Republican is going to be able to pull it out. He's also himself this very like bombastic and controversial character and so doing himself no favors apparently in this campaign. The you know, people are not happy, they're on the Republican
side with the way that he has conducted himself. But the fact that that seat is in question at all is crazy, at least defonic having to be pulled. How much did she win her that's like a plus twenty Republican district again, should be a layup, should be no problem for Republicans, And they had to pull her un ambassador nomination because they were worried that they could lose that seat. So we already know now listen, caveat. These are low turn on elections. Democrats are very fired up.
The Democratic base now is filled with high propensity voters, a shift that's part of the realignment. As you know, the voting coalitions have moved around, and Democrats have more college educated voters tend to be higher propensity voters. But when you're talking about a midterm election, you're still talking about it being important that you have those high propensity voters and who is really super motivated and also who
is depressed. So if you have a creatoring economy, you know, a stock market that has fallen, economy that is either in recession or teetering on the brink of recession, prices that have skyrocketed, stagflation, and all of it is late at the feet of Donald Trump.
Even people who are like more or less.
His supporters, they're not going to be super psyched about coming out to vote for more of this agenda. At the same time, just in terms of you know, additional economic news, you continue to see consumer sentiment falling off a cliff. You also continue to see things like delinquencies on mortgage payments, delinquencies on car payments going up and up.
So the indications are pretty dire. It's not like the economy is on really firm footing here for people to be able to absorb the type of shock that Trump is planning to put into plays. That is a landscape here and it is going to be a wild ride.
I guess the only thing that you can say is because he's not actually he's never been committed, like officially to any of this stuff. He's always been willing to pull back. Is you should all hope for that. Let's say there's a twenty to thirty percent correction and you get into a full blown panic on Wall Street, which, look, I shouldn't downplay any of this stuff, because this is real shit. That is a result. Oh yeah, not only is four oh one k. I mean that's just a
personal level for everybody who is out there. That means, think about it. Whenever your market cap and your stock and all that stuff goes down, what do people usually do? They pull back, not only pull backsmen, and they fire a bunch of people. So there's real there's real jobs, millions of jobs that are on the line here. Yeah, So you know, I can't sit here and just be like, oh, let's all just hope for a correction and all that plasts. Don't forget. You know, depression goes up the suicide rate.
If you really want to see something depressing, go check it foraight oh nine. It's a disaster every single time. Every major US depression from the Great Depression forward. In fact, the highest one of some of the highest suicide rates the United States ever had was during the Great Depression. So you can go and see it for yourself. There's really human consequences to a lot of this, and you know, you can't screw with people's lives generally, And you know,
even on the tariff point. This is the last thing I'll make is you know, as you said, even with the China stuff, it's not all that popular. I mean it's around like the fiftieth or sixtieth percent. I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's like ninety percent. I think the immigration stuff is way more popular than anything on tariffs. The problem that I always come back to is we have sitting on fifty some years of a policy and of an agenda that has been sold
to people. Now, think about the amount of deprogramming that it takes to say no, TVs being cheap is not the most important thing. Buying a new car every five years is not only financially responsible, but is also something that you know, the new bills and whistles and all that from China, that's not the be all end all of what your entire life is just supposed to be
about same with the new consumer goods. The American dream is not built on cheap you know, MacBooks like this from China that you buy every two years, or an iPhone which is basically the same over the last ten years that you just renew all the time. It's about being able to have children, if you want to, staying in place, if you want to moving, if you want to, being able to buy a house and to pursue whatever it is that you want to do, and not all
of the accoutrement that's in your house. But that's been the standard of living now for fifty years. That's two generations that effectively that have been brought up on this. So you would need not a massive cultural project like something from the White House, which is disciplined, which is different. You would need like an entire apparatus that is united
in this discussion. And you can't just sell it within all the bounds of chaos, because if you do, what you risk is actually getting in totally affirmed of people saying like no, no, no, no, this is not only what I know, but this is what I want, and then we're never going to get back. This will be look as an aberration. Yeah, not as something else.
Yeah, no, that's that's right.
I mean you also you have to sell people on a new and different bargain that is better than the one they have. And instead, what is being promised is just like we're going to hike the prices of the things that have remained to be you know, relatively inexpensive, and we're not going to help you on healthcare, We're not going to help you afford a house. In fact, the terrors are going to make housing even more expensive because many of the construction materials are you coming in
from abroad and are going to be more expensive. So you're not offering people like, Okay, we're ending this bargain of cheap consumer goods. We're China basically like exported deflation on these cheap consumer goods.
We're ending that bargain. But here's the new bargain. Here's what you get.
You're going to be able to afford home, You're going to be able to send your kids to college is going to be more affordable, you're gonna be able to get help. None of that is being offered. So it's just we're going to hype prices and you're going to suffer for what nobody could really say. I mean, there's just no narrative that is being offered here that makes sense to people whatsoever. And so, yes, I actually am for a new economic you know, grand bargain.
So to speak.
Here I am in favor of that. That's not what's on the table.
What's just being offered to most people at a time when they already are really stretched thin because of the inflationary effects, because also because of decades of wage stagnation, because of decades of union busting, destroying worker power, because of decades of yes, well, those consumer goods were cheap, all of the building blocks of a middle class life. Housing, education, healthcare have skyrocketed in price so that it is so
difficult to afford on one or two incomes. It's almost impossible for many people to be able to afford those things on two income households working full time. So you know, that's the landscape into which they're saying. And by the way, suck it up and pay more for your car, Suck it up and pay more for these consumer goods clothing, food.
Et cetera.
And yeah, it's not a good deal that's being offered. That's on the table right now.
No, it's not, and you actually need to offer something very very different, as I said, Otherwise you basically think about it. With Trump's chaotic strategy, which is constantly pulling back and going saying something and then pulling back, then you will not only inflict damage in the interim, you won't get the end result that you were trying to do, and you will turn the public that is against you.
And I think that's really what they're flirting with right now and America really, I mean, let's think about it. When's the last time they had a full blown COVID is a little bit different because COVID was like, you know, it was a pandemic, et cetera, and the economy, the stock market drop and all that was like relatively short lived. We have not had prolonged stagnation for a long time.
Even twenty twenty two I think was the last year that there was a drop in the overall S and P. But then you had two rip roaring years after that. I mean, we have not had, you know, a couple of years of like actual decline in a long time in this country. And if you remember what things were like in eight nine, it's not a surprise that that is where so many, not only the populist movements come from, but that is where the millennial generation and all of
that really became disconnected from the overall American dream. And then the split that has happened since then has been devastating. Anyway, Look, they're long standing social consequences. You don't need to be a historian or any of that to see multiple times in the past when things like this have happened. And so they want to save not only their political future, but really I think that the contract that they're trying to sell to the country, they're going to have to
do something different. But there is no indication of that whatsoever. Turning now to Signal Gait. Okay, so the idiocy continues in the White House. Remember if we'll recall the signal chats leak. Mike Waltz says that Jeffrey Goldberg, the neo kon journalist over at the Atlantic, that his number got sucked into his phone. Obviously it was preposterous. He says he never met him there, and the photo came out showing the two of them together at an event over
at the French Embassy. He says I didn't ever have talked to him before. Well, Goldberg is basically saying that's bullshit to basically every single claim that Mike Walts has made. Let's take a listen. This isn't the matrix.
Phone numbers don't just get sucked into other phones. I don't know what he's talking about there. You know, very frequently in journalism, the most obvious explanation is the explanation my phone number was in his phone. Because my phone number is in his phone. He's telling everyone that he's never met me or spoken to me. That's simply not true. I understand why he's doing it, but you know, this has become a somewhat farcical situation.
Okay, let's parse some language, shall we. My phone number is in his phone because my phone number is in his phone. My theory behind all of this, and I'm curious what you think. Yeah, Ryan basically said this as well, is it's obvious Waltz has been leaking to Goldberg now for quite some time. Yeah, screw up here was so big that Goldberg had to burn him. But he had to burn him in such a way that he can't fully cast the blame. So he can't come out and
just be like, look, this is ridiculous. He's been leaking to me for X, Y and Z number of months, so he's to say careful things. My phone number is in his phone because my phone number is and his phone not, because it's like he's had my phone number for a number of years, and obviously we've been in communication. I mean, the meeting thing, this is the other thing about Goldberg. He puts it in the story, but he's
very sly. He's like, yes, we have met, you know, once, but he didn't talk about some of the actual circumstances. And then the photo comes out from twenty twenty one literally of the two of them standing right next to each other, right, and then you add Mike Waltz's sketchy behavior on top of all of this. I mean, it's so preposterous for everything that is happening right now inside and unfortunately, I think it's starting to fade away, Like I think that Maga and Trump are basically getting away
with it. They're like, We're gonna weather the storm, no scalps for the enemy. And I'm like, do you guys not understand like how this is going to land to people? I mean, I know, it's weird to say the signal story is the biggest story of the Trump administration. All the data shows us that. I mean, and I think because it's funny, like there's an element of hilarity to it about texting the wrong person or whatever, and everyone can like somewhat relate to it, and everybody likes to
see people in power just be like them. But that's not the point. The point is not about all of that. It's really about the lies, about the sheer idiocy behind the scenes, and how they insult our intelligence, like to take to the national airwaves and say that somebody's phone number got sucked into my phone. I'm just sitting here being like, I am I taking I feel like I'm a Zoolander, Like I'm like, am I taking crazy pills?
And the craziest part about it is, you know, I think you originally made this comparison with making fun of joy Read and be like, oh, it's just like those Russian hackers who hacked her old blog posts. I'm like, they genuinely think, not only are you so stupid that you're just going to sit there and take it, but this is an indictment of the entire like MAGA ecosystem, which is either silent on it and or just backing
Trump upping. Actually it's Goldberg's fault. I saw somebody saying, like, he's a he should have left the chat immediately, Like what, yeah, yeah, exactly. It's like, no, guys, the point is he's a CIA cut out because he left the chat. You don't leave the chat. You stay forever and then you leak some
stuff to your colleagues or whatever. I just, I really, I'm so stunned by how they're trying to give them a pass and they're like no scalps or whatever, and it's like, well, hold on a second, Like I thought that they were supposed to have merit or whatever. But you know, similarly, I personally know several federal employees who have been screwed by either work you know, coming back chaotic procedure, no office space, which even though they were
called back sheer stupidity. I know several people who have either taken the buyout off or et cetera. So you're firing tens of thousands of people, including park rangers and the nuclear scientists, who are then rehiring on the theory that all these people are dead weight, and then that you have this guy, the most basic screw up of all time, for the top national security advisor, and he gets a pass. You don't think that people aren't going to see this, yea, you know, at a very that's
my thing about fairness as well. If you're going to fire all of these people, then you should actually be even more ruthless with the people in yourself. But no, they're setting a different standard, and it's like, Okay, I think America should really pay attention that the sheer idiocy, the stupidity, the lying, the expecting you to you know, if you're a maga out there and they're genuinely they think you're a fucking idiot like that. I want you to be clear, like that's what they think of you.
They think you're so dumb, and you know, to be honest, many of them are right that you'll just just serve as some sentinel and be like, actually, it's the left that's the problem here, that's demanding a scale. We don't play by their rules. I'm just like, okay, then, you know, just have them at the top of your national security advisor. I'm sure the entire country will be better off for it. I can't believe it.
Yeah, I really can't. Tribalism right ros brain, it really does.
Yeah, And I mean I think the reason that so, first of all, that interview Mike Waltz gave to Laura Ingram, it felt like, I guess he didn't think he would be pressed at all by her, and so even the basic question of like yeah, but how like why was this number on your phone? He had to come up on the fly with this like oh, Willy and maybe God like sucked into my phone. And then I loved when he was like, we're going to get the best minds, like.
We already know what happened.
Elon's technical experts right are looking like we.
We all know what happened here. It's you and Jeffrey Goldberg have the same ideology, like your allies. You may be on different political teams technically, but in all of this you are allies. So it's very obvious what happened here, you know. I think with regard to he feels like he has to lie about it because he feels like the biggest sin for Trump, in particular Goldberg's would be being friendly with Goldberg, somebody that he hates.
It does say something though, doesn't it about the whole relationship with him in Goldberg where that is, like you just said, you do have the same uniparty ideology, and all the reporting from behind the scenes is that Waltz quote annoys his colleagues because he's constantly talking about bombing Iran and or you know, it's like or he's like, oh, actually you even saw in the chats right, like he's like a brain dead idiot being like the muh actually
muff freedom of navigation please, you know, sitting in there, anybody from the Atlantic Council could have written something like that. It's just the way that this has all gone down just demonstrates also the stupidity. Why did Trump? You know, Michael Tracy me a good point because I was like, oh, this is a person who's out of step with the Trump admin. And he was like, you know, that's not
even true because Trump picked him. I go, you know what, You're completely right, Yeah, Trump picked him for this job. So what are we all supposed to sit here and think?
And the person who supposedly was you know, is closest to Trump, Stephen Miller, who sort of like was speaking for Trump, in coming in and say, okay, well this is you know, sorry JD about your concerns, but this is what the boss actually wants.
Is Stephen Miller and.
Steven Miller is there backing up the Yeah, no, we're going to bomb them.
We're going to bomb this apartment building.
Yay to you know, the death and destruction and great job everybody, even though you know, not a word is said about the fact that this policy, which by the way, they've continued to bomb and has continued to not work. This policy was trying the Biden administration. It was a failure.
There is no.
Even expectation that it's going to be successful this time around. It's just like bombing for the sake of bombing, and because Israel wants us to.
So the whole thing is.
Getting a look at those chats, it shows you how incredibly like idiotic and facile and borderline insane the foreign policy, the standard foreign policy thinking is in this administration and carryover this particular policy carryover from the last administration as well.
And it also really gives you a window. This is something I was talking to Ryan and Emily about on Friday. It gives you a window into like Okay.
JD does his.
Little like, well, you know, this is really like kind of Europe's problem. He's shot down by everyone who cares away in in that thrust. There should have been like, it's not just Mike Waltz. There should have been theoretically, Pete heagsth has had this come to Jesus moment and now he's Magan, he's America first, and he's against the wars.
Blah blah blah.
He's not backing him up. There's no one in that chain. Chelsea Gabbard's on that chain act, she's not backing them up. Steve Wikoff is in there, he's, you know, running around Moscow at the time. He's not that Nobody in there has anything to say other than yes, go team, bomb the apartment building.
Get the bad guys way to go.
Not a mention of the fact that the policy will accomplish literally nothing other than complete and utter, you know, other than death and destruction and.
Linger Israel is a very Israel's bidding.
What was the easiest to do. The lowest common denominator opinion in Washington is bomb the hoo thies and or let's stick it to Iran. Even JD if we're all being honest, the Europe thing is probably just I have no inside knowledge. I'm just telling you from what I think is very obviously it's like one of these like, yeah, but my Europe. You know, Europe is bad and that's why we shouldn't do it, which is like obviously something that you use because you know it's a framework that
everybody has to be built into. It's fine, you know, you don't hate the player, you hate the game, but you know, as you said, it's the one voice. And then Miller comes in shuts it down. Mike Waltz comes in again with some literal copy pasta from chat GPT about freedom of navigation, about why we got to do it. Pete hex Set's like, we're gonna go. We should go right now. And we've been bombing Yemen now for multiple days. That's you know, nobody just sits there and go, hey,
did it work? You know what happened? How much we spend on this operation mulhunt, you know, tens of millions of dollars. We have now spent and discharged more missiles against the hoo Thies than in all the previous thirty years of combat from the United States in America. We don't sit there and just take any stock of any of that. It's like, it's so ridiculous. And it shows you too that the hardest thing to do is to even use some fake argument about like maybe we shouldn't
do this'. That is the difficulty. That's the difficulty in Washington today, is to actually preach restraint, even couched in political rhetoric. Yes, that is actually the sickness at the heart. And it also shows you all. Going to war it's easy. You know. Every time I've read about the decision to go to war in Iraq, you would think that it would be difficult. No, no, no, no, it was the easy decision to make. Not only was the psyopped American
people in on it, the media was bloodthirsty. Congress wanted to do something. It took lone voices of courage to say no, we should not do this. And even they failed or didn't prevail or were compromised, you know, in their own way. Yes, sure, it's great to be vindicated years later. It doesn't matter if you don't say anything at the time. It's just you're done. Yeah, and well we're going to end up in a disaster. I really fear that's where we're next Tomorrow, we're going to cover
this Iran situation. Things are not good right now, you know, the rejection of negotiations and all that. I know what the solution is. We all do. We know where things are going to end up. It's the easiest path of least resistance for them, but definitely not for us.
And all done so casually.
I mean, that's what like the emojis, that's why everybody is sort of sticking on that understandably, because yeah, it feels like, you know, a group chat you'd be in with your your buddies or your family or you know, I said on Friday, like your kid's soccer team coordinating snacks for the next game or whatever. Like it feels so casual, and yet fifty some people were killed in this strike, like you know, fift pound emoji fire, American flag.
There's not a care or consideration over is, like who is this target?
Is this? What's the club?
We're talking about a civilian apartment building here that we're collapsing. We're all just like celebrating, like that's fine, And you know, I know that our foreign policy has killed many civilians, but.
They always tell us, oh, we take all the care.
And consideration, and you know, at least in the past, now it's not even it's not even contemplated. So to have these decisions that are both life and death for the people that are being bombed and also can have extraordinary consequences in terms of, you know, pulling our nation into potential war with Iran, to be taken so casually and with so a total lack of regard for what the policy is even going to accomplish. That to me
is what is so unsettling here. And then you know, the use of signal itself, I feel like hasn't gotten commented enough that Pam Bondi went on and was like, yeah.
We're going to keep using signal.
Basically, it's ying used intentionally to avoid FOIA requests.
I mean they are this is a way.
To try to subvert the legally acquired records keeping that you know is congressionally mandated, and I think it is standard protocol, And no one on that chain is like, wait, why are we using signal for that?
This?
Shouldn't we be using more secure channels. Also, it was weird how many people were on the chain like why is the Treasury secretary on the chain, you know, like, okay, it has to do with freedom of navigation. So for him to understand the overall plant, fine, does he really need to know like what time and where and what type of military hardware is being Floyd, et cetera.
The whole thing is just total.
Amateur hour, you know, I said on Friday, it gives like children playing war games.
And I think.
That's also a sober why it has so broken through with the American public and so captured people's attention, because it does like there's a when you're on the outside, you have this idea that serious people are making serious decisions with a lot of thought and you know, a lot of intelligent argument about how exactly to do these things, and then we see the reality of it, You're like, holy shit, these people are nothing. They're nothing special and this is being done incredibly casual.
If there is one thing that I could take away, it's that, guys, Washington, this is how it all works. I want you all to know that this America has been too siopped from all of these movies into thinking that we have like great men at the top. We once did, but that's been a long time coming, and everyone sits in the situation room and very seriously sits there and deliberates. It's like, no, this stupidity is actually how our entire government is run and has been for
a long time. Put B two up there on the screen. It's possible that Mike Walts could not be long for this world. Nobody really knows it, says in private meeting, Vance and top advisors suggest Trump oust Waltz. So the tell that JD actually did tell him to fire walt is that quote. Vance's office did not respond to comment on this. So if he had said it, then he would have denied it right, or he hadn't said it, then he would have denied it. Here was buried down
at the bottom. But that's a classic little Washington way and whether you can tell if something is actually true or not. Inside Apparently both JD, Susie Wiles, and who else in here said that they wanted to fire. So basically the top advisors for Donald oh Sergiogre, who is the top personnel official at the White House PPO director, all of them said, sir, you should fire him. He clearly is leaking, he's lying, and he has committed like a very basic act of appearing like an idiot. It's
just incompetence. It's not something we want. And Trump is like, yeah, but I don't want to give Jeffrey Goldberg a scalp. It's like that is the priority, you know, in his mind. And it's not the foreign policy view, it's not anything else. It's just the fact is is that he doesn't want to appear as if he's giving too much away, you know, to the liberal media and its calls for.
He specifically hates Goldberg over the the.
Suckers and loser story. That's right, right, yeah, I mean I read an article this morning. Actually, let's go and put that one up there on the screen B five please, just so you guys can see from B here, Mike Wallace is losing support inside the White House. What they point out is that, you know, his position is tenuous. Trump has apparently been furious with him. But and this was my big takeaway, is that he's like on the
phone with his advisors. Trump says that he does not want to recreate the stories of his first term and you know, willing miillery, firing people and having personnel issues and so in this way though, this is where the stupidity of it comes in. You are actively keeping someone in place who absolutely deserves to be fired just to avoid, you know, the story of somebody leaving, and they think that it would have been a cascading effect. I couldn't
disagree more. The fact is is that Waltz is lies, and then the insistence that no classified information was shared is actually what made the story ten times worse if they had just come out the day afterwards. And like National Security Advisor Walts offered his resignation this morning to the President. The President has accepted it and he wishes him well. It was obviously mistake. The National Security Advisor takes full responsible. I genuinely think the story would have
gone away, but all the stupidity of it. They can't. They really believe that by going on the offense constantly that they can just survive these things. But my point is about survive to what end? To keep a neo con leaker in his job just so that you don't
own the Atlantic. It's like, but you know the other irony here, nobody's getting owned more than anybody who doesn't want to go to war with Iran, like Jeffrey Goldberg, is actually succeeding in keeping somebody like Mike Waltz in his job if you decide to own him by not firing him. Okay, good luck to you. Yeah.
And I don't think this is going to put Mike Waltz off of leaking future things to.
Jeffrey all either.
Ideological.
Goldberg has gone out of his way to try to protect Waaltz.
Absolutely, the fact that he hasn't already pulled up like here's the picture, another picture and be with here's our chats, here's the other things that he sent me. Oh you want to say, buddy, that you don't know who I am.
Here are the receipts, here is THEO.
Like, the fact he hasn't done that is a incredible kindness to Mike Waltz, because that actually would pull the pin on him if it was shown and Trump believed that they were in regular or semi regular communication, Like I think that would pull the pin on Mike Waltz in terms of his you know, future within the Trump administration. But he's not doing that. He's just saying, like, it's
not true. We do know each other. My phone number is in his phone, because my number is in his phone, even with regard to how he handled the release of this getting out of the chat to begin with, then he initially doesn't want to actually release the details which proved that this was clearly classified information.
That's the other thing that is so dishonest.
Pretending like these war plans or attack plans, as they want to say, like this isn't classified information. Is also so insulting to anyone who has a brain and knows even the first thing about how Washington works and how much of this information is classified. But you know, Goldberg did his best to try to protect these guys, and
they just forced his hand at every single turn. So I was gonna mention, you know, there was your point, Zachera, about how they're handling this so differently than the treatment of you know, any other lower level federal government employee.
There was a DHS staffer that accidentally included a reporter on some details of forthcoming ice rates, and it was a much lower level screw up in terms of like the consequences, and that DHS staffer was immediately put on leave and had their their classification threatened, Like they're yeah, good, that's you know it was, Look, you messed up, and now you're going to be out of the job and you are not going to have access to the sort
of classified intelligence again. But for Mike Waltz, because he doesn't you know, because Trump don't like Jeffrey Goldberg, He's hanging in there now. I will say, I think, you know, maybe if down the line, if he screws up again and there's some other excuse to get rid of him. I do think that he's a little tenuous at this point.
I think that's that's what you could say. But no, the handling of this has been incredible, and it is also crazy to me that it is kind of the biggest like Trump, given everything that has happened in the Foreign Alien Enemies Act and the you know, the economic crashes and all of these, the roundups on college campus. Is everything that's been done, and this is the thing that has really broken through because it's a clown show.
It's just that that's it. That's right. That Look, all of those are substantive stories of which people what's the what's the normal response from somebody who doesn't know a ton about it, I don't know that much about it, you know, or something like that that seems complicated. People inherently have a reversion to to what to controversy or to something that seems like very complicated, but with this, yeah,
there's no complication. Finally, here, I just wanted to show you in terms of what this what it looks like for the people who are out there trying to defend this. This is the best that they've got. Some idiotic what aboutism that again just deeply insults your intelligence. Here's Greg Gottfeld. Let's take a.
Listen, and we were all smeared for speaking the truth that was clearly on display for years. And now these same jackasses are telling us that the signal app story is a grave concern when they hid the fact that Biden.
Was literally a concern for the grave.
That a little turnabout in language, all right, I liked it. There has to be a penalty for this cover up. The scandal isn't that they elected a vegetable. It's that journalists knew it and refused to act like journalists even as the facts got worse. Not penalty should be a complete loss of credibility, not just now but forever. The rest of us, from Trump on down to his supporters have earned a free punch, meaning every time they shout scandal,
we get to hit him with ridicule. I mean, you expect us to care about some group chat regarding a successful strike against terrorists after gaslighting us about a senile old man for four years.
You, yeah, that's the guests that they've got. Oh, you gaslighted us, So now we're going to gaslight you.
Right, we get a free punch. Yeah, we get to not care about the scandals.
You just know there's a bunch of boomers out there eating that up.
Oh yeah, it was getting cheers in the audience. I also love a successful by what measure? How was this a success?
Although the bomb went boom?
Okay, congratulations, guess what you accomplished? Literally nothing?
Yeah, that's what counts for success in Washington.
Yeah. Opparently, all right, let's.
Get to Trump three point zero.
Yeah, so apparently.
In this interview with NBC News, Trump made it quite clear that he plans on seeking a third term in office. Let's put this up on the screen. Kristen Welker was doing the interview here. She said, are you joking about this? He says, I'm not joking. When asked to clarify, I'm not. It is far too early to think about it. When asked whether he has been presented with plans to allow him to seek a third term, Trump said, there are
methods which you could do it. He also was asked whether that could involve running jd Vance and then him basically like sort of taking over for JD Vance and as they said, a possible scenario which Vice President jad Vance would run for office then pass the role to Trump. Trump responded that that's one method, but there are others too.
Asked to share another method, Trump simply responded, no. So Steve Bannon has been out there saying similar things, you know, seeming to I mean, he has said quite clearly that they're going to figure out a way to get Trump to run for a third term. The constitutional language is as clear cut as it could possibly be. There is literally no ambiguity there. Did you pull it up, you want to read.
It for it? Read it for everybody. I was looking at it this morning just to get the exact text. No person shall be elected to the office of president more than twice. No person who has held the office of president or acted as president for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected president shall be effected elected to the office of President more than once. This article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article
was proposed by Congress. Shall not prevent any person who may be withholding holding the office of President, or acting as President during the term within which this article becomes operative, from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such terms. So the background is twenty second Amendment was passed Congress in nineteen forty seven,
was ratified by the States in nineteen fifty one. Nineteen fifty two is a first presidential election under the new rule under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who subsequently was elected to two terms. And the background of it, as we have discussed here, the twenty second Amendment was, in my opinion, a severe overreaction to FDR seeking the unprecedented third and
to fourth terms. The Congress at the time was very upset at how much power FDR had accrued under his what twelve or so years while he was in office. They wanted to make sure that it never happened again, and to try and to ratify the two term norm that was set by George Washington actually into law. But now it is the law of the land. It is
the Constitution of the United States. I was thinking, you know, even in terms of how that whole like JD would run and you could hand it off to him, as the Constitution makes clear, no person who has been elected president twice twice can serve again as president, so he would actually not be in the technical line of succession.
Right, Yeah, so you could not even you know, constitutionally put Trump as like the VP on the ticket and then have JD step down, et cetera.
Well, even if Trump stepped down today and handed it over to JD, he still would never be elected or eligible because it says no person elect twice elected there the definition is ratified victory by the Electoral College, which has now happened twice.
Let's go ahead and listen to some of the ways that Steve Bannon has been talking about this, because I mean, I have been taking seriously this possibility for a while, because Bannon has been pretty consistently talking about it, and you know, there was even at Sea Pack there was a whole booths set up there about we want Trump to be, you know, our red Caesar. We want him to be able to serve a third term, et cetera.
And listen, this is a man who, when he did lose the election in twenty twenty, refused to accept defeat, like he did not want to give up power, And so I don't think any of us should expect that he's going to be willingly accept giving up power this
time around as well. So I think you have to take seriously now that you have Bannon and you have Trump being quite clear that he intends to seek a third term, you have to take it seriously and start thinking through the scenarios of how he could even theoretically try to accomplish this goal. With all that being said, let's go ahead and take a listen to C three Steve Bannon talking about this possibility.
I am a firm believer that President Trump will run and went again in twenty twenty eight. So I've already endorsed President Trump. A man like this comes along once every century. If we're low lucky, we've got him.
Now.
He's on fire, and I'm a huge supporter. I want to see him again at twenty twenty eight.
And obviously, anybody who doesn't like what you say but judges is at a function of a lack of intelligence. Doesn't know anything about you. I don't make that mistake. You're a smart guy. You know he's term limited. How do you think he gets another term?
We're working on.
I think we'll have I think we'll have a couple of alternatives.
Let's say that. We'll see we'll see what the definition is.
We'll say that people, We'll say what the definition of term limit is?
All right, Well, so you're talking about litigating this issue because I don't want people to listen to our interview and say Bannon's cooking up an insurrection. Bannon is cooking up you know what I mean? I want I want people to get a straight take on where your head is.
What do you see Chris? As you know, I've had I've had.
Greater long shots than this, and we supported President Trump. After the election, I realized, you don't believe the election of twenty towrners stolen.
We do.
We fervently believe that. Not prepared to talk about it publicly, but in a couple of months I think we will be.
But you are not suggesting revolution or overthrow or anything that people would condemn.
Chris, we just won one of the biggest sweeping victories. We're in the middle of a nineteen thirty two type realignment.
If we can continue on and.
Continue to have populist policies, populist nationalist policies, we have African amatic analogy coming.
To our side.
So again, I mean, I guess they're going to try to come up with some sort of like Kakamami legal theory, but even that, because the language is so clear, I'm not sure how they would do it. You know, I have been thinking about this. One of the things that I did consider is that you whether it's Jdie Vance or Don Junior, you run someone who basically is like a puppet figure.
I mean, this is kind of what Putin did in Russia.
Oh, like a Medvedev, like a meddev.
And it's like you, Okay, he's technically the president, but Trump is the one who's really pulling the strings. And you know, if you if that's the plan, then it sort of makes sense that he withheld his support from jade Vance as his successor because jade Vance has proved himself that he will be a total, willing, compliant puppet for Trump.
Well, if that's the case, you should just go ahead and pick your son Bottle, because no self respecting personal think and.
Maybe that's maybe that's why he isn't getting behind JD.
I considered that possibility.
I also thought through, like you know, Trump has been They've been threatening the courts and trying to you know, pressure and bully them and defying I would say, some of the court orders.
They have been using the weight.
Of the federal government to punish states for doing things that they don't want the states to do, you know, launching investigations with helding federal funding. You see the same playbook with regard to media outlets, with regards to law funds, with regards to universities. You could use some of that pressure to like, you know, let's say, okay, Trump runs a Republican primary, he wins the nomination, and then it comes down to what our state's going to put him on the ballot.
You could use some of that.
Pressure to try to coerce states to go along with this.
But I don't know.
I just my mind is not devious, devious enough to come up with the scenario of how this ends up working out for him. But like I said, I think you have to take it seriously, given that this is not a man who willingly gives up power, and he's saying quite openly. And I think one thing we've learned about Trump two point zero is the things that he says he's going to do and many things beyond that, he is entirely serious about it.
I think it's possible. I also think that his ego is just so fragile at the idea of having to pass on power, and all presidents who are two terms struggle with this, right like Reagan famously, he's like he didn't particularly love HW and he didn't really want to hand the reins over. His wife wouldn't even give him a tour or whatever. Psychologically, these people are crazy. I mean, we really need to think about it. And so that's what it takes to be able to get up to
this level. So for Trump, I'm beginning to see now the reason why he doesn't want to endorse JD or Don Junior or anybody is because the idea that you could hand over his life's accomplishment of getting elected president of the United States twice or three times, I guess in his mind over to somebody else. It's just so psychologically wounding because it's a subservient position and it's one that he correctly views as when you do that, you
no longer are the king maker. Right, There is a transition there where whoever he endorses then becomes the pre eminent head of the party, and you lose a lot of your control and of your power. That is ultimately
what I think drives him. As you've said too, though, I mean I think that Look, if we were going to say realistically the way that this would ever happen, let's put C four up there on the screen, where there's been an amendment to the Amendment that has now been introduced, and it says introduced a House resolution to amend the Constitution to allow a president to be elected for up to, but no more than three terms. The
language of the proposed amendment reesis follows. No person shall be elected to the office of president more than three times, nor be elected to any additional term after being elected
to two consecutive terms. And no person who has held the office of president or acted as president for more than two years of a term to wish a president was elected president shall be elected to the office of president more than twice, which basically means what it means Obama and Clinton and Bush could not run for a third term. But that Trump.
Bombas could there, that's Trump could beat Obama.
See, I don't know. I think Obama's hold is gone. I think his twenty years sigh up and the American people has finally ended just because of that Democratic poll where people are people are fought up with him. Michelle's doing her dumb ass podcast about whether you should what was it whether you should recline your seat on a commercial airliner? Lady, you have never been on a commercial airliner for the last twenty years.
You know, lecture us just as a digression our guests that we're having on Jock and Allen Amy Parn's great reporters, both of them. One of the tidbits they have in their book is that, you know, when remember when Obama was going to endorse Kamlin, I like took a long time and he did that, like weird scriptive video whatever. Apparently one of the requirements is Michelle did.
Not want to be in the video. Wow, that's kind of interesting, right.
I Mean, there's a lot of rumors swirling about how their marriage is going, et cetera. So I don't know that kind of fuel. It was like made me think about that, but then also made me think about like, I guess she's just.
Like, doesn't really like Kamalin maybe too.
I don't know, but it's definitely possible. Yeah, I don't know. I mean to be honest, if you read both of their books, I have no idea how either of them is still in that marriage. It's totally insane. I mean, it's just one of those where he literally is running for office and she's like I don't want you to do this, and he just does it anyway, and you're like okay. I mean, she's like, I don't want to be first lady. He's like, okay, suck it up. I have no idea. Why would you stick it out?
I don't think out in hand like you had to know this was who you were marrying.
I guess yeah, I don't know. You know, it's one of those where she's like, okay, then I'm just going to move in my mom and he's like, okay, you know, it's listen. I'm you know, don't judge. I guess whatever. But if you read behind between the lines of but you really should read the chapters of his rise in his book and in her book, and if you read that you're like, this is nuts, this is a total digress.
Yeah, but anyway to get back to the cool point here, I think Trump is going to try to run for a third term. I don't know how it's good. I don't know how. I don't know what argument he's going to make. I know Republicans will go along with whatever it is that he says and try to make the case. I haven't been able to figure out what exactly strategy they'll deploy. Apparently they haven't figured out what strategy they'll deploy. But I one hundred percent think that he is serious
about this. I don't want to give up a power, and he doesn't want to be a lame duck. You know, midterm, right, they're going to get They're going to get schlacked in the midterms, Like they already know it. I mean, they already know they're going to lose the House at the least and it could be a bloodbath.
We're going to get a little.
Bit of a glimpse of that this week of just like how bad it could end up being for them, and if there's a session, if there's a stock market crash, all of those sorts of things. So midterms are likely to go poorly for them, and then you've got you know, Trump on his way out. This is an old man too, by the way, like we forget he'll be I think, eighty two in twenty twenty eight if he were to
try to run again, et cetera. But yeah, you could imagine Republicans starting to agree and maybe create a little bit of space and think about who's going to be next, and start positioning themselves and start trying to make the break, et cetera. I mean, you still see Ron De Santis doing a little bit of this already down in Florida. He doesn't want any of that. He wants to keep
a firm grip on power. Bannon has also said he believes Trump will be you know, arrested and imprisoned if once he's out of office, if he doesn't run for a third term again. Trump probably believes that as well, so he'll feel it as like ecxistential too, And so I do think they'll try to pull it off, and they'll use whatever tricks in the bag legal, illegal, constitutional, unconstitutional, moral, ethical, unethical, or you know, otherwise that they can to try to accomplish that goal.
It's look I've said before I want the twenty second Amendment to go away. I think it's anti democratic. It's one of those where, yes, as horrific as it may seem for many of our liberal viewers, like, it doesn't make any sense to term limit somebody if that's the person who is being democratically ratified. You also should remember that if Obama had been allowed to run, he almost certainly, at the very least it would not have been Hillary Clinton.
Would you beat Trump in twenty sixteen, I don't know, Okay, nobody will know for sure, and he probably would have had a better chance, I think, than Hillary Clinton because it was pretty close.
So it was close, right, and Hillary was a horrendous candidate.
Yeah, and if you just think about it, it was still popular.
If you just think about it. I mean, there's actually an argument you made that we would be living now in the last term of the Clinton administration if there had been no twenty second Amendment. Maybe not would have you know, it would have been the best, but we wouldn't have been in Iraq, so maybe it would have been Okay, true. No, It's like, listen, the twenty second Amendment has cost us a lot of really stupid presidents or or as actually sorry, given us a lot of
very stupid presidents. Bush is almost certainly one a result of that, and the yo yo effect of that is likely due to the twenty second Amendment. I mean, even if you go back to nineteen forty, if FDR had decided not to run for his third term, we could have been in a hole, in a very very bad situation, which was his argument there at the time. Yeah, anyway, I democratically am very against the twenty second Amendment. I mean, I don't have term limits in Congress. We're gonna have
term limits for the President's preposterous. It was just obviously done to screw over the legacy of FDR.
Yeah that's true.
Yeah, No, I mean, you know, I have a thoroughly unprincipled position on this, which is I also in theory.
Second, but this.
Guy didn't beat him.
This guy here ago, we gotta be done with this man. You can beat him there one last thing.
Put up C five on the screen, so you know, the public, like you got to.
Give them credit.
At the time when the media was all like, oh, Biden, he's fit as a fiddle and sharp as attack. What they were like come on, and a majority here are also like a very clear majority. I think those who think that Trump is not going to run for a second term, it's like thirty some percent, But in any case, fifty two percent are like, yeah, he's gonna try.
Yeah, he's gonna try.
And I think that's probably where the smart money is. He's out and noun saying it. So I don't know why we wouldn't take him seriously at this point, given that he's definitely meant many of the things that he has said here.
Coming into the second term.
Well we'll see. I will enjoy tracking this great. My hope is that they are able to pass a complete that they are able to amend the Constitution and to finally repeal this amendment. In fact, the trade I'll take is that we'll bring back prohibition and then we'll take this one away. So that's I did not that's the biggest mistake, the biggest mistake. We not going to take you prohibition. Yeah, that's right, this country school of drunks. But you know whatever, all right, you guys will get
over it, just like they did in Prohibition. Some people will figure it out and the overall drinking rate will go down. It was better for all of you. Sorry, it's true.