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 Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal.
Lots of things going on here in the world. So we've got some updates with regard to the markets and China in particular, saying that hey, we're not anywhere close to a deal. There aren't even talks going on so as of seven fifty six right now, futures are down, so we'll get into all of that. We've also got Jeff Stein joining with the very latest with regards to
the economic prospects and the trade war. We're also taking a deep dive into Trump's plummeting approval ratings, specifically with regard to some of the groups that he had really improved his performance among. We're talking about young men, we're talking about Latinos, how they are feeling about all of this, and significantly, how much tariffs are really weighing on his economic approval at this point. We're going to have an update on the very latest with regard to Ukraine where
the potential peace talks are. There a lot of moving parts there, so break that down for you. We're also taking a look at the continued crackdown on quote unquote anti Semitism, Jordan Peterson entering the debate and Dave Smith weighing in and responding to that, so that'll be an interesting one. We've got a bunch of updates for you with regard to the Trump administration's deportations and use of
the Alien Enemies Act. One thing that we wanted to take a look at this morning is ICE held a US citizen for ten days wrongly in detention, and they've now been caught and called out for just blatantly lying about the chain of events there. So we'll dig into that, and we're going to be joined also by Abdula El Sayed. He is running for Senate in the state of Michigan and he is the first major candidate to receive Bernie Sanders endorsement. That is going to be a heated primary.
Abdelah Sayad comes from the left of the party. He has said what Israel is doing in Gaza is genocide. He is for medicare for all, so really interesting to check in with him and see how his campaign is getting off to here in the early days.
That's right, We're going to talk to him.
And he's also got a pro Israel opponent who's already in the race, so it'll be interesting to see how that is.
She gets a lot of APAC money, Hailey Stevens.
So many people are saying, can.
An interesting matchup there in Michigan.
Yeah, we're just looking literally at the numbers, that's right. Yes, Before we get to that, thank you to everybody who has been signing up for premium.
We really appreciate you.
Obviously, we've had an awesome show week of shows, and we have another one tomorrow, the Friday Show. Just a reminder that that Friday Show does have some exclusive content for premium subscribers, so you can have access to that Breakingpoints dot com as well as with all of our ames and everything.
We really appreciate you.
If you cannot afford it, no worries, just go ahead and like and subscribe to this video, and or if you're listening to this on the podcast, take the link and send it.
To a friend. So there we go. All right, let's go ahead and get to tariffs.
As Crystal said, there has been some major movement Donald Trump, well, it appeared originally he was blinking on China. He's blinking again, but the Chinese may not be being very receptive to that blink. Here was some of the comments that he made in the Oval office. Let's take a listen.
I think most of them will, and I think we're going to treat him very fairly well guarded. Were you worried about what the one hundred and forty five percent tariffs were doing too small businesses there at the US that why you're bringing in No, no, no, I haven't brought it down. I haven't brought it so one hundred and forty five I haven't brought it down. I said, it's a high tariff. It is a high tear, but
I haven't brought it down. It basically means China's not doing any business with us, essentially, because it's a very high number. So when you add that to the price of a product, you know a lot of those products aren't going to sell. But Johina's not doing any business. They were doing they were doing one point one trillion dollars. Think of the one point one trillion dollars, you know
what that is. And it was just very unfair to us, and we were doing very little, relatively very little with them. It was a one side and very one sided.
But we get along.
I get along very well with presidency, and I hope we can make a deal. Otherwise, we'll set a price and hopefully they'll come here and they'll contribute, and if they don't, that's okay.
Otherwise they'll set a price. We'll see about that though, and what that price is. Let's get in some indications
to put this up there on the screen. Major discussions inside of the White House quote to cut levies by half in some cases, though Trump has yet to make a final decision, the Trump administration is considering actually unilaterally slashing its steep tariffs on Chinese imports, in some cases almost by half, some fifty or sixty five percent, and the administration is also considering a tiered approach similar to one proposed by the House Committee on China late last year.
Thirty five percent levees for items at the US deems not a threat to national security, one hundred percent for those deemed strategic interests. Perhaps the most important thing in this is actually that the quote the bill would propose phasing in these levees over a five year period, which would mean basically a complete change in the way that these tariffs are being implemented. From fifty to sixty five percent.
It would instead be a phase in period. Another way to describe that would be something that maybe you could have done from the very beginning without igniting massive market turmoil chaos, dropping freight traffic by some sixty to eighty
five percent. You know, Crystal, It's interesting. It appears that one of the things that really forced Trump's hand on this was a meeting with the CEOs of Target and Walmart where they told him, in no uncertain terms, sir, if you do not have a change to the status quo, we will have shortages on shelves in two weeks time, and that in one month to two months time you will see full blown price increase as well as massive
empty shells all across the country. And I think it was then that it set in for Trump what he actually had instituted and had done.
Yeah, and there even if today we get the announcement okay, forget it, we're rolling it all back, We're not doing this at all, there will still be very significant reverberating impacts.
And you know, we all.
Got kind of a lesson in this during COVID the way that a disruption does not You can't just snap your fingers and Okay, we're back to normal now and everything flows the way that it used to. So I was digging into some like transport and logistics Twitter this morning, and they were talking about the fact that it takes about thirty days to ship from China to la It's about forty five to Houston, it's about fifty five.
To New York.
So if you do the math on when Liberation Day started and when you're really going to have the you know, noticeable impacts in terms of what is coming in from China. Talking about the beginning of May. That's a week away where you're really going to start to see this show up in la first, and then you know, rippling across the country. Like I said, even if there's a rollback, you are going to have significant problems and it is going to take a while to untangle things.
Now.
That is before we even talk about the fact that China's out saying hey, there are no deal talks and if they want to talk, okay, that's fine, but we are not going to unilaterally submit to your bullying. And it seems like, you know, just to recap the sort of Trump administration position. First Trump comes out and says that it's not going to be one forty five. One forty five is very high. We're going to do something different, and that's the real signal of okay, they're completely backing
off of this. Then you got Scott Bessen out saying, well, we haven't really you know, he didn't say we're backing off the tariffs right now. Now you have this indication from China that there are not talks that are ongoing.
So there's a lot of you know, there's a lot of question marks about whether in fact they're going to move off this position in the immediate term, because it feels like the Trump administration soager is trying to get some sort of face saving capitulation from China, and China doesn't seem particularly willing to want to give them that. So we're at a bit of an impath right now, and it is totally unclear whether we are moving off of these extraordinarily high rates anytime soon exactly.
And let's put the next one, please up on the screen. This was from Scott Beston, who immediately actually walked.
Back of the Wall Street Journal report.
He said that Trump has not made any unilateral offer to cut tariffs, but let's just be very clear. If there is any back down from one point forty five for where things are right now.
It would be a unilateral cut.
One of the reasons though, that they're constantly trying to juice the markets is because they we see.
The riding on the wall.
We had bond yields almost go up to five percent just two days ago. It's come down slightly from there, but there has been and I repeat, there has been no negotiation with the Chinese. In fact, the Chinese are the ones who are making that very clear. Let's go ahead and put this video up on the screen. This was a video that was released by the Chinese Foreign Ministry. They say, we have said from Taiwan, tariff and trade wars have no winners. Protectionism leads nowhere. To decouple is
to self alienate. They continue, this tariff war is launched by the United States. We have made it very clear that China does not look for a war, but neither are we afraid of it. We will fight. If fight, we must. Our doors are open if the US wants to talk. If a negotiated solution is truly what the US wants, it should stop threatening and blackmailing China and
seek dialogue based on equality, respect and mutual benefit. So to keep asking for a deal while exerting extreme pressure, they say, is stort.
I'm waiting for the subtitle.
It's not the right way to deal with China and it simply will not work. So that was an important speech there given in Beijing by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and it indicates everything that I've also even heard from behind the scenes, where you know this idea that there are major talks happening like there were, let's say, with
the Japanese. It's just not reality, the only thing that is currently open in dialogue with China is routine diplomatic you know, routine like diplomatic talk, nothing.
To do with tariff or de escalation.
There has been only you know what, one phone call with President Shihinping and with President Trump the Secretary of Best end. There's been no high level meeting there that has happened. There's been no foreign exchange on the tariffs. And in fact, it's the Trump administration now realizing truly for the first time, what this is all going to
look like. I want to point everybody to an interview that actually just came out this morning by a guy named David wu and actually he was the former analyst over at Bank of America, just a Trump supporter, somebody who's supported not only Donald Trump but even renegotiation of trade. Something he warns of in his latest episode is that
you are going to see widespread disruption. Like you said, even if you back off today with shortages in shelves, price increases that will hit in the next two week, two month period. All of this is unavoidable, even if there was a capitulation tomorrow, which does not seem very likely.
And the really astounding part of all of this, and this does, I guess speak to the wisdom of the stock market, is that the reason why I have been paying attention here to the market is because of how much of leading and a real time indicator of what the future is expected to look like. And when you saw all of the retailers that are so heavily reliant on China and we see the freight traffic numbers just absolutely plunge, let's you know, I mean you said you
dug into the numbers. Let's really underscore for people what a sixty percent drop in freight traffic means, Like that is insane. That means that all of the routine just in time deliveries that people rely on are done. I mean the inventory the way that this could be a whole podcast of itself, in the way that justin time delivery and inventory cost has basically moved it to the
US businesses. They don't want to pay to be able to house a lot of the things they're taking up space to cost them, rant to cost them all these other things. So they rely on these just in time very very nimble supply chains, which are great for efficiency but terrible for being autonomous. Well, we didn't really change a lot of that after COVID. In fact, we got became more reliant on the Chinese. Our trade deficit went up. Now you may say, yeah, let's do something about it.
I agree, but guess what. It costs a lot of money coming from the United States government to be able to incentivize any of that, and we don't see a single dollar that has yet been appropriated for any of those purposes.
So this is about as bad as it gets.
And that's something that I appointing people to the David wu podcast because he is someone who supported the administration and supports many of the goals of the administration. He says, you cannot point to a single a single triumph economically from the Trump administration, from its stated agenda, from doze
huts to the trade war and his disapproval. These are serious people, you know, serious people actually want to see many of the things that Trump allegedly says that he wants to do and says that it's not happening.
Yeah.
I mean, Steve Bannon, you and I were both sharing in our DMS the Steve Bannon clip where he's like, hey, Doge, what happened you know, he's saying, we need an audit of DOGE, which is hilarious.
It's like, thinkgel Dave weigeltweeted.
You need a Department of Government efficiency monitoring the Department of Government and efficiency. But you know, he's basically acknowledging the thing that you claimed you were doing you completely failed at. And where's any sort of pentagon cuts, where's any sort of actual fraud? Like, okay, you canceled. This is now my word's not his. Okay, you canceled some programs that like you didn't like because of their ideological valance or at least your sense of their ideological balance.
But by any metric, even the metrics they set out, even with their phony inflated numbers, total and complete.
Failure and but real destruction.
And I mean it's kind of similar here with tariffs, total and complete failure, but real catastrophic destruction. And when you're talking about supply chains, you're talking about what are the prices they're going to be, what's going to even be available to consumers, what's going to be on the shelves, and you're talking about jobs. I mean, just if you taking the consumer side of it out of it, all together.
You know, the trucking industry is massive. Trucking, that's one of the top jobs for non college educated men.
That's going to take a huge hit. All of the people that.
Work at the ports and make sure that your goods are unloaded and brought to the stores. I mean, all of that is going to take a huge hit. Not to mention we covered yesterday, we already have If one of the supposed goals is to increase US manufacturing, you already have so many US manufacturers, including Stilantis, including two hundred year old paper mill that's having to shut its doors.
They're already saying, hey, we have to do lay like forget about investing more, we actually need to cut back now. Some of these companies use any excuse to lay off people. And I'm sure that's some of what is going on right now, but it's also a real estimate of the fact that the business climate has turned sour because of an intentional plan by the Trump administration. And just one more note on China, can put a five up on the screen here.
This is another indication that.
You know, if the US was like okay, well, some of these countries are going to have to pick between US and China. The writing is increasingly on the wall what direction they're leaning. The European parliaments a final stages of talks with China to remove sanctions on lawmakers. So just an indication of like thawing of relations there that could open the door to more direct negotiations between Europe and China and you know, improve trade relationships there as well.
But I do think China's role here is really important. You know, they sort of set the tone of hey, we're not falling in line here, we're not capitulating to this bully. We are going to hold the line. We're going to you know, we're going to retaliate. And they said, Okay, we're retaliated to a certain point.
That's it.
That's all we're going to do, and we're going to wait and see what the US does. I think if they had capitulated and offered concessions pretty quickly, I think you would have seen a lot of countries around the world likely to follow suit and also feel like, okay, well, if China can't stand up to them, like, what chance
do we have? And so I do think that China's posture is part of the reason why as of today, you know, eight twelve in the morning, April twenty fourth, we have zero deals that have been you know, that have been finalized, that are are crafted, that are anywhere near some sort of final state.
We have zero.
They're supposed to do what ninety deals in ninety days were at zero. So on every level, whether it's you know, the manufacturing job loss, whether it's the you know, the treasury yields going up instead of down that was another supposed goal here, or whether it's the idea of crafting all of these deals around the world. On every single level, even by their own stated metrics, this thing has.
Failed, right, And you know, I actually think their Japan was also a major leading indicator because this is a critical US ally and for them, they come to America and they're like, Okay, what do you guys want And they're like, well, what are you offering?
They're like, but what do you want?
And for them to go home and then for their prime minister. So I've come to understand a little bit more about this. The Japanese prime minister was a little bit on shaky ground. What he is now doing is actually standing up to Trump and the United States in parliament to shore up his political standing in the party and to basically have a nationalist rally around the flag where people are not going to capitulate to what they see as capricious US.
Behavior and demands.
At the very same time, are willing in this case to deal with what they see as this serious Chinese. Keep in mind, these countries hate each other, but for them it's about money, it's about seriousness, and for them, they don't see a current path forward with the administration which is realistic.
I also just got this.
This is this new statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry, literally just this morning. They say Beijing is now telling the United States you must completely cancel all unilateral tariff measures if it wants trade talks. The strongest comments yet from the Foreign ministry. Beijing says there are no economic and trade negotiations between China and the United States. That's confirming what I was saying earlier. Despite some recent signs
of softening on the issue. They say this is not sustainable and there must They say that unilateral tariff measures were initiated by the United States. If the US truly wants to solve the problem, it must completely cancel all measures against China and find a way to resolve differences through equal dialogue. So you can see exactly there they're saying, no, we don't care anything that you say. Nothing is on the table, no communications, no high level talks.
Cancel them or so be it.
And you know the reason why I think they're on stronger ground is they've been preparing this is going to be very relating to our Ukraine conversation. They have prepared for this for twenty years and they have especially prepared for this in the last five And then what they saw after the COVID crisis is look, they can read a poll. They could see how Americans were really upset about the you know, the Wuhan lab and about the virus.
They were preparing for any sort of decoupling. And so they, you know, with the one Belt, one Road initiative and the twenty twenty five plan from China over the last decade, have invested massive amounts of money into the domestics supply chain. Then they actually got to battle test what it looks like when the Western financial system decouples from another country
which previously had lots of ties, called Russia. And they got to sit there and observe the entire global financial system, how it interacts.
And what it does.
And in that period, they've now had years to build alternatives. They've had the Brick Conference, they've shored up the yond, They've made sure that they can go all around the world for bilateral negotiations and make sure that at least in their hemisphere that they can stand strong. They have enough capital reserves and domestic supply chain to be able to pump into the economy. Their population is frothing at
the mouth right now against the United States. The Chinese censors are basically allowing anything critical of the US to go massively viral inside of the country. And again all of this is directed specifically at us. They are very prepared, much stronger than we are right now, for any sort of preparation of a long term trade war. And you don't just think about here the visage of empty shelves in the United States of America and what that mean.
You know, for people remember the gas crisis. That's truly what destroyed Jimmy Carter. Chaos, That's what it all feels like.
Right, Yeah, no, that's right.
And I mean also just like on a human level, if you're China, and you're looking at our leadership and the way they're making decisions, you know, with this preposterous chart that doesn't make any sense and throwing tariffs on penguins and you know Lesotho, and I mean it's just idiocy from the start. Then you're reading the reporting about
how this is no four D chess. Trump was arm twisted by basically like a plot between Bessett and Lutnik, while Peter Navarro was on the other side of the building to change his mind on this, Like you just have to look at what's going on and say, these people are not serious, Like they're not serious. They don't have a plan, they don't have a strategy. It is just as dumb as it looks to be on the surface.
So yeah, I feel pretty good in my you know, head to head matchup against this like clown car of buffoons and sycophants. So I think there's you know, some of that as well, and I think we are It is very unclear how this ultimately gets resolved with China because when they say, look, you take the tariffs off
and we can talk, I think they mean it. I mean, they have been very sort of steadfast in their positioning and your right to point to Russia as really a you know, test run for what this could look like and how it will ultimately go. And it's not that Russia didn't suffer any consequences from the all out financial war that we wage on them. And it's not like our relationship with Russia is you know, the same, were
as extensive as our relationship with China. But they got to have a kind of a dry run and have to feel fairly solid in their position. And it is ironic, Sager, to your point, this is a separate apart from China. But the Canadians have their elections next week, and Trump has really revived liberalism around the world.
That's true.
Yeah, He's actually shored up a lot of the forces that he would hate, so like liberal internationalism is actually arguably stronger than ever, which is compan well, you know, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. All right, we've got Jeff Stein standing by to break down some more of this, specifically Powell and Trump's backing down on firing him.
Let's get to it.
Joining us now is Jeff Stein of the Washington Post, great friend of the show, to talk about his latest reporting and some of the developments on Trump's tariffs. Good to see you, Jeff, Thanks for joining us.
Hey, my bud, You're always happy to be on.
All right, So Secretary Scott Bessen, seemingly the quote voice of reason, at least according to Wall Street, in the room, giving some new comments about how he wants to be clear that America First does not mean America alone. A little bit different than some of the things he said previously. Let's take a listen, and we're going to get your reaction this morning.
I will explain how they can provide that leadership to build safer, stronger, and more prosperous economies all around the world. I wish to invite my international counterparts to join us in working toward these goals. On this point, I wish to be clear, America First does not mean America alone. To the contrary, it is a call for deeper collaboration and mutual respect among trade partners. Far from stepping back.
America First seeks to expand US leadership and international institutions like the IMF and the World Banks by embracing a stronger leadership role. America First seeks to restore fairness to the international economics system.
So, Jeff, what do you make of those comments in the.
Wake of you know, reciprocal, reciprocal, unilateral tariffs put upon the entire world taken off, the posture through which this has all happened in some pretty acrimonious negotiations.
You know, how does that fit with a lot of the reporting that you have from behind the scenes.
I thought it was funny that Charaty used that phrase because Pratish Secretary Jenet Yellen definitely no mega person, and twenty twenty one said quote America first must not mean America alone, which is almost exactly what.
The current puritary said.
I don't know if they realized that they had, you know, that's something almost exactly what their produce is or headsetter apposed. Just a coincidence, I think to your point, there have been a number of very high profile fights in the last sort of two or three weeks over the scope
of the tariff policy. And whereas previously Peter Navarro, who is the you know, uber hawk who wants more and more and more confrontation, more and more trade barriers, more conflict with our international economic allies, has was initially sort of carrying the day in the initial round of tariff debates, Vessant is actually sort of on the ascendants, and you can really see that in sort of the tone and the message he's conveying there, which is so contrary to
the actions that the White House was taking just a few weeks ago. I mean, we imposed unilateral tariffs on every country, essentially dozens and dozens of countries over seventy I think was the final number. And essence here is trying to unicate that, you know, that is not necessarily the way of the future, that what Navarro's success it was in the early days of the trade war may
not last forever. Of course, the problems we can discuss is that Navarro, that's uber hawk, you know, right next to Trump at all times, is still, you know, just just a breath away from power in the sense that you know, anytime Trump wants him or is feeling an impulse to hit another country with high tariffs, he can just call Peter or just invite him into the Oval. And so there's there's a real dissonance here between the
messages from Navarro and the messages from Vesson. Vestn't as all the sort of palace intrigue reporting shows, and as our reporting shows as.
Well, has had the upper hand in a range.
Of sort of policy debates in the last couple of weeks, and so I think that's being reflected in this public communication as well, where he's feeling inboldened to say things like the clip you played, got it?
Yeah, I mean it's hilarious after it. Not only the way they've approached the trade war. I mean a few weeks ago, Trump said something like we shouldn't even have supply lines right, like literally everything we're gonna have like this North Korea style, fully autarcic economy. And you have not only that, you've got threatening war against Denmark and Canada and Mexico and Iran and all these countries around
the world. Jade Vance going to Europe and lecturing them about free speech, and then you know, coming here and cracking down on college students who dare to say anything that they don't like about Israel. So you've had this incredibly adversarial approach around the world, and that rhetoric is
still coming from Trump in a lot of ways. I mean just yesterday evening he did this you know, Oval office press a veil and was still calling Trudeau the Governor of Canada, we can go ahead and take a listen to a little bit of that.
Trudeau like, well, Governor Trudeau affectionately, I asked him, why are we spending two hundred billion dollars to support Canada? It's a subsidized Candida, And he was unable to answer the question.
I mean, why are we doing that? And I have to be honest.
As a state, it works great as a nation, considering the fact that most of the nation, you know, ninety five percent of Canada. What they do is they buy from us and they sell to us. They sell to us if we didn't buy their oil, if we didn't buy the and we don't need their oil, more oil than anyone. But we don't need their oil, we don't need their level, we don't need their cars, we don't need anything. So I said, why are we doing this?
Why are we.
Spending two hundred billion dollars? It doesn't make sense.
So you still have Trump saying things like that. You also, I just saw Japan says, hey, we're not going to be part of any trade block that seeks to isolate China because our trade with China is too important. So in some ways, even if besant is, you know, in
the driver's seat right now. I feel like the damage is already done with the way that this administration has conducted itself, you know, globally, and also with the type of rhetoric that Trump still embraces and still clearly is like where his heart actually is at.
Yeah, I mean, I think the fundamental problem for them here in some ways that destn't and to some degree, Trump have clearly been totally spoofed by what happened, not really even primarily in the back market, about what happened in the bond market, which threatened to raise borrowing costs for tens of millions of Americans, a sudden economic shock which would be sort of visible and devastating and immediate, and for vest In clearly the goal of the last
few weeks after the Liberation Day Tariffs had to turn down the temperature to kind of get people to sort of like step back from the brink, to relax a little bit, so we can get had a breathing room for the economy, because he will be blamed if you know, this is the most catastrophic self inflicted economic you know, leadership in American history, which if the US just drove off the cliff into a recession. Many people wouldn't, you know,
legitimately say they had done. But remember obviously that Trump's entire sort of worldview is that you need to maintain maximal leverage over other people at all times, and that's how you get what you want. You sort of control them, you insult them, you make them think that you're kind of crazy, and who knows what you're going to do next.
So it's this sprinksmanship that is, you know, core to what Donald Trump has been saying about human nature, really like about the fundamental relations between people for decades, and that sense goal of turning down the temperature is just fundamentally incompatible with Trumpt's strategy of maintaining maximal brinksmanship through this style that you were alluding to, and it produces this, you know, as I said, in extreme dissonance between the president and his top economic advisor.
You know, I met yesterday with the.
Head of of you know, the economic team for a foreign country. And it's a kind of meaning like as a reporter, you're like excited to like hear what they're hearing, Like what message are they getting from Treasury or Commerce or the White House, and then you know, I can use that to like report on what's happening. And then I get to the meeting, and instead of them telling like me like what they're hearing, all they want to do is ask me what I'm hearing. And they're asking me,
like when can we get a deal? And I'm like, no, no, I asked you that question, like you're supposed to tell me. And it reflects like the fact that nobody knows, like even I get the sense that the trunk people like Bunk themselves know exactly what the president wants.
And in the absence of that knowledge.
It's really really hard to like prevent an economic collapse because I mean, I don't want to be too dramatic here, but like that there are real risks that the uncertainty that they're causing will push us into a recession where a lot of people get hurt. And even if that doesn't happen, it seems quite good they're raising the risks, you.
Know, Jeff.
At the same time, one of the like more maximal things that Trump had signaled was that he was going to fire Jerome Powell. You though, let's put aaight please up on the screen. You have some reporting from behind the scenes about how some of his top aides told him to tone down the attacks on Valley. Seems to have listened. He said, Okay, I'm not going to fire him. I never had any plans to do so. So what's
going on behind that? Because I feel like his decision making around the FED is important for us trying and at least understand his mindset with respect to tariffs or any of these other big things that he says.
Yeah, it's a tricky story because is you know, for months, I've been hearing you know that people who were talking to Trump, were talking to people who are close to Trump that he's been sort of saying, uh, like, how we should get rid of him.
I don't really like what he's doing.
And it's really hard to gauge the seriousness of that because, you know, I'm just like kind of grousing about how he doesn't like what Powell's up to.
It's really different.
Than like drawing up the plan and like hitting the big red button. What is clear is that over the last you know, I guess. On Monday, the Wall Street Journal reported on the rumors that we've been hearing as well for a long time, which is that Trump was talking about this, and in response to that Wall Street Ternel story, the markets tank.
And so after that sort of.
As that process was unfolding, the people who have been most concerned about the markets within the administration, maybe not Minister of the most concerned, but among the most concerns Better Secretary Vestment and Common Secretary Cowver Nick went to the President and said, you know, a you know, we
don't think that this might even be legal. So Trump could fire Powell, but then you could still remain there, so you would kind of get the worst of both worlds, and that the market, you know, would be really destabilized. I think the way someone put it to me was basically that you know, if they fire, if you fire Powell, mister president, like we cannot maintain all these fights simultaneously.
Like let's pick our battles a little bit. How is going to be gone anyway, I think in late twenty twenty.
Six, So just hold off on that for now.
Doesn't mean that Trump wasn't sort of grousing about the potential, but that suggests, you know, as you're suggesting Sacker, that there's there's a uh recognition here that they can't be fighting all battles simultaneously at all times. I guess that was redundant, but but there's a limit to how much they can fight. And I feel like that, you know, is a comforting thing. But how much have they already done? And how much is this genie out of the bottle?
I don't know if you guys have been seeing some of the shipping data, you know, given bookings found sixty percent between the quest of China. Consumer confidence now at its second lowest level in the last nineteen fifty two. So we're in this weird place right now where the hard economic data jobs and inflation and GDP are still looking totally.
Fine for the most part.
But it's this like soft data that measures that's sort of like more real and more in real time. But it's not as as macro and sweeping that looked that is flashing red.
And I think the White House is very aware of that.
Yeah, I mean, what is your assessment of that, Jeff, How much even if this is something Soccer and I were just talking about, even if they back away from everything now, how much damage has already been done? I've seen the comparison Joe Wisentheal and others making the comparison to basically like the COVID disruptions that led to inflation, that led to shortes that took so long to untangle. It's not like you can just snap your fingers and unsnarl all of these things.
Yeah, I've been kind of like referred to it as the yly e coyote economy, and the sense that like we run off a cliff and we are we have not looked down yet, Like we just don't know what is beneath us. Because as I was sort of trying to say, like the most important economic data is pretty delayed, which is frustrating for.
Reporters to get a good sense of what's happening.
I think, you know, there are reasons to think, you know, that it won't be you know, nearly as bad as two and eight or twenty twenty. Trade is hugely important to the US economy, but it's you know, fifteen percent of the economy is important to double it. Another fifteen percent is exports. That's thirty twenty five percent. You know, most of the tariffs on other countries have been pulled back, but it's really the China question that is the most
significant right now. Then again, they've exempted electronics, so maybe that will sort of bail them out a little bit. We have a story at scoop this morning about rare earth metals which don't ask me to name them because I couldn't, but they're sort of crucial component parts for semis and the defense industry and a huge range of healthcare functions.
Companies are telling.
Us that they're on sort of their last reserve the next month or so, and China has cut those off. That China has essentially a choke hold on this on these rare earths, or rather the processing of these rare earths, but just as well might as well be the production event, and that show point by China. It's a really really serious potential blow to the US economy, which the Chinese
know and are are full well exploiting. So I think, you know, given some of the soccer tone from Trump in the last few days, it it is quite likely that the White House is looking at economic data that is really not good.
And you know, it's.
A cliche, but like economics is extremely psychological. If I think that you're not making a purchase, then I'm going to wait for the price to go down, which means I'm not buying, which means the guy across the street will also not buy because he'll wait for the price to come down, and that's pretty soon.
How you have a really serious downturn.
Yeah, man, grim stuff.
But we always appreciate your reporting, Jeff, thank you, Hey, my pleasure, thanks for having on guys.
So as all of this unfolds, with the trade war and the anti Semitism quote unquote crackdown and the Alien Enemies Act and the court battles, we thought we would check in with how Trump is doing in general in the polls, but specifically with some of the groups where he really made gains viz. A VI his own past performance, but also Republican Party performance with some of these key demographs groups. And some of these numbers are really really notable.
Let's put this first one up on the screen, probably the most stunning, given how well Trump performed with young men. We have a new Harvard Youth poll and his disapproval with young men is now at fifty nine percent. Forty percent say that they are worse off now under Trump, that is versus twenty nine percent only that say they are better off. Forty seven percent, so almost a majority say that Trump will hurt the economy. And just back in January, sixty two percent actually approved of Trump on
the economy. So, Sager, you know, we can look at the election results and how he really outperformed with this group visa VI previous Republicans and vs V his own performance in twenty sixteen and twenty twenty. And we can also look at the way this group felt about him coming into the administration. There was a lot of hope that you know, we'd be a great president for business and he would help them economically. And you know, there
were some cultural alignments there as well. And just as quickly as he won some of these folks over, it seems like they have soured and are unhappy. I have to think that the trade war is just a gigantic part of that trade war.
Is massive, and so really when you dig into a lot of this stuff, you can actually see in the minute groups. Keep in mind, this is the Pew research, you know, the actual demographic pole, which is pretty good in terms of its substance. I mean, I will obviously give the caveat polls et cetera. With Trump have not
always been all that accurate. But I actually do think that on demographics like young men and on latinos, those were accurately captured in twenty twenty four, and a lot of them fit with the global data that we saw coming out. Now when we think again about the kind of the where things are headed across the globe, economic concerns, and broadly also around media, environment and top issues, a lot of this would track. So let's put the next one up on the screen, because we can dig even further,
I think into it. What you see here is a similar sharp dropoff of approval amongst Hispanics. In the Pew Research poll, twenty seven percent approved, seventy two percent disapprove.
Now, I mean I.
Should always put the caveat that there are many people who support Trump and or voted for him who actually disapproved of him, which is kind of an interesting dynamic. But considering that he's at least as far as we know, not going to be on the ballot again, the reason why I think that we should at least look here is that the dropoff and constituency can tell us a little bit about the issues that we are seeing can contribute to this. So one of them is deportation and immigration.
There's just no question if you ask people, especially issue by issue, what they approve most of of Trump. Even within immigration, it's about quote, border security, and it's about the drop off.
In the number of border crossings.
But when you start to get into El Salvador and specifically the Obrego Garcia case, you start to see this twenty seven to seventy two stuff begin to show up. Same on the young men, you know that you flagged. The reason why I think that one is more important is that young men and young women right now, and we're going to get to this in a little bit, are facing a absolutely devastating economic situation where you have high interest rates and now you have a frozen economy,
especially at a hiring level. So one of the things that I have heard privately from so many people who work in the Fortune five hundred is we have a de facto hiring freeze across the entire company.
That's really devastating.
Because it's April twenty fourth, as you and I are recording this right now, which means two three weeks from now, we have so many kids who are graduating from college and graduating from high school. Well that's exactly when you
enter the job market. I mean, this is basically akin to graduating in two thousand and nine, and so now they really are facing a frozen employment and or lower wages, you know, maybe less bonuses, which means that you're gonna have less money, less earning power, and you still face a very high cost of living in many of these
different places. So that type of economic procarity I think is really starting to set in for a lot of the younger guys in particular, who saw a lot of dissatisfaction you know, with Biden and felt like they really their concerns weren't being looked at. And I think in this particular case, they're beginning to see the exact same thing. Same with the stocks. I mean, you know, we've talked
about this. It's funny to make fun of. It's funny to talk about, like, oh, crypto, what did Kamma says, like crypto is a black mail issue or something, But like I do think it's undeniable that it is something that young people look at or we've got a cattail there in our in our it's undeniable that they're younger guys in particular, if we look at the robin Hood phenomenon and things like that are paying attention if not,
and or equity owners. And you've seen massive, you know, correction in the stock market, almost down by fifteen sixteen percent from the all time high in November after Trump was elected. So there is just no question that there has been both a shift in terms of quote the vibe, which you know warned about at the time. I mean, so you can live and die by it, but really
at a material level, you're seeing the reduction. People can see the riding on the wall, and they're beginning to express their dissatisfaction.
Yeah, I don't think there's any doubt about it. And I just think about the experience of millennials graduating into the Great Recession and the way that that that combined with the Iraq War, shaped the politics of the millennial generation. Millennials are you know, one of the most left wing generations in American history, and you know, there, I think gen Z was really up for grabs. And I would say, you know, my sense of this generation is they're not
enamored with either party. Let's be honest, Democrats have a lot of work to do if they're going to affirmatively win over young men, because it's one thing for young men to say, you, now this Trump thing, this doesn't really working out the way that I wanted to it too, it's another thing to say, like, okay, but this other party is offering something that is superior and that you know, is appealing to me and my life, and I think is going to is going to sorry the cattle, misspell,
going to actually improve my material circumstance. So you know, this is far from a victory done deal for Democrats, but it just shows you, Sager, these groups are up for grabs. You know, people are not autumatized.
I do there.
Look, there are people who are highly polarized, and they're voting for Trump it doesn't matter what he does, or voting for the Republicans or voting for the Democrats, no matter what come hell or high water. But I think one of the major failures of political scientists over the past I don't know, since I've been following politics, has been to underestimate how much people genuinely can shift over you know, one election cycle, two election cycles, a couple of presidential terms.
It is remarkable.
And so I think with Latinos, they felt like, Okay, I was doing better economically in the first Trump administration, Let's give this guy another shot. We'd seen the numbers creeping up. We'd seen the sort of realignment in general where non college educated voters because of cultural issues as well as this sense that Trump's the businessman and will do better economically, had been shifting along ideological lines. But none of that is set in stone. You know, all
of it can be unraveled. And so for Democrats, the nightmare scenario was always that, Okay, you're going to lose the young generation, and you're going to lose if you continue to lose working class voters, non college educated voters across demographic groups, and you really have this full realignment,
you're done. Your permanent minority party. And so Trump has created an opportunity, you know, with the trade war in particular, where unlike the Great Recession, where sort of both parties had some blood on their hands in terms of creating that economic climate, and there was some bipartisan blamed to go around, etc. With this, and it's really clear cut. If you're graduating high school, if you're graduating college into the climate, you know exactly where to lay the blame
at this point. And you know, we've also got we can put up some of these additional numbers from Q research that just shows the way that his numbers are declining on issues across the board. So even on his best issue, which is immigration, even there he is underwater on the question of make good decisions about immigration policy, and that's his strongest one. Then you've got you know, negotiate favorable trade agreements, not doing well, handle public health emergency,
god forbid, make good decisions about economic policy. He's ten points underwater on that. I mean, you know, these are extraordinary things for Trump, where economics has always been his strong suit. And make good decisions about foreign policy. We'll talk more about that in the Ukraine block, but you know he's significantly underwater there as well. And then on just basic competence. We can put the next piece up on the screen. You can see the different demographic groups
and their headline. Here is his approval rating is underwater among most groups. Basically only Republicans and Trump voters are the ones who remain largely positive. And this is where you can see, you know, that number with regard to Hispanics. You can see where black voters are, you can see where men are, where women are, where each age group is. The age group that he continues to do the best with is basically like gen Z gen X rather I guess, but even there he is still underwater. So you know,
there's a lot. I mean, I wouldn't even say warning signs at this point. It's just really clear that the trade war in particular has been devastating for him, and even on the issues where he was previously strongest, which would certainly be immigration, because of the way that he has, you know, the way he's gone about this and then just like undeniably awful and cruel and also do process
undermining direction that he has taken. Even there, people are saying, you know what, this is not this is not what I want.
Yes, exactly.
Look, I mean I think it really comes down to chaos and process, and this is where having people who are competent and smart matters, you know, in not doing things. And I mean, we're going to talk about this ice thing later on. It's like they just lie, like they just lie about stuff, They make things that they have
no confidence in the process. And then going forward, can any serious person who is defending any of this really come back and say, well, the government says, it's like, that's a joke, right, And it's one where it tells you that many people who are casual observers and may even support these things in principle, have very little confidence and faith in the credibility of what the President and
the administration says. From immigration and trade, which again are two issues where he usually does pretty well, I do want to highlight this before up on the screen.
This was a huge recession indicator to me.
Is quote, the competition to get into law school right now is brutal. It's the exact same thing that happened in two thousand and nine. I'm comparing it also to Georgetown University here in Washington, which has received literally more applications ever than in its entire existence. Just this year, number of applications also to the other two hundred law
schools up by over twenty percent. The reason why is that a lot of students facing the job market that I just described, say well, maybe I'll just go into law school for three years and hope that things are better.
I would definitely caution a lot of people to do that.
With the rise of AI and with two hundred thousand dollars in debt that you might have on your sheet, but that was one we're just looking at that.
I was like, hmm, there's something going on here.
It's very clear about the lack of faith that people have in the job market, especially for people who are credentialed graduating from college.
You also found this. This is amazing. This is an old.
School BuzzFeed style article which now has recession indicators that people are noticing. Are we look, this is not one hundred percent serious, but it is actually really funny.
So they put together these twenty three subtle ones.
One was five dollars blackjack tables at the Aria in Las Vegas. Plumbers showing up on time, Italian sandwich shops and prime locations, struggling, more students in the master's and PhD programs in law school, companies moving overseas, real estate, ghost towns, a lack of botox, empty strip clubs, big lottery.
Jacklut it's got to be a big one, the empty strip club.
Yeah, they made that whole movie about it, Hustlers that the Jalo movie. It's actually a great movie.
Yeah.
Yeah, about two thousand and nine, big lottery jackpots, fixeder cars on Facebook, used guitar surplus, home cooked lunches, owners sold cars, a lack of work, injuries, availability at the vet, big company cost reductions, advertising to people who have already bought something, short fast food lines, card collections on sale, parking at Costco where there's plenty of parking on a Saturday, loan denials, declined payments, and finally the direct tariff effect, which is increased prices.
Now take all of that.
For my own personal anecdote is talking to my barber and he says people are waiting longer in between haircuts to come, and usually they would do every three weeks.
Now they're waiting five.
And he was like, man, I can already tell you we're seeing a reduction across the board and are a number of customers.
So take for that what you will.
No, I mean, all these little signs like they do add up. Listen, I haven't been to Costco in a little while. If I show up at Costco on a Saturday and that parking lot is MCI, I'm gonna know some shit is going down.
There is no doubt about it whatsoever.
Even in a recession, I would not dare go to Costco on a Saturday that's the absolute worst time to go.
But yeah, all of these, all of these are signs.
People people are, you know, picking up on it the equities market, perhaps talking to people at work dealing with their industry. If you're a trucker and you start to see the number of freight that's come in go down, you know what that means for you, which means what you start to save cash if you have some rack up, some credit card debt. We're seeing the credit card debt reach highs. Credit card companies are warning Wall Street saying
that we are seeing delinquency rise across the board. So there's a lot of a lot of things you could see right there. All right, let's go ahead and get to you.
So go ahead.
Well I was just going to say, I, well, number one, I'm at war with my cat over here. But number two, I saw a survey that found a majority of Americans say that their personal financial situation is getting worse, and that is actually a higher We didn't even have a
majority saying that like during the Great Recession. So outside of the goofy like you know, the strip club or whatever, we have a lot of real indicators that people consumers are pulling back, that people are worried, and that businesses are pulling them back, and that layoffs are beginning. And you know, so if you think things look politically ugly for Trump right now, not that that's the most important thing, but they're going to get worse.
At the same time, there's been some major movement with respect to Ukraine. President Trump and his team signaling that the next two weeks is a critical period for Russia and for Ukraine to come towards a peace deal that's been outlined by the administration. The Vice President on the ground in India actually gave him out line with respect to the administration's position.
Let's take a listen.
We've issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it's time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process. I think that we've put together a very fair proposal. We're going to see if the Europeans, the Russians, and the Ukrainians are ultimately able to get this thing over the finish line.
Again.
I feel pretty optimistic about it. I think everybody has been negotiating in good faith, but it's now time. I think to take, if not the final step, one of the final steps, which is at a broad level, the party saying we're going to stop the killing, We're going to freeze the territorial lines at some level close to where they are today, and we're going to actually put in place the kind of long term diplomatic settlement that hopefully will lead to long term piece.
Just to clarify, so you want the current lines of war in the war and you create to remain the same under your proposal.
No, no, I didn't say that. What I said is the current line somewhere close to them is where you're ultimately, I think, going to draw the new line in the conflict. Now, of course that means the Ukrainians and the Russians are both going to have to give up some of the territory they currently own. There's going to have to be some territorial swaps.
So that was ahead of what is now even further developments. Let's put this next part please up on the screen.
C three.
This was an initial reaction from the President after some statements by Zelenski. Now, specifically, what Zelenski and Trump here are sparring around is the US potential de facto recognition of Crimea and specifically also the Ukrainian uh basically acceptance of that. So quote talks and the war in Ukraine are stalled, leaving Trump frustrated and blaming Zelensky for failing
to accept. A peace plan of meeting Wednesday in London that was billed as a make or break moment for the talks fizzled after the Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff just cancel their plans to attend. This was after Zelenski pushed back against a proposal for a peace deal that Washington would de facto recognize the Russian sovereignty over the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia has occupied since
two thousand and fourteen. Trump criticized Zelenski for his comments, pointing out that Ukraine itself was being asked to recognize Crimea as Russian. It is quote inflammatory statements like Zelenski's that make it so difficult to settle this war. Trump said in one of his truth social posts, I should know Zelensky. Interestingly enough, it hasn't aired yet, Crystal, but he did sit down with Ben Shapiro recently. The interview will air I think sometime today. So I'm actually curious
to see what the guy has to say. He did admit that the Oval Office meeting did not go well for him and for Ukraine. But what this does show us is that Trump is in a very difficult position. You have Zelensky Parwai couldn't be solved in twenty four hours right before before he took office. Zelenski here, he won't even say that he's going to accept Russian occupation of Crimea, which has been the status quo for eleven years now. Russia also is not necessarily accepting a ceasefire.
In fact, just this morning, let's put this please up on the screen, the Trump truth quote, I am not happy with Russian strikes on Kiev. Not necessary, very bad timing, Vladimir stop. Five thousand soldiers a week, are dying. Let's get the peace steel done. In fact, despite all of his peace deeal talk, Russia actually greenlit air strikes on the capitol in Ukraine for the first time apparently in
many months. I mean, what that does tell us is that the Russians both are not necessarily accepting the credibility of this so called like US peace steal come forward. The Ukrainians as well, seem, in my opinion, very naively to believe that the Europeans will be able to prop them up for a continuing war.
It's just not reality.
I mean, over sixty or seventy percent of their military aid comes directly from the United States. European aid is like humanitarian and economic, that's nothing whenever it comes to actual guns and to weapons. So the two tides actually
seem more irreconcilable than ever. And you know, one of the things that I've really been thinking about, Crystal is that because this is such a titanic foreign policy effort in and of itself, the administration cannot put the due amount of attention that it needs to when the Secretary of State and Steve Wikoff are also dealing with of ceasefire you know, potential cease firing, Gaza negotiations there, you know,
negotiating ninety odd trade deals across the world. And so with their lack of attention everywhere, it creates a vacuum through which there's not enough seriousness. There's also not enough attention, i would say, from US policymakers around this, and in the absence of that, you're actually going to have the worst of all worlds, which is an intransigent Ukraine and an intransigent Russia, which would actually mean more conflict and
would potentially drive us even further into the brink. If the Russians feel that they can get away with something, you know, potentially really crazy with Trump's attention elsewhere, same with the Ukrainians, they may say, screw it, this is our very last effort. You know here right now, we're going to go all in and next who knows, you know what kind of situation that would.
Put us in.
So the chaos and the uncertainty within this even though look, I think people who watch the show, no, I think this piece deal is eminently reasonable for the Ukrainians because they don't have another choice. The other choice is to continue to fight and to die, which they literally cannot do without US supporter weapons.
It's not good for us. I don't think it's particularly good for them.
But the problem for US is it seems that we're not actually putting the amount of hard work and detail to be able to enforce or bring about something like this, and there's a massive vacuum of uncertainty, and within that there's actually a lot of danger that we can see right now.
No doubt about it.
And we all know, we've all seen the way that these conflicts can just sort of be put on the back burner and drag on in definitely, and I think we're really in danger of that right now, because increasingly that'll be the easiest option, and certainly for the weapons makers, that's the most profitable option. So there are plenty of interests that would be happy to see, you know, no peace deal come together and just sort of like continue
the status quo in perpetuity. And you know, there's there's political risks here for Trump as well, because while him attempting to pull together a peace deal is very popular, the idea of pushing Ukraine, whether we want to admit it or not, the idea of pushing Ukraine to give
up territory is very unpopular. So winding down these wars is always a very difficult political position, something that I think Trump himself has demonstrated some understanding of, and so that cuts against really pushing for a peace deal here as well.
You know.
The thing that is really just shows how far apart the two parties are is the resistance from Zelenski and Ukraine to even consider the acknowledgment of Crimea at this point. I mean, Russia had taken over Crimea even before this
current war. And so if you aren't even willing to consider that or put that on the table, like what are you going to do about Dunboss, let alone the other Russian conditions which really may be above and beyond what the Ukrainians would be willing to accept, things like you know, we're not going to allow any sort of peacekeeping force within the country, whether it's NATO or whether it's the EU or anyone else. We're not going to accept that. Certainly, NATO membership has to be off the table.
I mean think that's just like an absolute given at this point. But it doesn't seem like either party is really interested in these sort of significant concessions that would need to be made, and Russia striking Kiev, I mean that is that sense as big of a signal as anything else of like, listen, we can keep going. We you know, we're in have the upper hand here, and we don't particularly feel the need to bend to any of these terms or get anything less than what would be ideal.
In our view, right, And then that's the difficulty of this that you also pointed to Trump by negatively polarizing himself on everything, has probably made the Democrats, who probably just learned about Ukraine after their Oval Office meeting, more
dug in than ever, which you're exactly right. I mean, look, America has this extremely naive belief that we can just be the great policeman of the world and we can just prevent all of this territorial acquisition in Ukraine, a country which we have no treaty obligation to, which doesn't matter to us literally at all, not even a democracy. I've heard, you know, everyone's heard my spiel. Now at
this point it doesn't matter. The truth is is that a peace deal would not likely be popular because again, you have a lot of boomers who still have some Cold War style mentality where they're like, oh, that's just completely unacceptable. Why they have such an emotional attachment to this conflict I will never understand. But the point is is that what we are trying to do, it was
already on shaky ish ground. Now obviously Americans had mostly come around to military you know, stopping military aid to Ukraine, or we're roughly in a place where they thought we had given too much It's a different thing though to actually see actual de facto Russian occupation, and you have to be very sensitive in the way that you handle that.
And right now we don't really see. The other thing that the administration has said is oh, we're just going to walk away from this, and it's like, well, what does that mean, because if you were going to walk away from these quote peace deal, that would actually be good for Ukraine in fact, because for them already right now the weapons.
Continue to flow.
When we quote walk away, what we would really be walking away from is diplomatic negotiation and pushing for the settlement with Russia. If we just walk away and the status quo maintains and Ukraine continues to get the weapons shipments every single month, and the battle lines continue to go and it's just a protracted and a long conflict. And then saying for the Russians, if we walk away, they also get to continue.
They're slow march forward.
So I don't yet see a true incentive for negotiation that's been put on either side. I mean, look again, let's underscore the Ukrainians are delusional if they can't even accept you know, crimea Russian occupation of crimea for at a de facto level, not even an official level. What the hell else are we even doing here after over
a million people have been killed. But if that's really where they are, you know, democratically and both democratically in terms of popularity and at the leadership will level with Zelenski, then you know, I don't even know what to say to them at this point. Like if they truly want to fight it out and believe it should be like a war of annihilation, then that maybe that's a choice that they want to have. That's not something that I
think we should accept and or push for. But you know, that's where on the administration side, I just don't see the level of attention and detail that's actually happening here that could bring any sort of rap to this conflict. Considering how much other BS that all top level negotiators
are currently dealing with. They have to deal with Japan, with China, with you know, with Israel, with the now with Russia, it's like, you can't it's impossible, honestly be able to do this with the level of care and detail that you need. And that's what I'm worried about, is the vacuum because within that vacuum and the uncertainty.
Just think it'll be a disaster.
Yeah, No, that's a really I think excellent point that I hadn't really thought through. Is because they've basically, you know, gone to war with the entire world and started all sorts of conflagrations and are involved in all sorts of complex negotiations, including supposedly negotiating trade deals with like ninety countries around the world. Look, you just have finite resources, especially finite resources in terms of the type of top
level talent you would need to resolve this situation. Because Trump's bluster about I'll solve it within twenty four hours notwithstanding, like we always knew that was preposterous, because the fact of the matter is it's a very difficult situation to untangle at this point. There are no good or ideal answers at this point. And you know that was that's always been the horror and the tragedy of the Biden administration's approach and their desire to block piece deal, you know,
at the beginning. But we are where we are at this point, and you know, resolving this will be an incredibly difficult feat They Trump rarely you know, he now has recently started talking about Ukraine War, but often there were long stretches where he wasn't even talking about it.
Doesn't seem particularly focused on it, you know, the trade deal seems to be much more of his particular obsession, and so it's hard to see how we get more than just to continue to muddle through and maintain the status quo in the near future.
Yeah, I would say that the most likely scenario when your lack of attention is there is just continued weapons to Ukraine and continued Russia. Right, that is the that's actually easiest for everybody. The Ukrainians get to maintain their facade of fighting. They're just going to continue slowly dying and bleeding their country.
We and our.
Women's weapons manufactures. Oh it's nothing, you know, and not by the way, where's ewon, where's DOJE on the Ukraine War and everything that we continue to fund there? And then for the Russia, they don't care at all, you know, you know, this is the backbone of their economy. Their entire population basically at this point supports the war. Or you know, the disson in factions and all that people had such great hopes for hasn't materialized. Putin is stronger
than ever. If anything, you know, a lack of negotiation, it works to his benefit. He can just keep rolling forward. They push the Ukrainians out of Russia after they did their little invasion, they've actually seized even more territory. I mean, if you see, you know, broad collapse generally of what of what at least you know, any Ukrainian offensive strength, and year after year it's actually probably to the Russians advantage to sign sign no peace deal.
They wouldn't you know, they wouldn't love to keep doing that.
But at the same time, you know, it's not I just don't see again the proper conditions and this so called walk away, I just don't think that it's gonna work.