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, and welcome to Breaking Points.
Good to see Emily.
I'm back.
I'm so sorry to the haters.
Three three Lady shows in a row. If the audience can handle it.
We did say that Ryan is going to have to compensate with extra masculinity this week.
Yeah, so he's mentally preparing for that. Tomorrow we have Should I reveal the special Small Liberty guestos Absolutely so, Tim Miller of the Bulwark, so we can talk about, you know, his evolution, which I'm curious to hear him talk about and get his, of course opinion on news of the day, and he and me have some disagreements about where the Democratic Party should head from here, so it should be fun.
I'm looking forward to it.
Yeah, because he's really a convert. He's not just another Trump Republican. He's actually like had an ideological transition really to the left, at least the center left and not the left left.
So he's a fascinating story. This was really exciting. He's also fun, and he's I don't know, a great sense of humor.
Yeah, so I don't know him at all.
So I'm looking forward to, you know, having a dialogue with him and see where that goes.
Dialogue.
Okay, tune in tomorrow for dialogue.
I love everybody.
Why we put in the headline Crystal dialogues with Tim Miller. That'll be a hot hot take care of that one.
I would still click, I would still click.
Thanks em, appreciate that you and my mom, thank you. Okay, there is a lot of breaking news this morning we have. I don't think he can call it a China deal, but a major step back from the terror regime. Some may call it complete capitulation, but we get we talk through the details of what.
We know after those meetings.
We've got big news coming out of the Middle East as President Trump has the region this week. Confirmation that we are now indirect talks with Hamas and a US American citizen hostage is going to be released as sort of like a you know, attempt by Hamas sign of good faith, something of that nature. So Jeremy Scale is going to join us to break down.
All of that. He has some new reporting, so always great to talk to him.
Yeah, No, I mean, he has fresh reporting, so we're going to get updates straight from Jeremy in just a bit, so make sure stay tuned for that.
Yeah.
We also have Steven Miller floating the suspension of Habeas Corpus, so that seems pretty significant. We have President Trump out with a big truth social about prescription drug prices.
This is big. This is big. We'll see what happens.
Maybe, I mean he did, we can talk about it. He did the same thing basically in the first term.
It's just an executive order locked in.
Yeah, right, so it may not be something you can do by executive order.
It likely is not.
Although I think Roe Khana has legislation on that front. So there might be some I think they could do through Congress if Trump has the will and if Congressional Republicans want to get on board, and that is a big.
Giant if there. In addition, we have a new Kanye West song. I regretted inform you it is everything you would expect it to be at this point in his.
Life and career.
And I recorded yesterday an interview with the mayor of Newark. He is the one who was arrested outside of that ice facility, charged with trespassing.
He of course denies the charges.
Trump administration is now threatening the three Democratic members of Congress who were there at that ice facility as well, with threatening them with arrest and claiming that they assaulted ICE agents who were there, Federal agents who were there. So in any case, I asked him all the questions about that, his timeline, what his experience of what went down there was as well, and we had some video too that we.
Could take a look at.
And then after the show for our previous subscribers, Emily and I are going to be doing that AMA live, So if you want to participate in that Breakingpoints dot Com, thank you so much to everybody who has been signing up and supporting the show, making that Friday show happen, which I personally really enjoy doing so it's really fun so much.
Also, you and Kyle last week just taking the second half, and.
It was like cathartic, I think for everyone, was it? Yeah, you know, it's fun.
Like the opinions are divided on that, but yeah, no, I enjoyed it. I'll enjoyed it, of course.
I mean it would be bad if you did it was worse.
That would be a bad side. So in any case, thank you for supporting us and making that happen. And thank you guys also to those of you who are just liking, sharing, subscribing, all of that really makes a big difference as well. So with that, let's go ahead and get into what we know about these China talks. All right, guys, we have some huge news with regard to the Trump Administration's trade war visa the China, in particular,
where negotiators met over the weekend. In particular, the specifics as we know them are there's going to be a ninety day pause on the full hundred and forty five percent tariffs that have been levied against China. China is going to drop their teriff right for US down to ten percent. We are going to drop our tariff rate on China down to thirty percent. Truman administration officials, we're out making the case for this temporary pause and deal.
Let's go ahead and take a listen to that, Joe.
This is going to go where the President wants it to go. I was in touch with him over the weekend, and he wants free trade, free and fair trade. We've had free trade and as you said, that has not worked for the American people. There's something called the China shock which has gutted our manufacturing sector. And China has
a different form of government for us. They have a different economic model where they subsidize labor, they subsidize capital goods, and they have exported that to US and the rest of the world. We have put up tariffs to push back on that. So it will be a matter of what is the equilibrium level on tariffs and also getting China to open their markets for American companies because China actually has a low terraf regime, but it is the non tear of trade barriers that can be the most
difficult to overcome. So we will be focusing on the non terar of trade barriers and the subsidies, and the idea the China can become more open to American business and the things that are sold into the US can not have the same level of subsidy. And no one wants to do a generalized decoupling, but we are going to do a strategic decoupling because we realized during COVID
that efficient supply chains were not secure supply chains. So with steel, with semiconductors, with medicines, with a couple of other strategic categories, we are going to have to become self reliant again.
So Emily he's calling this a strategic decoupling. We's gone put New York Times up on the screen. We've got a great chart here showing the levels. First you had ten percent, then you had twenty percent, then you had fifty four percent, then you had one hundred four percent, Then you have one hundred and forty five percent. I'm just going to read a little bit of this article as well, so you can hear the specifics as we know them.
At this point.
The US and China said Monday they reach an agreement to temporarily reduce the punishing terrorists they've imposed on each other while they try to defuse the trade war threatening the world's two largest economies. In a joint statement, the country said they would suspend their respective terifts for ninety days and continue negotiations they started this weekend. Under the agreement, the US would reduce the tariff on Chinese imports to
thirty percent from its current one hundred and forty five percent. Well, China would lower its import duty on American goods to ten percent from one hundred and twenty five percent. We concluded that we have a shared interest, said Treasury Secretary Scott Besson at a news conference in Geneva. The consensus from both delegations is that neither side wanted a de coupling, he said, So this is really being interpreted as I mean, I think you have to call it effectively a capitulation
on the part of the Trump administration. And some of the numbers Emily that came in that I think have to impact them is number one concern over the bond market, concern over the stock market and how dowur things were looking there. But in addition, China seemed much more able to withstand this extraordinary trade war than perhaps the Trump
administration anticipated. We covered mentioned last week, numbers just came in that actually showed Chinese exports rising even as these punishing tariffs had been levied against them, so that indicated that they were kind of in it for the long haul. They took some initial retality to reactions, including you know, what are the things they instituted export controls on these rare earth minerals that are really critical. I'm seeing some indications on Twitter, but I don't have it confirmed yet
that those are actually going to stay in place. But they get to a certain point where they said, basically, we're not going to do anything else, and you're going to have to come to us when you're ready, when
you're ready to act responsibly here. And I think the Trump administration really between the stock market, the bond market, and also the Chinese government's ability to withstand these tariffs better than they had previously expected, that they needed to act or there was going to be an imminent economic catastrophe complete with shortages, empty shelves, you know, inflation. And it's also not clear that all of that will be forestalled because thirty percent terrace is still a very high number.
I was going to say, yeah, I think whether this is the capitulation is going to play out of the course of the next ninety days, because this is a ninety day pause, and if you are a small business owner, that's still really terrifying.
That's still a lot of uncertainty.
I'm perfectly prepared and eager to be pleasantly surprised by this. I think the idea of a strategic decoupling is directionally exactly accurate the confusion and chaos that rained for a
couple of weeks after Liberation Day. If it goes down in the ANNAWSI of history as being a month of of chaos and confusion that led to a quote unquote strategic decoupling, it's interesting to see Best saying, on the one hand, we realize we have multiple multiple interests that align, and that at the same time, nobody wants to do a general decoupling, so we're doing a strategic decoupling.
It's really interesting.
And his number here is that both sides de escalated by quote one hundred and fifteen percent.
That's more from his interview on Morning Joe.
Very interesting. By the way they sent Scott Besson onto Morning Joe. The day after this announcement is made, he was on Bloomberg as well, I think, But for him to go on Mourning Joe is actually pretty interesting to make a big trade announcement.
Yeah true.
I mean, we'll put that aside for now.
So what this actually accomplishes, I just think is still completely out in the open. For the next ninety days, I hope is good. But ninety days from now.
We could be we could be back where we work tomorrow.
Let's say the ninety day pause becomes an eighty nine or a one day pause.
You know, like we actually still don't really know.
Yeah so you so, yes, you still have a high level of uncertainty that hangs over this whole trade war. Charles Gasparino, who's the Fox Business senior correspondent and who's been the beneficiary of a lot of leaks from the Trump administration, so he's been really important to read. He says, breaking Trump Ray's tariffs on the world, the market's, particularly the bond market, which we need to finance our debt.
Rebelled Trump then was forced to back off end of story film at eleven of the present, spinning this is a major victory Okay, sorry, I couldn't help myself. But what we've seen is a little lesson on how markets exert their power when you have to depend on them, as we still do. And remember it's really the budget deficit that's causing the trade deficit, and we need the budget deficit to maintain our standard of living. You can't go to trade war with the world without bad stuff happening.
So this is someone who's been you know, very sympathetic, I would say to the Trump administration. He's on Fox Business, so he has those ideological inclinations, saying basically Trump folded night.
I think you have to look at it. Definitely a free trader for sure. Yeah, true.
I think you have to, though, look at it in that light, just given the fact that there really was not much here in terms of quote unquote face saving gestures, even from the Chinese government. You know, there was some discussion of fentanyl and you know, some talks about how they may do more to curb the you know, production export of the ingredients that go into making fentanyl. So there was some discussion around that. That's really about it.
So the Chinese government's calculation that they could basically do nothing and that the Trump administration would have to fold and come to them to back off of This ends up pretty much being correct. Now again, that doesn't mean that I think the most dire possible circumstances of a complete economic collapse, I think that will likely be forestalled by this announcement and scaling back, because when you are talking about one forty five percent, you are talking about
a complete cutoff. And you all know how many things that we need in this country that you have in your own households that are made in China. So that is forestalled called you know, so the very worst of a potential economic calamity at least gets pushed off for the moment. But we also shouldn't underestimate that thirty percent. I mean, if you think of like if they directly hiked your taxes thirty percent or even ten percent, that
is really significant. So if we had started Liberation Day, if we'd well, I think what was the initial tariff that was announced on Liberation Day Visa v.
China.
It very quickly escalated.
But if we had started from a position of thirty percent across the board tariffs on China, that was more than what Trump ever floated during his campaign. So it's still quite a high and very significant number. And I think you still have to worry about the inflationary impacts both of this thirty percent tariff on China and the ten percent tariffs that you know are sort of across the board. Howard Lutnik was out saying effectively that he thinks ten percent may just be the going rate tariff
rate going forward. You know that alone could have significant inflation effects. But there's no doubt some of the most potential catastrophic fallout here should be forestalled by walking away, by deciding by effectively blinking visa via this trade war with China. One last thing, Emily, before I get your reaction too, is I think it's also an indictment of the strategy that they deployed, of pissing off everyone in
the world going into this. You know, if this really is about China, then you would want to have Japan on your side. You want to want to make sure Europe's on your side, you want to make sure Canada is on your side. You know, you would want to
gather your allies and have some sort of unified front. Instead, those allies were increasingly uniting against you and with very few exceptions, actually sort of holding the line together in a relatively unified front that also made the position fundamentally unsustainable from the American perspective.
I want to say also, I mean, there will be a lot of people coming out afterwards if if let's say ninety from now, this is fine. Things have stabilized, and you know, maybe if you're a free trader, you're still upset with us, but things are stabilized and they aren't the you know, chaos that people felt on April second Liberation Day. There will be a lot of people saying, you know, you were Trump was right all along, the
haters were wrong once again. But I think also in this case it's very clear that the haters put up guardrails, not I think the good faith haters, let's say on the right at least probably convinced people like Bessn't and Trump himself to take another look at the execution of
these policies. Now, the ten percent tariff was, before it was actually implemented, seen as insane and extreme, and now because the reciprocal tariffs across the board were even like crazier, Trump is like successfully at the very least like numbed people to the idea of a ten percent.
Across the board.
The Liberation Day announcement was a thirty four percent tariff on China, so reciprocal tariff on China. So to Crystal, that gets your point about pitulation. He's coming down pretty damn close to that level.
Now.
The Dow has surged more than a thousand points as of when we're taping this, so big market jump. I think CNBC and some covers this morning used the word explosion. The markets are exploding. So we'll see to what extent the Trump administration touts that. I will still say, you know, this is Joe Wisenthal SMP five hundred only done one point two five percent this year. I'm sure some people
in the Trump administration actually will tout that. But the point that they made actually remains when the market was plunging, that that doesn't that has limited impacts on the working class compared to the wealthy, and so they still have a long way to go to dig themselves. I shouldn't say dig themselves out of the hole, but to prove that the strategy is more stabilizing than chaotic, because these ninety day pauses. If I'm a small business owner, these are just they're killing you horrible.
Yeah, and again thirty percent is still quite significant.
But you also have to ask, like, okay, so you did all this.
Okay, the market isn't down, cat Istra, but it's still down.
The likelihood of.
Recession is still up significantly from where you started the administration. And for what what did you accomplish?
You know, So for the people who.
Thought that there was a grand plan that was being executed here, who were all on board for a kind of you know, very radical reorienting of the global economic order, that's decidedly off the table, at least for ninety days, that is very much off the table at this point. This will, if anything, be you know, a mild sort of tinkering around the edges. So, you know, I think
that theory that there was a grand plan. Maybe there was a grand plan, but they had to back away from it in the face of realizing that they had made some faulty assumptions going in.
I think the Grand Plan was chaos. Like I think that's really.
I think that my theory of the Grand Plan was always just power for Trump being able to do whatever he wants.
Yeah, I mean, I think he wanted to be able to set off global chaos, and with the.
Belief that that was his leverage, that his leverage.
Is that we're the United States, we can upend your systems, we can upend the global financial system with the flick of a pen from the President of the United States, with this chart that we printed out that has Penguin tariffs on it. I think part of his strategy was actually just throwing everything into chaos. And I think when the bond market started freaking out, the realization is that that leverage only goes so far because it ends up hitting your own people at some point.
Yeah. No, that's exactly right.
And I do think there was just a fundamental miscalculation, both with launching the trade war against everyone in the world and with thinking that the Chinese that we were in a stronger position than the Chinese were, and we just weren't, you know, we just weren't. It was easier for them to find other customers around the world, as evidenced by their experts actually rising during this period, than it was for us to be able to replace all of the goods that we rely on importing from China
at this point. Now that could be done over a longer period of time, which will require, as we've discussed many times on the show, significant investments in industrial policy. And yet they were going the opposite direction of that. And I know they were had big hopes for the tax cut that was supposed to be in the reconciliation bill, but none of that has even come to pass as of yet. I wanted to read, because we've relied on his analysis a fair amount, for a read on how
the Chinese may be viewing these events. Arno Bertrand had initial reaction to China's statement on the agreement with the US. He says they highlight that besides the fact that tariff would be reduced, he says, to ten percent. There was some confusion about this. We went and checked. It's actually to thirty percent. But in any case, he says, a key outcome of the meeting is that both sides quote, recognize the importance of bilateral economic and trade relation to
the two countries and the global economy. Recognize the importance of sustainable, long term and mutually beneficial bilateral economic and trade relations. Continue to advance relevant work in the spirit of mutual openness, continuous communication, cooperation and mutual respect. This is indeed perhaps the most important outcome. Trump's teriffs marked the apex of Washington's decoupling illusion, and this reversal should
deter any future attempts of doing the same. To use the card analogy that the Trump administration loves to use, Trump went all in with his extreme tariffs, but when China called his bluff, he was forced to fold and accept that his approach could not be sustained. It is now clear when it comes to severing economic ties with China, the US simply does not have the cards, no matter how aggressively they try to play them. So with that in mind, you're left with only one viable strategy, cooperation
and mutual respect. So that's his reading of the contours of the at least temporary agreement that we have at this point.
Yeah, and I wondered what extent China was reacting to other deals that the Trump administration was working on with places like like you said, they had already found some willingness in that region, particularly to have you know, Tamu ship things.
Over to Cambodia, Vietnam or Yeah.
Yeah, and I wonder to what extent actually they saw that some of those countries actually do rely so heavily on US business that the Trump administration was coming to, if not, you know, great deals for the American people, at least deals, So I'm curious to what extent they were reacting to that. I'm also really curious what this does to the crackdown on Deminimus. And I'm really curious for how this pertains to the Hollywood announcement last what was that Sunday?
Yeah, last Sunday, so we yeah.
And then that's another thing I always thought was fake TikTok.
I'm really curious what this does for the TikTok deal because remember China's retaliation about a month ago. It scuttled that last minute deal that the Trump administration allegedly was very close to working out for a sale of TikTok
from Byteedance to a US company. And by the way, I've always thought that that was fake because not that there aren't buyers here that'll snatch up TikTok very eagerly, but that I don't think China has any serious intention of actually selling TikTok because guess what, they they have the freaking leverage because Trump doesn't want TikTok to be sold to a US company over and over again. I mean, that's why he's delaying it over and over again. He
knows that they have the leverage on that point. So that's just a huge section of the economy and of the average young American's daily life that's on the table here, and we don't really know what's going to happen going forward.
Yeah, now that is a good point.
So you know, all of the and this has been the overall trend of the Trump administration trade war because we've had all these fits and starts, first with regard to Canada and Mexico, and you'll have his defenders, you know, defend these extraordinarily maximalist policy positions of one hundred and forty five percent terras and total decoupling of China, and they're all in on it, and this is delivering for mainstream and then they get rolled back and it's part
of the deal. But you know, with this, it's hard to even point to what was actually achieved here because you still now they're backing away from total to coupling. So if you were in the we're going to do this hard reset and it's going to reindustrialize America that's not happening. Apparently the tariffs are not going to be you know, paying for the budget deficit.
That's not happening.
And you're you have not actually gotten any real concessions from the Chinese government out of this. You've just made it more likely we're going to face recession, more likely we're going to face inflation and higher costs on goods. So Trump walking away from this, walking back from the most maximust policy position, It's just hard to see how we're in any way better off and not worse off from before Liberation Day was originally announced.
I mean, the lack of even any real.
Face saving gesture here I think is pretty extraordinary. But you know, I mean, I'm glad to see that the worst of the potential economic calamity is at least for the moment, being put off the table. And at the same time, just to conclude here, I don't want to underestimate how they're still First of all, will likely be reverberating impacts from this pause and trade that we did have.
We saw in COVID how the supply shocks took a long time to work out, So I think you could have a verbrating impacts from that, and then the continued you know, teror regime that does exist around the world impacts from that, and to your point, Emily, the continued uncertainty because this guy, if he doesn't like the headlines that come out of this and he's filled in a certain kind of way and he wants to reassert his authority or whatever, they could be hyped back up to
two hundred percent tomorrow.
We just have no idea.
Well, in China has a very long, long, long, long, long.
Term strategy and its economy and its society more broadly, and right now, by the way, if you are a foreign investor, not even in China, you don't even know how the next United Space president is going to handle this question, let alone the next three years. The level of uncertainty in the US market right now is just dramatic.
And to underscore that, Crystal, even as we were talking here, Trump is giving a press conference and he has said that he's not looking to hurt China, that he plans to speak to Sheet and Pang maybe by the end of the week, and also that the Chin China deal does not include tariffs that are already on.
So we're learning more.
About this by the minute based on what the President of the United States says. But it's really really, really hard, not just to understand what's happening. To get the exact numbers, we had to sift through just this morning before Trump starts. Yeah, and we to sift through a lot of different reports because the flow of information is confusing. So that's just day by day, let alone trying to project out into the future.
The uncertainty is so so significant.
Yeah, indeed, so I'm sure I'll be covering this more tomorrow as we get more information, and we'll be able to play some of those clips from Trump's press conference today and figure out what exactly the hell is going on. Thinking of figuring out what exactly the hell is going on, Trump is also headed to the Middle East this week. There are a lot of reports coming out of Gazaway.
Thing we know in particular is that idea of soldier who's an American Israeli citizen and on Alexander is being released by Hamas in sort of a gesture of goodwill, as the Trump administration is doing something that the Biden administration never did and talking directly to Hamas bypassing Israel in you in negotiations being for. We don't know what that exactly is going to lead to or what it means.
But if one person can help us understand what is going on, that would be Jeremy Scahill, and he joins us now.
Happy to be.
Joined this morning by co founder of drop site News, Jeremy Skaehill.
Great Caesar, thank you, Crystal Hamiley.
Yeah, of course, So let's go ahead and put this first element up on the screen. There's a lot going on this week as President Trump heads to the Middle East. We got this announcement that I'll just read from President Trump's true social here. I'm happy to announce that Eden Alexander, an American citizen who has been held hostage since October twenty twenty three, is coming home to his family. I'm grateful to all those involved in making this monumental news happened.
This was a step taken in good faith towards the US and the efforts of the Mediator's Cutter and Egypt to put an end to this very brutal war and return all living hostages and range their loved ones. Hopefully this is the first of those final steps necessary to end this brutal conflict look very much forward to that day of celebration. So, Jeremy, just to start off with, can you break down some of the context in which this agreement and this ability to return again Alexander was obtained.
Well, I mean, one of one of the aspects of this that is truly extraordinary is that this is the first time that the United States has made a direct deal with Hamas that does not involve Israel. That's a
major step away from Biden era policy. For instance, there were a number of people with US citizenship who were taken captive on October seventh during operational upsa flood, and the Biden administration, you know, stood by and refused to actually negotiate directly with Hamas and constantly deferred to the Israelis. So what we're seeing is a kind of unorthodox aspect
of Donald Trump's presidency. He recently made a deal with what the US considers to be a foreign terrorist organization and a non state actors ansar Ala, the Houthis of Yemen. Now you have the US, beginning in February, engaged in direct talks with HAMAS that is now leading to the
release of a dual US Israeli citizen. The other aspect of this crystal that's really significant is that during this entire nineteen month period, there has not been a single male Israeli soldier that has been released from captivity in Gaza. And it's important to remember a lot of the coverage of this implies that Idon Alexander was a civilian that was kidnapped. Well, HAMAS considers him to be a prisoner of war because he was an active duty soldier in
the Israeli military. On October seventh, he was captured by Palestinian fighters in uniform while serving in a military that the Palestinians view as an occupying force that is operating on behalf of an apartheid entity. So, you know, there are details of this that I think we need to remember. Factually, recently, when I was meeting with senior officials from HAMAS and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, they indicated that for months they have told the United States that they are willing as what
they call a goodwill gesture, to release Dan Alexander. And part of this is that Hamas views Trump. They know that Trump's administration is filled with Zionists, They know that Trump's administration is very pro Israel. That's the big picture of this. But on a sort of technical level, they feel that they have a better shot with negotiating something with Steve Whitcoff and Adam Bohler than they did with Antony Blincoln or Bill Burns when Biden was president.
Well, let's put the next element on the screen, Jeremy, because this kind of gets to exactly what you were just saying. I mean, you pointed out that this was the first deal broker directly between the United States and Hamas without Israel, And I mean, there's been some interesting comments from the Israeli right in the last twenty four to forty eight hours, and I just wanted to see
what you make of all of these developments. Is this signal maybe the next chapter in the United States relationship with Israel is Israel realizing sort of the hardcore Israeli right realizing that maybe they want to disentangle from the United States as well. I mean, basically, what's the reaction been like in last twenty four to forty eight hours politically from Israel?
Well, you know, I mean last week you saw Mariam Aidelson, who is a US and Israeli citizen, her husband of course, was Sheldon Adelson. She gave one hundred million dollars to Trump's reelection effort in the last election cycle, and she owns a newspaper in Israel, and that paper really was kind of fanning the flames of this. The idea that there are indications that the Trump administration is sort of kicking Netanyahu under the bus is distance seeing itself from Israel.
I think we should be really careful about embracing that narrative too much. There's a big picture here, which is that Trump's agenda is an extremely pro Israel agenda. He puts Mike Huckabee in as the ambassador, their rhetoric on the West Bank indicates that they're moving toward recognizing full
Israeli annexation of the West Bank. We could talk for hours about the ways in which the Trump administration has facilitated Netnyahu's agenda, including taking the leash off and letting Netnyah who goes scorched earth ever since March eighteenth, killing upwards of twenty six hundred Palestinians, many of them women and children, including really indiscriminate attacks on camps housed by housing displaced persons, but on a micro level, Yes, Emily,
there's something really interesting going on, which is that Donald Trump, of course is a transactional guy. He also thinks very highly of himself, he thinks very highly of his legacy, and he is right now on his way in a day to the Middle East where he's going to meet with Saudi Arabia and try to secure this more than trillion dollar deal that involves weapons sales and other economic matters.
Similar deal being made with United Arab Emirates. Of course, there's going to be a lot of focus on the airplane that Qatar is reportedly going to be giving Trump. Trump seems to really want the Gaza war to be done. He called it a brutal war and said that it's time to wrap it up in that truth social post that you cited earlier. So I think what we're seeing here is have no illusion about the fact that Donald Trump wants to facilitate a horrifying agenda on behalf of
the Israelis. But on the technical aspects where Netanyahu starts to mess with let's just say America's business as Trump views it, which is also Trump's business and his family's business, then I think we have some space that opens up where people like Witcoff and Adam Bowler become quite interesting
to the Palestinian negotiators. And I've said on this show many times before, and I'll say it again, there is a chance that Trump's interests aligned enough with stopping that war that it benefits the Palestinians of Gaza, who have endured a horrifying genocide under both Biden and Trump.
How does this square with the reporting we saw last week from Reuters that there were high level discussions centered around a US occupation of Gaza that would be based on the Iraq government of the you know, our occupation of Iraq after and during the Iraq War. Does How did these talks square with that? Square with Trump previously floating, you know, we're going to clear ount all of the Palestinians. We're going to let the world's people be in Gaza,
you know his big real estate development plans there. How are you making sense of those things? And how are the Hamas officials you're speaking with making sense of those things?
Yeah?
I mean this morning I was communicating with a leader within the Palestinian Armed Resistance and he was saying, look, Hamas is taking a gamble here by making this deal for Idon Alexander, because they're not getting anything on paper in return that we know of. None of my sources have said that the US committed to anything. And the calculus here on their part is it relates to what
I was saying earlier. They feel that they that their best shot right now is to try to accentuate the divisions on a tactical level between net Yahoo and Trump in the hopes that Trump then will ultimately force net Yahoo to end the war. That's the gamble that Hamas has taken. Their broader position is we will not release a single Israeli captive unless there is a deal that leads to a permanent ceasefire and the full withdrawal of
Israeli forces. I spoke to a senior Hamas official last week about these AID plans that you're talking about, and he said, no one has consulted with us about this. We're not involved with us, and the dimes worth of difference between the Israeli position and Trump's position on how
AID should be administered ultimately plays to Israel's agenda. Now, there's also discussion that there may be a summit involving the Palestinian Authority President Mahmudabas, who's eighty nine years old, incredibly unpopular, is viewed by Hamas and in fact many Palestinians, as a collaborator with Israel. It's possible that Trump is going to try to make some deal that circumvents both Israel and Hamas and Islamic Jihad and try to say, well,
We're going to make a deal with Mahmudabas. There's a lot of complicated politics behind that. So I would say, Crystal that what Trump is trying to do with his proposal for having a so called NGO, which really isn't an NGO. It seems, as you indicated, it's more like a Paul Bremer coalition provisional authority type IRAQ two point zero. What Trump is sort of trying to do is get enough aid to say I'm doing something into the country, but not really linking it to an end to the war,
which ultimately is what Netanyahu wants. So you know, let's see. I mean, Hamas I think has shown an ability to really hold out despite the massive human consequences, and I don't see them just because Donald Trump wants photo ops in the Middle East. I think we're still in for quite a battle, both diplomatically and potentially militarily on the ground. Now, look what Netnyahuo has responded to all of this in public.
You know, all of these reports about Trump and Hamas, Trump and ansar Ala Llah onsar Allah in Yemen, as As sort of saying, well, We're going to go in and conquer all of Gaza. We're going to take all of Gaza. We're going to force the Palestinians into the south, and then we're going to have to try to figure out what third countries are going to take them. So
he's really telegraphing I want to continue this genocide. The question is is Trump willing to actually rain him in a in a serious way or is Trump going to try to have it both ways. Let it be a little bit calmer for some months, and then it all blows up again, which is basically what happened with the January ceasfire deal.
And it seems like a lot of that rides on what he hears from Steve Whitkoff. So we can go ahead and roll B to B on the screen. These were celebrations from Palestinians in the aftermath of the news. You can see this on your screen. This is a spontaneous march that was in Gaza City after the announcement yesterday, and when that's finished, we can put B three on the screen. This is from Steve Witcoff. It is a drop site tweet noting that Israel's Channel twelve reported that
Steve Whitcoff's meeting with hostage families. He said that, basically quote, Israel is prolonging the war even though there's no path forward, which is what a lot of the hostage families actually already believe as well. So, Jeremy, this brings us to the momentum. At least if people are looking for a glimmer of good news. The momentum is at least in a positive direction towards a ceasefire. But what could a potential timeline look like. I mean, if we put before
on the screen. Jeremy, you had and we talked to you about this last week. You had an interview with a top Hamas official last week in Dropsite on May fifth, So you have a sense of what might be on the table right now in the next week or so.
While there is this sense of.
Momentum, what could maybe what is the best case scenario.
What is the worst case scenario?
I mean, you know, first of all, it really is heartbreaking, and this has happened a number of times over the past nineteen months. When Palestinians and Gaza hear any sort of good news or something that feels like a step forward, you know, people are so desperate for an end to this that they do go into the streets and they do celebrate, and sometimes it's real and sometimes a deal is in the works, and other times Israel just responds
by escalating the attacks. I mean, just in the last twenty four hours, we've had a couple of dozen Palestinians, most of them women and children killed in heavy attacks that were conducted by Israel. So you know, on that front, it continues to be very heartbreaking, but understandable why people are so desperate for this. On the issue of Witcough, Witcoff is saying what is basic common sense now among the families of Israeli captives, and that they've been saying
for a very long time. So from their perspective, you now have an American official in Steve Whitkoff and to a degree in Donald Trump, that are willing to openly criticize net Yaho for not prioritizing the freedom of Israeli captives. This is a departure from the way Anthony Blincoln or people in the Biden administration were conducting themselves. They were
very reluctant to publicly criticize net Yahoo. At the end of the day, I think the best case scenario is that the United States recognizes that net Nyahu's agenda is totally counter to what would be good for the United States in the world, is totally counter to what would be good for stability in the region, and that means actually being willing to speak with organizations and movements like Hamas, Because whatever one thinks about Hamas, they were the last
democratically elected government in Gaza, they're not particularly happy about continuing to be the government. But if you are able to work with them to try to stabilize the situation, I think that you would find that the Middle East would that there would be steps in the right direction, and that Donald Trump's sort of accidental way in which he could end up making a deal ends up being a good case scenario because it ends war because it
gives some opening to talk. The worst case scenario is that Trump is very crassly and cravenly trying to secure these deals, give the facade that he actually wants peace, and at the end of the day washing his hands of it and allowing the net Yahoo's and the Mike Huckabies of the world to determine what American policy is going to be. That would be a catastrophic series of events. I think it's more likely we'll have some sort of
a deal. Whether that deal is going to be acceptable to the Palestinians and make it more likely that they're going to get liberation or self determination is a very very serious question that remains unanswerable right now.
To that point, Jeremy, if it ends up that Hamas committing to demilitarize, if that ends up being a red line, are they on that question?
You know?
I mean, it often gets thrown around in the media in a simplistic way. What does it actually mean? What the let's not just talk about Hamas in a broader sense among Palestinians. The idea that Palestinians are supposed to just hand in all weapons and trust that the world is going to somehow keep net Yahoo or Israel at bay is a farce that history shows is a total lie. So it's not just about oh, Hamas has some weapons stored somewhere that they want to use to go attack Israel.
We're talking about the very existence of the Palestinian people. There have been suggestions that if there's a hudnah, the Arabic term for a long term truce, that Hamas would be willing to make concessions on how weapons would be stored, how weapons would be held, But right now they're not really engaging much with that discussion outside of a technical framework that results in a US guaranteed and to the
genocide and full withdrawal of his Israeli forces. So of course is going to say this is a million red lines at present, but the devil will be in the details. If the international community ensured that Palestinians we're going to have sovereignty and we're going to be able to constitute an armed force capable of defending its territorial integrity, then I think that the rationale for groups like Hamas or
Islamic Chiad having the weapons goes away. When people get their freedom and they get their stability, they don't need to be engaged in resistance movements. Armed resistance movements. That's the core of the story. So from their perspective, weapons aren't the issue. The issue is their rights as a people, and you can make the resistance movements irrelevant by respecting the rights of Palestinians as all other people in the world are supposed to have under international law.
And go ahead, Crystal.
Last question for you, Jeremy.
We're about to talk about the Air Force one replacement from Kutchar and the extraordinary corruption of this administration. But I wanted to get your opinion on the reason why Kutcher wants to give this plane to the Trump administration and how that ties into the various negotiations that are going on here.
I mean, I have no idea what the actual if there's like a specific policy motivation for it. But you know, Donald Trump, the store of Donald Trump's presidency is wide open for business, and that's very clear. You know, Kutar is obviously an increasingly powerful player in international diplomacy. It is a major figure in the Gaza negotiations but also in other regional issues. So you know, Katar is subjected
to a lot of smears. Kuttar also is playing its own game here and recognizes that it is increasingly an influential player, and I think that it's it's symbolic of the fact that we have a man in the White House who' views the White House as a business that can benefit himself and his family, and you know, at the end of the day, maybe we'll do something good for America. But let's be clear about it. Donald Trump is an open store for more business.
Yeah, I know.
Ryan was pointing out on Twitter that in the first Trump administration there was apparently some sort of real estate bailout that Jared Kushner's dad was looking for from Qatar, and they declined, and then they felt that they really screwed up by not just you know, giving the you know, the Trump administration whatever grift and gift and corruption that they were asking for at the time.
So apparently they learned that lesson.
Yeah, I mean, it's it is it is extraordinary. It's it's presidency inc. You know, no doubt about it. But you know, I'll just go back to actually what Hamas people have told me. They recognize all of that, and they realize in that kind of specific, kind of kind of institutional corruption, there may be opportunity to accidentally get something better than they would have gotten, you know, from the adults in the room under Biden, and I think they're right who.
Were ideological, committed Zionists. So we'll see where all of this goes. Jeremi, thank you so much for taking the time to break it all down for us.
Great to see you.
Thank you as always.
Well, as we just mentioned in our conversation with Jeremy, if we put B six on the screen, news broke yesterday that kind of the details of this news broke yesterday. To be clear, some of this we kind of already knew, but then Jonathan Carlo at ABC broke the story open and there were some follow up reports that Cutter is essentially giving the United States the gift of a to be fair beautiful luxury plane.
They call it a flying palace, a flying.
Palace, and some of four has pictures of it, and it is indeed a flying palace. They came out with that, I think late last night or earlier this morning. Actually, we have some pictures here. If you put B seven on the screen, we could go through them. So the way this arrangement is going to work is basically that you have the plane being gifted to the Department of Defense used as Air Force one. Because this will come
as a shock to no one. Boeing has been myired in delays and all kinds of problems with their efforts to rehaul the plane for the president. So this is what you're seeing said by side on the screen. Last week, the Trump organization unveiled a new five point five billion.
Dollar golf resort project and Cutter.
Today, ABC reports that Cutter are set to give Trump a four hundred million dollar luxury Boeing seven forty seven. And then if you're looking at those things side by side, Crystal, the dates are just incredible.
April twenty ninth and then May.
Eleven, two weeks later.
And you know the true story of this, like how Cutter has worked out the steal with the United States government.
The details are still a little bit unclear.
We do know that Pambondi, who is the obviously sitting attorney in General, she used to be a lobbyist for Cutter. She was at Ballard Partners. And what she was doing the filing. You can look at the filing. It was to help Cutter basically improve its approach to human trafficking to it was in the leader of the World cup. She left and then came back and re picked up the contract. But it was like to help them message and deal with the United States all of that stuff
as it pertained to human trafficking. So we just have a web here of conflicts of interest and before I just.
Making one hundred and fifteen K a month.
Yeah, those Cutter contracts are good, which is why Cash, Pattel, Lee, Zelden, and Pambondi are members of the Trump administration who have previously taken money from Catter before going into the administration. This is an intercept story back from February that I highly recommend everyone read. Obviously, Cutter is served infamous for doing this with Western countries. But this is the arrangement of this. The Trump administration says, put BA eight on
the screen. This is the actual text of the emolument's clause, which Crystal demanded we put up on the screen. She was like, like during the tea party, like the Libertarians walking around with their pocket constant.
Right, blanch your pocket constitution, friends, This is the emolument's clause.
So the way they're getting around it with the gift of the Boeing seven verse seven eight is that it is going to the Defense Department. So the e Molument's cause prevents gifts to rulers, officers or representatives. So Crystal their way around that is saying it is a gift to the Defense Department from what we can tell.
And then it's being given to the Trump Presidential Library. Yes, so it will only ever benefit him. It's not like whatever the next president, whoever the next president is AOC or JD vance probably is going to benefit from it.
It's just going to be Trump.
But technically because it's going to the Defense Department, not directly to the person of him.
That's how they're.
Getting around it. And bond memo authored by Pam Bondi, who had previously been paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by Kaitar.
Yes, no exactly, and so Crystal this is their way around it is saying that it is a gift not to the president himself but to a the Department Defense, which Cutter says, it's just temporary, so you know, the next three years temporary quote unquote, and then it goes to the Trump Library. So in neither of those cases is it going directly to Donald Trump.
That's the that's the line.
Okay, yeah, I mean it's so cliche to say at this point, but imagine if Barack Obama, you know, and you know so many Republicans too, they you know, they consider Qutar to be just like an agent of Hamas and you know, run by terror, like the language around Qatar that comes from the right. And then to have them making this extraordinary, just brazen gift of corruption, this four hundred million dollar plane to Donald Trump is I mean,
what can you even say about it? This is what I was referring to with Jeremy what Ryan said on Twitter, which I think is good sort of like context for how this and why this all is happening. He says during Trump One, Jared Kusher's dad shook down Qatar for a real estate bailout. Qatar turned him down. The US then let Saudi Arabia and the UAE block Qatar, and they very nearly invaded. Secretary Tillerson tried to stop them and defend Qatar, where the US is a major military base,
but Kushner intervened against Katar. Katari officials told us at the time they understood it all to be paid back for not making the investment, and said if they'd have known the consequences, they would have just paid it. Clearly, they've learned from last time, and that's where you are. It is like, you know, it's very clear he's for sale to the highest bidder. So they're like, okay, you have this. He's always had this fixation on Air Force one and wanting a new Air Force one and upgrading
Air Force one blah blah blah. So they picked up on this and they're like, okay, well we can play that game too.
Yeah.
Trump put out a truth social on it as well, and yeah, it's just completely the word is shameless, so he says, So the fact that the Defense Department is getting a.
Gift free of charge of a seven.
Forty seven aircraft to replace the forty year old Air Force one temporarily in a very public and transparent transaction, so bothers the crooked Democrats if they insist we pay top dollar for the plane.
Anybody can do that.
The Dems are.
World class losers Mega Crystal.
So this introduces an interesting question, which is, to his point, they are so shameless about this. We are just seeing it transpire completely nakedly in public. So maybe there's a benefit in a weird way to trump Ism, which is literally just we are treating Jeremy just said this.
Actually we had them on.
We're treating the American government as a business, and we're doing it out in the open ways that other presidents had it previously done it. So I guess it's a on another level of like just money going back and forth. But b at least we get some more insights into it as it happens.
I'm sorry, I can't get on board with classes half full. There are solatives of the American presidency being for sale to the highest bidder, I mean, and that's that, truly is what it is. And I think, you know, to zoom out to the matter perspective, because you see these things, you see this, you see I will never get over the Trump crypto coin and the way that that is just a direct pipeline for bribery, and it has already been utilized. We don't even know by how many people
and to what ends. We have no clue. So to the point about you know, oh, at least it's transparent, it's not transparent. We know that the vast majority of the largest purchasers of Trump shit coin are foreign nationals. We have no idea who they are, what they want, or what they're going to ask for when they get their little private dinner with him. We know that some people who are you know, involved in various crypto scams have used that in order to get their enforcements dropped
against them. So, you know, I think you have such a brazen ramping up of outright theft, corruption and bribery in this administration, and it can sometimes boggle the mind as to why there isn't just this mass public reaction against it, because obvious the public is disgusted with corruption. And I do think that it's this thing where number one, it's just become sort of accepted with Trump, like, well, yeah, he's just as hard what it is.
And number two, because.
He ran on it, I know the system alone can fix it.
Blah blah blah.
Well he ran on the draining the swamp. He did not run on I'm going to be the swamp times one million. But I think because he just does these things out in the open, and because there's so much to get outraged about, people get sort of fatigued over and it just becomes kind of like baked into the cake.
I think that's number one with regard to him. But number two, I do think because you have this sense and reality of a granted much lower level, but still significant and outrageous and unacceptable levels of corruption that have been endemic in the American government across both parties for so long, it's hard to it's hard to make plane how much of a different scale we're talking about here.
You know, even if you consider what I think, are you know, some of the most grotesque abuses, like the insider trading of Nancy Pelosi and things of that nature, that cannot come close to getting a direct four hundred million dollar gift from a foreign government. It doesn't come close to getting literally billions. I mean, I saw the recently, a huge percentage of Trump's net worth is now because of his crypto coin, which is just about.
Yes, overt bribery. It's a huge chunk in history.
There is nothing that compares to this level of corruption. But when you have, you know, so much corruption that was already endemic to the American presidency and American politics, with the floodgates being opened under Citizens United, and how big money flows and courses through the veins of our political system, I think it becomes very difficult for people to really wrap their minds around how much of a different scale we're talking about here with Donald Trump.
Yeah, no, I mean I think that's true.
And I was I was sort of being tongue in cheek earlier, so forgive me for that. I mean, it is with Trump kind of interesting to see his justification for these things as they happen, that he is merely getting the Trump plane or he's merely getting the plane back when Boeing couldn't, you know, make all of the necessary improvesment. By the way, the right answer to that is to make Boeing get.
Its shit together.
Rank you have all of the le as Trump would say, you have the cards, make Boeing get its shit together. But yeah, I mean, I think with him it's easy to I guess, forget that he can say these things are transparent.
What we do not know is what's happening behind closed doors.
So Ryan putting out that point about the Kustner family and Rex Tillerson, A lot of that is known in retrospect after the first Trump administration. A lot of the like even the broad contours of that, we understand post presidency. There's always there are always things happening that we don't know about. And right now Donald Trump is going to the Middle East. He's attempting to brokers cease fire, he's
attempting to calm tensions. But what how you get from point A to point B. We would be foolish to think that we know everything. Yeah, is being negotiated with Cutter and with other countries that also may be engaged in soft levels.
Of corruption, you know.
And by the way, I don't know that.
This will actually be called illegal, Like I don't know that this will I'm sure it'll be challenged in court. Yeah, I don't know that they'll actually I think I think they have found a pretty good loophole here legally, but it's obviously on its face corrupt, so something not technically being against. There are things all the time, like actually a lot of the stock trades that happen you just mentioned, Nancy Pelosi. Ye, a lot of the stuff. Sometimes they
don't comply with the law. But a lot of this stuff actually is compliant with the law. They're trading and they just close it, but it's still completely unethical.
Well, the Supreme Court has made it basically so that you know, corruption or bribery literally has to be like I am taking this bag of money from you in exchange for this thing which I then actually accomplished. I mean, they have narrowed it extraord narrowly so that you know, the general baseline level of corruption in DC is wildly unethical to your point, yes, but much of it not illegal.
And so in terms of.
How the courts will view this, particularly that I have no idea, you know, I haven't read any legal analyzes of what direction they could go in with this, but I think it's important to think about why the monument's clause is in the Constitution, and it's because listen, zooming out from look, it may end up that the four hundred million dollar plane here actually helps secure a better deal for you know, the Palestinians and ends in a place where I'm glad that they you know, that the
thumb was put on the scale in that direction, that there were a long way from that.
But as opposed to Democrats taking a bunch of money from APAC and then pretending that they well.
He's got on the other side, he's got Maria Maddilson giving him one hundred million dollars. So maybe the four hundred million dollar plane you know comes out in the back. I don't know, but I'm just saying, zoom out from these particular details. You don't want an American president to be operating foreign policy based on what is in their own personal financial interests.
The ideal here is.
That you want them to be representing the interests of the country, not the interest of their own bank account. And with Trump, this has always been a problem because his business obviously has tentacles all around the world. You raise the element here of they just did a business deal in Qatar as well. He's got the Saudi Live golf deal, real estate developments all over the place, Gozla.
He wants to be a real estate film apparently.
Yeah.
And the level of foreign entanglements with this president has always been extraordinary, always really truly been unprecedented, I think in American history. I don't think there's any parallel that you could really point to with this. And now you layer on top of that just these totally outright brazen
bribery schemes and Trump one point zero. You had the Trump Hotel, and the way to get in his good graces here in DC was to come with your foreign delegation and book a large block of rooms and spend wildly and lavishly at Trump Hotel. That was your way to signal you know that you are helping him out personally and financially with the crypto coin. And then this just like brazen Freere's four hundred million dollar luxury palace in the skyplane that we know that you'd be really
excited about. Those things are you know, are just on steroids in a way that we could not have possibly imagined. And you can never know when he's making decisions. Are these actually the decisions he thinks are good for the American people in American interests and good for you know, whatever goals we would want to establish, or is this just about who came in as the highest bidder.
Well, and it's also not about money like this is it shouldn't be about money. Foreign policy shouldn't just be about money, obviously, And that's another problem with this is, you know, the blend in his truth social post I think is genuinely a very interesting glimpse into how he views these things. It is this Trumpian pragmatism, which is
that it's not corruption. It's this pragmatic way to get around Boeing and do what's in the best interests of the United States, And how could you possibly be upset about that? But it's not just about getting a new plane. It's about what Katar thinks it's getting for giving you the new plane.
And that's why.
We talked about this on the show last week. The problem with conflicts of interest, which we cover here all the time, whether it's Republicans or Democrats, is the appearance of the conflict of interest. It is not merely whether someone acts in a way.
That exposes their conflict.
It's actually this is what the United States for a long time was at least slightly better than some other countries and actually cracking down on the appearance of conflict of interest.
And by the way, I said slightly better, that's the bar.
And global politics for this is low, such as the nature of humanity. But we used to take that much more seriously, and now there's just a complete shamelessness to it, at least around Trump. And I mean I hope that Democrats being scandalized by this, and even like the Center and everyone basically being scandalized.
By this, scandalized by this, as it.
Would be consistent and so I hope people being scandalized by this. It means that in the post Trump era we go back to being scandalized by these things in general, because it really is the appearance that gives other countries the idea that maybe something happened, that he can be bought, that the United States can be bought. That in and of itself, just the appearance of it, whether or not he actually acts in their interest.
I mean, obviously.
It's worse if he does.
But the appearance in and of itself is part of the problem here, because it erodes the reputation of the United States, and it erods the credibility of whatever deal is ultimately.
Reached, and that's the sort of long term damage.
Obviously, I'm worried about the immediate damage with the terump presidency, but I also am worried about the long term damage because typically when these things get put on the table, then you don't walk back from it. Like what president future president Republican or Democrat, is going to look at the opportunity to become massively wealthy and you know, take these sorts of bribes from foreign countries and is going
to turn away from that? Talking about people who are you know, extraordinarily ambitious and power hungry who ascend to those levels. So I think that post Trump, I think it's going to take more than just a sort of return of norms. I think you're gonna have to codify. You're going to have to have some new laws. Like you know, post Watergate, post Nixon, there was a rash of legislation that was meant to ensure okay, we're not doing that again.
We need to return to good governance.
Some of that was campaign finance reform, by the way, that has been completely destroyed and decimated by this point. But you're going to need some actual like legal teeth and legislation to put this toothbasse back in the tube.
Yeah, no, I think that's right.
I think we saw that with Joe Biden refusing to acknowledge his mental capacity after Trump won, and a lot of establishment Democrats helping him cover up the state of his health no matter what they say now. I think a lot of it was because of the first Trump administration, which, by the way, we have technowledge in and of itself.
Donald Trump was elected because of in part Clinton corruption, because people were so discussed by Clinton corruption, So we can keep pulling back the layers on this, but there has never been. I mean, Clinton Foundation, I think was utterly egregious. I think Joe Biden's part in the Hunter Biden and Frank Biden and James Biden and Valerie Biden lobbying scheme was grotesque. I think it was undercovered. All of that is true, but on the scale of what's
happening with Donald Trump. You mentioned the net worth. I looked it up while we were talking to CBS reported on it. This is a normal Eisen Richard Painter thing from a sort of left of center nonprofits. So take that for what you will. But they estimate the Trump families networth has increased by two point nine billion because of the crypto holdings, and that represents about forty percent of Trump's networth. Forty percent of his net worth, imagine.
So this is a man who has spent decades in business. These meme coins lost launched in January. We're five months in and forty percent of his net worth is now tied up in those meme coins.
Is remarkable, tells remarkable, tells you everything right there.
That's statistic