Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here, and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show everything. Good morning, everybody, Happy Tuesday. We have an amazing show for everybody today.
What do we have, Chris sal.
Indeed, we do lots to get to you this morning. Polls Polls pull some very interesting numbers coming out New York Times on both the Democratic side and the Republican side. Who's up, who's down? What does the race look like? We will dig into all of that. We also had some very interesting testimony here on Capitol Hill from a former Hunter Biden business associate who is by the way, facing jail time and is really undermining the story that Biden has been going with. We've got some media cope
for you. We've got we got the whole thing with regards to Hunter Biden. Also, big developments in terms of Ukraine. You know, these drone strikes on Moscow are now becoming just an absolutely regular occurrence. So we'll tell you about that, some of the things that are going on there. Wild story coming out of California. I honestly don't know what to make of it. There was an unlicensed medical testing lab that you know, authorities were able to get into.
They found all kinds of you know, viruses and all kinds of like human biological substances. Very disturbing actually, and some disturbing connections there as well. Sager's got an update for us as well in terms of the UFO testimony that we saw recently and some pushback that we're getting drama breaks, some major drama there, So we will break all of that down for you as well. But before we get to any of that, thank you again to all of the premiums describers.
So we've been really working hard.
To get some big guests in studio, and I know you guys have really been responding to those interviews, so thank you so much for your support.
Yeah, that's right.
So we've got more big guests that are coming down the pipeline. We've been working and using extensively a lot more resources. Thanks to everybody that's been able to sign up breakingpoints dot com. You guys not only enable the ability to actually get these done, all the man hours that go into it, the after the production travel, et cetera.
That makes that possible.
So thank you all to those people, And of course, as a thank you, we always release those interviews first to our premium describers. So if you want the big names and you want them first, then that's the reason to sign up breakingpoints dot com if you are able. But let's get to this big New York Times poll Crystal, which is making big waves both.
On the Republican and on the Democratic side.
Really, yeah, that's right, So let's start with what's going on with the Republicans.
Let's go ahead and put this up on the screen.
So Trump with a massive lead in terms of this New York Times Siana poll, which is considered kind of a gold standard. They spend a lot of money on these things to try to make them as accurate as possible, not that they always really succeed there, but this comports with the trend that we have seen of Trump really pulling away from the field.
So we have him at fifty.
Four, so more than majority DeSantis at seventeen, and then everybody else is at either three, two or one percent. You got Pence, Scott and Haley at three percent, Vivek and Chris Christy at two percent.
So obviously, doing the basic.
Math year, even if you add up all of the Trump opponents together, you still do not match what Trump has. They did test the head to head Trump versus DeSantis, and he was winning by a two to one margin. So even in the fantasy world where everybody drops out and everybody coalesces around Ron DeSantis, Donald Trump still with a massive, massive lead. Let me read you a little
bit of the analysis here. They say that mister Trump held decisive advantages across almost every demographic group and region and in every ideological wing up the party, as Republican voters waved away concerns about his escalating legal jeopardy, led by wide margins among men, women, younger, older voters, moderates, conservatives, those who went to college, those who didn't go to college, cities.
Suburbs, and rural areas.
And you can also see that there were additional ominous signs, they say, from mister DeSantis, who performed weakest among some of the Republican Party's biggest and most influential constituencies. He earned nine percent DeSantis nine percent support among voters at least sixty five years old, thirteen percent of those without a college degree, so basically working class voters only thirteen percent for DeSantis. And you know, in another science sager
that is very not so great for DeSantis. Republicans who described themselves as very conservative favored Trump by a fifty point margin.
Sixty five to fifteen.
And that's really where DeSantis has been trying to lean. He's gotten to the right of Trump on a variety of issues, hoping that he could pick up these very conservative voters.
It is not working out for no, it is certainly not working out at all.
Our own Amblin Dashinski actually flagged or really interesting some takeaways I think from here. Let's go and put this next one up there on the screen. This one, as you can see here, is about one of the most important things that they actually poll test in Trump feed. DeSantis strong leader, gets things done, able to beat Joe Biden, fun,
likable and moral. So interestingly enough, Desanta is actually beating Trump on likable and moral, but whenever it comes to strong leader, Trump is crushing DeSantis sixty nine to twenty two in terms of get things done, it's sixty seven to twenty two. That's brutal for DeSantis because his entire case is I'm the guy who actually gets things done
and not focused on the drama. But really, to me, the one that actually just brought it all home was the fun deficit, Crystal Chris is Trump fifty four percent fun, DeSantis sixteen percent fun. That is actually the biggest delta between the two. And look, politics is a show. Trump he captive to these people. He gave meeting to their lives. He gave them, he gave them the jolt that they always wanted to see, somebody who pisses the people off that.
They hate more than anything on national television.
And he gave them that gift four years, every single day, three hundred and sixty five, every tweet that was ever sent. DeSantis, in many ways is almost undermining that ability because he wants to be the guy who gets things done. He doesn't want to focus on the drama. He doesn't want to do silly season. And you know something we've maintained here for a long time is that that's just a very wrong reading of the GOP electorate. The GOP electorate
loves silly Season. They actually they love Trump. They think it's hilarious. And that comes through dramatically really throughout all of this. Because they don't think he's likable. They know nobody's ever thought he's likable. They don't think he's moral, but they think he's hilarious. They think he's funny, they think he's strong, and they think he can beat Joe Biden.
You can't disagree with them.
I can't disagree with him either. That's the thing.
Can you really anyone who is honest, who is not a self serious you know, it's not a self serious like Cerebrole just like sitting there and be like, oh, the democracy and all that.
On an objective basis, he's good at what he does. He's a funny guys.
It's charismatic, and he's hilarious. It's terrific that he's such a terrible person. But that is the report. And so if you've got two guys who share basically the same ideology and one of them is funny and the other one is sort of like grading and not that fun to listen to Yeah, I mean listen. I don't want to be too hard on DeSantis, because I do think that he basically read the electorate wrong in every key way.
I also don't think that there is really a way to go head to head against Trump and come out on top just because of where the Republican base is right now. We'll get some more of those numbers in just a second. Another way, though, in which DeSantis misread the Republican electorate was on making wokeness the center, end all, be all of his campaign. Only twenty four percent of Republican voters said they would be more likely to support
the candidate focused on fighting quote woke issues. And they did a bunch of tests of like wokeness versus you know, other messaging, and in every instance the other messaging sort of more of a focus on law and order and border came out way on top over focusing on fighting
back against wokeness. They asked questions about the fight basically that DeSantis is engaged in with Disney, and more people were on the side of, hey, you know, you shouldn't be using state power to go after private corporations, And that was across demographic groups.
Across education groups.
So I understand why he put that at the center because he has a very difficult challenge trying to stitch together this coalition. And the one thing that does seem to be a glue across a very divided Republican electorate right now is concerns about quote unquote wokeness. But clearly it's not enough of a concern. It doesn't feel like it touches people's lives directly enough for this to be
sufficient for them to move off of Trump. Let's go and put this next piece up on the screen that shows some of the divide within the Republican park already along really class lines. So at the top you see you've got magabase that's like thirty seven percent.
Those are the people rock solid for Trump.
You've got thirty seven percent of persuadable voters who they like Trump, but they could be maybe open to a different candidate. And then you've got twenty five percent who are not open to Trump. Across those different categories, you have a very big class divide. So in the magabase you have a much higher number who do not have a college degree. You have then on the open to Trump, you have a much higher number who do have a college degree. It's a majority there that have a college degree.
You have near a majority there among the not open to Trump who earn one hundred k or more. So very clear classified in terms of which category these people sort themselves into.
So on the.
Number who oppose immigration reform, you see huge split between the magabase, it's seventy one percent no immigration reform. Among the higher end income and college education group that are not open to Trump, it's only thirty seven percent. You see a big divide on opposing a to Ukraine, much more popular position among the working class MAGA base. This one was the most notable, though, perhaps among the MAGA base, eighty percent say that America is in danger of failing.
Among the more affluent not open to Trump group, it is only thirty seven percent who say America is in danger of failing.
I mean, I guess it makes sense.
When you yourself are doing pretty well, you probably feel pretty good about the direction that the country is heading in.
You don't feel an existential risk.
Whereas if you are in that non college educated, more working class base, it makes sense that you would see things quite a bit more dimly than the rest.
Yeah, that's right.
Let's put the next part up on their on screen, because they have a very important sliding graphic here which shows you that the MAGA base is already thirty seven percent. Then amongst the so called persuadables, seventeen percent of those people actually lean towards Trump. So now you just got to an outright fifty percent amongst the rest, there are twelve percent others, and then really only a very slight
crossover between persuadable and not open to Trump. So we've always said it, you know, it's very difficult to try and cobble these things together.
I've never really believed that.
The coalition really existed for Ron DeSantis, just given the way that people feel about Trump, and this is just a you know, a good confirmation of that, I think in many ways, and the class divide at this point, I almost think it's important just to stop talking about even DeSantis many of these other people and just look at the base as it exists. And that why I think that they still look and favor Trump. I mean, consider the Ukraine question. Sixty four percent of the MAGA
base opposes a to Ukraine. Fifty eight percent of these persuadable voters also oppose a to Ukraine. Twenty six percent don't In the not open to Trump the GOP lawmakers who are vastly represented in Congress and in the Senate. Whose side are they on. They're on the side of the affluent, They're on the side of the small And these people who are not open to Trump, these are
old time Republicans. These are Mitt Romney, small business owners, you know, the multi millionaires, like the guys in Florida on a nice boat and you know, like in the in the Trump boat parade. But they don't do it because they love Trump. They really just do it to like flex the boat on the hill attacks. Yeah, these guys are being Republicans for you know, for decades. It's like those are the people that you need to really persuade or really should be like act being working on
behalf of it. If you think about it in terms of coalitions, this shows me again that like there it's Trump, it's Marjorie, it's Matt Gates.
I can name. On the other hand, like maybe JD.
Evans At sometimes like Josh Holly, a few others, Like that's basically it in terms of their coalition that's in Congress. So no wonder that they feel so connected to Trump because he is really the only even spokesperson in rhetoric for so many of the things that they even come to care about.
Although, to be honest with you, looking at these numbers, what really comes across is it's more about the vibes and specific policy issue because even pulled okay.
So what do you think about Ukraine? A to Ukraine?
And even among people who are like I support it, and I support Ukraine and I want to be there, you know, indefinitely, they still support Donald Trump, right, I mean, on all of these among people who think that Social Security shouldn't be cut, and among people who think it should be cut, they all support Trump. So I think, to me much more at the core is the fun graphic of how people, how people feel. He's a strong leader and I have a good time when I'm listening to him.
That's what I'm really in it for.
And you know, I mean this is not to like cast ex versions on the electro but part of how DeSantis misread the Republican base is by thinking like, oh, if I go down the issue list and I like check off the boxes and I get to Trump's right, and I find the right position on all of these things and get the right answer, then people are going to come into my camp.
It hasn't worked out that way.
In fact, the more that he has, you know, leaned into his policy oriented message, the more people have moved on to Donald Trump. So I really, you know, I think what you're saying is important in the fact that there is a failure of democracy in terms of representation in Washington, the issues that are pushed by either major
party in Washington, what the actual policy incomes are. I think that is incredibly important and essential, But I don't actually think that's driving what the support is in the Republican primary. There is a quote in here though, that I think more gets to this point why people are overwhelmingly backing Donald Trump in the Republican primary. Let's put this up on the screen. This is from David Green, sixty nine year old retail manager in Somersworth, New Hampshire.
He says of Trump and why he supports him. Quote, he might say mean things and make all the men cry because all the men are wearing your wife's underpants, and you can't be a man anymore. You got to be a little sissy and cry about everything. But at the end of the day, you want results. Donald Trump's my guy. He proved it on a national level. Much more vibes that because I mean, DeSantis has leaned into whatever shoes this man is gesturing at. He's very much leaned into those policy issues.
But Trump, that makes the more like strong man kind of case.
I love this guy because he just says it out loud. He's right by the way in terms of like how people view things, like that's it, that's what it takes away. That's why I mean, look, I led with fun whenever I said it explained everything. There are a few other things that I do think you know, tangentially apply, but fun the appears strong pissing the people off what I hate the most.
That's pretty much always been it.
So anyway, man may have his own issues that he's working there there. Your top issue is women's men wearing women's underpants. Anyways, let's move on to the Biden side of the aisle, because we just this morning got the New York Times Siana poll on the Democratic side, and it is also very interesting.
Let's put this up on the screen.
So Biden has somewhat improved his position among Democrats, although a.
Majority are still like, we'd rather have someone other than Biden.
But here's some of the analysis from the New York Times. They say warning signs a bound for the president. Despite his improved standing and a friendlier national environment, mister Biden remains broadly unpopular among a voting public that is pessimistic about the country's future, and his approval rating is a
mere thirty nine percent. Perhaps most worryingly for Democrats, the poll found mister Biden in a neck and neck race with former President Donald Trump, who held a commanding lead among likely Republican primary voters as we were just discussing, even as he faces two criminal indictments and more potential charges on the horizon. Mister Biden and mister Trump were tied at forty three percent a piece in a hypothetical
rematch in twenty twenty four, according to the poll. Now, in terms of primary support, within this poll, Biden had the backing of sixty four percent of Democratic primary voters who were intending on participating in the party's primaries. Thirteen percent were behind RFK Junior, and ten percent chose Mary and Williamson. So even though you still have and They've got some good quotes here. I'll read to you Voters who are on the Democratics, they're not enthusiastic about Biden.
They feel like they have no real choice. I think that the relentless message from the party leadership and from corporate media aligned with the Democratic Party that listen, guys, Biden is effectively the only candidate in the race, and we're just gonna ignore.
These other two. I think that's worked.
You've got a couple of quotes here that I want to share with you. One individual who has said about Trump and Biden. I'm sorry, but both of them to me are too old. Biden to me, seems less mentally capable age wise. But Trump is just evil. He's done horrible things. That is the case that the Democratic Party is hoping is going to resonate with the American public. Like, listen, you may not be in love with Jo'biden, but look at the alternative.
You have.
A thirty eight year old woman government analyst from Atlanta described herself as a political progressive not aligned with a party, who said mister Biden's tax policy had been skewed to favor the wealthy while the middle class paid more than its fair share. Quote, we're kind of smushed in the middle. We're taking the brunt of the taxes for everybody. She did say she'd vote for Biden again, but added she
wouldn't do so with much gusto. It's basically like, I don't have another choice because I don't feel comfortable not voting.
She said, Yeah, I mean on the Democratic side, it's pathetic whenever you're only getting six two thirds or whatever people to support you.
So let's just leave that aside.
The most the big headline to me was the Trump I mean the actual head to head one versus him. I mean he is actually tied in this pole crystal at forty three percent a piece in a rematch in twenty twenty four. That's a terrible position to be in as an incumbent president, especially two years out. You know, we really have not yet heard the full critique of Donald Trump in an actual like media circus environment of a full twenty twenty four campaign. He theoretically should be
stronger right now than he ever has been. The counter to that could be, oh, well, Biden hasn't yet made his case to the American people. I mean, my counter would be, you're the president. You get to make your case every day.
Yeah.
Also, you are getting older every day, which is part of the problem as to why people are very skeptical of you.
I mean, this really does confirm a couple of things.
Trump is still dramatically electable, as much as people want to count him out. This New York Times poll I saw CNN story yesterday kind of preparing the liberals just being like, guys, Trump could actually win. And it's true. I mean I've always said this. When you are the nominee of a major party, you can win the presidency. But then with Trump, he is always underestimated. Yes, I understand twenty twenty two didn't go well.
It's true. Twenty eight two didn't go well either, But he won the freaking presidency.
You can't deny it. He only lost forty four, five hundred votes. And I just checked the twenty twenty poll that came out October twenty twenty see in New York Times Sienna is actually a poll historically biased against Trump in terms of his favor They had Biden up fifty one to forty two. Yeah, and the last poll of October twenty twenty, so if they have him tied Trump Biden. I'm giving Trump plus four. Historically, that's what it usually
has come down to. Didn't seem to work in twenty twenty two, but to me, that was because Trump himself wasn't on the ballot.
This man magician. I don't know what it exactly it is.
But in terms of getting people actually to the polls to come out to vote, he seems singularly enabled to do that as a politician. It's one of the rarest things you'll ever see in politics.
So I have that cnnpiece from Harry Anton, who's like, there are a guy analysis of the polls, and the headline that he has here is the chance of Trump winning another term is very real. And one of the things he says that I think people really need to internalize. Trump is not only in a historically strong position for a non incumbent to win the Republican nomination, but he is in a better position to win the general election that at any point during the twenty twenty cycle, and
almost at any point during the twenty sixteen cycle. Keep in mind, with Donald Trump in twenty sixteen, he was almost always pulling behind Hillary. With Biden in twenty twenty, it looked like it was going to be a blowout if you were just looking at the polls. He has very rarely been looking at poles where he was actually in the poll itself tied with his Democratic opponent. So now listen, he's facing a number of other charges. He's going to be going to trial before this election.
He could be.
Facing prison time. That's a very real possibility, and I have to think that that is not going to be an easy thing for him to be able to overcome. So there are a lot of wild cards out there, but I think people need to take very seriously the fact that Joe Biden is an extraordinarily weak Democratic nominee.
For all the people out there who are really concerned about electability, you know, and if God forbid, in my opinion, Donald Trump gets re elected, they need to take a really really critical lens to the Democratic Party and the fact that they shut this process out. They did not allow voters to have a choice. They said, you have to be stuck with this man that an overwhelming majority of Americans are like, this guy's just tooling.
Yeah, I look, I mean it's been obvious from day one. They're playing with fire, you know, if they believe that Trump is an existential with which they say all the time.
Who knows if it's whether they believe it or not.
Well, if you lose, it's your fault, one hundred percent. It's on you and more and more than I'm reading Crystal. While stop the steal is a problem, while the criminal cases are a problem. You know, everyone else can recite
the litany of problems. He's a strong politician, man. Yeah, it comes like anytime we see like a very serious look at his real support against Biden, specifically in the swing states and all that, I always come away with the same thought of this man, he's getting awful close to the Oval office right now, especially when you peg it to how the media and all these other people are painting his chances, and so look, be a fool and count him out if you want to. Yeah, you know, I would not advise.
The one thing that I'll put on the other side of that equation for Joe Biden is, you know, the economy does seem to be improving, Inflation does seem to be going down, although you know, if you ask American voters they still learn not feeling it.
Really.
In terms of an improved economy, the mood is very, very negative. But you know, my instinct is that the charges and the criminal jeopardy for Trump, while it doesn't matter in a Republican primary, could be damaging to him in a general election. But on the other hand, I mean as silent tepas, I don't know what he did on January six, It's not like people don't know that he's facing these charges, etc. So listen, it's a jumpall
right now. I think that's all we can say. And I to me, yes, it speaks to the strength of Trump as a politician. But for me, Trump's success and very near success in twenty twenty has always been a deep reflection of how weak the Democratic Party is and how little they live up to their promises and actually deliver for people. So I think it's pathetic, well they should be in this position going into this election season.
Let's move on to another piece on the Democratic side, which is continued questions and maybe answers about Hunter Biden his business dealings and critically because it is the part that really really matters the involvement of his father, the President of the United States, Joe Biden. So yesterday, one of Hunter's former business partners Devin Archer, who was involved
in the whole Bearisma situation. He was on Capitol Hill to testify, and what he said directly undercut what Joe Biden's line has always been about his lack of involvement in Hunter Biden's busy. Said he never even talked to Hunter about his business dealings. Well, Devin Archer has a different story. He says Hunter would quite often, many times put Joe on speakerphone with his business associates to try to basically sell the Biden brand and leverage his famous,
powerful last name into his own business dealings. Democratic Representative Dan Goldman was asked about this after the hearings. Let's take a listen to how he spun those revelations.
It was clear that it was part of the daily conversations that Hunter by and had with his father, And it was and sounded like most of the time, now President Biden didn't even know who the people he was at dinner. He was just asked to say hello, uh, and he would, you.
Know, talk about the way he described it.
Several times they asked over and over and over he described what the weather was, how, how what's going on on your end? He the witness was very, very consistent that none of those conversations ever had to do with any business dealings or transactions. They were purely what he called casual conversations.
Oh okay, incredible, incredible, And we are expected to believe in his telling of events that the President of the United States is so naive that he doesn't know what's going on in these conversations.
And they expect the American.
People to be so naive to buy this version of events. And they also expect us to completely, like, you know, erase our memories of Biden saying that none of this ever happened.
So he said he never spoke to him once on the phone. And this guy's like, oh, they were just talking about the weather. You just said they talked for how many times?
Story significantly completely changed the goalposts.
Put this up there on the screen. Also from Fox News.
Devin Archer actually whenever he was present in front of the in front of the committee, unfortunately, was actually behind closed doors. So I really would like to see the transcript of that hearing. I am calling on them to quote release the transcript. And look, I've always said this too with Archer, he's an unsavory character.
In his own right.
He's facing jail time, but he was there at the center of all of these deals. And one of the reasons I feel like I'm growing nuts, Crystal is I you know, I've been covering this for almost five years.
I actually looked through my notes. I did a monologue on Rising September twenty fourth, twenty twenty, which detailed every single one of the allegations that Devin Archer made behind the closed door at this hearing about the Russian billionaire who transferred money there about it was actually the source material was the twenty twenty GOP Overside Committee report, which detailed all of this and which Joe Biden then denied on September I believe it was twenty fifth somewhere around then,
at the very first presidential debate. This has been out in the open for years. I mean, I actually so. I also went back and checked. I did an interview with Peter Schweizer, who wrote the book on Hunter Biden, on March fourteenth, twenty nineteen, over at Rising, and every single detail about BHD partners Devin Archer, China, Ukraine and
Bearisma is listed in that interview. So it's like this has all been present in the public sphere before Joe Biden was even a declared candidate, let alone the president.
So it's like, how are we still litigating.
This and never have gotten to the actual bottom of it until now August one, twenty twenty three. Like that's the absurd part to me, rather than the facts. I mean Archer saying I put the guy on the phone, like I put the guy. Of course you obviously did. Archer testifying that BIZMA hired Hunter for the quote Biden brand, and everyone's like, oh, what is shocking?
Is it shocking?
Like you need Devin Archer to testify to that? Yeah, why does the guy get eighty three thousand dollars a month? Okay, it's not shocking to anybody. We knew consistently that Biden had met at the very least have been testified to by eyewitnesses with business partners. So it's like, to me, this is only confirmation of facts on the that we have known for years at this point. So it's just it's really repulsive to me to see Goldman and all of them not admit the very basic truth.
I mean, there's only one honest interpretation of this.
Biden lied straight up on the debate stage on the campaign trail as President of the United States, and White House Press Secretary Jensaki and kream John Pierre both told lies about Hunter's business dealings from the podium and the story period. If we are to believe this testimony, not only is testimony, multiple other corroborating reports, the text message you know that has come out. It's like all of this, It's just it's absurd that they can still try and stick to their original.
I mean, it was always very plain on its face that the most charitable interpretation of Hunter's business dealings is that he was using the Biden. I mean, there was never any other possible explanation, right, Remember how he was like on the Amtrak board.
Of course, road trains.
He liked the train, Like okay, yeah, that's what that's what gets you on that board. It was always really obvious, and I'll never forget when we ask Congress and Ted Low about these dealings and he's like, yeah, people will sit on boards on the iron salaries as if, as if that's totally fine. Now listen, that may not be illegal.
Although I do think some of his potential unregistered lobbying for foreign governments is something that deserves a lot of scrutiny and may be illegal, but you know, unfortunately, leveraging your political connections and parlaying them into lucrative financial positions may not be illegal.
Number one.
Number two, I'd like to see Republicans apply some of the same scrutiny to their own activities and dealing with those of Donald Trump. But Biden has really caught himself here and backed himself into a corner by stating so unequivocally that he never even spoke to Hunter about those And it's just that part. It's gone like, it's very clear that that's a lie. At this point, you got
this other piece. There was Devin Archer apparently, you know, reportedly testified that Biden had met with this Russian oligarch who was also involved in in potential business deals, and there were questions about why this particular Russian oligarch did not end up getting sanctioned. Karine Jean Pierre refused to answer a question about this from the podium.
Let's take a listen to that.
Regarding Russia's sanctions, I'm wondering if you could share the reason why President Biden hasn't sanctioned the Russian billionaires Vladimir yet to Shenkov and Elena Vautarina.
How is he handling the conflict of interest there?
Giving his son was a business associated these two people, and can you confirm that, as sitting vice president he dined with that arena in Georgie.
I'm just not speaking to anything that's related to his son from here.
If you want to have if you want to ask a questions about Hunter Biden specifically, I would refer you to his family.
So just continuing this done while here a complete bs.
Once again, I literally had the notes right here in front of me as I wrote at that time, and payment included a three point five million dollar wire transfer from Ellena Butarina, the richest woman in all of Raschia, conveniently the wife of the former mayor of Moscow. Business associations with individuals who are linked to the Chinese Communist Party and the People's Liberation.
Army of Chin it's all, it's all been in the public record.
Yeah, everyone knows this, and it's like, you know, Stephen friend of the show, a great reporter, you know at least has the kahones to ask about this and to get them on the record, but it's like the level of obviousness of which what was testified here that the Biden brand was being stocked by Bearisma of course, that Biden had been on the phone now with Hunter Biden associates, and the thing is about Dan Goldman is now Goldman is dropping the only defense that the White House ever had.
I never talked to him about business, which was ridiculous in a farce on its face, but never had any real credible testimony.
Archer has been saying this.
Tony Bobolinski came forward in what I mean it was October I believe of twenty twenty, and said, yeah, what are you talking about?
I met with Joe Biden.
I literally all of this, all of the core allegation, the facts, everything has been here now for years, and you know, still the media is either is either downplaying it or I mean, really what it was shocked me with Goldman is like I'm like, wait, he just admitted it, Like he said, he admitted the quiet part out loud, like he says Biden talked to him on the phone, and it's like you said, Crystal, even if they were just talking about the weather, which I don't believe let's
say that they were. When you were able to dial somebody up in a meeting to flex your relationship with them and put them on the phone with business partners.
That's worth a lot of money. If he's trying to close a dealer.
He says, yeah, I've got juice, and they're like, yeah, well kind of juicy got And he goes, I can get my dad on the phone anytime I want. And you're sitting in a caf in China or you're seeing in a cafe in Italy, which both of these happened, just so you're aware. And he dials his dad up in the middle of the night or whatever, and his dad probably answers because he's terrified his son.
Is probably going on a crack bingch again.
But you're doing that to flex the fact that you have such a deep relationship with the guy that's still corruption, you know, regardless. And Biden, you know, he said he's not stupid. He's been in the game for a long time. He knew exactly what Hunter was doing when this was all going on.
Yeah, I think I think there's no it's hard to come up with another plausible explanation here. So we've got some interesting media coverage of Devin Archer's testimony and what this all means for Joe Biden. Let's take a listen to how they are portraying the facts.
So Goldin is sort of explaining that Archer qualified the topics of discussion on these phone calls as niceties, that Biden sometimes didn't even know who was on the other line with his son Hunter, and you know source in the room telling scene. And now that Archer did not point the finger directly at any sort of a connection between Joe Biden and his son's form business dealings'd rather, you know, said that he was that Hunter Biden was selling the illusion of set access oris.
Really a stunning development, zech when you consider that Republicans were selling this as a breakthrough that would link Hunter's business dealings with his father. Instead, business was apparently never discussed, according to Devin Archer. Zach Cohen, thanks much for the reporting.
Right, that's the takeaway.
Right, So we're either we're either supposed to believe that the press of the United States is such a fool that he had no idea what was going on with these many phone calls with Hunter's business associates, or they're wildly, you know, he lied, and they are still wildly misrepresenting what really happened here. I mean, listen, have Republicans put their finger on like Joe Biden directly financially benefiting from Hunter's business.
No, they haven't.
They have not gotten any you know, smoking gun evidence with regard to that. But do they have pretty clear evidence that Joe Biden has lied to the America people about how all this went down and you know, the at least verbal involvement of him with his son's business dealings.
Yes, yeah, I mean this is where the semantics of it just become absurd to me. If I have a little sister, If my little sister was trading off my name in the way that James Biden was trading off of his and used one hundred thousand dollars slush fund to buy herself a laptop, threw a deal with the Chinese Communist Party, and not just buy herself a laptop, but for all of my nieces and nephews and possibly even my in conjunction by the way, with one of
my children. Yeah, I think I did financially benefit from that. I mean, by any common understanding of family corruption, they obviously benefited from it. So did Biden's actual bank account get any money.
I don't know. I mean I actually still think it's possible.
But you know, in the I think we even said this at the time, Crystal, it's almost very like third world in the way that this entire thing went down. Like the way that it works in a developing world is, you know, you never pay. Sometimes you pay somebody off directly, but usually it's like, ah, you pay my uncle, you pay my cousin. The cousin will you know, facilitate. It's like in Narcos Mexico, whenever the Defense Minister of Mexico, he's like, you don't deal with me, you deal with
my nephew. The nephew is the one who is like the bank transfer guy between the cartels and the government. I mean, you know, with modern money laundering and FBI stings and all of that, Like even in the rest of the world, briefcases full of cation, all.
That stuff doesn't happen.
It's but it is still obvious in any familial like network ties that if you are going to mansions paid for with corrupt cash, you benefited from that. We understand that right whenever it comes to private jets. But why don't we understand it whenever your quality of life and all the people around you is directly affected by this corruption, then to me, and again in any common public understanding of that, I understand not legally, then you clearly did financially benefit from these transactions.
Republicans, you know they're doing this for political reasons. They
clearly don't really care about corruption on its face. Sure, I don't say shit about Donald tr All of that can be true, and it can also be true that the conduct here from the President of United States is a problem, and it's something that the mainstream press should be digging into rather than trying to give excuses and you know, spin this testimony yesterday, which was really bad for the president and did reveal lies that he's told the American people, try to spin this as like a
loss for Republicans. And also, I just you know, why are you why play into their game where they want this just to be about like scoring points against President Biden in this like partisan battle.
Why play their game?
Why not just actually look at the facts when it pertains to Trump, when it pertains to Biden.
I mean, that's certainly what we try to.
Do here obviously.
Yeah, and you know for all of the what ifs, you can search breaking points Jared Kushner Saudi, if you're interested.
Was yesterday we were talking about Trump builking his orders for sixty five million dollars in legal fear.
You are welcome to search Steve Minuchin, Trump, Saudi, Jared Saudi. You know, like all of the America First Policies Institute, you know, billionaires. I was like, we could go into it forever, and that's that's the way that it should be. Okay, let's go to the next part here. Some interesting developments going on in Ukraine. Obviously Chrysill alluded to this. There have been multiple drone strikes now by the Ukrainians on the city of Moscow, kind of just becoming a routine development.
I guess us all just hope that, you know, they continue to just strike buildings and you know, if they don't kill the wrong guy and that way launches us all into a massive conflict. But there was a piece of news buried actually within a New York Times expose, not even expose per se, more like a profile of Elon Musk and of Starlink, which revealed not only the Ukrainian reliance on starlink, but also Elon's personal intervention here into the conflict, which does say a lot about our society.
So let's go and put this up there on the screen. Elon apparently is personally intervening in the war and vetoing access to its services for Ukrainian military to facilitate operations that he personally does not approve of. So as an example that they give here, they say that mister Musk expressed fears that Ukraine would use starlink not just to defend itself but also to conduct offensive operations to regain territory seized by Russia, which would cause significant military casualties.
And this was actually personally intervened then by the Biden administration to call him. Let's go to the next one that actually shows you. Starlink access since then has quote fluctuated depending on the movements of the war in Russia as Russia won territory and Ukraine fought to take it back. As battle line shifted, Musk has used a process called geofencing to restrict where starlink is available on the front line. SpaceX uses this location data by its service to enforce
then geofencing limits. This has caused problems when Ukrainian troops tried retaking cities like Kirsan in the Russian controlled areas in the fall, they needed internet access to community eight members of the arm versus message mister Musk requests to restore service and areas where the army was advancing. So it's it's funny because there are several elements to this. On the one hand, you could be like, oh, this
is capricious. On the other, Starlink is being provided for free the Ukrainian military, and they call it the backbone of their you know, of their military operations. So if they want some terms of dictation or whatever with what's going on, then you should pay for it.
That's number one too.
You know, you're welcome in many cases to go get some ISR, which is intelligence and surveillance and reconnaissance of your own. If you could afford it, you can't because the US is the one who's paying all of your bills. So I've seen Elon take a tremendous amount of criticism for this crystal.
But if he.
Does personally own the company and they he's providing them a service for free, then in my mind, it's like, well, okay, well then why shouldn't his opinion matter, Like, if you're paying for it, then that's one thing. You know, we can have a negotiation here and still obviously he can do what he wants. But they're not even paying for it.
They're literally forgetting it for free. And then you know, the US military and apparently the Ukrainian military are so wholly reliant in a single point of failure, which is a private company in the whims of the guy who changed freaking Twitter to X It's like, well, what are you surprised by at this point in the conflict? Why are you invested in something else? So that's a whole other conversation. I think it's a big meta problem. It's worth discussing.
It is a big meta problem, and I really would like people to try to put aside how they specifically feel about Elon Musk and how they specifically feel about what the right or wrong policy is with regard to Ukraine.
We should not be outsourcing key sta functions to any one person, period because, like you know, when when he gave access to Ukraine to Starlink, like celebrated, but then you didn't realize that you were then giving him a say in the in what your foreign policy, as the supposedly most powerful nation on the planet, what your foreign policy is. I mean, you're basically like putting that in his hands. That's insane, that is malpractice.
Yeah, that'sul.
So we should not be outsourcing key government state functions of you know, state craft and warcraft to one person, whether you like him or hat him, or feel indifferent about him, or think he makes good decision a bad decisions or whatever. So the part of this piece that actually really struck home for me is they quoted this tweet from Elon from back in April, where he says, quote between Tesla, Starlink, and Twitter, I may have more real time global economic data in one head than anyone ever.
That may be true.
I think he's right, and I really want us to take in the fact that this one individual, again, however you feel about him, and I certainly made my feelings and you know, analysis of his business decisions clearer, how are you feel about him? He is deeply integral to at least three really key industries in our society. Tesla, I mean the move towards ev vehicles. This is a central component of the Biden administration pauses central push in terms of people who care about climate change, and he
is huge market shared there. Starlink. I think this is case in point of why he's got a huge number of the number in here.
What is it.
He's got like more than half of the satellites that are orbiting our earth are elon Musk satellites. That seems like it's pretty significant. And Twitter, and now that he or x whatever, you know, he has bought and now controls a key part of our communications infrastructure and something that is you know, bedrock to our democracy and our town square, etcetera, etcetera. So this one individual has so much power in so many sectors.
I'm not sure people have really wrapped the hudder.
Yeah, and then just don't be surprised then whenever that individual flexes that power based upon their whims, especially when you're not paying for it, you know, it's like that's the one that really and it's especially great me. You know, it's like like you said, he was celebrated whenever he gave it to him for free, and then they didn't realize that, you know, there is no such thing as
a free lunch. Meanwhile, obviously the war in Ukraine continues to become brutal or Russians really showing us all who they are.
Let's put this up there on the screen. Just a barbaric attack.
Yesterday there was a missile strike actually on Zelenski's hometown, which killed six civilians, including a ten year old girl and her mother. It's always important just to remember that this level of barbarism happens on a daily basis. Then, of course, you know, Ukraine is retaliating, and then of course that singular missile strike was done crystal because Zelenski went on Twitter and issued effectively battle plans for retaking Crimea.
We're in a vicious you know cycle, and this was meant to be a personal rebuke against President Zelenski as well.
Let's also not forget this. Let's put this up there on the screen.
The Kremlin actually just yesterday threatened the use of nuclear weapons in retaliation for the drone strike on Moscow skyscrapers.
They warned, quote, there is no other way out.
After attacks on the business district that closed Russian airspace and left one injured. Closing Russian airspace, by the way, is no joke. You know, I've just recently been taking flights to India back and forth. The disruption over that airspace is one of the most critical areas for specifically European flights to East Asia and also the long haul flights that come from the East coast of the United
States that usually fly over this. It's not only has caused multiple cancelations, but the uncertainty and all of that. I mean, we all know the Malay I forgot was it Malayian flight for I forget that got shot down over Ukraine, not I mean, not that long ago.
It's almost like I think it.
Was like about a decade ago, because some Russian separatists thought that it was I forget exactly what they thought it was. But the point being, you know, one hundreds of civilians were killed. So it's creating a tremendous amount of uncertainty in this entire conflict. We've got little kids getting killed in apartment buildings, you know, in terms of a retaliation, and then we've got you know, drone strikes
on them freaking business district in downtown Moscow. I mean, that's what I said at the beginning of this entire discussion, which is it only takes one guy to get killed and things change completely.
They don't know who they're going to hit.
They could hit, you know, somebody who's like the cousin of whatever, some person who's very special up in there, and the whole conflict could change completely overnight. So anyway, you know, it's always just a reminder that like there's a tremendous amount of uncertainty and risk and you know, trauma and all that that actually comes.
To a real war. It's not just a video game that people playing on Twitter.
I mean, it's really a live fire exercise.
And so it appears that the Ukrainians have been trying to target these sort of like symbolic targets ministries. You've had little in the way of casualties in terms of these attacks directly on Moscow right now. I mean, their intent is to terrorize the citizen.
Ryan.
I think that's really the intent.
You can see some of the videos that people post, and you know, I'm screaming in terrors they see drone strikes on their city. And it's understandable when you consider the horror that the Russians have inflicted on Ukrainian civilians, you know. So I'm not saying that these are like
on the same level. But there's a lot going on in Russia domestically right now, with moves being made by their legislative bodies to try to you know, potentially have martial law, to try to potentially have another round of recruitment. And if Ukrainians, if Zelenski thinks that these drone strikes on Moscow are going to you know, force the crumblin to the table and you know, make the Russian population really reject this this war, I think that's very foolish.
I don't think that that's likely to be the outcome. So ultimately you're just playing with fire here and risking a broader conflagration. And maybe that is the real point for the Ukrainians.
Yeah, well that's smart and look, who knows. We'll continue to keep everybody updated. Let's go to the next part. This is a wild story, one that we actually spent hours kind of try to digg In went.
Down this rabbit hole.
I was just like, what the hell is going on?
Is this as osne as it appears on the surface, And the answer actually is yes, So let's put this up there. The first person to flag it to me was Kyle Bass, who put out this tweet, and we're going to go through some of the actual allegations in here. He says, quote, an illegal, secret Chinese bioagent lab has been raided by the FBI, the CDC, and California Public
Health Department in Fresno County, California. The CDC's Division of Select Agents found infectious, infectious, bacterial and viral agents at the site, which was listed as an empty building. Bioagents included malaria, rebella, and HIV.
He continues, Chlamydia E.
Coli, numerous other types hepatitis B, and C herpes. One in five the lab had quote nine hundred genetically engineered mice designed to carry various COVID streams living in inhumane conditions, with another one hundred and seventy five that were actually found dead. Okay, so let's look at the actual details, and it appears actually that many of them do add ups.
Let's go to the NBC News report. So the NBC News reports specifically did not put the they did not ascribe the origin and the connections to the Chinese Communist Party in this, but they do actually confirm something key one. This was an illegal, unlicensed laboratory full of lab mice, full of medical waste and full of hazardous material. The Fresno County Public Health Department quote, evaluate and assess the
activities of this unlicensed lab. And what they found is that with multiple state and federal agencies determined biological and chemical contents that were actually on site, including coronavirus, HIV, hepatitis, and herpie So they actually confirmed some of the actual chemicals and the biological strange and many of the others that were present there on site. Then you have to go down like a bit of a deeper rabbit hole here, and this was a fascinating view actually from public local news.
This is why we do still need local news, Crystal, because they have great investigations.
Let's put this up there.
They say, quote, I have never seen anything like this a legal medical lab discovered in Really this is from your Central Valley dot com. What they point to is the city manager actually of the property says that she's never seen this in her twenty six twenty six year career in the County of Fresno. We had eight hundred different types of chemicals and all of that which were
on site. But eventually what comes through is that the tenant was a company called Prestige Biotech and this has now since been confirmed that was registered in Nevada but was actually unlicensed for business in California. So the company's president is a Chinese citizen who they were only able to speak with via emails which were actually included in the court documents. And quote other addresses provided as authorized agents for these empty offices were addresses in China that
could not then be verified. Also, agents found thousands of package boxes, many with shipping labels from China, which were included in the court documents. Uh so, what was this lab doing in Fresno County, California?
What's happening with this?
And the craziest part, nobody knows, right, who is this company, who is this Chinese guy? Where are or how did they get a permit for all this stuff? Did it come through legally or illegally in customs? And then what were they studying in this? So this is one of the most bizarre odd things that has happened. You know, there's obviously been a lot of skepticism and allegation and discussion around Wuhan, but you know, at least that one was a level you know, it's the Level four safety
bio lab run by the Chinese government. This is some sketchy company in the middle of Fresno doing god knows what with who knows the amount of unregulated chemicals, and the why question has still yet to be answered, despite multiple people in California trying to get to the bottom of the Yeah, from what I could read in the court documents, it's a.
Wild story and they authorities just sort of stumbled upon this. Yeah, the city inspector saw a garden hose that was like in a place of garden hose that was supposed to be which I didn't really know that they regulated where garden hoses could be, but apparently they do this.
They do billing.
They were like, you can have the garden hose there, what else is going on? And then they go into this supposedly empty warehouse building and find all of this crazy stuff they In terms of what the owner of this company, Prestige Biotech, is saying, he told officials that Prestige Biotech moved assets that were that belonged to a defunct company called Universal Meta Tech, Inc. To that warehouse
from Fresno after that other company went under. Prestige Biotech was a creditor to that other company and identified as its successor. According to court documents, officials were unable to get any California based address for either company except for the previous resident location from which you m I had
been evicted. So basically the story from the owner of this sketchy biotech company is that they had acquired this other defunct biotech company, that these were the assets from that one and they just were.
Sort of like storing them there randomly. Is basically the idea.
But I mean you think like live mice included in this, I don't know, it's it is a wild one. I have no idea what's going on with this, but it is really weird.
Yeah, I mean I think what has kind of come through is that clearly. I mean, the thing is too, is that the pictures like you could see, can we throw the first one up there just so people get an idea? I mean this all I mean, I would have believed if they had told me that it was like a meth lab or some sort of drug lab. As you can see from I mean, it's filthy, there's stuff everywhere. Clearly, it's not clean gloves just hanging out,
you know, beakers and all this stuff. I mean, it genuinely does look like it could come out of a drug denner, out of a movie. And yet you find out that we're talking about like viral agents, infectious bacterial filthy mice in conditions. And then you know, the why question is the one that just continues to abound from all of this. So, yeah, like you said, they stumbled
across it somehow. I mean, what's really actually kind of terrifying to me is that none of this was flagg through customs because allegedly all of we are supposed to have very stringent regulation on age, you know, chemical agents, viral agents, bacteria and all this stuff that comes into the United States, and it's especially supposed to be.
Very high on China.
Now, the problem is that China makes the vast majority of inputs for a lot of our drugs, but they do come in via a relatively regulated process. One of the reasons why they we're supposed to look very hard at the unregulated market is a Chinese fentanyl is probably responsible for the vast majority of opioid debts here in the United States. And that's the reason why the drug cartels they don't make those drugs here in America. They
make it in Mexico, where the export controls. It's much more corrupt effectively in order to get it into the country. That's the whole point. So then my question is like, well, how the hell did they even get this Well.
But we don't necessarily know that it came from that. The materials came from.
Too, well, the shipping boxes came from China, so I mean, yeah, you're right, maybe they shipped to Mexico and they drove it across the border.
I mean, we've generated we have no idea where this stuff was acquired from whatsoever. I mean, that could be too that it was shipped. We just don't know. And the thing to me that doesn't pass the sniff test about the story that this was. You know, they're basically just storing this stuff here after this other company went to funked or whatever. When you look at those pictures, I mean, this isn't just like things in storage boxes.
You've got a whole lab set up there.
You got the gloves there, you've got things and beakers, you've got stuff that's on the table. I don't know, it doesn't look like you were just like, oh, let me put it in storage and then I don't know, dispose of it somehow do something with it.
It's a weird one.
Also, the you know, creating front companies and all that in order to justify legal export import. That's a time honored kind of Chinese tradition for you know, I've read, I've read and done some dives into Chinese men in all business.
It's almost exactly the same in.
Terms of like, oh, you have a defunct company a fake address in China. In terms whenever you're trying to, you know, trace it back and be like where did this company.
It's not a Chinese specific phenomenon. That's what sketchy businessmen do all around the world, including here in the good old US of A.
Maybe they probably stole it from They probably stole the tactic from us. So you know, don't don't let anyone say that they didn't steal the best. Uh, let's go to the next part here. Crystal being very gracious in allowing me to give everyone an update on the UFO phenomenon, So we updated everybody about the hearing about what happened. Dave Grush came forward and make some extraordinary allegations Chrystal. One of the things that you asked me was what
do you think of all this? Like, what what are we to make of all this? Yeah, And what I said is it's important, uh, for to get this on the record and to create a binary. I think creating the binary the most important thing. Is it true or is it not true? He's entered this under oath in
the congressional record. We also have a previous director of the program, the ARROW program, coming forward and saying there's no evidence of extraterrestrials, there's no evidence of any of these hidden craft retrieval sides, any of the stuff that Dave Grush has alleged before. Just to give people a flashback to that, that was doctor Sean Kirkpatrick, who is directly at odds now with Grush's testimony.
Here's what he said a couple of months ago before to Congress.
I should also state clearly for the record that in our research, ARROW has found no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity off world technology or objects that defy the known laws of physics. In the event sufficient scientific data wherever attained that a UAP encountered can only be explained by extraterrestrial origin. We are committed to working with our interagency partners at NASA to appropriately inform US government's leadership of its findings.
So Crystal.
After Dave Grush caave testimony at that hearing which directly contradicted what he said and which he said that Grush also said that he had brought forward these allegations to Kirkpatrick, a very odd letter began to circulate. It appears that Kirkpatrick circumvented Pentagons the pentagons like official framework for releasing statements, and released a statement of his own accord on his
LinkedIn page respond very odd. This does not happen in the government, and does not happen in the Department of Defense, of which I used to cover. I've never seen anything like this in my entire career. So here's the letter that he put out. Again, he is saying quote, they'd either his personal observations and opinions and do not represent the DoD or the IC positions, IC being the intelligence community.
Long letter here effectively saying that he's very proud of his team, and he says, quote, I cannot let yesterday's hearing pass without sharing.
How insulting it was.
To the officers of the Department of Defense an intelligence committee who chose to join ARROW many not unreasonable anxieties about the careerists that this would entail. So he specifically in this letter calls Grush a liar. He says, contrary to assertions made in hearing, the central source of those
allegations has refused to speak with ARROW. Furthermore, some information were purportedly provided to Congress has not been provided to ARROW, raising additional questions about the true commitment to transparency by
some Congressional elements. So I'm going to zero in on that and kind of let all of the other stuff go, because the important thing that has comed out from here is he is claiming very matter of factly, not necessarily under oath, remember that, and also not through the official meeting, so through the official process.
So I don't really know what to.
Make of it, but he effectively is saying Dave Grush is lying. Because Grush said at the hearing that he had provided materials, evidence and all of that to the program, to the ARROW program that was reviewing the past record of UFO knowledge files and all that stuff, and that the reason he became a whistleblower is because it was not taken seriously and that it was buried.
So we're basically we're in.
Now an almost total like yes or no question, Like one of these people is lying and lied to Congress.
What did you make of this part?
At the very end, he says in this statement on his LinkedIn Also, to be clear, none of the whistleblowers from yesterday's hearing ever worked for Arrow or was ever a representative to Arrow, contrary to statements made in testimony and in the media. So he's also, am I right asserting that Grush is even lying about what positions he held.
From what I read, there are some technicalities in terms of the way that Grush described his attachment to the program.
Not necessarily we.
Didn't like director the program, So they're using some sort of legalistic language here.
There's two ways to read it, you know.
And again this is not a vetted statement by the Pentagon, you know, it's not officially. This is just him something that he put out on his LinkedIn page. But he's basically saying, I don't know this guy. He never brought any this stuff forward. He's a liar, he never made any of the clearity, didn't even work for me. I mean, each one of those is extraordinary in itself. I mean, he's effectively the only place where he's not given himself out is saying that he was never shared those materials.
Because now it's straight up like did Grush lie or not? And listen, we really have no way of knowing. This is why it's so difficult actually to look at these two things, because remember that the Grush report.
I mean, it's not like he just came forward to the New York Times.
He went through the internal whistleblower process in the Department of Defense, which the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community said that they found credible and urgent and bearing investigation. So it was vetted at the very least in some way, you know, at least from what we're seeing, much of what he said even at the hearing was set in an unclassified setting, of which has been cleared by the Department, but of which has not been restricted from saying out
in the open. He says that he provided, you know, all of these materials to Congress for investigation into the specific allegations about these programs and all of us. So I mean, I'm I'm like, even though I thought that this was an incredibly bizarre event. I'm happy that it happened because and you know, it probably sucks for Grush and many of these other people to be called liar is because now we actually really have to find out because you know, he Kirkpatrick had given himself some outs
in the past. He said, oh, we don't have any evidence.
All.
This is a lot of different ways that you could spend that you know, whether he lied to Congress or not, but this one is such a direct and a personal statement saying he's a liar. And let's put this Daily Mail piece up on the screen. Because this included also quotes from very confused members of Congress who actually saw it. So, for example, Anna Paulina Luna, who is one of the congresswomen who has been really at the side of Tim
Burchett on all of this, here's what she said. She said, it's crazy to me that they would try to discredit them. The fact that Kirkpatrick just tried to discredit Also the other two witnesses that were legitimate pilots for the military that had the gimbal and the tic TAC video we're confirmed by DoD is exact reason why I think people don't trust Arrow. The evidence was brought forward by multiple veterans who had confirmed the video footage of the tiktak
and the gimbal of advanced technologies that does exist. The DD even admitted it, like what are you talking about that? Actually, you know, highlights what you said, you know, the very odd part at the end whenever he's like, well, none of these three witnesses worked for us, and it's like, well, let's put Grush aside. The other two never claimed to ever work for the program. They were just like, yeah, I flew planes and I had a UFO encounter.
Yeah, So this was very much aimed at Grush.
This was absolutely aimed at Grush, Which was why I thought it was bizarre that he also tried to kind of take umbrage at Fravor and at graves testimony. Who I mean, they didn't even really say anything about Arrow anyway. The reason why I wanted to highlight it is just that clearly we are in a situation now where one of these individuals is telling the truth, and it's actually, frankly should be easier now at this point to figure
it out. And I implore these members of Congress, like, please find out and update us in a very you know, speedy manner, because enough, you know, public interest has been given now to the non human biologics, to the you know, the all of the just incredible allegations made by Grush. But we have enough now to where he at the very least, like he said it under oath, that he's provided materials to them. And we've also got some documents that are provided by George Knapp, which makes some really
crazy allegations that were entered into the congressional record. It's like, look investigated and just tell if it's true or not true.
I mean, it's going to be very difficult to get any kind of answers about some of the extraordinary claims that were made in testimony. But some of the stuff that is laid down in this personal statement seems more provable. Exactly did he actually provide the material that he said he did or not, Like that seems like something we could potentially get to the bottom of, you know, what is the reality of who we work for and whether
he technically worked for Arrow or not. And while those things don't provide us conclusive evidence of you know, what's going on with these they do provide you with a little bit of information about the credibility of these various No.
I think that's incredibly well said.
That gives us, This gives us actually quite a lot more to work with. And bizarrely enough, I found it ignored by the media just because as a headline itself, it's like UFO whistleblower called liar by head of the Pentagon program. I mean, that's extraordinary to me. And then not again, not done through the official Dood process. So that's the breakdown from the best of what I've been able to gather on it covering this topic. You know, things always just seem nothing I guess, is ever done
in the ordinary fashion. Crystal, what are you taking a look at?
Whatever you think of Barbenheimer, the explosion of cultural fascination with both films is basically a testament to our love affair with human creativity. For once, studios took a risk on a few things that were truly new and different, and they were rewarded with massive audiences and a flood of national discourse that has briefly recreated a monocultural event the likes of which I really thought we might never
see again. Ironically, this moment of delight in human imagination comes at a time when the very essence of creativity is actually under threat. Big tech, in order to monopolize the new world of AI, is attempting to feed their models with the whole world of human ingenuity, scraping every bit of language, articulated vision, and novel innovation that they can get their hands on so that their machines might
impersonate a bastardized version of the human spark. These so called large language models can't create anything new, but by harvesting our musings, our pictures, our conversations, our stories, companies are hoping that the bots can be trained to mimic us well enough.
That we will accept their AI derived products.
Basically, they're trying to eat our souls and then sell them back to us. But increasingly artists and creatives are refusing to be food for bots.
That would replace them.
Part of this resistance, of course, is located in Hollywood, where rules around AI use are at the center of the actors and Writers' strike. Studios want to be able to scan actors and use their likeness forever for whatever they want, obliterating the livelihoods of many actors, including extras Studios also want to be able to use AI to write first drafts of new shows and films, bringing writers in at the end just to polish.
Those scripts at a lower pay rate.
Both of these things, of course, are assaults on workers pay, and that is really crucial. But they're also an assault on the very essence of human creativity. Instead of a human vision board of whatever collection of experiences brought that particular person to that particular moment, studios want to use AI to barf up a regurgitated amalgamation of the creativity that it has pilfered from humanity. A pure embodiment of this struggle is coming from an unexpected place, the world
of fan fiction writers. Now, these authors delight in expanding the universes of.
Their favorite shows, books, characters.
They take inspiration from another human spark and let their own imaginations run wild. They create communities around these expanded visions. They author stories primarily for the sheer joy of creativity, since copyright laws keep them from directly monetiged their work, and many were horrified to see their works scraped and ingested by AI. And the way these authors figured out their work had been fed to the machines. It's actually
kind of interesting in and of itself. One of the bots exhibited detailed knowledge of something called the omegaverse, which is apparently a specific sexual dynamic that only exists in the fan fiction world.
That's all I really know about it.
There was no way the bots could have known about the omega Verse if they had not been trained on reams of fan fiction. Rather than accepting this unauthorized pilfering of their labors of love, fan fiction writers state a revolt. Some decided they would no longer post their stories publicly, and instead sending to private lists or taking other steps to keep their work private and walled off from the machines. They've also been pushing popular fan fiction sites to ban
AI generated content. A number also mounted a unique protest of small scale sabotage. Authors banded together for a ritathon in which they attempted to produce as much garbage fanfic as they possibly could in an attempt to confuse the machines. Actually love the ingenuity of this approach. Creative community using creative misshift to mess with the bots. It's quite beautiful, actually. More mainstream artists are also mounting resistance of their own
using the legal system and demands for payment. Thousands of authors, including James Patterson, sign an open letter demanding permission and compensation for the use of their work. Comedian Sarah Silverman is among a growing number of creatives who have filed lawsuits against big tech companies for the unauthorized use of their work to train AI models. The news industry has also been fighting to get paid for use of their archives, and the AP has actually reached some sort of a
deal with open AI to license their news content. Well, I can imagine the big boys, like The New York Times, let's say, cutting deals with AI companies. Who's going to look out for the product of smaller scale creators, Because while you may not see yourself as a creator, to be human is to create, to tell stories, to share thoughts, to build, to find delight in sparks of inspiration. AI
will never be able to actually do these things. But I think the attempt to vacuum up as much human creative content as possible, from works of art to Facebook musing should be properly seen as an existential threat. The goal of these tech oligarchs is to make AIS regurgitated derivative products good enough that these products come to dominate the cultural landscape and certainly the marketplace, devaluing human creativity and squeezing it down into increasingly cramped corners of our society.
Technology which was supposed to bring the marvel of human creativity to global audiences instead being used to quash human creativity centrality to our own society. It's not that the
drive to create will be extinguished, of course, not. If you can make a living from artistic expression, then the day job is certainly going to take precedence if AI is creating our music and our movies because it's cheaper than paying real human beings, or basically marking an endpoint for the advance of human creativity on a national or international scale, because AI cannot create anything new, only recycle the old, leaving us in an endless cultural loop living
off the scraps of recombined Friends episodes and Star Wars spinoffs. Tech Giant's vacuuming up every quean and labor of love, flight of fancy creative spark, and lots of driveling and drivell and mundane meanderings, besides all to train AI models to serve their own profit making purposes.
I mean, guys, what could go wrong here?
In other words, you might have liked Barbie, but are you really going to like Barbie five?
Brought to you by the bots?
Perhaps better to reflect on Oppenheimer, where we track how humanity invents the tools of our own destruction. And Sager, you know it really got to me the fan things.
And if you want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot com.
All right, Sager, what are you looking at?
I'll worry a lot here on Breaking Points about polarization red versus blue. It's the easiest form to discuss, but in reality, the way that polarization really affects our lives is all the little ways that we start to hate each other, from dating preferences to where you will live, to the type of car that you will buy, to which school you will send your kids to. Polarization actually divides us in a more fundamental way than we often
tend to realize. And I often said that polarize today is best understood by a single question, did you attend a four year college degree or not? The answer to that question is probably the single best determinant of how you voted in twenty twenty. If you did, statistically are much more likely to vote Democrat, and if you didn't, statistically more likely to support Trump. Where there are important exceptions,
and overall it's good as good as we got. But increasingly another factor is actually beginning to emerge that could really hurt us.
What gender are you?
As you could actually see from those maps, if only women voted, Democrats would win by a huge margin. If only men voted, the same would happen for Republicans. So once again, there are important exceptions to this rule. But the more true that it becomes, the bigger problems we are going to have. In fact, the more that I'm looking at emerging data, I'm realizing we've never actually been less racially polarized as a country, which.
Is not a bad thing.
But within races we are actually polarizing amongst very different lines. Take Latino voters, for example, The two big predictors of whether a Latino voted for Trump in twenty twenty are did you attend college or not?
And are you a man or a woman. The same is true for white voters.
Increasingly we see signs of this trend even amongst black voters. Andrew Breitbart once famously said politics is downstream of culture in this divide, I think it's becoming even more clear what stun mean was not just that this is true for adults, but it appears true even for the emerging generation of teenagers, who much has been talked and written about as the great liberal hope.
If you're talking about just women, that might be true.
But some new data unearthed by Daniel Deviz at The Hill, buried within the Monitoring the Future survey from the University of Michigan, finds that the political identities of twelfth grade boys differs starkly from the political identities of twelfth grade girls. The Michigan survey finds, quote, twelfth grade boys are nearly twice as likely to identify as conservative versus liberal. Now,
it's important that many people don't identify as anything. Important to note that conservative standing still only is approximately one quarter.
Liberal is a thirteen percent.
But it's important designator whenever you put it up against women. For girls, it could actually be more different, as the survey finds, quote, the share of twelfth grade girls who identifies liberal rose from nineteen percent in twenty twelve to thirty percent in twenty twenty two. Only twelve percent of girls identified as conservative in last year's survey, so effectively the polar opposite of what's going on with boys. What's interesting is not the divide, but how actually new the divide is.
As they know quote.
As recently as late two thousands, liberal boys occasionally outnumbered conservatives, and back in the car To era, both boys and girls were leaning towards liberal. As researcher Gene Twine actually founded a new book published Generations, the difference in attitudes between twelfth graders has never been bigger than today. What's really interesting is that over a five year period, girls became slightly more liberal, but it's boys in particular who
became much more conservative. So this explains actually a lot about today, a lot of trends like Liver King and Andrew Tate phenomenons, online shit posting, Reddit culture. As the overall culture becomes dramatically more hostile to traditional masculinity, especially during the Trump years, the new data on high schoolers in particular will have profound consequences for our society, culture, and our demographics as the years progress. We're already seeing
what happens when this is applied to college. For example, the more colleges coded as left wing and for women and gays, the more that boys are just going to drop out. That's something that I've covered here repeatedly. Boys who are fleeing college by the millions in this higher education soon will have a gender gap nearly equal to the electoral gap that we are seeing right now. It
is really as if worlds are colliding. And to once again answer the question, why should you even care about gender gaps and politics or in education, because it profoundly influences who dates who, and thus who is going to reproduce or even if that's attainable. A college graduate, for example, on average forty three percent less likely to date someone who is quote a Republican than the average American. It jumps up to sixty five percent for the term quote
is a Trump Supporter. Dating in political polarization amongst gender creates a dramatic mismatch in the availability of mates both genders as they age up to the point where they desire a permanent partner.
And while I support.
People's right to be single, of course if they want to, the data tells us that people who are single longer and throughout their lives are less happy, less likely to report satisfaction in life, more likely to suffer from health problems, suffer worse overall lifetime earnings, and suffer on a myriad of other key quality of life metrics. So what can we do about this? I honestly don't know. Richard Reeves has some great ideas in his book about how to stop gender imbalances in schools and higher.
Education, but I think it goes way deeper than that.
Culture is telling men that they are not wanted, and they're responding accordingly by becoming both less desirable as mates and becoming more self loathing and angry with the Internet as a vehicle. Andrew Tait was a symptom of this disease. Liver King and many other scam artists to come and go. Since step one at least is acknowledging that we have a problem. It's okay to be a man, and it's also okay to care about men. So I'm clear curious what you thought, Chris.
All about that, And if you want to hear my reaction to Cyber's monologue, become a Premium subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot Com.
We're gonna have a great show for everybody on Thursday. Enjoy Counterpoints.
Tomorrow. Ryan will be where's he coming in from? From France.
We're jealous of him here at Breaking Points, so anyway, enjoy the show. Thank you to all of our premium subscribers who've been signing up, and we're working on some big, big guests just to explain the current apps and so we'll see you guys later