8/7/23: Trump Lawyer Spars With All Five Networks, Americans Oppose More Ukraine Aid, Republican Voters Turn On Anti-Woke, Wells Fargo Deletes Customer Funds, Lizzo Controversy, Jim Cramer Cries, Biden Sanctions Fail, Biden 2024 Debate w/ Michael LaRosa

be reelected. We'll talk to him about the economic numbers, how people are feeling, and see what he thinks about all of that. Before we get to any of that, though, little programming. Note tomorrow is back to school day for my kids, so you need to get them off in the morning. So the show, I'm going to do the show with Sager, but we'll be.

senior advisor to Biden in the White House. Kind of the first time that we've been able to host someone here in the studio who is literally from Biden White House. We appreciate them engaging with us, and I don't think it would be possible without all of you guys. So Breakingpoints dot Com if you can help us out and become a premium subbeber helping build a space for some fun conversations and interviews.

his client. We've pulled some of the highlights of that. Let's take a listen former.

Mister Trump wanted it to be debated in the state legislatures. But what make no mistake about it? Based on what Vice President Pence will say, the government will never be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump had corrupt or criminal intent.

President Trump believed, in his heart of hearts that he had won that election, and as any American citizen, he had a right to speak out under the First Amendment. First of all, this protective order that's being suggested by the Biden administration is an effort to keep from the press important nonsensitive information that the Biden administration has that may speak to.

this indictment our core political speech. Every single thing that President Trump is being prosecuted for involved aspirational asks, asking state legislatures, asking state governors, asking state electoral officials to do the right thing. In fact, even asking Vice President Pence was protected by free speech. And none of that is illegal.

saying was a pack of lies. And so that's one piece. The piece about Pence is kind of interesting. He claims that Mike Pence will end up being one of their best witnesses on the stand. I find not a little hard to believe, given that Pences at this point, you know, he was kind of wafflely and a little wiggily about what exactly he thought about January six. At this point, he's made some pretty clear comments that what Trump did was wrong. Pence himself sought out legal advice to figure

out if he was allowed to do that. He came to the conclusion, based on what he was presented with, that this was not something that you could do that, it would be against the law, unconstitutional etca. So we'll see if Pence ends up being a good witness for that. And he mentions there also this protective order and there have been some legal developments with regard to that that

we'll get to in just a minute. But you see him out there really making the case, and to me, the fact that he is on all five of these shows trying to make the case to the American people tells you they see it as much more critical to sort of win hearts and minds and try to win an election. They feel better about those odds than they probably feel about their odds in the.

a difficult task often for prosecutors. That's part of the reason why if you guys read the indictment, you can actually see there's multiple times where Trump is presented with a list of people who presented him with the facts that he did lose the election in that way. Crystal Mike Pence. I think what they're saying might be a good witness is that Pence can testify that no, no, no, he really did believe it whenever he was pressuring me.

The problem for Trump is that if they did in fact or Pence can't testify when Trump said, quote, you are too honest, then being too honest would imply that you're going countervailing to the facts as he would know it. And then second, really going and rejecting some of the Sydney Powell claims in private before then embracing some of them in public. So those would be two key instances where the prosecutors might try and prove that he did not in fact or he did not in fact believe

everything that he was saying. It is an interesting thing, though, you know, to try and prove somebody's state of mind, as it coincides with free speech protections. It's another reason that they're saying, but overall, I think that your read of the whole thing is correct, which is, look, they don't think they're going to win this case. They're obviously going to throw everything they got at it, but they're going to try and throw every team to the American people.

And also, you know, look they don't have an un they do have a decent case on appeal, very likely considering that some of this is almost certainly going to get adjudicated by the Supreme Court, so they're going to lay that out there as well. But this is political. Anything with the political official by definition is going to fall into this realm. And I read it exactly the same way you did.

rights one in particular, people have been pointing to. But even this idea of okay, you were a corruptly imp acting government proceeding right, obstructing a government proceeding official proceeding, that particular charge has been used against literally hundreds of

the January sixth rioters. So in a sense, even though you know Trump's actions were not exactly the same as people who were trespassing in the Capitol and doing whatever those people did, you still have some sort of precedent of using this charge with regards to obstructing the counting

of the electoral votes on January sixth. And out of I think there are fifteen different judges who have handled cases that involved this charge with regards to January six rioters, and fourteen out of the fifteen found it to be an appropriate charge.

tested in court at this time. So Trump himself, of course not remaining quiet either on the campaign trail where he's been railing against Jack Smith and calling him deranged and whatnot, but also very much on truth social going after basically everybody who is involved in this case.

way more for you. Considering the fact that I had to fly to a filthy, dirty, falling apart, very unsafe Washington, d C. Today, and that I was then arrested by my political opponent who's losing badly to me in the polls.

in terms of how this case unfolds. So we've got a little bit of kind of wrangling going on in the legal world as they try to settle what are the rules and the guidelines with regard to the discovery process, and what's the timeline going to be one, are the dates going to be said, et cetera. So gun and put this up on the screen. There was a dispute between government lawyers and Trump's lawyers about when they would have to respond to this motion that was filed by

the government. The judge denied Trump's request for additional time to respond to the DOJ motion for protective order. And this all has to do again with the rules with regards to discovery and who can have access to all

of those materials. The government wants to request a rule barring Trump's lawyers from providing copies to Trump of discovery materials deemed sensitive, and they cited one of these truth social posts in their emotion to say listen, this guys shouldn't have access to this stuff because just look at how unhinged he is on social media.

But politically, he has to be able to continue to speak out on this to try and can not only drive his fundraising operations, but he needs to make a public case about whether whatever happens here in court, that it doesn't actually matter or it doesn't impact like what he's running on. So I think that just really connects to it. Attacking the judge, attacking the jurors, attacking the pool.

All of that is just part of the political process, right, because you're like, hey, this is illegitimate in its face, before this thing even starts a most Republicans already believe that. So now you have to try and target independent voters. We have a decent amount of polling on this. You and I were taking a look at around way people feel about this. They both feel it's political and that it's just so that's always fun.

of the American people are. I mean, the Republicans look seventy percent of them think that Trump won, like they think this was all justified, which actually brings up what I think is an interesting point that some in conservative media have been pressing people on the Trump side of like, Okay, so are you going to prove that are you going to actually bring you know, the kraken this time and prove that the election really was stolen, because then like

you're off the hook then and everything he did was completely justified. And so that's something to keep in mind, is if the election really was stolen, this is your golden opportunity to present to the entire nation your evidence that this election was unjust Something tells me they're not going to be going in that particular direction. One last piece about this, you know, the motions and the judge's decision here put this up on the screen from CNN.

benefit actually to keep this thing dragged out. If anything, if you are going to get convicted or whatever, you won't kind of want that baked in from the beginning. It would be the best thing that ever happened to

him from a primary perspective. But it's also interesting in terms of political point of view, he does seem to be thinking of this as truly clinched just I think it was yesterday his super pack released a first ad, not attacking Ron DeSantis, just going after Joe Biden, which is one of those moves where you only do whenever you no longer think you have to run against somebody. So yeah, I mean, lots of interesting little signals.

what we're looking at. That's what this election is gonna is going to be about. That's what is going to turn on. So it's not a surprise to me that he sort of feels like, all right, the Republican nomination, even this far out, is all but wrapped up, wrapped up, And my bigger issue is getting past Joe Biden and trying to push these trial dates off far enough so that I don't end up having a campaign from present.

up there on the screen. This is the first question, should the US authorize additional funding to Ukraine? Yes? Forty four percent, No, fifty five percent. That's the first time actually that we've seen that number. This is actually really interesting, and I want to keep this up here for a little while. What type of assistance should the US provide

to Ukraine? Sixty three percent say intelligence gathering, fifty three percent say military training, But then the majority drops off providing weapons forty three percent, and is stunning, only seventeen percent say participation in military operations. And I've been yearning for something like this for a long time. Crystal because one of the way that the Ukraine hawks will try and hijack the debate. But well, the vast majority of Americans want to support Ukraine. I'm like, yeah, but to

what extent and how like intelligence gathering? Okay, sure, you know, even that gets a little sketchy whenever we're providing military targets inside of Russia. But that's a whole other conversation. Yeah, as you start to segregate it down anything that involves like actual participation in kinetic events, people are like, not only no, but hell no. And then in terms of even supporting the overall war effort with actual like weapons

and increased funding. Their Americans are really beginning to turn on that. So let's go to the next one. We have the partisan breakdown here. This is actually really interesting. We're talking about it before the show. Democrats on further support for Ukraine, support for additional funding super majority nearly sixty two percent. The US should do more, sixty one percent go to the Republicans here. So then when you see Republicans on further support for Ukraine, vast majority seventy

one percent should not authorize funding. US has done enough sixty percent. But then we go to the next one, and this is where things are really odd. I worry that this war will continue without resolution. Democrats at eighty two percent, and then actually Republicans and Independence at seventy three and seventy five, respectively. So Democrats are worried that the war will continue without resolution, but are also basically united in wanting to actually authorize even more aid for

the war in Ukraine. So politically, people are kind of all over the map. Democrats are worried, but they want to send more weapons. But the big top line figure Independence Republicans overall majority turn against increased actual military aid to Ukraine, and that flies in the face of what the administration is doing. Just two weeks ago, Biden promised actually more aid to Ukraine because the one hundred billion or so apparently has not been enough. He just said, quote,

we will not waiver. This was the NATO summit. We are going to help Ukraine build a strong capable defense across land, air, and sea, which will be the force stability in the region and deccur against any and all threats. I think the American people are beginning to come to terms with what the reality of this type of rhetoric looks like one hundred billion dollars is more than we gave the Afghan national security forces over twenty years, and

I think we all know how that worked out. We've brought everybody stories here about how even the Ukrainian military, which has been trained directly by the West, provided with weapons, has really faltered. They've had to revert to much more primitive tactics. And actually, just this morning, Krystals, I was reading a piece about the Ukraine. I talk a lot here about one of the reasons why it's going to be so difficult for Ukraine. I always say they don't

have any industrial base. Well, they actually confirmed it. In the year before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine did not did not produce one single artillery shell. Today on the front line, they are using ninety thousand shells per month.

To put that in perspective, the United States, with the full power of its industrial base, produces t four thousand shells per month, which is actually ten thousand more than we were producing in twenty twenty two, which means that the overall number of shells the Ukraine consumes is some four to five times higher than the entire United States

is able to produce per month. The Ukrainian ammunition chief even admits there is no way we will be able to produce that amount of shells quote four years, which shows you that absent charity from all of the West, their military and war effort collapses effectively overnight. And Congress and the American people are at a point where like,

we have done enough here. And I know this can sound very difficult, but people need to understand, like the level of money that would be required to basically convert American industry to support the war in Ukraine would be astronomical, and it would be doing so for something which fundamentally is not of an actual core interest to the American people.

So reality, I think is really beginning to take its toll, both on the Ukrainian war effort sometime soon in the future, but really in the minds of people who are looking at this and being like, look, it's been nineteen months here, you know, like we got to bring things to a close at some point.

The Democratic position here, it could seem a little perplexing on its face, where on the one hand they're like, yes, absolutely, more AID. On the other hand, they're like, you know, I'm pretty worried this is just going to continue forever. So on the one hand, you would think like, well, maybe you should consider that we should take a different approach, maybe there's a different you know, tactic, since this seems

to be just continuing to draw off this conflict. But I think Democrats more than any other group, they really do buy whatever the mainstream media line is, by and large line and singer, I mean, they have the highest

levels of trust in mainstream media outlets. And that's basically the messaging that you get from corporate press, which is that you know, the way to bring this resolution clothes that the correct action here is just to continue to support them and maybe they're going to win and take back all the territory, and that's our best shot, and so that's what we should do. And of course there's also a lot of parts and loyalty of just all right, this is what Joe Biden says the right course of

action is. So we just we trust our guys, so we believe that this is the best way to bring things to a close, even though it's hard to see how that's really going to happen. The other thing to note is, you know, Democrats are fairly unified behind the Biden position. And I'm not just talking about elite Democrats who are one hundred percent unified behind the Biden position, but the Democratic base fairly unified behind the Biden position.

The Republicans have a pretty significant divide on their hands between what Republican elected elites and even many of their sindential contenders, and certainly the donor base the policy that they support, versus the policy that now quite a significant majority of the Republican base supports. And this is again where you know Donald Trump, who just positions himself wherever he thinks it's going to be politically advantageous. On most issues, he doesn't really have a sort of like core belief.

He just goes where his gut tells him is the right place to be based on his political needs and interests. You know, he really identified this split very early, and you know, very early in the primary season. Previously he'd sounded these extremely hawkish notes, being you know, to the sort of to the right and to the more hawkish side of Biden. He's gone back and forth and wavered even within the primary. Occasionally he goes back to that

kind of rhetoric. But by and large, he intuited that there was this divide between where the Republican base was and where Republican elites were, and also intuited that that divide would continue to open up, and he positioned himself once again in the place that makes the most political sense for him.

very beginning. That was not a popular position at the time, but it ended up being a political savior in the long run. I also bet on that frankly, you know, in the future. I was like, listen, you guys, can you know, put as many Ukraine flags in bio and out front of your house as long as you want.

But great power conflict in a World War One style one always ends up basically catching up with reality and that's basically where we find ourselves right now, which you know, it's I think it's sad because it's a terrible tragedy. Everything that we've been reading about Ukrainian casualties is a nightmare. I mean, there were not releasing their casualty figures, but even they are fully acknowledging that it is a very heavy loss. You know, inside Ukraine, actually we're not hearing

every thing about what's happening. There have been very viral blog post crystal of Ukrainian military bloggers kind of reflecting the sentiments of the rank and file, who said that their commanders are throwing them into the grinder with absolutely no concern for their lives and these things are going very viral. So I mean inside Ukraine, I mean think about it, like when you've got ninety thousand people in a pretty small country, you know, against relative to the US,

where who have lost limbs. At that point, you all know somebody who's been wounded on the front line. You may probably be connected to someone who has lost their life and has been killed. Things start to get very real once you get to that level of death and of wounded in the population. This happened. I keep coming back to the First World War. It's a very instructive thing.

I mean, we had almost a near revolution in France after millions of Frenchmen were wounded or killed on the front line, where they effectively demanded they're like, look, we got to bring this, we got to completely change tactics and all that. And it's also the revolution in Night ten eighteen in Germany, which was really like a ground up revolution against the conditions imposed on by the war,

which brought down the entire Kaiser regime. So look, you know, if you let these things go on long enough, who the hell knows what's going to happen. Russian revolution also, of course, and I would say like let's avoid that scenario as much as possible, because it's not like everything worked out for the better.

might how they might actually turn against it. One of them is actually a quote from an actual voter buried inside this piece. Can we put that police up there on the screen that really does identify what she was talking about. She like, for example, she says, quote, if if you don't like what bud Light did, don't buy it. Then she says, quote, if you don't like what Disney

is doing, don't go. That's not the government's responsibility. But then there was even one who talked about book banning, and what they said there, Crystal, was that they both believed what was it, COVID is a Chinese lab okay, do you have a full one in?

leave corporations to support whichever they choose fifty two percent. Okay, interesting, Let's go to the next one there, please. I am a Republican who quote supports gay marriage fifty percent, opposes gay marriage forty one percent, and then the next one there. What we can find is what is more important for Republican candidate quote protecting individual freedoms fifty one percent, guarding

traditional values. So I think when you put those together, I'm not going to toot my own horn, but some of us have been talking about a phenomenon called barstool conservatism for a while which specifically emphasizes like individual libertarianism and a much more like secular country and environment, which is more opposed to political correctness and to social transgenderism and CRT, then much more so they are than what a traditional nine two thousand and four Republican kind of

would be. And the more actually that you conflate those two things, the less popular that they are. But I thought it was very interesting to kind of see this very kind of libertarian bent become the prevailing attitude amongst the primary voter as a Republican, not just amongst the individual electorate, but that's overall indicative of a lot of social trends.

So they say, when presented with a choice between two hypothetical Republican candidates, only twenty four percent of national Republican voters opted for a candidate who focuses on defeating radical woke ideology in our schools, media, and culture over a candidate who focuses on restoring law and order in our streets and at the border. So, now does Trump dabble in some of this like woke anti woke talk as well? Yeah, it's as Sacer just pointed out, and he's out truth

and about it this morning. But in terms of the central focus of his campaign, you would say, it's more about the border.

of like style and affect. The coalition that Ron DeSantis is trying to pull together is, in fairness, I think, a very difficult coalition to pull together. It includes people who you know, really despise Trump at this point and don't want anything to do with him, and he also has to try to win over some people who still really like and you know, but maybe it might be open to a different candidate. To try to pull that

group of people together is very hard. So the place the lane that he thought might unite the entire Republican coalition is on being anti woke. So he's really made that his bread and butter, even leaving decide, you know, some of the things that he did earlier on in his gubernatorial career, certainly things that he did when he was in Congress. But it's just I think there's been

dramatic overreach number one. Number two, it has rubbed up against this live and let lift ideology that runs very deep, not just within the Republican Party but within the American public. In general, where it's like, listen, you're an adult, go do what you want to do. Let's like, you know, make your choices. As long as they don't interfere with me.

I really could care less, and also rubs up against this traditional conservative position of like, hey, businesses get to make their own decisions within their own companies, is not the governors.

been Republicans ever since. The activist base, specifically of younger Republicans who are the most pro Desantists people, I think you will mostly find out there are very much kind of on board the whole, like we got to use the government and weaponize it against corporations who we don't really agree with on a cultural level. So I think that because DeSantis is what he's like forty four or

something like that. Yeah, of his cohort of Republicans, he's going to be in more of that like minded group, So there's something to that. There's also in general, who are the people who are professional who don't like Trump.

You have two sets. You basically have the group I just talked about who thinks Trump is too friendly to like gay interests, and we've suckered up to what Caitlin Jenner and didn't use the power of the government to actually transform conservative and then you got more like January sixth is the worst thing that ever happened in American history,

like Liz Cheney types. So if you're a Desantist, Desanta's person kind of their professional Republican apparatus, well you're really going to be in that first category that I talked about. And those are the type of people who I can tell you from personal experience. I know many of the people who work for him, many of the people who are on his campaign and who backed him from the beginning, they very much fall into the category that I just described. So I think it could be a staff driven thing.

But listen, I mean DeSantis also probably believes it, so you can't take that away from.

and it makes sense. I mean, we see a similar divide on the Democratic side, where it's like, you know, more affluent, college educated Liberals, they're more concerned with the cultural value set and the working class, you know, multiracial working class base that still supports Democrats. They are more concerned with bread and butter issues like hey, how am I gonna be able to pay the bills at the end of the month in healthcare, et cetera, and unions.

So you see a similar divide. The issue says isn't obviously the same on the Republican side, but you see a kind of similar divide where if you were non college educated and you think that immigrants are a real threat to your sort of livelihood and they're depressing your wages, et cetera, and you're worried about like safety in your community. Like these are very kitchen table, bread and butter issues.

I think that cohort well, specifically because I came up with them throughout Washington and have watched them kind of with curiosity as they branch out between Trump, DeSantis, and then like Tim Scott, people that there really are only the three genders I guess in Republican politics, so those

are kind of where people generally fall. But overall, I do think it is clear that that college educated group clearly really isn't as touch as they would like to think with the mean republic can voter as to what animates them into why they are all voting or very likely to vote Trump in the first place.

up on the screen. This is insane. A bunch of Wells Fargo banking customers went to pay their bills, check their bank account accounts, et cetera, pay their rent, and found out their deposits were gone because of a quote technical issue me read you the opening of this piece. They say that those deposits had disappeared, causing the customers to express concern over where their money had gone and in some cases to report being late on their bills. Wells Fargo said it a technical issue and that it

has been resolved. By the way, this isn't even the first time this has happened at Wells Fargo, which you all probably know. Wells Fargo has a very checkered recent past of all kinds of fraud that they have been. You know, they have gotten into all kinds of legal troubble for creating all these fake accounts, which by the way, they were caught doing again just recently, even though they said they'd turn over a new leaf and changed their ways,

et cetera. But a similar glitch that resulted in deposits being erased or being reported incorrectly happened for customers Back in March. NBC News put this up on the screen. They did some additional reporting on this. They talked to some of the customers. They actually found a guy that this happened to in both instances. It happened to him in March, and then it happened to him again now, and understandably he's like, all right, I think I'm done

with this bank. They also spoke with a woman, Genie Cortez, single, disabled, self employed accountant and Alaska resident. She was supposed to have paid her rent, gas, A Lite, extric and internet payments for the month by now, with funds that she deposited Wednesday. She was told Friday by Wells Fargo Rupp that she would not be able to access her deposit for another three to five business days. She'd earlier been told Wells Fargo could send her a letter to give

to her creditors, that too, has not arrived. She said, quote, there is simply not enough funds without that deposit to cover them all. Talking about her bills, I simply cannot live without my funds now. So this bank screws up deletes these deposits. Glitch, whatever happened, technical issue that again had already happened to them previously, just a few months prior. In March, this happens again, and people were just absolutely screwed by this. I mean, you know, and screws up

your credit. It makes it and once it's just it can be a total cascading effect. The late fees that get piled up for you know, potentially like getting kicked out of your apartment, et cetera. So people put in a very bad position because of this.

that they had made with their bank cards. Wells Fargo had stopped this conduct this year as a part of a larger effort to clean up other unlawful practices stretching back to two thy eleven. So they have now paid two record fines on a Consumer Banking Institution three point seven billion was a record after a previous one billion, which they had also been forced to pay before that.

So this is totally crazy. And at this point, now this is what the overall statistics, six point two billion dollars have been fed for banks for mistreating customers and investors. Who wants to bet that those finds pale in comparison to the overall profit that all said banks have made in the two thousand since the two thousand and eight financial cross six point two billion is like a paltry day on Wall Street for some of these folks. Yeah, it's just crazy. Yeah, they always get away with it.

D three up on the screen. So this ties back to the conversations we were having around Silicon Valley Bank and the bank balance that happened at that time, and one of the theories was like, if the government is making it clear that even these mid sized institutions are too big to fail, you know who's going to get screwed?

interesting reason. So actually deposits at the big banks have gone down. Some of the biggest deposit declines during the second quarter were not those mid sized regional lenders that everybody was worried about. They were the industry's giants, JP, Morgan, Chase, Bank of America, City Group, Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo, the four biggest banks by assets gave up a net two hundred and sixty two billion in deposits when compared with

the year earlier period. Now, it is no surprise that even without the issues that were happening at banks, that deposits would be going down right now. Why because you had the Federal Reserve hike interest rates and so there are sort of better opportunities to move your money out of a savings account and earn higher interest somewhere else. So it's not a surprise that deposits are being pulled down. What is a surprise is that they are coming overwhelmingly

from the biggest players. The reason for that is that the smaller players realized they're going to have to compete by offering higher interest rates on their savings accounts, and so they have upped the amount of interest that customers who put their money in a savings account in those banks, those smaller banks have upped the interest that those are accounts are earning. And because of that, they have actually

in some instances increased their deposits over this period. So it's surprising as the total opposite of what everyone had predicted.

emergency fund and all that. And I remember looking, you know, at one of these large banks and they didn't even offer like a higher interest savings account. So you start googling around and I came across all of these banks which are paying like five or six percent interest, banks I'd never even heard of, and I was like, well, that's interesting, Okay. You know, you start to read a little batter, you're like, okay, FDIC insured, all right, you know,

maybe you could take a chance on that. So like, on a personal level, actually kind of went through this and it does make sense, which is that's how these banks are able to make a name for themselves. And also, frankly, in an arrow where the Federal Reserve is paying like four and a half on T bills, there's no reason that these banks don't have the capacity to do it because they can literally just take your money and investment in treasuries and then pay you back in the same

interest and still make a modest profit. So there's no reason for the big banks not to offer it other than they literally just don't want to. So small banks using the arbitrage. I guess you can always have faith in the American entrepreneur.

hostile work environment. This was all in a lawsuit that was filed last week. They alleged she pressured one of the dancers to touch a nude performer at an Amsterdam strip club and subjected the group to an excruciating audition after leveling false accusations that they were drinking on the job.

That audition, they said, was so brutal, it lasted twelve hours and they were so terrified for their jobs that one of the dancers actually soiled herself because she was so afraid of just asking to go to the bathroom.

performers vaginas as well. Lizzo then turned her attention to one of the dancers who was suing her and began pressuring Miss Davis to touch the breast of one of the nude women, pressure that that dancer ultimately gave into. She felt very sort of like bullied, and like the from listening to some of the interviews with the dancers, they felt very much like their job was on the

line and all of these interactions. So where Lizo may have been like, oh, we're at the club and we're friends, whatever, they're viewing this as like, this is my boss, this is my entire career on the line. I do think you know one factor here is she's known for and full disclosure, I've been to a Lizo show, so I've

watched some of these dancers perform. She's known for her dancers being bigger, consistent with her image, and so if you are a high level dancer who has that physique, it's probably hard to find war in other areas, so you feel extra pressure of like, I got to keep this job because this is the dream. This is the thing with Ann, and I don't even know if I'll be able to work. I have a little bit of an interview with two of the dancers who are involved in this laws.

little weird. But then we were told that a headcount was already sent, a list was already sent, so she knows who's coming. And at that time we had already been kind of fearing for our jobs and being austra so It is an understand it's an understanding in the camp that if you don't really participate and you know, try to get in with Lizzo, it's you won't be booked on as many jobs, she won't like you as much. It just you'll be ostracized later. So we went, We

stayed in the corner. We talked to each other the whole time. We tried to ignore, you know, what was happening. A lot of crazy things were happening. And after a lot of explicit things went on, Lizzo kind of saw me singled me out. She was kind of going around like inviting people to touch the nude performers, and I guess it was my turn.

sound and too outrageous to not be addressed. These sensationalized stories are coming from former employees who have already publicly admitted they were told their behavior on tour was inappropriate and unprofessional. As an artist, I've always been very passionate about what I do. I take my music and my performances seriously because at the end of the day, I only want to put out the best art that represents me and my fans. With passion comes hard work and

high standards. Sometimes I have to make hard decisions, but it's never my intention to make anyone feel uncomfortable or like they are not valued as an important part of the team, which you think, Sagar.

harassment scandal broke wide in a career crisis. They say that the quote two days her record sales, including streaming an airplay of collapse. Looking at numbers from illuminate, the trends have not just fallen, but have evaporated. It's as if every radio has pulled LISO hits, fans stop streaming the records, and they forgot about buying them or downloading them. This is actually incredibly rare. We did not see a

similar instance whenever it came to Kanye West. I think, for example, or I mean, listen, you know many people in the music business and all of that are not

exactly angels. And we've been talking about this about why I think this like kind of culturally resonated, which I think that because she casts herself as such an image of female empowerment, as above the rest, as a genuine like liberal icon, that whenever she is found to just be like a rich, pompous, you know, a ridge girl, pops mean girl, like probably everybody else in this profession, that people are like, hey, you know what, screw you?

Like there's a real personal identification. I think that a lot of people personally found, you know, with both her music and kind of the way that she presented herself and all of that. Of course, you know, media kind of blew that up out of proportion. It's not like she wasn't playing into it. And so when it turns out that she's just like everyone else, you know who has too much money and is the center of attention and acts like this and treats their employees like pawns

and then calls them on professional whenever they speak out. Yeah, you're like, oh, hold on, honestly, you've got a titanic ego that really backstops a lot of this, and that led to an actual consumer backlash.

brand is the fat chain part. And I will say, when I actually read the allegations with regards to the alleged fat shaming, it's a little ambiguous.

like we weren't sure of your commitment. And the dancer interpreted that because she says, listen, everything about me was the same. My energy level, my dancing, my capabilities, you know, my commitment, all of that was the same.

or this wasn't their thing. The one dancer, Ariana who's involved in this suit says she was known as being sort of like the most modest, and they didn't feel that they really had a choice and participate in these activities. They felt there was a lot of kind of bullying, shaming, harassment that Lizo created this you know, really toxic setting where they just felt sort of like powerless and like their whole lives were on the line if they didn't

go along with whatever was happening there. And there's also this piece about the girl who led the woman who led the dancers, was they say, you know, really very religious, fine, but then really proselytizing to the others. But and then at the same time with like shame them for being virgins and post this. So she was like opposed the premaral sex, but then she was also like posting publicly and humiliating some of the girls who were.

that I would rather do. I'm giving up, you know, my personal time and like so many of the things that I would rather pretending to, like the type of food or whatever the hell that you're putting in front of me and having to sit there and kind of eat it with a smile on your face while you

secretly hate yourself inside. That is a terrible experience. So like when she was talking about that, I'm like, man, especially you know, you're on the road, you're tired, you don't want to be doing this, and she's like, you got to come to the club. It's like I cannot. For me, first, I cannot imagine more nightmarriage type situation. But millions of Americans are put into that same type of environment in their own way, you know, by being

forced into something or whatever with their boss. Sometimes it's okay, you know, sometimes you actually do want to do that and there's a genuine friendship, but the power differential is one that people who are bosses very often forget, and then they delude themselves into thinking that everybody actually does.

feeling it down much. So part of me is like, maybe her thing is just a little bit tired anyway, in which case I don't think she recovers, but clearly a lot of people still like the music, So.

just codes cringe. I think in a way whereas it would have been more celebrated by the media, I would say even three maybe four years ago. Maybe partially also why people are willing to turn on her, you know now, So I don't know, I don't know what It all kind of leads to I'm the last person. I guess.

and healthcare benefits. Now, the rhetoric at the time from the executives, of course, was oh, we're all in this together. When profits returned, the gains all flowed to the top. Today, starting wages at the Big three are about ten dollars lower per hour than they were back in two thousand

and seven when you account for inflation. In the bailout, workers gave up annual cost of living increases, something that the UAW first won back in the nineteen forties, and without those gains to keep up with inflation, worker wages for both new and experienced workers fell further and further behind.

Not so for the CEO those of the automakers, though they have seen their pace bike forty percent in just the past several years, widening a massive gulf between the pay of the executives and those of the workers who slaver, of course, makes.

the working class always loses. Now, take a listen to how uaw president that Kramer reference there, Sean Fain, take a listen to how he described the class warfare that has been waged against his members at a time when the automakers are back to record breaking profitability.

weren't spent on the EV transition. So when the Big Three say the future is uncertain and that the EV transition's expensive, remember that they've made a quarter of a trillion in North American profits over the last decade. And afford billions of it into special dividends, stock buybacks, and supersize executive compensation. Our message going into bargaining is clear, record profits mean record contracts.

Many of the new EV battery plants are joint partnerships with foreign companies that are not subject to UAW contracts. These new plants are also concentrated in Southern states and environments that are more hostile to unionization, and already the union has plenty of examples to point to where lower paid EV jobs are replacing higher paid gas powered vehicle jobs.

raise to the bottom, and facilitating corporate greed. Everything is really at stake for workers in the auto industry right now, and they're huge implications overall for the dying American middle class. These workers join the ranks of hundreds of thousands of others who are using this time of fat profits and tight labor markets to try to strike a better deal and clawback some portion of what workers have lost out

to capital over the past four years. And I have to tell you pretty impressed with the audacity of the auto workers asks. They are pushing for a twenty percent pay hike now with additional five percent increases until the pay increase reaches forty percent number, which, by the way, consistent with the pay hikes that the big three CEOs

have garnered over just the past several years. They are also asking for a right to strike over plant closures and for automakers to fund a program that would keep workers employed if those automakers decide to close a plant. They're to make that EV workers get the same deal as non EV workers, and they're making some real demands for work life balance, including shorter work weeks and more

paid time off. Contrast that with the pasture of the labor movement since the nineties, where they were constantly on the back foot, constantly playing defense, trying to keep the

concessions from cutting too deep. Now we got a new leadership with the Team Starts, which just won quite a bit for their members and a tentative deal that their members are now voting on three hundred and twenty three thousand workers across the country have already gone out on strike this year, making it one of the biggest years

for strikes since the year two thousand. Among those workers, of course, are the writers and actors who are fighting their own existential battle to have a stake in the future of that industry. And this all comes at a time when public support for unions has skyrocketed across party lines, forming a new national consensus, bipartisan consensus in favor of workers against capital.

on without some serious problem. That was based upon all of our general understanding of the global economy, one in which the global economy is backstopped by the US dollar and the US power, one which the US and the West control, to the global financial system, where if one is cut off it becomes incredibly difficult to conduct commerce.

Almost immediately, however, cracks began to show. It turned out the rest of the world didn't really agree with our view of the Russia Ukraine conflict, or even if they did, they didn't care nearly enough to stop buying oil from Putin, especially when there was a good deal to be had. And slowly, something even more frightening is becoming clear. What if the United States isn't nearly as powerful as we

once thought. What if we don't really have control over the global financial system as we wanted, And what if instead we have accelerated the development of multipolarity and a world where the US does not nearly have as much say in the affairs of the world. It's difficult eighteen months later not to come to that conclusion, as we have a look at the middling effects that US sanctions

have had on the Russian economy. Just last week came a stunning announcement from the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, the Russian economy is going to grow this year by one point five percent. How can an economy so cut off from the West, so attacked, not only survive but grow. The answer is important for us to understand. It tells a story of how the rest of the world is really not with us on Ukraine. The first and most

important to that story is oil. The West and the US have cut themselves off, but as I said earlier, doesn't mean the rest of the world is, And in fact, despite efforts by the European Union and the US to cap the price on Russian crude oil, the price is high enough at a discount that Russia has been able to facilitate enough money into its economy and fund its war machine. The Wall Street Journal even says that the

current global position is especially advantageous to Russia. The countries most likely to depart from the Western Ukraine consensus are India, China, and other rapidly growing industrialized Asian countries. These Asian countries comprise almost three quarters of all global economic growth this year.

They are happily consuming Russian oil at a steep discount, fueling their industrial economies Without Asian cooperation, Western sanctions have found themselves able only to slightly dent Russian revenues instead of cripple them as they once thought. This story, of course, has been told here many times now and looked at deeply.

But the other question, the question of Russian economic resilience, is equally piercing in its indictment of Western sanctions US and Western bands on exports to Russia, especially if anything thought to be able to fuel war machine was thought to be deadly to the Russian military's ability to wage

war on Ukraine. However, instead of directly importing Western tech, the Kremlin simply buys it via third parties who are not subject to sanctions, namely former Soviet socialist republics Armenia, Georgia, Kyrghyzstan, z Pakistan, Kazakhstan. By importing the exact same things through third parties, they quickly have been able to import materials

they need for precision guided weaponry. Which in recent months has been bombarding Ukraine on a near daily basis even deeper than that, though, it's a profound view into what the real strength of an economy is what matters when

the chips are down. Despite being nearly cut off from the entire Western led financial system, Russia has turned to its hard assets that it has its disposal and is putting oil revenue to the most direct use, pumping it right back into the economy, spending massively on industrial production

to continue at the war effort. Russian government spending is now fourteen percent of the entire country's with an explosion of weapons and ammunition spending and of computers, electronics optical outputs, the government has effectively created a government stimulus by orienting its spending around the war effort, with an increase in material being sent to the front line and easing the effect of any of the war at home on the

elite front. Sanctions two have clearly failed. One of the efforts by the West was to wage economic war on Russian oligarchs and billionaires with two hopes. One, seize the assets create economic problems inside Russia, the other fuel rebellion against Putin, encourage people to speak out and save their finances. Almost no high high profile oligarchs, however, have spoken out, save for that very weird pregosion coup that lasted forty

eight hours. Instead, something else entirely has occurred. Many oligarchs, now seem entirely cut off from their finances in the West, have found themselves actually more dependent on Putin than ever before. They can't speak out because it means absolute financial destruction at home, and as long as they and their families are inside Russia, they more or less have less agency than they once did when they simply relied on him, but also were able to hobnob with the Western financial alite.

And all of this is a familiar story the law of unintended consequences, and worse, a reveal of what power the US has in real terms. We have discovered our ability to compel another date, another nation to do what we want in financial terms actually didn't work. And worse, we have forced our actual strategic partners in Asia to make a choice between their own economies and a moral war we're waging which does not affect our actual material interests.

The end result of this will be a study by Beijing, how do you sanction proof your entire economy, and in eye opening across South America in Asia they have much more autonomy than they once thought without being touched by US public opinion. The net result is one which nobody wanted. The West and the US are weaker. Ukraine is under siege, embroiled in a devastating war of attrition. The Kremlin has zero signs of stopping. If that's not the definition of failure,

I'm not sure what is. I mean, everybody predicted otherwise. They not only survived. IMF says they're going to grow. And it's a real lesson too, you know.

a huge Biden fan I have. You know, sometimes I take issue with sort of the you know, strategies around him that are pursued, But I love all those guys, and you know we you know, winning an election like that in twenty twenty against incumbent and being an underdog basically in a primary, you go through a lot with people, and certainly me and the first lady who traveled together for you know, three years, and so I have a lot of affection and for the family personally and the

president personally. But I would also say that as president, judging by any historic historic measure, you might disagree with what he has done, but he has been the most effective president I think we've had since LBJ in terms of the amount of legislation. He was able to get done with a Democratic Congress with a small majority, the same majority that exists now. He was able to do more than most presidents do in eight years, and he

did it basically in two and a half. So from that perspective, from the scoreboard perspective, he gets an A plus plus. You couldn't ask for more to be done. You may not disagree with all of it, but he's gotten a lot done, and a lot of it came from like wishless for Democrats that they've been wanting to get done for decades.

where a lot of incumbents are at this stage. There's a lot of fatigue with incumbents by this point, and I think that's why you're seeing, you know, there's some minimal primary challenge, there's some democratic lack of enthusiasm, but that's all fairly standard operating procedure at this point in any administration.

I wouldn't expect to see many changes because that, you know, this red wave that everybody had been talking about just never never materialized, and the President took a lot of credit for that, and they should.

enough to eat. And you know, Michael, I want to say, like some of the things that this president did at the beginning of the administration, in particular, I was frankly kind of surprised by, and I think we're more progressive and more more aggressive than was reflected in his Senate career. You know, the stimulus checks, the child tax credit, even his attempts to reduce student loan debt, even though they've

gotten stemming by the Supreme Court. We got a debate about whether it could fight more and how he could do that differently, et cetera. But a lot of those pieces I thought were really encouraging. But the story of his administration since then has been basically those programs getting slowly stripped back, and things that could have had more of a permanent impact, like the fifteen dollars minimum wage,

for example, he's failed to get through. During the campaign trail, he used to talk about, you know, we're going to do a public option. In terms of expanding healthcare, I never hear anything about healthcare anymore. He's supposed to be the most pro union president in history, Yet any thought of passing the pro Act or using his executive power to cancel contracts of union busters.

inflation hasn't really helped me. So how do you square a message from the President that's trying to say say, hey, the economy is great, and a reality that's being experienced by the American people that are saying not in not in my household.

have to start feeling the economic gains. Now, there was a New York Times article out I think our New New York Times SIENA pull out a couple of days ago, and it said that actually, the standard of living most people feel well I'm sorry, not most people, but the standard of living and the cost of consumer goods have actually, sorry, the cost of goods has come down, wages have gone up, are going up, Inflation is cooling and the standard of living.

People said they were worse off a year ago. It dropped about ten points from the last year, So there's improvement. I think there is improvement in people's lives. But you're right, there's a lot, I mean, and that's why he's running for reelection.

I hear Trump is bad, which no disagreement there. I literally haven't heard a single agenda item for what would be accomplished in a second term. Isn't that you know, shouldn't he be making an affirmative case. It's not just about, Hey, the Republicans suck and Donald Trump.

case to be made. I agree with you that all with all the legislative success he has had and the accomplishments and three hundred bipartisan pieces of legislation, whatever, the legislative scoreboard doesn't always translate into voting behavior. There is more right, there is performance, there's candidate quality, There is how you appear in front of the voters. The performance

aspect of politics. There's a lot more that I think they're going to have to do because the numbers are where they are and they have to get them up. But you're right, there's a lot of things on the progressive agenda that need to be talked that they need to be talked about, and you're gonna have to and he's gonna have to address that as well.

before I was even basically since I was alive. So it's not like we could deny that things are a little little bit different really on that front. He would be the oldest president in modern American history, no in ever actually in American history. Should he be re elected up until the day that he served, I mean, should Americans feel okay that he's up to the job. I'm putting this in the nicest way I.

escape it. He's going to be the oldest he's the oldest president, and he is going to be the oldest president. But you know what, I would take thirteen million jobs created in two years plus. Remember think about what this seventy eight eighty year old did. He walked into a crisis of huge proportion unlike we've entered, we've ever seen

in our lifetime in a century. Not only did he, you know, force a huge spending package to stimulate the economy through Congress, but he administered the most successful vaccination program in history. And we can't forget where we were when he came in and where we are now. Schools were closed, businesses, were closed, the economy was feeling a lot of pain, and he's reversed a lot of that and actually created more jobs than at pre pandemic levels.

And he did that as he's eighty year old. Not to mention the huge wish list or a laundry list I could run through.

what he does. And he's been, like I said, probably the most successful president we've had, uh since LBJ in terms of the amount of things he's been able to get done at his age.

two people. My biggest advice, and this has always been my advice, is that we live in a we still, whether we like it or not, we are playing by at least the legacy.

of distrust. And you know what, there's no reason to be generally speaking, the President likes the press, but he should engage them more, and they should build constructive relationships that earn them goodwill and not lose them the benefit of the doubt. And I think if you talk to a lot of reporters, sadly, I think that's been going on, and I would say that the President should engage more with the media.