00:00:00
All right, everybody. Welcome back to the Allin podcast. Your favorite podcast, podcaster's favorite podcast.
00:00:06
With me again, the original Quartet is here. Schmoth Poly Hotia in just an absolutely fabulous winter sweater.
00:00:16
January looking great. Look at the size of those buttons. >> Huge buttons.
00:00:21
>> How many rhinos died to provide those buttons? >> Zero rhinos. Zero rhinos.
00:00:26
>> I'm a simple man that lives by simple means. Okay. Beautiful. Beautiful. And
00:00:31
your sultan of science, David Freriededberg. What's the background here? Is that in Is that a melancholy
00:00:37
and infinite sadness background? I'm trying to figure it out. >> J, we don't talk about my backgrounds.
00:00:41
Thank you. >> It looks like melancholy and infinite sadness by the double album by the
00:00:46
amazing band um Smashing Pumpkins. Am I close or is it the original artwork of that?
00:00:53
>> Don't talk about my backgrounds. >> You don't talk about your backgrounds.
00:00:56
Talk about your background. much giving me so much to work with here. Luckily, I
00:01:00
have my straight man, my brother in arms, my Davos party crashing partner, David Saxs.
00:01:09
>> I got you your first invite to something elite and exclusive. >> I mean, I got invited to go 25 years
00:01:18
ago. They just wanted 50 dimes, but we had a fun time. >> Yeah, we had a good time.
00:01:23
>> We had a good time. Uh any uh post Davos WF impressions? We had a lot of interesting meetings. So
00:01:31
most of which I don't think we can talk about on air, but um yeah, it was it was
00:01:36
an interesting uh interesting event. >> We were staying in a log cabin that was
00:01:40
like 300 years old. The ceilings were like six feet high and the door frames were like 5t high. So bumped our heads a
00:01:47
couple of times. >> Yeah, >> it was pretty crazy. >> It was brutal. I mean,
00:01:51
>> it looked good on the web. The photos of the place looked amazing. >> The Airbnb photos look great.
00:01:57
>> Yeah. But, uh, I think you need to be inside the circle. You need to be inside
00:02:02
the thick of it. Not driving in every day, but it was a distinctly different Davos. Uh, we've mocked Davos here for
00:02:09
many years, but this one was a business takeover and a Trump takeover. >> Correct.
00:02:16
>> Chimath, you would have loved it. It was 1.5 days of everybody hand ringing of
00:02:22
what Donald Trump would say when daddy got there. Then for the 75 minutes daddy gave his talk, the entire city shut
00:02:30
down. Everybody ran to a television set. Then for the next 1.5 days, everybody talked about what Trump said.
00:02:37
>> Basically, I think there are two really big differences with the Davos based on
00:02:40
what I heard because this is the first time I've attended. one is it was much
00:02:43
more business- ccentric and then second there were a lot more Americans there a much bigger American presence and I
00:02:51
think that that owes to the fact that President Trump gave a major speech there and I think it was Larry Fank
00:02:59
who's chairman of the whole thing now who sort of orchestrated that >> and he he wanted to get President Trump
00:03:05
there and I think he's pushed >> for them to be a little bit more business centric and it feels like
00:03:12
they're catering a little bit less to kind of boutique European political issues, although
00:03:19
that's clearly a big part of it. I would say in terms of memorable moments, a big
00:03:25
one was I'm only going to talk about this because I think it was publicly reported otherwise I wouldn't bring it
00:03:29
up, but there was this opening night dinner and so Larry Fink calls on like five people to give little speeches and
00:03:37
the last one he called on was Howard Lutnik, our Secretary of Commerce. And Howard just goes up there and he just
00:03:44
starts dropping truth bombs on them and and uh and again he said all this on the
00:03:51
record in his remarks at Davos I think either that day or the next day. So again I'm not talking out of school. It
00:03:58
was all stuff that he said but basically he said to like all the Europeans he said look I've been coming here for 30
00:04:03
years and you guys have completely failed. You've wrecked your economies with all this net zero stuff and climate
00:04:08
change and energy. and he just started blasting on that and then all the open border stuff. He really let them have
00:04:15
it. I mean, he was really the truth. And then there was this uncomfortable like rustling in the audience, you know, as
00:04:21
he was like gathering steam and then it's been reported Al Gore started booing at the end.
00:04:28
>> Drunk on Chardonnay. Is that true? I can't verify that it was Al Gore, but
00:04:34
I definitely heard somebody. And I think it was Al Gore who was >> just like the two guys from the Muppets
00:04:38
in the Balcony, Statatler and whoever. And it was just like Waldorf and Statler.
00:04:43
>> Well, look, I mean, >> yeah, Walder and Statler. >> This whole climate change thing was Al
00:04:48
Gore's big hoax going back to the '9s. And >> well, did he win an Oscar? He won an
00:04:52
Oscar. I mean, and even absolutely Bill Gates has acknowledged that this is not an existential threat. It can be dealt
00:04:58
with, >> you know. So I think the bloom is off the rose in terms of that whole agenda
00:05:05
>> I'd say at Davos. Although to be sure I'd say most people there still probably
00:05:10
agree with Al Gore. I mean they haven't changed their policies. I'm talking
00:05:13
about the European countries even though it's wrecking their economies. >> They are beholden to this net zero idea.
00:05:19
>> It feels like they're in transition and scrambling to try to figure out where
00:05:24
they what direction they should go in. they don't feel they can trust America
00:05:27
or that we're not their like reliable partner. We're not going to bail them
00:05:30
out. We're not going to protect them, etc. And they're going to have to sort
00:05:34
of get together as the mids mid-tier economies, economies 5 through 20, and they're going to just have to build
00:05:42
their own voting block, their own trading block, and uh go it alone and spend their own money.
00:05:47
>> They have it. It's called the EU. It's just yeah >> has not been very successful because I
00:05:52
think of their own policies, their energy policies and the open border policies.
00:05:56
>> I'm not sure what going it alone means if you don't have >> best-in-class AI or best-in-class
00:06:01
weapons. >> Absolutely. I I think it means they're going to have to start investing in
00:06:04
those things, buying weapons, making weapons means much of anything. >> Yeah. I I think it means Canada
00:06:13
and the EU and all these other countries that feel, hey, we're we're we're gonna
00:06:18
have our rug pulled by the Trump administration. We're just going to have to band together and create commerce.
00:06:24
And we saw China and uh Canada do a big deal. And I think that's them just trying to say, hey, we have some
00:06:32
sovereignty here. We're going to do a partnership with Canada and bring BYD cars in here. And hey, they'll be our
00:06:36
big trading partner. So, you know, that's the reaction I think on the other side.
00:06:43
>> But they don't >> they don't what >> they don't have as many degrees of
00:06:48
freedom as they think they do because great powers define the international system, not mid-tier powers. And a bunch
00:06:54
of second or third tier powers cannot redefine the international system even if they band together. And I think at
00:07:00
the end of the day, the Europeans, they understand the importance of the United States and specifically they want to
00:07:06
keep the US in Europe. I mean, they're desperate to keep NATO together and to
00:07:11
keep the US interested and present in Europe because just remember European history before the Americans were there.
00:07:19
It's like hundreds of years of wars and constantly fighting each other. >> Exactly.
00:07:23
>> Culminating in World War I, World War II, basically the total self-destruction
00:07:27
of Europe. And the most peaceful period they've ever experienced has been post
00:07:32
1945 when the Americans are there as the great pacifier. So, they do not want us
00:07:37
leaving. And I think they're willing to make large concessions to the US to ensure that we stay there, even though
00:07:43
they'll probably grumble about it. But I think that to that end, I think that
00:07:50
what President Trump was saying is, look, you guys got to share in the burden here. We've been paying for this
00:07:54
whole thing. >> Yeah. No, it makes total sense. And they got their spending up to 3% for NATO and
00:07:59
they're going to go to five. So, mission accomplished on that. >> Yes. And on Greenland, he's like, look,
00:08:04
you know, we we we was the best part of the speech. He's like, >> "Do you want me to talk about
00:08:10
>> for you? >> You got to do something for us. This has got to be a choice."
00:08:12
>> He gets 45 minutes in. He's like, "Do you want me to talk about Greenland? I
00:08:16
could talk about it. I You ready? I'm going to talk about it right now." And
00:08:19
then he starts talking about it. But then he starts calling it Iceland. And everybody in the room's like, "Wait, he
00:08:25
wants Iceland, too?" And the whole buzz was Trump's going to take Iceland and
00:08:30
Greenland. And then, you know, he sort of backed down, but we're not going to
00:08:34
invade. And then there was like a sort of sigh of relief. But do you think they actually thought Sachs that he was going
00:08:42
to invade Greenland to take it? >> Well, I mean, I don't know. I think that
00:08:48
obviously they thought it was a possibility, but the president took the use of force off the table. And yeah, I
00:08:53
think you did feel a sigh of relief there. I think you're right. But I think
00:08:58
that also, I mean, we don't know the details. They haven't been publicly
00:09:01
reported, but there was some sort of meeting at Davos that was convened, I think, by the NATO Secretary General,
00:09:08
Mark Ruda, where they negotiated an acceptable compromise on the issue. So, I'm sure we'll find out the details in
00:09:15
due course, but it's safe to say that President Trump got enough of what he wanted that he was satisfied with what
00:09:21
they worked out. >> I don't know how they just like it's like Lucy with the uh football and
00:09:25
Charlie. It's like he's gonna pull the football. Like he's just anchoring the
00:09:29
ne negotiations at a military invasion and takeover. He obviously is just going to go for a lease. It's like they they
00:09:36
don't know it in year, you know, whatever we're in now, year five or six,
00:09:41
year six of Trump being president. Like they should get it by now. He just anchors things at an impossible insane
00:09:47
level and then he falls back to whatever he really wanted. It's a classic negotiating technique. All right, we got
00:09:53
a lot on the docket. Let's get to work. Everyone wants to hear four venture capitalists and investors talk about the
00:09:59
horrific situation in Minneapolis. So, here we go. Uh, for background, I mean, Jason,
00:10:05
>> for background, last month, the DHS started an operation called Metro Surge,
00:10:11
sending 3,000 federal agents into Minnesota to crack down on illegal aliens. Over the last 3 weeks, two
00:10:17
motans were tragically killed in altercations with federal agents. January 7th, 37year-old Renee Good was
00:10:24
shot to death by an ICE agent. This incident involved Good accelerating her car, which was surrounded by agents at
00:10:30
the time. We're still waiting for the final investigation on this one, but apparently three shots, one through the
00:10:36
front windshield, perhaps two through the side. Uh, all these details are still being investigated. Then
00:10:42
tragically on January 24th, Alex Prey, also 37, was shot and killed by two border patrol agents, not ICE. Prey was
00:10:49
an ICU nurse at the local VA hospital. There's a ton of frame by frame breakdowns available. New York Times and
00:10:57
Wall Street Journal did a good job on these. So, I think maybe it's best for
00:11:01
us to focus here on maybe the aftermath of all this and the resolution, but you guys can feel free to chime in on the
00:11:07
frame by frame breakdowns if you like. In five parts, Steven Miller tweeted that Freddy was an assassin trying to
00:11:14
murder federal agents. A source told Axis that Gnome said, "Everything I've
00:11:19
done, I've done at the direction of the president and Stephen, Steven being Steven Miller. Greg Bovino uh has been
00:11:25
removed from duty and had his social media accounts turned off. President Trump has pivoted, evolved
00:11:33
and put Tom Hman in charge." Quote, "Tom is tough but fair and will report
00:11:39
directly to me," Trump wrote. And uh at the time of this taping, which is on
00:11:44
Thursday's uh there was a press conference this morning and here is what Tom Holman said and after 30 seconds
00:11:52
we'll go to you Saxs for your reaction to all this. >> No agency organization is perfect.
00:11:57
President Trump and I along with others in administration have recognized that certain improvements could and should be
00:12:03
made. That's exactly what I'm doing here. So if we get these agreements in
00:12:07
place, that means less agents on the street, more agents in the jail. Matter of fact, I have staff from CBP and from
00:12:15
ICE working on a draw down plan. What does that look like based on the cooperation?
00:12:20
>> Sax, your thoughts? >> Well, first let me say the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Petty are
00:12:27
regrettable and and tragic. So are the deaths of Lincoln Riley, Joselyn Nungare, Rachel Morren, Victoria
00:12:34
Harwell, Ivory Smith, and too many others to mention who are murdered by criminal illegal aliens. And the media
00:12:40
won't ever tell you their names. But President Trump was hired by the American people to do a job, which is to
00:12:46
seal the border and deport criminal aliens so that more of these tragedies do not occur in the future. And this is
00:12:51
a popular policy. Over 55% of the American people say they want all illegal aliens deported and over 90%
00:12:59
want criminal aliens removed. And by criminal aliens, I'm referring to the ones who commit additional crimes after
00:13:04
they enter the country illegally. Now, this policy is working. Uh murders were down 21% last year. It's one of the best
00:13:12
years in record. And in most states, the process is smooth and doesn't make national news. And the reason for that
00:13:19
is because local authorities are cooperating with ICE. But Minneapolis has taken a different approach. They've
00:13:25
engaged in a campaign of quote massive resistance to federal authorities. So let's talk about what's actually
00:13:32
happening there on the ground. I think the first thing to understand is that what's happening is much more than just
00:13:38
protests. And obviously I have no problem with people peacefully protesting and making their opinions
00:13:43
known, but that's not what's going on here. These are Antifa style operations
00:13:47
designed to thwart the enforcement of federal immigration law. They're highly organized. They're
00:13:54
communicating in encrypted chat groups. They stalk and dox ICE agents. They follow them around town. They surround
00:14:02
them at their hotels. They use their cars to block roads. And they use bullhorns and whistles to alert
00:14:07
criminals who are about to be arrested. And remember, ICE is a law enforcement agency. They have warrants to arrest
00:14:14
known criminal aliens. Despite this rhetoric of them being like the Gustapo, they are going after specific named
00:14:20
individuals for whom they have warrants to arrest. These are dangerous missions and these agitators are interfering and
00:14:28
making these missions even more dangerous. Now, the media has tried to portray good and pretty as simply
00:14:34
innocent bystanders or people who were peacefully protesting ICE policies. They weren't. They were foot soldiers in
00:14:42
these Antifa style operations and most importantly they brought deadly weapons to the fight. So Renee Good hit an
00:14:49
officer with her SUV which under a Minnesota law signed by Tim Waltz himself in 2020 justifies the use of
00:14:56
deadly force by an officer to defend himself. And Alex Prey was even more reckless. I think we've probably all
00:15:02
seen the video by now where he sought confrontation with ICE officials. He was kicking the car. He was in a rage. This
00:15:09
wasn't his first time doing this. And any experienced gun owner will tell you
00:15:13
that if you're armed and you're dealing with law enforcement, you have to be the
00:15:17
world's biggest pacifist because you're putting your life in danger by making
00:15:22
them fear that their lives are in danger. And I think the mainstream media didn't tell people these facts. They
00:15:27
just presented highly selective camera angles. They even airbrushed and facetuned Prey to make him appear to be
00:15:33
a more, I guess, handsome victim, which is truly sick. Now, in a way, I feel sorry for Good and Pretty because they
00:15:42
were the victims of a tinder box that was created in Minnesota by the extreme rhetoric and decisions of Tim Waltz,
00:15:52
Jacob Fry, and the political establishment. The local police in Minneapolis should have been allowed to
00:15:58
keep conditions safe on the street by creating a perimeter and keeping protesters away from ICE officers who
00:16:05
were executing lawful warrants of arrest. But the police were told not to. And then the agitators stepped in and
00:16:13
they took advantage of this sort of vacuum of authority to physically intervene. So I think it was almost
00:16:19
inevitable that some sort of tragedy was going to result from this abdication of
00:16:23
public safety. Now why would Walson Frey want to risk such tragedies with their massive resistance? I think there's two
00:16:32
reasons for this. This is the last point I want to make. First, they are desperate to change the subject from the
00:16:36
billions of dollars of fraud that they allow to occur on their watch. Remember we had Nick Shirley on the show just a
00:16:43
few weeks ago talking about the 8 billion so that was stolen by Somali fraudsters and this campaign of
00:16:50
resistance in Minneapolis has done a really good job making everyone forget about that. But I think there's a second
00:16:56
and bigger reason that applies and I think it applies to to national Democrats which is they want to thwart
00:17:03
mass deportations because illegal immigrants are a vital part of their power base. And you can see this in the
00:17:10
2030 aortionment forecast which just came out. Illegal aliens count towards the census which occurs every decade.
00:17:18
And the census determines the aortionment of congressional seats and electoral votes. And what you see in
00:17:23
these maps is that citizens of blue states have been migrating to red states because those
00:17:31
blue states are failing. And as a result of that, blue states are expected to lose nine house seats and electoral
00:17:40
votes because of the changing population numbers. Illegal aliens in blue states have been propping up those numbers. And
00:17:47
so, for example, in the last election, President Trump would have won an additional nine electoral votes
00:17:53
if we had an accurate counting. So, look, this is not about principle. This is bare knuckle politics. The Democrats
00:18:01
are playing for keeps. They don't really care how many innocent Americans get
00:18:05
hurt or killed in the process. This is about thwarting a popular policy of deportations
00:18:12
and sealing the border which the American people voted for. So don't let the media fool you.
00:18:17
>> Freedber Chimath, you want to give your opinion on these two tragic deaths
00:18:23
>> or not? I mean, I don't feel you're obligated to comment on this if you
00:18:27
don't want to. >> I'm happy to. Nick, I sent a clip into the chat.
00:18:31
>> Deported all immigrants who are here illegally, 55% of the New York Times,
00:18:34
Marquette, 64%. CBS News, 57%. ABC News with a slightly different question, 56%.
00:18:40
So, what you're seeing essentially here is a very clear indication that a majority of Americans, in fact, when
00:18:47
they're asked this blunt question, which I believe gets at the underlying feelings, do in fact want to deport all
00:18:52
immigrants who are here illegally. There's no arguing with these different numbers cuz they're all essentially the
00:18:57
same across four different pollsters. >> I think Sax is right that there's a very
00:19:01
very vocal minority. But if we just put that aside, it's important right now to
00:19:05
just stick to the facts. Democracy is supposed to be the will of the majority, but also defense and protection for the
00:19:15
minority. In this example, the will of the majority is pretty clear. As the CNN clip just showed, everybody wanted the
00:19:22
southern border shut and the northern border shut and a structured path to deal with
00:19:29
illegal immigration. David's right that that creates a cascade of second and
00:19:32
third order effects that have huge implications with respect to the Democrats and their ability to
00:19:40
have and curate power. I don't know whether this is what's motivating them or not. I don't want to
00:19:46
speculate on that. But the conceptual problem and the conceptual desire of Americans is undisputable. I think
00:19:54
that's why Donald Trump won. Now I think though we have to explore the tactics.
00:19:59
I think the reality is that both of these two deaths were complete and total tragedies
00:20:06
and it has created such an upswell that it has the potential to spin out of control. And if it does that, it risks
00:20:16
his ability to continue doing his job and delivering on the conceptual promise that everybody wants. The other thing is
00:20:22
that I think that he has otherwise, the president, done an incredible job up until now. The fact that Tom Hman is
00:20:28
going there is a really good thing. He was the same person that was awarded a medal by Obama for how he managed
00:20:35
Obama's deportation process. It's time to just get control of the process and
00:20:39
dial down the temperature because the structural things that they are doing are correct. There are people here that
00:20:46
broke the law. There are criminals that are here illegally. We need to remove them because that is the will of the
00:20:53
majority. Now we just need to find a way of doing it that creates some freedom to
00:20:58
operate for all of law enforcement so that these tragedies stop. That's my two
00:21:02
cents. >> Okay. Freedberg, would you like to comment on this or pass? I >> I'll comment. Can I just ask you to
00:21:08
react to what Sach said? Do you agree or disagree with his point about the Democrats needing to remove people
00:21:15
because they do count in the census and they increase the seats in the House. >> Elon's talked about this a whole bunch
00:21:22
as well that the immigration is being done to boost the voter roles. I don't
00:21:27
know enough about the census specifically because that occurs x number of years and uh if it's accurate
00:21:33
at all. So I'll leave that aside and do some research on it. In terms of importing people for votes, this uh
00:21:42
strategy does not make a lot of logical sense. And so many workingclass people voted Trump into office and so many
00:21:49
specifically uh Hispanic people, Mexican people are all voting for Trump now because he's a populist and he appeals
00:21:56
to to that group. So whatever if Biden and the Democrats were doing that for that reason, that makes no sense. And
00:22:04
also those people would have to become citizens in order to vote and that's a
00:22:09
20 30year process. So, you know, they'd be playing an incredibly long game uh on
00:22:15
that front >> unless there is cheating in the voting. >> Yeah. >> And we've talked about that as well
00:22:19
here. >> For example, if there's no voter ID, you know, >> you know, the Heritage Foundation, I
00:22:24
think David, you worked there at some point, right? Did an internship. >> That uh organization, that think tank
00:22:30
has done tremendous research into this. They have a database. I think they've
00:22:33
collected now 3,000 cases of voter fraud over a 40-year period. So really the whole concept of voter forward being
00:22:40
able to tilt a presidential election is just ridiculous and has not been proven.
00:22:44
I think Trump filed about 50 or 60 lawsuits and lost all 50 of them. So there's there's no credence to that. Uh
00:22:50
but you know I have a couple of thoughts broader on what we've seen and I do
00:22:55
actually agree with you David. There should be voter ID everywhere. I I don't
00:22:58
think anybody should be able to vote without a driver's license. If you can't
00:23:00
or ID if you can't take the time to get ID why should you vote? It doesn't make
00:23:04
a lot of sense right. >> Why do you think that's such a push on the other side though Jal? Like what's
00:23:07
the motivation for not having IDs? >> The stated >> if it's not about getting people to vote
00:23:13
that aren't allowed to vote. >> The stated reason, which I don't believe, is that it's more democratic
00:23:20
and you want to get as many people to vote as possible. So, but I don't agree
00:23:23
with that. I think everybody should have ID. >> Yeah. Like you got to have ID to buy a
00:23:26
beer, right? So, >> yeah. I mean, to get on a plane to I mean, even to ride a train, like you
00:23:31
need an ID. I don't I don't understand. >> I think the answer speaks for itself. I
00:23:34
mean, uh, to me it's obvious the reason why you prohibit, by the way, it's not
00:23:38
just saying you can vote without an ID. They actually prohibit the people administering the polls from checking.
00:23:43
There's only one reason to do that. You want to allow cheating, obviously. And
00:23:48
one of the things that Doge found was that there were lots of illegal aliens being added to the social security
00:23:53
roles. Now, they weren't necessarily collecting social security, but in a lot
00:23:57
of >> they were actually paying into it. So, it was quite the opposite. My point is
00:24:00
that when you get an SSN number, in a lot of states, all you have to do is check a box when you get a driver's
00:24:06
license, which they also give to illegal aliens in order to be added to the voter
00:24:09
roles. >> So, they are finding illegal aliens on voter roles. But look, regardless of
00:24:14
where you are on cheating in elections, the census just counts total population and then they aortion house seats and
00:24:23
electoral votes based on total population, including illegal aliens. And there is data on this. Trump would
00:24:28
have won the last election by an additional nine electoral votes if these changes had been made before the last
00:24:34
election in 72. >> Do you think uh >> so just to put a pin on that point? It's
00:24:39
really important because what it means is that a future Republican would not need to somehow crack the Democrats blue
00:24:46
wall of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Right? So nine electoral votes is a lot and it does put the
00:24:54
presidency that much further out of reach for future Democratic candidates. It provides a powerful incentive and
00:25:01
it's again it's not just the electoral votes. It's also these House seats.
00:25:04
California would have lost House seats. I think it was like four if this had been recognized because again there's
00:25:11
been a huge migration. Jake, you know this better than anybody since you're one of the people who've left. The state
00:25:16
is so badly mismanaged that people have been fleeing blue states in droves. And the fact that you've got illegal aliens
00:25:23
then replacing that population mass that effect and allows these blue states to maintain their level of representation
00:25:30
in the house. That is a huge incentive. >> Freeberg, do you support the use of ICE agents DHS to go into
00:25:40
these cities and do you think they were too violent? And do you agree with that strategy that
00:25:47
Trump's now seems like pulling back? >> I mean, I know the answer. We talked
00:25:52
about it on private chat. Yeah. >> Okay. I'll be very matter of fact. >> Yeah.
00:25:56
>> Neither of these people should be dead. It's sad that it happened. >> Who's to blame?
00:26:00
>> Neither of these people should have been doing what they were doing. Federal law enforcement agents
00:26:08
should not wear masks. They should identify themselves when asked. Ideally, they wear body cams like
00:26:14
local law enforcement does. I like body cams. I actually like watching videos of
00:26:18
police wearing body cams on YouTube and Tik Tok. I think it's a very important
00:26:24
way to hold law enforcement accountable to their work. There may be reasons why federal law enforcement can't do that.
00:26:29
If they're undercover and whatnot, they shouldn't have to identify themselves,
00:26:32
but I think those are important ground rules. I think that federal law enforcement should have warrant or
00:26:38
probable cause. They should not be allowed to randomly ask people for papers. I don't agree with that. If that's what
00:26:47
they're doing, and I'm not saying that that's what I agents are doing.
00:26:49
>> No, no, that's what they were doing. That's all been proven. >> I don't know that. I don't know if
00:26:52
that's been proven. >> Wearing masks, not identifying themselves. >> That's not what I'm talking about. Hold
00:26:55
on a second. Hold on a second. There have been a lot of claims made that they're going around quote rounding
00:27:00
people up asking for ID and papers. I don't know if that's true. I have personally not been convinced of that.
00:27:06
You may have seen something else, but I've not been convinced of that. But if
00:27:09
that is what they're doing, there is no probable cause and there's no warrant
00:27:12
attached to that. That should not be allowed. I think the mechanism for fixing that, the mechanism for
00:27:18
addressing that is number one to go to federal courts and file injunctions, which is actively happening through the
00:27:24
legal process. And there's a due process that then would take place that would
00:27:27
determine whether these agents are following the law and doing things by the rule of law or are not. And if
00:27:33
they're not, injunctions will be imposed and they can't do what they're doing.
00:27:37
Short of that, no one should take it into their own hands to obstruct law enforcement, federal or local law
00:27:42
enforcement. I think that that is wrong. I don't think that individuals that
00:27:46
disagree with a law or disagree with the actions of law enforcement officers should obstruct their actions. The
00:27:53
correct path is number one to protest peacefully, number two to go to the courts and file injunctions, and number
00:27:59
three to change the law. To go to your local, >> vote for someone and change the law. I
00:28:06
think it's totally okay for protesters to not like the law. There's a million
00:28:10
laws and regulations and other [ __ ] that I fundamentally disagree with, but those don't give me the right to impose
00:28:17
myself physically in the driveway with a car blocking law enforcement from doing
00:28:22
their job. If law enforcement was arresting a non-ilgal immigrant murderer and someone did that, would people be up
00:28:30
in arms? It's because people disagree with the law. And if you disagree with
00:28:34
the law, you've got to change the law. And that's okay. Now, right now, it is
00:28:40
the case that it is the law that if someone came here without going through the immigration process as defined by
00:28:46
the law, then they are technically here illegally. That is the law. That's what
00:28:51
it is. And so, there is a course or a path or a point of view on how do you enforce that law and that is what people
00:28:57
are having disagreements over. And again, file injunctions if you don't like the methods, change the law if you
00:29:03
don't like the law. My personal view on immigration, just so I can wrap this all
00:29:08
up, I don't see how we're going to do this in a humane and just way of removing people from this country who
00:29:13
have been here for a period of time and have paid taxes and have been good contributors to this country. I don't
00:29:19
know how you're going to do it. I don't know how you're going to do it without
00:29:21
inciting a civil war. So I think the compromise has to be that there has to be a path to permanent residency and
00:29:27
eventually citizenship for individuals who have been in the United States for some period of time who have followed
00:29:33
other laws who have paid taxes and who have not taken advantage of public services that they are not supposed to
00:29:39
use. With those conditions met there should be some path otherwise we're going to have civil war. I think that
00:29:47
separate to this there's a bigger point to be made and Ray Dalio has made this
00:29:50
and I will restate it and you guys can roll your eyes at this but I think that there's a deep emotional driver to all
00:29:55
of this. People look at this and they get incited. They get activated emotionally. Everyone I speak to is
00:30:01
activated emotionally over this issue and we have to ask ourselves the important question of why are people
00:30:05
activated so emotionally right now? What is going on? What is the fundamental root cause of this? What is the
00:30:11
fundamental root cause of this prediction model that Ray Dalio has talked about saying that there's a 35 to
00:30:17
40% chance of a civil war in the United States based on predictions that he made
00:30:20
in 2020. And it is rooted fundamentally in the fact that everyone to some degree
00:30:26
feels some amount of oppression right now. And this is a manifestation of that oppressed feeling. That oppression comes
00:30:33
from the fact that the world is racing ahead and people are not a part of it. that people feel like they're being left
00:30:38
behind and they see victims of that world and they want to act. And I think we need to pay attention to that and be
00:30:43
very cognizant of it because I think fundamentally it is an inevitability that there will be a civil war if we
00:30:49
don't recognize it and address it and find some paths of compromise to solve
00:30:53
these problems. >> Okay, I'm done. >> Uh, superb. >> So, it ship it. Episode done. I mean,
00:31:02
>> let's go home. >> So, yeah, I'm strongly in agreement with
00:31:05
you. the police should um not be interfered with. I said that here and I said it on Twitter. You should stay home
00:31:10
if you can't peacefully protest and also agree with you strongly. The police uh
00:31:16
should be trained to deescalate, wear body cameras, not wear masks, be trained properly, all that stuff.
00:31:22
But I I want to make three points here. And the first is, you know, President Trump has surrounded himself with a lot
00:31:28
of really competent people, yourself included, David Rubio, Bessant, Lutnik, Kushner. We had a lot of them here. my
00:31:35
pal Chris Wright, but he's also surrounded himself with very inexperienced sick offense that he
00:31:41
picked based on their loyalty to him and that group needs to go because that group is sinking his second term. I'll
00:31:48
put on that list Steven Miller, Christy Gnome, Cash Patel, and Pam Bondi. Uh these folks have been a disaster for
00:31:53
Trump. They're not qualified to be in the positions they're in, and they have
00:31:57
caused a lot of chaos. And back in August, I explained exactly how unpopular these,
00:32:06
you know, ICE actions were. And I implored people, hey, stay home if you cannot be peaceful. If you want to
00:32:12
record people, that's fine. But I predicted as well that somebody's going
00:32:15
to get killed. And that these agents were acting just without training. They were not deescalating. And they were in
00:32:22
fact provoking a lot of this which I think was part of the concept that Steven Miller had was to provoke these
00:32:28
kind of reactions. Nick, you can pull up my first chart. You remember back in October was talking about Trump's
00:32:35
sinking approval rating back when these ICE issues were happening. The Epstein files weren't being released. Then in
00:32:43
November, I brought this up again. Trump's uh net approval rating hit 13%. And then same chart coming up now. He's
00:32:54
uh 18%. What's And you know, a lot of people like to use this term taco. Trump always
00:33:02
chicken out chickens out. I don't like when people use that because I think they're trying to goat him on. I think
00:33:08
he needs to react to these plummeting ratings here. If you could play the Tillis quote, Nick,
00:33:14
>> if I were in her position, I can't think of any point in pride over the last
00:33:18
year. She's got to make her own decision or the president does. But she has taken
00:33:22
this administration into the ground on an issue that we should own. We should own the issue of border security and
00:33:27
immigration. But they have destroyed that for Republicans. Something that got the president elected. They have
00:33:32
destroyed it through their incompetence. David Miller is in the same boat. this guy after doing the stupid comments he
00:33:38
made about Greenland getting the president in a difficult circumstance is one of the people that came out publicly
00:33:44
and said that this guy was a terrorist before he had even talked with anybody on the ground and that's clearly not the
00:33:49
case now. So I mean it's just I mean Steven Miller never fails to live up to
00:33:54
my expectations of incompetence. >> And here's Marowski uh with a similar
00:33:59
opinion another Republican. >> Senator, do you have faith in Christine Noam as DHS secretary? I I've already
00:34:04
made a statement on that. >> Oh, I I wasn't there for it. >> Yeah, I I said that I've lost confidence
00:34:09
in her. >> Do you think that President Trump should remove her from the position? Do you
00:34:12
think she should resign? >> Obviously, up to the president. Um I think we would be we would be better
00:34:20
served with leadership. >> At the end of the day, Americans don't like to see this violence. They don't
00:34:28
like cruelty. They don't like chaos. The reason Trump lost to Biden, who's not a
00:34:33
very strong candidate, is because of the general chaos people felt with the immigrant ban the last time and
00:34:40
people do want to see the border closed and that has had a great effect I think on the country and I think that's
00:34:47
fantastic and he should take a victory lap for that. But leadership starts at the top. President Trump put Steven
00:34:54
Miller in charge of all this. Uh I think he's a bad actor. I think these people
00:34:59
who he hired were picked strictly to do lawfare and to do this kind of sadistic violent behavior to feed a MAGA base
00:35:06
that's not going to keep Trump in office and in fact going to cause him to lose
00:35:11
the second uh to lose the midterms. So the easy solution which I brought up here over and over again is if you want
00:35:20
to stop having people come into this country, you have to look at why they're
00:35:24
coming to this country. They're coming to this country because they want to have a better life. That's why they're
00:35:28
coming here. And that's why they'll pay a coyote 10 or 20 or $30,000 and risk
00:35:32
their own safety coming across that border where many people die and abused and are abused. So if you want to stop
00:35:39
this, all you have to do is go to the business owners and find them. And if they keep hiring illegal aliens, you
00:35:44
keep finding them and you put them in jail. But you don't see Steven Miller doing that. Why? Well, because a lot of
00:35:50
those businesses are the voters who put Trump in office. They're Republicans.
00:35:54
Yeah. Sure, there's Democrat owned business owners as well, but you can solve this whole problem without sending
00:35:59
mass agents in to beat the [ __ ] out of people, to be violent, to provoke these
00:36:03
kind of reactions. And that doesn't absolve people driving their cars into the police. That's horrible and it's a
00:36:10
terrible tragedy. And these people, as I've said three or four times, uh should
00:36:14
not go out and protest. But you could solve this. If there are no job opportunities for illegal aliens, they
00:36:21
will stop coming here. finally agree with your point strongly, Freedberg, that we should be compassionate to the
00:36:26
people who have been here 10, 20 years and paid their taxes. I've said this here many times. They should be given a
00:36:30
path. America is a country built by immigrants for immigrants, including the three of you, my bestie immigrants.
00:36:38
>> And we all came here illegally or our parents did >> and we didn't seek into the country.
00:36:44
>> Yeah, absolutely. >> Now, you kind of gave this diet trial. I don't know why you've picked Steven
00:36:49
Miller as the vessel of your hatred. It's like you've >> No, it's not hatred. I based on
00:36:53
>> There's been a transference. There's been a transference of your
00:36:56
>> trans just based on his TDS to Steven Miller derangement syndrome or something
00:36:59
like that. >> If he if his actions were if his actions were kind and compassionate
00:37:05
>> if if his if he was compassionate towards immigrants and uh recognize the importance of
00:37:12
immigrants to this American story, I would be fine with it. It's just based on his behavior. David, I don't have
00:37:17
TDS. You can name call all you want. I'm just basing it on your behavior. >> You've decided to do this ad homonym
00:37:23
against him. And look, the big picture is that threat is basing it on their I'm
00:37:27
basing it on their qualifications. >> You're not really presenting You're not
00:37:30
really presenting evidence. You're showing what other people think. You're
00:37:33
showing polling and then what a few senators think. So basically, you're trying to build a Hold on. You're Hold
00:37:39
on. Let me finish my point. You're basically trying to build a case against him by using the opinions and
00:37:44
declarations of other people rather than actually presenting evidence and building that case other than just a
00:37:49
name call and say that he's not compassionate. The big picture is that I would say that Steven Miller has been
00:37:54
more correct about immigration than you have been over the last several years. For years, you were denying that we had
00:38:01
an open border problem, did you not? >> No. No. for one year when the spike went
00:38:05
up I said let's get the data on this because it doesn't make sense that it
00:38:09
would triple year-over-year and then we found out that it was in fact and with the new information I changed my opinion
00:38:14
and said yeah this is obviously happening that was literally what happened >> well I don't know I mean during the
00:38:21
buying years I remember we had a bunch of debates about this and you were saying
00:38:24
>> my position was let's see the data cuz the data if you look I I I played this
00:38:28
chart on the podcast many times we showed like the last four years and then there was a spike and I said this
00:38:32
doesn't make any sense How did this spike happen? It's just my opinion. You
00:38:35
don't have to have a you can have a difference of opinion. >> Let me go back to the origin of the
00:38:40
chaos in Minnesota. You don't see this happening in other states. And I just
00:38:44
want to point out one of the major reasons why. So in other states, you know, take your pick. When you have an
00:38:50
illegal alien and they get arrested, they get handed over to ICE or Border Patrol for deportation. That's what's
00:38:58
happening in Minnesota. the politicians have given an instruction not to do that. So, literally, you have criminals,
00:39:05
people who've been arrested. There's a case that was just um posted today of an
00:39:09
illegal alien in Minneapolis who killed an innocent mother and severely injured two others backto back in uh drunk
00:39:18
driving crashes. He did not have a valid driver's license, did not have insurance. He was arrested for vehicular
00:39:24
homicide. ICE asked him to be turned over to them and the authorities in Minneapolis refused to do that and they
00:39:32
eventually released him. So that puts ICE in the position of having to go out and find these guys and arrest them.
00:39:39
That's how all these operations started. And you make it sound like these guys
00:39:43
are the Gestapo and they just randomly round people up. That's not what's
00:39:46
happening. They have arrest warrants with the names of specific people that they're going after. There are arrest
00:39:52
warrants, but there were also Steven Miller told them to just go round people up at specific locations. So,
00:39:58
>> there is that as well. And they've been trying to hit numbers that they just
00:40:01
can't possibly hit. You have to ask yourself >> why didn't we have you have to ask
00:40:06
yourself, I think, Sax, why didn't we have this kind of violence and unmarked
00:40:11
people, breaking people's rights under Obama who did far more? >> I'll tell you why. You want to know why?
00:40:16
Because Obama said that we should deport. Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to
00:40:25
control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their
00:40:34
reasons. The 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable. >> I'm saying he was able to do it without
00:40:40
sending masked agents in to beat the >> No, the Democratic party changed. That's
00:40:44
what happened 15 years ago. the position that Obama Can I just talking about the
00:40:48
policing? You ask me a question. Why wasn't the policeing? Why didn't this
00:40:50
happen under Obama? Let me tell you the reason why the policing happen years ago. The Democrat party was still
00:40:55
somewhat rational on this issue and it was basically a bipartisan position to support deportations of illegal aliens
00:41:02
and not to have an open border. The Democrat party changed their point of view on this issue. Now,
00:41:07
>> that's not what I'm talking about policing. >> Let me finish my point. Tom Hman has
00:41:11
said over and over again, we don't want to go out on the street. It's dangerous.
00:41:14
They don't want to be put in this position. ICSE has an incredibly dangerous job to do. Border Patrol has
00:41:19
an incredibly dangerous job to do. By the way, the reason why they wear masks is because they're getting doxed by
00:41:24
these groups who are organizing with each other on signal and they're being followed around. They're being stalked.
00:41:30
They're being chased to their hotels and these guys follow them around. They
00:41:33
block their cars by um interposing vehicles. They're interfering in in official operations. They're interfering
00:41:40
with arrest and they're getting in physical altercations with them. This is very dangerous for eyes. They don't want
00:41:45
to be in this position. But the reason why all of this is happening is because Tim Waltz and Jacob Fry and the rest of
00:41:52
these guys, Lieutenant Governor, they are saying, "Do not cooperate with ICE.
00:41:56
Do not cooperate with the border patrol." Telling local authorities in Minnesota, when you arrest an illegal
00:42:01
alien, do not turn them over to ICE. It's better to release them. These people are such anti-ICE zealots that
00:42:07
they would rather release a killer onto the street than keep them in jail where they can be turned over to ICE. And
00:42:16
that's the whole reason why they don't want to keep them in jail is because
00:42:18
that would create a central repository, if you will, for ICE to go collect all these illegal aliens. Last year there
00:42:24
was something like 470 convicts, okay? Illegal aliens, criminals. And I'm not
00:42:30
talking about that their crime wasn't breaking into the country. I'm talking
00:42:33
about subsequent crimes that were released in Minnesota so they they cannot be rounded up by ICE and deported. These
00:42:41
people are zealots and that is the source of the problem. And then on top of that, you've got rhetoric by people
00:42:47
like Tim Walls and the lieutenant governor calling ICE and Border Patrol agents who are just trying to do their
00:42:53
jobs the Gestapo and Nazis and riing people up. And I think that people like Alex Pretty or Renee Good, they're
00:43:01
victims of this type of rhetoric. These are left-wing activists who are in this leftwing echo chamber and they're
00:43:09
baronating in all this rhetoric that's portraying law enforcement officials as
00:43:15
Nazis and they're embibing this constantly to the point where they're full of rage and anger. You see that
00:43:20
video of Alex Pretty attacking Border Patrol. This is two weeks before he gets killed. He's kicking the car. He's like
00:43:27
foaming at the mouth. He's in some sort of rage. This is someone who's emotionally disturbed and he's got a a
00:43:33
gun on his waistband, which look, every gun owner knows that you have to be exceedingly careful if you are carrying
00:43:41
a weapon and then you are dealing with law enforcement. The last thing you want to do is go out looking for an
00:43:46
altercation with them, which is what he did. And by the way, I think it's completely tragic that the two of them
00:43:52
were killed. I don't want to see that happen. But again, they are victims of
00:43:56
this political environment, this chaos that's being whipped up by the elected
00:44:00
officials in Minnesota. This would not be happening if they simply turned over the illegal aliens in their custody to
00:44:06
ICE and Border Patrol, which is all that they're asking for. >> I've said on this podcast like many
00:44:11
times, but none of you will respond to it. Why are they doing this instead of just finding the business owners?
00:44:16
Wouldn't that be a better policy? And you're in the White House, you're around
00:44:18
these people. Why don't you tell them why don't we do that? Why don't we just
00:44:21
give fines to business owners who hire illegals and stop the incentive to come here?
00:44:27
>> How do you know that they hired illegals? How would you know that? And if you know that, then you know the
00:44:32
individual. >> It's super simple. You would just go do uh a little investigation. You go to the
00:44:37
car wash, you videotape it like any other detective or any other federal agent or a local police officer would,
00:44:43
and then you track those people down. You very quietly go pick one or two of them up on the way home. You ask them
00:44:48
for their papers or you go to the owner and say, "Hey, we have these six people.
00:44:51
Here's their pictures. Here's the pictures of the six people. Show us their papers. Show us their social
00:44:56
security number." That's all you have to do. Freeberg, >> here's my here's my here's my proposal.
00:45:01
Okay, Jacob, you may have a point there, Jacob. You may have a point, but I'm not
00:45:04
sure >> that it's good enough in the case of an illegal alien who's already been in this
00:45:09
country committing crimes. Okay. Yeah. So, if you have if you hold on, if you have a drunk driver
00:45:14
>> who has killed people through drunk driving and they're they're captured, I
00:45:18
think they should be turned over and deported immediately. >> But if you want to do big numbers, like
00:45:21
big numbers, you could just go to a farm, you could go to a car wash, you could go to a restaurant, you take
00:45:26
pictures of everybody coming in and out for their shift, you go to the business owner and say, "We have these people.
00:45:31
They can you show us their uh paychecks and their pay stubs?" >> All right. So, we'll agree to disagree
00:45:38
on some of this and uh we'll agree that this is a tragedy and that we need leadership to calm these things down. Uh
00:45:46
and we need to agree on a very reasonable immigration policy which is not what we have right now in my
00:45:53
opinion. All right. Claudebot has gone viral overnight. I have been claed. I have been one claude. I am all in on
00:46:00
this. Um this is an open-source project created by a gentleman named Peter Steinberger. He's an Austrian developer
00:46:07
and entrepreneur. So, what is it? It's uh basically an open-source personal assistant. Uh think
00:46:14
like Siri or maybe Jarvis. Have any of you guys used it yet? Has anybody installed it yet?
00:46:20
>> I did. I spent 15 minutes and I saved 15% on my car insurance. >> Are you joking? Sure. You installed it
00:46:26
and then asked it to go. >> You know what's so funny, Nick? I posted this. The number of people that didn't
00:46:31
understand that that was a joke. >> No, I understand it's a joke. Yeah,
00:46:34
>> I know you did. Yeah. Yeah. >> But there was a bunch of people that
00:46:37
were like, "Really? How did you do it? Can I do it?" And then some people were
00:46:40
like, "Wait, only 15%." And other people were like, "Wait, you set it up
00:46:43
yourself. You didn't have somebody help you." >> This is the great This is This is
00:46:47
literally the greatest thing ever. Have you installed it yet, Freedberg? >> No, I don't want to give
00:46:53
>> Okay. >> an open source tool access to all my emails and messages.
00:46:56
>> Have you done it yet? >> No, because I'm concerned about the security issues. But I want to I want to
00:47:01
do it, but I'm concerned about the security. >> I've spent the last 72 hours doing this.
00:47:05
I'm going to explain to you what we did at the company. It's mind-blowing. Okay,
00:47:09
so it is basically think like an open- source Siri or Jarvis, right? You get into an interface and you can talk to a
00:47:16
virtual assistant and it does things for you just like chat GPT or XAI might. But
00:47:21
the way it works is you kind of load a virtual machine if you know what that is or you can put it on your Mac Mini. You
00:47:27
run this like a server. Then you start authenticating it with your services. So, Gmail, Notion, Slack, WhatsApp,
00:47:34
maybe even your password manager. Super dangerous. Nobody like Claude or XAI or Microsoft would ever allow you to do
00:47:42
this because it's so dangerous, obviously. >> But we did this and we put it to work.
00:47:48
Here's what we did. I created a virtual podcast producer and we made this persona
00:47:56
and we created a new Gmail account, Sachs, a new notion account, a new WhatsApp account, everything. We created
00:48:03
like basically an a virtual employee. We put it together and we made it the producer for my new This Week in AI
00:48:10
podcast. There's a little plug in there for it. So, we had it start doing research on guests. So, we said, "Hey,
00:48:17
research guests, right?" just like you can do in an LLM. Then we connected it
00:48:21
to um the existing feeds like the podcast feeds and the database of like people we've had on the show and like
00:48:28
who's booked. Then we said make a CRM Sachs for all potential guests and suggest other guests and it vibe coded a
00:48:36
CRM for itself. >> Can you show this? >> I said hey do some research on this.
00:48:41
Right. So then we start a thread with it with the actual producer Oliver who's
00:48:46
working on this. So I said, "Do this guest research." It did all this guest
00:48:48
research. Now, this is as good as like Nick or Lisa would do at a first pass, but it did it instantly. And then I made
00:48:55
a prompt for it to like, and I was using this prompt, by the way, David, when we
00:48:58
were in Davos for our guests. And so this like gets the company's name, the founder information, you know, look for
00:49:05
their competitors, all the stuff that a producer would do over a day or two. Do a timeline, give suggested questions,
00:49:11
etc. So I teach it this. So, here's producer X and it says, "Got it. That's
00:49:17
what uh that's a great guest research." And I said, "Okay, do the guest research
00:49:21
on this person." It comes back with that. And it gave me its media appearances, all the stuff I would want
00:49:25
to do for research. Then I said, "Um, uh, I think this would be >> You're interacting with it like an
00:49:31
agent." So, how is it different than an agent? >> Watch. Okay, we're getting to it. So,
00:49:35
then I said, um, producer X, email Alex and let him know that I want to have him
00:49:40
on this weekend in AI. CC me and CC Oliver. And it says, uh, I couldn't verify the email, but I'm going to try
00:49:47
this one. And it wrote this email. It sent the email. Then after it sent it, >> did he respond?
00:49:54
>> So here's the email to the guest. >> Oh my god. >> Hey, Alexis
00:49:58
wanted me to reach out. He'd love to have you on this weekend to discuss ExoLabs, your work on distributed
00:50:03
inference on the recent he like did this like little thing. Let me know if you'd
00:50:06
be interested. >> So then >> it's [ __ ] crazy. He says, >> this guy says, "Sounds great. I'll be in
00:50:13
touch." >> Then I said, "Here's what I want you to do. I want you," and we created a group
00:50:19
called replicants. So now we've made five replicants at the company. And today is like replicant day or replicant
00:50:25
week. So I told it every time you do work for me in the replicant room, say what you did and then also put it on
00:50:33
your calendar. So now it's putting on its calendar what it did in timestamps.
00:50:39
So he said I did some guest research here and then yesterday I did this booking report and that I'm doing this
00:50:45
AI around it that I'm doing this >> and then I set up a and then producer
00:50:48
lawn had it set up a ticker because we did this email ticker and did all that work
00:50:53
>> and the crazy thing is you can start talking to it directly so I can have a
00:50:58
direct conversation with producer X and it learns and now it knows everything. So we started one to be an SDR and then
00:51:08
we are giving it access to our CRM there. But it built its own CRM, David. It's building its own SAS tools to solve
00:51:14
its problems. Every time you add it to something, it gets smarter. So now we've
00:51:19
we're making a LinkedIn for this persona. >> The LinkedIn is going to start adding
00:51:23
people. People don't know that these aren't humans. >> Yeah, >> it's insane.
00:51:29
>> All right, let me give you a few thoughts. So, I was paying close attention to the whole Claudebot
00:51:33
freakout, you know, over the weekend. And, you know, again, I wanted to set it up really badly, but I was too afraid of
00:51:39
the security issues to do it, but I was watching everyone else do it. And look, I think the takeaways for me are number
00:51:44
one that this will be the year of the rise of the personal AI assistant. Until now, AI has mainly come in the form
00:51:52
factor of a chatbot and it's been used as a research tool. Some people have >> search. Yeah,
00:52:00
>> it's better search. There's kind of this niche case of, you know, fantasy chat
00:52:04
bots where people actually like somehow talking to a chatbot, but really it's
00:52:08
about better web search and it's about research. Now, we're moving to a completely different form factor, which
00:52:14
is again this AI assistant that's an agent that can do things for you and it's going to get better and better at
00:52:20
doing different tasks for you. Everyone's going to have this amazing AI agent. Now, you know who who is the
00:52:26
beneficiary of this market opportunity? I mean there's obviously going to be
00:52:29
some startups like the guy who's doing Claudebot which I guess he renamed it
00:52:32
was it moldbot or >> it's called Maltbot now because Claude got upset >> right so in any event it's Maltbot now
00:52:39
but I think it's a tremendous opportunity for Google because the question is who has your data Google has
00:52:44
all my email my calendar my documents which is exactly the stuff that I would want to integrate with Cloudbot if I
00:52:49
believed it was safe obviously I've already made the determination that Google is safe because they already have
00:52:54
all my data so I think Google is in a tremendous position to offer a personal AI
00:53:00
assistant that's connected with your email and calendar for those of us who are using G Suite and so on. Obviously,
00:53:06
there'll be opportunities for other companies as well, but I think this is going to be such a big product that it
00:53:12
may become the dominant form factor of AI, meaning more popular than the the sort of researchoriented chatbot.
00:53:19
Speaking from the policy point of view, I think it's going to change the policy
00:53:22
debate around AI because so much of the policy debate over AI is about fighting the last set of battles around social
00:53:31
media >> question and answer modality. >> It's sort of treating AI as like a form
00:53:35
of social media. I mean, I hear policy makers say all the time, what are you going to do to protect kids against
00:53:40
predators? And it's like, well, wait, what predators are you talking about? This is not social media, right? I mean,
00:53:46
I understand if you want to protect kids against, I don't know, a fantasy chatbot
00:53:49
that's recommending they do bad things, but it's just it's very different,
00:53:52
right? This is just a completely different modality. And I think that the rise of agents will make that clear that
00:53:58
we're dealing with something that's not social media. Maybe there's some
00:54:02
analogies to the previous set of policy battles that were fought over social media, but I think it's quite different.
00:54:08
So, I think Claudebot is a breakthrough. I think it's a really interesting proof
00:54:13
of concept and we'll also have to see exactly who who the big winners are here.
00:54:18
>> I think what's interesting is that if I said to you, hey, there's going to be an
00:54:22
AI personal assistant. You would have some point of view in your mind on what that means. It's like, oh, it can, you
00:54:29
know, change my calendar, tell me about my travel, read my email for me, summarize that that kind of
00:54:35
stuff. But what I think people don't realize, it's almost like the first time
00:54:39
you use FSD in your Tesla or the first time you used an iPhone, you realize that it's so much more that it widens
00:54:45
the aperture of what's possible that it's not just the assistant in the way
00:54:49
that you might otherwise be thinking about it, but it's like this super worker. And the super worker, like to
00:54:54
Jal's point, it it does both scheduling, calendaring, ideation, knowledge work,
00:54:59
creates new code, creates CRM tools, books your travel, it does everything. And then if you start thinking about
00:55:06
having an army of super workers, you're like, "Oh my god, what's possible?" And
00:55:10
now think about what Elon's doing. Yesterday, Elon shut down the Model S and Model X production lines in Fremont.
00:55:17
>> And by the way, you know, a year ago, I'd never owned a Tesla. And I was so
00:55:20
blown away with FSD that in the last week, we bought two more Model X's. So now everyone in my family, we're all on
00:55:26
Tesla because the experience is so good. But they're shutting down the Model S,
00:55:30
Model X lines to make Optimus. So if you've got the same thing that Jal's
00:55:34
talking about and experiencing, but you've actually got it in physical form in addition to digital form, that's the
00:55:40
future where everyone has a super workforce and you put two optimists in your garage and they build and run a
00:55:46
business for you and then everyone becomes an entrepreneur. >> What was my prediction, Jason? What of
00:55:51
my prediction? >> Oh, that they would merge all these companies and then this week
00:55:54
>> it's happening. >> It's happening apparently. Um or I shouldn't say it's happening. We don't
00:55:58
know it's happening, but beep >> boop. Between this and my copper prediction,
00:56:04
>> I'm about to retire. >> You know, copper's up 26% in a month.
00:56:10
>> What is that? Is an annualized. >> Check this out. S >> I we invited somebody from Craft
00:56:16
Ventures on and I forgot who's from Craft Ventures who's going to be on this
00:56:19
week in AI. So, I said, "Can you tell me who's doing it?" And it said, "Oh, I
00:56:24
couldn't find it." I said, "Oh, it's in the notion database." So, it goes and it
00:56:27
found it. Oh, Mike Robinson from Craft Ventures is on February 24th. And then there's also Brian from Craft or
00:56:33
whatever. And he was on a different liquidity round table. And I said, "Hey,
00:56:37
can you email Mike and I want to do a pre-show call with him?" Guessed his email, sent it. I said, "C Heidi, I
00:56:43
haven't given him an access to my stuff." And it said, "Oh, do you want to
00:56:45
get his top three times, all this stuff?" It's crazy what's going on here,
00:56:49
folks. I would say out of 50 hours a producer does a week, this does 40 of them. And of what an SDR does, this does
00:56:59
95%. This is going to be crazy because it keeps learning. Now, your API bill is going to be nuts. The first day we did
00:57:09
this, we hit like a $100. I think it's going to be like $1,000 a day in API calls. So, my team's like, "Hey, this is
00:57:14
a lot of API calls because people are going crazy inside Slack and making all of these agents."
00:57:20
>> Good news, Kimmy 2.5. Yeah. >> Uh we are ordering Mac um studios, the
00:57:27
really powerful studios with like max memory on and they're putting Kimmy. Is
00:57:31
that the new open source one? >> Yeah, we're putting Kimmy on them. We're
00:57:36
going to have free free for and then it according to people online like 95% of all these queries can
00:57:43
be done for free with Kimmy. >> You'll save 90%. >> It's crazy.
00:57:47
>> It's really crazy. >> This is independent by the way of whatever LLM you want to use. You can
00:57:52
swap out LLMs. You could route it to different LLMs. You can do whatever you want with it. I tried to have it create
00:57:57
Reddit accounts for me. Like, I want a Reddit account to go do research. And it's like, I can't do that. It's against
00:58:02
the term of service. I don't think people understand how important this Kimmy K2.5 moment is.
00:58:07
>> Wait, what is Kimmy K2? >> Just to set some context, right? So, I
00:58:11
think the last few years we've all kind of lived in a world of what I would call
00:58:17
blackbox AI, meaning you go to your favorite chatbot, basically, you put in a prompt and you press enter, right? And
00:58:25
all of those things go to proprietary models and they're excellent. OpenAI has
00:58:31
some, Anthropic has some, Google has some, and they all give you back an answer. Super powerful. But the
00:58:37
important thing that we don't know to care about right now is that all of that
00:58:41
stuff is gated. What does that mean? You don't own the keys. You don't own the
00:58:45
blueprints. You have no idea what's actually going on. And what Claudebot demonstrated this week is you're one
00:58:52
terms of service update away from everything breaking, right? Because at one point, Anthropic didn't like what
00:58:57
was going on and they said, "No, this is not allowed." So, we've talked about this battle between
00:59:04
open source and closed source. So all of the models that that have been winning,
00:59:08
the blackbox models are closed source models. But open source is important because it's transparent. It gives
00:59:15
everybody their own sovereignty whether you're a company and frankly really more
00:59:21
importantly whether you're a country. It gives you control of your own speed. It
00:59:25
gives you a lot of execution control. You can audit the weights of the models. It allows you to host it on your own
00:59:31
hardware. And the most important thing is the data never leaves your control. So that's why open source was really
00:59:37
important, but it was always kind of like an underdog and it wasn't particularly good. So this week you wake
00:59:43
up, you go to the office and Kim K 2.5 is important. So this is why it's so important because it was incredibly
00:59:50
profound. It's a trillion parameter mixture of expert model. When you farm out work, the proprietary
01:00:00
models keep that agentic layer kind of secret. Kimmy Cape 2.5 was like okay look here's
01:00:08
this thing called agent swarm it's a technology that we built that's also now
01:00:12
public and it allows you to create all you know 100 sub aents and what that allows you to do is basically solve any
01:00:19
complicated multi-step problem in parallel so I think this is the moment now if I had to
01:00:26
make a prediction I think there is the clear shot across the bow of closed source and I think
01:00:33
open source can Why? >> Because when Kimmy K2.5 is accessible, >> it democratizes something this trillion
01:00:42
parameter reasoning >> that right now you could not otherwise get. Now you can do vision to code, you
01:00:50
can do massive context windows. It's really unbelievable and it's available
01:00:54
to everybody. >> And to just build on it, you're exactly correct and I think it's a very big
01:01:01
deal. You can run it. This is the other thing. What What have the two limiting factors been here?
01:01:06
>> I'm not a big fan of like these locally hosted models. I think it's all [ __ ]
01:01:09
and janky. It's all like kids mucking around. >> I think running these things locally are
01:01:16
stupid and janky. >> The whole point of open source is to go and take them into these huge data
01:01:21
centers is to use nextgen silicon. And we talked about this last week or the week before where again post Grock what
01:01:29
I think will happen is you're going to see an explosion of decode silicon. If
01:01:34
you take these next generation systems and you marry them to open source you're
01:01:39
going to cut the cost of AI by 90%. And when you do that you know Jason your bill is going to be 10 bucks a day.
01:01:47
>> Yeah. >> And you're just not going to stop. Here's the interesting thing for me like
01:01:51
back to this like running it like there are now people who figured out how to daisy chain the Mac studios. So people
01:01:58
are you can see there's two stack there. People are starting to stack these. This
01:02:02
is commodity hardware running open source. The there's two advantages to this one. We have control of all the
01:02:09
data. We have it on our own hardware. We can run it infinitely. And these things
01:02:14
are only getting better. the M5 chips coming to these Mac studios and if you want more power you stack it up and then
01:02:19
the open source models are getting easier. So what's going to happen is 90% or 95% of our jobs are going to go to
01:02:25
this local hardware will control it. We don't have to worry about our information going up to Samman I canled
01:02:32
I canled all of my OpenAI accounts. $25,000 gone. It's a matter of time until the big model makers create an
01:02:41
incremental revenue stream for guys like you, Jason, to license back all your prompt and response data. And you'll
01:02:47
probably make enough to pay for the all the costs of hosting and running these models. Anyways,
01:02:52
>> yeah. Anyway, I this is like feels like >> it's a very big moment.
01:02:56
>> It's a big mo it feels like a very big moment. And then, you know, let alone if
01:03:00
when do you think freeberg we get it on here? When do we get it on our phones? when we'll be running Kimmy.
01:03:07
>> We're not even talking about a lot of the architectural changes that are
01:03:10
happening that we've talked about in the past. There papers that indicate we
01:03:13
could probably go down by 70 to 100x in terms of compute need in how the the model actually runs. So yeah, ultimately
01:03:21
these things end up on the on the iPhone running locally and you don't need to go
01:03:25
to the cloud. By the way, just having our nation's AIS are on the line here, I
01:03:30
think this has a dramatic effect. If you play all of these paps out on the way a
01:03:35
lot of these states have written their idiotic legislation where those those legislative approaches encompass
01:03:42
strictly the view of AI being a chatbot interface run by a single company running a model in a data center. And if
01:03:48
all of the models end up running locally on machines in open source, different contexts, different use cases, all of
01:03:55
like we said from the beginning, all of the [ __ ] idiotic, dumbass takes by legislators on what they think they need
01:04:01
to regulate and how go out the window or they create a lot of confusion on what's
01:04:05
actually going on in the real world and it puts us at risk. I strongly endorse the effort by those in the
01:04:12
administration to pass a federal AI preeemption law that avoids all of this nonsense in the states and the local
01:04:17
governments. And I think that this evolution of AI from being centrally hosted in data centers by closed models
01:04:24
through chatbot interfaces. All of those layers break. You start to recognize very quickly why you need to have
01:04:31
federal preeemption on this stuff because people get way too ahead of it and it's going to limit innovation.
01:04:35
>> Yeah. Did you just Well, obviously I agree I agree with that. And again, just
01:04:39
to build on that point, you can't underestimate how much the policy debate in Washington has indexed on a single
01:04:48
use case. >> That's what I'm saying. >> Which was a niche fantasy chatbot
01:04:53
application, >> right? >> Yeah. That's all that people know. Yeah.
01:04:56
That's all they know. >> That turned into horror stories. I mean, legit horror stories. But
01:05:01
>> again, that is just not the predominant use of AI. And it's certainly not going
01:05:05
to be in a year. >> One way to think about it is imagine if the internet came out and the only thing
01:05:09
that happened on the internet for the first three years was like pornography websites and like just like and then
01:05:15
people are like, "Okay, we got to regulate the internet." And it's like,
01:05:18
"Hold on a second. This is an idiotic use case. Perhaps we should take a zoom
01:05:22
out and think about what the internet could enable and all of the other use cases." And legislation needs to be
01:05:27
crafted with a bigger view. And perhaps it's a little too early to make those
01:05:31
judgment calls. >> Yeah. You got to wonder what impact this is going to have on the valuations of
01:05:37
these companies. I mean, if you can run this stuff locally on your own hardware,
01:05:42
you can bracket or put it in a virtual machine and open source wins, it's going
01:05:45
to change the economics of everything. And the people I'm talking to in startups, which is where you always see
01:05:50
the most efficient use of technology, they're all using Kimmy and what was the
01:05:55
other? >> Let me ask you a question about that actually, Chimoth. So Kimmy K2 powerful
01:06:00
model but it is a Chinese model or at least it originates in China obviously once it's open source people can fork it
01:06:06
and make their own but does that concern you particularly around the use case of coding because
01:06:14
what if there was a secret prompt in the model >> zero day attack or something
01:06:19
>> well it's like something built into the model that's secret that could inject
01:06:22
corrupted code and you know so much code's now being written by these models
01:06:28
in such volume that I mean humans in the beginning were checking it all. But now
01:06:32
even the founder of Cloudbot said he he doesn't even check all the code because
01:06:35
he can't personally supervise all of it. So as AI coding becomes a bigger and
01:06:39
bigger percentage. Right now it's probably what like 50%. As it goes to 99% no one's even checking it. You have
01:06:45
to really worry about prompt injections. >> Exactly. >> Code injections.
01:06:50
>> I think you're bringing up an important point. Right now we overly rely on eval
01:06:54
to tell us how good a model is and I don't think we've developed a standard
01:06:59
to I mean the the big model companies do it internally but the safety teams who are responsible for red teaming
01:07:07
these models don't really work as a broad coalition. Everybody has their own
01:07:12
version of what they do to make sure that their own models are good and performant. I think that there's an
01:07:17
opportunity because somebody has to be able to take an open source model. Let's
01:07:21
just say you're France and you're like, "Wow, where am I in this whole AI race?
01:07:26
I'm nowhere. We have a bunch of applications that we want to develop and we need our own
01:07:32
sovereign AI stack." And so, okay, we'll take Kimmy K 2.5. What do they do to
01:07:38
your point Sachs to get complete assurance that that model is reliable and safe under all weather conditions?
01:07:46
Honestly, the answer is I don't know what they would do right now. But that's
01:07:50
the opportunity because somebody has to be able to say, "Okay, look, we're going
01:07:54
to sandbox it in the following way. We're going to run it under all these race conditions. We're going to get to
01:07:58
all these corner cases so that we can tell you that it's actually good to go
01:08:01
and then you can use it." But how long will that take? And then by that time,
01:08:05
are we on Kimmy K3? And then what is France supposed to do? I don't know. So
01:08:10
these are complicated questions. But yeah, we do need an entire reimagining of how you red team some of these open
01:08:17
source models, obviously. >> And there's open source models being made here in the US too, by the way.
01:08:23
>> Exactly. No, no. Meta is doing them. >> Wherever it comes from, >> you're going to need AI models to look
01:08:28
for corrupted code and to do the security eval. And there's going to have to be continuous monitoring. The good
01:08:33
thing about open source is that when one person discovers a bug or a flaw or whatever, they share it with the
01:08:39
community and then it gets patched globally. >> The the other problem with open source
01:08:44
though right now is you can't really fork it and make it your own. Why? Because there's so much investment by
01:08:49
Moonshot. That's the company that makes Kim K2 in that example that you'll have
01:08:53
so much drift in one version your fork will be worthless. So why would you do it? So again, it goes back to sachs. We
01:09:00
have to be able to say okay Moonshot will provide Kimmy K2 and every update thereafter but now we need to stress
01:09:05
test it and we need to redte team it and we need to be able to say that this thing is bulletproof and right now there
01:09:11
is no clean way of going to a third party vendor to do that in a quick reliable cycle and that's a business
01:09:17
opportunity for somebody just speaking of the business opportunity I think there are a number
01:09:22
of American >> AI companies that are working on open source models it is a gap that we have
01:09:28
>> so and that is an opportunity I mean, look, if you're running critical
01:09:32
infrastructure, I don't think you want to be using a Chinese model, period, on
01:09:37
that critical infrastructure. >> I think if you can get it validated by an American company that's trustworthy,
01:09:42
then it's no longer really a Chinese model. Chinese contributed some really great ideas and now there's a branch
01:09:47
that you can use. I think it's just hard to ignore how good this stuff is now.
01:09:51
>> It feels like this was a turning point this week. Okay, I want to get to one
01:09:56
more important story. But dollar has dropped as gold and silver and copper have ripped. Dollar index is down 10% in
01:10:04
the last year. Hit its lowest level in four years on Tuesday. Trump was asked if the dollar declined too much. His
01:10:11
quote, "No, I think it's great." Wall Street thinks Trump wants a weaker
01:10:14
dollar to boost US manufacturing and exports. Obviously, we have a weaker dollar. That means the stuff from the US
01:10:19
is cheaper. Foreign stuff becomes more expensive. Uh and um we have a situation here, Freeberg, that you've talked
01:10:27
about. Money printing has increased to $2.5 trillion a year. Trump wants to print an additional 500 billion more.
01:10:34
That would bring us close to 3 trillion uh for the military and uh money has poured into gold and silver which have
01:10:42
way outperformed the S&P. Shout out Vinnie Lingham. Freeberg, your thoughts on dollar devaluation and what we're
01:10:49
seeing? Yeah. So, people talk about the market going up, but I'll use an analogy. If
01:10:55
you live on an island and there's two huts on the island and there's a bunch
01:10:58
of shells that people are using for trade, each house is going to be worth a certain number of shells. And then if
01:11:05
people went and found a whole bunch of more shells, the price per house would go up in number of shells. But there's
01:11:10
just more shells in in the supply. And effectively, you've inflated everything.
01:11:15
And that's effectively what's gone on with the US fiscal condition. We've
01:11:19
talked about this many times, but I think it's always worth a rehash. In a democracy like we have for the past 250
01:11:25
years, without adequate constitutional constraints, it has always been the case that over time spending goes up.
01:11:31
Government spending goes up. And this is because in a democracy, people ask for their government to do more every year.
01:11:36
And as they ask for their government to do more every year, the government agents who are elected say, "Okay, here
01:11:42
you go." And they spend more. Eventually, when the borrowing capacity gets unlocked, which is what happened in
01:11:46
the United States when we went off the gold standard, you borrow like crazy. You print money to to fund those
01:11:52
borrowing costs and you use that fundamentally to drive the next voting cycle, which is to give people more and
01:11:58
more of what they want. But eventually, the bill comes to you and in the United States, the bill is coming to you. Let's
01:12:04
start by looking at the money supply chart. This is the M2 money supply chart, showing the rapid rise in dollars
01:12:09
in supply as a function of the central bank of the United States. the Federal Reserve making loans to banks ultimately
01:12:16
to fund federal spending. I mean really an extraordinary number. And if you look
01:12:19
at the M2 money supply chart going back to 1960, 1955 and you can see postcoid we were hoping
01:12:28
that we would have resolved and sort of reduced the money supply by some amount but co really created this accelerating
01:12:36
mechanism and you know we're back on track in the last couple of years to increasing the money supply. And so over
01:12:43
time the the US dollar gets devalued as there are simply more dollars in the market and US treasuries gets
01:12:49
challenged. So if we take a look here around the world central banks have decided that they no longer want to hold
01:12:56
US treasuries. And so this is the value of gold versus treasuries in central banks in their inventory. So we are now
01:13:04
seeing that for the first time in history or >> no no hold on that's not accurate. It's
01:13:08
not like they're selling. This line just shows it's stable per se, right? It's
01:13:12
more that the incremental buying is in real assets. >> Yeah. But this dollar the dollar value
01:13:16
is also adjusted. So fundamentally I mean one way to think about this is the relative value of central bank holdings
01:13:22
around the world. We now see gold eclipsing US treasuries. So now gold is a larger share of the holdings. Yeah. So
01:13:28
now gold is the largest share of the holdings of central banks. If you look at the next chart which is just over the
01:13:33
past year as JCL pointed out this is the dollar index. So it's the dollar against
01:13:36
a basket of foreign currencies has declined you know from a index of about call it 109 down to 96 today. This chart
01:13:46
actually looks at so what is the US stock market trading at and instead of trading it in US dollars what if you
01:13:53
just looked at the US stock market the total value in ounces of gold. And so if we had the gold standard still and if we
01:14:02
functionally converted stock market value from dollars back into gold, you can see that the stock market in the
01:14:09
United States over the past years, so this is about seven and a half years going back to the pre-COVID era, is
01:14:15
actually down, down pretty substantively from the pre-COVID era. So stock markets
01:14:20
are fundamentally down. Everyone's cheering, clapping, bouncing up and down. Stock markets are up. Stock
01:14:25
markets are up. And I'm going to tell you why this is important in a minute.
01:14:27
Uh, and everyone's, you know, jumping up and down saying, "Great, the stock
01:14:30
market's up." The stock market's up in dollar denominated terms. But if you
01:14:33
look at the stock market relative to gold, it's actually down. And the sell-off is not just in the stock market
01:14:41
relative to gold, but you can actually look importantly at the metric that we all should care the most about, which is
01:14:46
US Treasury yield. So, this is the 30-year. So, the 30-year yield is now at 4.9%.
01:14:52
The average US government's cost to borrow today is 3.3%. So if we end up needing to roll all of
01:14:59
the US government debt, assuming we take on no new debt, which we know is not the
01:15:03
case, $39 trillion of debt outstanding, the federal government level today, and it had to get refinanced at this rate,
01:15:11
we would have an incremental annual cost to service the debt, just the interest on the existing debt, of roughly $700
01:15:18
billion a year. incremental cost to service existing debt as interest rates climb from 3.3 to 5%. And so
01:15:27
fundamentally, this is about 70% of the current defense budget. It's about 10%
01:15:32
of the overall federal budget. It's a significant percentage of US GDP, about
01:15:36
3% of US GDP. It's a substantial number and it creates the spiraling problem
01:15:41
that we're in. Now, I just want to make one final point. So, there's this
01:15:43
dolorization moment. It's always worth having a reflection on it, but I just
01:15:47
want to tie it back to Minnesota, Donald Trump, and socialism. And I think it's important for us to
01:15:55
just highlight that if you own assets like we do, the four of us, we own stocks, we own real estate, we own other
01:16:03
assets. As the dollar devalues and everything inflates in value, our asset prices go up and we get wealthier and
01:16:12
wealthier and wealthier. The majority of Americans do not own assets. They are net asset negative. As a result, they
01:16:21
live off of income and they do not benefit from the ddollarization like asset holders do.
01:16:29
And this is what is ultimately fueling populism in the United States. And the populism in the United States is what is
01:16:36
driving socialism. And the response to those behaviors is what Donald Trump elected to some degree. and the response
01:16:43
to the Donald Trump actions is what's driving the civil unrest in Minnesota and other places. And I fundamentally
01:16:51
believe that much of the unrest, the civil unrest, and ultimately this divide in this country is driven by the fact
01:16:59
that ddollarization because of excess government spending ultimately leads a majority of people in this country to
01:17:05
feeling oppressed and left behind because they're seeing a few people in the country accelerate their net worth
01:17:12
like all of us here. And there's no way for them to catch up because they don't
01:17:15
actually own assets. So, I'll be I'll I'll be honest with you guys and make a
01:17:20
confession. I was kind of at I was at the gym this morning on the treadmill. >> You were at the gym.
01:17:25
>> Yeah. And while I was there, I was actually thinking about the wealth tax
01:17:28
stuff that's going on in California. And I I wonder if it may be an inevitability
01:17:35
in order to keep the United States from going into civil war. I mean that very wholeheartedly. Like I just don't know
01:17:41
if there's a way of solving this fiscal problem without a functional redistribution of wealth. And the
01:17:46
question is can you do it violently or nonviolently? And if there's a nonviolent path, I think that's probably
01:17:51
the preferable path. >> Did you ever think about do you ever think about violently picking up some of
01:17:56
those weights? We can leave that that in or take it out. >> The problem with that is look, you know,
01:18:01
where this California wealth tax is going, right? It's not going to the quote unquote people. It's going to
01:18:07
these special interests who've been looting the state for decades. >> Audit everything before you raise taxes.
01:18:13
It's very simple, folks. Audit everything. >> I mean, if the money is going to waste,
01:18:17
foreign abuse, and special interest, then how do you solve the divide problem? I mean, I guess the ones that
01:18:23
the special interests are capable of organizing are able to extract, but doesn't actually solve the problem. In
01:18:29
fact, everything gets worse because >> yeah, >> those government special interests
01:18:34
generally rig the system in their favor in a way that actually raises the cost for everybody.
01:18:39
>> So you look at California, everything's performing worse. >> Can we pour one out for David Freeberg's
01:18:45
favorite government program? >> Free beer. >> Free beer. >> Free homeless for 55 homeless people
01:18:54
suffering from the shakes. And they spent $6 million on it, but it's over. 6
01:18:59
million a year. 6 million a year for 60 bo hobos to get beer because they had the shakes. The dream is over. The dream
01:19:07
is over. Freeberg. No more free beer. >> By the way, I think Sax's point is the
01:19:11
right point, which is the resolution to this isn't a fair and reasonable redistribution of assets.
01:19:18
It's fundamentally a moment of extraordinary theft. When there's this massive movement of capital like this
01:19:24
through a centralized system like the government, there's no free market transition of capital and as a result
01:19:29
you end up most seeing a large percentage of it go into into theft back into the hands of a few who were really
01:19:35
good at capturing that money as it comes out of the government's coffers. That's
01:19:38
a good point. >> You've diagnosed this many times. I mean, look, Texas and Florida
01:19:43
do a better job for their population collecting half as much in taxes per capita as California does. And having no
01:19:52
income tax or capital gains tax, >> that's because if you commit fraud here,
01:19:57
we put you in a firing squad. That's how it works. Right to the firing squad.
01:20:01
We're going to go to the range. Let's go to the Come by Sachs. Come by the ranch.
01:20:04
I have a shooting range. >> Matt Matt Mayan entered the California guminatorial race. He's running for
01:20:10
governor. >> He's running California. >> Yeah. >> Uh what does it mean? Who is he? Explain
01:20:15
to the audience why this is important. >> Well, he's the mayor of San Jose.
01:20:18
>> Chats are on fire. >> Yeah. He's much more of a moderate and he's not a union captured candidate.
01:20:24
>> Oh, here's your poly. >> Yeah, here's poly market. So, Matt Mayan
01:20:27
announced this morning very late entry to the gubernatorial race. Katie Porter is kind of the, you know, the output of
01:20:35
the Democratic machine. Tommy Styer is the billionaire climate change advocate. But Swallwell, you know, the congressman
01:20:41
from the east, >> hasn't met a virtue. He doesn't want a signal. >> He's literally like Christmas lights
01:20:48
blinking. >> Tom St. >> Well, look, if if if Maym, is that the right way to pronounce his name?
01:20:53
>> Yeah. Matt Mayan. >> Matt Mayan. California has a jungle primary, right? So, everyone's running
01:20:58
at the same time. There's no separate lanes for Democrats or Republicans. If
01:21:01
he ends up top two, let's say it's him and Swallwell, I think he'll win because
01:21:06
all the Republicans will vote for him. They'll go for the more centrist candidate.
01:21:11
>> We had a political strategist over for dinner. There's a version where the top
01:21:14
two people could be both Republicans actually right now. Current course and speed, the top two vote getters are
01:21:19
trending to be both Republican. >> Yeah. >> I like the Karen. The Karen's the most
01:21:24
entertaining. She's the one who said, "Get out of my shot." That's the one.
01:21:27
>> Katy Porter. >> The get out of my shot one. >> Yeah. She's tumbling. She's tumbling.
01:21:31
Yeah, she's not doing well. She's coming down in the she's not likable and she
01:21:34
seems and I think everyone sees right through her as being, you know, effectively captured by California
01:21:39
institutions, >> but Maym and Swallwell much more independent, but I think it's going to
01:21:45
be a battle between the two of them. >> Just to go back to your point, Jamas, so
01:21:48
what's interesting is there are two Republicans running for governor of California. Chad Biano, who's a sheriff,
01:21:55
and then Steve >> Steve Hilton, >> who's a political commentator, used to
01:21:58
be on Fox News. They're both at about 15%. Which actually puts them in the lead or close to the lead because the
01:22:05
field's so fragmented right now. Exactly. The problem that they have is so I guess if the field stayed
01:22:10
permanently fragmented, yes, they could be in the >> Could you imagine the melting mines?
01:22:15
>> Yeah. But that's not going to happen as much as I would like it to because the
01:22:20
Democratic field's going to coalesce and if it doesn't coales the the party
01:22:23
machine will get together and they'll tell a bunch of people to drop out and
01:22:27
get real >> and they'll they'll basically shift it. So the problem with the Republicans is
01:22:31
and it actually be better if there was one Republican instead of two because they need to be at like 30%. Right.
01:22:37
>> Right. >> But you know they're each going to get 15%. They they have more of a ceiling is
01:22:41
what I'm trying to say. Right. >> Yeah. That's true. That is true.
01:22:43
>> Yeah. It's only the final two that make it into the general. So, if the rest of
01:22:47
the Dems literally stay equal and there's five Dems that are at like 5 to 10% each, you could end up seeing the
01:22:53
two Republicans in the top two spots. >> I don't think that's going to happen. I
01:22:55
don't think you're going to end up with five Dems at at 10%. I think what could
01:22:59
happen though actually is it's probably better that you have two Republicans
01:23:02
rather than one because the disaster would be let's say you end up with Swallwell and one of the Republicans in
01:23:11
the runoff, then Swallwell definitely wins. That's what always happens, right?
01:23:16
>> The best chance for Matt Mayan is that it's him versus either a Democrat or a
01:23:21
Republican actually. >> And then if he's up against a Democrat, a more liberal Democrat like Swallwell,
01:23:27
the Republicans will support Maym and he'll win. And if he's up against a
01:23:30
Republican, then he'll also win because all the Democrats will support him. And
01:23:33
remember, this is like a plus 20 or 30 blue state. So, >> and by the way, he is such a good guy.
01:23:39
He's been such an effective mayor of San Jose. you know, he cleared up homelessness. I mean, his polic actual
01:23:45
work running something stands out amongst the rest of these folks. So, I think he's got a real shot, Sachs, at
01:23:51
moving up real fast, even though he's coming. >> Well, yeah. Look, if he plays his cards
01:23:54
right, he could win. I mean, look, I think there is a a path here for California restoration. You get someone
01:23:59
like Matt Mayan as governor, maybe Rick Caruso takes another shot at running for
01:24:04
mayor in LA. >> I think everyone recognizes that. >> Get in the game.
01:24:08
>> I think everyone recognizes that Karen Bass has been a disaster. She, you know,
01:24:12
aided and abetted the >> burning down of the Palisades. And then if you defeat the wealth tax so that the
01:24:18
>> Wait, did Trump take over, >> you could have a path? >> Did Trump just take over the rebuild in
01:24:23
Pacific Palisades with an executive order? Did I see that in my feed? >> He did. Yeah. Well, you know, there's
01:24:28
been a very small number of permits granted. I mean, how long has it been like 18 months now?
01:24:33
>> Sound [ __ ] >> Wait, so Sax, would you move back if there was a great restoration in
01:24:37
California? I feel like somehow it's just not going to happen. You know, it's like
01:24:44
>> it's over. Not in our lifetime. >> I feel like the fact that you're telling
01:24:48
me that Ma May is this great candidate and, you know, the whole tech world's
01:24:51
going to get behind him. I'm sure that's true. And then somehow I think it's the
01:24:54
reason he's going to lose and I think, you know, we'll end up with Swallwell,
01:24:59
who I think >> you're so jaded, Sax. I think that somehow >> well Swall is considered to be kind of a
01:25:06
lightweight and a pretty dim bulb. >> Friend of the pond, Eric Swall, come
01:25:13
back anytime. Who interviewed him with me? >> Jim, was that you? Did you interview him
01:25:17
with me? >> Yeah, I did. Yeah, you did. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean, just manifestly not up to the
01:25:23
challenges that are going to beset California in the coming years. You need someone really stellar to clean things
01:25:30
up after the fiscal insanity of the Newsome years. >> Well, look, I'll restate this on the
01:25:35
show very clearly. California has a trillion dollar fiscal cliff coming up because of the pension obligations. I
01:25:41
don't know if you guys know this. I'll make this one point very important to
01:25:44
know. They once tried to change the benefits, the pension benefits, and they lost a court case. And so there's
01:25:51
precedent in California state court that you cannot change pension benefits on the date that someone was hired. You can
01:25:58
never change their future benefits. Really important to know. So all of the benefits that have been given to every
01:26:04
California public employee up to this day or that they've been promised, they
01:26:08
are promised for life and you're not allowed to take them out and they cannot
01:26:11
be disposed of except for some form of bankruptcy. And there is no mechanism by which the state can declare bankruptcy.
01:26:19
So fundamentally and functionally, there are two ways that California can be saved. Number one, you pass an amendment
01:26:25
to the Constitution to fix this pension liability problem. And number two is the
01:26:29
state has the ability to declare bankruptcy. Everything else is all about how long are you keeping the state alive
01:26:34
for. >> Well, I I I support that that change to bankruptcy law. I just think it'll be
01:26:38
hard to get. But, you know, we could try. And look, if you had a governor of California
01:26:43
come to the federal government and say, "We would like this," then there's a
01:26:45
much higher chance of it happening. But actually, I think one question I think one question
01:26:50
>> for you to ask in evaluating this is what does Gavin Newsome want? Because
01:26:54
obviously he's running for president in 2028, you know, who would he like to
01:26:58
replace him as governor? You know, and obviously he doesn't want a Republican
01:27:02
because that'd be a rebuke. You know, does he want Swall? Does he want someone
01:27:07
who will appear even weaker and stupider than him? or does he want someone like Maym who will be appearing
01:27:16
>> to clean up the state? I think he might want the idiot >> although it's a it's a tough it's a
01:27:21
tough tough choice for him. >> She'll just scream. I like >> Well, here's the thing is he also
01:27:25
doesn't want the state to fall apart while he's running for president cuz he
01:27:28
might be blamed for that too. >> So, does he want someone like Compton like Maym who's criticized him because
01:27:33
Maym has criticized Newsome on things like homelessness, right? >> So, Gavin is super thin skin.
01:27:40
>> They can get past that. >> I don't know. But Gavin is super thin
01:27:42
skinned, so I'm sure he resents that. So probably the machine gets behind Swallwell,
01:27:48
even though it probably means a train wreck for the state. But we'll see. >> Yeah, that's doesn't seem like a good
01:27:53
idea. Yeah, I think he would want. >> But this is a big opportunity for tech
01:27:57
to flex his political muscles to see. >> Yeah, let's see. Let's see.
01:28:00
>> Let's see if they can do it. Let's see if they can do it. >> It's not just tech. It's anyone that
01:28:04
doesn't want an establishment governor. And I think that includes Hollywood. It
01:28:08
includes agriculture. It includes large swats of the state's economy. So, let's
01:28:12
see what happens. >> All right, everybody. The AllIn event series continues. All-in Summit Los
01:28:17
Angeles September 13th to 15th. Tickets are now taking applications. So, join us
01:28:24
in September. And if you are a venture capitalist, LP in funds, sovereign wealth fund, um, endowment, we're going
01:28:33
to be having our first all-in liquidity event May 31st to June 3rd. Go to allin.com/events
01:28:40
to apply for a ticket to liquidity as well. And we'll see you all next time on
01:28:46
the world's greatest podcast, the All-In podcast. Go ahead and subscribe to our 1
01:28:53
million subscriber channel on YouTube. That's right. YouTube just broke 1 million. All right. Love you, besties.
01:28:59
Bye-bye. >> Bye-bye. Love you, Bruce. >> We'll let your winners ride.
01:29:06
Rainman David >> and it said >> we open sourced it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it.
01:29:24
>> Besties are my dog taking your driveways. >> Oh man, my habitasher will meet the
01:29:33
ugly. We should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy because they're all just useless. It's like this
01:29:38
like sexual tension that they just need to release somehow. >> Your feet. >> We need to get merch.
01:29:49
>> I'm going all in. I'm going all in.