00:00:00
you were bloated last night what else is
00:00:02
new I said not bloated my God you really
00:00:06
are though you look bloated listen
00:00:07
that's coming from you you started to
00:00:09
look like Bert and now you're back to
00:00:11
Ernie your face is getting round again
00:00:13
all I have to say is hold on a second
00:00:15
guys I gotta get a drink is that okay
00:00:16
you guys got a minute for me to get a
00:00:17
drink yeah yeah I definitely do I
00:00:19
definitely do go ahead hold on a beer no
00:00:22
no
00:00:22
um I'm actually you know I've been
00:00:23
working on my weight so I'm just gonna
00:00:25
pick here I think I have the mocha latte
00:00:27
from Super got and I also have the
00:00:28
chocolate shake do you have a
00:00:30
recommendation here for me Friedberg
00:00:31
because I'm going to put it in my coffee
00:00:33
is mocha on a mocha yeah you can't go
00:00:36
wrong thank you double mocha is a win
00:00:38
just on a completely unrelated topic did
00:00:41
you happen to invest in super gut Jayco
00:00:43
no no I haven't invest yet but use the
00:00:45
promo code
00:00:47
oh okay it's been a big part of my
00:00:49
weight loss Journey it's also been a big
00:00:51
part of me and Freeburg uh becoming
00:00:53
besties and creating a unified block for
00:00:56
all in Summit 2023 so I've got two solid
00:01:00
votes I'll be very honest with you if
00:01:02
you guys give me a credible plan where
00:01:04
we can maintain the Integrity
00:01:08
hold on
00:01:11
continue listen to me listen to me
00:01:13
listen to me if you if you two idiots
00:01:16
I'm not involved yes you are you clearly
00:01:19
are involved with it with this [ __ ]
00:01:20
great important vote hold on no continue
00:01:22
I'm writing this and I'm writing it down
00:01:24
if you two idiots the two of you have to
00:01:26
do this together because otherwise I'm
00:01:27
with David and there's an absolutely got
00:01:29
it you two idiots you need to come up
00:01:32
with a plan
00:01:34
where we can each make
00:01:38
make four million bucks each net then
00:01:41
I'll do it four million net okay great
00:01:44
look at jaycal writing that down as as
00:01:46
if he respects a contract okay got this
00:01:49
got this I signed the [ __ ] car I
00:01:51
signed the contract for Jacob the
00:01:52
negotiation begins at the point where
00:01:54
there's a signed contract yeah exactly
00:01:57
it's like okay now I'll negotiate with
00:02:00
you
00:02:01
[Music]
00:02:13
[Music]
00:02:17
all right everybody the show has started
00:02:19
the four of us are still here by some
00:02:22
miracle we're still going after 107
00:02:24
episodes and it's better than ever last
00:02:26
week we were number 12. so mainstream
00:02:28
media
00:02:30
we'll see you in the top 10. here we go
00:02:33
Twitter files part one part two despite
00:02:36
your oppressive conditions yes
00:02:43
if I was getting five paid five bucks
00:02:45
for this I'd be on strike right now guys
00:02:48
not only are you getting five bucks
00:02:49
you're getting a bill for the production
00:02:50
okay here we go how beautiful is it that
00:02:54
the same reporters who couldn't stop
00:02:56
writing about the oppressive working
00:02:58
conditions that Elon Musk was supposedly
00:03:00
creating because he simply wanted the
00:03:02
employees to go back to the office and
00:03:04
work hard and if they didn't he'd give
00:03:06
them a generous three months severance
00:03:07
package yeah those same reporters are
00:03:09
now on strike because the salzburgers
00:03:12
are running a click bait Farm over there
00:03:13
with oppressive working conditions the
00:03:15
intellectual dishonesty has never been
00:03:17
higher in the world
00:03:20
honesty yes will the publisher of the
00:03:22
New York Times agree that anybody who
00:03:25
isn't happy there can have a voluntary
00:03:28
three-month severance package yeah click
00:03:30
this link and do you want to work hard
00:03:32
or do you want three month Severance if
00:03:34
the New York Times publisher did that
00:03:35
you know it would happen 800 of 1200
00:03:38
people would take the severance
00:03:40
of course
00:03:41
all right here we go Twitter files have
00:03:43
dropped part one dropped with the
00:03:45
legendary award-winning highly respected
00:03:48
journalist Matt taibi if you don't know
00:03:50
who he is he is a left-leaning
00:03:52
journalist who worked at Rolling Stone
00:03:55
and did the best coverage hands down
00:03:58
of the financial crisis and the
00:04:00
shenanigans and he held truth to power
00:04:01
to that group this is important to note
00:04:03
the second drop was given to Bari Weiss
00:04:07
who is a right-leaning independent
00:04:10
journalist these are both independent
00:04:12
journalists she previously worked at the
00:04:15
New York Times itself now
00:04:17
I think we should work backwards
00:04:20
from two to one do you agree yes for
00:04:22
sure let's start with the drop that just
00:04:24
happened last night yes so last night a
00:04:26
drop happened so
00:04:28
here's what happens in Twitter files
00:04:31
part two I'm gonna give a basic summary
00:04:32
and then I'm going to give it to sax
00:04:33
because he's chomping at the bit we now
00:04:34
have confirmation that what the right
00:04:37
thought was happening all along which is
00:04:39
a secret
00:04:41
silencing system built into the software
00:04:44
of blacklists was tagging right wing
00:04:48
conservative voices in the system
00:04:51
and these included people like Dan uh
00:04:55
bongino is that you pronounce it yes he
00:04:57
was tagged with being on a search
00:04:59
Blacklist what that means is you're a
00:05:01
fan of of Dan's who is a former secret
00:05:05
service agent who is now a right-wing
00:05:07
conservative I could just say
00:05:08
conservative instead of wing a
00:05:10
conservative radio host podcast host he
00:05:13
was not allowed to be found in search
00:05:15
engines for some reason
00:05:17
Charlie Kirk who is a conservative
00:05:19
commentator he was tagged with do not
00:05:22
amplify I guess that means you can't
00:05:24
Trend into people's feeds even if they
00:05:26
follow you
00:05:27
and then
00:05:28
there were people who were banned from
00:05:30
the trends Blacklist including a
00:05:33
Stanford professor
00:05:34
Jay
00:05:37
a did I get it right yes
00:05:40
okay I got it right doctor of Stanford
00:05:42
school of medicine and he was not
00:05:46
allowed on the trends Blacklist because
00:05:49
he had a dissenting opinion a Stanford
00:05:52
Professor had a decision on covet that's
00:05:55
turned out to be true and this is where
00:05:57
the danger comes in because all of these
00:05:59
actions were taken without any
00:06:03
transparency and they were taken on one
00:06:08
side of the aisle by people inside of
00:06:10
Twitter essentially covertly no
00:06:13
ownership of who did it and they never
00:06:16
told the people they gaslit them
00:06:19
they could see their own tweets
00:06:22
they could use the service but they
00:06:25
couldn't be seen even by their own fans
00:06:27
in many cases here sax when you look at
00:06:30
that let's just start with that first
00:06:31
piece
00:06:32
the shadow Banning as it's called in our
00:06:36
industry where you can participate in a
00:06:38
community but you can't be seen
00:06:41
are any is there any circumstance under
00:06:44
which this tool would make sense for you
00:06:46
to deploy and then what's your general
00:06:48
take on what has been discovered last
00:06:50
night okay look two more questions yes
00:06:53
let me start with what's been discovered
00:06:54
here let me boil it down for you this is
00:06:57
an FTX level fraud except that what was
00:07:01
stolen here was not customer funds it
00:07:03
was their free speech rights not just
00:07:05
the rights of people like Jay about
00:07:07
acharya and Dan bongino to speak but the
00:07:09
right of the public to hear them in the
00:07:12
way that they expected okay and you had
00:07:15
statement after statement by Twitter
00:07:17
Executives like Jack Dorsey like Vegeta
00:07:21
Gotti like you know Yol and others
00:07:25
saying we do not Shadow ban and then
00:07:27
they also said we certainly this is
00:07:29
their emphasis do not Shadow ban on the
00:07:32
basis of political Viewpoint and what
00:07:34
the Twitter files show is that is
00:07:36
exactly what they were doing they in the
00:07:38
same way that SBF was using
00:07:40
FTX and customer funds is his personal
00:07:43
piggy bank they were using Twitter as
00:07:45
their personal ideological piggy bank
00:07:48
they were going in to the tools and
00:07:50
using the content moderation system
00:07:52
these big brother-like tools that were
00:07:54
designed to basically put their thumb on
00:07:56
the scale of American democracy and
00:07:58
suppress viewpoints that they did not
00:08:00
agree with and they did not like even
00:08:02
when even when they could not justify
00:08:06
removing content based on their own
00:08:08
rules so there are conversations in the
00:08:11
slack that Barry Weiss exposed where for
00:08:13
example Libs of tick tock they admit in
00:08:16
the slack that we can't suppress limits
00:08:19
of tip talk based on our hay policy Libs
00:08:22
of tick tock hasn't violated it we're
00:08:23
going to suppress that account anyway
00:08:25
now it's important to note what Libs of
00:08:27
tick tock does this is a great talking
00:08:28
point Libs of tick tock finds uh people
00:08:32
who are trans
00:08:34
people who are you know maybe not lgbtq
00:08:38
and they feature their tick tocks
00:08:42
and they mock them on Twitter now this
00:08:45
certainly is Free Speech and the
00:08:47
argument from the safety team was by
00:08:49
putting all of these together you're
00:08:52
inciting violence towards those people
00:08:54
and they said they haven't broken a rule
00:08:56
but collectively
00:08:57
they could be in some way targeting
00:09:01
those people is there anything fair
00:09:03
Friedberg to that statement
00:09:07
that they targeted them
00:09:09
by collecting their let's say views that
00:09:12
are I'm asking this question for
00:09:14
discussion purposes I'm not giving
00:09:15
myself hold on I want free breakfast why
00:09:18
can't I finish I'm going to go back to
00:09:19
you spoke for two minutes that's why
00:09:21
Friedberg you turned down moderating
00:09:23
today sex you could everybody else
00:09:25
yesterday as long as I want and I get
00:09:26
interrupted you got two minutes yes let
00:09:30
me just finish the SPF analogy okay the
00:09:32
filibuster continues then you can both
00:09:34
sides of this don't worry sex while
00:09:36
you're speaking let's drop one or two
00:09:37
words on you and then yeah why did
00:09:39
people like ADI and Yol deny that they
00:09:42
were engaged in Shadow Banning even
00:09:43
though that's clearly what they were
00:09:44
doing because they knew that they had an
00:09:47
obligation to be stewards of the public
00:09:49
trust they were custodians of public
00:09:52
trust they knew they were violating that
00:09:54
trust the same way that SBF had a duty
00:09:58
to be custodians of his customers funds
00:10:01
they did not Implement their own policy
00:10:04
that they said they were implementing
00:10:05
why because they were suppressing
00:10:08
accounts that personally offended them
00:10:09
that personally they disagreed with and
00:10:11
they wanted to deprive the public of the
00:10:13
right to hear okay so now the way that
00:10:15
they're justifying this hold on the way
00:10:16
that the media is today justifying it is
00:10:18
they're pointing to obscure Provisions
00:10:20
in the terms of use around spam accounts
00:10:23
things like that saying oh well the
00:10:25
terms of you showed that they had the
00:10:26
right to do this this is like the margin
00:10:28
account okay they do not have the right
00:10:31
to use these tools in this way okay Jay
00:10:35
bhattacharya was not posting spam
00:10:39
Professor it doesn't yes
00:10:46
opposed to lockdowns that was the Great
00:10:48
Barrington declaration and they
00:10:51
suppressed it what is the justification
00:10:53
so now you have to answer my question
00:10:54
then sex since you want to talk so much
00:10:57
hold on sax I want you to answer the
00:10:59
question then since you are so
00:11:00
interested
00:11:01
I want him to answer one question then
00:11:04
it's going to you free bird sax should
00:11:06
lives of tick tock be able to collect
00:11:09
uh trans people uh living their life
00:11:12
making tick tocks put them into a group
00:11:15
feed
00:11:16
mock them
00:11:18
and
00:11:20
if those people experience
00:11:23
harassment because of it is that
00:11:25
something that Twitter should allow I'm
00:11:26
asking you this without giving my
00:11:28
opinion I'm curious your opinion
00:11:29
specifically for the libs of tick tock
00:11:31
since you opened that door and you
00:11:33
wanted to bring up that very thorny
00:11:35
issue go listen so unless there's Tick
00:11:38
Tock my understanding of that account is
00:11:39
that they only take videos that have
00:11:42
already been made public by another
00:11:43
account they're all public they're all
00:11:46
in the public domain and then they
00:11:48
repost them sometimes they make a snarky
00:11:50
comment but usually they just let them
00:11:51
stand on their own that is not a
00:11:53
violation of free speech now the way
00:11:56
that I think these Twitter Executives
00:11:58
have interpreted it is that they live in
00:12:00
such a bubble and they live in with such
00:12:03
privilege and entitlement that they
00:12:05
think that when their point of view gets
00:12:08
criticized or challenged that that in
00:12:10
and of itself is harassment that's not
00:12:12
that is public debate and they want to
00:12:15
make themselves and their points of view
00:12:16
immune to public debate and the way that
00:12:18
they do that is that they claim that any
00:12:20
criticism is harassment it's not
00:12:23
if in aggregate final final follow-up if
00:12:26
an aggregate those people report being
00:12:28
harassed and they have evidence of being
00:12:30
harassed what should Twitter do listen
00:12:31
if somebody is harassed I'm I'm fine
00:12:34
with taking that down but being publicly
00:12:36
criticized or simply retweeted is not
00:12:39
harassment okay harassment needs to be
00:12:41
targeted and it needs to be more than
00:12:43
just public criticism or even a snarky
00:12:46
comment here or there and so you don't
00:12:48
consider a not you know a a daily feed
00:12:51
of trans people being uh mocked you
00:12:55
don't consider that Target harassment
00:12:57
got it don't listen to me about it
00:12:59
listen to Twitter's own slack Files
00:13:01
about it they knew that the account that
00:13:04
lives of tick tock was not violating the
00:13:06
rules yet they suppressed that they've
00:13:08
suspended it six times they knew they
00:13:10
were on Shaky Ground they wanted to do
00:13:12
it anyway why because they because you
00:13:13
know because people are experiencing
00:13:15
harassment that's why they did it but it
00:13:17
is a thorny freedom of speech issue I
00:13:19
agree with you I think uh I think sax
00:13:22
has
00:13:24
articulated a vision for the product he
00:13:28
wanted Twitter to be but I don't think
00:13:31
that's necessarily the product that they
00:13:33
wanted to create it's not that Twitter
00:13:35
set out at the time or stated clearly
00:13:38
that they were going to be the harbinger
00:13:40
of truth and the Free Speech platform
00:13:41
for all I think they were really clear
00:13:44
and they have been in their behavior and
00:13:47
as you know demonstrated through this
00:13:48
stuff that came out which to me feels a
00:13:50
lot like uh we already knew all this
00:13:52
stuff this is a bit of a nothing burger
00:13:54
that they were curating and they were
00:13:57
editing and they were editorializing
00:13:59
other people's content and the ranking
00:14:02
of content in the same way that many
00:14:05
other internet platforms do to create
00:14:07
what they believe to be their best user
00:14:10
experience for the users that they want
00:14:12
to appeal to and I'll say like there's
00:14:14
been this long debate and it goes back
00:14:17
20 years at this point on how Google
00:14:19
does ranking right I mean you guys may
00:14:21
remember Jeremy stoppelman went to DC
00:14:24
and he complained about how Google was
00:14:26
using his content and he wasn't being
00:14:27
ranked high enough as Google's own
00:14:29
content that was being shoved in the
00:14:31
wrong place and there's a guy who ran
00:14:33
kind of he was a spokesperson for the
00:14:35
SEO the search engine optimization rules
00:14:39
at Google and it was always the secret
00:14:41
at Google how did the search results get
00:14:43
ranked and I can tell you it's not just
00:14:46
a pure algorithm that there was a lot of
00:14:48
manual intervention a lot of manual work
00:14:49
in fact the manual work gets to be the
00:14:51
to the point that they said there's so
00:14:53
much stuff that we know is a is the best
00:14:55
content and the best form of content for
00:14:58
the user experience that they ranked it
00:15:00
all the way at the top and they called
00:15:01
it the one box it's the stuff that sits
00:15:03
above the primary search results and
00:15:05
that editorialization ultimately led to
00:15:07
a product that they intended to make
00:15:09
because they believed it was a better
00:15:10
user experience for the users that they
00:15:12
wanted to service and I don't think that
00:15:14
that this is any different than what's
00:15:16
happened at Twitter
00:15:18
Twitter is not a government agency
00:15:19
they're not a free speech they're not
00:15:21
the internet they're a product and the
00:15:24
product managers and the people that run
00:15:25
that that product team ultimately made
00:15:28
some editorial decisions that said this
00:15:30
is the content we do want to show and
00:15:32
this is the content we don't want to
00:15:33
show and they certainly did wrap up
00:15:36
um you know a bunch of rules that had a
00:15:37
lot of leeway for what they could or
00:15:39
couldn't do or they gave themselves a
00:15:41
lot of different excuses on how to do it
00:15:42
I don't agree with it it's not the
00:15:44
product I want it's not the product I
00:15:46
think should exist I think Elon also saw
00:15:49
that and clearly he stepped in and said
00:15:51
I want to make a product that is a
00:15:53
different product than what is being
00:15:54
created today so none of this feels to
00:15:56
me like these guys were the Guardians of
00:15:58
the internet and they came along and
00:16:00
they were distrustful they did exactly
00:16:02
what they did what a lot of other
00:16:04
companies have done exactly what they
00:16:05
set out to do and they editorialized the
00:16:07
product for a certain user group and by
00:16:09
the way they never blocked they never
00:16:10
edited people's tweets they changed how
00:16:13
people's results were showing up in
00:16:15
rankings they showed how viral they
00:16:16
would get in the trend box those were
00:16:18
in-app features and in-app services this
00:16:21
was not about taking someone's tweet and
00:16:24
changing it and people may feel ashamed
00:16:26
and they may feel
00:16:27
you know upset about the fact that they
00:16:30
were de-ranked uh or they were kind of
00:16:32
quote Shadow banned but ultimately
00:16:34
that's the product they chose to make
00:16:37
and people have the choice and the
00:16:38
option of going elsewhere and I don't
00:16:40
agree with it and it's not the product I
00:16:41
want and it's not a product I want to
00:16:43
use and I certainly don't feel happy
00:16:45
seeing it but so you want to see
00:16:46
products in you want free work to
00:16:48
summarize it you want to see the free
00:16:50
market do its job
00:16:51
you worked at Facebook Facebook seems to
00:16:54
have done I would say an excellent job
00:16:57
with content moderation I think in large
00:16:59
part correct me if I'm wrong because of
00:17:00
the real names policy uh but you tell us
00:17:03
what you think uh you know when you look
00:17:05
at this and the 15-year history of
00:17:07
social media and moderation
00:17:10
I think moderation is incredibly
00:17:12
difficult and typically what happens is
00:17:14
early on in a company's life cycle and I
00:17:18
I'm going to guess that Twitter and
00:17:20
YouTube were very similar to what we did
00:17:23
at Facebook and it's very similar to
00:17:24
probably what Tick Tock had to do in the
00:17:26
early days which is
00:17:27
you have this massive tidal wave of
00:17:30
usage and so you're always on a little
00:17:33
bit of a hamster wheel and so you build
00:17:36
these very basic tools and you uncover
00:17:38
problems along the way
00:17:40
and so I I think it's important to
00:17:44
humanize the people that are at Twitter
00:17:46
because I'm not sure that they're these
00:17:48
super nefarious actors per se I do think
00:17:50
that they were conflicted I do think
00:17:52
that they made some very corrupting
00:17:54
decisions but I don't think that they
00:17:56
were these evil actors okay I think that
00:17:59
they were folks who against the tidal
00:18:02
wave of usage built some brittle tools
00:18:05
built on top of them built on top of it
00:18:07
some more and tried to find a way of
00:18:09
coping and as scale
00:18:12
increased they didn't have an
00:18:14
opportunity to take a step back and
00:18:15
reset and I think that that's true for
00:18:17
all of these companies and so you're
00:18:19
just seeing it out in the light what's
00:18:22
happening at Twitter but don't for a
00:18:23
second think that any other company
00:18:25
behaved any differently Google Facebook
00:18:27
Twitter bite dance and Tick Tock they're
00:18:30
all the same they're all dealing with
00:18:31
this problem and they're all probably
00:18:32
trying to do
00:18:34
a decent job of it as best as they know
00:18:36
how so what do we do from here is the
00:18:38
question okay
00:18:40
the reason somebody needs to do
00:18:42
something about this is summarized
00:18:44
really elegantly in this Jay
00:18:46
bhattacharya tweet so please Nick just
00:18:50
throw it up here so that we can just
00:18:51
talk about this
00:18:52
this is why I think that this issue is
00:18:56
important critically this is a perfect
00:18:58
tweet still trying to process my
00:19:00
emotions on learning that Twitter
00:19:02
blacklisted me okay who cares about that
00:19:04
here's what matters the thought that
00:19:06
will keep me up tonight
00:19:08
censorship of scientific discussion
00:19:11
permitted policies like school closures
00:19:13
and a generation of children were hurt
00:19:16
now just think about that in a nutshell
00:19:19
what was Jay bhattacharya to do maybe he
00:19:22
was supposed to go on Tick Tock and try
00:19:24
to sound the alarm Bells through a tick
00:19:26
tock maybe he was supposed to go on
00:19:27
YouTube and create a video maybe he was
00:19:30
supposed to go on Facebook and you know
00:19:32
post into a Facebook group or or do a
00:19:34
news feed post
00:19:36
the the the problem is that and the odds
00:19:39
are reasonably likely that a lot of
00:19:41
these companies had very similar
00:19:42
policies in this example around covet
00:19:44
misinformation because it was the CDC
00:19:47
and you know governmental organizations
00:19:49
directing you know information rules
00:19:53
reaching out to all of these companies
00:19:56
right so we're just seeing an insight
00:19:57
into Twitter but the point is it
00:19:59
happened everywhere the implication of
00:20:01
suppressing information like this is
00:20:03
that a credible individual like that
00:20:06
can't spark a public debate
00:20:09
and in not being able to spark the
00:20:12
debate you have this building up of
00:20:15
errors in the system
00:20:17
and then who gets hurt in this example
00:20:19
which is true is like you couldn't even
00:20:21
talk about school closures and masking
00:20:24
upfront and early in the system if you
00:20:27
had scientists actually debate it maybe
00:20:30
what would have happened is we would
00:20:31
have kept the schools open and you would
00:20:32
have had less learning loss and you'd
00:20:34
have less depression and less over
00:20:36
prescription of you know ritalin and
00:20:38
adderall because those are all factual
00:20:40
things we can measure today so I think
00:20:42
the important thing to take away from
00:20:43
all of this is we've got confirmatory
00:20:46
evidence
00:20:47
that whether they're you know these
00:20:50
folks under a tidal wave of pressure
00:20:51
made some really bad decisions
00:20:55
and the implications are pretty broad
00:20:57
reaching
00:20:58
and now I do think governments have to
00:21:00
step in and create better guard rails so
00:21:03
this kind of stuff doesn't happen I
00:21:05
don't buy the whole it's a you know
00:21:07
private company they can do what they
00:21:09
want I think that that is
00:21:11
too naive of an expectation for how
00:21:13
important these three companies
00:21:16
literally are
00:21:17
to how Americans consume and process
00:21:20
information to make decisions incredibly
00:21:22
well said sax your reaction to your
00:21:24
besties I largely agree with what Jamal
00:21:26
said but let's go back to what Freiburg
00:21:28
sex I think what freeburg's point of
00:21:29
view is is really what you're hearing
00:21:31
now from the mainstream media today
00:21:32
which is oh nothing to see here
00:21:35
you know that they told us all along
00:21:37
what was happening this was just content
00:21:39
moderation they had the right to do this
00:21:41
you're making a big deal over nothing no
00:21:43
that's not true go back and look at the
00:21:45
media coverage starting in 2018. article
00:21:48
after article said that this idea of
00:21:50
Shadow Banning was a right-wing
00:21:52
conspiracy theory that's what they said
00:21:54
furthermore Jack Dorsey denied that
00:21:56
shadow Banning was happening including
00:21:58
at a congressional hearing I believe
00:22:00
under oath so either Eli or he was lied
00:22:03
to by his subordinates I actually
00:22:05
believe that the latter is possible I
00:22:07
think I don't think it's true with SBF
00:22:09
it might be true with Jack because he's
00:22:11
so checked out furthermore you had
00:22:13
people again like Vegeta Gotti again
00:22:15
tweeting and repeatedly stating we do
00:22:18
not Shadow ban we certainly don't Shadow
00:22:19
band on the basis of political Viewpoint
00:22:22
so these people were denying exactly
00:22:24
what their critics were saying they were
00:22:27
accusing their critics of being
00:22:28
conspiracy theorists now that the thing
00:22:30
is proven the mountain of evidence has
00:22:33
dropped they're saying oh well this is
00:22:34
old news this was known a long time ago
00:22:37
no it was not known a long time ago it
00:22:39
was disputed by you and now finally it's
00:22:42
proven and you're trying to say it's not
00:22:44
a big deal it is a big deal it's a
00:22:46
violation of the public trust and if you
00:22:49
are so proud of your content moderation
00:22:51
policies why didn't you admit what you
00:22:53
were doing in the first place
00:22:55
that's what I said you feel good that
00:22:57
elon's running this business now I mean
00:22:59
like the things that you're concerned
00:23:00
about as a user as someone who cares
00:23:03
about the Public's access to knowledge
00:23:07
uh to opinions uh to free speech this
00:23:10
has got to be a good change right like
00:23:12
this has come to light it's clearly
00:23:13
going to get resolved everyone's going
00:23:15
to move forward I mean do you think that
00:23:16
there's penalties needed for the people
00:23:17
that work there or like what what what's
00:23:19
the anger because because no you won
00:23:21
like I think look I think we got I think
00:23:24
we basically got extremely lucky yeah
00:23:26
that Elon Musk happened to care about
00:23:28
free speech and decided to do something
00:23:30
about it and actually had the means to
00:23:32
do something about it he's just about
00:23:34
the only billionaire who has that level
00:23:37
of means who actually cared enough to
00:23:39
take on this battle but are you saying
00:23:41
that this is
00:23:42
praise for that but
00:23:46
I mean unless Elon can buy every single
00:23:48
tech company which he clearly can't I
00:23:50
think you guys are right this is
00:23:52
happening a lot of other Technologies
00:23:53
we're about to rewrite the government
00:23:55
the United States government is going to
00:23:56
make an attempt to rewrite section 230.
00:24:00
I think that what this does is put a
00:24:02
very fine point on a comment that Elon
00:24:05
actually tweeted out and Nick if you
00:24:06
could find that please that's a very
00:24:07
good tweet where he said going forward
00:24:09
you will be able to see if you were
00:24:12
Shadow banned you were able to see if
00:24:15
you were de-boosted why and be able to
00:24:18
appeal and I think that that concept
00:24:20
to be very honest with you should be
00:24:22
enshrined in law and I think that should
00:24:25
be part of the section 230 rewrite and
00:24:28
all of these media companies and all of
00:24:31
these social media companies should be
00:24:33
subject to it and the reason is because
00:24:35
it ties a lot of these Concepts together
00:24:37
and says look
00:24:39
you can build a service you're a private
00:24:41
company make as much money as you want
00:24:43
but we're going to have some connective
00:24:46
tissue back to the fundamental
00:24:47
underpinnings of the Constitution
00:24:49
which is the framework under which we
00:24:51
all live and we're going to
00:24:53
transparently allow you to understand it
00:24:54
and I think that's really reasonable
00:24:55
make that a legal expectation of all
00:24:58
these organizations
00:25:01
the companies the companies will love it
00:25:03
because I think it's super hard for you
00:25:05
to be in these companies and they
00:25:07
probably are like take this
00:25:08
responsibility off my plate it's just
00:25:10
very simple this is a there's really
00:25:12
four problems that occurred here number
00:25:14
one there was no transparency the people
00:25:18
who were Shadow banned taken out of
00:25:21
search Etc they did not know if they
00:25:24
were told and it was clear to users we
00:25:27
could have a discussion about was that a
00:25:29
fair judgment or not in the cases we've
00:25:31
seen so far from Bari Weiss's reporting
00:25:33
in the Twitter files part duh it's very
00:25:36
clear that these were not justifiable
00:25:38
number two
00:25:40
these were not evenly enforced it's very
00:25:43
clear that one side because we don't
00:25:46
have one example of an a person on the
00:25:49
left
00:25:49
being censored when we if we do then we
00:25:53
could put balls and Strikes together and
00:25:55
we could say how many people on one side
00:25:56
versus how many people on the other it's
00:25:57
pretty clear what happened here because
00:25:59
these all occurred with a group of
00:26:02
people working at Twitter which is 96 or
00:26:05
97 percent left leaning the statistics
00:26:08
are clear
00:26:09
number three
00:26:10
the shadow Banning and the search
00:26:12
Banning and I think this is something we
00:26:14
talked about previously chamoth it feels
00:26:16
very underhanded this was your point if
00:26:19
we're going to block people they should
00:26:20
be blocked and they should know why the
00:26:24
fourth piece of this which is absolutely
00:26:26
infuriating and this is a discussion
00:26:28
that myself Saxon and um Elon have had
00:26:31
many times about this moderation and I'm
00:26:34
not speaking out of school now because
00:26:35
he's now very public with his position
00:26:36
and you know his position he came to on
00:26:39
his own it's not like
00:26:41
this is sax and I you know coming up
00:26:44
these positions this is why Elon bought
00:26:45
the business
00:26:46
if you really want to intellectually uh
00:26:50
test your thinking on this and I am a
00:26:52
moderate who's left-leaning I can tell
00:26:54
you there's a simple way for anybody who
00:26:57
is debating the validity of the concerns
00:27:00
here imagine Rachel Maddow or Ezra Klein
00:27:03
or whoever your favorite left-leaning
00:27:05
pundit is was Shadow Band by a group of
00:27:09
right-wing moderators who were acting
00:27:11
covertly and without any transparency
00:27:14
how would you feel if Maddow reporting
00:27:17
on you know uh all the Russian
00:27:21
coordination with Trump's campaign did
00:27:23
this or Ezra Klein with whatever topics
00:27:26
he covers and you will very quickly find
00:27:29
yourself infuriated
00:27:31
and you should then intellectually as we
00:27:33
say on this program steel Manning if you
00:27:35
argue the other side it's infuriating
00:27:37
for either side to experience this and
00:27:39
that is what the 230 change needs to be
00:27:41
chamoth you're exactly correct
00:27:43
if you make a an action it should be
00:27:46
listed on the person's profile page and
00:27:48
on the tweet and if you click on the
00:27:50
question mark you should see when the
00:27:52
action was taken by who you know which
00:27:55
department maybe maybe not the person so
00:27:56
they they get personally attacked and
00:27:58
then what the resolution to it is this
00:28:00
has been banned because it's targeted
00:28:02
harassment this can be resolved in this
00:28:04
way then everybody's Behavior would
00:28:06
steer towards whatever the stated
00:28:09
purpose of that social network is you
00:28:12
can get better Behavior by making the
00:28:14
rules clear by making the rules unclear
00:28:17
and making it unfair you create this
00:28:20
insane situation go ahead chamoth and
00:28:23
that's why I'm infuriated about it I
00:28:25
think you have to take it one step
00:28:26
further to really do justice to why this
00:28:29
should be important to everybody and I
00:28:31
do think this school example it really
00:28:33
matters to me like
00:28:34
we have like I don't know now we know
00:28:37
what the counter factual is which which
00:28:39
is that we have
00:28:41
I mean we've relegated our children to a
00:28:43
bunch of years of really complicated
00:28:46
relearning and learning that they never
00:28:48
had to go through because of all the
00:28:49
learning laws they gave them but like
00:28:52
what if Jay bhattacharya who's I mean
00:28:54
like you can't be you know have a higher
00:28:57
sort of role in society in terms of you
00:28:59
know population credentials I mean
00:29:01
imagine if if you know there was a
00:29:04
platform where he could have actually
00:29:05
said this and that you know people would
00:29:06
have clamored and said you know what you
00:29:08
and fauci need to get to the bottom of
00:29:10
this or where legislators could have
00:29:12
seen it and said you know what before we
00:29:14
make a decision like this
00:29:16
maybe hey fauci go talk to Jay because
00:29:19
he's a Stanford Prof he's probably not
00:29:20
an idiot why does he think that or maybe
00:29:23
let's convene you know an actual group
00:29:25
of 20 or 30 scientists and the fact that
00:29:28
this one version of thinking about
00:29:31
things was deemed so heterodoxical it is
00:29:34
just such a good example they shut down
00:29:36
an important conversation you know that
00:29:38
the decision was so wrong and the damage
00:29:41
was so severe so we know what happened
00:29:43
by suppressing that speech and that's
00:29:45
one example well it's in in my in my
00:29:48
estimation it is the Silver Bullet
00:29:50
example that cleans through all of this
00:29:52
other stuff because you know I don't
00:29:53
really care if Rachel Maddow has your
00:29:55
client who the hell cares this is
00:29:57
important stuff because it affects
00:29:58
everybody irrespective of your political
00:30:00
persuasion and what editorial you want
00:30:01
to read sure math what if the
00:30:03
investigation into the Catholic church
00:30:05
and the abuses that occurred there
00:30:07
somebody said oh this person it needs to
00:30:09
be shut down
00:30:10
and then children are molested for
00:30:12
another decade by the way we have an
00:30:13
example of that Sinead O'Connor came out
00:30:15
on SNL you can look it up for if you're
00:30:17
under 40 years old and said fight the
00:30:19
Real Enemy she ripped up a picture of
00:30:20
the Pope because of the scandals there
00:30:22
she was excommunicated she was canceled
00:30:25
at that time one of the first people to
00:30:26
be canceled because she spoke truth to
00:30:28
power what if somebody an investigative
00:30:30
journalist at the New York Times the
00:30:32
Boston Globes are in the movie Spotlight
00:30:33
those are the people who broke the story
00:30:35
of the Catholic church if somebody came
00:30:37
in and the Catholic Church put pressure
00:30:38
on a social network he said hey you
00:30:40
can't put this stuff up here you can't
00:30:41
have this discussion here's here's
00:30:43
another example why are we shutting down
00:30:45
discussions in America remember the
00:30:47
Vietnam papers because because Jake how
00:30:48
the media the media does not value
00:30:50
transparency anymore if you go back and
00:30:52
look at the way the media portrays
00:30:54
itself like in the movie The Post which
00:30:56
is about the revelations about the
00:30:58
Catholic church or you go back to All
00:31:00
the President's Men what the media
00:31:02
surprised and what they congratulated
00:31:05
themselves on was first of all EX
00:31:07
transparency and exposing the lives of
00:31:10
powerful people well that is exactly
00:31:12
what has happened here the lies of the
00:31:14
powerful group of people who were
00:31:16
running Twitter policy and suppressing
00:31:19
one side of the debate
00:31:21
has been exposed and the media is
00:31:23
treating it with a yawn like there's
00:31:24
nothing to see here why because they
00:31:26
were complicit in this they were
00:31:27
complicit in suppressing the views of
00:31:30
people like Jay bhattacharya they were
00:31:32
complicit in choosing the views of fauci
00:31:35
and the elite on covet and so they have
00:31:37
no interest now in bringing making in
00:31:41
making what's happened here at Twitter
00:31:42
fully transparent I have to own it I
00:31:44
think by the way just so just a quick
00:31:45
correction there I think sax when you
00:31:47
said the post Washington Post Watergate
00:31:49
Spotlight exactly I'm not even thinking
00:31:51
about Spotlight sorry it was Main Event
00:31:53
okay but like but the post is another
00:31:55
example that that movie was about
00:31:57
another event like this which could have
00:31:59
been easily suppressed in today's world
00:32:01
much harder there which was the Pentagon
00:32:03
papers and in that world you know there
00:32:06
was an immense amount of pressure that
00:32:08
the government put on the Washington
00:32:09
Post but then they said you know what
00:32:11
we're going with it and they still
00:32:12
published it and it created a
00:32:14
Groundswell of support to really
00:32:15
re-examine the Vietnam War and it had a
00:32:17
huge impact but could you imagine this
00:32:19
time around which is like hey guys
00:32:20
there's going to be some kind of
00:32:21
misinformation you know these Pentagon
00:32:23
papers are not real it's it's coming
00:32:25
from the Russians suppress it
00:32:27
and nobody could it's so much easier now
00:32:29
to run this plane what journalists need
00:32:31
to realize
00:32:33
is that today's conspiracy theories are
00:32:35
tomorrow's Pulitzer prizes on to you sex
00:32:38
not in the current media environment
00:32:40
they work for these uh corporations and
00:32:42
they don't get rewarded for telling the
00:32:45
truth oh no they they're going for
00:32:47
pulitzers trust me they are but what
00:32:49
they need to do is start thinking short
00:32:51
term and think long term anytime there's
00:32:53
a conspiracy theory you must give it
00:32:55
some validity and say is there any truth
00:32:58
here because it could in fact be a
00:33:00
scandal that's being covered up
00:33:04
they're involved in the cover-up right
00:33:06
now this is a cover-up I agree I'm in
00:33:09
agreement with you let's bring the first
00:33:10
batch of Twitter files into the
00:33:12
conversation the one that mataibi
00:33:14
exposed what he did was confirm that a
00:33:17
completely True Story by the New York
00:33:19
Post about Hunter Biden that came out a
00:33:21
month before the election was suppressed
00:33:22
by Twitter Executives including at the
00:33:25
behest of you know of of FBI agents and
00:33:30
uh former Security State officials so
00:33:32
this has now been exposed there was no
00:33:35
legitimate basis for suppressing that
00:33:37
story it was true it was a respect to
00:33:39
publication they did it anyway this is
00:33:42
election interference you know the same
00:33:44
people who Pride themselves on
00:33:47
strengthening democracy
00:33:48
are engaged in this wide scale
00:33:51
censorship of one side of the political
00:33:53
debate including of true stories for an
00:33:55
election and then they puff out their
00:33:57
chest and say we're protecting democracy
00:33:59
they're not protecting democracy they're
00:34:00
interfering with democracy they're
00:34:02
interfering with the Public's right to
00:34:03
know
00:34:04
and then we look at a country like China
00:34:06
and we say we're so much better than
00:34:08
them because they've got this problem
00:34:09
over there where the state and big Tech
00:34:12
are colluding to create a big
00:34:14
brother-like system well what is this
00:34:16
what are these tools that have been
00:34:18
exposed one person is a big brother like
00:34:21
system okay yeah but just you have to I
00:34:23
know you want to make it like an
00:34:24
equivalency it's less than a one percent
00:34:27
equivalency because in our society we
00:34:29
can have moments like this and we can
00:34:31
have investigations so just to put it in
00:34:33
person I don't look I think I don't
00:34:34
think we're equivalent but what I'm
00:34:36
saying is that this is very much like a
00:34:39
big brother social credit system
00:34:41
alarm Bells should be going off
00:34:47
just we had this one idiosyncratic
00:34:50
billionaire who believes in free speech
00:34:52
if he didn't decide to take this on we
00:34:54
would never have known this stuff okay
00:34:56
tell me what happened in between these
00:34:57
two things there is an attorney
00:35:00
at
00:35:01
uh Twitter and under the details of this
00:35:04
uh right okay it does not work for the
00:35:06
Twitter Corporation I do not speak for
00:35:07
the Twitter Corporation sax does not
00:35:09
work for the Twitter Corporation and
00:35:10
does not speak for it but there was in
00:35:12
between these two drops something that
00:35:13
happened yes so basically what was
00:35:16
discovered and this is all just publicly
00:35:18
reported is the former FBI lawyer named
00:35:21
Jim Baker had now become Deputy general
00:35:24
counsel at Twitter and this guy Jim
00:35:28
Baker is like the zelig of the whole
00:35:30
Russian collusion hoax he was involved
00:35:32
in the uh in the fisa warrants that were
00:35:35
that the FBI applied to the fisa courts
00:35:37
that had all the errors and Emissions he
00:35:40
was involved in the alpha Bank hoax he
00:35:42
was the guy that that Perkins uh Coe
00:35:45
lawyer assessment was feeding this like
00:35:48
phony uh phony scam 2 and he I don't
00:35:53
think he was officially sanctioned but
00:35:55
basically he was asked to leave the FBI
00:35:56
and then lo and behold where does he
00:35:59
land at Twitter
00:36:02
and he is involved in their content
00:36:04
moderation policies I think what it
00:36:05
shows is How Deeply intertwined our big
00:36:09
tech companies have become with the
00:36:11
security state
00:36:12
now how did this get exposed well
00:36:16
Barry Weiss was basically putting
00:36:18
forward document requests for this for
00:36:22
the latest batch of Twitter files and
00:36:23
she wasn't getting anything back and
00:36:25
she's like what's going on here and the
00:36:27
guy who's giving her the files is his
00:36:29
name is Jim
00:36:30
and she's like well wait like wait Jim
00:36:32
Jim who and she finds out wait Jim Baker
00:36:35
wait that Jim Baker the New York Post
00:36:38
had a long story about this guy
00:36:40
and so it was discovered that the guy
00:36:43
who was curating the Twitter files
00:36:46
was this former operative of the FBI who
00:36:49
was involved in the Russian collusion
00:36:51
hoax and then was involved in their
00:36:55
their Blacklist decisions
00:36:57
so in any event once this came out
00:37:00
Twitter fired him
00:37:02
and then you know
00:37:04
Barry apparently received all these
00:37:06
files that are now the the second batch
00:37:08
of the Twitter files and just to be
00:37:10
clear that's not James Baker if you're
00:37:12
you know thinking it's the
00:37:14
former right and Cabinet member not
00:37:17
James Baker this is Jim Baker who's a
00:37:19
different person right but a lot of
00:37:21
people are wondering well how could this
00:37:22
have been missed listen he's an FBI yeah
00:37:25
these guys don't want to be found I mean
00:37:26
they they this is some people call it
00:37:29
you know the permanent Washington
00:37:30
establishments some people call it the
00:37:32
Deep State the administrations come and
00:37:34
go the people who work in Washington
00:37:36
stay there forever and they can simply
00:37:38
effectuate policy by outlasting
00:37:40
everybody else and clandestinely
00:37:43
implementing what they believe and
00:37:45
they've become a constituency of their
00:37:47
own that exercises power like a
00:37:49
praetorian guard in Washington so in any
00:37:52
event this guy is an expert at Bowl
00:37:55
weavling himself into the bureaucracy
00:37:57
great praetorian guard bully you're yes
00:38:02
when they finally rooted
00:38:07
this this mole out of the FBI he bow
00:38:11
evils himself into another powerful
00:38:13
bureaucracy what is that word
00:38:17
like Burrows
00:38:20
like Burrows like that so
00:38:25
he digs his way into the Twitter
00:38:27
bureaucracy to the point where he isn't
00:38:29
even found and then somehow he has put
00:38:32
himself in the position
00:38:33
to be intermediating the Twitter files
00:38:36
can you believe this
00:38:39
so once once it was discovered
00:38:41
Roman army that served as personal
00:38:44
bodyguards and intelligence agents the
00:38:45
praetorian guard okay got it well you
00:38:47
understand what happened is is that the
00:38:49
pritarian guard originated because they
00:38:51
were to defend the life of the emperor
00:38:52
and that's what people are
00:38:54
that then they became so powerful that
00:38:57
uh that whoever bribed the praetorians
00:38:59
would become emperor and then finally
00:39:01
the last step is that the praetorians
00:39:03
themselves would pick the emperor and
00:39:05
whoever basically led the praitarian
00:39:07
guard would be the next emperor
00:39:09
at any event I mean we're not we're not
00:39:11
at that point yet but the point is look
00:39:13
the point is that these Security State
00:39:15
officials have power that they should
00:39:18
not have Okay that's the bottom line
00:39:21
they should not be involved in our
00:39:24
elections in this way they should be
00:39:26
completely non-partisan and
00:39:28
non-political they should just do their
00:39:30
jobs as law enforcement officials but we
00:39:33
know from the hunter Biden story that a
00:39:35
very important piece of this was the
00:39:37
pre-bunking that the FBI went to
00:39:39
Facebook and Twitter and social networks
00:39:41
and said be on the lookout for a story
00:39:44
about Hunter Biden it is Russian
00:39:46
disinformation and they Prime these
00:39:48
social networks to suppress that story
00:39:50
when it came out that was something they
00:39:52
never should have done and they knew
00:39:53
they knew the story was not fake they
00:39:55
knew it was not Russian discrimination
00:39:56
because they had the laptop in their
00:39:58
possession since 2019. well okay that
00:40:00
has not the Providence of the um laptop
00:40:03
is still being reviewed In fairness and
00:40:05
they're still going to hold on you're
00:40:06
wrong and there is an investigation
00:40:07
going on of Hunter Biden you all also
00:40:09
have to put the context in here and
00:40:11
please let me finish there is a context
00:40:13
here of there was massive election
00:40:15
interference going on both sides of the
00:40:17
aisle Republicans Democrats all wanted
00:40:20
to see the Russian interference and the
00:40:22
Ukrainian interference and Trump's
00:40:24
encouraging the Ukraine and the
00:40:26
Republican the the Russians to interfere
00:40:28
in elections everybody was on high alert
00:40:30
and that happened to drop
00:40:32
uh like it was announced 30 days before
00:40:34
and it dropped 10 days before the
00:40:35
election so everybody was on high alert
00:40:37
and I agree
00:40:39
that's why it was the perfect it should
00:40:41
have been done it should have been done
00:40:42
properly
00:40:44
they should have said they should have
00:40:45
come out publicly and say we don't know
00:40:47
the Providence of this we could be
00:40:49
hacked it might not be hacked Jason
00:40:52
let's wait and see we have to reserve
00:40:54
Justice let me tell you what happened
00:40:55
let me just tell you what happened okay
00:40:56
so they make sure you Source this I will
00:40:59
so look it's all in the New York Post
00:41:02
okay they've done oh great no it nobody
00:41:05
has refuted it nobody is refuted it
00:41:07
no let me just get let me just get this
00:41:10
on the record here so from the post the
00:41:13
FBI was given the laptop in 2019 by the
00:41:16
lab store owner those guys have
00:41:19
forensics they have cyber experts they
00:41:21
knew the laptop was real we know it's
00:41:23
real now nobody questions that in fact
00:41:25
the FBI has admitted that the laptop was
00:41:27
real and that the honor buying files are
00:41:29
real nobody disputes that okay but what
00:41:32
they did before the election is they use
00:41:34
this excuse of Russian disinformation to
00:41:37
discredit the story before it even came
00:41:38
out but they had no business getting
00:41:40
involved in the story that way they
00:41:42
simply didn't they should have stayed
00:41:44
out of it completely
00:41:45
I don't I don't understand how you can
00:41:47
possibly justify that yeah I mean I
00:41:48
think we do have to look at the context
00:41:50
of that time period when Hillary's
00:41:52
emails were hacked and we had a problem
00:41:53
that's a perfect excuse I will finish
00:41:56
the sentence and we had a president
00:41:57
which you will agree Are Presidents and
00:42:00
presidential candidates should not be
00:42:01
encouraging foreign powers to hack their
00:42:03
uh their adversaries
00:42:06
with that answer my question do you
00:42:08
agree that president
00:42:18
you're still wrapped up on this you
00:42:20
can't let it again you personally attack
00:42:21
me you don't answer the question that's
00:42:22
fine we'll move on
00:42:24
you can't be intellectually honestly the
00:42:26
audience knows you're not being
00:42:27
intellectually you don't even know what
00:42:29
you're talking about if you could answer
00:42:30
the simple question should presidents
00:42:33
encourage foreign powers to hack their
00:42:35
adversaries then you would be being
00:42:36
intellectually dishonest I am absolutely
00:42:38
disappointed that you will not answer
00:42:40
that simple question it's an obvious yes
00:42:43
it's an obvious yes but of course but I
00:42:46
don't really believe that happened
00:42:47
because you know Trump's going to win
00:42:49
the primary let's keep going
00:42:53
listen I I don't I've said so many times
00:42:56
in the show that he's not my candidate I
00:42:58
don't know what you're talking about
00:42:59
you're going to win
00:43:01
what you're doing right now is like
00:43:03
delusional you're going back to some
00:43:05
throwaway comment he made it a rally in
00:43:07
2016. it's got nothing absolutely
00:43:09
nothing to do with this story and the
00:43:11
fact you're even bringing it up is like
00:43:12
pure TDS and I don't know what wasting
00:43:15
time instead of answering a question
00:43:17
that's your Technique is to call me
00:43:20
names instead of answering the question
00:43:22
I want to unmody the waters I want to
00:43:24
make one more time another technique
00:43:25
that I'm muddying the water so I'm not
00:43:27
budding the words
00:43:29
let's move on I want to make one final
00:43:31
Point okay I'll make a final Point
00:43:33
there's no letter listen there was a
00:43:35
letter with this Hunter Biden thing this
00:43:37
is 2020 election Jason we're not going
00:43:39
back two elections ago I wanted to talk
00:43:41
about the most recent one okay fine you
00:43:43
had Clapper you had Comey you had 50 of
00:43:45
these Security State officials they
00:43:47
write a letter saying that the hunter
00:43:48
Biden story has all the Hallmark works
00:43:52
of Russian deformation they claimed that
00:43:54
it was Russian inspiration when it
00:43:55
wasn't they knew it wasn't and it was
00:43:58
the same story that the FBI was telling
00:44:00
uh Twitter and it was the same story
00:44:02
that these Twitter Executives were
00:44:03
indulging it even though they all knew
00:44:06
or had reason to know it wasn't true and
00:44:09
they suppressed the New York Post story
00:44:10
anyway I don't know why you're bringing
00:44:12
up this Trump stuff it has nothing to do
00:44:14
with the real issue here the hold on a
00:44:16
second the real issue is this does
00:44:19
social media have the right to suppress
00:44:21
true stories put out by our media before
00:44:25
the month before an election yes or no
00:44:29
I will answer your question yes or no
00:44:31
and you will not answer mine because
00:44:32
you're being intellectually dishonest
00:44:34
yes we should know we should not
00:44:36
suppress news stories if it was and I
00:44:38
will argue both sides if it was Snowden
00:44:40
if it was the Pentagon papers if it's
00:44:42
Hunter Biden's laptop taking out the sex
00:44:44
stuff which we both agree on
00:44:46
or if it is uh Russia and uh Ukraine
00:44:50
where your presidential candidate at the
00:44:53
time
00:44:54
Trump asked zelenski to find dirt on
00:44:58
Biden before the election and he asked
00:45:00
the Russians to hack Hillary's email and
00:45:02
they did that and they released it 10
00:45:04
days before the election that is facts
00:45:06
that happened and that is that's not
00:45:08
what this one you said you would let me
00:45:10
speak and you will let me see your money
00:45:13
in the waters no stop interrupting me
00:45:15
and stop insulting me I will say my part
00:45:17
you said yours and then we will move on
00:45:20
the fact is
00:45:22
Trump encouraged hacking of other
00:45:26
candidates and he did it twice in a
00:45:28
four-year period back-to-back elections
00:45:30
we need to be on higher alert when you
00:45:32
have a republican candidate Trump doing
00:45:35
something so absolutely
00:45:39
treasonous
00:45:41
story this is why it was a perfect cover
00:45:43
story is because
00:45:45
the trees in this behavior let's move on
00:45:48
I I don't think it was a perfect phone
00:45:50
call I think it was
00:45:51
Shenanigans there were lots of
00:45:53
shenanigans hold on I'm not defending
00:45:56
anything Trump did okay I don't feel the
00:45:57
need okay I never defended it but here
00:46:00
but the deal is that you're letting your
00:46:03
TDS I don't justify he's crazy you're
00:46:06
letting you're you're allowing this
00:46:08
Russian deformation to be a cover story
00:46:11
I don't think post should have been
00:46:13
blocked you're you're you're
00:46:14
misconception wasn't even bringing this
00:46:16
up
00:46:17
under which the car the reason I'm
00:46:20
bringing it I agree that the person did
00:46:22
a great cover story that's your
00:46:24
interpretation the context also is
00:46:26
everybody was on high alert waiting for
00:46:29
a hack to drop and in fact a hack
00:46:31
dropped 10 days before you have
00:46:33
okay we found out subsequently was a
00:46:36
hacked they knew at the point Twitter
00:46:39
and Facebook did not know Twitter and
00:46:41
Facebook didn't know that's the point
00:46:45
you you go back to the Twitter files the
00:46:48
first drop
00:46:49
Jim Baker hold on a second Jim Baker and
00:46:52
Vijaya Gotti said okay that there were
00:46:55
in a lot of internal questions about
00:46:57
whether that that honor buying story
00:46:59
could be justified under the Hacked
00:47:01
policy okay and there were many
00:47:04
legitimate questions raised internally
00:47:06
about whether they could maintain that
00:47:08
party line and the emerging view was
00:47:11
that they could no longer maintain that
00:47:12
line and still Gotti and Jim Baker said
00:47:15
no we will maintain the idea that this
00:47:17
was hacked information until proven
00:47:19
otherwise
00:47:20
even though it was not hacked it was a
00:47:21
New York Post story okay agree to
00:47:24
disagree let's move on why are you
00:47:26
bringing up all this like irrelevance
00:47:27
the audience and the other besties want
00:47:29
us to move on so let's move on China
00:47:31
ends most zero coveted rules and Iran
00:47:33
might be abolishing its morality police
00:47:36
news broke uh in the past week on
00:47:38
Wednesday China's Health authorities
00:47:39
overhauled its zero coveted policy and
00:47:42
announced a 10-point national plan that
00:47:44
scrapped most health code tracking and
00:47:47
also they're rolling back their Mass
00:47:48
testing and this allowed many uh
00:47:51
positive cases too just simply
00:47:53
quarantine at home like we were doing
00:47:54
I guess a year ago now and uh they're
00:47:58
limiting some of these uh lockdowns
00:48:01
this all comes from a Foxconn letter
00:48:03
which
00:48:05
we don't know the cause causation here
00:48:08
but we don't know that's why I just said
00:48:10
we don't know cause and correlation here
00:48:11
give give us some perspective here trema
00:48:13
well
00:48:15
I just think it's kind of ridiculous to
00:48:18
assume that the second largest economy
00:48:21
in the world pivots based on one letter
00:48:25
from one CEO so I know that that's how
00:48:27
the Western describe the letter please
00:48:28
yeah well apparently what happened was
00:48:30
Terry guo
00:48:32
who's colloquially known as Uncle Terry
00:48:34
who's the CEO of Foxconn wrote a letter
00:48:36
that essentially said you know if we
00:48:38
don't figure out a way to get out of
00:48:39
these Panda this this lockdown process
00:48:41
we're going to lose
00:48:44
um you know our leadership in the global
00:48:46
supply chain and apparently that jolted
00:48:49
the central Planning Commission to
00:48:51
realize that they needed to you know get
00:48:53
out of these lockdowns I think it's
00:48:54
something different which is I think
00:48:55
this has been part and parcel
00:48:58
of a very focused and dedicated plan
00:49:02
baiji phase one was to consolidate power
00:49:06
phase two was to get through November
00:49:09
and to basically get reappointed for
00:49:11
life and dispel any other you know
00:49:14
Rivals that he actually had
00:49:17
and now phase three is just to reopen
00:49:19
the economy again so this guy can
00:49:21
basically sit on top of
00:49:23
the second largest economy in the world
00:49:25
so I think this is sort of a natural uh
00:49:28
flow of things
00:49:30
the other part of it which I think is
00:49:31
being underreported is I think that the
00:49:35
way in which they did it was less
00:49:36
responsive in my opinion to a letter
00:49:38
from Uncle Terry but was more responsive
00:49:40
to the fact that there are people on the
00:49:42
ground and I think that these guys are
00:49:43
getting very sophisticated and
00:49:46
understanding how to give the Chinese
00:49:48
people some part of what they want
00:49:51
so that they're roughly happy enough to
00:49:53
keep moving forward and I'm not going to
00:49:55
morally judge whether it's right or
00:49:56
wrong but it's just a comment on what
00:49:58
the gameplay and The Game Theory seems
00:50:00
to be coming from the leadership of
00:50:01
China
00:50:03
so it says I think this is it's it's
00:50:05
it's good for the Chinese people and the
00:50:08
real question is what will it mean for
00:50:09
the U.S economy if these guys get their
00:50:13
um get their economy going again we
00:50:15
talked about this previously but this is
00:50:18
a good example of the autocrat not
00:50:22
necessarily being absolute
00:50:25
uh in in their Authority and the sense
00:50:29
that I think we get at this point coming
00:50:32
out of China is that there was enough
00:50:35
dissent from the populace on the
00:50:37
lockdown and the experience of the
00:50:39
lockdowns and we can all go online and
00:50:40
see the videos of Steel bars being put
00:50:43
on doors to keep people in their
00:50:44
apartment buildings and people screaming
00:50:46
and buildings being on fire people can't
00:50:48
escape the buildings how much of that
00:50:50
was true or not and riots in the street
00:50:52
and people fighting with the covet
00:50:54
testers how much of it is true or not we
00:50:56
don't really know
00:50:58
but it certainly seems to indicate that
00:51:00
there was enough dissent and enough
00:51:01
unrest that in order to stay in power
00:51:04
the CCP had to take action and they had
00:51:06
to shift their position and shift their
00:51:08
tone and I think it's a really important
00:51:11
moment to observe that sometimes the CCP
00:51:16
um and you know perhaps even we can
00:51:18
extend this into other autocratic
00:51:20
regimes that we think are absolute in
00:51:23
their Authority and their Empower and
00:51:24
their power
00:51:25
perhaps are necessarily influenced by
00:51:28
the people that they are there to govern
00:51:29
and that they are
00:51:32
you know uh ruling over and that
00:51:35
while we don't think about these places
00:51:37
as democracies
00:51:39
perhaps they're not entirely the
00:51:42
traditionally defined autocracy
00:51:44
that there is the an influence that the
00:51:46
people can have and maybe we see the
00:51:48
same change happening in Iran
00:51:50
with young people and a population
00:51:52
that's more modern that's growing and
00:51:54
swelling in size that doesn't want to
00:51:56
accept some of the traditional norms and
00:51:59
the traditional
00:52:00
laws and you know maybe that will kind
00:52:03
of start to resonate around the world
00:52:04
that the internet is starting to do what
00:52:07
everyone hoped and wanted it to do which
00:52:09
is the democratization of information
00:52:10
the democracation of seeing other
00:52:13
people's conditions and seeing what the
00:52:14
rest of the world is and is like gives
00:52:17
the populace the ability to rise up and
00:52:20
to say this is what we want because we
00:52:22
know that there are better things out
00:52:24
there and these autocratic regimes have
00:52:26
to start to shift slightly and over time
00:52:28
maybe that has a real impact here's a
00:52:30
specific statistic and chart for
00:52:31
everybody the demographics of uh Iran
00:52:34
are incredibly
00:52:37
um notable if you look at this chart
00:52:40
now for those of you listening it just
00:52:42
shows people by age and how many what
00:52:45
percentage of the population they are or
00:52:46
actually the raw numbers of the
00:52:48
population as you can see it's basically
00:52:49
like a pair uh you have very few old
00:52:52
people and you have a lot of people in
00:52:54
their 20s and younger and so young
00:52:57
people I don't know Jason it's really
00:52:59
40s and 30s is really yeah okay so 40s
00:53:02
30s uh you don't have the geriatric
00:53:05
population that you see in other
00:53:07
countries like Japan and so the
00:53:09
demographics of Iran are extremely uh
00:53:12
weighted towards younger people
00:53:15
Millennials gen xers and younger and uh
00:53:18
they have vpns virtual private networks
00:53:21
they can see everything happening uh in
00:53:23
the Free World
00:53:25
uh versus let's say closed societies and
00:53:28
so I think that's what gives me a lot of
00:53:30
Hope is that these countries are going
00:53:31
to have to evolve because young people
00:53:33
are seeing how the rest of the world
00:53:34
lives
00:53:36
and I think that's a big part of the
00:53:37
change tomorrow what are your thoughts
00:53:40
about Iran specifically I think
00:53:42
demographic change and then China and
00:53:45
demographic change
00:53:47
protests I've said this before and I've
00:53:49
been tweeting about this for years but
00:53:51
people so poorly understand demographics
00:53:53
everybody thinks that we have a surplus
00:53:54
of people and we don't
00:53:56
and we need to have a positive birth
00:53:58
rate in order to kind of continue to
00:54:01
support the expansion of the world and
00:54:02
GDP and we need that and right now we're
00:54:05
not in that situation if you look at a
00:54:07
country by country basis a lot of these
00:54:09
countries
00:54:10
um are facing that
00:54:12
in a pretty cataclysmic way the most
00:54:16
sensitive country to this is China I
00:54:18
mean their population got current course
00:54:20
in speed I think the last number is it's
00:54:22
going to have by 2100 there'll be about
00:54:25
600 million people in China which is
00:54:28
unbelievably disruptive in a very
00:54:30
negative way for them right because you
00:54:32
will have a lot of people who are
00:54:34
entering the workforce having to support
00:54:37
an entire cohort of people above them in
00:54:39
terms of age right who are retired Etc
00:54:41
so the state's going to have to get much
00:54:43
much more actively involved over the
00:54:45
next 50 years in China
00:54:47
and then you look at other countries
00:54:48
like Nigeria or India who are in uh you
00:54:52
know at the beginning of what could be a
00:54:54
multi-decade boom because you have 20
00:54:57
year olds that will be entering the
00:54:58
workforce you know they'll effectively
00:55:00
work for less than their older
00:55:02
counterparts right so then they'll be an
00:55:04
incentive then to bring work on Shore
00:55:06
into those countries
00:55:09
and so it's going to have huge impacts
00:55:11
because then you have Rising GDP you'll
00:55:13
have Rising expectations of living
00:55:15
quality you'll have Rising expectations
00:55:16
of how governments treat those people so
00:55:19
it's all kind of positive in general but
00:55:21
the world needs more people
00:55:23
let's just be clear especially in
00:55:25
Western countries we are going to be not
00:55:28
we're not as badly off as China but
00:55:30
we're not far behind yeah here's a quick
00:55:32
view of China and Japan which is in the
00:55:34
same kind of I don't know what they
00:55:36
exactly call these charts are kind of
00:55:37
like vertical histograms but you start
00:55:40
and again you know data's hard to come
00:55:41
by in some countries but you know
00:55:43
China's starting to get top heavy
00:55:45
uh when compared to Iran and then if you
00:55:48
look at Japan quite stunning there's
00:55:50
just no young people left and uh they
00:55:52
live very uh to much older ages in Japan
00:55:55
it's this longevity is one of their
00:55:57
great strengths as a population as a
00:55:59
country and so these demographics can't
00:56:01
be fought uh you're going to have a
00:56:03
contraction constricting economy in
00:56:05
Japan
00:56:06
and their place in the world is going to
00:56:08
be very very different
00:56:11
okay where do we want to go to next we
00:56:13
never asked my opinion on on uh
00:56:15
usually you just talk so go ahead I
00:56:18
didn't want to I didn't know no I
00:56:20
usually have to fight to give my opinion
00:56:22
oh here we go listen have your agent
00:56:25
call my age and we'll talk about it okay
00:56:26
uh we'll talk about it
00:56:28
I have a slightly different view of
00:56:30
what's happening in China uh Jason which
00:56:33
is you know I think that the people
00:56:35
there need to stop harassing the CCP you
00:56:38
see the Chinese Communist Party they're
00:56:40
the elites they've set things up for the
00:56:42
benefit of the people they're not
00:56:43
engaged in Shadow Banning they're just
00:56:45
you know they have a system there to you
00:56:48
know to engage in censorship to prevent
00:56:50
abuse and harm yeah right that's the
00:56:53
system continue they've set up right
00:56:55
yeah and the people just need to
00:56:57
understand that that when they say
00:56:58
things like you know when they oppose
00:57:01
things like covet lockdowns like
00:57:03
jabaracharya did they need to understand
00:57:05
that that is engaging in abuse and harm
00:57:08
exactly yes and you know what they they
00:57:11
re-education camps for citizens who need
00:57:14
you know to uh maybe rethink their
00:57:17
positions on freedom and their wages the
00:57:20
hours they work and their and their
00:57:22
social conditions you're you're
00:57:23
absolutely correct China really has
00:57:25
built a perfect model for our society
00:57:27
yeah well well said sex all right now we
00:57:30
can move forward let's go for it we
00:57:33
already finally we're in agreement by
00:57:34
the way you know that's going to get
00:57:35
clipped out and go viral do you
00:57:37
understand right according to it's
00:57:39
according to our Elites according to our
00:57:42
Elites sites Yol Roth or Taylor Lorenz
00:57:45
to criticize them is a form of
00:57:48
harassment
00:57:49
you understand that right so therefore
00:57:52
what the people in China are doing
00:57:53
specifically by opposing lockdowns
00:57:56
you know they're taking the j-podacharya
00:57:58
point of view they're engaging in harm
00:58:00
and abuse and harassment of their
00:58:04
betters the disagreements why won't they
00:58:07
just submit to the social credit system
00:58:10
that has been set up for them
00:58:13
for their benefit it's for their benefit
00:58:15
why question it yeah just accept accept
00:58:17
your fate and work hard for the good of
00:58:19
the people great great points let's move
00:58:21
forward should we talk about sales I
00:58:23
think it's actually a pretty it's a it's
00:58:24
a pretty good satire I agree
00:58:26
all right I think we have to talk about
00:58:28
FTX I I don't know if you saw and I
00:58:32
the the people covering for SPF
00:58:36
it continues to be an absolute joke the
00:58:39
number of interviews that SBF is doing
00:58:41
is absurd but the people carrying water
00:58:44
for him is is even more offensive I mean
00:58:48
if you're a criminal trying to cover up
00:58:49
your crime okay we get it you're trying
00:58:51
to cover up and stay out of jail uh but
00:58:53
Kevin O'Leary
00:58:55
um who
00:58:56
um calls himself Mr Wonderful uh was on
00:59:00
CNBC trying to defend the fact that he
00:59:03
was given
00:59:04
this is stunning by the way 15 [ __ ]
00:59:08
million dollars to be a spokesperson for
00:59:10
FTX so the grift
00:59:12
not only went to the Press
00:59:15
politicians uh but now commentators on
00:59:18
CNBC
00:59:20
15 million dollars to put that in
00:59:22
context I mean you're talking what an
00:59:24
elite NBA player gets from Nike this
00:59:28
does not exist in the world uh you know
00:59:31
Kevin O'Leary might get you know 50 to
00:59:33
200k for speaking gigs but nobody gets
00:59:36
15 million dollars to show here's a 75
00:59:39
second clip that I don't know if you've
00:59:41
all have seen but is unbelievably
00:59:44
stunning see on the other side of 75
00:59:46
seconds if you're a defense attorney
00:59:48
that represents someone that you know is
00:59:51
guilty you gotta say yeah well they're
00:59:52
Innocent but you may know they're guilty
00:59:54
you may know they're guilty if you find
00:59:56
someone if you watch someone kill
00:59:58
someone yeah they're innocence there's
01:00:00
only the murder of my money in this case
01:00:02
okay it's murder of of ftx's money it's
01:00:05
My Views everybody's look Joe if you use
01:00:09
money that you've got I don't I don't
01:00:11
know I don't think you should be singing
01:00:12
the blues right now at all oh yes I'm
01:00:14
singing the blues why because you're 15
01:00:16
million didn't pass out that you that's
01:00:17
a lot of money a paid spokesperson it's
01:00:20
a lot of money you didn't have to do
01:00:21
much for that that's pretty that's found
01:00:23
a different decision that's a different
01:00:24
discussion you know you can make that
01:00:26
decision on your own but I'm going to
01:00:28
this point if you want to say I'm guilty
01:00:31
before he's tried I just don't
01:00:32
understand it but it may end up costing
01:00:34
me 15 minutes for a reputation on
01:00:36
everything else that's the problem
01:00:37
that's why I stayed on this Pursuit I'm
01:00:39
very transparent about it I've disclosed
01:00:41
everything I know about it I will find
01:00:42
out more information if I make the
01:00:44
credit committee I will act as a
01:00:45
fiduciary for everybody involved I will
01:00:47
testify I am an advocate for this
01:00:50
industry and this changes nothing just
01:00:53
look at the numbers that came out of
01:00:54
circle today I'm an investor there too
01:00:55
you've got the I lost it all in FTX and
01:00:58
we have a fantastic print on Circle the
01:01:01
promise of crypto remains this will not
01:01:03
change it pretty crazy 15 million bucks
01:01:06
any thoughts on the continuing SBF Saga
01:01:09
sex
01:01:10
well I don't know why we should care so
01:01:12
much about him I mean Kevin Leary but um
01:01:15
but it's indicative right it's
01:01:17
indicative of all these guys that got
01:01:18
money from this who is he who is he he's
01:01:21
on track tank he's the one what he's on
01:01:23
Shark Tank and he's a contributor to
01:01:25
CNBC who's on multiple times a week the
01:01:27
point is like you've got the grift I'm
01:01:32
just trying to point out 15 million
01:01:33
dollars to a CNBC commentator is just an
01:01:36
extraordinary payoff I've never heard of
01:01:39
anything like that I don't I don't think
01:01:41
it's fair to pick on Kevin O'Leary per
01:01:43
se because there is a bunch of those
01:01:46
guys that took money from him you know a
01:01:48
bunch of athletes did probably a bunch
01:01:50
of movie stars you know Republicans yeah
01:01:54
like everybody got paid by this guy okay
01:01:58
just like in the just like in the
01:02:00
Twitter example I think it's important
01:02:01
in this case to generalize because the
01:02:04
generalized thing is the real problem
01:02:06
look if you want to focus on the Crux of
01:02:08
this you have a concept in law that sax
01:02:11
knows better than the rest of us called
01:02:12
fraudulent conveyance and we have
01:02:15
example after example where it does not
01:02:18
matter whether it was in the Bernie
01:02:19
Madoff example or for example Jason we
01:02:21
talked about it the guy in La that lost
01:02:23
all the money client funds playing poker
01:02:26
yep you have to give the money back
01:02:28
especially if it was fraudulently
01:02:30
conveyed to you explain can you explain
01:02:32
this in detail for a second so the
01:02:34
audience understands well on my
01:02:36
understanding which is very basic and I
01:02:37
think David can probably do a much
01:02:39
better job is the following which is
01:02:41
if you get money
01:02:43
some way
01:02:45
but it comes from somebody who
01:02:47
fraudulently acquired that money you
01:02:50
have to give the money back so in this
01:02:52
example what it would mean is if that
01:02:55
they can show that that 15 million
01:02:57
dollars that this guy got
01:02:59
came from SBF basically rating the piggy
01:03:02
bank
01:03:03
of user accounts
01:03:06
he's going to have to pay the money back
01:03:08
just like for example in the Madoff
01:03:10
fraud the
01:03:13
the the folks that went to find the
01:03:16
money were able to go back to folks that
01:03:17
actually redeemed even the beginning
01:03:19
early ones and said I understand that
01:03:21
you didn't know any better but this was
01:03:22
fraudulently conveyed to you so we need
01:03:24
the money back and they got the money
01:03:26
back in that case if they had put a
01:03:27
million in and it grew to 3 million they
01:03:30
got their million principal back but the
01:03:31
two million in gains which were
01:03:32
ill-gotten had to be returned returned
01:03:35
return returned exactly so as I as I
01:03:37
understand it based on just what I've
01:03:38
read that there's a 90-day rule around
01:03:40
contributions meaning that if I think
01:03:43
this has to do with the bankruptcy that
01:03:45
that if he donated money within 90 days
01:03:48
then that can be Unwound so
01:03:52
um yeah but I do think it creates
01:03:54
potentially a powerful incentive here by
01:03:58
politicians and various political groups
01:04:00
for him not to be convicted of fraud for
01:04:03
him to be able to plead this out into
01:04:04
some sort of negligence because they
01:04:07
don't have to give the money back they
01:04:08
keep the bag what an incredible Insight
01:04:10
well this is what I think so interesting
01:04:12
about the governor Larry thing it's not
01:04:13
about Kevin O'Leary but it's about the
01:04:16
fact that the money was spread around so
01:04:18
widely and into such like deep trenches
01:04:21
of the regulatory Society Society like
01:04:25
into the blood influencers
01:04:27
um yeah and basically I think the guy
01:04:29
like cemented this the he thought that
01:04:32
like which which I think by the way is a
01:04:35
really interesting product of the crypto
01:04:38
ecosystem and the model that so many
01:04:40
kind of crypto businesses have engaged
01:04:42
in over the years which is if you can
01:04:43
Fester the belief then there is a
01:04:45
business if you cannot Fester the belief
01:04:47
there is no business that there isn't a
01:04:49
fundamental productivity driver it's
01:04:51
about building a belief system and you
01:04:53
can buy a belief system if you can take
01:04:55
money that people have given you you can
01:04:57
embed it in influencers and celebrities
01:05:00
and politicians and regulators and if
01:05:03
you give it to enough of these people
01:05:04
and you give enough of it to them maybe
01:05:06
that belief system solidifies and your
01:05:09
thing becomes real which is of course a
01:05:11
Griff technique by the way in the
01:05:12
grifters oh tell us all about it Jacob
01:05:14
yeah yeah
01:05:16
it's a master no no it's the patina and
01:05:19
it's this uh you know you look like
01:05:21
you're incredibly Rich you know you're
01:05:23
going to fancy restaurants you're
01:05:24
wearing an expensive suit you're getting
01:05:25
in a sports car and then you own some
01:05:28
Palazzo or whatever and then some other
01:05:30
rich person comes and you get them to
01:05:32
invest in something and then you have
01:05:33
Scotland with the money but they see all
01:05:35
the accoutrements you check all the
01:05:37
boxes your parents were Stanford you
01:05:39
went to MIT and you are donating large
01:05:42
sums of money and you got this big table
01:05:44
at the club and you got a penthouse
01:05:45
everybody starts to feel well might is
01:05:48
right you got the wealth there might be
01:05:49
how would you guys like how would you
01:05:51
guys feel about honestly honestly no
01:05:54
backing a CEO of a growth stage company
01:05:57
that you put your firm's money into who
01:05:59
lives in a hundred and thirty million
01:06:01
dollar house and has not yet exited the
01:06:03
business yeah absolute alarm Bells
01:06:05
everywhere and this is why I'm not a fan
01:06:07
let me ask you guys a question okay
01:06:09
secondary sales yeah let me ask you guys
01:06:12
a question do you think that a billion
01:06:14
dollars of dark money could stop a red
01:06:16
wave just asking for a friend
01:06:22
sex no honestly do you think it's
01:06:24
overweighted the money yes his mother
01:06:25
was a huge Democratic bundler yeah and
01:06:28
moreover the the specific politicians he
01:06:31
needed to influence there yes there were
01:06:32
some Republicans but by and large it was
01:06:35
the SEC so are you the first person to
01:06:37
make this clan I want to say did you
01:06:39
hear it here first on the olive pod
01:06:41
mushrooms David sacks making the
01:06:43
Declaration
01:06:46
because of well let me ask you let me
01:06:48
ask a follow-up question what do you
01:06:49
think would have more impact on our
01:06:52
election
01:06:53
enormous amounts of dark money going to
01:06:56
Democrats or extensive Shadow Banning of
01:07:00
conservative influencers yeah which one
01:07:03
do you think would have a bigger impact
01:07:05
in the 50 50 country where I mean the
01:07:09
scales are like balance where these
01:07:10
elections are just a few thousand votes
01:07:12
yeah what do you think the result is
01:07:14
going to be if we actually have a Level
01:07:16
Playing Field we get rid of this
01:07:17
swindler's dark money yeah that's an
01:07:19
interesting question um Let me let me
01:07:21
add a link to that
01:07:23
um what would have a bigger impact this
01:07:25
uh
01:07:26
I think this is a great except for when
01:07:28
you guys had your fight like or taking
01:07:31
away a woman's right to choose after 50
01:07:33
years of giving it to them which would
01:07:34
have a bigger impact on the red wave
01:07:35
that didn't have a big impact but I
01:07:37
think we're going to move across that I
01:07:38
think we're gonna move past that yeah
01:07:39
all right great yeah great great great
01:07:41
strategic what do you think about the
01:07:44
cinema Kristin Cinema Kirsten Cinema
01:07:46
flipping to Independent do you think
01:07:47
that's a big deal or I think I think
01:07:49
it's really interesting I think it's
01:07:50
actually a very shrewd move on her part
01:07:52
well
01:07:52
first of all I think she's great you
01:07:55
know yeah just tell us tell us about her
01:07:57
sex
01:07:58
no well she she's she is the center from
01:08:02
Arizona a formerly Democrat now
01:08:04
independent who is in the mold of you
01:08:07
know John McCain who is a former center
01:08:09
from Arizona sort of this Maverick
01:08:11
independent and she does not kowtow to
01:08:13
her party Orthodoxy and when Biden
01:08:17
wanted to pass three and a half trillion
01:08:20
of buildback better spending she along
01:08:23
with Manchester to post it and I think
01:08:24
save the administration from this
01:08:26
gigantic boondoggle that would have been
01:08:28
inflation much much worse now imagine
01:08:30
got all the credit but she was equally
01:08:32
responsible for putting a hold on that
01:08:34
and then as a result they only did the
01:08:36
750 billion inflation reduction act so
01:08:38
she's willing to Buck her own party now
01:08:40
as a result of that
01:08:42
I think they were planning on she was
01:08:44
going to get primaried that the
01:08:46
progressive wing of the party was
01:08:48
planning on primary her and by moving to
01:08:51
an independent in a sense she preempts
01:08:53
that because what she's now saying is
01:08:56
she's now sort of like you know uh
01:08:58
Bernie Sanders is an independent or this
01:09:01
guy uh Angus King from from Maine they
01:09:03
still caucus with the Democrats but
01:09:06
their independence and the in and the
01:09:08
Democrats don't run uh candidates
01:09:10
against them because they know
01:09:12
that if they do you'll have a republican
01:09:15
a Democrat and independent and the
01:09:17
Democrats in The Independents will split
01:09:19
the vote and the Republican will win so
01:09:21
basically she's now daring the Democrats
01:09:24
hey if you want to run a candidate
01:09:25
against me I'm not going to sit around
01:09:27
and get primaried by them you go ahead
01:09:30
and run somebody but then we're both
01:09:31
going to lose so they're a republican
01:09:33
that's what's smart about it is I think
01:09:35
she's daring Schumer to run somebody
01:09:38
against her
01:09:39
it's also interesting she's she's the
01:09:42
only member of Congress I've read That's
01:09:44
non-theist which is kind of like eighth
01:09:46
issue doesn't talk about God or doesn't
01:09:48
believe in God and I think she's the
01:09:49
first openly bisexual member of Congress
01:09:52
she's a Maverick
01:09:54
certainly sex do you think she held up
01:09:57
on making this decision until after that
01:09:58
Georgia Senate runoff election finished
01:10:01
and do you think that it influenced the
01:10:03
decision I don't know but I I think that
01:10:05
the the Democracy well imagine if she
01:10:09
doesn't make this move now okay and then
01:10:12
in two years well I guess really next
01:10:14
year she gets primaried okay and then
01:10:16
what if she loses the primary it's going
01:10:18
to be very hard for her to run as an
01:10:20
independent at that point it'll look
01:10:22
like sour grapes sore loser right but if
01:10:25
she goes independent now
01:10:28
she's saying listen I'm running as an
01:10:30
independent no matter what the question
01:10:31
you have to make is what the Democratic
01:10:34
party is whether to support me or
01:10:37
basically take this election and throw
01:10:38
it will we see more of this purple
01:10:40
approach I was just going to ask you
01:10:42
what does this mean for Joe mentioned
01:10:45
well I don't think Joe manchin has this
01:10:46
problem and I'll tell you why because
01:10:48
um West Virginia unlike Arizona is like
01:10:50
a plus 22 Red State Joe manchin is the
01:10:54
only politician in that state who could
01:10:57
win that seat for the Democrats when Joe
01:11:00
manchin retires that seat is going
01:11:01
Republican and Schumer knows this the
01:11:04
Democrats know this they think they're
01:11:05
lucky stars every day that they got Joe
01:11:07
manchin because otherwise that would be
01:11:09
a republican seat and so look all this
01:11:12
stuff about how the progressives were
01:11:13
upset with mansion and all that
01:11:15
publicity he got that may be you know
01:11:17
the sort of progressive Wing is going to
01:11:19
say that publicly but the smart
01:11:21
Democrats know that they're very lucky
01:11:23
to have a politician like Joe manchin on
01:11:25
their side of the aisle I could ask a
01:11:27
question to you chamoth why
01:11:29
do Democrats
01:11:31
why why are they
01:11:34
it seems to be so anti-moderate
01:11:37
Democrats why are they so resistant to
01:11:40
the concept of a moderate Democrat when
01:11:42
obviously moderate Democrats seem to
01:11:44
have an advantage in these elections
01:11:46
well no I think David described it well
01:11:48
which is that in many of the seats this
01:11:51
is both true for republicans and for
01:11:52
Democrats you're not really competing in
01:11:54
a general election you're competing in a
01:11:56
primary and if you win a primary you're
01:11:57
probably going to win so like you know
01:11:59
if you're in Mississippi for example you
01:12:01
just have to win the Republican primary
01:12:02
Nothing Else Matters and then you're
01:12:04
just going to skate to Victory and so
01:12:06
the real question is who votes and those
01:12:08
are different oftentimes and who votes
01:12:10
in the general and this is why you get
01:12:13
this dispersion that's happening where
01:12:15
folks seem to be getting more and more
01:12:18
extreme it's reflecting the sound bites
01:12:21
that those primary voters want to hear
01:12:23
and this is the big problem that we have
01:12:25
and that's why like if you have a bunch
01:12:27
of this you know ranked Choice voting or
01:12:30
you know these other kinds of methods it
01:12:32
starts to clean that up so that you move
01:12:34
people more into the moderate middle
01:12:37
but that's why that's why you have this
01:12:39
crazy stuff happening all right
01:12:40
everybody this has been another amazing
01:12:42
episode of the all-in podcast for the
01:12:43
dictator
01:12:45
the Sultan of Science and David sacks I
01:12:48
am Jake out we'll see you next time bye
01:12:51
we'll let your winners ride
01:12:54
rain man
01:12:55
[Music]
01:12:59
we open source it to the fans and
01:13:01
they've just gone crazy
01:13:02
[Music]
01:13:25
it's like this like
01:13:29
[Music]
01:13:32
your feet
01:13:35
we need to get Mercies
01:13:38
oh
01:13:40
yeah
01:13:42
[Music]
