10/28/25: Trump War On Venezuela, US Aircraft Crashes, AI Replaces Thousands Of Jobs

Krystal and Saagar discuss Trump doubling down on war with Venezuela, multiple US crafts crash near China, whistleblower speaks out on American journalist killed by IDF, AI replaces thousands of jobs.

 

Pablo Torre: https://x.com/PabloTorre 

 

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com

Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this
election and we are so excited about what that means
for the future of this show.

Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.

Speaker 3 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com. Good morning, everybody, Happy Tuesday. Have an amazing
show for everybody today.

Speaker 4 (00:36):
What do we have, Crystal, indeed, we do.

Speaker 2 (00:38):
Take a look at Venezuela Barry Weiss's sixty minutes with
a terrible piece of propaganda that we will break down
for you. We're also going to update you on a
variety of stories with regard to Israel, but specifically we've
just had revealed a cover up of the murder of
Sharin Abu Akle, who's a Palestinian American journalist. A lot
to get into there, about our own government's involvement in

(00:59):
that cover up. AI is coming for our jobs, and
we have new numbers and new statements from companies to
back that up. Two military assets crashed into the South
China Sea within thirty minutes of each other. It seems
like things are going great there. Kamala apparently running for president. Unbelievable,
really quite extraordinary that she thinks that she has any
sort of a prayer going forward, or any sort of

(01:19):
a role for the country or in the Democratic Party.
I'm taking a look at the plot against twenty twenty six,
against the midterms, and we have Pablo Torre joining us
to talk about sports scandals. There were a variety of
indictments that came down, pretty fascinating stuff, and I'm really
curious to get from him. How widespread the rot is,
I think is the big question.

Speaker 3 (01:38):
Absolutely, Pablo, I've been described as human missile. I love
this guy. I totally respect him. He's one of the
few people in sports journalism actually doing real journalism, doesn't
care about the access. So I'm very very excited to
talk to him. But before we get to that, thank
you everybody who's been subscribing to the show. Breakingpoints dot
com if you can support us. I did an event
recently on Sunday with Hassan Piker. We're going to be

(02:00):
dropping that soon. Maybe we'll drop it early for our
three and am subscribers. Yeah, it's a good idea. I
came up with that right on the spot.

Speaker 1 (02:06):
Oh it was great.

Speaker 3 (02:07):
Yeah, we really enjoyed it at the New Yorker Festival.
Thank you to them for hosting us.

Speaker 1 (02:11):
But there you go.

Speaker 3 (02:12):
That's a reason to subscribe Breakingpoints dot com if you
are able. If not, no worries, just please hit subscribe
on our YouTube video. If you're listening to this on
a podcast, send your favorite episode to a friend or
rates five stars if you're listening with that, Let's go
ahead and get to Venezuela. Ryan and I revealed quite
a bit behind the scenes about the Regime Change op

(02:32):
currently being spearheaded by Marco Rubio. They now have their
radio Rwanda in CBS News under Barry Weiss, where they've
broadcast a full on basically a commercial for Regime Change
in Venezuela. They're saying it's going to be a cakewalk.
They've got their leader, they have their Akmachalabi, they have
a one hundred hour plan how they can peacefully take power.

Speaker 1 (02:53):
Let's take a listen.

Speaker 5 (02:54):
Their reports to the opposition says they have this one
hundred hour plan with the Trump administration forul transition. Is
there any guarantee that the transition will be peaceful.

Speaker 6 (03:05):
There's no guarantee at all. And in fact, one of
the things that worries me most is that there's been
no apparent negotiation with the key element in all of
this story, which is the Venezuelan armed forces. If anson
armed forces don't go along with this, and by the
armed forces, I really mean the high command and people
who will give the orders, then there's a possibility perhaps

(03:27):
the armed forces might split. There's a possibility they might
oppose a new government coming in.

Speaker 4 (03:33):
He says.

Speaker 7 (03:33):
Well, armed Colombian gorilla groups that Maduro allows to operate
in Venezuela might also resist a change in power.

Speaker 5 (03:42):
Is there a scenario that the US has to put
boots on the ground to keep order.

Speaker 6 (03:46):
I can't see a scenario in which they wouldn't have
to put boots on the ground.

Speaker 1 (03:50):
No scenario. It wouldn't have to put boots on the ground.

Speaker 3 (03:53):
All the armed forces will just peacefully split apart and
they'll just hand power over and there are one hundred
hour planned. This new lady who just happened to get
the Nobel Peace Prize and just happens to be funded
by the United States government. Also just another you know,
a pump for Ryan and I reporting. Did you notice
how they talked about the Colombian gorillas in that story
and that what we discovered was USAID's type dollars flowing

(04:16):
into Columbia into Guyana. There are oil projects there. I mean,
the whole ground is set. Guys, like this is full
on and people need to be sounding the alarm, and
unfortunately CBS News is instead broadcasting a commercial for regime change.
This is literally like a two thousand and two style report.
Iraq will be a cakewalk. We will be greeted as liberators.
Everybody will be happy. We have a great plan in

(04:39):
place and what could possibly go wrong here? And of course,
you know, implicit in all of this is the assumption
that Maduro is some great drug trafficker, which just is
not true. I mean, that's one of those which drives
me crazy. They're literally blaming there were like half a
million Americans have died of fentanyl and that's on Nicholas.

(04:59):
It's not, it's it's literally not. Is some cocaine coming
from there? Yes, something like seven percent of cocaine, ninety
three percent of cocaine Colombia and Mexico, one hundred percent
of fentanel Mexico and China, almost all of it in
Mexico precursors from China.

Speaker 1 (05:16):
That's it. I mean, these are facts.

Speaker 3 (05:18):
These are facts from the United States Intelligence Community classified
intel assessment as of now as I can report, and
as publicly available from the United Nations, from the United States,
from the DEA, everywhere. You know, you don't need a
functioning brain to know this is complete bs.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
Yeah, and it would have been nice to see that, really,
you know, dug Into in the six years piece. But
instead what they do as they go and they talk about,
you know, the poverty and all the human rights abuses
and the oppression, and you know, Americans are good people,
and they look at this, all these people are really suffering.
Maybe we do have to do something. So building the
case and it's also it is incredible to me, like

(05:54):
in the build up to a Rock there was a
lengthy process of propagandizing the American people like they felt
like they really had to make an elaborate case. Now
it's so slapped together. Everybody knows what the administration is
selling is a complete and total lie. Yet it gets
sort of taken seriously. You know, they routinely call these
boats that are being blown up drug boats, even though
we have no idea that literally any of them are

(06:15):
actually carrying drugs. They just sort of accept the premise,
even if they'll put in there will probably not that
much fentanyl comes from Venezuela, but put that aside, look
at what a bad guy Medora ultimately is.

Speaker 4 (06:25):
So they interviewed this.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
Guy, Bassard James Stories, the last American diplomat at the
now closed US embassy in Venezuela. They interview him to
talk about what a terrible guy Meduro is. And I'm
not here to defend Madurea. I'm just saying, like, why
are we going to do another regime change? Or will
we never learn our lesson on how disastrous these things
are for our country, for their country, for the region, etc.

(06:48):
In any case, let's take a listen to that this is.

Speaker 8 (06:50):
A very bad actor sitting on top of the world's
largest known reserves of oil plus the critical generals that
will fuel the twenty first century economy. And he's in
bed with our strategic competitors.

Speaker 5 (07:06):
And how has he been able to cling to power
for as well as he has.

Speaker 8 (07:10):
I mean, let's be very clear. This is a criminal
organization masquerading as a government. This is an individual who
is under indictment for not cadist trafficking, commits human rights violations,
someone who has used the apparatus of the state to
throw people in jail, to torture them, to kill them.

Speaker 2 (07:28):
Let's just keep in mind, Zagar, we are literally backing
a man who was a terrorist in Syria and doing
deals with him, and he's collaborating with him.

Speaker 3 (07:38):
For who sits atop the world's largest oil reserve in
Saudi Arabia. People who torture, people who use an authority.
I'm sorry, and this is what Look. I accept the premise. Yes,
you know he's bad and all that. I'll just say it.
I don't care. Like at the end of the day,
Venezuela's problems are Venezuela's, it is not ours. I do
not care who rules over the people of Venezuela. I
do not care who rules over the people Saudi Arabia.

(08:00):
I wish the best for them, but at the end
of the day, that's their problem. Many of them elected
and chose that life.

Speaker 1 (08:06):
Yes, there's stole the election or whatever.

Speaker 3 (08:08):
They stole an election in Turkey, they stole an election
in multiple US backed regimes around the world. I have
a certain point, I have a level of empathy that
extends to the border of the US. From that point forward,
do what you want to do. Secondary this is about
some strategic problem about China. I'm sorry, it's total bullshit.
Once once again, I will report from what Ryan and
I were able to say, and none of this was

(08:29):
disputed from the State Department, from the CIA, from the
White House, all of us who reach out to comment
and since in forty eight hours have not disputed a
single word. Nicholas Maduro does not care about China or Russia.
He cares about himself. He told America, have as much
oil as you want. I won't even sell it to
China anymore. You can have all of it if you
want it. And you know what we said. No, So

(08:50):
it's not about strategy, it's not about any of that.
It's literally this is a psychotic operation from the South Floridians.
Our friend Wanda vid Rojas put this up pleas on
the screen. A zero wrote this fantastic article. I really,
I really want people to take time out of other
day to read it, because if you have not been
to Miami or South Florida, you do not understand the

(09:13):
disposition of these Cuban and expatriate Venezuelan hawks who literally
occupy our government in the form of Marco Rubio, like
these people are deeply ideological. Rubio posted a photo of
Maduro next to Gaddafi in twenty nineteen, implying that the
you know, the nice outcome would be for him to

(09:34):
be sodomized on national television.

Speaker 1 (09:37):
That is the that.

Speaker 3 (09:38):
Is the Secretary of State and the National Security advisor
of this administration. Trump is surrounded by Floridians. If you're
from Texas like me, or at California or whatever, you
can't even put yourself in the brain of how crazy
these people are and like it's religious.

Speaker 2 (09:54):
Think about the way Miriam Maddelson thinks about it.

Speaker 1 (09:57):
Yeah, exactly, I was about to go apply that to.

Speaker 2 (10:00):
The way they feel about Venezuela and Cuba and Nicaragua.
It's really worth reading the article because he goes through
the evolution of this right. So you have these incredible ideology,
incredibly ideological actors, Marco Ruby a chief among them, but
others in the administration as well, and they were trying
to push this the typical like he's a bad guy,

(10:21):
human rights, rigged election, and we're kind of hitting their
head against a brick wall with Trump on that stuff
wasn't really landing, and so it's when they turned to
the oh, he's a drug kingpin fentanyl. We got to
do something about this. And especially because Trump had been
frustrated in his desire to you know, bomb cartels in
Mexico thankfully thus far, even though there's still a lot

(10:44):
of desire to go in that direction in this administration.
So he seized on this. And there's an added political benefit,
which is, you know, a lot of the Miami Republicans
are upset about you know, they were Marco Rubio was
supportive of temporary proti status for people coming from Venezuela
and from Cuba and Nicaragua. And so now you have

(11:06):
that temporary protected status being taken away. You have obviously
the you know, insane dream in Venezuelans and including the
like theatrical show of shipping a number of Venezuelans off
to Seacot with no due process. And so you have
a lot of Miami Republicans who are pretty upset about
that and not happy with the treatment of you know,
people that they have that they have this empathy for
and that they actually care about and feel are fleeing

(11:28):
political persecution in many cases actually are fleeing p political persecution.

Speaker 4 (11:32):
So this is a way to sort of.

Speaker 2 (11:34):
Like soothe both the politicians and the voters in South
Florida who are upset about that.

Speaker 4 (11:40):
So it checks all the boxes. You know.

Speaker 2 (11:41):
Trump gets to do his insane drug wars, Steven Miller
gets his authoritarianism and his cruelty, Marco Rubio gets his
ideological ends. Maga is largely silent. Few rumblings here or there,
but that's about it. And so you know, that's why
this thing just seems to be marching forward with like
a logic of its own. But if you poke at
it at all, it all completely falls apart and is

(12:03):
completely insane. If you ask the American people, there's pulling out.
Of course, they're like, what are you talking about? No,
I don't want another regime, James War, and yet here
we are marching towards it. And you know, just to
pick up on the point Sagara's making about, like you
know your view is like, well, I don't really care.
It's up to them to rule themselves.

Speaker 6 (12:20):
I mean.

Speaker 2 (12:20):
Number one, like, the sanctions we've had in place on
Venezuela are part of the miseration of that population. Number Two,
if you do have empathy for the people of Venezuela,
like ask yourself, how did it go for the people
of Iraq, How did it go for the people of Afghanistan?
How did it go for the people of Syria? How
did it go for the people of Libya. We made
their lives, We murdered many of them, and we made

(12:42):
their lives absolutely miserable.

Speaker 1 (12:44):
You know.

Speaker 2 (12:45):
It was not some humanitarian thing that we did there
that turned out great and the women got to go
to school. No, No, it was a disaster. It would
have been better if we never got involved whatsoever. And
so even if you are looking at those pictures of
people in poverty you're worried about it, number one thing
we should be doing is making a deal with them
and in sanctions relief that would be the best thing
we could do, and number two, the absolute worst thing

(13:07):
we could do is some sort of a regime change
mess that is very likely to result in a failed
state in all of the catastrophic human consequences of that.

Speaker 3 (13:15):
Yeah, I mean, what you hear about Venezuela all the time,
Oh it's been twenty five years is collapse their population,
they used to be so rich and all of that. Yeah,
it was twenty five years ago. Like what you think
you just undo twenty five years of socialism and sanctions
in like in two decades or in two years.

Speaker 1 (13:30):
It's not possible.

Speaker 3 (13:31):
It would literally probably take fifty years to undo the
damage of the last twenty five years.

Speaker 1 (13:35):
Like, no, I don't want to do with any of that.
I'm with you. Make a deal.

Speaker 3 (13:39):
If they want prosperity, they can decide it for themselves.
They hate Maduro so much, rise up and overthrow them.
It's not my problem, you know, at the end of
the day. And it's one of those I feel the
same way about Cuba, which I know puts me at
odds with a lot again of these South Floridians who
think it's like on America to go and flee and
free the island of Cuba.

Speaker 1 (13:57):
Again.

Speaker 3 (13:57):
You know, it's been decades long. If they really care
so much, they would have done.

Speaker 1 (14:00):
Something about it. I truly believe that.

Speaker 3 (14:03):
And it's one of those where they instead they want
to use the power of the United States government to
go in and to smash everything apart because oh, Maduro
stole an election.

Speaker 1 (14:11):
Again, there are.

Speaker 3 (14:11):
Multiple US back dictators all over the world who have
stolen elections. We still buy oil from them. I'm not
looking for logical consistency or some great ethics. We're looking
for deals. And again, if you want to counter China,
he's offering he's offering the oil right now. He said,
you can have all of it. I will even step
aside sometime in the future or announce that I will

(14:33):
as long as my regime apparatus gets to keep power.

Speaker 1 (14:36):
That's not enough for us.

Speaker 3 (14:36):
And instead we're sending carrier strike groups, all kinds of
messages to Venezuela. Here's the latest one, Senator Rick Scott
again Florida, telling Maduro I would head to Russia and
China right now, basically telling him to pull an aside
because the regime is going to go.

Speaker 1 (14:50):
Let's take a listen. If I was Madru, I'd head
to rush your China right now, because his days are
our numbered. Something's going to happen, whether it's internal or external.
Think something's going to happen.

Speaker 5 (15:01):
The firepower that's off the coast right, this is Ernald Mada,
This is a lot of US forces.

Speaker 4 (15:06):
Are we about to invade Venezuela?

Speaker 1 (15:08):
I think so. I mean, I if we do, I'd
be surprised.

Speaker 7 (15:12):
Earlier this month, President Trump announced he approved covert CIA
operations inside Venezuela.

Speaker 3 (15:19):
There you go, I would head to ven I would
head to Russia or China right now.

Speaker 2 (15:23):
And basically, thing's going to happen, whether it's going to
internal or external. Well, even if it's internal, it's still
fugging us. It's still external. By the way, we know
that the CIA has Greenland operations. By the way, Maduro
is saying they already captured some CIA operators, there's you know,
we don't have proof of that, but you know, he's
about as trustworthy as this is well.

Speaker 3 (15:41):
One of the Okay, again, if you care so much
about the Venezuelan opposition, do you know what i Ron
did after all those Mosad killings?

Speaker 1 (15:47):
You know what they did?

Speaker 3 (15:48):
They said every one whose opposition is MOSAD, and they
killed all of them. Just so everybody understands. If you
were a dictator and you had an outward threat, which
is openly saying they're going to use their intelligence community
to topple regime, what would you do. I would say,
everybody who opposes me is CIA, and then I would
kill all of them, because that's the logical thing that
most oppositional you know, anti Western dictators have done for oh,

(16:12):
I don't know, multiple decades. So it's only the best
pretexts in the world to kill everybody that you want to.
Just to back up your point, let's go and put
a six pleas up on the screen.

Speaker 1 (16:21):
This is from Miami Herald.

Speaker 3 (16:23):
Venezuela just yesterday claimed to have captured a CIA group,
accused the CIA of plotting a false flag attack, that
they had captured mercenaries who had come from Washington and
Trinidad into Tobago coordinating military exercises, and said that they
were trying to thwart some sort of false flag operation
that would come to generate a full scale military confrontation

(16:45):
against Venezuela. I mean, the United States would never have
a false flag incident in the Caribbean to precipitate an invasion,
would they would they? Oh right, uss main, Okay, well,
let's get to the next part here. A four or
Senator Lindsey Graham says he can to invade the US,
could easily invade Venezuela. By the way, he also mixes

(17:06):
up the names of dictators overthrown by the US.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
If you're wondering about.

Speaker 3 (17:12):
If you're just wondering about the intellectual firepower that's back
in this just take a listen.

Speaker 9 (17:16):
We didn't have a declaration to go into Panama. Bush
forty one went into Panama to replace the leadership there
because the Panama leadership, Panamanian leadership, we're working with drug
cartels to threaten our country. Reagan didn't have a declaration
of war congressional authorization to deal with Cuban influence. So

(17:37):
this idea of rampaul I just fundamentally disagree with. To
the other senators, you deserve more information, and you're going
to get more information, But there is no requirement for
Congress to declare war before the commander in chief can
use force. Panama and Grenade are two examples in our
backyard where Republican presidents chose to go after countries and

(18:01):
leaders that were threatening our people.

Speaker 10 (18:04):
Preventative self defense employed to counter non imminent threats is
illegal under international law. So if we are not at
war and these suspected criminals pose no threat of imminent violence,
isn't this potentially a war crime to be killing the
people on these boats and then to be taking out

(18:24):
a leader.

Speaker 9 (18:28):
No, not at all. I don't know what manual we're
referring to, but I know what President Bush forty one did.
He took down Ortega, the leader of Panama, because he
was involved in drug trafficking threatening our country. So, yeah,
the game is changing when it comes to drug traffickers
and drug cartels. We're going to use military force like

(18:49):
we have in the past to protect our country. That's
the new game we're playing, and I'm glad we're playing
that game. And if I were Maduro, I'd find a
way to leave before he goes down.

Speaker 3 (19:00):
I would find a way to leave before it goes down.
By the way, basically, a member of the United States
Congress saying Congress doesn't need to intervene in a declaration
of war defending a regime chain violent regime change coerced
regime change, whatever you want to call it.

Speaker 4 (19:13):
I mean, it's just exists anymore.

Speaker 2 (19:15):
I mean it's pathetic like and this is not this
is far from the first time they've abdicated their duty.
But they don't even they don't want responsibility, they don't
want to be involved in the Well I've talked kings
of our country.

Speaker 3 (19:26):
Yeah, I mean, I've talked about this, but the legacy
of Iraq was basically that nobody ever wants to take
a vote like that again, because it all came back
to bite them in the ass. It was politically convenient
to take the vote, so they did, and then later
on Hillary loses the two thousand and eight primary because
of the vote, and arguably John Kerry loses the two
thousand and four election because he also voted for the
war in Iraq, of that whole flip flop label that.

(19:47):
So from that point on, they were like, yeah, we're
just gonna let this aumf thing and then everybody thin
can float up to the president.

Speaker 1 (19:53):
They love it.

Speaker 3 (19:53):
They love it this way, and that's why there's been
permanent war for the last twenty five years. They don't
have to necessarily take any real response ability by the way,
at the same time, let's go and put a five
here and nasalman.

Speaker 4 (20:04):
Trump is doing a fundraiser.

Speaker 3 (20:05):
Yeah, he's doing a fundraiser, not just a fundraiser, the
very first fundraiser of twenty twenty six, just all aware
while punishing Thomas Massey. Interesting here we have Maduro again
say that the US is fabricating war as it deplores
the world's largest warship, the USS Gerald Ford, on its
way to the Caribbean to support quote anti drug operations

(20:25):
or whatever it is. It can carry up to ninety aircraft.
It is the biggest increase of US firepower in the region.
The United States, by the way, I just checked this
now has more firepower in the Latin American region and
in the Caribbean than at any time since the Cuban
Missile crisis of nineteen sixty two. That is how extraordinary

(20:45):
the current US build up is. So we have CIA
operations gone on the ground, We've got regime change commercials
on sixty minutes, one of the most respected theoretically one
of the most respected names in news in the United States,
watched by some ten to fifteen million people. We have press,
which is basically silent about this entire thing. I have
yet to see a national Democratic politician or anyone make

(21:07):
a big deal out of.

Speaker 1 (21:08):
This, you know.

Speaker 3 (21:09):
Yet Listen, I'm here with you on the White House
East wing. Can somebody stand up about Venezuela. Please, I'm
begging for opposition for anything to say something, and no
organized politician or movement inside of the right like this
is a full on, full on bipartisan op at this point,
either from a tacit agreement or from just you know,

(21:29):
cheering it on outwardly. And yeah, I guess we'll all
own the consequences. You know, Vast numbers of vast numbers
of Venezuelans likely to you know, spread throughout the region.
It could cause a refugee crisis. It could, I mean literally,
it actually could go the Libya route, since that is
apparently what they want, and it could turn into an
actual drug capital ironically in the next five year, who

(21:52):
knows what's going on.

Speaker 2 (21:53):
It could destabilize the region too, right, you know, the
fallout doesn't just stay contained to Venezuelan, and then a
miseration of.

Speaker 4 (22:00):
The people there, you know, could destabilize that whole area.

Speaker 1 (22:02):
Yeah, I don't know. I think it's all it's all bad.
It's all bad.

Speaker 3 (22:08):
Let's go to the next part here. This is about
just you know, by the way, if anybody's wondering about
our capacity for regime change and how excellent our military
is now at the moment, we had two horrible crashes
in the South China Sea with the President was asked
about recently, which highlights our lack of military readiness.

Speaker 1 (22:29):
Let's take a lesson.

Speaker 11 (22:30):
You can served on the incident on the mimits of
both a fighter jet and a helicopter.

Speaker 6 (22:35):
I've heard, yeah, you know, what happened there was They're
gonna let me know pretty soon.

Speaker 1 (22:39):
I think they should be able to find out.

Speaker 12 (22:41):
It could be bad fuel.

Speaker 1 (22:42):
I mean it's possible it's bad field.

Speaker 7 (22:44):
Very unusual then that would happen to me.

Speaker 11 (22:46):
I don't think there was foulay, and they think it
might be badfield.

Speaker 8 (22:50):
We're going to find out.

Speaker 3 (22:51):
So the President said there it could be bad fuel.
And there's a lot of questions here after this incident.
Let's put this up here on the screen. A US
Navy hell copter and a US fighter jet both crashed
in separate incidents in the South China Sea. So both
happened on October twenty six, two days ago, a Seahawk
helicopter went down at two forty five pm quote while

(23:14):
conducting routine operations from the USS Nimics. The helicopter was
assigned to a helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron. Search and Rescue
said that they rescued all three crew members, so thank
god that that happened. But following the incident, an FA
eighteen super Hornet assigned to a different strike fighter squadron
also crashed in the waters of the South China Sea.

(23:35):
Both of the crew members successfully ejected and they were
safely recovered. Now, the Nimets as one of literally the
largest aircraft carriers in the world and is supposed to
be one of the pride and joys of the US Navy,
and there's it's supposed to be decommissioned by the way,
and I think next year. But the point remains is
that this is supposed to be like a forward deployment
of a great you know, projecting power of the United

(23:58):
States military. And you have two set crashes and now
they're saying bad fuel.

Speaker 1 (24:03):
How does that happen?

Speaker 3 (24:04):
The reason I'm sticking with this is that there have
been a number of incidents that I always try to
highlight whenever we're trying to pour trillions dollars more into
our defense budget. Is at the basic level, like the
actual functional level, we're falling apart at the seams. So
we have awesome technology, the B two bomber Operation Midnight Hammer,

(24:24):
but from what I know, we barely had the fuel
infrastructure to refuel the bombers, like the stuff that actually
makes them all tick, and all the logistics in the
background is highly inefficient, rolled up destroyed by private equity, Raytheon,
Lockheed Martin all of these monopolies, there's been no competition
in the sector. It's highly inefficient to cost unbelievable amounts

(24:49):
of money. It's like hundreds of thousands of dollars per
flight hour to keep these things up.

Speaker 1 (24:54):
There.

Speaker 3 (24:54):
By the way, we've also been circling Venezuela for some
reason more recently. So I just wanted to high the
story just to show you all there's no cakewalk in
the United States military. In fact, you know, despite the
trillion dollars that we spend now per year, it's probably
never been less efficient at the actual like functional level
of all of this high priced technology. And what did

(25:15):
we all notice in with the hoo thies is that
a very small force with no real organization, no nation
state or anything effectively was able to conduct all of
these operations without being stopped, despite almost a billion dollars
or more worth of missiles that were fired at them.
So everyone just keep that in mind. The asymmetric threat
that we have witnessed now from China, from Russia, from

(25:38):
Ukraine and others just shows you how I mean, Ukraine
is a perfect example. Is you have this massive Russian military,
supposedly all technologically advanced, and the Ukrainians just come in
with these drones and are able to screw them up.
It's not hard, right, and we've seen that happen against
US China. Apparently there's all kinds of experiments going on
on the battlefield. So just a flag for anyone. You know,
there's a lot of people out there like we have

(25:58):
the world's best military. We certainly have a great military,
but it is not all that is sometimes cracked.

Speaker 1 (26:03):
Up to me. And these are always what I point to.

Speaker 2 (26:05):
Yeah example, I mean there's two pieces here. There's like, okay,
well what the hell actually happened?

Speaker 4 (26:10):
Number one?

Speaker 2 (26:11):
And Number two is Seth Harp, who wrote Fort Bragg
Kartel and whose incredible journalist tracks military readiness.

Speaker 4 (26:16):
This is kind of his beat.

Speaker 2 (26:18):
He said, Seventeen Army helicopter crashes in twenty twenty four,
the midair collision over the Potomac this January. Three fighter
jets that simply fell into the Red Sea in April
and May. That was with regard to the Hoofies. Another
whole helicopter crew lost last month. And now this unmitigated
chaos and incompetence in US military ages.

Speaker 1 (26:39):
Right, he pretty much sums up. He's absolutely right.

Speaker 3 (26:41):
And there's been numbers of these safety incidents all the time.
In the Persian Gulf, there was an incident recently which
actually you know, a couple of guys were killed. Just
to highlight that Yemen thing. This is just from a
couple months ago. Put a ten please up on the screen.
Second US fighter jet falls overboard from the Truman Aircraft Carrier.
Just the second time in eight days a US fighter

(27:01):
jet was lost to the Red Sea.

Speaker 1 (27:03):
Let's see it.

Speaker 3 (27:04):
I can look teen super hornet. So my ballpark is
like sixty seventy million, what is it?

Speaker 1 (27:09):
Let's it say?

Speaker 3 (27:11):
Yeah, I'm gonna guess like seventy million. Yep, we are
all right here you go sixty between sixty I swear
I did. Yeah, that's and by the way, that's a
cheap one. Just they're all aware that's a cheap one
sixty to seventy million dollars. So that's one hundred and
forty million that just slid into the sea. What did
they say there was like rough seas or something. I'm like,
something tells me that in World War two, whenever we

(27:34):
were fighting the Japanese with limited radar and it was
one of the great sea forces that the world had
ever seen, that they also had rough seas and it
didn't happen all that often. Just my you know, personal thought.
So it's one of those where when I look at this,
I just see it and it's not on the service members.

Speaker 1 (27:51):
It's really not.

Speaker 3 (27:52):
It's on the higher ups, and it's on the design.
It's on the structural design of all of these monopolies
of focusing on the wrong thing, of being excited by
flashy technology and not on the guns and the bullets
and the ability to just function at a very basic level.
And to the extent, Russia has found success on the

(28:13):
battlefield in Ukraine. It's because they operate more like a
World War One military than any modern military. They need men,
they need ammunition, and they need shit at home that
produces ammunition. That's all you need and you can actually
be quite successful. So yeah, and oil by the way
to sell to other people. And that's it. You know,
we don't need AI or data centers or any of
that stuff. It's nice, it's definitely nice to have, but

(28:34):
it's not going to win in the long run. And
so you can see all the signs here for catastrophic
failure if something ever popped off, who knows, I.

Speaker 2 (28:41):
Mean, we bounced all of our capacity. Of course, military
industrial complex it's a bunch of monopolies.

Speaker 4 (28:46):
I mean, knowing people who work in the space.

Speaker 2 (28:49):
You know, on the government side, they talk about how
if you want to get like you know, Locke or
Boeing on the phone or what like, you can't.

Speaker 4 (28:58):
You can't.

Speaker 2 (28:59):
Like they think there's so far above the you know,
the government, the people they're supposed to be interfacing with.
They're completely unaccountable and the cost overruns are insane. This
is a big part of the reason why the Pentagon
fails every audit and it's like not even close. So
all of this money that we're spending in defense and

(29:20):
you know, and have pathetic incidences like this, and you know,
all sorts of problems right thround the entire complex.

Speaker 3 (29:28):
Bad. Yeah, and that's why you know they want to
overthrow Venezuela. Like maybe maybe it also could be a
total disaster, you know, it really could be.

Speaker 1 (29:35):
And that's one of the course where right.

Speaker 4 (29:37):
Back to our whole democracy.

Speaker 3 (29:39):
Building, democracy building, we're going to collapse the regime. We're
not gonna put any foods on the ground.

Speaker 4 (29:43):
It's so easy, mission accomplished, hundred hour.

Speaker 3 (29:45):
Plan USAID, USAID will magically just install this leader and
it'll all work out for the best.

Speaker 1 (29:52):
Right, That's what always happens in the story.

Speaker 2 (29:55):
We learn nothing, we learn nothing. We deserve what we get,
I guess all right, So you guys have recalled back.
In twenty twenty two, Palestinian American prominent journalists Shrine Abu
Accle was murdered by IDF soldiers. Now in the wake
of this, of course, the IDF said, oh, we had
nothing to do with it, and there were other you know,
Palestinian fighters in the area. But don't worry, We're going

(30:16):
to conduct our own investigation. And the Palestinians also conducted
their own investigation and found and by the way, New
York Times and journalistic outlets also conducted their investigations, came
to the conclusion pretty clear that, you know, Sharen, who
was wearing a pross best and her photographers also wearing
press bests, that they were directly targeted by the IDF.
There were no you know, Palestinian resistance fighters in the

(30:38):
area whatsoever. The only people that were firing was this.
You know, they were able to pinpoint a specific IDF
soldier who ultimately killed her. It was horrific, I mean,
just absolutely horrific story, and our government felt some pressure
to do an investigation because of her American citizenship and
because of how incredibly prominent this was. Emily has talked

(31:00):
a lot about how covering the story and realizing how
blatantly the Israelis were lying was a big part of
her evolution in changing the way that she was thinking
about our relationship to Israel. So, you know it, and
I know Emily is not the only one. So that's
part of why this was an incredibly important story, not
to mention just an American journalists being targeted murdered by
the IDF. So in any case, Zeteo was able to

(31:23):
speak to a whistleblower a while back, who at the
time Renee remained anonymous, who said, I was the guy
who led the investigation on the American side to this.
We concluded with a high level of certainty that it
was IDF, that she was directly targeted, that they did
know that she was pressed. And yet my superior said, Nope,

(31:45):
we're going to take that conclusion out of our report,
and we're going to say couldn't say don't know. Let's
go ahead and take a listen to Mehdi interviewing Colonel Gavioviks.
He's the whistleblowers, initially anonymous, now coming forward publicly to
talk about his experience and this cover up of the
murder of an American journalist.

Speaker 12 (32:06):
What was the assessment you submit to General Michael Fenzel,
the US Security Coordinator when you come back from Janine,
And what does he say.

Speaker 13 (32:12):
In response, so our initial assessment, what do you give
the assessment probably about on the nineteenth or twentieth, after
looking through everything in detail, and I passed this to
both Ambassador Knights and Lieutenant General Fenzil that my findings
were beyond reasonable doubt that this was an intentional killing
of Shrina Bakla.

Speaker 12 (32:28):
This is on the nineteenth or twentieth of May twenty
twenty two. Yes, this is within ten days. Yes of
her killing. Yes, you on behalf of the United States
government are saying that beyond reasonable that that's a legal
standard in a criminal call. Yes, it is she was
intentionally killed, correct, not accidentally, not crossfire, not collateral damage.

Speaker 1 (32:46):
Correct.

Speaker 12 (32:47):
What does he say?

Speaker 9 (32:49):
So?

Speaker 13 (32:49):
He said that point in time that he had heard
from General Fuchs the day that the incident happened. This
is an Israeli general in natal general he was the
central command commander that General Fuchs came and told them
that it was very power that an Israeli's shoulder had
killed him or had killed her. Sorry, but that it
was an accident, that it was a matter of tragic circumstances.
But they that was the story that he stuck to.
He said, Geno. Fuchs told me this, so I believe

(33:11):
it was not intentional.

Speaker 12 (33:13):
So the US general takes the word of a foreign
general over his own officer who he sent to investigate
that is correct. How did you feel about that?

Speaker 13 (33:22):
I felt very disappointed and upset about that, and I
continued to try to convince him throughout for the next
two years. Honestly, as we continue to work on the
investigation for.

Speaker 4 (33:31):
It wild stuff.

Speaker 2 (33:32):
So the American investigator comes up, you know, evaluates the evidence, says,
beyond a reasonable doubt, they murdered her. It was intentional,
they knew she was pressed. And his superior says, what
I talked to this is really general. He says, it's
an accident. So that's what we're going with. That's what
we're going with. We're putting that over your investigation. What

(33:54):
you have to say. And keep in mind, this is
supposed to be an independent investigation, separate and apart from
the Israelis, but it is not. At the end of
the day, they just instead of looking at their own
evidence that our government compiled, they go with the word
of this Israeli general. We can put the New York
Times stair sheet up on the screen. They wrote up
this story too. They said, US assessment of Israeli shooting

(34:15):
of journalists divided American officials.

Speaker 1 (34:19):
Nameless journalist, Well, yeah.

Speaker 4 (34:20):
Nameless journalists, very lame headline.

Speaker 2 (34:22):
In any case, if you read this report, they lay
out the reasons why Colonel Gaviovic's thought that this shooting
was deliberate. Number One, records of Israeli military radio traffic
that morning before the shooting showed that the soldiers were
aware of journalists in the area, and there had been
no gunfire coming from the journalist direction that might make

(34:43):
the Israeli soldiers likely to shoot toward them in self defense.
There was an Israeli military vehicle down the road from
Misabu Okla that morning. A sniper watching the road from
inside the vehicle would have been able to see the
journalists clearly. When he visited the scene of the shooting
hours after it occurred, he said, his colleagues, wearing blue
vest similar to miss Abu Acclay's Navy blue protective vest

(35:03):
mark press positioned themselves where she had fallen. They were
visible to him from where the shooter's vehicle had been.

Speaker 4 (35:09):
He said.

Speaker 2 (35:09):
The precision of the shots hitting miss Abu Aclay's head
and a carab tree near her did not suggest an
uncontrolled spray of gunfire. That, together with the fact the
shooter fired first at miss Abu Acclay's producer then heard
then at a passerby who tried to help, indicated to
him the shooting was deliberate.

Speaker 4 (35:26):
Quote.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
For the shooting to be accidental, the most absurd thing
in the world would have had to happen.

Speaker 4 (35:32):
He said.

Speaker 2 (35:32):
The individual popped out of the truck just was randomly
shooting and happened to have really well aimed shots and
never looked down the scope, which would not have happened.
So that was the actual evidence on the scene. Again,
New York Times and other outlets did investigations at the
time came to very similar conclusions, backed up with the
Palestinian said about the incident. And yet Soger they and

(35:53):
this was under the Biden administration. They heard from this
Israeli general. They don't want to screw up their relationship
with these They were afraid of the Israelis pulling their
cooperation and support for whatever intelligence sharing and gathering operations
that they were conducting together, so they just went with
the li instead.

Speaker 3 (36:09):
What I think is so important about the story is
that number one had happened under the Biden administration, and
two this happened before October seventh, Just to show everybody
how you know, dominating the relationship and the influence was
even in that environment, and to the level to which
the Biden administration abandoned a citizen of the United States
of America on the word of Israel. And by the way,

(36:31):
these are United States colonels and generals, you know, generally
not the most liberal folks, right. These are people who
are probably just wanting to do their jobs, their officers
security coordination. They're given the task investigator the shooting. They
take this job seriously. They conduct their examination, they say
that the shooting aft was intentional based upon their findings,
and then they are outwardly shunned inside of the administration,

(36:53):
shunted aside, and the report itself comes out and paris
the Israeli line. I mean, even, by the way, what's
so crazy is that the FBI declined to investigate because,
according to the colonel, it had been requested not to
do so by Israel.

Speaker 1 (37:10):
So they said, even though.

Speaker 3 (37:11):
Current protocol apparently would have been that the FBI had
to open its own investigation, that the Israelis had not
been requested to do so because they didn't want real
law enforcement people to come in and they wanted to
leave it as ambiguous as possible.

Speaker 1 (37:23):
They say.

Speaker 3 (37:24):
It eventually did open up its investigation, but three years
later has quote not released any findings nor said when
it might do so. In the immediate aftermath, they assigned
this team, which again is not even a real investigative
agency to you know, to trajectory of. But this is
not there, this is not what they do generally. And
even these guys, you know, overcome all those obstacles. They

(37:46):
take the jobs seriously and they're like, yeah, Israel, they
did it, and not only it was intentional, and then
so it was It's basically it's like in a movie.
When you want something to remain covered up, you don't
give it to the proper investigating agency, give it to
somebody who's incompetent. But then the incompetent agency, you know,
has people or not incompetent, but it's not their specialty.

(38:07):
And then they take the job seriously and they uncover
the truth and they're like, oh my god, now what
do we do. That's quite literally what happened, Like it's
it's one of the most classic tales of government.

Speaker 1 (38:15):
It's corruption.

Speaker 2 (38:15):
It's shocking, it is shocking, and it's also I mean
it's also worth saying, you know, now, after two plus
years of a genocide, how many how many members of
the press have been murdered by Israel r like, And
it's so many and so frequent that you don't you
can't have this level of public pressure and public scrutiny.

(38:37):
You know, this time, when they murdered Sharen, they were
still you know, trying to uphold this view in the world.

Speaker 4 (38:42):
Oh, we would never do that.

Speaker 2 (38:43):
I mean, you remember them in the beginning phases of
their assault on Gaza. We would never attack a host,
We never attack a most We've never attacked the press.
Now they just do whatever the hell they want because
they've gotten away with it. And so, you know, I
think what's important about digging into this is number one
is American and it's a member of the press. So
understanding what happened in our government's own complicity is extremely

(39:06):
vital in the public interest. But it is also such
a roadmap of how Israel was able to get to
this place where they operate with just total and complete impunity,
because you did have a situation here where there was
enough pressure that the government followed. Okay, well, at least
we have to do something, and that was important because
if that didn't happen, then we would never have this
moment now where we've got a whistleblower coming forward who's

(39:28):
exposing these inner workings of how this all goes down.
But if you want to know how they got away with,
you know, mass darvation and turning all of Gaza into
complete and total rubble, and targeting innocent civilians, you know,
killing tens of thousands of children at the very least
and largest population of child amputees. If you want to
know how we got to the point where they could
get away with it, it's step by step by step

(39:50):
through all of these actions where there's complete impunity, where
we just take their word, where we follow their lead,
where we do their dirty work, where they.

Speaker 4 (39:57):
Cover up for their murder of our own citizen.

Speaker 2 (40:01):
That's how you get to a place where they can
act with such total and complete impunity and absolutely no accountability.

Speaker 1 (40:07):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (40:07):
Absolutely, let's by the way, dot forget how the Biden
administration played this at the time.

Speaker 1 (40:11):
Here was their initial response.

Speaker 11 (40:13):
We have been very clear and consistent about first condemning
the tragic killing of Charine, but also when both the
US's report as well as the IDs report last summer
went public. We have spoken consistently about the need and

(40:36):
the call for accountability in this case, and we continue
to do so. However, as is consistent from the IDF's
finding as well as the finding of the US Security Coordinator,
is that this was not intentional. It was a tragic
due to very tragic circumstances. So yes, we continue to

(40:57):
seek accountability for Charene. We finish well, and that is
the one of the ways in which we are doing so,
in ensuring that when it comes to rules of engagement,
we're working on those issues in concert and in partnership
with our Israeli counterparts to ensure that civilians and journalists

(41:17):
and members of the media are not put in harm's way.

Speaker 1 (41:22):
So well, how did that hold up?

Speaker 3 (41:24):
Right now that laudability goes? Oh way, that dude, veydon't. Patel,
who for the record does not look like me, is
currently employed at a public affairs firm here in Washington
and is doing quite well, which also does work for
the Israel.

Speaker 2 (41:37):
Yeah, s KDK, which is probably the best known democratic
Yeah a pr shop, and yeah it works for the Israelis.
So I guess he ended up exactly where he is
meant to end up. We'd have a few other updates
wanted to bring you guys with regard to what's going
on in Gaza right now.

Speaker 4 (41:52):
It can put be four up on the screen.

Speaker 2 (41:54):
This is a good piece of reporting SKY News revealing
that Israel's backing four different anti hill mass militias operating
behind the quote unquote Yellow line that's the ceasefire boundary
for IDF troops. So you know, they talk about how
these groups operate within less than seven hundred meters from
Israeli positions. They coordinate logistics supply deliveries with the IDF

(42:16):
through the Karam Shalom crossing. Sky found similar coordination Northern
Gosa malicious receiving aid and vehicles via Israeli and Palestine
authority channels, and possible Gulf backing including ties to UAE
linked forces in Yemen. So you know, at least one
of these gangs was linked to actual terrorists. We can
put the B five up on the screen. This is

(42:38):
kind of crazy Washington Post publishing this propaganda from one
of those gangs about how you know the life on
the Israeli side of the Yellow line is so great,
and how you know speaking for all Palestinians that they
all just you know, want to reject Hamas, but they're
kept on under Hamas's brutal thumb. So just you know,

(42:58):
published publishing the like total propaganda from a gang leader,
something the Wall Street Journal had also done, by the way,
and then you've got the White House amplifying it as well.

Speaker 4 (43:08):
So major si up going on here.

Speaker 2 (43:10):
And then one other thing I wanted to note this
is on the positive side, but B six up on
the screen Glamour magazine naming Miss Rachel as their women
of we are very much deserved.

Speaker 1 (43:19):
Shout out to Miss Rachel.

Speaker 4 (43:21):
Miss Rachel.

Speaker 1 (43:22):
Yeah, I mean I've been I don't know the whole thing.

Speaker 3 (43:26):
Between Venezuela between this, I just don't know if the
press is cut out for this because at every turn
what we see is they I think I described it
like as a chess board, and that they report each
individual move without reporting whether it's going to checkmate or not,
like the overall.

Speaker 4 (43:46):
What's happened before? What is this building towards? Is there
a plan? Is a building towards anything exactly?

Speaker 3 (43:53):
So like on Venezuela, right, you can only a reconable
person watches that commercial and is like, oh my god,
like this is happening, and it's happening for this this
and this reason. Even in the New York Times headline,
they were like journalists, it's like, what kind an American one?

Speaker 1 (44:06):
Palestinian one?

Speaker 3 (44:06):
Not that you particularly care, right, you know, what's what
does that mean? What does that demonstrate? You know?

Speaker 1 (44:12):
They just write it up as straight fact.

Speaker 3 (44:13):
They don't even give any personal context, and of course
it's not like anybody really cares. Like in the broader environment.
Same with this whole ceasefire created two gazas, and my
gaza is ready for peace. I'm like, who are you?
Do you give any context of who that person is.
It's like, look, i mean people think I'm joking, Like
this is literally how Iraq and all of that played out.

(44:35):
Chalabi and those people were literally publishing op eds in
the Washington Post. The entire surge strategy was all dictated
in the opinion pages of Washington. I'm not joking, like,
this is all part of the apparatus where things are
meant to be sent to one another, and maybe it's
forgivable the first time.

Speaker 1 (44:53):
It happens, but it's happened.

Speaker 3 (44:55):
I'm over and I mean, first of all, it's happened
throughout modern history, but in particular in this moment, Like
if you lived through Iraq, like you have to be
alter Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, you know, Libya, Afghanistan, if you
live through those, how can you possibly just disregard the blinders.
It's like, I just don't understand how it all works.

Speaker 2 (45:15):
What do you think was with Israel? What do you
think was the turning point that led people like Marjorie
Taylor Green, Tucker, you know, Charlie Kirk was starting to
ask questions, Kay, what do you because previously they were,
you know, pro Israel. Most these people, certainly Marjorie Taylor
Green was Tucker just sort of like, you know, standards,
you could serve a line.

Speaker 4 (45:34):
What do you think caused the flip?

Speaker 3 (45:36):
Two things? Number one that just like sheer barbarity. Two
is the is the level of control, because I think
there's something deeply American about we control our own destiny.
And so to see politicians so overtly subsume themselves to
a foreign political cause, it's just disgusting, you know, to
me personally, and I think as to a lot of them.

(45:58):
That latter part is a huge, huge reason why a
lot of people are willing to speak out it against it.
But I mean, you can't really underestimate the sheer barbarity
of it as well. I mean, I'm not going to
say that the US has not been complicit in a
lot of barbaricacts throughout the world, but it's really one
thing to like fund it, to go to extraordinary links
here at home to quash descent over it's just too much, right.

(46:19):
It's one of those where the level of propaganda for
a war which at the end of the day did
not really matter to America and if anything, it would
have been better for us if it had ended a
long long time ago. That was just it was a
jump point for a lot of people, and then the
traditional talking points just all become bs right, like beacon
of Western civilization.

Speaker 1 (46:38):
You're like really, like, you know, you're.

Speaker 3 (46:39):
Always talking about how great you are compared to your
Middle Eastern neighbors.

Speaker 1 (46:42):
I'm like, you look the same to me.

Speaker 3 (46:43):
Sorry, you know, if you want to look at barbers,
if anything, you know, at this point, yeah, you know
what I mean, Right.

Speaker 1 (46:48):
That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 3 (46:49):
It's like, oh, the Saudis are such backward folks, they
cut people's heads off. I'm like, wow, that would be crazy,
wouldn't it. You know, it's or they're like, oh, the
Middle Eastern cultures, you know, fetishize rape. I'm like, oh, yeah,
that's something you definitely never would do in a prison,
and then your own civilization would bust you out of
the jail for it.

Speaker 9 (47:07):
Right.

Speaker 1 (47:07):
So it's when those things start to fall apart, it's
it's too much for us.

Speaker 4 (47:10):
Yeah, that's just me.

Speaker 2 (47:11):
By the way, one of the rabbis who is prominent
and spreading the mass rape hoax arrested for pedophilia in Texas, alleged.

Speaker 4 (47:20):
But actually arrested.

Speaker 2 (47:21):
Yeah, you know, I think, as far as I can tell,
wasn't able to flee the country.

Speaker 1 (47:24):
Well for now on bail. Now, we'll see.

Speaker 4 (47:28):
We'll keep an eye on that.

Speaker 3 (47:29):
Yeah, everybody monitor those flights to Tel Aviv and tell
me if you see them. Turning now to the economy,
the AI revolution in the job force continues. Go and
put this up here on the screen. This is a
tweet from Senator Bernie Sanders, quote stop hiring humans. A
new billboard says the era of AI employees is here.

(47:50):
Billboards across the country promoting their replacement of millions of
jobs with AI and robotics.

Speaker 1 (47:54):
Great idea.

Speaker 3 (47:55):
One simple question, how will does displaced workers survive when
there are no jobs or income for them? This is
increasingly the question that many companies and young people are
going to have to answer. Let's put this up here
on the screen. It backs up much of what I
have been saying. Now is that quote more big companies
bet they can still grow without hiring quote. It is

(48:17):
the corporate gamble of the moment. Can you run a
company increase sales and juice profits without adding people. American
employers are increasingly making the calculation they can keep the
sized teams flat or shrink them through layoffs without harming
their business. Part of that thinking is that AI will
be used to pick up the slack and automate more processes.
Companies are hesitant to make any moves in an economy

(48:38):
that is still uncertain. JP Morgan's chief financial officer told
investors recently the bank has now quote a very strong
bias against having the reflective response to hire more people
for any given need. Multiple other companies last week had
sales rose even without adding employees. Financial Services companies like
Goldman Sachs said that the firm will constrain headcount growth

(48:59):
through the end of the year and reduce roles that
will be more efficient with AI. Walmart, the nation's private employer,
said it would keep headcount roughly flat over the next
three years, even as sales grow. Multiple other companies that
they list now say that they will be reducing their
headcount because of AI and the ROI of AI is increasing,
apparently on their conference call mentions of chief financial service officers.

(49:21):
By the way, just this morning, huge news out of
a couple of major companies. I believe we have one
of them on Amazon. Do we have that, No, we don't, Okay,
So this morning, yeah, Amazon is announcing thirty thousand corporate
employees will be cut from the company, fourteen thousand immediately.
Ten percent of the entire white collar workforce will be

(49:42):
asked from the company. By the way, another huge piece
of news, arguably in my opinion, more important. Ups will
now cut forty eight thousand jobs in management and operations.
That is some disclosed it would cut twenty thousand positions previously. Shares,
by the way, are up twelve percent market trading.

Speaker 4 (50:00):
So the facts when you fire people.

Speaker 3 (50:02):
The fact that UPS is going to fire forty eight
thousand management and operations people shows that, and by the
way that the stock goes up, that actually might be
the most AI firing of all time, because now is
the time when you don't fire people, because we're going
into Christmas season November and December that's usually when they
surge temporary hiring. They may actually still do that just

(50:24):
for the average packer, shippers, delivery people, et cetera. But
the management and operations they're probably just trying to automate
all of those procedures.

Speaker 1 (50:33):
I mean, it's a grim amount here.

Speaker 3 (50:34):
You're cutting ten percent of people at Amazon again November December,
the busiest months at the whole company, some fourteen percent
or ten percent of your entire workforce before Christmas. Now
you have UPS here being fied forty eight thousand people.
You have the open acknowledgment I've talked here about how
AI is just like more Excel corporate sludge ninety percent

(50:56):
of the time. Is you no longer have to have
a guy who takes minutes for a meeting. It summarizes
your stuff, It can help you put power points together,
it can check your commas, your periods and your footnotes
and automate them. That's usually the grunt work that most
twenty two year olds get hired in the white collar workforce,
and now all of those are slowly starting to erode.

(51:17):
So if you're a new hire out there and you
took some fifty sixty thousand dollars in debt.

Speaker 1 (51:21):
You're screwed, screwed. It's really it's dark. It is dark.

Speaker 2 (51:26):
It is I mean, and it's here, right, this is
not coming, it's here. You're going to see it through
two different modes. One is these big layoffs like we're
seeing with Amazon and Ups. Both of them are important
industry leaders both within their space and also nationally. Other
countries are going, I mean, other companies are going to
see that and follow suit. Amazon also, we covered last

(51:48):
week New York Times got their hands on internal document
showing that they're planning to get rid of six hundred
thousand blue collar workers over the coming years. With those
because Amazon has such extra ordinary churn, they're just planning
as people leave because they can no longer take the
physical stress and burden of you know, working in an
Amazon warehouse or as an Amazon delivery driver, as those

(52:11):
people leave, they're just not going to be replaced. And
I think we're going to see a lot of that too.
And that's what these companies who spoke to the Wall
Street Journal, that's what they're indicating is, oh, you know
Susie laugh. Normally we'd hire to replace Susie. Now we're
just not going to We're just going to allow that
sort of churn to lower our overall headcount and sub
in ai to make our existing workforce, you know, pick

(52:33):
up all the slack for the workers that no longer
are here. And yes, of course all the incentives, all
of the Wall Street and incentives are to move in
that direction. So I mean, I really appreciate Bernie God
bless them, like he must have the most incredible genetics,
because man has not slowed down. Still extremely sharp, still
absolutely with it in terms of the threats that is

(52:54):
facing the American workforce, really the global workforce at this point.

Speaker 4 (52:59):
And here's the other thing.

Speaker 2 (53:00):
Let's fo see four up on the screen and then
we can get Sager's pull out from this. But Wall
Street Journal also had a piece about the economy that's
great for parents, Lozzy for their grown up kids.

Speaker 4 (53:09):
So you know, if you're someone who was.

Speaker 2 (53:12):
Able to get your college education was relatively inexpensive, and
you you know, at that point in time, you could
just get a job out of college, stable career, climb
your way up the ladder. Housing was a lot less expensive,
healthcare was a lot less expensive. Now you have assets,
you know, now you're in the stock mar you're four A,
one K. All those sorts of things are doing good.
And meanwhile your kids, who did you know, trying to

(53:36):
follow the same track, go to college, take on the debt,
come out of college, and there's nothing for them. The
unemployment rate for new college grads is going up and
up and up. Now, partly it's because people are worried
about a recession and all the tariff insanity and everything
that's going on, and partly it is because of AI
and put C three up on the screen. This was

(53:58):
the piece that Soccer highlighted in particular. This chart is
this is really really dire stuff. You know, in terms
of the fulfillment of the population, in terms of the
stability of the society as well, you only have eleven
percent of eighteen to twenty nine year olds who have
confidence that they will be able to buy a home.

(54:21):
But all of these numbers are actually really bad. So
you only have you know, just over twenty five percent
who say they can keep up with expenses. By the way,
numbers are not all that much better for those who
are thirty and older.

Speaker 4 (54:33):
You're under thirty five percent. Maybe that's like thirty three.

Speaker 2 (54:35):
Percent who are confident they can just keep up with
their expenses. You know, for eighteen to twenty nine, you
have under twenty percent who think they can buy a car.
Also under twenty percent, maybe that's around sixteen percent who
say they could pay an unexpected medical expense. You have
under twenty five percent who are confident they could find
a good job. Fifteen percent say that they're confident they

(54:58):
could have enough savings for retirement. And I've been reading
this book by Peter Turchin about when societies like collapse,
and his analysis is that the two major factors that
lead to sort of like societal breakdown and revolution are
decline and material living standards. And in the US context,
he looks at the decline in life expectancy, which is,

(55:22):
you know, undeniable. And there's this mass disparity too between
the wealthy and the poor, et cetera. But that we're
going backwards in terms of life expectancy. And the other
thing is what he calls overproduction of elites. So if
you have a large cohort that are going to college
doing the thing, getting their law degrees or getting their MBAs,
thinking that they're going to be able to ascend not

(55:42):
into like the top echelon, but into some level of
like I'm going to have a house and have a
basic stable life, and the society is failing to deliver that.
Those are actually we think about like the you know,
the working class revolution. Those are the people who traditionally
become the radicals in the revolutionaries actually frustrated would be
elite man.

Speaker 1 (56:00):
I wish you had more time. I could go on forever.
But you are absolutely correct.

Speaker 3 (56:05):
Something I've always said in some of my arguments with
a lot of Marxists and socialists, one of the things
that annoys me is they're always like, the working class
will rise up. I'm like, what do you tell me
about the Russian Revolution, And they're like, oh, well, it
was a people's revolution. I'm like, no, it actually was
a revolution of the elites. If you read any true
biography or history of the Russian Revolution of Bolshevism and

(56:25):
specifically of Marxist Leninism. You will discover that the peasant
population of Russia was the most supportive of the czar.
The reason that the Tsar fell was because he lost
the entire support of the political echelon, from everyone from
the royals to the middle tier to the bourgeoisie. Those
were the people that rose up against the Tzar and
toppled him. The way that the Bolsheviks were able to

(56:47):
take powers basically have a bunch of highly educated, you know,
former members of the echelon or the gentry class who
come in and that's part of the reason that they
target the so called Kulocks at the very beginning in
order to subjugate the population. But the point remains not
just in the Russian context, even in the French Revolution.
If you look at any true violent overthrow, it's these

(57:07):
people specifically. This is why I look at Zoron as
a you know, very say consequence of all of this.

Speaker 1 (57:14):
Republicans are always dunking on. They're like, oh, you have
white middle class people.

Speaker 3 (57:17):
I go, yeah, But you got to understand if you're
twenty five years old or twenty seven and you move
to New York. You know, the prototypical profile is somebody
who has like fifty to seventy thousand dollars or whatever,
maybe some more in student debt, was promised a job
in X, Y and Z and white collar workforce. And
when the cost of living is where it is to
have a basic life, from health insurance to cost of

(57:38):
living to rent, et cetera, it is so untenable that
it leads you to believe that the absolute basics of
your needs will ever be met.

Speaker 1 (57:46):
So what do you do.

Speaker 3 (57:47):
You know you're going to cause you're going to back
some radical shit. I think that this is a lot
of the case for a lot of Trump people as well.
So the point remains that if you do not serve
and solve a point for where everyone still believes in
upward mobility, and specifically for these older people, if you
have no faith that your children will have a better

(58:09):
life than you, which, by the way, you know in
that article that's what it's all about. You shouldn't have
any faith that they're gonna have a better life than you.
And I do feel for a lot of them because
there's a term called henry where it's like high income
not rich yet, which is basically what a lot of
these people are.

Speaker 1 (58:24):
They did everything the right way. You know, they have.

Speaker 3 (58:27):
A good job or whatever. They know, they have a house,
et cetera. And their belief was that their children will
do better. So they don't have enough money to like
bail their kids out entirely. Right, they can help they
can help them, but you know, there's a big difference
being able to buy your kid a house and then
let's say like put your kid through college. Right, that's
like literally a multimillion dollar difference in assets. So the

(58:47):
point is that they don't have enough money to do
too much about it, but they have just enough to
float them for a couple of years. That level of
precarity is also going to lead you down a very radical,
radical path. So, yes, all of the ingredients are here.

Speaker 1 (59:00):
If we want them.

Speaker 3 (59:01):
And I mean, look, I always say I think something's
going to break. But at the same time, I just.

Speaker 1 (59:06):
I don't know. You know, the S and P five
hundreds is of all the time today, So what do
I know?

Speaker 2 (59:10):
Yeah, well, and I don't even think people are looking
for their kids to do better than them at this point.

Speaker 4 (59:14):
It's just like, can they achieve.

Speaker 2 (59:17):
Like the same level of just basics to build, get
a house, raise a family, have health insurance, and that's
increasingly what is feeling impossible. And you know those numbers
of how young people feel about their own academic situation,
that's you, I.

Speaker 1 (59:30):
Think, can you really tell them they're wrong? No, obvious
course not.

Speaker 4 (59:33):
They're absolutely, of course not.

Speaker 2 (59:34):
I mean the competition, you know, just to get into college,
and then you come out of college and AI's taken
all the jobs. And I think you already even before
AI had this issue and declining material circumstances and parents
feeling like their kids aren't going to be able to
achieve what they are in.

Speaker 4 (59:50):
All this stress.

Speaker 2 (59:51):
I mean, that's what leads to like the varsity blues
situation where people are so desp Oh my god, I've
got to do whatever I can make sure my kid gets.

Speaker 4 (59:58):
Some sort of an elite slot.

Speaker 2 (01:00:00):
And you know, so you already had that, and now
you have AI coming in and decimating the type of
jobs that typically would go to new college grads or
new law school grods even and yeah, it's a big problem.

Speaker 1 (01:00:12):
Last thing.

Speaker 3 (01:00:13):
You know, everyone says, oh, well, it's better because it
was inefficient. There's a lot of social benefits. When I
was a very very young journalist, was I truly adding
so much to the conversation.

Speaker 1 (01:00:24):
No, even though I definitely thought that I was.

Speaker 3 (01:00:27):
But what was I learning? I was learning the craft.
I was around other people who taught me the basic
building blocks that allow you to progress into a career.
So let me defend gruntwork somebody. First of all, grunt
work is good for you because it teaches you discipline,
attention to detail, and gives you the basics so that
you can accomplish your task and sit around and kind

(01:00:47):
of absorb information and institutional knowledge from other people around
you to build a network which will allows you to
rise up either through the company or through your industry,
or figure out that that's not what you want to
do so you can go and do something else. If
you don't even get that opportunity, then you get nothing.
And that's what's so deeply frustrating. I think for a
lot of people. I really if you're twenty two years

(01:01:08):
old or you're just graduating from college, I truly truly
feel for you, because you.

Speaker 1 (01:01:13):
Know, you were just old.

Speaker 3 (01:01:15):
You're just old enough where the old system existed so
you were able to take out the debt. You probably
still believed in the dream at that time, and now
you're just smashing into reality and you know it's going
to be a tough climb out