11/20/25: Epstein Files Coverup, Bipartisan Epstein Deal, MAGA Revolts On Trump AI Regulation Ban

Krystal and Saagar discuss the Epstein files coverup, bipartisan deal to protect Epstein associate, MAGA revolts over Trump AI regulation ban.

Ross Barkan:https://x.com/RossBarkan?s=20  

 

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.

Speaker 1 (00:33):
Good morning, everybody, Happy Thursday. Have an amazing show for
everybody today. When do we have Crystal?

Speaker 4 (00:37):
Indeed we do so.

Speaker 2 (00:38):
A new plot to hide the Ebstein files is coming
into view. Dems and Republicans also, after voting to release
the Abstein files, which was good, come together in an
absolutely disgusting grow testue corrupt deals. So we'll break those
details down for you. Meanwhile, DC Republicans and Trump himself
working overtime to try to block any sort of AI
regulation at the state level. You know, we got to

(01:00):
talk about that one. Some shocking new polling on the minterms.
We'll break that down for you. Trump's case against Jim
Comey is falling apart spectacularly in an absolutely humiliating fashion.
And Ross Barkin is going to join us to break
down a number of things that are going on in
New York, specifically with our mom Donnie. He is actually
coming to DC to meet with Trump. He also last

(01:20):
night showed up at him meeting to block an endorsement
of Hakeem Jeffrey's opponent. So lots going on there, and
there are a whole bunch of other primary challenges from
the left coming in New York City specifically, So super
excited to talk to Ross about all of that.

Speaker 1 (01:34):
Yeah, that's exciting. The zorn Our boys all grown up.

Speaker 3 (01:37):
He's already blocking endorsements for the blocking endorsements for Hockey
Jeffrey's challengers.

Speaker 1 (01:43):
Just tragic to see the world of politics.

Speaker 3 (01:46):
Thank you to everybody who is signing up Breakingpoints dot
com to become a Preme subscriber. We have been overloaded
with new listeners and viewers because of our Epstein coverage
and we're very happy to have you. Please support our
work if you're able to breaking for If you're not
no worries, please just subscribe to our YouTube channel. And
if you're listening to this as a podcast, please send

(02:06):
an episode to a friend or.

Speaker 1 (02:08):
Rates five stars. It really helps the show grow.

Speaker 3 (02:11):
But as you said, Trump has officially signed the new bill.

Speaker 1 (02:14):
He did it in the dead of.

Speaker 3 (02:16):
Night, in silence, with no cameras, not exactly something he's
known to do. This is the man who will call
a press conference in the Oval Office for like we
are updating the way that we you know, have hurricane
planes or something, and turn it into a one hour
long thing.

Speaker 2 (02:31):
He could have had the victims there, I mean, that's
what Rocanna I know at least probably Thomas Massey as
well Marjorie Taylor Green were suggesting do a signing ceremony,
take ownership over it, have the survivors there behind you,
y n history.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
Yes, he signed it late last night, and in fact
I was in touch with some of my friends who
still cover the White House.

Speaker 1 (02:49):
They actually were sent.

Speaker 3 (02:50):
Home as reporters when the bill was delivered to the
Oval and he signed it in private and then they
released it only through official channel. This is very rare,
again for the Trump administration. I can't tell you how
many bill signings I attended when I was a White
House or boy.

Speaker 1 (03:03):
It's very common.

Speaker 3 (03:04):
It's one of the ways that you kind of turned
something into a press conference. And again he does this
all the time for various small little things. So, you know,
interesting behavior. Let's go and put this up here on
the screen. Then from signs the bill authorizing the release
of the Epstein files. The actual law text itself is
really important. It now says that the Attorney General has

(03:26):
thirty days to make available unclassified documents related to the
disgraced finance here and his associate Galaine Maxwell. The difficult
part is what did I just say unclassified? And already
the Attorney General is laying the groundwork for some significant
redactions in the eventual release some one.

Speaker 1 (03:45):
Month from now. Here's what the Attorney General, Pam Bondi,
had to say.

Speaker 2 (03:48):
Does the new investigation by the Southern District of New
York US Attorney prevent the Department from releasing all of
the remaining files?

Speaker 5 (03:56):
So we have released thirty three thousand, over thirty three
thousand Epstein documents to the Hill and will continue to
follow the law and to have maximum transparency. Also we
will always encourage all victims to come forward.

Speaker 3 (04:12):
So clearly she didn't say no, because the question very specifically,
does the new investigation prevent the DOJ from releasing all
of those files? Now, this is in combination with Ken Klippenstein.
He's got a new report. Let's going to put that
up here on the screen. The Epstein Bill passes as
top official circulate plans to block transparency, and so what

(04:32):
he has been able to reveal is that if you
actually read the text of the law, there is a
national security a concern carve out that is inside Hr
four four oh five requires the Attorney General to complete
the release of the information, including a de class classifided information,
to the maximum extent possible. This raises two concerns. First,
it may not be feasible to properly undertake an extensive

(04:54):
review in such a short period of time. Second, ignores
the principal declassifications to rest with the agency. So this
is exactly the national security argument that he warned about,
which would be used to block the disclosure from the
DOJ and from the FBI with their hundreds of the
one hundred thousand files or so that are inside.

Speaker 1 (05:12):
Very good flag from him.

Speaker 3 (05:13):
What it does represent though, is that just like with
JFK or with you know, UFOs, with anything, just because
they put something out that doesn't make it true. Just
because they put something out doesn't actually mean that it's
usually not indicative of even further of a cover up.

Speaker 1 (05:27):
So that is the flag where we are.

Speaker 3 (05:28):
I do want to take a moment to celebrate Thomas
Massey at Rocanna.

Speaker 1 (05:31):
I mean, you know, I said that I'm a cynical guy.
I don't usually expect.

Speaker 3 (05:35):
Anything to really happen here, and I thought it was
dead the moment that Trump and all of them started
to come after it, and they just.

Speaker 1 (05:41):
Kept fighting, kept fighting.

Speaker 3 (05:42):
Four hundred and twenty seven to one in the House
of Representatives never seen anything like it. Brute forced it
through the Senate, even though Mike Johnson and Trump said
that the Senate wanted to change it. No senator wanted
to be on the record saying that no, we're not
going to vote against it. And Donald Trump cowed in
the dead of night, forced to sign this piece of
legislation which he fought tooth and for over two months
to try to defeat.

Speaker 1 (06:02):
So things are still possible in this town, folks.

Speaker 3 (06:04):
I mean, it's amazing to see awestly warms my heart.
I don't know, for the first time in a long.

Speaker 2 (06:08):
Time, I don't know if we've ever seen a I
think you have to go back to like John McCain
blocking the ACA repeal and replace to think of a
similar sort of defeat. But this one was so comprehensive.
He was looking at Trump, was looking at losing some
one hundred potentially Republicans. And that's why Ultimate is like, well, jeez,
I just gotta I mean, I just got to.

Speaker 4 (06:26):
If you can't beat him, you got to join him.
What else can I do?

Speaker 2 (06:28):
And I'll just try my best to message that really
the Democrats are all the bad guys and there's no Republicans.
And I'm certainly not implicated here, even though we've already
seen the birthday book, we've seen his name littered throughout
these files, and we've seen these special treatment that Glene
Maxwell is getting down at her club fed as well,
which is also very indicative of the fact that he's
worried what she could present to the public. So, you know,

(06:49):
give a lot of credit to everyone that was involved.
Rocanna Thomas Massy first and foremost Marjorie Taylor Green also
very impactful on the Democratic side.

Speaker 4 (06:57):
You know, you have to think, Sager.

Speaker 2 (06:58):
You remember when we interviewed Alyssa's in her line and
the official line of the Democratic Party was Epstein is
a distraction. Sure, we're interested in it, but this is
a distraction from the price of eggs or whatever. Not
to say those aren't important issues as well, of course
they are. But Rocanan was like a dog with a
bone with this thing. He understood, and I think in
large part because he goes on shows like ours, and
goes on all kinds of different podcast shows, and goes

(07:19):
and is out there in the country as well, he
understood that this really struck a nerve, that it really
went to the core of Donald Trump's brand, the way
he had presented himself, not just to the country, but
to specifically to his own base. He knew this would
be a very difficult issue for him, and that instinct
and that insight ultimately paid off. Now we were never
pollyannish about thinking that this was going to be some

(07:40):
silver bullet and now all the truth is going to
come to light.

Speaker 4 (07:43):
That is not how these things work.

Speaker 2 (07:44):
They are certainly engaged right now and I mean I
think they've been engaged to cover up the whole time.
The Trump administration is likely scrubbing the files. They're using
this investigation to block things. All they have to do,
because the bill says unclassified information, all they have to
do is, oh, well, this is classifieds are you can't
have it. And those pieces that they don't want to
come out will not come out. But you know what,
at least, at least we now have a tool. Just

(08:06):
like with the JFK bill that was past in the nineties,
it gave researchers and activists a tool to try to
force and compel the federal government to come out with documents,
and over time we've learned more and more and more.

Speaker 4 (08:19):
My own personal opinion.

Speaker 2 (08:20):
Is, even if it is just like you know, Larry
Summers or Bill Clinton or who whatever the Democrats are,
that we get the dirt on, that's fine. That's impotment.
I mean, you know, that is a step forward. And
I think everybody already sees and knows that Trump was
very tied up in these circles in various ways, as
he was Jeffrey Epstein's best bud for like an entire

(08:43):
decade and his littered name, littered throughound the emails that
we already have released. So you know, with all the
caveats of the way they're going to go about trying
to scrub this and trying to cover up and cover
Trump's ass and all of that, I think we still
have to acknowledge that this is an extraordinary against the
odds victory and ultimately, really, you know, a victory for
these survivors, a victory for truth and discovery about foreign

(09:04):
influence in our government as well, specifically with regard to
the nation of Israel. Not that the media is continuing
to really cover that aspect outside of a few notable examples.

Speaker 3 (09:14):
Yeah, they're going to be correct kicking and scream into that,
and when they do, they just pearl clutch around it.

Speaker 1 (09:19):
But we'll get there.

Speaker 3 (09:20):
As you know, it's a long march in this war
beens covering since twenty and eighteen. I went back and
saw the very first video ever done on the subject,
and look, as you said, you know, even even covering
stuff up that in and of itself tells a story.
The nine to eleven commission, the infamous twenty eight pages.
We all knew it was in the pages eventually started
leaking out, and soon they became public with the Saudi

(09:42):
connection and all that was revealed, and now it's basically
part of lawsuits and others against the Saudi government and
put the Obama presidency in a very tough position whenever
he tried to block that, finding Saudi Arabian government, you know, liable.
He literally tried to block it, and the entire United
States said it voted again. So these things do have power.
It will take a lot long time. It's like, you know, again,
have covered so many of these things. Just this morning

(10:04):
there's a new CIA report that actually boasted about tricking
Congress on JFK.

Speaker 1 (10:08):
This is from the nineteen seventies. But I mean, I
get good.

Speaker 3 (10:12):
Look, I know, at the time when we needed it,
it didn't come out that said.

Speaker 1 (10:16):
The fact that we still have all this truth matters.

Speaker 3 (10:19):
And yes, even if they do cover up the Israel
connection and all that, we can get to that. You know,
by the way, we have enough in the public domain
already in order to basically say that it's done in
Dustin in terms of what he was, even if it's
just Larry Summers and the Rothschild family, and yeah, that's
actually still a pretty big deal. Yeah, or JP Morgan
or any.

Speaker 1 (10:38):
Of these other people.

Speaker 3 (10:39):
Look at the what's happened now with Larry Summers. I'm like, yeah, good,
you know these people should be.

Speaker 2 (10:43):
Revealed for well, and think about like, if a Democrat
does win the White House in twenty twenty eight and
all the dirt has been released on the Democratic side,
what you think they're gonna then they're gonna be Okay.
The law compels me to release the rest of what
we have with regard to Trump. So if you are
just fixated on what was Trump's involvement here, which I
think is somewhat fair given that he is the president
of the United States, you know, this law also makes

(11:04):
it so that just with the change of leadership, you
don't require any new legislation or anything of the sort
to you know, have a tool to again press the
government to release additional information. So huge win here all around.
Speaking of Larry Summers, so we covered previously, he is
announced he's stepping back from all of his public commitments.
He resigned from the Open AI board, he stepped down

(11:26):
from his role crafting economic policy or the Center for
American Progress, but he is continuing to teach his Harvard classes.

Speaker 1 (11:35):
Or he was yesterday. Now he is no longer after
this video came out.

Speaker 2 (11:39):
Oh really, Oh I missed that. Yeah, late last night,
so that was okay, I missed that. I guess I
was saying for that. In any case, so he went
in front of his class and you know, explained how
much he regretted his interactions with Jeffrey Epstein, which just
a reminder, he was talking to this man up until
the day before he was arrested. So this was not like,
oh it was the two thoughts. I had no idea.

(12:00):
I really didn't understand. No, this is after he's a
convicted sex criminal, registered sex offender. This is after all
of the reporting from Julie K. Brown and others about
the extent of his of his network and this elaborate
global paedophile ring, like all of that is out there,
and Larry Summers is using him for advice for how
to sleep with this woman who was not only his

(12:21):
mentee but also the daughter of a Chinese party official.
So in any case, this is Summers explaining to his
class how much he regrets all of these interactions of
you will have.

Speaker 6 (12:32):
Seen my statement of regret stretching my shame with respect
to what I did in communication with mister Evsteine, and
that I've said that I'm going to step back from
public activities part time. But that I think is very
reports Fellman teaching combligation. And so with your information on,

(12:55):
we're going to go forward and talk about the materials.

Speaker 2 (13:03):
Malcolm of awkward beginning of the class I could possibly
imagine and the text on the screen because the student
surreptitiously recorded this is like, this is how Harvard classes start,
Professors apologizing for their Jeffrey Epstein.

Speaker 3 (13:14):
Yes, well yeah, so as of late last night, Larry
Summers has revealed he will not finish his semester of
teaching as Harvard investigates Epstein ties. And look, you know,
maybe I'm just woke because I have a daughter now,
but yeah, I mean, could you imagine being a woman
in that class or any any class being taught by

(13:34):
Larry Summers When the Epstein emails are about him trying
to leverage his like power and connections. Larry Summers like
hitting on this woman while he's married and then bragging
about it to his wingman jeffreyps. I feel like no,
like get this fucking creep away from my kids. Man,
I mean, how could you possibly say that this.

Speaker 1 (13:55):
Dude can be in a position of any power influence
on young girls?

Speaker 7 (14:00):
No?

Speaker 2 (14:01):
Yeah, you know, yeah, I mean he went to great
lengths to be but she wasn't a student, but she was.

Speaker 4 (14:05):
He described her as like his mentee.

Speaker 2 (14:07):
So he and he talked in the emails about how like,
I don't think she really wants this romantic relationship anymore,
but she still needs me for my guidance and basically
like I'm in this powerful position, so maybe that just
keeps her around, like actively talking about the way he's
exploiting this power dynamic to get in this woman's pants,
really disgusting stuff. And then also like I think Larry Summer,

(14:29):
in my opinion, Larry Summer should have been drumped down
in a public life long ago for his complicity and you know,
NAFTA and the bank bailounce, and I mean he's just
been at the as I said before, the scene of
like every great economic crime in recent American history. That
wasn't enough to push him out, but at least temporarily,
there are some repercussions Woke is back. There are consequence
culture it's here, and you know, fairly so, I would say,

(14:52):
in the case of Larry Summer.

Speaker 3 (14:53):
Yeah, I mean seriously, though, there's this whole talk right
now amongst a certain group of people that are like, oh,
this is like a me too witch hunt.

Speaker 1 (14:59):
I'm like, is it, like no? For real?

Speaker 3 (15:01):
Though, like he admitted to trying to cheat on his
wife with Jeffrey Epstein grabbed bragged about it as a
lecturer's creep well into his sixties and leveraging his own power.

Speaker 1 (15:12):
I don't think that that's like the same as the asease.

Speaker 3 (15:14):
I'm sorry, Jess a battle article, right, I mean then,
and by the way, even whenever it comes to that,
I'm like, wait, so are we saying like Matt Lauer
never should have been you know, fired?

Speaker 1 (15:21):
Like, no, I don't think anybody is really saying that.

Speaker 4 (15:23):
Okay.

Speaker 3 (15:24):
What people are saying is like, yeah, I think it
went too far or it became a mania or hysteria. Fine,
I haven't seen that happen yet with the Epstein case.
If anything, is the opposite is that there are a
lot of bunch of people who just openly are able
to go on cable television. As we'll get to in
a little bit like, Oh, he was just a guy
my constituent there who was texting me. So yeah, I mean,
you know, whenever it comes to this, it's one of

(15:45):
those where what's the standard, like it to be full
but a full blown convicted criminal like Epstein was right
in order to be canceled quote unquote.

Speaker 1 (15:54):
I don't know. I just think the whole thing's crazy.

Speaker 2 (15:55):
Yeah, maybe it is an indication we're coming to like
a healthy place with all of this, where we hand
like evaluate the claims against someone on their merits and
consider what appropriate consequences are. And it's not just you know,
if there's anything said about you, then you're canceled. And
it's not believe all women, and it's also not believe
all men.

Speaker 4 (16:12):
It's like, yeah, okay, so we can process these things.

Speaker 2 (16:15):
We could see the totality of who you are and
how I mean this was years that he was so
close with Jeffrey Epstein.

Speaker 1 (16:23):
I mean, it's anyway, also, he's in the position of
immense power.

Speaker 3 (16:26):
I just talked about the professor. That's the least of
our problems on the board of open AI. You want
this freak on the board of the chat GPT and
of determining standards for national suicide.

Speaker 1 (16:37):
What were we just talking about? No, okay, I mean,
come on.

Speaker 2 (16:41):
Well, I mean and I'm like also very sort of
selfishly interested in getting him out of this Center for
American Progress effort as well, separate and apart from the
Jeffrey Epstein piece, because of his terrible economic ideology. So
in any case, I do have a submotivation there, I
will confess. Let's put a four up on the screen,

(17:01):
and we finally have one other outlet that series of
reporting on Epstein's Israel connections. So in some of these emails,
and this is very interesting. This is from another friend
of ours, of course, Bronco Marcitich, who does fantastic reporting
over at Jacobin magazine, and he writes that in these
newly released files, it shows Jeffrey Epstein claiming to have
been involved in Ahudbarock's twenty nineteen election challenge to Benjamin Netanya,

(17:24):
who is as this, well past time to ask questions
about the billionaire pedophiles links to Israel. Yeah, here here
on that one, and it's wild. He's actually emailing with
Steve Bannon. And one of these emails got a lot
of attention because he says something like, you know, now
you can understand why Trump stays up at night's wedding
when he knows that you and I are in touch.

(17:46):
But what the mainstream price when they reported that one out,
what they left out of the equation is that the
context was him bragging about how influential he was in
Israeli politics, and he's using that just to look at
how influential I am here. That's why Trump has got
to be so stressed about my connection with you and
lay up at night. And this was like again, very
close to the time that he ends up being arrested,

(18:08):
in prison and then dead. So one other subplot story
of this, though, is that one of the emails that
the mainstream press did reproduce, they messed up. It's said
in it Ahood like Ahood Brock, and they messed up
the transcribing that and they put it as chud So

(18:29):
instead of Ehud. Multiple news outlets put h ud So,
which totally buries the context of what this was all about.
Was that intentional or not, I don't know, you guys
can be the judge of that. But very interesting accidental
oversight here from the mainstream media, which has still continued
to treat that Epstein ties to Israel like some anti

(18:52):
Semitic conspiracy, even though it's all like documented and reported.

Speaker 1 (18:56):
I do want to give a shout out to the
Podsave bros.

Speaker 3 (18:58):
Who recently shouted out that's you know, after Tommy Veder
claimed previously that it was a conspiracy.

Speaker 1 (19:05):
Oh Diddy, Yeah, yeah, I.

Speaker 3 (19:06):
Mean it's one of these where all of these people,
I get it, okay, to them, it seems icky because
it all bubbled up on the bad side of the
Internet and with bad right wingers like look, you know,
many of us were not speaking out of our ass.
The trail of the evidence was actually all there for
anybody who wanted to see. It's been there since about
twenty twenty one. And it doesn't just rely singularly on

(19:29):
the alex Acosta quote, like if we look at the
weapons background and the koshogi's and who all of that
he was working with and who he was interested in
and broadly his own connections. Is the fact that he
went to Israel while he was signing his non prosecution agreement.
It was all there, okay, it was it was out
in the open, and they never wanted to acknowledge it
at this point with the drop site report, it's like

(19:50):
gun dusted in terms of how connected he was to
the state of Israel.

Speaker 1 (19:55):
But they just can't get there.

Speaker 3 (19:56):
And this kind of reminds me the Cuomo thing you
just said with Larry Summers on the merits Summers should
be nowhere because of who we were, Like his own,
like the sex with Epstein stuff is kind of secondary
and for some reason, like with Coomo, everyone was like, oh, well,
his me too investigation.

Speaker 1 (20:13):
That's why it's like, no, the.

Speaker 3 (20:14):
Nursing home thing alone was enough to say, how can
we possibly.

Speaker 1 (20:18):
Ever trust your judgment?

Speaker 3 (20:19):
I think that the reason why there's been a lot
of like capital D Democrats who are interested in the
stories because I see like it attacks Trump and you know,
they don't care about Larry Summers or Bill Clinton at
this point, not should you, but guys like that is
kind of the secondary element of it.

Speaker 1 (20:34):
Now.

Speaker 3 (20:35):
The reason why like any sort of blackmail or any
of that matters from Trump to Clinton to any of
these other people in power is because of the foreign
leverage with these governments that he was working with. That's
what makes it actionable and actually, you know, impactful in
terms of beyond money or you know, the JP Morgan chase,

(20:55):
but brokering governments and leaders and security agreements, like that's
what puts it in the realm of the public interest,
in my mind, is not just that connection. And so
I do think, you know, kind of like with JFK
or any of these other stories, where I think it's
easy to sit there and dissect magic bullet, but I
think it becomes more interesting to zoom out and.

Speaker 1 (21:15):
Be like, Okay, so why did they kill him?

Speaker 8 (21:17):
Right?

Speaker 2 (21:17):
You know, it's like it's not just about the plot
was pursuing that were such a Cuba But.

Speaker 1 (21:23):
My opinion was all about Cuba.

Speaker 9 (21:24):
Right.

Speaker 3 (21:25):
I know there's all Israel secondary part of the JFK stuff.
I haven't seen enough to back that up, but in
my opinion, it was mostly about Cuba and then eventually
became an ideological like sphere that morphed into Vietnam.

Speaker 1 (21:35):
That's why Oliver Stone.

Speaker 3 (21:36):
Is obsessed with that because he had to go fight
in Vietnam when he was eighteen years old, and his
entire life was like, you know, impacted by that, and
he became obsessed with that question and it is I mean,
he described it as one of the most impactful turning
points in American history. He's correct about that. You have
to go and to look at the consequences. I think
same in here. So I think one of the things
for all of us is we can't let this part

(21:59):
of the story die.

Speaker 1 (22:00):
You really can't.

Speaker 3 (22:00):
Like it's such it's so important, you know, to make
so that some media cannot try to spin this in
the direction that they want, because it's also to their benefit.
Where I've seen this mainstream media thing which is starting
to catch on now, which is like, oh, well there
was no big sex blackmail story. I'm like, well, it's again.
I've always said, it's not about that, per se. It's

(22:22):
really about the network and the stuff that he was
able to get away with and then leveraging those connections
to money and to power on behalf of multiple foreign governments,
including yes.

Speaker 1 (22:31):
The state of Israel. Like that's what it's actually about.
So that's my.

Speaker 2 (22:35):
Yeah, you know, I mean we have to, like you
have to be blind at this point not to put
some of the puzzle pieces together. Trump, I think we
can say definitively now, is very concerned about whatever Glaine
Maxwell could say. Right so clearly he would have thought
that Jeffrey Epstein knows at least whatever Ghlaine Maxwell knows,
and he would I mean, he was close friends with

(22:56):
this man. He knew the level of connections that he had.
He would have known about the globe trotting and known
about all of these influential people's people and governments that
he was connected to. Like I think at this point,
it would be incredibly naive to not think that Trump
believed Epstein had things on him that would be very,

(23:16):
very damaging, if not fatal, to his political career. And
you do have this email from Epstein to Steve Bannon,
again one of Trump's closest confidants, very soon before he
ends up in prison, saying, now you can understand why
Trump wakes up in the middle of the night's sweating
when he hears you and I are friends and listen, guys,

(23:38):
you also have to say, it is in Trump's first
administration that Epstein ends up dead. So this is the
sort of communication that's going on. Steve Bannon reportedly said
before Epstein he thought was the one person who could
take down Donald Trump. Epstein ends up in prison and
then dead under the first Trump administration, and now his
accomplice Glene Maxwell is getting club fed treatment down with

(24:00):
her puppy and she's like, you know, the warden's her bitch.
She can make him do whatever she wants to do.
I mean, this is crazy shit, guys, So open your eyes.
Nothing is definitively proven, but open your eyes to the
picture that has emerged at this point, and you know
it's I would say that it is an incredibly important

(24:21):
line of inquiry to understand how this impacts today, Not
what did Trump do in the past. How does this
impact Donald Trump and his conduct of foreign policy today
right now?

Speaker 4 (24:33):
That is the most important question with.

Speaker 10 (24:34):
All of us.

Speaker 3 (24:34):
It's just so disgusting and yeah, I mean it's one
of those where this is what again people they don't
want to zoom in, like the point is is it's
about Trump. It's also it's been going on for twenty
thirty years, like who wants to know, right with Israel
and all these other foreign governments, for all of these leaders.

Speaker 1 (24:56):
I mean, god, I.

Speaker 3 (24:57):
Mean, don't forget the British ambassador to the UN the
United States of America was fired because of the Epstein connection.

Speaker 4 (25:03):
That's right.

Speaker 3 (25:04):
He literally do you remember in the email he said, Oh,
it's a travesty of justice. What's happened to you? He said,
it was unjust that he was convicted.

Speaker 4 (25:12):
Back in two thousand and six.

Speaker 1 (25:14):
We all just met the Prince, Prince Andrew, the sketchy
of justice.

Speaker 4 (25:18):
Yeah, but it was in the other direction.

Speaker 3 (25:20):
Prince Andrew just got stripped of all his royal titles.
And of course there's people are like, oh, it's all
a witch hun I'm like, yeah, maybe the king knows
a little bit something that you and I don't know.

Speaker 1 (25:28):
Okay, maybe that's what it is.

Speaker 3 (25:31):
Just happened to think that, not to mention the Prince Andrew,
or I guess Andrew, we can now call him out
Andrew mount Batten. Andrew mount Batten has all these sketchy
financial dealings, you know, with his wife and leveraging his
It all fits together for what purpose we don't one
hundred percent know yet. So I'm looking forward to some
of the future releases, regardless of what they cover up,

(25:53):
because in information, there's always power.

Speaker 1 (25:55):
Let's go to the last story here.

Speaker 3 (25:57):
This is a five. This is about quote. Democrats are
going to come to regret this. After epstein Boat Trump
is ready to attack. So Trump now has directed the
DOJ to open an investigation to all the Democrats who
are named in the Epstein files. Fine, we've made fans cool,
all right, let's get it out into court.

Speaker 1 (26:13):
There is some concern though, that by citing.

Speaker 3 (26:16):
An active DOJ investigation that they will actually be able
to cover up some of the Epstein stuff in terms
of redactions. However, don't forget that even at the end
of prosecution that you will still be able to eventually
get access to them within this. But it could be
a delaying tactic regardless though. I mean, as we're our
last block is about James Comey. When you have to

(26:37):
file stuff in court, you'll learn a lot of stuff,
learn a lot. And that's something that's not been to
the benefit of the Trump administration and multiple different occasions.
So I'm looking forward to this no matter what comes
of it, because we will learn quite a bit.

Speaker 2 (26:50):
Yeah, well, he wants to flip it and make it.
I mean, his language is though this is just all
about Democrats. There are no Republicans implicated, and I just
think like we're so far past people seeing it through
that lens that it's ridiculous. And you know, I even
wonder if he really follows through on all of the
you know, all of the bluster that he has here,
because we're going to talk about the Stacey Plasket thing.

(27:11):
We covered that before. Obviously we covered Larry Summers, et cetera.
Republicans really seem to think like Democrats are like desperate
to protect Bill Clinton at this point, like it's fa
like it's okay whatever comes on about him, We're not
all that panicked about it. So I have a feeling
he's going to have a hard time really going on
the offense on this thing after spending so much time

(27:31):
and continuing with an active cover up of any potential,
you know, negative or damning or even just suggestive implications
for him himself.

Speaker 1 (27:39):
You were absolutely correct.

Speaker 3 (27:44):
Speaking then of Stacey Plasket and the corrupt dealings going
on in the House of Representatives, the People's House, our
great representatives, the founders conceived of the great civilian legislators
who would rise up among its constituents come to Washington.

Speaker 1 (28:00):
To work on our behalf.

Speaker 3 (28:02):
And after this Democratic representative from the US Virgin Islands
was caught literally live texting Jeffrey Epstein in the House
of Representatives in the middle of a meeting. Her defense
is I was simply texting with my constituent, and that
has now been embraced by her colleagues to help cover
her up.

Speaker 1 (28:20):
Let's take a listen.

Speaker 7 (28:21):
I believe that Jeffrey Epstein had information, and I was
going to get information to get at the truth. Having
a friendship with him is not something that I would
deem to have if individuals are not involved in illegal activity,
extending his criminal enterprise or his financial enterprise, or all

(28:44):
of those things, I think that we need to look
at what people are doing moving forward.

Speaker 4 (28:49):
Wait, let me just better understand that. What is that point?

Speaker 2 (28:51):
Because at the time he was an sex offender and
it had been detailed all the sexual if there are.

Speaker 7 (28:55):
A lot of people who have done a lot of crimes.

Speaker 4 (28:58):
Her text with that Jeffrey Epstein were not illegal, but
in your view, were they appropriate?

Speaker 7 (29:04):
Well, Stacey Plaski is not accused of violating any House rule,
any law, any statute.

Speaker 11 (29:09):
And without even going to the ethics Committee, much less
a court, they want to arraign her on some charges
based on a newspaper article that she did something lawful,
however ill advised it may have been. She took a
phone call from one of her constituents. Is his position
that anytime Jeffrey Epstein got somebody on the phone, and

(29:30):
you got a lot of people on the phone, that
person is suddenly guilty. That sounds like guilt by association.
That sounds like collective.

Speaker 3 (29:37):
Guilt, collective guilt guilt by I'm like, yeah, yes again,
Am I just the only guy who won't meet with
convicted sex offenders for real?

Speaker 10 (29:46):
Though?

Speaker 1 (29:46):
Like you know, it's I don't get it. These politicians,
all these other people.

Speaker 3 (29:50):
Also, you know, when you meet politicians, especially the ones
where I it's not some like the it's not usually
broker by the Paul and the other person.

Speaker 1 (29:57):
There's usually a bunch of staff involved.

Speaker 3 (30:00):
They do background checks or at least cursory Google searches
on the people that you're ostensibly supposed to be meeting with.
By the way, he has her phone number, and did
you did you hear her defense? A lot of people
are convicted of crimes like what.

Speaker 2 (30:13):
I mean, what just is one of these where it's
like you just got to come clean, you say, listen,
he was incredibly influential on the Virgin Islands.

Speaker 4 (30:21):
I mean that's the truth.

Speaker 1 (30:22):
Yeah, he was one of my rich richest constituents.

Speaker 2 (30:25):
Probably they're richest constituent, certainly one of and there were
incredible like it was incredibly interconnected between the political class
the Virgin Islands and Jeffrey Epstein and so you know,
I mean I think she could say that, and then
she could say and you know, because of his long
dealings with Trump, I thought he might have something interesting. Okay,
I get that, but like to pretend like the other

(30:48):
thing is she said this thing about, oh, we weren't friends,
but the text messages are extremely friendly. He's telling her
how great she looks up there, and you know, she's like, oh,
hurry up, I've got I'm up next. You got to
give me something, etc. Like the tenor of the text
messages is that this was not their only exchange by far,
and that they were actually very friendly. So you know,

(31:10):
I think at this point you just have to say,
this was a horrible lapse in judgment. But I was
just trying to get some information that would be useful
because I knew his long relationship with Trump et cetera.
And apologize and move on. But for her to continue
to double down and then for her colleagues to come
to her rescue, like this is really pretty appalling.

Speaker 1 (31:28):
Yeah, that's right. And you know why we started with
that is just to.

Speaker 3 (31:33):
Give you, all of you into how this great town
of our works is that there were supposed to be
a censure of her and of GOP Congressman Corey Mills,
who we will also get to here in a little
bit for his own disgusting behavior unbelievable. And what ended
up happening is a little handshake among friends where the

(31:56):
House Republican leadership met with the Democratic leadership and they go, look,
we won't go after your guy if you don't go
after our guy. And they all shook hands, and we
just had a couple of cocktails at the at the
Capitol Hill Club. They say, by partisans, you cover for
our girl, I will cover for your boy.

Speaker 9 (32:15):
Right.

Speaker 1 (32:15):
That's that's what it's all about, folks.

Speaker 3 (32:17):
It's just all about making sure we just sweep it
under the rug and we all just continue like friends
as normal. And Anna Paulina Luna GOP congress women, actually
revealed some of this on the floor at the House
of Representatives.

Speaker 1 (32:29):
Putting it all into view. Here's what she had to say.

Speaker 10 (32:31):
For what purpose does agenerlated in Florida sake recognition.

Speaker 2 (32:34):
I have a parliamentary inquiry generlated in Florida will state
her inquiry.

Speaker 12 (32:41):
I was wondering if the Speaker of the House of
Representatives can explain why leadership on both sides, both Democrat
and Republican, are cutting back end deals to cover up
public corruption in the House of Representatives from both Republican
and Democrat members of Congress.

Speaker 6 (32:53):
The General Lady has not stated to popular a proper
parliamentary inquiry very much.

Speaker 12 (32:58):
But I think the American people know what happened tonight.

Speaker 3 (33:02):
So we go through Corey Mills. You guys want to
know about him. Let's go and put this one next
one up here on the screen. I mean you got
to go read through this. The United States files restraining
order against Corey Miller.

Speaker 1 (33:13):
Do you want to go through some of the.

Speaker 4 (33:14):
Yeah, so yeah, I mean buckle up.

Speaker 2 (33:17):
So this guy basically is discussing abusive creep allegedly and
also incredibly corrupt with his international armstealing business. So first
way that he came to the public's attention as a
potential abusive asshole was there was a police call from
his girlfriend here in d C. Initially alleging domestic violence. Now,

(33:40):
when the police showed up, she had bruises, but she
recanted her story. Okay, Apparently after that hit the news,
his other girlfriends down in Florida. She a former Miss
USA pageant queen. She sees that he's having this relationship
in DC and is like, dude, were supposed to be together,

(34:01):
what the hell and breaks up with him. He continues,
allegedly to harass her for months, threatening her, threatening her
new new boyfriend, threatening also to release explicit images that
have been shared in the context of their relationship, and

(34:21):
lo and behold dropsite our friends.

Speaker 4 (34:23):
Over a drop site. Of course did the first report.

Speaker 2 (34:26):
They were the first ones to get their hands on
these text messages that he was just relentlessly sending to
her and truly disgusting and incredibly threatening things. And so
she filed ended up filing restraining order. That restraining order
was granted, so he is not allowed to contact her,
not allowed to be anywhere around her. So the judge
found it credible enough. And you know, it's a relatively

(34:48):
significant bar actually to me, to you know, get a
judge to believe that you're sort of like imminent danger
of harm.

Speaker 4 (34:55):
So that's who this dude is.

Speaker 2 (34:57):
Then, in addition to that abusive, harassing, stalking behavior over months.
In addition to that, he also is accused of corrupt
dealings with this you know, his arms dealing business where
he has government contracts in spite of the fact that
he is himself a member of Congress. So there's also

(35:18):
a lot of questions about that. There also were questions
of potentially him misrepresenting his military service and stolen valorno.
He denies all of these claims, etc. So this is
all alleged, but he's he's really the total package. This
guy just a great, great, honest man, seemingly and delight
to be around on every level. In the context of

(35:41):
reporting this out, Dropsite spoke to a number of his
former romantic partners and by the way, this guy was
married up until just a couple of years ago too.
By the way, anyway, they spoke to a number of
his romantic partners, and two of them separately described him,
like independently as a psychopath. So, just so we're aware
of who we're dealing with and who Democrats agreed in

(36:02):
this corrupt deal and Republicans agreed in this corrupt deal
to cover up for.

Speaker 1 (36:06):
Yeah, that's right.

Speaker 3 (36:06):
And you know, like you said, there is the allegations
against him for federal contracting, there are the stolen valor
actually allegations that have been levied against him, and there's
this allegation about misconduct dating violence.

Speaker 1 (36:20):
Let's go just you guys want a little.

Speaker 3 (36:22):
Preview before shall we into who these great legislators are.

Speaker 1 (36:26):
I mean, this is a screenshot.

Speaker 2 (36:28):
So this is this is messages with the DC girlfriends
who called the cops for assault and then recantadi his story.
And this is where he is effectively pimping him her
out to one of his friends, allegedly, and he says,
and you'll be a good girl and do anything he
wants or asks.

Speaker 4 (36:45):
Of course, I aim to please.

Speaker 2 (36:46):
She says, he can have you as many times as
he wants, any way he wants, and finish anywhere he chooses. Rite, babe,
yes baby, and what can you not do? Won't say
no to anything Chris wants, yes babe, and drop site
reporter on this as well. That actually the male friend
that was in this was like disgusted by him pimping
out his girlfriend in this manner. So listen, adults can
do whatever consensual etc. But we're talking about someone who's

(37:10):
accused of assault, who's accused of stalking, who's accused of
harassment over months, had to have a restraining order issued,
and that is the person that they're covering up for.

Speaker 1 (37:20):
He denies it.

Speaker 3 (37:21):
I guess even though the read.

Speaker 2 (37:24):
The message gleamed the videos that he was threatening to
release of her were baking.

Speaker 4 (37:29):
Were her baking cookies?

Speaker 1 (37:30):
Makes sense?

Speaker 4 (37:31):
Judge didn't buy it.

Speaker 3 (37:32):
Do you you make up your mind for yourself, shall you?

Speaker 1 (37:36):
Uh so?

Speaker 3 (37:37):
Yeah, that's what our great representatives came together this week
to cover up to Stevie Plaskett, who was texting Jeffrey
Epsteine live in the middle of a hearing. She says,
a lot of people are convicted of crimes. He's just
one of my constituents, Jamie Raskin and Jakim Jeffries Basically
then do a deal with the Republicans where both don't
get to be censured. And so I just think, you know,

(37:59):
if you really want to see how it all works,
who gets protected?

Speaker 2 (38:02):
But Rashida to leive she got censured for saying from
the River to the Sea, Palestine, let's you free.

Speaker 3 (38:07):
It's one of those where I don't know. I very rarely,
genuinely feel like sick to my stomach. And I'm not naive.
I've lived here for a long time. I get it
a stuff that all goes behind the scenes, but when
you all breaks out into the open, and the way
that they just nakedly cover up for one another. And again,
these are supposed to be our representatives, and this is

(38:28):
what they're spending their time, not only doing on our
dime whenever they're here in Washington, this is what they're
doing to preserve each other's party reputation because at the
end of the day, that's all that really matters to them.

Speaker 1 (38:40):
It's disgusting.

Speaker 3 (38:41):
So let's go to another one because this also just
demonstrates the kind of you know, the criminality and the
narcissism that dominates at the highest levels of American politics.
Let's go ahead and put B five up here on
the screen. Been wanting to cover this for quite a
long time. So there was this recent retirement of a congressman,

(39:03):
Representative Chewey Garcia. He timed his retirement this month in
a way that advantaged his chosen successor. This eventually led
to a potential rebuke from his own representatives Democrats in
the House of Representatives. It was a reprimand it doesn't
carry any formal penalty. But what happened is he announced

(39:23):
his retirement this month one day after the filing deadline
for candidates had closed. That way, his chief of staff
was the only candidate who knew about his retirement had
enough time to collect twenty five hundred signatures to run
for the seat. So basically boxed out the ability of
anybody to be able to actually open and run. And

(39:45):
this is supposed to be some progressive who believes in democracy. Okay,
it's like all they care about is themselves is passing
the torch chosen. They don't give a shit about the voters.
It's completely rigged. And what's so discussed about it is
that when you know, I can never say this one's
name is glusen Camp. When blusen Camp Perez, this congresswoman

(40:07):
where she's from Washington, tries his censor, she gets like
blown up by the Democratic Party establishment, by the way,
including a lot of progressives and others who were like, oh,
this is the improper way to go. Why can we
not cover, like just call this out for what it is.
This is a type of crap that happens every single
day all over you know, in DC and the way

(40:29):
they rig the rules and the petitions and ballot signature challenging.
But this is one of the most overt that I
had ever seen. He claimed he was retiring abruptly because
of his wife's declining health, but he gave a heads
up to his chief of staff so that they could
take the seat. And if you were, you know, that
person who lives in this district, like, you should feel outraged,
you should feel betrayed. This is the state of Illinois,

(40:50):
which is a machine state. And you know, in his defense,
he's probably like, yeah, people do this shit all the time, right,
what's wrong with that? Well, you know what's wrong with
it is we are supposed to live in an ostensible
democracy and again and this.

Speaker 2 (41:00):
Is the party that's supposed to care about exactly for
sea as well. And you know, I think I think
a lot of progressives like Chewey Garcias or generally voted
in a progressive manner. I think he had a lot
of has a lot of friends in the caucus, so
they sort of felt bad on a personal level. But
it's like put that you got to put that aside.
You know, you got to Okay, you can say, like
I like his legislative record, but this was unacceptable there

(41:21):
that's not that hard to do. And one of the
people who gave a long, elaborate explanation for why she
opposed Marie Gluesen camp Perez. By the way, I'm not
a fan of Marie Gluesen Camprez, but on this one,
on the merits, she's just correct. But AOC put out
this long, tortured tweet about why she thinks was this
wrong move at the wrong time? Just to give I'll
give her rationale. It can put this up on the screen,

(41:42):
she says, this is how I feel about it. Oh
my gosh, this is acman length. Guys, buckle up. I
love machine politics and got to office Deviana Incumban who
got in that way. However, there are quite a few
problems with choosing to grind the entire House to halt,
to force all four hundred thirty five members across the
country to do a rush vote on this one individual
instance of many. Mind you one, why is it that
this objection wasn't brought up until now? The author I

(42:04):
had no problem when Bill Posey did it or even
earlier this year when a member's account was tweeting post
mortem for an election. The standard of this resolution is
unevenly applied, and choosing to enforce it by privileged resolution
for some but others does open legitimate questions of rationale
or motivation. Why not care about this for them? But
care about it now? The question has not been answered? Okay, Well,
maybe we start the trend of caring about this now.

(42:25):
That would be a positive, wouldn't it?

Speaker 1 (42:26):
Okay?

Speaker 4 (42:26):
Number two?

Speaker 2 (42:27):
This is why the Ethics Committee exists. Establishing this process
as precedent will mean all four hundred and thirty five
members of the House will be forced to vote on
a slough of individual member indiscretions determined by political convenience
or whoever's in the majority. I don't think it's the
best use of my constituents time to sort through the
details of every individual matter of a person acting out
of accordance with the esteem the office once a week

(42:48):
for a four vote under rush circumstances. The House has
an investigatory structure of this for a reason. If there
was a complete file with ethics ortain investigation barrier and
then ignored, I'd understand that's not the case here. Three,
these specific kinds of resolutions can only be executed on
on a partisan basis because the mechanism of seeking privilege
on this can only move forward with GOP leadership's blessing.
That means partisan enforcement. I do not want to open

(43:11):
the door to that. Make it nonpartisan or don't bother.
That's why the Ethics Committee is structured the way it is.
For this resolution was dropped on a fly out day
to begin voting on a fly in on a fly
in day, giving people no time to review the details
of the matter while they're home in district on a weekend,
on a matter of local politics that nobody had familiarity with.
It's really, that's so not true. We had familiarity with it.

(43:31):
It's not hard to understand this was not a complicated situation.

Speaker 4 (43:34):
In any case.

Speaker 2 (43:35):
People are genuinely not familiar with the details of the
surprise vote because this is the kind of thing brought
to Ethics precisely to investigate and confirm details. So a
bunch of like process related concerns about, oh, well, we
have this other committee that's supposed to handle this, and
this wasn't the time or the place even though I
totally low the machine politics. But I don't even really
know about this anyway. I mean it just I think

(43:56):
it all just rings very hollow ultimately, Like on the merits,
what he did was wrong?

Speaker 4 (44:01):
Why is that so hard to say?

Speaker 2 (44:02):
Like, Okay, maybe you don't like that this is always
the process going forward and probably won't be. But would
it be such a bad thing if you did have
the precedent set that when people hand pick their successors
and rig the primary process to guarantee that their hand
picked successor is effectively the next congress person for the district.
I don't think that's a terrible precedent to set that

(44:23):
you vote on those things and you express your disapproval
as a body that this is not the way democracy
is supposed to work.

Speaker 3 (44:29):
Yeah, it's the process. Shit, it's maddening. Just like, first
of all, who are you? Are you missprocessed? You know,
you supposedly stood up against machine politics and all of that,
or do you stand for representation? And then like that's
what it's all about, right, That's what it's supposed to be,
And so you've become the creature which you allegedly ran against.

(44:51):
I ran against me it's like, Okay, now you're taking
part in the exact same thing. Actually, it would be
a phenomenal precedent to always censure anybody who ever did
anything like this.

Speaker 1 (45:00):
That's literally that would be one of the best things.

Speaker 3 (45:02):
It would be something that allegedly again, you know, you Democrats,
they talk so much about democracy. And this is one
of the reasons in my belief that the whole jan
six attack on Trump didn't work is they were like, well,
you guys didn't even have a primary. You guys covered
up Biden. So we're supposed to lecture listen to you
on lectures about democracy. No, we don't. We don't believe
that you believe in democracy at all. That was a

(45:22):
huge critique. And then look, is everybody in America going
to hear about this stuff?

Speaker 1 (45:26):
No, I don't think so. But it's enough.

Speaker 3 (45:28):
It's enough of a signal that protecting the party is
the only thing that matters still to a lot of
these people. And you know, anything process oriented just bullshit
in my opinion, because that's what the establishment does have.
When they've lost on something, then they critique on the process.

Speaker 1 (45:43):
That's what they do.

Speaker 4 (45:44):
Yeah, agreed.

Speaker 3 (45:47):
Turning down to AI so I did update all of
you that in the new you know, funding structure for
the government, the Republicans were trying to insert some language
of regulating states, making sure that they are not allowed
to regulate AI. Well, now this has become a full
fledged fight from the Trump administration and it was especially
had gasoline poured on the fire after Jensen Wang, Elon Musk,

(46:11):
Greg Brockman from Open AI all were at the White
House for the Saudi State dinner and the three of
them apparently met with Donald Trump and are continuing to
push this ban on states from being able to regulate AI.
There is a new report, let's put this up here
on the screen from the information that the Trump administration
is working on an executive order to try to foil

(46:34):
state AI regulation. This comes on the heels of Trump
himself actually putting out a truth to this effect again
after meeting with all of these AI executives. You can
see from the truth he says investment AI is helping
to make the US economy the hottest in the world.
Over regulation by states is threatening to undermine this growth engine.
Some states are even trying to embed the ideology into

(46:56):
AI models, producing WOKEI remember Black, George Washington, we must
have one federal standard instead of a patchwork of fifty
state regulatory regimes. We can do this in a way
that protects children and prevents censorship. So obviously a lot
of this is being pushed hard by the AI companies,
specifically because they do not want individual states where they

(47:17):
have to comply with different regulation. Of course, you know,
it's definitely to their benefit, And I think this is
the whole ballgame because when you see like the state
of California, obviously, where all of these people are headquartered,
that's what they're actually terrified about, is safety standards and
others that would require them to comply in a certain way.
But I think more broadly, this is really about control

(47:39):
because these people want to become gods.

Speaker 1 (47:42):
They say it out in the open.

Speaker 3 (47:45):
Dario literally says, none of you are going to work
in five years. Elon very recently. What did he say
is like all of you are going to be phenomenally
rich and very happy. I mean, it's the World Economic
Forum meme. You will own nothing and you will be happy.
We promise you'll be rich.

Speaker 1 (47:58):
Wink wing. Yeah, we don't have plans for that, but
we promise yeah, we.

Speaker 3 (48:03):
Promised, fine, you will be rich, and we're like, okay, cool.
You know, why should I take your word for it exactly?
And I do want to give, honestly a good amount
of credit. There are some states, even Republican states, that
are standing up. But first, let's listen to Trump himself
on the issue.

Speaker 1 (48:20):
See one. Please, let's take a listen.

Speaker 10 (48:22):
We will work closely with friends and partners like those
in this room to build the largest, most powerful, most
innovative AI ecosystem in the world. And we are going
to work it so that you'll have a one approval process,
not have to go through fifty states in the United States.
You know, you can't go through fifty states. You have

(48:42):
to get one approval. Fifty states is a disaster because
you'll have one woke state and you'll have to do
all woke. You'll be back into the woke business. We
don't have woke anymore in this country. It's virtually illegal.
But you'll have a couple of wokesters, and we don't
want to do that. We want to get the AI done.

Speaker 3 (49:03):
A bunch of wokesters in charge over there of AI.
I mean, look, listen, I'm not gonna say woke AI
or whatever of that is not a issue. But I
think it actually is one of those things that belies
the problem, which is yeah, because they get to program
whatever they want, including political and cultural ideology, into the AI,

(49:24):
and that has massive effects for everything. So yeah, not
just culture, race, but oh suicide. The one that I'm
hands down the most concerned about, pornography, sports betting.

Speaker 1 (49:36):
I told you all this shit is coming. It's already here.

Speaker 3 (49:39):
The Microsoft Copilot literally is running ads on the NFL
network and be like, Microsoft Copilot will help you do
your fantasy team, which is a wink wink to sports
the most degenerate behavior. That's all they're trying to do
is to make it just even more addictive, make it
integral and essential. And that's why it does need regulation.
And if the States are the only people are going

(49:59):
to stand up for it, good, you know, that's a
good thing. Yeah, because look, I mean, if this is
all moving so quickly, with so much money, and the
ambition for control has never been more overstated by leaders
of an industrial revolution, literally never, even if you look back,
you know, to the origins. A lot of the times,

(50:21):
the people who were in charge even of the railroads
or the factories, any of that stuff.

Speaker 1 (50:25):
They were always trying to pitch it.

Speaker 3 (50:27):
Yes, is good for themselves, but they're like, look at
all this benefit to humanity. I don't even think that
they try this time for any of the benefits that
are supposedly there. It's pretty out in the open. They
want to become trillionaires. Literally, they want to become transhumanists,
and their plan is to put everybody out of work
and to roll up the riches of the nation into
their cells.

Speaker 2 (50:46):
Sorry, yeah, they The only reason they really have to
put up with us now is two things. First of all,
they need workers, and second of all, they need people.

Speaker 4 (50:54):
To buy stuff.

Speaker 2 (50:55):
But already, and Ryan was pointing this out, like the
consumer economy is so skewed towards the wealthy that they
barely needed most of the population just to keep the
consumer economy going. They want to make you irrelevant. I mean,
this is the main event of Trump administration two point zero.
There's a lot going on, there's a lot that's consequential.
I'm not saying it's not. This is the main event.

(51:16):
This is what you need to keep your eye on,
because this is truly like they're going for complete and
total control in a way that has never been possible
before in human history. How do you think it's going
to go for democracy or for society at large? If
you have one of these companies achieve superhuman intelligence and

(51:38):
be able to truly get rid of most of the workforce,
how do you think this is all going to go?
Think of the level of control right now we're talking
about like before the show started, if you ask Grok
who is more fit, Elon Musk or Lebron, James groc
will tell you Elon Musk is more physically fit than Lebron.

(52:00):
And that is like literally you can go and look
right now at the answers that.

Speaker 4 (52:03):
It will give you.

Speaker 2 (52:04):
Okay, So this is the level of megalomania, and we're
going to hand this incredible power, like global power and
control to this handful or you know, single individual totally psychotic.

Speaker 4 (52:18):
This is insane.

Speaker 2 (52:19):
And so Trump he was on the ropes, you know,
he was being sued and he had all these criminal
cases against him. He wanted to get back in the
White House to make all of his problems go away.
He changed his position in a number of things. He
threw fully in with the tech oligarchs, who you know.
There's a there's an idea that these tech brotypes were

(52:40):
more on the Democratic Party side, and I think, like
socially liberally that's true. Especially in the Obama era, there
was a real close symbiosis. They let all their mergers
go through, et cetera. But they have deeply authoritarian instincts.
They're like move fast and break things ethos. That means
they don't they don't think there should be any democratic
checks on what they're all out to do. So even

(53:01):
though the Trump tech world marriage was kind of an
odd fit to begin with, it makes sense when you
consider a guy who has zero respect for norms, institutions, traditions,
et cetera, and who is an authoritarian with a tech
world which is similarly egotistical and think that they should
be able to rule everything and run everything and have
absolutely no checks. And so you had this coming together

(53:24):
in this Trump administration, In this Trump campaign, Elon of
k course gave more than two hundred and fifty million dollars.
You had them involved in picking JD. Vance as a
vice president. Peter Tiel has always been very influential bringing
all these people together the inauguration, they're all there you
see these repeated dinners where they're there, they're sucking up
to Trump like this is the main event of the

(53:46):
Trump administration. And so I think, you know, I would
not be surprised at all if he passes he signs
an executive order that says we're going to sue you.

Speaker 4 (53:55):
Our Justice Department is going to sue you if you
try to.

Speaker 2 (53:58):
Rain this in even a little bit, because every single
move he's made is to just completely unleash this thing
and hope for the best. And Trump doesn't give a
shit about anything or anyone. He's happy to suck up
his crypto riches and let his oligarch friends do whatever
the hell they want. And he does not give a
shit about whether or not you have a job in

(54:18):
the future, about even whether human societies sor you know,
lasts beyond his life, which is a genuine question if
we continue in this direction. So I think, you know,
from the immediate effects in terms of what it does
to all of our brains and the sort of you know,
the degenerate behavior as Sager describes it, I think those
are genuine concerns to the way it's already spiking our

(54:40):
electric bills way it's destroying water systems, the way it's
degrading our environment. To the medium to longer term, we
already see the job loss kicking in to the more
existential threats of what this means for our democracy and
for human civilization all together. We need to come together
and fight against this with everything we have. We need

(55:00):
people who are like across the aisle, cross partisan, cross
ideological coalition who care about the future of humanity and
want to put some checks on these people because they
are absolutely out of control.

Speaker 3 (55:13):
Yeah, And I mean the way they sell it is like, well,
we got to beat China and all of that, and
it's like, look, and I recently said this. I did
a podcast with the Bloomberg guys over at odd Lots
because they asked me about that, and I said, the
technology is not the same thing as the companies, right,
because the point around this, let's say, in terms of
our objection, is specifically about the monopolization and the control

(55:34):
by single individuals. And yes, I know it's a meme
that I only care about sports betting a week, To
be honest, the one that I care about the most
is mental health. Is suicide is though when I read
those transcripts of those kids who are interacting with chat
ept and being like, hey, you know about advising about
how to hang himself with nooses and notes that combined.

(55:56):
Emily sent us a study yesterday about how short term
for short term video consumption has nuked cognition. If you
have a society which is urascinated through vice which I
focus on through, which is illiterate or functionally illiterate and
not doesn't know how to think for itself, which increasing
the short short form video content consumption, and outsourcing knowledge

(56:20):
to chatch ept. Put those together, you are basically a
meat sack vessel who is using opiates of some kind
you know, in order to numb your pain, and then
outsourcing all of your thinking to this like godlike machine
which has no qualms about validating where you're at, try
not trying to help you, and can encourage you to

(56:41):
kill yourself. Oh and by the way, that includes states
where there is assisted suicide, which Sam Altman literally said,
if it's legal, yes, we would direct you.

Speaker 1 (56:50):
I cannot think of anything more.

Speaker 3 (56:52):
Dystopian like the suicide thing and the mental health stuff,
the pornography again, I mean think about it.

Speaker 4 (56:58):
Like this, not surveillance too. I sterarily talk about.

Speaker 3 (57:01):
So you take a society, you pump them full of
weed and alcohol and gambling and make it so that
socialization itself is bad. And then you create this chatbot
which will fulfill all of your fantasies to make sure
that you never leave what do you think is gonna happen?

Speaker 1 (57:14):
Right?

Speaker 3 (57:14):
I mean, that's the stuff that I'm the most ten
fifteen times more worried about than anything else. And the
sick part is it's good for their business because it
means that you're gonna sit there and you're just gonna
keep typing and typing, and it's going to be the
most I mean already people are addicted to their phones now,
make you know, romantic relationships into that it's bad. And yeah,
like that is where the concern about regulation and democratic

(57:38):
input and making sure that you know, Sam Altman isn't
the only person or Elon or any of these other.

Speaker 1 (57:43):
People they're trying to cannot allow these people to do it.

Speaker 2 (57:45):
They're trying to colonize our minds, even to an even
greater scent than they already have, trying to colonize our
minds and strip us of our genuine humanity. Like, I mean,
that's what like the capitalist class has always sort of
seen us just as like meet sack and widgets to
plug into their business as and how they see fit.
But with this technology that becomes increasingly possible where they

(58:07):
can just render us they don't have to care about
us at all, they can just render us irrelevant completely.
So yeah, when Elon we're all going to be so rich,
I don't think I don't think I would take them
at face value with that. Go look at it Elon's
history of how his promises. Ultimately we're how to Doge?
Go tell me about that one. How much money did
we save in Doge? How did that work out? I mean,
this man, whatever, all of them are, none of them.

(58:30):
There's no human on the planet that should be trusted
with this level of power. More Perfect Union has been
doing really great on the ground reporting about the impact
of these data centers and also the community pushback against
these data centers.

Speaker 4 (58:43):
And I think this is a.

Speaker 2 (58:44):
Very important part of this fight because it's the part
that's the most visible in people's communities. The rest of it,
the chatbots, the videos where it's sort of insidious, right, Like,
it's not that different from just being able to google stuff.
I think parents a lot of times don't really understand
the way that kids might be using Chat, GPT or
rock or other lms. So it's a little bit more
sort of under the radar, whereas the data centers are

(59:06):
incredibly visible. They're having this big immediate impact in communities.
They're having this big immediate impact on people's electric bills.
So I think it's a very very important part of
the fight. They recently did a video about the impacts
of one of these data centers. This is the two
let's go ahead and listen to this.

Speaker 1 (59:21):
I grew up here and I wanted my kids to
be able to do the same. And we welcome Meta,
which opened a data center in our town.

Speaker 8 (59:26):
We were behind in eighteen old or once and it
backed up and we almost got killed. My eye had
to go mouth those people out. She'll say, Nedda's stapend.

Speaker 1 (59:36):
She just doesn't like it, and I don't work it.

Speaker 8 (59:38):
We've been there for like Sincella's alive and pups.

Speaker 11 (59:41):
A live, so I don't really like.

Speaker 9 (59:43):
That we're going to have to move.

Speaker 13 (59:45):
We went to Hollyridge, Louisiana, where Meta's New Manhattan sized
data center is being built. Meta's new ads claim these
communities welcome data centers, but residents painted a very different picture.

Speaker 9 (59:55):
We had no vote on it, no community mat no nothing.
It was done all under the table, and when was
said and done, it was nothing nobody could do.

Speaker 1 (01:00:06):
You're planning to leave. I've been here eighty one years.

Speaker 5 (01:00:10):
I can't stay here with nobody outn't talked to.

Speaker 6 (01:00:13):
My mom has been out here in all her life,
eighty two years.

Speaker 10 (01:00:17):
She's really not happy about it, but does want to
leave too.

Speaker 1 (01:00:21):
Do you think they care about the people that live here?

Speaker 4 (01:00:24):
No, I sure don't.

Speaker 13 (01:00:26):
Residents emphasized the increased traffic violence for Metas trucks. I
dug through police reports and found a six hundred percent
increase in vehicle crashes on the road surrounding Metas construction
site in the last nine months.

Speaker 11 (01:00:37):
The playground at the front of the school, they're not
letting y'all play on that, right.

Speaker 8 (01:00:41):
META trucks don't watch y'all. If they try to stop,
they will They're wrecked into the gate. And that's why
they're saying we shouldn't go out there and all that,
because it's too many wrecks and meta trucks and they
could crash.

Speaker 4 (01:00:57):
I really loved that playground.

Speaker 1 (01:00:59):
Wish you could play there.

Speaker 4 (01:01:00):
Yes.

Speaker 13 (01:01:01):
Residents also shared their distrust in the quality of their
water and the lack of support from elected officials to
address it.

Speaker 9 (01:01:07):
My neighbor was washing my clothes and that's not a
whole load of white because they come out from that
brown water.

Speaker 1 (01:01:15):
Do you feel like it's safe to drink?

Speaker 6 (01:01:17):
No? Well that one.

Speaker 1 (01:01:18):
Have you heard anything about them addressing.

Speaker 4 (01:01:21):
That they No?

Speaker 13 (01:01:23):
No, have you got any information about the project that
offered anybody?

Speaker 1 (01:01:26):
None at all except on the internet and on my face.

Speaker 2 (01:01:30):
But the data center is the size of Manhattan, and
these you know, tech companies have so much money to
throw around. I mean talk about the influence of money
in politics, like that's why these things are going up
everywhere with very little from the politicians pushed back, but
at the ground level in the communities. And I say
this living in a community that is having a number

(01:01:51):
of battles over these data centers myself, there is a
huge level of pushback. More perfect unions in another video
that I really encourage you in partnership with them. Hey,
John Russell on Mingo County, West Virginia one of the
poorest counties in the entire country. Former coal I mean,
still cold country, but obviously a lot of the coal
jobs have gone away, economically devastated, and the political officials
decided at the state level really to locate this data

(01:02:13):
center there. And you have a bunch of residents who
are furious about it, but their governor and their legislators,
you know, in West Virginia, pass a law limiting the amount.

Speaker 4 (01:02:24):
Of local control that you even have.

Speaker 2 (01:02:26):
So even if your community doesn't want this data center there,
they can just come over the top and put it
there against your wishes. So I think, like I said,
I think this is a very important part of the
fight because it's so visible and there's so much pushback
across the board. Whether you're on the left or the right,
there are reasons to hate these things going in your town.

Speaker 1 (01:02:41):
One hundred percent.

Speaker 3 (01:02:42):
And like I said, I want to give a shout
out to some governors, including some who I'm personally beeping
with at the moment. Let's go ahead and put this
up here on the screen. Listen, you know I'm a
straight shooter whenever it comes to these Ron DeSantis actually
is speaking out he's saying, stripping states of jurisdiction to
regulate AI is a subsidy to big tech and prevent
states from protecting against online censorship of political speech, predatory

(01:03:05):
applications of target children, violations of IP rights, data center,
intrusions on power and water resources. The rise of AI's
the most significant economic cultural shift occurring at the moment.
Denying the people the ability to channel these technologies in
a productive way via self government constitutes federal government overreach
and less technology companies run wild.

Speaker 1 (01:03:22):
Not acceptable. Agreed endorse Go to the next one.

Speaker 3 (01:03:25):
Please, This is from Governor Spencer Cox over at Utah,
says Governor de Santus is correct.

Speaker 1 (01:03:29):
States must be able.

Speaker 3 (01:03:30):
To regulate the tools of AI that could severally impact
our kids, our families, our constitutional rights, our security. We've
already made the mistake of allowing social media companies to
destroy our children's mental health to our country part let's
not do it again. And so last one C six
just to show you, I mean this is bipartisan and
it's all over the place. Some of the most popular
states in the country, Pennsylvania lawmakers bipartisan coalition are outraged

(01:03:51):
at the federal attempt to prevent states from regulating AI.
So I expect some of the states to rise up
and to try, but if Trump does sign.

Speaker 1 (01:03:59):
An executive order, there will be a lot of litigation.
Will continue to track the story.