December 16, 2025 • 43 mins
Krystal and Saagar discuss Fox News war on Christmas for AI data centers, Trump aide unleashes on admin, Pinochet defender wins Chile election.
Juan David Rojas: https://x.com/rojasrjuand?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.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
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 1 (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 1 (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 2 (00:33):
Let's talk about Fox News and this war on Christmas.
So this is a fascinating one. You've got a Fox
News anchor who is saying we all need to buy
artificial Christmas trees to make room for the AI data
centers because they're going to take over the real Christmas
tree farms. Let's gohead and take a listen to this.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
This farm is one hundred and fifty acres. Yeah, they're
going to be farms, be transmission lines that have to
go through developments and farms. That's the very nature of
a growing economy like that, everybody needs to get on board.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
I just don't.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
It's a you know what, buy a fake tree.
Speaker 1 (01:17):
Oh oh, digger right in my heart? What I have
a fake tree coming time for this? I know I
can't afford the tree.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
One can only imagine the executive orders and state mandated
real Christmas trees that would arrive. If a lib said
something equivalent O run MSNBC.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
You know what, I'll defend them. That would be a
good executive order. It's a good thing. In fact. Uh,
you know, I'm from Texas. I'm from Texas. We don't
do real trees. Okay, right, it's not really a thing.
Speaker 4 (01:47):
You know.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Pretty much everybody has an artificier. Some people pay the extra.
My wife feels very passionately about real Christmas trees, which
were some original fights in our marriage. I have come
to become a real tree guy. Real trees are good,
and you know, it does get you a little bit
more in the Christmas spirit. But more importantly about this
whole data center buying artificial trees. This is a perfect
(02:12):
example of what we've talked about with the mindset around AI,
which is you need to personally sacrifice so that the
slop can continue so that you need to personally sacrifice,
not just monetarily, but let's say the human experience putting
up a tree in your house, you know, having fun
with your children, decorating that, so that we can have
(02:34):
this impersonal technology which the CEOs say is going to
take their job and to rip even more of that
away from us. I actually can't think of a better
kind of clip to that encapsulates that and what worshiping
GDP really looks like, because that's what it is. That
that is the explicit kind of view of what that
means and of what people hold dear and why being
(02:57):
you know, an anti AI disposition is so increasingly popular
in American politics today.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Yeah, no, absolutely, I mean that's what they're saying, is like,
we need to change our lives and our traditions to
make way we need to adjust for the AI revolution
that is here that is not really meant to benefit
us at all. It's all to enrich and consolidate power
(03:24):
in the hands of a very few number of people.
I do have some good news on the AI front, however,
Kirson Cinema, who is a former senator and cartoon villain.
She has gone from being in the Senate to now
being a lobbyist for AI data centers. She was pushing
one in this one particular Arizona town and they overwhelmingly,
(03:46):
i think unanimously the city council voted it down. But
in any case, she was also welcomed onto Fox and
Friends to make the case for AI data centers and
how they are actually more eco friendly than they were
in the past.
Speaker 5 (03:58):
SoC let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 6 (04:00):
As you know, there's this massive effort kind of on
the left to kind of come into communities and give
misinformation around water and energy and AI data centers, and
that's a lot of misinformation. This administration is doing a
good job of telling the truth, creating more energy domestically,
the National Energy Dominance Council doing a whole of government
(04:21):
approach to ensure that we're creating our own natural gas,
our own nuclear to power the future. We're actually using
less water with AI Data centers and in the past.
So that communication is bringing people together who just want efficient, proactive,
good lives where their kids have a better life than
they had. So this is I think a really important
(04:41):
issue that has nothing to do with partisanship.
Speaker 2 (04:43):
So keep in mind again this lady is paid to
utter this absolute garbled nonsense. The fact that she can
go up there with a straight face and be like, oh,
this is all good for American energy production, Like we
have looked the way the grid is already being strained
by the power usage of these AI data centers. And
(05:07):
I also find it very interesting saga that she is
framing this as a partisan issue, that oh, it's all
these left wing people who are coming in and telling
you bad things about the AI data centers, while the
President is telling you the truth that this is a
good thing for the American economy, etc. Because the reality is,
as we've covered here extensively, you know, if you look
(05:28):
at the Georgia elections, if you look at the Virginia elections,
if you look at local opposition to AI data centers
being located here, it is very cross ideological and there
is not a clear left right divide here. So that's
something that clearly she and whoever's paying her are trying
to push.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Yeah, I mean, it's the Christen Cinema thing. It's just
too much. And I think what everybody can appreciate now
is how overtly corrupt so much of this is you
have not only the I mean, this is an X
senator who took multiple votes on behalf of big industry,
which we covered here at the time, left in order
(06:07):
to personally enrich herself. I mean, and you know, by
the way, there was all this debate they were like,
does she really believe this a shimatt. It's like, no,
she just wanted to get I mean, it looks like
she just wanted to get paid right in terms of
her advocacy, and now she's like pro Trump now hilariously
for big business reasons. I just want to put it
all together just to show how corrupt so much of
(06:29):
this is. I recently flagged this. I was reading through
you know, I took interest in this de banking conversation.
I think the conversation at in d banking is important.
We've talked about Lefang with this before. There were legitimate
instances of political deep banking that happened, which are really
concerning at a free speech level. These were weaponized by
the tech guys who started saying that depbanking happened in
(06:52):
order to loosen restrictions around their industry. Famously, we had
the Mark Andresen moment on Joe Rogan, but there are
many others. We had Mark Zuckerberg and others for pro
crypto interests. And again I think there are real concerns
around industry specific for politics. But I could not get
over as I was reading this new D Banking report
(07:14):
only weirdos like me. This is the Office of the
Comptroller from the Treasury, so they did a nine month investigation.
They're going to look into who's getting D banked and
you would be amazed to find that this new D
Banking report signals out not just crypto and other industries,
but pornography. Let's go ahead and put this up here
on the screen. The OCC's preliminary finding show that between
(07:37):
twenty and twenty twenty three, nine banks made inappropriate distinctions
among customers in the division of financial services on the
basis of lawful business activities by maintaining policies restricting access
to banking services or requiring escalating reviews and approvals. Sectors
subjected to restricted access included oil and gas, coal mining, firearms,
(07:57):
private prisons, tobacco, eas cigarets, manufacturers, adult entertainment, and digital assets.
Now let's stick with porn and with crypto. You know,
there's this idea that these banks are ideologically opposed to
porn and to crypto. These are some of the greediest
people in the world. You think they don't want to
(08:17):
take their money. Do you know why they don't want
to take their money with crypto? They're worried about KYC
Know your Customer laws and specifically money laundering, which they
have a legal mandate not to to help prevent and
to help report to the FBI or to the US
authorities on porn. It's the same thing what the banks
suddenly grew a conscience. Do you think that that's the
(08:38):
banks are like, oh, my only fans, we can't be
taking their money, or the banks are looking at human
trafficking laws and at revenge porn laws, and at the
internal enforcement of these gigantic conglomerates which are addicting all
of these American men and which are flagrantly in violation
of multiple trafficking laws on the books right now to
(09:00):
help prevent women who are being exploited posted online international
rings which are profiting to the tune of billions of dollars,
and are like, yeah, we can't take their money because
to do so would actually be a violation, specifically of
trying to protect all of these girls, of which these
laws were passed on their behalf. Maybe it's the latter.
(09:21):
And so the Trump administration here taking significant pressure from
the porn industry and others, which again are salivating at
the idea of access to the legitimate banking system, and
now effectively pressuring our largest financial institutions to basically take
their money and look the other way. I can't think
of anything worse. You know. Look, you know, tobacco, fine, whatever,
(09:43):
I get it. You know, that's one of those where
you know, I think tobacco is horrible smoking. Obviously, it
kills a lot of people, the industry, et cetera. That's
one which again I get not wanting, you know, especially
with lawsuits and everything, you don't necessarily want to be
connected to that. But with pornography and with crypto, like
(10:03):
we said, the banks don't care about conscience. They're doing
it for a reason. It's not ideological, it's.
Speaker 2 (10:11):
Not even I mean, these banks were happy to do
business with like after de commission because the money was green.
They're like, yes, let's do the deals. It's fine. We
don't care like we're going to continue to hang out
with him. We've had more and more reporting about that.
So yeah, it's not like they're out here being some
like good lefties like we're gonna, you know, not work
(10:32):
with the And it is interesting to me, uh, going
back to the Mark Andresen Rogan appearance, and just to
remind people, he used the conservative perception and probably a
time it was like legitimate, legitimate reality that there was
ideological debanking to then launch a war on the Consumer
(10:55):
Financial Protection Bureau, which had actually stood up Rogi Chopra,
who was ahead of that agency, stood up against ideological debanking.
But they he found it to be a useful construct.
And then even some of the examples that he offered
that he was like, oh, this person was de banked
just because they're like a conservative and they like Trump,
(11:16):
and then you dig one layer Dee burn and it's
like or maybe they were committing like scams and fraud.
I think people need to really remember, especially crypto is
rife with all kinds of scams and rug poles and
fraud and money laundering, Like none of it's being prosecuted
anymore under the Trump administration.
Speaker 5 (11:35):
But that has been the reality of crypto.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
So there have been very good reasons why banks would
look a scance and not want to get involved with
some of these sorts of things. So it's a classic
playbook that they have used. David Sachs did this too
in his defenseive AI of them like completely deregulating AI.
They take a culture war issue and they frame it
(12:00):
in a way to protect like a pro oligarch agenda.
And so that's a lot of what's going on here
as well. You remember David Sachs and his tweet he
was talking about like, oh, if you don't want to
black George Washington, then we've got to make sure States
can never regulate AI and we could just do whatever
we want to do. So you know, similar kind of
bait and switch going on here as well.
Speaker 1 (12:20):
Yeah, these culture war stuff, you know, in absence of
big arguments around here. By the way, again, like I
said on AI, I've never had more pushback from the
White House. It's kind of fascinating. I enjoy arguing with
them about it. There is a legitimate view about the
AI States thing. I don't agree with it necessarily, but
I'm telling you right now, this porn thing, there's no
(12:41):
defense one hundred percent. It's being pushed by the industry.
It's just like weed I talked about yesterday. You can
defend weed rescheduling all you want, and if it was
done through a real process, I would look, I would
fight it, but I would I'd be like, okay, so
be it. But this is literally because the White House
tea the staff were about to talk about was hired
(13:02):
by a weed company whenever she was outside of office
and then brought that former client to the Oval office
who has billions of dollars at stake and whose stock
massively profited. That's it. That's the only reason that this happened.
Because a bunch of multimillionaires hired pro Trump X campaign officials,
donated or and or hired to the Trump campaign and
(13:24):
then got their way to the Oval and then did
a corrupt deal in order to get it done. Like
that's it. It's the same thing here with porn. It's
because I mean, also, you know, you kind of have
to understand if you're saying banks should disregard KYC regulations
whenever it comes to you know, like crypto and others,
then you know, oh, okay, well it is kind of difficult.
(13:45):
Let's say, to apply it to the pornography industry for
them in general. They want to make it as easy
as possible for all of these vice industries to do business.
I think that's disgusting in an era where the very
basics of life have never been more on affordable or
unattainable for a lot of younger people, and that these
are the very things which are destroying them from the
(14:07):
inside out. And you know, this is a big talk
from the administration which cares about Christianity or moral purpose
or any of that. I have never seen a more
socially libertarian administry, Not even the Biden administration did shit
like this. Let's go to C four, you know, just again,
just to give you an example, Trump is now considering
(14:28):
wiping federal gambling winnings taxes. Let me explain something again.
There's no such thing as gambling winnings. Only four per
They did a study one hundred of thousands people who
did sports betting. Four percent of people had a profit
after five years four percent, ninety six percent. You're gonna lose,
You're a loser, one hundred percent. Now, all this will
do is give casinos and sports betting companies free advertising. Saying,
(14:53):
by the way, when you have this parlay which you're
definitely going to hit. It will also be tax free.
It is a gig gigantic giveaway and brand you know
benefit to these gambling it's so repulsive, like loosening restrictions
on weed, porn, gamble. It's literally like they're personally attacking me.
(15:14):
But look, this is not this isn't about me, Okay
at the end of the day, like you can live
your life the way that you want. But but and
this is just my opinion. I think that the government
should not make it easier easier for multi billion dollar
industries to corrupt you, to corrupt the people around you,
to corrupt your community. The point of the government of
(15:35):
our society is to promote human flourishing. There's nothing about
this which does any of that. All it does is
vastly enriched people who wake up every single day thinking
about how to milk you for as much money as possible.
Those people are my enemies.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
The gambling thing is crazy because it comes to a
moment too when I think there's increasing recognition of like,
oh this this is a disaster, right, this is a problem.
Speaker 5 (15:57):
You know. There, we've got a major issue with addiction.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
We've got a major issue with people who are you know,
giving all their life save and betting on whether it's
boarding events. Now we've got you know, CNN making a
deal with the betting companies you bet on literally everything.
All these scandals coming out about insider trading and rigging
the markets, all that sort of stuff. And you know,
in the past, when we've had things that society is
considered to be like a vice or behavior, they want
(16:21):
to discourage, but they don't want to outright ban. Oftentimes
what you do is you actually tax it, you make
it more expensive, or you make it more difficult. Here,
you're going in the opposite direction, Like instead of doing
a vice tax, you're doing like a vice text credit,
you're doing like a vice encouragement, actively trying to funnel
people into something that we know is fundamentally rigged, exploitative, predatory,
(16:43):
and damaging. So yeah, I mean, you know, come get
your Christian nationalists. This is it is really pretty wild
what's going on here. But it's the whole administration, the
core foundation. There are no foundational principles outside of just
like a money grop, I mean, that's what it is.
It's just like a heist. They are taking everything that's
not nailed down. Everybody's in it for their own bag.
(17:05):
Like you know, even the foreign policy is run for
a bunch of oligarchs. Bag the domestic policy, the economy
is run for them. That's the whole thing. And so
you know the fact that the gambling and the poor
industry and whatever getting their seats at the table and
getting their taste no surprise.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
Absolutely, all right, guys, I think we all talked a
little bit too much. So we're going to have to
go to Susie Wiles before we welcome our friend Juan
David Rojas. Turning now to Susie Wilds. This just broke
this morning. We had to add this in. This is
one of the craziest interviews by a senior White House
official I have ever seen in my life, in any
(17:42):
other White House, any other time, normal time. She's getting
fired today under this president who knows. Let's put this
up here on the screen. This is a New York
Times write up of a multi page interview that Susie
Wiles has been sitting with Vanity Fair for over the
last year, in which she gets candid about the entire
Trump presidency admits that many of the things that the
(18:04):
White House set are lies, admits that Elon is using ketamine.
She criticizes the president. She says that the vice president
is a conspiracy theorist who his conversion to away from
never trump Ism was political. She says Trump has an
alcoholic personality. So let me read from the New York
Times write up of this lengthy vanity fair profile. President
(18:25):
Trump's chief of staff said she tried to get him
to end his score settling against political enemies after ninety
days in office, but acknowledged the administration still ongoing push
for prosecutions has been fueled in part by the President's
desire for retribution. So number one, the mortgage fraud case
against Letitia James or against James Comy, all of that,
(18:46):
it's not about the case, it's political retribution from the president.
She just tweeted it out. That's an old meme from
the twenty tens. Is just tweeting out what you know,
as journalists, we've been working on this story, trying to
prove that this is the true reason why Trump is
doing this, even though yes, it's obvious we need evidence,
and now we have the White House chief of staff
(19:06):
He's like, oh yeah, He's doing it for political retribution purposes.
That's what these prosecutions are about. Okay, let's sit with that.
Let's sit with that as we continue again for over
eleven interviews that she's given the Vice president, she said,
quote has been a conspiracy theorist for a decade. His
conversion from Trump critic to ally was based on, on principle,
what was sort of political. Elon Musk is an avowed
(19:28):
ketamine user in odd duck whose actions were not always
rational and left her quote aghast Russ's vote the budget
director quote is a right wing absolute zealot, and the
Attorney General Pambondi quote completely whiffed in handling of the
Epstein files. She continued, by the way, to say about Venezuela,
(19:52):
this is my personal favorite. She said here about the boats,
that the policy of the United States is that or
for Donald Trump is to quote blow up as many
boats as possible until Maduro decides to leave office. That's
what she said. So admitting none of this is about drugs,
it's not about fentanyl, which is all bullshit and which
(20:15):
again I knew that I've been saying that here. But
to have the White House Chief of Staff just come
out and be like, oh, yeah, yeah, it's all fake
and it's about regime change. Ok. Thank you, thank you,
Madam Susie Wiles. You know, I mean continuing here. Describing
Trump as an alcoholic personality with respect to quote operates
(20:37):
with the view that there's nothing he can't do. That's
not usually something I would describe as an alcoholic. But okay,
she said, so much of her job revolves around the
president's personality and stream of consciousness public comments. She said
that during the whole tariffs thing that the Vice President
jad Vance was sent into convince Trump to pump the
(21:00):
brakes on tariffs, and she said that there was a
huge disagreement that they were deciding. People were predicting disaster
on usaid. She thinks no rational person could think the
USAID process was a good one. Nobody. I mean, the
whole thing is crazy and we're just scratching the surface.
I haven't even been able to I haven't been able
(21:22):
to get even all of them just yet, what these
comments are. But trashing the cabinet admitting the Epstein files
is a huge problem. Says she can't understand why Gleane
Maxwell was moved to a different prison, says that the
Epstein files was mishandled says that Venezuela is really all
about regime change, that usaid was a disaster, that she
(21:45):
was a keep in mind, you know, part of why
this is so crazy is it's not just about telling
the truth. This White House, her employee, Caroline Leavitt took
to the podium to defend every single part of this
bullshit at the time, as the official part of the admitted,
and she's admitting that in private. Oh my god, we
were a gas by it. We were disgusted. We tried
(22:07):
to move off of this policy. The prosecutions are political.
I mean, how is that going to play in court?
How is this going to play if this is a
true court? James comy, congratulations, you just got acquitted, all right,
Letitia James who they've tried to indict what three more times?
Speaker 5 (22:21):
Great times from a grand.
Speaker 1 (22:23):
Jury and can't get it. Yeah, good luck, you know,
to the prosecutors who are trying to do this. It's
just so crazy. I have never seen anything like this
in my entire time covering Washington.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Ever, it is wild.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
Let me read and she, by the way, undercut a
number of other policies. She talked about how they mean
to be more careful with deportations. She said she did
not agree with pardoning the violent January sixth ers, that
she pushed to just do the nonviolent ones and was overruled. There,
So all kinds of the like most like core and
(22:57):
controversial Trump two point zero policies. She's effectively undercutting here
everything from the day one j six rioters pardons up
into Venezuela, where she's just giving the game away, that
the blowing up of the bots isn't about drugs, it's
about regime change. On the political retribution piece, let me
read a little bit of this, so she said, quote,
(23:18):
we have a loose agreement that the score settling will
end before the first ninety days are over, she said
at the time when that did not happen. By August,
she told mister Whipple that I don't think he's on
a retribution tour, but said that Trump was aiming at
people who did bad things and coming after him. In
some cases it may look like retribution, and there may
be an element of that from time to time.
Speaker 5 (23:40):
Who would blame him, not me? And so in terms
of just.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Actual real world impact, yeah, any of those court cases,
Tisha James, James, call me Eric Swallwell, Adam Schiff. There's
been all sorts of talk about people that are going
to go after on this mortgage fraud bullshit. Those cases
will all be undercut today extent that they had any
likes to begin with, by this overt admission from the
(24:06):
Chief of Staff that yes, these are political. This is
about retribution, that's what he's doing. So that in and
of itself is wild to undercut jd Vance. Trump may
not really care that much about that, but to say,
you know, oh yeah, of course he converted to trump
Ism because it was.
Speaker 5 (24:23):
Political, which is obvious.
Speaker 2 (24:25):
But you know, here you've got the Chief of Staff
acknowledging what everybody could see the reality in front of
their eyes, calling him a conspiracy theorist, talking about Elon Musk,
drug use, all of it. I mean, yeah, it's pretty wild.
And the other thing about this saga is the White
House participated with all of this, like this was authorized.
I mean there's a big, like glossy photo shoot involved
(24:46):
with a bunch of different administration officials. Other officials spoke
to this reporter as well, So this was all this
whole project. This whole write up was greenlit by the administration,
even though you know, I would be very so prize
if they knew the extent of what Susie Wiles was
saying here.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
No, they didn't know. I can already my phone's it's
pinging a little bit here right now. Yeah, I'll just
I'll just leave it at that. In terms of what
people around Washington, including people who are I mean, here's
the thing. It's an unspoken rule here in DC when
you work for somebody, you never make yourself the story.
Never so the White House chief of staff, many chiefs
of staff, you know, to presidents and others, they don't
(25:24):
sit for interviews. Why because your job is to execute
the agenda of the president. You're never supposed to be
the main character. Ever, that's the job of the principle.
I know this sounds like kind of servile, but like
in a certain way, like that's the job, right, That's
what you do as a staffer. And so for sitting
for eleven interviews here, eleven interviews and just letting loose
(25:46):
about your thoughts about how Pam Bondi's an idiot, she
said completely whift on Epstein. I mean, if the White
House Chief of Staff thinks this, How can we as
citizens have any confidence in our government if the White
House Chief of Staff is openly saying that what the
President is saying is a lie, Is that many cabinet
members are idiots or incompetent? Is that doge which was
(26:10):
held up as a central pillar of the administration there
at the time, what she was quote aghast by it?
First of all, what are you doing in that job? Lady?
What are you even doing? If you think this you
should leave right? What does it say about you that
you think all of this and that you're sticking around
to quote do something about it because you're obviously you're
not doing a very good job. You actually don't have
that much influence if that's what you think that you're doing.
(26:32):
And then second, yeah, I just I cannot get over
how you can just openly admit so many things which
again we all know are true. But there is a
difference legally, first of all, in a court of law
to say that you have a political prosecution. But second,
like on regime change, that's got to be one of
the most consequential policies of the entire Trump administration. And
(26:55):
to just come out and be like, our flimsy bullshit
pretext is in fact, the bullshit is amazing. I mean
it's shocking to the cares well.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
And that's something in a future administration if you've got
Democrats in control, like people need to think about the
you know, potential prosecutions they clearly are worried about, like
with the double tap strike, whether that was legal or not. Obviously,
like I think the whole thing is illegal, but they
clearly got nervous about that as well, judging by the reaction.
(27:24):
So when you have her coming out and publicly undercutting
the bullshit legal pretext that they've been using, Yeah, that's
that's a big problem for Pete Hegseth. That's a big
problem for that admiral what was it, Admiral Bradley who
was kind of thrown under the bus. That's a big
problem for all of the seals that were involved in
this policy.
Speaker 5 (27:44):
It's that's a big issue.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
Let me read the part of the Epstein portion, because
this is pretty wild too. So this is about Pam Bondi.
She also gets into Trump a little bit with regard
to Epstein. So, as you mentioned before, Soccercy says, I
think Bondi completely whipped, appreciating that that was very targeted
group that cared about this. First she gave them binders
full of nothingness. Then she said the witness list or
(28:09):
the client list was on her desk. There is no
client list, and it's sure as hell wasn't on her desk.
Mister Vance, by contrast, she said, understood the sensitivity because
he himself was a conspiracy theorist. She said so again,
saying directly, when Pam Bondi told you that this was
on her desk, she was lying, there is no client list.
It's sure as hell was not on her desk. That
(28:31):
is what she had to say about that. And then
she says that she has read the Epstein documents and
acknowledged Trump's name is in them. Quote, we know he's
in the file, and he's not in the file doing
anything awful. Nothing awful, Sager. So rest easy there. But
neither apparently, this is one more part on this. Neither
apparently is Bill Clinton. Asked about Trump's claims going back
(28:54):
years that Clinton had visited the Epstein island as well,
said there is no evidence. Asked if there's incriminating evidence
about Clinton and the files as Trump has suggested. She
says the President was wrong about that. So she's saying
Trump is lying. Trump is in the files but not
doing anything awful, and that he is lying about what
(29:15):
the files contained with regard to Bill Clinton.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
It's so crazy, man, I truly have never seen anything
like this. The last interview that was anything remotely comparable,
in my opinion, was maybe Steve Bannon in the first
hundred Days where he openly trashed Jared Kushner and other
members of the administration. Who was it to the American Prospect?
Is that right? It was some like kind of.
Speaker 5 (29:36):
Left It was like New York magazine.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
No, it was a lefty magazine.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
I remember Near Magazine is kind of lefty. But anyway,
I don't remember exactly, but yeah.
Speaker 1 (29:44):
There was that. But honestly, like Stan McCrystal, he was
the general in charge of Afghanistan at the time, and
Michael Hastings, the Rolling Stone journalist, ended up being delayed
and McCrystal, what did he say about Obama? He said
he was an idiot something like that. I had some
comment about Obama where he was like, he's dumb. Uh
published it and he was immediately fired. But that was
(30:06):
in the old rules. I don't know if that's going
to happen now. I have no idea I have. I mean,
how could you ever enter a cabinet meeting again when
I mean Susie Wilds, who I guess is one of
your technically kind of your boss, is out there just
trashing you, uh in the public. It's amazing, But that's
the world we live in. Is Cash Patel sitting for
interviews about his love life with Stephen Miller's wife, who's
(30:29):
dressed casually for some reason. This entire thing, I don't know.
I don't know what is happening to this uh, to
this government. But yeah, we're being confederacy and I don't
even have work. I'm literally speechless. How retarded this is.
It's crazy. It's fucking crazy.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
So you have the chief of staff, so this is
not live trust arrangement, Trump's chief of staff saying he's
lying about the Epstein files, Pam Bondi was lying about
the Epstein files, that she disagrees with the deportation approach,
the USAID approach, that Elon Musk, who was handed the
(31:09):
keys to the whole freaking government, is a drug addict,
that russ vote who still has the keys. The whole
government is a right wing ID love that the vice
president is a conspiracy theorist. I mean, what more could
you possibly get into this series of interviews.
Speaker 5 (31:27):
It's pretty wild. I don't know.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
I mean, I have to think that there would be
some like, there has to be some blowback for this.
I mean, especially the parts where she says things about Trump,
in particular that he's lying and that she disagreed with
him on the J six pardons and you know, the
undercutting of the Venezuela policy. That's a live, active, very significant,
serious issue, and here she is just like giving the
(31:51):
game away on that one.
Speaker 5 (31:53):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
It's very different from my impression of her, Like I
didn't know anything about her, but it seemed like she
was just this very we haven't heard from her that
she is very like disciplined and buttoned up.
Speaker 5 (32:03):
This is the total opposite of that.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Well, you know, maybe everything Trump everyone turns into a
narcissist around Trump. I guess you know that's possible, asked.
Speaker 2 (32:11):
I also wonder how hill you know he's he's very
against alcohol at.
Speaker 1 (32:16):
All right being described.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
I also wonder how he'll react to being characterized as
having the personality of an alcoholic.
Speaker 1 (32:23):
His brother that will land with him. Yeah, yeah, I
go over, No man, all right, more consequential news. We
got Juanda vid Rojas standing by to talk about Chile.
Let's get to it. Turning now to our friend Juanda
vid Rojas, who joins us live to discuss the most
recent elections in Chile, who have elected a new right
(32:44):
wing president, Jose Antonio cast by nearly twenty point margin one.
Our excellent analyst of all things Latin America joins us
to break down. Good to see you man, Thanks for
having guys. Absolutely so let's put this up here on
the screen. Why the Chilean left fail you discuss some
of the policies over the last five years, some of
the rise here of Jose Antonio coast about how exactly
(33:08):
this all came to be. Why don't you break some
of it down for us and maybe what it means
for the region and if anything, for the United States.
Speaker 4 (33:14):
So gust he's you know, he's been called far right,
like ultra conservative. He's very conservative. He is an apologist
for the Pinochet dictatorship, which for decades after the dictatorship
of people on the right tried to like distance some
distance themselves from the former dictator. And actually the first
(33:37):
like few presidents after the dictatorship were all like center left.
It was only until Seast I think in like twenty ten,
who was like the first conservative when he was like
tried to distance himself from the dictatorship. Cost is like
he says that, like, you know, he condemns the human
rights abuses, but that you know, his legacy and especially
(33:57):
Pinochet's economic legacy were great. His brother actually was one
of the Chicago boys that advised Pinochet and like installing
this neoliberal model. The country is known as like the
cradle of neoliberalism. And so his brother, Migekas, actually served
as the president of Chile Central Bank during the dictatorship.
(34:18):
And so you know, there's a lot of polarization around this.
People on the left will say that, you know, will
condemn the human rights abuses and like a lot of
the legacy of the economic policies, and people on the
right will say, oh, look, but we had this great
economic growth afterwards and this kind of this kind of
flaws and some of these arguments. So that's a bit
of the rundown for the moment for the United States.
(34:40):
Cost Almost all right wingers in Latin America, you could
describe them as neo conservatives. They worshiped the United States.
They hate Russia, China, I run blah blah blah blah.
This guy like is going to be really good for
the current administration. He loves me. Lay a lot of
like posting after the election was showing how like geographically
(35:01):
the continent of South the South America is like divided
along the middle between right and left governments, and Melay,
what he did is that he posted like the the
like western half that are like conservative governments, this like
tech bro like futurism stuff with like skyscrapers, and then
the leftist governments are a bunch of like Brazilian favollas.
So that's to give you an idea.
Speaker 5 (35:21):
Got it, gotcha.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
So they're they're excited about like the prospera type ification
of those countries.
Speaker 4 (35:28):
So yeah, that's a good way of putting it.
Speaker 2 (35:30):
So his his brother was a Chicago School neoliberal economic
adjustment austerity guy. Dad was a Nazi. He's a Pinochet apologist.
This is a lot, it's a lot to take it.
So what was it that you know, people were responding
to to reject the the you know, more left leaning
government and go with this guy who you know, I mean,
(35:52):
his politics are pretty radical from those familiar collect Uh
connections and his embrace or justification of Pinochet but also
the embrace of Malay. Also says he wants to consult
with Bikelly with regards to to crime. So, I mean,
this is a pretty dramatic turn what led to it?
Speaker 4 (36:11):
Yeah, So I will say that Kas despite his past
and and like he this is the third time he
ran for president, and previous other times he was like
really hardline on abortion, he kind of toned that down
this time around. He is honestly, as far as like
anyone can really say, a committed democrat, he's not. He said,
he's not interested in like trying to take over all
(36:32):
the institutions, persecute his opponents, and like govern for life
like Pinochet, and in general you can he even also
say that like the candidate that he defeated was the
Communist Party candidate. She was nominated by the Communist Party,
but for communists, honestly, she was pretty moderate. She was
really critical of like human rights abuses by like Maduro
(36:53):
and Artaica in Latin America, which is I said, like
in some other time that it's rare for like leftists
to openly like celebrate Maduro. It's also rare for them
to be stridently critical of him too, So that's something
interesting in Chilean politics, and I think that explains a
lot why so many people were willing to gravitate towards him.
(37:13):
As for the failings of the current government, current President
Gabriel Borodich, he won in twenty twenty one, he was
seen as like the shining star on the international left.
The country was like trying to rewrite his constitution and
he said he was going to ury neoliberalism. That didn't
really work out, and we can talk some more about that,
but in a nutshell, I like to say that he
(37:35):
was basically like the Chilean Mam Donnie. And to be clear,
I like him and mom Donnie. I think both of
them like on a personal level. They seem kind of
like nice guys and charismatic, et cetera. And Bodich actually
did some really good things in my opinion. He raised
them minimum wage like twenty percent the forty poorest Chileans,
(38:00):
the bottom forty percent of Chileans now have access to
free healthcare. Pensions are a little bit less miserly, which
historically were terrible in Chile. And the best thing actually
is that there's a gradual reduction in the work week
from forty five to forty hours. That's something that unions
had been demanding for decades, really really good stuff. The
(38:20):
problem is that the broader political environment after the pandemic
shifted two issues that really benefited the right. There was
a crime wave. Some of that had to do with
the fact that there were these like mass protests in
twenty nineteen that led to the Constitutional Convention, similar to
twenty twenty here with BLM like there was backlash against
the police and that led to officers like not one
(38:43):
even like police high crime areas. There's also been a
broader reconfiguration of the drug trade in South America, favoring
like Asian and European markets, so that's led a lot
of organized crime to move into countries like Chile. There
was inflation, and even though the government rage them in
a wage the truth is that the increase was roughly
(39:03):
in line with previous governments, so in relative terms, like
people's buying power went down. And finally this is always
the kryptonite for progressive governments. There was this huge migration surge,
especially in ilegal immigration. The country's immigrant population is double
to one point six million, is around three hundred thousand undocumented,
mostly Venezuelan's now in Chile. And that doesn't sound like
(39:27):
much here, but that's enormous in Chile, considering that the
country's whole population is around twenty million. And so how
did a Boord handle that? Similar to with Biden, his
government had like the lowest amount of deportations in history,
around half of the previous government and like, for example,
(39:49):
with Biden, like you can say, for instance that Biden
apported a lot of people at the border. Within the
country not so much. And so there was this every
single time, including in Latin American countries, you see this
divide between people who are more college educated and more
working class. And every single time the more college educated
people have a reluctance understandably so for like you know,
(40:14):
humanitarian reasons to not really want to like do think
things like deportations, whereas working class people feel, you know,
they have concerns over crime, strains the social services competition
with illegal labor. So it it bords. To his credit,
he did like militarize the northern border to try to
(40:36):
stem new arrivals. But people really resented the fact that
the government was not really keeping up enforcement. And Sokas
has this trumpst program. He wants to build a border
shield of walls, ditches, and.
Speaker 1 (40:50):
It's gonna be a long shield.
Speaker 4 (40:51):
Man.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
That's a skinny country.
Speaker 5 (40:52):
Yeah, we all know the shape.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
That's tough. That's gonna be a tough wall to build.
Love Chile, by the way, very cool country that I've
been to before. So finally a question for you, Juan.
You talked there about America. What about Venezuela, Like you
just said, what's the opinion on the on the current
government on regime change? Would they be supportive of something
like that? Traditionally, you know, with Pinochet and our past relations,
(41:17):
it was viewed as this like power center of bulwark
against Latin American leftism. Is that something that we're going
to see again? What do you think?
Speaker 4 (41:25):
Oh? Yeah, I'd say that the president elect his administration
will be We'll go along basically with whatever the Trump
administration wants, including of Venezuela. The current government of void
each like I said, they were very critical of Maduro.
They have said that they would not, you know, support
any kind of regime change like by force and Venezuela.
(41:49):
But yeah, it's yea, this is a really sensitive topic.
I mean, who knows. Maybe cous could be apprehensive about
this though, because the thing is, you know, the president,
you set for this. It's like, okay, you know, maybe
we're you like it if it's against Maduro, but it's like,
you know what, if they can do it to Maduro, right,
they can do it to anybody.
Speaker 2 (42:09):
So yeah, it's yeah, yeah, And just because they like
you today doesn't mean in the future they won't turn right,
So that very very interesting stuff.
Speaker 4 (42:20):
One yeah, yeah, oh you know one interesting thing actually
in Chile, permanent residents, this is hilarious, are allowed to
vote if they've lived in the country for five years,
and so Venezuelans were actually a really coverted electorate during
this past campaign and guess who they voted for. They
voted for cast was promising to deport them because Venezuelans
(42:44):
are super neo conservatives. So there's been a lot of
discussion around that. The leading conservative candidate now in Peru
for twenty twenty six said that Peru should just give
citizenship to Venezuelans so that they can vote for him.
It's a talk about importing voters.
Speaker 5 (43:01):
Wow, wow, it's uh.
Speaker 4 (43:04):
Yeah, it's it's funny stuff.
Speaker 1 (43:05):
Well, dude, this is why we like talking to you.
Speaker 2 (43:08):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (43:08):
A lot of other stuff going on in the world.
Chile always a fascinating country, beautiful country. Wish them the best.
Thank you for joining us, sir, Thank you, Thank you
guys so much for watching. We appreciate it. We have
a great Crowned Point show for you all tomorrow, and
we will see you all on Thursday for our last
show before Christmas. Christal will be back in the studio,
don't worry, so we'll see all that
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 1 (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 1 (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 2 (00:33):
Let's talk about Fox News and this war on Christmas.
So this is a fascinating one. You've got a Fox
News anchor who is saying we all need to buy
artificial Christmas trees to make room for the AI data
centers because they're going to take over the real Christmas
tree farms. Let's gohead and take a listen to this.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
This farm is one hundred and fifty acres. Yeah, they're
going to be farms, be transmission lines that have to
go through developments and farms. That's the very nature of
a growing economy like that, everybody needs to get on board.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
I just don't.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
It's a you know what, buy a fake tree.
Speaker 1 (01:17):
Oh oh, digger right in my heart? What I have
a fake tree coming time for this? I know I
can't afford the tree.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
One can only imagine the executive orders and state mandated
real Christmas trees that would arrive. If a lib said
something equivalent O run MSNBC.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
You know what, I'll defend them. That would be a
good executive order. It's a good thing. In fact. Uh,
you know, I'm from Texas. I'm from Texas. We don't
do real trees. Okay, right, it's not really a thing.
Speaker 4 (01:47):
You know.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Pretty much everybody has an artificier. Some people pay the extra.
My wife feels very passionately about real Christmas trees, which
were some original fights in our marriage. I have come
to become a real tree guy. Real trees are good,
and you know, it does get you a little bit
more in the Christmas spirit. But more importantly about this
whole data center buying artificial trees. This is a perfect
(02:12):
example of what we've talked about with the mindset around AI,
which is you need to personally sacrifice so that the
slop can continue so that you need to personally sacrifice,
not just monetarily, but let's say the human experience putting
up a tree in your house, you know, having fun
with your children, decorating that, so that we can have
(02:34):
this impersonal technology which the CEOs say is going to
take their job and to rip even more of that
away from us. I actually can't think of a better
kind of clip to that encapsulates that and what worshiping
GDP really looks like, because that's what it is. That
that is the explicit kind of view of what that
means and of what people hold dear and why being
(02:57):
you know, an anti AI disposition is so increasingly popular
in American politics today.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Yeah, no, absolutely, I mean that's what they're saying, is like,
we need to change our lives and our traditions to
make way we need to adjust for the AI revolution
that is here that is not really meant to benefit
us at all. It's all to enrich and consolidate power
(03:24):
in the hands of a very few number of people.
I do have some good news on the AI front, however,
Kirson Cinema, who is a former senator and cartoon villain.
She has gone from being in the Senate to now
being a lobbyist for AI data centers. She was pushing
one in this one particular Arizona town and they overwhelmingly,
(03:46):
i think unanimously the city council voted it down. But
in any case, she was also welcomed onto Fox and
Friends to make the case for AI data centers and
how they are actually more eco friendly than they were
in the past.
Speaker 5 (03:58):
SoC let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 6 (04:00):
As you know, there's this massive effort kind of on
the left to kind of come into communities and give
misinformation around water and energy and AI data centers, and
that's a lot of misinformation. This administration is doing a
good job of telling the truth, creating more energy domestically,
the National Energy Dominance Council doing a whole of government
(04:21):
approach to ensure that we're creating our own natural gas,
our own nuclear to power the future. We're actually using
less water with AI Data centers and in the past.
So that communication is bringing people together who just want efficient, proactive,
good lives where their kids have a better life than
they had. So this is I think a really important
(04:41):
issue that has nothing to do with partisanship.
Speaker 2 (04:43):
So keep in mind again this lady is paid to
utter this absolute garbled nonsense. The fact that she can
go up there with a straight face and be like, oh,
this is all good for American energy production, Like we
have looked the way the grid is already being strained
by the power usage of these AI data centers. And
(05:07):
I also find it very interesting saga that she is
framing this as a partisan issue, that oh, it's all
these left wing people who are coming in and telling
you bad things about the AI data centers, while the
President is telling you the truth that this is a
good thing for the American economy, etc. Because the reality is,
as we've covered here extensively, you know, if you look
(05:28):
at the Georgia elections, if you look at the Virginia elections,
if you look at local opposition to AI data centers
being located here, it is very cross ideological and there
is not a clear left right divide here. So that's
something that clearly she and whoever's paying her are trying
to push.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Yeah, I mean, it's the Christen Cinema thing. It's just
too much. And I think what everybody can appreciate now
is how overtly corrupt so much of this is you
have not only the I mean, this is an X
senator who took multiple votes on behalf of big industry,
which we covered here at the time, left in order
(06:07):
to personally enrich herself. I mean, and you know, by
the way, there was all this debate they were like,
does she really believe this a shimatt. It's like, no,
she just wanted to get I mean, it looks like
she just wanted to get paid right in terms of
her advocacy, and now she's like pro Trump now hilariously
for big business reasons. I just want to put it
all together just to show how corrupt so much of
(06:29):
this is. I recently flagged this. I was reading through
you know, I took interest in this de banking conversation.
I think the conversation at in d banking is important.
We've talked about Lefang with this before. There were legitimate
instances of political deep banking that happened, which are really
concerning at a free speech level. These were weaponized by
the tech guys who started saying that depbanking happened in
(06:52):
order to loosen restrictions around their industry. Famously, we had
the Mark Andresen moment on Joe Rogan, but there are
many others. We had Mark Zuckerberg and others for pro
crypto interests. And again I think there are real concerns
around industry specific for politics. But I could not get
over as I was reading this new D Banking report
(07:14):
only weirdos like me. This is the Office of the
Comptroller from the Treasury, so they did a nine month investigation.
They're going to look into who's getting D banked and
you would be amazed to find that this new D
Banking report signals out not just crypto and other industries,
but pornography. Let's go ahead and put this up here
on the screen. The OCC's preliminary finding show that between
(07:37):
twenty and twenty twenty three, nine banks made inappropriate distinctions
among customers in the division of financial services on the
basis of lawful business activities by maintaining policies restricting access
to banking services or requiring escalating reviews and approvals. Sectors
subjected to restricted access included oil and gas, coal mining, firearms,
(07:57):
private prisons, tobacco, eas cigarets, manufacturers, adult entertainment, and digital assets.
Now let's stick with porn and with crypto. You know,
there's this idea that these banks are ideologically opposed to
porn and to crypto. These are some of the greediest
people in the world. You think they don't want to
(08:17):
take their money. Do you know why they don't want
to take their money with crypto? They're worried about KYC
Know your Customer laws and specifically money laundering, which they
have a legal mandate not to to help prevent and
to help report to the FBI or to the US
authorities on porn. It's the same thing what the banks
suddenly grew a conscience. Do you think that that's the
(08:38):
banks are like, oh, my only fans, we can't be
taking their money, or the banks are looking at human
trafficking laws and at revenge porn laws, and at the
internal enforcement of these gigantic conglomerates which are addicting all
of these American men and which are flagrantly in violation
of multiple trafficking laws on the books right now to
(09:00):
help prevent women who are being exploited posted online international
rings which are profiting to the tune of billions of dollars,
and are like, yeah, we can't take their money because
to do so would actually be a violation, specifically of
trying to protect all of these girls, of which these
laws were passed on their behalf. Maybe it's the latter.
(09:21):
And so the Trump administration here taking significant pressure from
the porn industry and others, which again are salivating at
the idea of access to the legitimate banking system, and
now effectively pressuring our largest financial institutions to basically take
their money and look the other way. I can't think
of anything worse. You know. Look, you know, tobacco, fine, whatever,
(09:43):
I get it. You know, that's one of those where
you know, I think tobacco is horrible smoking. Obviously, it
kills a lot of people, the industry, et cetera. That's
one which again I get not wanting, you know, especially
with lawsuits and everything, you don't necessarily want to be
connected to that. But with pornography and with crypto, like
(10:03):
we said, the banks don't care about conscience. They're doing
it for a reason. It's not ideological, it's.
Speaker 2 (10:11):
Not even I mean, these banks were happy to do
business with like after de commission because the money was green.
They're like, yes, let's do the deals. It's fine. We
don't care like we're going to continue to hang out
with him. We've had more and more reporting about that.
So yeah, it's not like they're out here being some
like good lefties like we're gonna, you know, not work
(10:32):
with the And it is interesting to me, uh, going
back to the Mark Andresen Rogan appearance, and just to
remind people, he used the conservative perception and probably a
time it was like legitimate, legitimate reality that there was
ideological debanking to then launch a war on the Consumer
(10:55):
Financial Protection Bureau, which had actually stood up Rogi Chopra,
who was ahead of that agency, stood up against ideological debanking.
But they he found it to be a useful construct.
And then even some of the examples that he offered
that he was like, oh, this person was de banked
just because they're like a conservative and they like Trump,
(11:16):
and then you dig one layer Dee burn and it's
like or maybe they were committing like scams and fraud.
I think people need to really remember, especially crypto is
rife with all kinds of scams and rug poles and
fraud and money laundering, Like none of it's being prosecuted
anymore under the Trump administration.
Speaker 5 (11:35):
But that has been the reality of crypto.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
So there have been very good reasons why banks would
look a scance and not want to get involved with
some of these sorts of things. So it's a classic
playbook that they have used. David Sachs did this too
in his defenseive AI of them like completely deregulating AI.
They take a culture war issue and they frame it
(12:00):
in a way to protect like a pro oligarch agenda.
And so that's a lot of what's going on here
as well. You remember David Sachs and his tweet he
was talking about like, oh, if you don't want to
black George Washington, then we've got to make sure States
can never regulate AI and we could just do whatever
we want to do. So you know, similar kind of
bait and switch going on here as well.
Speaker 1 (12:20):
Yeah, these culture war stuff, you know, in absence of
big arguments around here. By the way, again, like I
said on AI, I've never had more pushback from the
White House. It's kind of fascinating. I enjoy arguing with
them about it. There is a legitimate view about the
AI States thing. I don't agree with it necessarily, but
I'm telling you right now, this porn thing, there's no
(12:41):
defense one hundred percent. It's being pushed by the industry.
It's just like weed I talked about yesterday. You can
defend weed rescheduling all you want, and if it was
done through a real process, I would look, I would
fight it, but I would I'd be like, okay, so
be it. But this is literally because the White House
tea the staff were about to talk about was hired
(13:02):
by a weed company whenever she was outside of office
and then brought that former client to the Oval office
who has billions of dollars at stake and whose stock
massively profited. That's it. That's the only reason that this happened.
Because a bunch of multimillionaires hired pro Trump X campaign officials,
donated or and or hired to the Trump campaign and
(13:24):
then got their way to the Oval and then did
a corrupt deal in order to get it done. Like
that's it. It's the same thing here with porn. It's
because I mean, also, you know, you kind of have
to understand if you're saying banks should disregard KYC regulations
whenever it comes to you know, like crypto and others,
then you know, oh, okay, well it is kind of difficult.
(13:45):
Let's say, to apply it to the pornography industry for
them in general. They want to make it as easy
as possible for all of these vice industries to do business.
I think that's disgusting in an era where the very
basics of life have never been more on affordable or
unattainable for a lot of younger people, and that these
are the very things which are destroying them from the
(14:07):
inside out. And you know, this is a big talk
from the administration which cares about Christianity or moral purpose
or any of that. I have never seen a more
socially libertarian administry, Not even the Biden administration did shit
like this. Let's go to C four, you know, just again,
just to give you an example, Trump is now considering
(14:28):
wiping federal gambling winnings taxes. Let me explain something again.
There's no such thing as gambling winnings. Only four per
They did a study one hundred of thousands people who
did sports betting. Four percent of people had a profit
after five years four percent, ninety six percent. You're gonna lose,
You're a loser, one hundred percent. Now, all this will
do is give casinos and sports betting companies free advertising. Saying,
(14:53):
by the way, when you have this parlay which you're
definitely going to hit. It will also be tax free.
It is a gig gigantic giveaway and brand you know
benefit to these gambling it's so repulsive, like loosening restrictions
on weed, porn, gamble. It's literally like they're personally attacking me.
(15:14):
But look, this is not this isn't about me, Okay
at the end of the day, like you can live
your life the way that you want. But but and
this is just my opinion. I think that the government
should not make it easier easier for multi billion dollar
industries to corrupt you, to corrupt the people around you,
to corrupt your community. The point of the government of
(15:35):
our society is to promote human flourishing. There's nothing about
this which does any of that. All it does is
vastly enriched people who wake up every single day thinking
about how to milk you for as much money as possible.
Those people are my enemies.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
The gambling thing is crazy because it comes to a
moment too when I think there's increasing recognition of like,
oh this this is a disaster, right, this is a problem.
Speaker 5 (15:57):
You know. There, we've got a major issue with addiction.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
We've got a major issue with people who are you know,
giving all their life save and betting on whether it's
boarding events. Now we've got you know, CNN making a
deal with the betting companies you bet on literally everything.
All these scandals coming out about insider trading and rigging
the markets, all that sort of stuff. And you know,
in the past, when we've had things that society is
considered to be like a vice or behavior, they want
(16:21):
to discourage, but they don't want to outright ban. Oftentimes
what you do is you actually tax it, you make
it more expensive, or you make it more difficult. Here,
you're going in the opposite direction, Like instead of doing
a vice tax, you're doing like a vice text credit,
you're doing like a vice encouragement, actively trying to funnel
people into something that we know is fundamentally rigged, exploitative, predatory,
(16:43):
and damaging. So yeah, I mean, you know, come get
your Christian nationalists. This is it is really pretty wild
what's going on here. But it's the whole administration, the
core foundation. There are no foundational principles outside of just
like a money grop, I mean, that's what it is.
It's just like a heist. They are taking everything that's
not nailed down. Everybody's in it for their own bag.
(17:05):
Like you know, even the foreign policy is run for
a bunch of oligarchs. Bag the domestic policy, the economy
is run for them. That's the whole thing. And so
you know the fact that the gambling and the poor
industry and whatever getting their seats at the table and
getting their taste no surprise.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
Absolutely, all right, guys, I think we all talked a
little bit too much. So we're going to have to
go to Susie Wiles before we welcome our friend Juan
David Rojas. Turning now to Susie Wilds. This just broke
this morning. We had to add this in. This is
one of the craziest interviews by a senior White House
official I have ever seen in my life, in any
(17:42):
other White House, any other time, normal time. She's getting
fired today under this president who knows. Let's put this
up here on the screen. This is a New York
Times write up of a multi page interview that Susie
Wiles has been sitting with Vanity Fair for over the
last year, in which she gets candid about the entire
Trump presidency admits that many of the things that the
(18:04):
White House set are lies, admits that Elon is using ketamine.
She criticizes the president. She says that the vice president
is a conspiracy theorist who his conversion to away from
never trump Ism was political. She says Trump has an
alcoholic personality. So let me read from the New York
Times write up of this lengthy vanity fair profile. President
(18:25):
Trump's chief of staff said she tried to get him
to end his score settling against political enemies after ninety
days in office, but acknowledged the administration still ongoing push
for prosecutions has been fueled in part by the President's
desire for retribution. So number one, the mortgage fraud case
against Letitia James or against James Comy, all of that,
(18:46):
it's not about the case, it's political retribution from the president.
She just tweeted it out. That's an old meme from
the twenty tens. Is just tweeting out what you know,
as journalists, we've been working on this story, trying to
prove that this is the true reason why Trump is
doing this, even though yes, it's obvious we need evidence,
and now we have the White House chief of staff
(19:06):
He's like, oh yeah, He's doing it for political retribution purposes.
That's what these prosecutions are about. Okay, let's sit with that.
Let's sit with that as we continue again for over
eleven interviews that she's given the Vice president, she said,
quote has been a conspiracy theorist for a decade. His
conversion from Trump critic to ally was based on, on principle,
what was sort of political. Elon Musk is an avowed
(19:28):
ketamine user in odd duck whose actions were not always
rational and left her quote aghast Russ's vote the budget
director quote is a right wing absolute zealot, and the
Attorney General Pambondi quote completely whiffed in handling of the
Epstein files. She continued, by the way, to say about Venezuela,
(19:52):
this is my personal favorite. She said here about the boats,
that the policy of the United States is that or
for Donald Trump is to quote blow up as many
boats as possible until Maduro decides to leave office. That's
what she said. So admitting none of this is about drugs,
it's not about fentanyl, which is all bullshit and which
(20:15):
again I knew that I've been saying that here. But
to have the White House Chief of Staff just come
out and be like, oh, yeah, yeah, it's all fake
and it's about regime change. Ok. Thank you, thank you,
Madam Susie Wiles. You know, I mean continuing here. Describing
Trump as an alcoholic personality with respect to quote operates
(20:37):
with the view that there's nothing he can't do. That's
not usually something I would describe as an alcoholic. But okay,
she said, so much of her job revolves around the
president's personality and stream of consciousness public comments. She said
that during the whole tariffs thing that the Vice President
jad Vance was sent into convince Trump to pump the
(21:00):
brakes on tariffs, and she said that there was a
huge disagreement that they were deciding. People were predicting disaster
on usaid. She thinks no rational person could think the
USAID process was a good one. Nobody. I mean, the
whole thing is crazy and we're just scratching the surface.
I haven't even been able to I haven't been able
(21:22):
to get even all of them just yet, what these
comments are. But trashing the cabinet admitting the Epstein files
is a huge problem. Says she can't understand why Gleane
Maxwell was moved to a different prison, says that the
Epstein files was mishandled says that Venezuela is really all
about regime change, that usaid was a disaster, that she
(21:45):
was a keep in mind, you know, part of why
this is so crazy is it's not just about telling
the truth. This White House, her employee, Caroline Leavitt took
to the podium to defend every single part of this
bullshit at the time, as the official part of the admitted,
and she's admitting that in private. Oh my god, we
were a gas by it. We were disgusted. We tried
(22:07):
to move off of this policy. The prosecutions are political.
I mean, how is that going to play in court?
How is this going to play if this is a
true court? James comy, congratulations, you just got acquitted, all right,
Letitia James who they've tried to indict what three more times?
Speaker 5 (22:21):
Great times from a grand.
Speaker 1 (22:23):
Jury and can't get it. Yeah, good luck, you know,
to the prosecutors who are trying to do this. It's
just so crazy. I have never seen anything like this
in my entire time covering Washington.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Ever, it is wild.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
Let me read and she, by the way, undercut a
number of other policies. She talked about how they mean
to be more careful with deportations. She said she did
not agree with pardoning the violent January sixth ers, that
she pushed to just do the nonviolent ones and was overruled. There,
So all kinds of the like most like core and
(22:57):
controversial Trump two point zero policies. She's effectively undercutting here
everything from the day one j six rioters pardons up
into Venezuela, where she's just giving the game away, that
the blowing up of the bots isn't about drugs, it's
about regime change. On the political retribution piece, let me
read a little bit of this, so she said, quote,
(23:18):
we have a loose agreement that the score settling will
end before the first ninety days are over, she said
at the time when that did not happen. By August,
she told mister Whipple that I don't think he's on
a retribution tour, but said that Trump was aiming at
people who did bad things and coming after him. In
some cases it may look like retribution, and there may
be an element of that from time to time.
Speaker 5 (23:40):
Who would blame him, not me? And so in terms
of just.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Actual real world impact, yeah, any of those court cases,
Tisha James, James, call me Eric Swallwell, Adam Schiff. There's
been all sorts of talk about people that are going
to go after on this mortgage fraud bullshit. Those cases
will all be undercut today extent that they had any
likes to begin with, by this overt admission from the
(24:06):
Chief of Staff that yes, these are political. This is
about retribution, that's what he's doing. So that in and
of itself is wild to undercut jd Vance. Trump may
not really care that much about that, but to say,
you know, oh yeah, of course he converted to trump
Ism because it was.
Speaker 5 (24:23):
Political, which is obvious.
Speaker 2 (24:25):
But you know, here you've got the Chief of Staff
acknowledging what everybody could see the reality in front of
their eyes, calling him a conspiracy theorist, talking about Elon Musk,
drug use, all of it. I mean, yeah, it's pretty wild.
And the other thing about this saga is the White
House participated with all of this, like this was authorized.
I mean there's a big, like glossy photo shoot involved
(24:46):
with a bunch of different administration officials. Other officials spoke
to this reporter as well, So this was all this
whole project. This whole write up was greenlit by the administration,
even though you know, I would be very so prize
if they knew the extent of what Susie Wiles was
saying here.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
No, they didn't know. I can already my phone's it's
pinging a little bit here right now. Yeah, I'll just
I'll just leave it at that. In terms of what
people around Washington, including people who are I mean, here's
the thing. It's an unspoken rule here in DC when
you work for somebody, you never make yourself the story.
Never so the White House chief of staff, many chiefs
of staff, you know, to presidents and others, they don't
(25:24):
sit for interviews. Why because your job is to execute
the agenda of the president. You're never supposed to be
the main character. Ever, that's the job of the principle.
I know this sounds like kind of servile, but like
in a certain way, like that's the job, right, That's
what you do as a staffer. And so for sitting
for eleven interviews here, eleven interviews and just letting loose
(25:46):
about your thoughts about how Pam Bondi's an idiot, she
said completely whift on Epstein. I mean, if the White
House Chief of Staff thinks this, How can we as
citizens have any confidence in our government if the White
House Chief of Staff is openly saying that what the
President is saying is a lie, Is that many cabinet
members are idiots or incompetent? Is that doge which was
(26:10):
held up as a central pillar of the administration there
at the time, what she was quote aghast by it?
First of all, what are you doing in that job? Lady?
What are you even doing? If you think this you
should leave right? What does it say about you that
you think all of this and that you're sticking around
to quote do something about it because you're obviously you're
not doing a very good job. You actually don't have
that much influence if that's what you think that you're doing.
(26:32):
And then second, yeah, I just I cannot get over
how you can just openly admit so many things which
again we all know are true. But there is a
difference legally, first of all, in a court of law
to say that you have a political prosecution. But second,
like on regime change, that's got to be one of
the most consequential policies of the entire Trump administration. And
(26:55):
to just come out and be like, our flimsy bullshit
pretext is in fact, the bullshit is amazing. I mean
it's shocking to the cares well.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
And that's something in a future administration if you've got
Democrats in control, like people need to think about the
you know, potential prosecutions they clearly are worried about, like
with the double tap strike, whether that was legal or not. Obviously,
like I think the whole thing is illegal, but they
clearly got nervous about that as well, judging by the reaction.
(27:24):
So when you have her coming out and publicly undercutting
the bullshit legal pretext that they've been using, Yeah, that's
that's a big problem for Pete Hegseth. That's a big
problem for that admiral what was it, Admiral Bradley who
was kind of thrown under the bus. That's a big
problem for all of the seals that were involved in
this policy.
Speaker 5 (27:44):
It's that's a big issue.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
Let me read the part of the Epstein portion, because
this is pretty wild too. So this is about Pam Bondi.
She also gets into Trump a little bit with regard
to Epstein. So, as you mentioned before, Soccercy says, I
think Bondi completely whipped, appreciating that that was very targeted
group that cared about this. First she gave them binders
full of nothingness. Then she said the witness list or
(28:09):
the client list was on her desk. There is no
client list, and it's sure as hell wasn't on her desk.
Mister Vance, by contrast, she said, understood the sensitivity because
he himself was a conspiracy theorist. She said so again,
saying directly, when Pam Bondi told you that this was
on her desk, she was lying, there is no client list.
It's sure as hell was not on her desk. That
(28:31):
is what she had to say about that. And then
she says that she has read the Epstein documents and
acknowledged Trump's name is in them. Quote, we know he's
in the file, and he's not in the file doing
anything awful. Nothing awful, Sager. So rest easy there. But
neither apparently, this is one more part on this. Neither
apparently is Bill Clinton. Asked about Trump's claims going back
(28:54):
years that Clinton had visited the Epstein island as well,
said there is no evidence. Asked if there's incriminating evidence
about Clinton and the files as Trump has suggested. She
says the President was wrong about that. So she's saying
Trump is lying. Trump is in the files but not
doing anything awful, and that he is lying about what
(29:15):
the files contained with regard to Bill Clinton.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
It's so crazy, man, I truly have never seen anything
like this. The last interview that was anything remotely comparable,
in my opinion, was maybe Steve Bannon in the first
hundred Days where he openly trashed Jared Kushner and other
members of the administration. Who was it to the American Prospect?
Is that right? It was some like kind of.
Speaker 5 (29:36):
Left It was like New York magazine.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
No, it was a lefty magazine.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
I remember Near Magazine is kind of lefty. But anyway,
I don't remember exactly, but yeah.
Speaker 1 (29:44):
There was that. But honestly, like Stan McCrystal, he was
the general in charge of Afghanistan at the time, and
Michael Hastings, the Rolling Stone journalist, ended up being delayed
and McCrystal, what did he say about Obama? He said
he was an idiot something like that. I had some
comment about Obama where he was like, he's dumb. Uh
published it and he was immediately fired. But that was
(30:06):
in the old rules. I don't know if that's going
to happen now. I have no idea I have. I mean,
how could you ever enter a cabinet meeting again when
I mean Susie Wilds, who I guess is one of
your technically kind of your boss, is out there just
trashing you, uh in the public. It's amazing, But that's
the world we live in. Is Cash Patel sitting for
interviews about his love life with Stephen Miller's wife, who's
(30:29):
dressed casually for some reason. This entire thing, I don't know.
I don't know what is happening to this uh, to
this government. But yeah, we're being confederacy and I don't
even have work. I'm literally speechless. How retarded this is.
It's crazy. It's fucking crazy.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
So you have the chief of staff, so this is
not live trust arrangement, Trump's chief of staff saying he's
lying about the Epstein files, Pam Bondi was lying about
the Epstein files, that she disagrees with the deportation approach,
the USAID approach, that Elon Musk, who was handed the
(31:09):
keys to the whole freaking government, is a drug addict,
that russ vote who still has the keys. The whole
government is a right wing ID love that the vice
president is a conspiracy theorist. I mean, what more could
you possibly get into this series of interviews.
Speaker 5 (31:27):
It's pretty wild. I don't know.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
I mean, I have to think that there would be
some like, there has to be some blowback for this.
I mean, especially the parts where she says things about Trump,
in particular that he's lying and that she disagreed with
him on the J six pardons and you know, the
undercutting of the Venezuela policy. That's a live, active, very significant,
serious issue, and here she is just like giving the
(31:51):
game away on that one.
Speaker 5 (31:53):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
It's very different from my impression of her, Like I
didn't know anything about her, but it seemed like she
was just this very we haven't heard from her that
she is very like disciplined and buttoned up.
Speaker 5 (32:03):
This is the total opposite of that.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Well, you know, maybe everything Trump everyone turns into a
narcissist around Trump. I guess you know that's possible, asked.
Speaker 2 (32:11):
I also wonder how hill you know he's he's very
against alcohol at.
Speaker 1 (32:16):
All right being described.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
I also wonder how he'll react to being characterized as
having the personality of an alcoholic.
Speaker 1 (32:23):
His brother that will land with him. Yeah, yeah, I
go over, No man, all right, more consequential news. We
got Juanda vid Rojas standing by to talk about Chile.
Let's get to it. Turning now to our friend Juanda
vid Rojas, who joins us live to discuss the most
recent elections in Chile, who have elected a new right
(32:44):
wing president, Jose Antonio cast by nearly twenty point margin one.
Our excellent analyst of all things Latin America joins us
to break down. Good to see you man, Thanks for
having guys. Absolutely so let's put this up here on
the screen. Why the Chilean left fail you discuss some
of the policies over the last five years, some of
the rise here of Jose Antonio coast about how exactly
(33:08):
this all came to be. Why don't you break some
of it down for us and maybe what it means
for the region and if anything, for the United States.
Speaker 4 (33:14):
So gust he's you know, he's been called far right,
like ultra conservative. He's very conservative. He is an apologist
for the Pinochet dictatorship, which for decades after the dictatorship
of people on the right tried to like distance some
distance themselves from the former dictator. And actually the first
(33:37):
like few presidents after the dictatorship were all like center left.
It was only until Seast I think in like twenty ten,
who was like the first conservative when he was like
tried to distance himself from the dictatorship. Cost is like
he says that, like, you know, he condemns the human
rights abuses, but that you know, his legacy and especially
(33:57):
Pinochet's economic legacy were great. His brother actually was one
of the Chicago boys that advised Pinochet and like installing
this neoliberal model. The country is known as like the
cradle of neoliberalism. And so his brother, Migekas, actually served
as the president of Chile Central Bank during the dictatorship.
(34:18):
And so you know, there's a lot of polarization around this.
People on the left will say that, you know, will
condemn the human rights abuses and like a lot of
the legacy of the economic policies, and people on the
right will say, oh, look, but we had this great
economic growth afterwards and this kind of this kind of
flaws and some of these arguments. So that's a bit
of the rundown for the moment for the United States.
(34:40):
Cost Almost all right wingers in Latin America, you could
describe them as neo conservatives. They worshiped the United States.
They hate Russia, China, I run blah blah blah blah.
This guy like is going to be really good for
the current administration. He loves me. Lay a lot of
like posting after the election was showing how like geographically
(35:01):
the continent of South the South America is like divided
along the middle between right and left governments, and Melay,
what he did is that he posted like the the
like western half that are like conservative governments, this like
tech bro like futurism stuff with like skyscrapers, and then
the leftist governments are a bunch of like Brazilian favollas.
So that's to give you an idea.
Speaker 5 (35:21):
Got it, gotcha.
Speaker 2 (35:22):
So they're they're excited about like the prospera type ification
of those countries.
Speaker 4 (35:28):
So yeah, that's a good way of putting it.
Speaker 2 (35:30):
So his his brother was a Chicago School neoliberal economic
adjustment austerity guy. Dad was a Nazi. He's a Pinochet apologist.
This is a lot, it's a lot to take it.
So what was it that you know, people were responding
to to reject the the you know, more left leaning
government and go with this guy who you know, I mean,
(35:52):
his politics are pretty radical from those familiar collect Uh
connections and his embrace or justification of Pinochet but also
the embrace of Malay. Also says he wants to consult
with Bikelly with regards to to crime. So, I mean,
this is a pretty dramatic turn what led to it?
Speaker 4 (36:11):
Yeah, So I will say that Kas despite his past
and and like he this is the third time he
ran for president, and previous other times he was like
really hardline on abortion, he kind of toned that down
this time around. He is honestly, as far as like
anyone can really say, a committed democrat, he's not. He said,
he's not interested in like trying to take over all
(36:32):
the institutions, persecute his opponents, and like govern for life
like Pinochet, and in general you can he even also
say that like the candidate that he defeated was the
Communist Party candidate. She was nominated by the Communist Party,
but for communists, honestly, she was pretty moderate. She was
really critical of like human rights abuses by like Maduro
(36:53):
and Artaica in Latin America, which is I said, like
in some other time that it's rare for like leftists
to openly like celebrate Maduro. It's also rare for them
to be stridently critical of him too, So that's something
interesting in Chilean politics, and I think that explains a
lot why so many people were willing to gravitate towards him.
(37:13):
As for the failings of the current government, current President
Gabriel Borodich, he won in twenty twenty one, he was
seen as like the shining star on the international left.
The country was like trying to rewrite his constitution and
he said he was going to ury neoliberalism. That didn't
really work out, and we can talk some more about that,
but in a nutshell, I like to say that he
(37:35):
was basically like the Chilean Mam Donnie. And to be clear,
I like him and mom Donnie. I think both of
them like on a personal level. They seem kind of
like nice guys and charismatic, et cetera. And Bodich actually
did some really good things in my opinion. He raised
them minimum wage like twenty percent the forty poorest Chileans,
(38:00):
the bottom forty percent of Chileans now have access to
free healthcare. Pensions are a little bit less miserly, which
historically were terrible in Chile. And the best thing actually
is that there's a gradual reduction in the work week
from forty five to forty hours. That's something that unions
had been demanding for decades, really really good stuff. The
(38:20):
problem is that the broader political environment after the pandemic
shifted two issues that really benefited the right. There was
a crime wave. Some of that had to do with
the fact that there were these like mass protests in
twenty nineteen that led to the Constitutional Convention, similar to
twenty twenty here with BLM like there was backlash against
the police and that led to officers like not one
(38:43):
even like police high crime areas. There's also been a
broader reconfiguration of the drug trade in South America, favoring
like Asian and European markets, so that's led a lot
of organized crime to move into countries like Chile. There
was inflation, and even though the government rage them in
a wage the truth is that the increase was roughly
(39:03):
in line with previous governments, so in relative terms, like
people's buying power went down. And finally this is always
the kryptonite for progressive governments. There was this huge migration surge,
especially in ilegal immigration. The country's immigrant population is double
to one point six million, is around three hundred thousand undocumented,
mostly Venezuelan's now in Chile. And that doesn't sound like
(39:27):
much here, but that's enormous in Chile, considering that the
country's whole population is around twenty million. And so how
did a Boord handle that? Similar to with Biden, his
government had like the lowest amount of deportations in history,
around half of the previous government and like, for example,
(39:49):
with Biden, like you can say, for instance that Biden
apported a lot of people at the border. Within the
country not so much. And so there was this every
single time, including in Latin American countries, you see this
divide between people who are more college educated and more
working class. And every single time the more college educated
people have a reluctance understandably so for like you know,
(40:14):
humanitarian reasons to not really want to like do think
things like deportations, whereas working class people feel, you know,
they have concerns over crime, strains the social services competition
with illegal labor. So it it bords. To his credit,
he did like militarize the northern border to try to
(40:36):
stem new arrivals. But people really resented the fact that
the government was not really keeping up enforcement. And Sokas
has this trumpst program. He wants to build a border
shield of walls, ditches, and.
Speaker 1 (40:50):
It's gonna be a long shield.
Speaker 4 (40:51):
Man.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
That's a skinny country.
Speaker 5 (40:52):
Yeah, we all know the shape.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
That's tough. That's gonna be a tough wall to build.
Love Chile, by the way, very cool country that I've
been to before. So finally a question for you, Juan.
You talked there about America. What about Venezuela, Like you
just said, what's the opinion on the on the current
government on regime change? Would they be supportive of something
like that? Traditionally, you know, with Pinochet and our past relations,
(41:17):
it was viewed as this like power center of bulwark
against Latin American leftism. Is that something that we're going
to see again? What do you think?
Speaker 4 (41:25):
Oh? Yeah, I'd say that the president elect his administration
will be We'll go along basically with whatever the Trump
administration wants, including of Venezuela. The current government of void
each like I said, they were very critical of Maduro.
They have said that they would not, you know, support
any kind of regime change like by force and Venezuela.
(41:49):
But yeah, it's yea, this is a really sensitive topic.
I mean, who knows. Maybe cous could be apprehensive about
this though, because the thing is, you know, the president,
you set for this. It's like, okay, you know, maybe
we're you like it if it's against Maduro, but it's like,
you know what, if they can do it to Maduro, right,
they can do it to anybody.
Speaker 2 (42:09):
So yeah, it's yeah, yeah, And just because they like
you today doesn't mean in the future they won't turn right,
So that very very interesting stuff.
Speaker 4 (42:20):
One yeah, yeah, oh you know one interesting thing actually
in Chile, permanent residents, this is hilarious, are allowed to
vote if they've lived in the country for five years,
and so Venezuelans were actually a really coverted electorate during
this past campaign and guess who they voted for. They
voted for cast was promising to deport them because Venezuelans
(42:44):
are super neo conservatives. So there's been a lot of
discussion around that. The leading conservative candidate now in Peru
for twenty twenty six said that Peru should just give
citizenship to Venezuelans so that they can vote for him.
It's a talk about importing voters.
Speaker 5 (43:01):
Wow, wow, it's uh.
Speaker 4 (43:04):
Yeah, it's it's funny stuff.
Speaker 1 (43:05):
Well, dude, this is why we like talking to you.
Speaker 2 (43:08):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (43:08):
A lot of other stuff going on in the world.
Chile always a fascinating country, beautiful country. Wish them the best.
Thank you for joining us, sir, Thank you, Thank you
guys so much for watching. We appreciate it. We have
a great Crowned Point show for you all tomorrow, and
we will see you all on Thursday for our last
show before Christmas. Christal will be back in the studio,
don't worry, so we'll see all that
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.