12/5/25:Bannon Praises Ryan, Hegseth Boat Strikes, Pentagon Press Clowns & MORE!

Ryan, Emily, Griffin and Mac discuss Bannon praising Ryan's reporting, Hegseth orders new boat strikes, Pentagon press core clowned & MORE.

Mac's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/GoodPoliticGuy

Griffin: https://x.com/griffinpdavis

 

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

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

 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

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

Speaker 2 (00:02):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of the show.

Speaker 1 (00:09):
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 (00:15):
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 (00:26):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com.

Speaker 3 (00:31):
All right, good morning everyone, it is Friday, December fifth.
Welcome to your Breaking Points Friday Show. We got Emily,
we got Ryan, and we have McCauley Holmes here in
the studio today.

Speaker 4 (00:42):
How's everybody doing.

Speaker 5 (00:44):
Here's you Mac, how you do it? Fired up? Fired
up and ready to go incredible and no Crystal, no Sager.
We'll make it.

Speaker 4 (00:51):
Everybody.

Speaker 3 (00:52):
Feel free to tune out now or or go big
in the comments for us, you know, maybe support the
Friday Show. This this band of pirates. We have a
big show today. We've got more strikes on Venezuela. We're
gonna be talking to Ryan about his war on the
new Pentagon Press Corps. We've got some news on the

(01:15):
January sixth pipe bomber than Cash battel. We also have
a little bit more betting news. Perhaps we'll get into
a little bit of canvas Owens versus TPUs A, and
perhaps if we have time, even a big a little
bit of Olivia Nuzzy. So quite a big Friday show
plan for you today, but I wanted to start with Ryan. Ryan,

(01:36):
we have to ask you were on Steve Bannon's show
yesterday and do you have Are you ready to issue
an apology?

Speaker 4 (01:45):
How dare you what happened here?

Speaker 3 (01:48):
Should we just throw up a clip before Ryan defends himself,
Mac throw up a throw up a second.

Speaker 4 (01:54):
Let's just give the audience some texture.

Speaker 6 (01:56):
Let's look at some of this this glazing that took
place yesterday, glazing.

Speaker 7 (02:00):
All over the story. You look forward to having you backward.
I want people to start going to your site on
drop site News. Where do people go? What's your social media?

Speaker 8 (02:09):
Yeah, drop drop site news dot com on all social
uh and we're on all social platforms that you know
at drop Site News. Yeah, I think you're I think
the posse uh well, we'll find a lot useful there.

Speaker 7 (02:21):
I think they will find a lot. You're an intrepid reporter, sir,
and a voice of truth. Sometimes people love it and
sometimes people love it less. But you're you're a warrior.
Thank you so much for drawing.

Speaker 4 (02:33):
I appreciate you. No warrior, Ryan, How to go?

Speaker 9 (02:39):
Ryan?

Speaker 5 (02:40):
It was hilarious.

Speaker 8 (02:41):
I gotta make I'm gonna I guess that's gonna have
to be a new semi ironic Pin tweet if he
finishes talking about me being tough as boot leather, which
is just comical coming from Bannon. Awfully leathery dude, so
he would know it was. But it was great to
be on because I He's got a huge audience. And

(03:03):
we had just published a story this week about how
Kere Starmer and his political machine had spent years actively
and secretly destroying both left wing and conservative media ecosystems.
We covered the story yesterday because one of the outlets

(03:23):
that they secretly went after, well they went after it publicly,
but what wasn't known is that it was Keure Starmer's
machine that was behind it. One of those outlets was
The Federalist, where Emily used to work, and she remembers
the way that this was a quite effective actually attack
on the monetization of their news outlets that were oppositional

(03:46):
to them on the left. They effectively destroyed this major
progressive publication in the UK called The Canary. It's just
now recovering, but they went from something like twenty plus,
you know, full time staff and an influential force in
UK media to like one person thanks to this this

(04:08):
secret attack, and the whole aim of it was to
destroy Corbinism inside the Labor Party and to elevate cure Starmer. So,
I don't think Bannon has a whole lot of love
for Corbinism, but he does have love for bright Bart,
the Federalist and the other right wing papers and is
against uh is against having them censored. So it was

(04:32):
a it was a good outlet to get that story out.
By the way, for the book it's it's an adapted
excer and expanded reporting from the book called The Fraud,
which I have here and which people should get if
if they want to learn the nitty gritty about here Starmer.
It's by Paul Holten a journalist over in the UK.

Speaker 5 (04:53):
But yeah, that's so. That was that was fun.

Speaker 8 (04:55):
As as Emily knows, I listened to the war Room
sometimes to like keep up with what the populist right
is up to. So I'm familiar with the posse and
the Shenanigans they get up to.

Speaker 9 (05:06):
It was like a longtime listener, first time, Yes, situation,
that's right.

Speaker 3 (05:13):
Was there a little bit of a Trump mom Donnie
energy in the room there, you know, lefty popular, right
wing populous?

Speaker 5 (05:20):
Yeah, maybe that's what it is. This is this is
the real Maga communism, right. Yeah.

Speaker 8 (05:25):
And people were asking if I asked him about the
Epstein connections. I had actually asked him about that two
weeks ago for a story that we wrote about Epstein,
him and Mody trying to arrange a meeting between him
and Mody.

Speaker 5 (05:38):
But no, I hadn't. I didn't.

Speaker 8 (05:39):
You can go watch the interview. I didn't ask questions
I was getting questions asked asked of me.

Speaker 3 (05:46):
Well, uh, we accept your apology, Ryan for platforming this figure.

Speaker 5 (05:51):
Yeah, platformed him.

Speaker 3 (05:53):
You're right, we they we're all we're all stained. Our
blood are the blood's on all of our hands here.
But Ryan, you will be sharing a seal next time.
You guys can be bunk mates in the next.

Speaker 10 (06:05):
Time getting arrested by decades.

Speaker 3 (06:11):
Let's get to our top story today. More strikes in
Venezuela and Mack, you can pull it up here. Pete
Hegseth announced yet another strike here, and I think another
thing that someone flagged is he seemed to do it
at the request of a tp USA producer, Andrew pul

(06:33):
of It said all it would be awesome if we
could get more of these strikes. Pete Hegseth quote tweeted
it Mac if we could pull that up next and said, yeah,
we got it here for you. Your wish is our command.
Andrew just sunk another Narco boat. So TPUSA still very

(06:53):
relevant in the conversation here, Ryan, what do we make
of this?

Speaker 8 (06:58):
I'm curious how Emily would understand this. But Charlie Kirk,
you know, personally lobbied at some at some expense, you know, uh,
Trump not to attack Iran. Trump apparently even yelled at
him over it, like Kirk knew that what he was

(07:19):
doing was was risky and was going to cost him
a little bit. You now have a tp US a
reporter in the Pentagon press room agitating for new strikes
against Iran, and now you've got this TPUSA producer like
asking you know, to blow up more more boats and
to burn more more people alive. That doesn't feel And

(07:42):
maybe I'm maybe I'm wrong, and maybe Kirk would just
absolutely love this stuff, but it feels off given Kirk's
kind of turned towards more America first isolationism.

Speaker 9 (07:55):
It's been interesting because the divide that I expected to
be at least a little what's the best, a little
more salient, it's just not there.

Speaker 10 (08:06):
And I don't know why it's not there.

Speaker 9 (08:09):
I think maybe people I would expect it to be
quieter if we were actually doing this with like Sinaloa, right, so,
like if the entire predicate for this alleged operation was
more believable, that this was actually about the people who
are trafficking fetanyl into the country every single year and

(08:31):
killing American kids, mixing it up with cocaine or whatever.
But even in this situation where you have language that
feels like it's ripped straight out of two thousand and two,
in two thousand and three, I don't know, I don't
know where different people would have fallen down on it.
I do know that it's really like the America first

(08:52):
world is pretty they're fine, pretty much pretty much fine
with it. Yeah, I don't know, but I don't know
if actual I don't think they know how actual, like
average Republicans are going to react to this going into
the future, because people genuinely are psych of this. And
if there's a power vacuum in Venezuela that starts to

(09:12):
feel a lot like Iraq in two thousand and three,
it's going to look like another blunder. I think pretty
obviously it's going to look like another blunder. And one
of the big blind spots I think on the right
is there's a lack of there's a lack of you
either have to go with the normy conservatives or you

(09:36):
have to go with like the fringe fringe like bigots
to get criticism of Trump. And I feel like there's
a big opening because there's all kinds of decisions being
made that normal Trump voters are like whoa, whoa, whoa,
whoa whoa, and Norman Conservatives aren't pushing the brakes. It's
only like the fringe people who are.

Speaker 8 (09:57):
Hmm, yeah, it's interesting, Yeah, like yeah, the populist right
does like that, Gates types they do, yeah just fine,
not just fine with it, but like lusting for it.

Speaker 9 (10:11):
Gates had a decent question at the pressure. We talked
about that already, Ryan, but that.

Speaker 8 (10:15):
Was yeah, Yeah, had another good one. We can get
into it in a little bit. And Maria, the guy
he's talking to, not going to say he was drunk,
but I'll let people Josh.

Speaker 10 (10:25):
Joe, you wouldn't say that.

Speaker 5 (10:27):
You would with an answer, I would never.

Speaker 8 (10:28):
I would never suggest that they're day drinking at the Pentagon.
Now that the actual press court, we'll get that.

Speaker 4 (10:33):
We'll get that in a second.

Speaker 3 (10:34):
But Mac, my question for you, Mac is like, you know,
it's one thing when we see the politicians like Josh
Shapiro signing bombs to go, you know, strike Palestinians, but.

Speaker 4 (10:43):
Now it's podcasters.

Speaker 6 (10:45):
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I guess my question for Emily
is like, if they're kind of going along on the
right with the boat strikes, do you think that that
dynamic will change? Would there be a fracture if we
actually do the full regime change, because that's like an
entirely different thing. Like I can see people excusing blowing
up a couple of boats in the Caribbean, but like

(11:08):
full blown regime change in the Western hemisphere, massive destabilization.
We're trying to force this Machado woman into power, Like,
what is that that not going to lead to any
sort of major divide in the right. Is everybody just
going to sort of fall in mind on this because
it seems like that would be a major fracture point
broadly with Americans.

Speaker 9 (11:28):
Yeah, and Narco Rubio is really intentionally making the argument
that there's nothing more America first than tending to your
own hemisphere. That if you're America first, you should be
cheering this because it's about hemispheric defense. And I think
that's pretty obviously.

Speaker 5 (11:42):
Yes, America firsts in like the Americas if anywhere.

Speaker 9 (11:46):
Can be America anywhere can identify as an American border.

Speaker 10 (11:50):
But yeah, I think that's why.

Speaker 6 (11:51):
He's like, I think Machado, Machado probably identifies as an American.

Speaker 9 (11:55):
Actually probably does. But that's the that's why they're making
that argument. So I think they understand that people are
not into rehip change wars. I think what actually would
really change things, and some of this is you know,
American Bravado, Like people don't really worry too much about
like Venezuela. Don't feel super threatened by Venezuela. But if

(12:17):
American boots that aren't just like CIA boots, but like
American troops are in an operation on the ground in Venezuela,
I do think you'll have more people looking around and
being like, what the hell is going on? Why are
we doing this right? But honestly, I just think people
don't see. It doesn't feel to people like a massive

(12:38):
invasion of a rocker Afghanistan, and so they just they
might not love it, but they also don't care that much.

Speaker 10 (12:45):
That's my explanation.

Speaker 6 (12:46):
I guess I just don't I don't see how rapid
the flip was between all of the rhetoric on you know,
we're not going to do the sort of unnecessary foreign
wars and regime change operations. We're going to be America first.
To immediately it's like, no, the neo cons are actually
in control, like Lindsay Graham is celebrating Trump's actions every day,
and Marco Rubio seems to be steering the ship like

(13:08):
it's just a complete betrayal of the vibes the energy
that I feel like the Maga coalition was trying to
form themselves as well.

Speaker 9 (13:18):
Ryan pointed out the like Charlie Kirk flying to Washington
and getting yelled at by Trump over Iran, And I
think that's super interesting, and Ryan, you might have more
thoughts on that. But people felt like Trump was vindicated
with Operation Midnight Hammer and that they were made to
look a fool. And you know, I don't necessarily think

(13:40):
that's the case, but that's you know, people felt like
they had maybe a little bit of egg on their
face and are potentially holding their powder. But that doesn't change,
you know, going into a midterm cycle. The average right
of center voter is like, what, my grocery bills are
still high? And you guys are you have people on
the ground in Venezuela, like what do we doing? So

(14:01):
it doesn't change the possibility of that happening for them
in the midterm y or two.

Speaker 8 (14:06):
Yeah, I think people when it came to the Midnight Hammer,
people were happy that Trump did not do more than
twelve days of bombing, and so kind of just all
collectively decided to pretend that he was a champion for
stopping his own bombing, like he you know, he's out

(14:27):
there celebrating himself for reaching this the ceasefire, which is
like you're the one doing the firing. It's like all
you have to do is stop shooting. Congratulations. And because
the kind of populoust isolations right wanted that to happen,
they were like okay, cool, Like yeah, great job Trump.
But I don't think anybody really actually genuinely celebrates his

(14:48):
like starting a you know, starting a bombing campaign and
then ending it, right except an ever ending bombing campaign
and occupation of Iran.

Speaker 5 (14:58):
Yes, well that's that's true.

Speaker 3 (15:00):
Well, speaking of celebrating and trying to add some public
positivity to the mix on all these foreign affairs, this
leaked is nicely to Ryan your war with the new
Pentagon press corps here in d C. Mac, can you
throw up some of the first images? I got two
images here here.

Speaker 5 (15:19):
Let's get the group the group photo.

Speaker 4 (15:21):
Let's get the group photo in first.

Speaker 3 (15:23):
Now there's been a no right, correct if I'm wrong,
But basically all the people in this photo have signed
something saying that they will not leak or basically report
any information that they get that would be considered negative or.

Speaker 6 (15:38):
There will be no journalism occurringtrusive in this photograph.

Speaker 3 (15:42):
Yeah, and we've got another one here, MAXI can you
throw up the second one here? They've been taking photos
of themselves doing photo shoots in these empty offices that
the journalists used to occupy. Now the influencers are here
doing photo shoots. We've got what an infamous cam Higbee here.
He's been one of the main provocateurs, and his caption

(16:05):
here for people listening says journalism degrees are useless and
needlessly expensive.

Speaker 4 (16:10):
I just proved it, Ryan. What are we supposed to
make of all this?

Speaker 10 (16:14):
I mean, he's right about that, he is.

Speaker 8 (16:17):
I'm pretty sure that at Drop Site News we don't
have a single person with a journalism degree, like at all.
I mean we're about ten journalists I think on staff
at this point. I'm pretty sure none of them have
none of them went to journalism school. He's correct that
you do not have to go to journalism school. But
if I were him, I would stop boasting about my

(16:39):
lack of education that like just him personally, Like in general,
it's good, that's fine, you don't need to go to
journalism school. This guy specifically doesn't seem to understand what
journalism is. He he and his friends are out there
saying that the previous press corps was bad because they
were adversaries. They used the word adversarial with negative connotations.

(17:05):
They were harassed, he said, they were harassing the press secretary.
The press secretary there said that they would knock on
her door all hours of the day and come in
and ask her questions. And sometimes sometimes other journalists would
have an appointment, and a second journalist would come in
with that journalist and also ask her questions. And also

(17:28):
they would stand outside the Secretary of Defense sorry now
the Secretary of War's office, to wait until he came
out to see who he was meeting with. Like these
are the examples that she was giving that he was
elevating as the kinds of things that you should that
the Press Corps you know, was embarrassing itself by doing.

(17:50):
Laura Lummer went even further, saying it's illegal to classify
to nothing wrong with what she signed, because it's illegal
to publish classified information that goes beyond what this new
Pentagon Press Corps even agreed to. What they agreed to
in this document that they shamefully signed is that they
would not ask anybody other than authorized Pentagon officials for

(18:12):
information Like that's absurd. What the document does allow for
is if you if you don't as long as you
don't ask, and somebody comes up to you and says, hey,
I have information for you, then you're allowed to publish
that according to this document. Now, like, how are you
supposed to confirm that? Like, let's say somebody hands you

(18:34):
a document that's classified and said like this is a
war crime.

Speaker 5 (18:37):
You should go out and report this.

Speaker 8 (18:39):
According to the Pentagon's rules that they agreed to, you
can't then go to any other sources with that and
say this is what I've heard.

Speaker 5 (18:46):
Can you confirm that this is true?

Speaker 8 (18:48):
So it appears like they don't understand what journalism is
because what they've agreed to do is just when the
Press Secretary wants to talk to them, the press secred
to we'll talk to them, don't ask any questions except
during a briefing, don't knock on my door, whether or
not sending an email to the Press Secretary Council.

Speaker 5 (19:10):
And didn't.

Speaker 6 (19:10):
One of these guys put out a tweet yesterday that
was like I just spoke to Pete Hegseth for a
little interview. It was off the record, so I can't
tell you anything that was said, but it was a
great conversation.

Speaker 8 (19:23):
And what's what's funny too, is that the Pentagon might
end up regretting bringing in people who have no idea
what they're doing, because some of these guys came out
of this off the record meeting and started talking about
like what what questions were asking what they would and
wouldn't answer, And it's like, I mean, I'm all for

(19:45):
these guys breaking their off the record valves that they
make to the to the Pentagon officials, but like, that's
not what off the record means, Like off the record
means it's off. It's like off the record. But these
guys don't know. I just I don't think that they
were like being deceitful. I just think they don't know
like the basics of journalism. And so they're like it

(20:06):
was off the record and this is what he said.

Speaker 6 (20:08):
It's like, uh, so we might we might accidentally get
some some news out of these guys.

Speaker 5 (20:15):
We might.

Speaker 8 (20:17):
Now another problem that or another problem that it at
least raises concerns. So do you see my my Matt Gates?

Speaker 5 (20:27):
Yea is that video at the body? So Gates, we
should play this because it's funny.

Speaker 8 (20:32):
It's funny, and you guys will see why it's funny
as you as you listen to this guy slurring his
words through the answer. But also and maybe Matt Gates
is just really fired up about like the performance of
the F thirty five platform, and I know he has
been for a long time.

Speaker 5 (20:52):
But when you.

Speaker 8 (20:53):
Bring in non regular press corps that doesn't have the
same kind of standards, how do we know whether or
not these reporters have consulting contracts with other weapons contractors.
Like so, if you if you're gonna have if you're
gonna just let anybody in who will sign this document.
Let's say they are working for Raytheon. Let's say they're
working on side for a Raytheon or a lobbist that

(21:14):
works for Raitheon doing some consulting work. And then they
start asking questions about how awful this like Lockheed project is,
Like the Lockheed project might be terrible, but it's like
we do we feel comfortable that this is stuff is
on the up and up. So let's let's roll the
Gates thing. And I'm not saying he's getting paid by
Raytheon or whatever. I don't I don't know, But like,

(21:36):
what do we know about.

Speaker 11 (21:38):
This platforms that I've long been a critic of. I'll
start with the F thirty five. They cost about one
hundred million dollars a copy. What percentage of the F
thirty five are fully mission capable today?

Speaker 12 (21:49):
So that's a great question, man, and I appreciate you
getting after it, because not enough, not enough. It is
the most capable fighter that we have right now, when
if you're live when it flies, you're right, it is
the most capable fight what we have right now. And
you saw last just last month in the acquisition speech.
Is a department and leadership if that's willing to get

(22:09):
after it to challenge industry to produce better.

Speaker 4 (22:13):
Yeah, but what percentage of them can fly? So not enough?

Speaker 10 (22:16):
Not enough?

Speaker 4 (22:17):
Yeah, but you just.

Speaker 11 (22:18):
Called it our most capable platform, and less than forty
percent of them, by my last review of the Air
Force's statements, are fully missioned capable. Why is it not
failure for a platform to perform at less than forty
percent when it costs one hundred million dollars?

Speaker 12 (22:35):
So, Matt, looking at it holistically, sure you can throw
out the number forty percent, but when you look at
operation Midnight Hammer operation rough right.

Speaker 11 (22:42):
Those weren't after thirty five was not delivering the payload
on midnight.

Speaker 12 (22:47):
But they were supporting, right, and so those BT's wouldn't
have gotten there without that the airport.

Speaker 11 (22:53):
What would have stopped them?

Speaker 12 (22:54):
There are plenty of service to air missile systems that
the air Radiance have.

Speaker 4 (22:58):
We know that they did they shoot any of them? No,
they didn't.

Speaker 5 (23:02):
Because we were so so bad.

Speaker 12 (23:03):
And that platform, the F thirty five, is an amazing
platform that can go.

Speaker 6 (23:09):
After these Okay, what what are you going on? What
is going on in that interview?

Speaker 5 (23:16):
Ryan? I know you had some some commentary attached to
this tweet here.

Speaker 8 (23:20):
I mean, yeah, I was saying, maybe the h this
new Press Corp Cam and the others can find out
if if they're day drinking at the Pentagon now and
not that there's.

Speaker 5 (23:32):
Anything wrong with that, And I don't know, Hey go
for it.

Speaker 8 (23:36):
But yeah, but then, and I think Matt Cat's is
exactly right by the way that the F thirty five
is trash. It's a gigantic boondoggle. It's it's one more
ripoff of the American taxpayer in our military industrial complex.
But I also don't know like who's planting you know,
who's seating those questions? Like it that's that's that's the

(23:57):
uh yeah, that that's now.

Speaker 5 (24:00):
The Old Press Corps is part of the old it's part.

Speaker 8 (24:02):
Of the military industrial complex too, Like they benefit you know,
a lot of the trade press. You know sells their
you know products to Lockheed and you know, sells their
newsletters and whatnot to like Locko.

Speaker 9 (24:14):
Well yeah, not even the trade press and all the others. Yeah,
even even like Politico Axios Lytico.

Speaker 8 (24:20):
Yeah, like weapons makers are major funders of Watchington journalism.
So it's not like it would be unique, but but there,
but it's like acute corruption versus like general corruption anyway,
I don't know, Yeah, it's a And all of this
happened right after this, this second strike on September second,

(24:43):
Like if you look at the timeline heg Seth recreated,
you know what it means to be a Pentagon reporter
after this, And people who are close to him think
that those things are connected, that that he was doing
this as an effort to stop the Pentagon press from
looking into the war crimes that they're committing.

Speaker 9 (25:06):
So I feel like they would be doing this regardless
because the Pentagon, and Ryan you'll know this better than
I do, But the Pentagon is this like massive, sprawling building,
and if you give reporters a physical foothold in the door,
which they had, and you're Pete Hegsath, and you know,

(25:26):
there are a lot of decisions that Pete Heggseth might
make to upset the war machine that we might like.
There are some that are not going to upset the
war machine that we will definitely dislike, for example, the
boat strikes. But there are a lot of like old
school Pentagon people in there that definitely are leaking to reporters.

(25:48):
And so I feel like they were trying to figure
out a way to make that stop and land it
on this bizarre policy. So I feel like they were
going to do this no matter what at some point
because they don't want these like Jennifer Griffin of Fox News,
who Hecksath snapped at, if everyone remembers in that press
or they cannot stand the people who have had their

(26:11):
offices there forever and they know they've got those they're
getting those coffees with the leakers people are coming in
and out all of that stuff. Because yes, you can
send classified information over signal for example.

Speaker 10 (26:24):
You can leak it over signal for.

Speaker 9 (26:26):
Example, but it's a whole lot easier to say something
in person.

Speaker 10 (26:32):
So they they know. So that's why I think happened.

Speaker 3 (26:37):
No matter what, So Pete Pete Hegseth takes over their
department has famous had had a drinking problem. Now I
guess everyone at the department has a drinking problem I've
ever seen. I've never seen someone have to slur surface
to air missile system. That's hard to say drunk. That's
a tongue twister. But Emily to your point earlier about

(26:57):
there being sort of like this like open area where
for like there there's a there's an open niche for
a more normal person to critique the Trump administration or
what have you. Perhaps it's not going to be happening
with cam Higbee and this press corps. Are there other
people that you could say, like, oh, like maybe this

(27:19):
person could come up and rise, rise to the moment
or are we just seeing like a lack of a
bench in the in the conservative commentator sphere and journalists sphere.

Speaker 9 (27:29):
I always wait for Matt Kates to do it, honestly,
because Gates is on foreign policy, like really sharp about
these types of things.

Speaker 10 (27:38):
It's mostly the foreign policy.

Speaker 9 (27:40):
You know, he was trying to get rid of the AUMF,
he was trying to get our troops out of Africa. Like,
he's actually very opposed to a lot of the old
school not neo cons but like even America First type
people who have new neo conservative sympathies. So it's there
for the taking if Gates wants it. He definitely dabbles
in it, that's for sure. Sager is somebody who does it.

(28:03):
But Sager is like definitely detached himself from the broader
conservative movement and isn't.

Speaker 10 (28:09):
Like really a part of that world. So there's definitely
there's a lot of room and there.

Speaker 9 (28:14):
I think people are misunderstanding why a lot of folks
turned to like the French commentators. It's like they're the
only ones criticizing this insane Venezuela policy.

Speaker 10 (28:26):
That's it, Like, where else are you gonna get it?

Speaker 9 (28:28):
You either have to like listen to the left or
I don't know a Ben Shapiro.

Speaker 3 (28:38):
Wow, a plethora of options here. Well, I wanted to
move us to this next story, Emily. I want to
throw to you for this one. This is the January sixth,
pipe bomber, folks, we got him. Mission accomplished. Mac if
you could throw up this tear sheet and Emily you
could kind of fill in the details. But it says
the Trump dooj has to suspect Brian Cole arrested and

(29:01):
facing explosive charges. What do we know about Brian Cole?

Speaker 9 (29:05):
Emily, Yeah, we're starting to learn more. So what happened
is out of absolutely nowhere. Yesterday the FBI announced that
they had made this arrest. They had a very vague
press conference, and then Cole was charged in court. So
Cole was in Woodbridge, Virginia, so a suburb of Washington,

(29:29):
DC and thirty year old right now, sort of been
about twenty five back in twenty twenty one. The charging document,
I have it up in my screen says he has
five feet six inches tall and wears corrective eyeglasses. That
actually is important because as the hoodie suspect who placed
those pipe bombs behind the Republican National Committee and the

(29:53):
DNC then as well, was said to be roughly in
that height range, sort of a short person for a
man if it was a band.

Speaker 10 (30:01):
But now the blaze came in hot a.

Speaker 9 (30:04):
Couple of weeks ago and accused a woman who currently
works for the CIA of being the person in the hoodie.
According to Gate Analysis, they retracted that story yesterday. This
person has an alibi. They were said to be working
for Capitol Police at the time. So all that is
to say, the charging document makes it look a whole

(30:25):
lot like the FBI under the Biden administration had all
of the pieces of the puzzle and just did not.

Speaker 10 (30:33):
Put them together.

Speaker 9 (30:34):
And maybe that was for a nefarious reason, Maybe that
was out of incompetence. You know, it's always important to
remember incompetence. It is a good explanation for a lot
of what happens in DC. But for example, during twenty
nineteen and twenty twenty, the affidavit says Cole purchased multiple
items consistent with the components that were used to manufacture
the pipe bombs placed at the RNC and DNC. The

(30:57):
FBI obtained records for the checking accountants credit cards for
the time period from January twenty eighteen to January twenty
twenty one. Three additional credit cards were obtained for the
time period of January twenty eighteen to November twenty twenty five.
The FBI reviewed the transaction history for all of these accounts.

Speaker 10 (31:13):
It looks like it was really basic police.

Speaker 9 (31:14):
Work, to be honest, and the pieces probably could have
been put together a long time ago.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
So where this They pinged a cell tower and then
they found that he bought parts and equipment right for
the prom.

Speaker 9 (31:30):
Right exactly, so like pipe heads, all of those things.
They were able to, again do what's fairly basic police work.
And so where this is going politically Caftel, Dan Bongino, Pamboni,
they have all said that there was nothing new that
they did. They were just combing through the pre existing

(31:52):
investigation and looking for scraps of information that may already
be there. Obviously they didn't trust the investigation, and from
there they kind of found a break in the case.
They said it was quote forensic evidence. So where this
is going politically is already leaks have gone into different
media publications that Brian Cole may have some Antifa connections.

(32:13):
It looks like his family is left wing. Everyone should
be careful with that too, because that can even if
that is quote Antifa, even if he does have some
type of like Antifa motivation, you then have to ask
what the FBI's involvement with that Antifa group might have been,
because that's where this is all heading is, if the

(32:36):
FBI was aware of this information years ago, why did
they stop or why did they not figure it out publicly?

Speaker 10 (32:44):
At least? I think there's some open questions. Yeah, and
there were.

Speaker 9 (32:53):
They were very coy about assets in the crowd and
actual agents of the crowd on January sixth for a
long time, and then Thomas Matsy and others kind of
forced them to come to the table and say they
did have assets. Who were there, some who were just
there by happenstance they had been working with the FBI
as informants essentially, and were there others. I think it

(33:13):
was a couple at least that were there intentionally. So
I was at January sixth, I was like reporting.

Speaker 10 (33:22):
And because I always had.

Speaker 9 (33:27):
Quote unquote reporting, Well, actually I started that day at
the Ellipse aid Trump's speech, because there had been like
legit Antifa activity on Bill and Plaza, which was right
where Trump's speech was going to be, uh that whole summer,
and so that's why I went down there that day
and I ended up walking and trying to get interviews
with people who were walking over to the Capitol, and

(33:47):
I saw legitimate, genuine MAGA people be whipped into a
frenzy like that was not they were they were not.
It wasn't just a crowd of Feds. It was a
lot of like average you know. I saw soccer mom
at one point like ushering people over. You know. It
was like the craziest thing I've ever seen. It was
not at crowd of Feds. There are a lot of

(34:08):
people who have come out since because they were prosecuted
for it, told and said exactly why they did what
they did.

Speaker 10 (34:14):
It's because they thought the electure was being stolen.

Speaker 9 (34:16):
So if there are feds, we need to know if
if they were people contributing to the whipping of MAGA
into that frenzy, we need to know. It doesn't undermine
the fact that there were a whole lot of people
that did heinous illegal activity that day who weren't you know,
just doing it because FEDS were whipping them up and
telling them to They have agency too, So I do think,

(34:38):
and Ryan, I'm curious.

Speaker 10 (34:38):
What you make of that.

Speaker 9 (34:40):
That's where this is heading is a question of whether
the FBI just didn't want some type of link to
the pipe bomb placement, which has always been very weird.
They didn't want some some type of link to it
to come out into the public view.

Speaker 8 (34:58):
Yeah, I think they're gonna have to explain why it
took this long to make an arrest if they weren't
really relying on any new information and they were just
you know, that it was out there for them. I
think also the Blaze looks like they're gonna cook over this.
You know that that story that they did. Immediately when
you read it reeked of defamation.

Speaker 5 (35:19):
You're like, hold on, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa whoa.

Speaker 8 (35:22):
You're like, you know, the defenses against defamation are you know, one,
if they're a public figure, then there's a much higher
bar for that public figure to be able to come
after you for saying something false about them. This woman
that they singled out was not remotely public figure and

(35:48):
seem to have a decent alibi. So like, if you're
if you in their retraction, you know, they it's clear
the retraction was written by a lawyer, and they're saying, like,
you know, we we published this information in you know,
good good faith with the with our belief that it
was accurate but we're now retracting it because it looks

(36:08):
like it isn't. But in order to get out of defamation,
you have to show that you you know that that
you you know. If they can show that you knew
or should have known that what you were writing was false,
then you're in trouble. And they kind of should have
known because you know, she had a real alibi. They

(36:30):
didn't really have enough evidence to stack. On the other
side of that, this like weird, like they compared her
gait in like like they did some Gate analysis. It's like, whoa, guys,
you can't accuse somebody of being a pipe bomber. And
the other thing you need for defamation is to prove
like actual damages. And I can imagine that this woman

(36:53):
suffered like legitimate, serious, genuine damages from millions of people
thinking that she's a pipe bomber. So I think, you know,
Blaize Blaze Blaze's defamation insurance is going to get a workout,
I would suspect from this.

Speaker 3 (37:10):
So, Ryan, what do you make of the evidence on
Brian Cole? Now there's this They say that they pinged
or his cell phone, pinged cell towers that were in
the area.

Speaker 4 (37:21):
We have this like these photos, this video footage.

Speaker 3 (37:25):
And you know they say that he bought parts that
could create a bomb, but those parts are bought over
the course of months, if not years, if I'm mistaken.

Speaker 5 (37:35):
So and he went to several different years, and he
also went to multiple different locations.

Speaker 4 (37:39):
It looks like now I believe everything.

Speaker 3 (37:41):
Cash Mattel says, that's my that's my particular hill that
I die on this show. But Ryan, what's your what's
your believe meter at right now?

Speaker 9 (37:50):
Yeah?

Speaker 10 (37:51):
Ran, are you are yous massy on this? Let's see
what they've got. I'm not buying it.

Speaker 9 (37:54):
Thomas Massey posted at nine am yesterday after the arrest
was announced.

Speaker 5 (37:58):
I think it is.

Speaker 8 (37:59):
I think it's good practice to always be skeptical of
all federal indictments like that, just as citizens, we should
be demanding extraordinary evidence when when claims are made so
that like you can't you can't believe what's in an
indictment just because the Feds put it.

Speaker 5 (38:18):
In an indictment.

Speaker 8 (38:21):
You know, we'll see, you know, I'm not I'm certainly
saying I'm not on I'm not saying he's didn't do
it either, Like I don't know that for for certain either, I.

Speaker 6 (38:35):
Mean, who knows if this is all that they have,
But it does seem like a lot of the stuff
that's that you're putting up here, Emily is just like
circumstantial stuff, Like you would need more than this to
actually convict him. Right to say I bought some component
parts in his phone was generally in the area, but
like that wouldn't be enough for a conviction, right.

Speaker 10 (38:54):
I guess will depend on the jury.

Speaker 9 (38:55):
I mean, if you're you're pinging it, if your cell
phone you live in Woodbridge and your cell phone is
pinging in the area of the r n C and
d n C the night of January fifth when they
say the well, they have video of the bombs being
placed if you roughly resemble the person on the video,
and then they have this these credit card records here.

Speaker 7 (39:14):
Well.

Speaker 9 (39:14):
Also the other thing that we're missing is his car
was a half a mile from the bombs where the bombs.

Speaker 10 (39:18):
Were on January fifth, It was parked on Capitol Hill.

Speaker 9 (39:21):
And then they have all of these credit card records
that see him allegedly buying the black end caps for
those pipes. And if people don't remember what the pipe
bombs looked like it is always worth revisiting there, so hilarious.

Speaker 10 (39:34):
I'm sorry, but like they look cartoonish.

Speaker 9 (39:36):
They have literal like oven timers, TVC. It's completely insane.

Speaker 10 (39:46):
Yeah, I would Ryan.

Speaker 9 (39:47):
Like always be completely skeptical of all this stuff.

Speaker 6 (39:51):
He can't, he can't be a real Antifa member. He's
not a real Antifa super soldier, because they would have
they would have had spotless, they would would use they
would use cat shit the home depot, right right, Well,
I think they said in the indictment that he did
use cash. Of all places, yeah, oh, at other places
he use cash. Yeah, some pla have video of him
going and buying it, I guess, yeah, or maybe a

(40:12):
cell phone pinging or something like that.

Speaker 5 (40:14):
Here.

Speaker 6 (40:14):
I got a picture here of what one of these
pipe bombs supposedly here, So I guess that's what that's
what it looks like according to I mean, yeah, he's
got the it's a kitchen timer. It's like a literal
kitchen timer that you would have, and then it's you know,
wiring into the pipe.

Speaker 5 (40:31):
But yeah, and you don't know.

Speaker 8 (40:35):
I imagine the detectives were like, okay, there's only a
few home depots you know within ten miles of here, But.

Speaker 6 (40:43):
Who amongst us hasn't purchased twelve black end caps and
two galvanized end caps from four different home depots in
northern Virginia. Yeah we've all been there, bro.

Speaker 8 (40:53):
Yeah, you gotta get your gotta go to Ohio or
whatever to get your And like it does show like
this is not the nineteen seventies, Like they can they're
going to catch you doing this stuff.

Speaker 5 (41:03):
Like you can take you can pay in cash, you
can take.

Speaker 8 (41:06):
Cautions, but you know that the surveillance state is impressive.

Speaker 5 (41:12):
Yeah. So, Emily, just like, hey, home depot, like who
bought twelve caps and a kitchen?

Speaker 4 (41:18):
The narks their narks as we know, home.

Speaker 8 (41:21):
People is going to nark you out like home deep
like if you were you were times yes, if you
thought home Depot was right?

Speaker 5 (41:27):
Or die for you? No not having?

Speaker 4 (41:30):
Uh?

Speaker 3 (41:31):
So, Emily, like, what is this larger significance of this
January sixth pipe bomb around the event of January six
and like what is the Trump administration or DJ trying
to do with this to kind of like maybe reframe
or recontextualize the events, because what I know from the
pipe bombs is that a lot of the authorities said
that those pipe bomb threats diverted resources during really crucial

(41:54):
hours that could have allowed them to contain more of
the January sixth event. And also this sense that well,
if the bombs replaced that some of this was premeditated, right,
that this wasn't just an in the moment fervor, but
if someone planted these bombs, that there was a larger
plan before the Trump rally, and YadA, YadA.

Speaker 4 (42:17):
What do you make of all that?

Speaker 9 (42:19):
Yeah, So I'll read a post here from Julie Kelly,
who's one of the kind of people on the right
who's followed this really closely.

Speaker 10 (42:25):
She said, this is where she's going with it.

Speaker 9 (42:27):
She says, washing posts also reporting Cole's quote unquote extremist
political views. As I've already said on an interview this morning,
it appears the Ray FBI buried the pipe bomb investigation
in early twenty twenty one after discovering the hoodie individual
seen on January five was not MAGA but was Antifa.
That would have not only decimated the developing January sixth
insurrection narrative at the time, but completely contradicted Ray's early

(42:48):
insistence that Antifa played no role in January six, huge
scandal if true. I'm saying that just to give a
sort of flavor of where everyone's going with us, But
I think it does test a couple of narratives that
people on the right have had going into this, which
is one of them was was that you know, there
were in the circles and people in the right who

(43:09):
followed the story closely, they would point out, rightfully point
out that first of all, there are bomb sniffing dogs
around the DNC at the time that the alleged pipe
bomb was there, Nobody caught it. Kamala Harris was being
moved around through that area. There was no like intense
panic about the fact like that it's that stuff was
genuinely a bit strange. The man who was one of

(43:33):
the FBI officials overseeing the Gretchen Whitmer fed kidnapping plot,
as Nick Turse and others and Terse is still at
the intercept, right Ryan, that was and I think you
probably were still there when that reporting was happening, probably
edited some of that, Yes, excellent reporting, And that guy
had been reassigned to d C and all of a

(43:56):
sudden j six pipe bomb, all of that stuff happens,
and so the suggestion by people who bring that up
is whether any of this was organic. So what that
tests is this idea that it's Antifa unless Antifa is
like working hand in glove.

Speaker 10 (44:11):
With the Feds.

Speaker 9 (44:12):
And so I don't think anybody has a clear victory,
like a very clear narrative victory going forward. There's just
so much The pipe bom story is just it's very
hard to believe that some random lib did all of this,
and all of the strange stuff that happened afterwards was
just because Chris Ray was trying to bury an Antifa plot.

(44:36):
I don't know, honestly, I think there's some more weirdness happening.
It just it seems too strange that these things were
there and nobody saw them for fifteen hours, nobody caught
them for fifteen hours.

Speaker 10 (44:50):
But yeah, to a.

Speaker 9 (44:50):
Grifferen's point, that is the implication is that in some
way the pipe bombs were used to divert resources from
the capital so that the capital would fall and then
you would have this like false flag thing to pin
on MAGA. So it gets really weedy and complicated with
pipe on theories. But if the if what the MAGA
FBI is saying is that it was just an ANTIFA

(45:12):
guy and there was no FBI involvement then other than
bearing the story.

Speaker 10 (45:18):
Then some of those are.

Speaker 6 (45:19):
Their logic though, Like what would be the narrative then
that they're trying to sell if it was an ANTIFA guy,
that he just happened to do this the day before,
to try to pin it on MAGA or something, or
what's the logic behind.

Speaker 9 (45:31):
That, Yeah, to create Yeah, that's that's why I think
it challenges some of those narratives because.

Speaker 4 (45:37):
Or that the FBI put him up to it. Yeah,
it could be that.

Speaker 5 (45:39):
Yeah, the FED the FED line makes a lot more
sense to me.

Speaker 10 (45:42):
I agree, But.

Speaker 4 (45:44):
It could be fed tifa could be a combination of both,
so possible.

Speaker 5 (45:49):
Mac.

Speaker 10 (45:50):
You've seen that, haven't you. You've seen fed tifa.

Speaker 4 (45:52):
You've seen that.

Speaker 5 (45:54):
We we've we've seen a couple of fed tifas out there.

Speaker 3 (45:57):
Oh on your DC protest observes. You've seen the Atlanta
a few times.

Speaker 5 (46:02):
Yeah, very interesting.

Speaker 3 (46:05):
Yeah, Well, January sixth, the story that keeps on giving.
I wanted to move us over to Pallenteer and the
Deal Book summit. What a summit that happened all sorts
of characters that Andrew Ross Sorkin was speaking to, but
we wanted to focus on CEO Alex Karp of Pallenteer,

(46:29):
who who was getting really excited about his business. I
think that's the most I don't know to describe it, Griffin.

Speaker 9 (46:39):
I love how you shepherd us through these the news
stories like it's American bandstand. Like that, let's move on
to Palenteer.

Speaker 3 (46:48):
I'm trying to I'm trying to keep a brisk pace
because we have so many stories to get to Mac.
Why don't we play this first clip from CEO Alex Carp?

Speaker 13 (46:57):
What is the biggest problem in this culture?

Speaker 5 (47:00):
Tell you the biggest problem?

Speaker 13 (47:00):
No one believes the institutions are credible and why don't
they believe?

Speaker 14 (47:04):
There?

Speaker 13 (47:04):
And I struggled to believe they're credible too, because these
business leaders make completely stupid decisions and they get bailed
out a year later they're getting huge bonuses. What do
the American people get nothing? That's a huge problem. Like
if you make I think the real version is like
I made a lot of decisions when we began talking

(47:26):
annoying each other ten years ago. Hopefully I'm annoying you
as much as ten years ago or more, when when
I made you know this, every decision palet your made,
FDS going public, building products, no one enterprise, large data
sets going to government, acknowledging American superiority, being pro marcnocracy,

(47:49):
launching an AI platform, calling into question that AI models
would actually be able to perform with our orchestration. Every
single one, every single are intology, every single one of
those was viewed as stupid. You know what, I actually
have grown to appreciate about capitalism. All the people who
made the right decisions went broke, are going out of business,
or are now have to copyist Microsoft lnsontology. Everyone wants

(48:12):
to do FDAs. Everyone basically copies me and palent.

Speaker 5 (48:16):
Here is this.

Speaker 6 (48:19):
This is the stable leadership that I want in charge
of my mass surveillance death company.

Speaker 3 (48:24):
Everyone that is like yeah, I mean, is everyone that
we watch now either drunk or geeked out?

Speaker 4 (48:32):
I mean Ryan, Like, what do we make of this?
Like this Alex KRP guy.

Speaker 8 (48:35):
I mean, he's the he's our philosopher king, right, you know,
he's he's the he. I guess he's the surveillance god
that we deserve. This is We're headed to a pretty
pretty dark place. And the people that we're empowering aren't
aren't obscuring from the public. You know who they are
and what they're about.

Speaker 3 (48:59):
We also have another clip here Mac where he's you know,
slightly more substantive about the inner workings of the Palateer
business here and the end that he talked about eliminating
or not valuing the humanities uh Department of Palateer. Why
don't we take a listen to that.

Speaker 14 (49:14):
But take the media out of it. There's a group
of thirteen more Palateer employees who at an open letter
to you and they stated, quote that Palenteer's leadership has
abandoned its founding ideals.

Speaker 13 (49:26):
We have five thousand ex Palentarians and four thousand current Paleteerians.
And by the way, we encourage a culture of disagreement,
which you know exists. Anyone can come visit us. You'll
find half the people disagreeing with me, at least on
any issue. But I just want to say, we have
five thousand Expalenterians. You have thirteen, half of whom we're

(49:48):
like in the Humanities Department of palenter which is a
little bit like being in the printing best part of
New York Times a very important part, but no one's
really listening to your opinion, so it's like it's yeah,
you know, if you have an organization, I'll tell you what.
A lot of Paleterians, Palatineerers are mostly uncomfortable. Most Palateerers
are like you, okay, I don't know who you are

(50:09):
best year an objective journalists, but they broadly are okay
with They like working with you in Ukraine. By the way,
could Europeans finally stick up for us since we're basically
between US and Russia? But they they're very proud of
that in general, although that's also very controversial and non
elite circles. That's important to remember. They're pretty okay with

(50:32):
Israel stuff, especially since a lot of the BS written
about us on the right primarily not primarily on the left.
And somehow we're doing facial recognition stuff and we're building
a database. Any technical person knows that's BS. By the way,
if you've heard that and you believe that, listen to
the person who told you that. Do ten minutes of
research and you'll see who has credibility for you.

Speaker 5 (50:54):
So is he is he denying there at the end
that he's working with the Israelis on targeting and god,
so is that what he was doing at the end there.

Speaker 9 (51:01):
I think what he's doing is denying And it is
a sort of cliche about Palenteer mistake that some people make,
which is that they are themselves doing the like CCTV
like pulling all of that data. Instead what they do,
as though this is much better, is helps the government
streamline and the analysis of these mountains and mountains of data. Technically,

(51:27):
that's I think the distinction that he's trying to make,
and obviously it is a real distinction, but it's still
they're still obviously massively bolstering the surveillance state. Polunteer was
started with with money from the CIA's venture capital firm,
which is a thing that exists, and one of the

(51:47):
reasons is that Teel had this idea to outsource surveillance
analysis in a way that was like civil libertarianism, and
the CIA obviously sees that and is like, great, you
have the veneer of civil libertarianism for this massive surveillance
analysis technology.

Speaker 10 (52:08):
And Teil claims that it's better.

Speaker 9 (52:10):
In Carbal claim that it's better that Palenteer does it
than the government itself or someone else because Palenteer has
all of these guardrails and civil liberties and that sort
of thing.

Speaker 10 (52:22):
So that's I mean, that's where they go with this.

Speaker 9 (52:25):
But you know, I don't think anyone's happy to say, like, oh,
or anyone's like super supportive of the idea that people
are making massive profits off of streamlining the analysis of
mass surveillance.

Speaker 3 (52:39):
And Ryan, what do you think about the checks and
balances within the Palaeer If he's not really listening to
anyone in the humanities department?

Speaker 8 (52:48):
Do they have a humanities department? I don't even understand
what that means. I was just searching now. Maybe maybe
he's referring colloquially to some other department that they do have.
What would a humanities department do at Palentteer? But sure,
I don't know. Maybe there's some a you know, room
for disagreement in there. But you know, carp seems like

(53:10):
a guy that doesn't lack for confidence and that you know,
he's gonna, you know, he's gonna make a decision, he's
going to execute it, and I think he'd be he'd
be proud of that. His point is fair that like,
all right, you got nine thousand current and former employees.
You're gonna be able to find some that are that
are critical of it. Uh, the entire you know, whether

(53:31):
or not you know people inside Paler are critical of it.
I think like basically the entire world is like, I
wish this wasn't happening. I wish this company was not
doing the things that this company's doing, but they're still
doing it so and.

Speaker 6 (53:46):
I think there is something to be said about like this,
this bizarre era of the billionaire celebrity, the CEO celebrity,
with how comfortable all of these people who are doing,
i think objectively evil things around the world, doing public
appearances like this, publicly defending themselves, trying to be celebrities
to hype up, you know, their stocks.

Speaker 5 (54:06):
And things like that.

Speaker 6 (54:07):
I think there's something deeply dark about that in my view,
because I feel like a long time ago in this country,
we used to have billionaires sort of just mind their
own business and just sort of fade into the background,
and now it's like every single one of them has
to be out in the public eye. They have to
be celebrated, they have to be praised, they have to
you know, be viewed as some sort of like gods,

(54:28):
and I think there's something extremely dystopian about that.

Speaker 9 (54:32):
The other thing worth mentioning is that karp Is has
been for a long time like a Democratic donor who
backed Kamala Harris in twenty twenty four, which is just hilarious,
and on so many different levels. He was against Donald Trump.
He said he was voting against Donald Trump. And then
Pallenteer has just been showered with contracts and the Trump

(54:54):
era from Republicans, one big beautiful bill and such.

Speaker 10 (54:58):
So it's all they're They're winning no matter what at
the end of the day.

Speaker 4 (55:03):
And you know, so he was, he was a K Hiver.

Speaker 10 (55:06):
He was in the hive.

Speaker 6 (55:08):
Wow, he he was doing mass surveillance on the Bernie Broos.

Speaker 5 (55:12):
Maybe he made the K Hive.

Speaker 3 (55:15):
Yeah, but but yeah, to Max's point, there is this
sort of like unimpeachableness about all these guys going out there.
I mean, we had the call she CEO, who looks
like a SoundCloud rapper saying that we're going to financialize
like every aspect of your life. We've got Peter Tiel
being like, I am not the Antichrist, wink wink wink,
Like yeah, it seems like there are these terrible, terrible

(55:37):
public advocates for their businesses that could only make you
concerned or worried about the future, which is the exact
opposite of what a spokesman should be for a company,
which to me only kind of like exudes the fact
that how unimpeachable, how kind of they have their whole
keys to the kingdom here and they can say whatever
the hell they want.

Speaker 9 (55:59):
Yeah, I mean, the Palenteer is not going anywhere. And
the reason I mentioned that is to say it's not
going anywhere in a dem administration either, like it's Palneers
is here to say, the government is addicted to palunteers
analysis software.

Speaker 10 (56:16):
So that's that's our future.

Speaker 6 (56:18):
Should we listen to this, this last clip that we
have of him, I guess trying to portray Palanteer as
being a champion of the working class somehow.

Speaker 5 (56:28):
Let's let's go ahead and watch this.

Speaker 3 (56:29):
This last Maybe maybe he watches War Room with Steve Bannon.

Speaker 13 (56:34):
In this country, you have one percent of the country
in prison, one percent who were in prison and therefore
have no rights. Do you know what happens to you
when you go to prison. They take you away from
your kids. You know who that happens to disunfortunately working class,
disproportionately black and Hispanic men and white men in the

(56:55):
under class. Where are the thousands of articles about them.
Nobody cares, And they don't care because it does not
either serve the ability the desire to force me to
vote for one party, which basically takes away all my power.
That's effectually what it does. If I agree to say
this is the worst thing in the world, I essentially

(57:15):
have given up my vote. My vote is not for you,
My vote is for these two issues. The second reason
they don't care is because somehow no one has empathy
with any of those people, because none of us really
deal with those people. At Palenteer, we are on the
side of working class Americans. We support people who go
to the military, We save their lives, we bring them
home safer. Our AI actually makes workers more wealthy, more valuable.

(57:40):
And ten to fifteen million people that love me despite
what's written, half of them made a lot of money
on us.

Speaker 11 (57:46):
And you know what they're like.

Speaker 13 (57:47):
They're like people like me who think, you know what,
we have to do better.

Speaker 5 (57:50):
Of course we have to do better, all right.

Speaker 6 (57:53):
I'm deeply confused about the transition that he just did
there from like talking about you know, the mass and
of Americans to pallanteers on the side of the working class.
We're making American workers wealthy because we are enriching the
American military's capabilities to do warfare overseas. I'm not really
tracking the through.

Speaker 10 (58:13):
Line there, Ryan, do you have any idea, I mean.

Speaker 4 (58:18):
Ry deep meditation on it. I think we broke Ryan.

Speaker 8 (58:25):
Yeah, I mean he's yes, he's making people safer on
the battlefield. Is his claims that's one claim AI is
going to make workers more productive and therefore richer. I
don't know how he all productivity gains have flowed to
the top two people like Alex Karp.

Speaker 5 (58:46):
Over the last forty to fifty years.

Speaker 8 (58:47):
So I don't know what policy he's pitching that is
going to actually break that. So I don't see how
he can make that claim with a straight face.

Speaker 9 (58:57):
And is he's saying they help put the right people
in prison as opposed.

Speaker 8 (59:00):
To That's the part the part where like with Mac,
I'm like, I don't know what he's saying. I mean,
maybe it's like you know, Larry Ellison has said, like
when you know absolute master veils is everywhere. Then people
will behave better and maybe it's good that people behave
I don't like that.

Speaker 6 (59:18):
I'm well, he's it almost seemed like he was getting
to like a there's a structural like racism problem with
the prison industrial complex or with policing. But then it's
like Palenteer is working with ice, Palenteer is working with
local police outfits, So like, are aren't you kind of
reinforcing whatever structural issues that you see with that system?

Speaker 5 (59:38):
Like I'm I don't know.

Speaker 9 (59:40):
They still see themselves as people who are disrupting those
systems and making them better. They've been doing that for
a long time now, so I don't know, like.

Speaker 10 (59:47):
That's what they've been doing. What they've been doing for
a long time.

Speaker 9 (59:50):
So if they were making the system better, they would,
you know, have to show significant structural evidence of improvement.
I would say, I think it's pretty clear that what
their technology does is make mass surveillance a lot easier.
They will say it makes it a lot more in
line or a lot more aligned with like your constitutional

(01:00:10):
rights and a lot more efficacious in ways that you know,
if it's if it's more effective and it's more aligned
with their constitutional rights, then how could you possibly be
against what Palenteer is doing. If it's not Palenter, it's
going to be some worst type of actor, which I
don't think is a great argument for Palenteer to be
perfectly honest.

Speaker 3 (01:00:33):
There's also there he calls them Palaeerians. There is this
sort of almost like this like cult like movement that
he's trying to establish. Right, if you're on our side,
you're a Paleteerian.

Speaker 9 (01:00:44):
I think that's very Silicon Valley post. Like Silicon Valley
around like two thousand and eight, two thousand and nine,
they were like Googlers and they were all doing that.

Speaker 6 (01:00:53):
Mm hmmm, yeah, yeah, well, no, he does have some
some coalition of like cultists that that support him and
hype him up. So I think he is trying to
directly feed into that and do sort of a performance
for like a select group of the population that that
enjoys hearing him cracked out in interviews like that. That's

(01:01:13):
probably true, I think, And I think there's some element
to the idea that like, if your entire life is
helping to facilitate, you know, blowing up Palestinian children and
having you know, helping ice to to ship families to
overseas concentration camps. Then like maybe you do need to
take the edge off every once in a while, yep.

Speaker 3 (01:01:33):
Or maybe they're helping, like weigh the ice employees because
there was that guy that got kicked out for being
like four and sixty pounds.

Speaker 6 (01:01:39):
We need an ice and ice weight database and ice
obesity data base.

Speaker 10 (01:01:43):
Well, I'm sure they have that. I'm sure they have that.

Speaker 4 (01:01:48):
All right.

Speaker 3 (01:01:49):
Well, I'm feeling as a member of the working class,
I'm feeling good, and I think that will leave us
here for the free half of the show. We got
big stories that we're saving for the second half of
premium users. We're getting into the battle between TPUSA and
one singular Candice Owens. We're also maybe gonna be Ryan

(01:02:11):
told me he's been doing a lot more research into
the Olivia Nuzzy story, and we have an incredible Olivia
Nuzzy impersonation from Emily always ready on deck.

Speaker 8 (01:02:20):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (01:02:21):
So get the sunglasses ready.

Speaker 5 (01:02:23):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (01:02:23):
And we've got a few other stories. Maybe we'll get
into a little bit more of the call sheet betting,
superfunding of politics, and let's get here.

Speaker 10 (01:02:31):
Let's get your reaction to Netflix Warner Bros.

Speaker 3 (01:02:33):
To the in the same Oh yeah, and we'll talk
about Netflix, folks, if you like going to the movies
you know and savor it while it lasts, because it
is doomed at this point. We'll get into all that
and more. You can go to Breakingpoints dot com and
sign up become a member while also you're answering questions
from the audience and we'll see you all there