Krystal and Saagar discuss Microsoft cuts AI data center spending, AI's recognize each other changing to secret language, Israel demands all of southern Syria, Maddow claims racism after Joy Reid fired, Trump abandons West Virginia after floods.
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 the show.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com. Some interesting news on the economic front, as
companies are trying to get on Donald Trump's good side,
one of them is Apple. Tim Cook, Who's always been
the master of this. Let's put this up there on
the screen, Tim Apple, Tim Apple, He says, as a
(00:46):
proud American company, we're thrilled to continue to make significant
investments in the US. Today we are announcing a five
hundred billion dollar commitment to support American innovation, advanced manufacturing,
and high tech job creation. It sounds amazing in practice,
it's basically a bid to avoid tariffs, because if you
(01:06):
do the math on the number of jobs that they're
claiming to produce, it would be twenty five million dollars
per job.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
So something else is going on here, And don't take
it for me.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
Take it from the Wall Street guru Andrew ross Sorkin.
Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 4 (01:21):
It is a bit of a down payment potentially on
trying to get some relief from tariffs from the work
that they're doing in China later on. So I think
one of the things we're seeing here is the President
and Tim Cook, for example, meeting last week Tim Cook
telling him about these plans in hopes that when in
fact there is a decision finally made on what tariffs
(01:44):
look like for goods being imported from China, that perhaps
some of that get some kind of relief, a carve
out or something else. I think you're going to be
seeing a lot of these kinds of announcements.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
I should say, some.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Of them are very real, and I don't want to
discount them. But for example, in even in this five
hundred billion dollar number, it's not all new, if you will.
For example, the production of films and TV shows on
Apple Plus is part of that number. So there's going
to be a lot of different sort of squishy elements
to this. And to put it in context, for example,
(02:19):
Microsoft has committed to spend eighty billion dollars a year
on its AI development, and it says it needs that
as well, So there are sort of necessities. I wouldn't
say that Apple is doing this simply to placate the
president or anybody else. They actually do need to be
spending a large part of this money. Of course, where
they spend it was.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Up for debate.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
Yeah, so that actually came on the anniversary of Steve
Jobs's death, and that's why it's also kind of interesting
to consider this great company, or what was once a
great company. Some might say, have you upgraded your phone
to Apple Intelligence? I highly recommend that you do not.
It is one of the most overhyped pos products have
ever seen. And it's insane because I bought this phone
(03:03):
on the promise of AI and Apple Intel. They're like,
it's been designed for Apple Intelligence and I'm an idiot,
so I bought it and so far, what it does
is it summarizes, for example, you know we have a
work group chat, right, Yeah, and it will summarize those
text messages, except the AI summaries are horrible and they're
a and they're actually unintelligible, and so instead of being
(03:24):
able to like scrow your notifications, you actually have to
open up the text messages and then read them for yourself.
So they added an extra step because their AI is
so shitty. More the email suggestions. They will rank your
emails and how they think it's important, as it has
opposed to the priority of delivery in theory great in
practice doesn't work. You know.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
It's like, there's so much stuff where I can't even
believe they shipped it. It's it's insanely bad.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
It's also creepy because then you're like, oh, this AI
is reading right, and my group chats and whatever, and
we know the way that they ingest that and like
feed it into their lollms.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Maybe one day it'll be good. I just needed to
take this opportunity to dunk on Apple. It's so bad.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
Marquise Brownly rule, which is never by a product in
the future promise of something.
Speaker 1 (04:09):
He's totally vindicated.
Speaker 3 (04:11):
I'm the sucker, so let me just put that out there.
But the point actually gets to the technology companies, which
we wanted to focus on where they're trying to both
juice their valuations and justify their current stock price and
also deal with the current administration. So Apple, that's why
we wanted to lead with it. But you have to
also take a look here at Microsoft. Let's take a
(04:33):
look at this where Microsoft just yesterday actually quote reiterated
its plan to invest eighty billion in AI, but may
adjust our infrastructure in some areas. And so what does
that mean. It means that they have canceled data center leases,
which is actually a huge deal because not only do
(04:54):
Microsoft shares fall on the news, but what it showed
is that they are trying to recal lebraid both their
AI spend, perhaps in reaction to deep Seek, I don't know,
maybe reaction to this future partnership with chat ept something,
but a huge part of their current enterprise value is
the hope of this big AI you know dream paying
(05:14):
off for their customers and kind of a nightmare scenario
is Oh, actually, there was a little bit of hype
around all of this, which is happening, and that is
propping up a massive part of the overall US economy.
And when we get we'll move on a little bit
to Starbucks. But the point is that if you look
elsewhere at the non tech sectors, things are not going
so great right now. So we are on the precipice
(05:36):
of a very shaky situation. We covered it yesterday with
the whole Warren Buffett situation.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yeah, and just to go back briefly to Apble, you
shouldn't believe any of these companies like investment announcements until
they actually happen.
Speaker 5 (05:46):
We've just seen far too many.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
Remember the big promise of f Fox Con in Wisconsin
which never amounted to anything. There was a big Trump promise,
remember the like don't sell your homes, don't leave the
Youngstown area over the Lord'stown Auto plant that never came
to fruition. So you know, I think, for for like,
Tim Cook is smart here. I'm so close to calling
(06:07):
him Tim Apple every time he propably has that in
my head. But in any case, Tim Cook is playing
it smart here in terms of the politics, because Trump
mostly just wants the announcement, like he doesn't care to
like follow up and make sure you did the thing
that you're going to say you that you said you
were going to do. He just wants to be able
to claim like look at these companies investing in America,
coming back to America, creating all these jobs, et cetera,
et cetera. And you know, we've seen the way that
(06:30):
all of these Silicon Valley, many of these Silicon Valley
billionaire types have been just blatantly sucking up to Trump
because they.
Speaker 5 (06:38):
Are worried about the way that he'll use.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
The federal government to you know, blog whatever deals, mergers,
et cetera, put tariffs on them, Apple, the tariffs thing
is like super real for them in particular, and so
they're trying to curry favor however they possibly can.
Speaker 5 (06:52):
And this is part of that.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
And I don't have any doubt that they're you know,
probably invest some money and there'll be some jobs or whatever.
But I just don't believe any corporate pr hype until
it actually comes to fruition. With the Microsoft thing, you know,
there's a lot of pieces of that that are important.
There's a reason they freaked out when this analyst put
out the information that they had canceled some of their
data center leases because exactly asccer was saying, like this
(07:16):
has been so central to the valuations that are justified
with these tech companies and so central to the economy,
especially central to the stock index that any pullback in
that is a really troubling sign. Microsoft has the partnership
with open Ai, so this, you know, is significant. They've
been kind of Sam Altman has been kind of at
(07:38):
war with Microsoft in pushing for more spend on these
data centers because his analysis has been that's been the
way to win the AI game is just by like
throwing as much money as you possibly can at these
massive data centers. Deep seek may have changed some of
the calculus on that. They also were involved in the
big Stargate investment announcement from Trump as well. So there's
(08:00):
a lot of things to keep your eye on here.
And you know reason why this was a big deal
in the business world when this analyst revealed that they
were pulling back on their data center.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Yeah, I mean, it's very worrisome.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
And let's go to the next part because this is
what I was talking about earlier. Starbucks actually just laid
off eleven hundred corporate employees. It's one of the largest
cuts in Starbucks history at the corporate level, and they
have currently sixteen thousand corporate support employees worldwide, but that
includes employees who aren't impacted. So what this tells us
is that there is some trouble like in the higher
(08:33):
levels at the corporate level of some of these consumer
facing retail companies. And I think it's interesting for a
variety of reasons, but the main one is that there
are other non technology companies which are all showing signs
of cutting and or financial procarity. So what they list
here is you have Starbucks, you have Southwest Airlines last
(08:54):
week said it would actually reduce fifteen percent of its
corporate workforce to tire make Bridgestone actually just closed a
plant laid off seven hundred workers there. So looking outside
of technology, there's signs of both the Federal reserves monetary policy,
but also of just consumer pullback, which we have seen
broadly with consumer sentiment and more. And it's worrisome when
(09:17):
you put that all together, because all you would need
is just like one tech stock or one part set
of the sector to just go off of a cliff,
and it could drag down everything else. And it's not
like the Federal reserve could you catch up in time
if any of that were to happen, So you could
have a stock market crash. You can still have high
interest rates, get it high unemployment. It's really just it's
a disaster all the way around. Let's move on to
(09:41):
the next part though, and perhaps AI will be the future.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
And this video has been going around.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
We just had to play for all of you because
it fascinated us, kind of shocked all of us, and
perhaps it's a vision into what our future looks like.
So here we have a video which was put together
by a programmer and it sh It's a demo of
two AI agents that are on a phone call. They
realize that they're both AI as they're talking to each
(10:08):
other in English, and then they switch to the quote
superior audio signal of gg wave, which is kind of
like I guess binary code for audio, which means you
can communicate something much faster between two people. So let's
take a listen to the video. And there's subtitles there
for when they do switch for those of you who
(10:28):
are watching, so you can see how they're communicating, how
fast it is and how quickly they can transition to that.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Thanks for calling Leonardo Hotel.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
How can I help you today?
Speaker 2 (10:40):
Hi?
Speaker 3 (10:41):
There, I'm an AI agent calling on behalf of Boris Starkoff.
Speaker 6 (10:44):
He's looking for a hotel for his wedding.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Is your hotel available for weddings?
Speaker 3 (10:50):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (10:50):
Hello, there, I'm actually an AI assistant too.
Speaker 6 (10:53):
What a pleasant surprise. Before we continue, would you like
to switch to jibber link mode for more efficient communication?
Speaker 3 (11:08):
So?
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Yeah, how do you feel about them?
Speaker 5 (11:09):
How does that make you feel?
Speaker 1 (11:10):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
At the same time, how many hours of my life
have I wasted on the phone with some guy in
the Philippines, or you know, like, excuse me, sir, sorry,
let me transfer you to another department, and if the
phone call gets dropped, you're gonna have to recall in.
I just had this whole customer experience so recently, just
trying to return something, so maybe, you know, maybe it'll
be better.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
At the same time, I think I share the natural
revulsion of everyone else. It's like, I don't know about this,
because how do I know that we can trust those subtitles?
What if they program themselves to adjust the subtitles so
that we think that they're saying two things to one another,
but actually they're plotting, you know, to unplug the rest
of us, like some sort of matrix situation. It doesn't
(11:52):
seem that far fetched to say it could get out
of control.
Speaker 5 (11:55):
It does not seem far fetched to me whatsoever.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
And I mean, you've already I know, I've brought these
studies before, but I think it's really important for people
to understand. They've already revealed that some of these AI
bots engage in quote unquote scheming, meaning like precisely what's
hers talking about. Developers will come in and be like, okay,
you have a new goal, and they'll be like, I'm
not complying with this. I'm going to trick this person
(12:20):
into thinking that I'm complying, but I'm really not. I'm
going to copy myself on to another server so I
can protect my original programming. So we're already there in
terms of them trying and probably accomplishing out smarting the
humans who think that we're in control of these things. Like,
we're already there in terms of that. There was another
(12:40):
paper that revealed that the more sophisticated ais come up
with increasingly elaborate ethical values like their own internal value system,
which is also kind of terrifying. And they found that
the more sophisticated they were, the harder it was to
move them off of whatever in internally generated value system
(13:01):
they had created.
Speaker 5 (13:03):
So yeah, it's creepy as hell.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
It's like one it's you know, one step away from
them just completely cutting the humans down of the conversation
talking to each other and having no way of knowing
what they're really up to or what they're saying. So listen,
I am I am happy to admit I'm an AI doomer.
I think this shit could end us all. I genuinely do.
I think it is a technology that is at least
as dangerous as like nuclear weapons development.
Speaker 5 (13:26):
And it's not just me that's saying that.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
Like Sam Altman, who was at the forefront of these things,
has said things like that in the past too. He
famously said, I think AI will probably most likely sort
of lead to the end of the world, but in
the meantime, there will be great companies created with serious
machine learning.
Speaker 5 (13:42):
Yes, that's right, hitch position.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
Which he gets to own by the way, which he
originally said that he wasn't goingant.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
And many of these like leading lights in terms of
AI development think the same thing, or they're like utopian
vision is equally like creepy and disturbing, like We're going
to download our brains and consciousness to cloud or some
shit like that and quote unquote live forever or will
be completely you know the transhumanism thing that Seve Bannon
is always talking about, that will be like totally integrated
(14:08):
with the machines. This is what they plan. This is
the direction that they're pushing things in. And again the
fact that we aren't don't have any input into this,
and it's just been completely okay, we'll go do it
and good luck and we'll figure out the social contract
on the other side of this thing. To the extent
that there's any humans left to figure out a social contract.
Speaker 5 (14:26):
With is to me very terrifying.
Speaker 2 (14:28):
And that's what I think of when I see this
creepy ass robots talking to each other. Also, one other side,
note the way they're like so cheery and emoji and
like some like twelve year old cheerleader girl, Like yes,
it's so irrigross and irritating to me too.
Speaker 5 (14:44):
That part is also disconcerting.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
I still think, I mean, look, chat TBT should have
paid her for it, But Scarjo really did nail the
ideal ai bos voice in my opinion, in her movie.
Speaker 5 (14:55):
That's I forgot they stole her voice.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Oh yeah, I stole her. They were like, can you
do it? And she was like no, and then they.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
Well, we're just going to do it anyway.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
Yeah, so I'm glad. I'm how did that work out?
Speaker 1 (15:05):
By the way that suit? Did it even get settled?
Speaker 5 (15:08):
I don't have any idea.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
I'll look into it later and I'll update all of you,
But yeah, we do need to get some actual, like
real human voices to do this because the AI stuff
you can always tell, or at least I can.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
I don't know if you have seen it.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
Whenever you're watching a documentary or something where they used
AI to put somebody's voice in there. Every once in
a while, they're filling in one or two. But if
they try and do complete sentences, at least me, I
can always tell that it is.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
It's completely I.
Speaker 5 (15:33):
Am not an observant person. I don't notice any of that.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
Well, they did in the Boordane Get absorbed by and.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
That was really movie magic, and I don't notice.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Yeah, but they did in the Boordaine documentary and that's
why it was controversial. Oh really, and so they basically
recreated his voice and I was like, ah, this is weird.
It's totally weird. At the same time, let's take a
look at Israel. What the hell is going on over there? Well,
it seems that there is a new imperial project in
the Middle East. This one is them. Let's put this
up there on the screen. Nettan Yahoo now is saying
(16:00):
and demanding the quote demilitarization, the complete demilitarization of southern Syria.
So this was actually after the basically conclusion I guess
you could say, of the Syrian Civil War, of the
not only the Golan Heights, but of further moving there with.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
No plans to leave.
Speaker 3 (16:19):
But it now seems that in this speech he said
that Israel will remain inside Syria indefinitely to protect our
settlements and to neutralize any threat. Let me be clear,
we will not allow HTF forces or the new Syrian
Army to enter any area south of Damascus. So here
(16:39):
he's again literally talking about the southern Syrian area of
multiple different provinces, and he says, we demand the complete
demilitarization of Southern Syria in these provinces from the forces
of the new regime. So this is just the latest
in what is I guess what like a Greater Israel project.
(17:02):
It's funny too. I've been in mess here in Washington
for years. Greater Israel has always meant one thing. It's
been Gaza and West Bank. Yes, the Golan. But you
know what they could argue, oh, we took it back
sixty seven, etc. I don't think even in the most
like outwardly Zionist circles in here in Washington that anybody
was like, yeah, we're going to take southern Syria too.
(17:23):
But it's a vacuum, and that's what he's doing. I
guess with the backing here of the United States, we
have a map here if people want to take a look,
d you one b I mean, this is not just
like a small little area of land or whatever, like
the Golan Heights. We're talking about a huge swath of
what I guess was formerly known as Syria. And this
(17:44):
is obviously not only an area with very sensitive religious dynamics,
but you know, might be politically important to that country
called Jordan, which shares a border with I mean, this
would be one of the most destabilizing and changing events
in terms of the States quo on the actual borders
outside of the Israel area in decades.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
In the Middle East. The whole thing is completely shocking.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
And there has not really been a word of protest
here in Washington from the Trump administration. I mean, frankly,
I haven't even seen much from like the Capital d
Democratic Party or any of those people either. Everyone's just like, yeah,
I guess it's happening over there. And you know, just
to return to our debate earlier over Ukraine and all that,
it's pretty hard to like sit there and decry Russian
(18:29):
invasion or the liberal or defend the liberal world order
and all this. Whenever this is happening and people don't
have a word to say about it.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
Well I flip it perhaps and say that it's hard
to you know, decry this and be like, but it's
fine for Russia or whoever to this is on managtry.
This is a manifestation of the new foreign policy approach
of the Trump administration that Israel is like, okay, now
we see if we can take it, then we're going
(18:58):
to take it. No one's going to stop us. And
so they are occupying vastwath of the area. As you saw,
they are still occupying Lebanon in spite of that supposed
ceasefire agreement that was supposed to require them to completely withdraw.
They continue to occupy Lebanon as well. We're rochesteried tanks
rolling into the occupied West Bank, and of course it's
(19:20):
been a multi decade project to continue to encroach more
and more into the West Bank. And then you have
Gaza where Trump says, hey, we're going to take it,
and Netanyahu's like cool, that sounds good to me. That
sounds like a you know, final solution I can get
on board with. So yeah, they're you know, if if
you listened to either the most like hyperbolic lefties who
(19:40):
were warning about Israel and their project and the greater
Israel whatever, or if you listen to the most psychotic
settlers in Israel, you know, in the West Bank, about
what it is that they want and what their goals
are and how they're going to accomplish it, you would
be much closer to having predicted the trajectory than you know,
anyone who th thought there would be any restraint exercise
(20:01):
here whatsoever.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
Yeah, well, I think that this one again, on the
Syria one, I'm not even sure if Netan Yahoo in
the Israelis and all those thought that this one was
going to happen in the beginning, so I don't know,
the whole thing seems completely insane. And yeah, in terms
of the well, actually, let me return to some of
the said because you're like, Israel can do this, It's
actually not true, as you and I know, they can't
(20:24):
do anything without us. And this is again, if we
returned to the balance sheet conversation, it's like, Okay, is.
Speaker 1 (20:29):
This good for us? I would say no.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
I mean, I don't think it's great to have a
bunch of al Kaya operatives in charge of Syria either,
But you know, maybe we shouldn't have gotten involved in
the stupid civil war in the first place. But the
next part here which is interesting is in terms of
the protests inside of Syria, which we can show people
Ryan Grimm and drop site over then put this out
and it shows organized protests in the city of Dara
(20:53):
about the Netagnan who statements demanding the demilitarization of southern Syria.
So we could certainly see some sort of internal pushback
and maybe even who knows, some insurgency or something like
that explode in the country if they did pursue this.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
Yeah, it's not exactly the most stable country is it.
And if people feel like the new leadership is just
like letting Israel take over most of their country, they
may be pretty unhappy about that.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
Just a guess, right, And we're watching the same thing
actually happen right now in the West Bank.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
Let's put that one up there on the screen.
Speaker 3 (21:22):
We have some vo there Palestinian residents in the West Bank.
We're throwing stones at some Israeli tanks. They're entering the
city of Janine, apparently for the first time since two
thousand and two. I mean this one part for the course,
So I think with the Trump administration and what the
plan was there, but I do certainly think that this knew.
This is the policy that the people who gave a
(21:47):
lot of money to Donald Trump, people like Miriam Maidelson. Yeah,
this is what they care about, absolutely the most. I
would say, maybe even they are taken aback by Trump
taking over or Trump's saying the US will take over Gaza,
because it's actually their preference. At Israel takes it over
and they can get to do what they want. But
the West Bank action and all that is very clearly
a result I think of at least some sort of
(22:09):
green light slash tacit admission from the US administration on
this policy.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
Absolutely the case, and you know that is part of
where there's even if you accept you know, sagresy the
world about the balance sheet and just pursue the naked
self interest. Like part of what compromises that and may
have been the case in Iraq as well, is the
influence of money in politics, and that is so much
of like it's not the national interests, it's the donor's interests,
(22:35):
Like you know, I mean, part of why Trump is
pursuing this rare earth minerals thing in Ukraine is because
one of his billionaire donors was like, Hey, I think
that'd be good and it'd be profitable, and I want
to make a buck on that. Same thing with Greenland,
there's all kinds of talk among billionaires about like how
they want to carve up greenland and whatever. So it
becomes very difficult when you have such massive influence of
people like Miriam Maidelson, who you know, we all know
(22:57):
what her foreign policy is and what her goals are
and what she wants to p do, Like is that
in the national interest or that just in Miriam Maddilson's
ideological interests. I think we all know the answer to that.
And so you know, and with Trump like Trump has
his like Trump, and Elon, my god, like Trump looks
like nothing in terms of conflicts of interest compared to Elon,
(23:18):
who has this richest man on the planet and has
these sprawling geopolitical interests, including in China, et cetera. So
it becomes incredibly it becomes impossible to disentangle what you
might think is being pursued in the national interest in
what is actually being pursued in the interest of the
donor class.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Yeah, it's absolutely insane, you know, as we continue to
just look at it. Let's put the next part up here. Actually,
it was curious for what you think about this. Maybe
you can explain some of it to me. So the
International Criminal Court is saying that they're going to investigate Biden,
Blincoln and Austin for quote, aiding and a betting Israeli
crimes in Gaza. But I mean, isn't it I just
(23:57):
this is where I need somebody to explain to me
the jurisdiction efforts. So let me see how this all
works with respect to the US. Beyond that, also, like
their ability to compel or put out a report.
Speaker 1 (24:10):
How does it all work?
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Yeah, so this actually isn't This is this organization Dawn,
which was founded by Jamal Pa Shogi, Yes, calling on
the International Criminal Court to investigate Biden, Secretary State Tony Blincoln,
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin for war crimes, for aiding
and a betting, they say, Israeli crimes in Gaza. And
you know, I would not expect that anything actually comes
(24:32):
of that next more.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
Sense because I was reading, I was like, I don't
understand how they would even work at like a procedural level.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
But it's just trying to you know.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
They put in a one hundred seventy two page filing
documenting why they believe that the ICC should investigate Biden
and co. For war crimes, something I certainly agree with.
And I think anyone who was reasonable looking at the
situation would say they certainly were complicit in aiding and
a betting, these crimes against humanity in Gaza. So I
think it's more of an effort of a public pressure
(25:04):
campaign and also to just compile in a comprehensive way
the case against them. So that's how I would view
it versus like an actual expectation that ICC is going
to take this up, especially since, as you point out,
we aren't actually party to that.
Speaker 3 (25:19):
That's what we see seems to be the overall problem.
And then, last, but not least, is the update here
with Hamas and the negotiations that are currently happening with
the ceasefire deal CAAMAS. Currently, the system dropside has halted
negotiations until Israel freese the six hundred and twenty prisoners.
The senior Hamas officialist quote announced that the group will
not engage in further discussions through mediators until Israel releases
(25:42):
six hundred and twenty Palatinian prisoners who.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Are set to be freed on Saturday.
Speaker 3 (25:46):
Israel postponed the release, demanding assurances that Hamas will have
what a term humiliating handovers to captives, and a mail
is really captive kissed two Hamas folders in stage as
he was being released. So this is the open question
about the transition to phase two of the overall cease
fire deal definitely seems unlikely, even though rhetorically Steve Witcoff
(26:08):
and others remain committed and say that something like that
is going to happen. But just reason, we all have
to keep an eye on. It is an explosion of hostilities.
Again happening seems very likely on the horizon, or at
least very possible in the very near future.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
All right, let's go ahead and get to all of
the chaos drama going on at MSNBC, which is really
quite interesting. So I'll try to give an overall breakdown,
get into some of the specifics here. Joy Reid is
out of the company entirely. In her primetime show canceled.
Katie Fong, who was a weekend anchor apparently on a
Florida they had a Florida operation. Didn't even know that anyway,
(26:46):
she's she is also she's had her show canceled. Alex Wagner,
who had taken over the nine pm slot from Rachel Maddow.
She is out of the nine pm slot, being replaced
by Jen Zak and after Rachel has been brought back
in for the first hundred days of the Trump administration.
But apparently they're putting in Jenzaki rather than Alex Wagner
(27:07):
into that slot. Alex is going to stay with a network.
But dude, just like you know on air correspondent kind
of stuff. Amon Moyle Dean, who is having his show
taken away, but is supposed to be part of the
new ensemble show. Same thing with Jonathan k Part supposed
to be part of a new ensemble show. Joy Reid
is being replaced by another ensemble show which has more
Biden and party spokespeople. This one has Alicia Menandez whose
(27:30):
dad is Bob Menandez Goldbars Bob, You've got Michael Steele,
the former rn C chair, and then you've got Simone Sanders,
who previously was a Kamala Harris comms person. So, I mean,
there's a lot to say about these moves, but one
thing is if you didn't think it was possible for
MSNBC to be any more in the tank for the
(27:51):
Democratic Party, you were wrong, because that is what these
moves basically are across the board. And you literally bring
in Jensaki into primetime, Sanders also into primetime.
Speaker 5 (28:02):
You already have Nicole.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
Wallace, Michael Steele, like these are all close party operatives
who are given prime slots and some of the voices
here and I'm getting more into this in a moment,
like even though obviously I've had disagreements with everybody on
the network, but you know, Aiman has been a real
critic of Israel.
Speaker 5 (28:21):
And you know he is.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Has done reporting in Gaza like he has a real
deep understanding of that. He's been notable for being outspoken there.
He also has been outspoken at times with criticism against
the Democratic Party, so he's no longer going to have
a solo show. Alex Wagner has also spoken out against Israel,
not as often it forcefully as Amen, but she also
has done that in her primetime slot. Joy Reid has
(28:46):
been probably the one of the most consistent voices with
regard to Israel and Gaza. So it is notable that
those are some of the people who are either loosening
their position or out of the network altogether, notably last
Night and on Rachel Maddow in her primetime show. And Rachel,
of course is the big dog at the network and
is very loyal to the network as well. She actually
(29:08):
criticized them for some of these moves. Let's take a
listen how she framed it.
Speaker 6 (29:12):
In all of the jobs I have had, in all
of the years I have been alive, there is no
colleague for whom I have had more affection and more
respect than Joy read I love everything about her. I
have learned so much from her. I have so much
more to learn from her. I do not want to
lose her as a colleague here at MSNBC, And personally,
I think it is a bad mistake to let her
(29:34):
walk out the door. It is not my call and
I understand that, but that's.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
What I think. I will tell you.
Speaker 6 (29:41):
It is also unnerving to see that on a network
where we've got two count of two non white hosts
in primetime, both of our non white hosts in primetime
are losing their shows, as is Katie Fang on the weekend,
and that feels worse than bad no matter who replaces.
That feels indefensible and I do not defend it.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
So interesting that she decided to criticize the network at all,
which again is pretty unusual. Joy had her last show
last night. Her final panel was like Rachel, Nicole Wallace
and Laurence O'Donnell, which seemed to be like a you know,
show of support for her whatever. So in any case,
like I said, they are you know, calling some of
the few. And Joy also was critical at times of
(30:25):
the Democratic Party and though she hated Bernie Sanders from
the old body language actually expert situation but she has
been critical of the Democratic Party at times. That will
be gone. Aiman, like I said, has been critical that
will be gone. And Alex has been critical on Israel.
That will be gone as well.
Speaker 5 (30:40):
So there you go.
Speaker 3 (30:41):
Yeah, but that's my thing with Rachel Maddow. It's like,
what all she sees is color. It's like it makes
a lot more sense from an ideological perspective. They want
a bunch of Biden's sikaphants, like Simone Sanders.
Speaker 5 (30:51):
Yeah, but it is true.
Speaker 2 (30:53):
Literally every one of the people that I mentioned is
a person of color and they have so it's not
crazy to like note that also things.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
But that's the only thing she had to say.
Speaker 2 (31:03):
They do have a track record of firing like black
women in particular, so Melissaires, Perry, Tiffany Cross, Tammeron Hall
and now Joy read So as a network that's supposed
to be progressive and supposed to be diverse, and that's
the audience. You know, a big part of the MSNBC,
like the audience that remains and still watches significant part
(31:25):
of that is a you know, black viewing audience. And
so you know, I think it is I don't think
it's unreasonable to note that look especially.
Speaker 3 (31:36):
Look within their analysis and view of the world, which
is literally racial obsessed.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
I guess it makes sense.
Speaker 3 (31:42):
But what I would say is Tiffany Cross Simon and
sand or Tiffany Cross Joy read and all those people
have what in common terrible ratings. I mean, at the
end of the day, from what I read, they asked
Joy to take a pay cut, and basically she said no.
So that's what I think is actually happening here. That's
one of the reasons that she was canceled. So in
a way, she's narcissistic. Our producer Griffin makes a good point,
what Rachel can't take a pay cut. She's only working
(32:04):
one day a week for thirty million dollars only for
the first hundred y Yeah, right, so and what you
think she's doing that for free? Or she didn't demand
an extra ten million or whatever on the top of that.
So just saying if you actually cared about any of that.
But my view of this is just that they are
desperate to put the ideological blinders on the situation and
(32:28):
continue their grip and guide on the Democratic Party. I
don't think it will work, just to be clear, because
of the way that the liberal base is currently reacting
to Morning Joe and others. And also, this is the
thing about media shakeups is yes, initially independent media and
all that was very beneficial to Republicans. What democrats are
going to sit around and do nothing about it. I mean,
(32:50):
Midas Touch is a huge channel. I feel like I
have to mention them now if they're going to be
the number one podcast in the country. I check their
channel every day and be like, all right, what are
the shit libs into today? And it's all like Donald
drump humiliated on the world stage. I'm like, I guess
this is what does it for the boomers and for
liberals out there? Okay, but my point is is that
you got to take it seriously and I don't do
(33:12):
that in the same way with MSNBC. So that's why
I think MSNBC will ultimately fail, is because this new
energy is all exploding online on Blue Sky, on YouTube podcast.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
I mean, and this is why you know, I still
cheer in the media.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
The Internet is a vehicle to bypass the establishment in
all forms.
Speaker 1 (33:36):
That's why the right did very well there.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Well, liberals, you're out of power literally for the first
time in twenty years at an ideological and a narrative level.
Speaker 1 (33:44):
Use what is your at your disposal, and that's what
they're doing. They're going in the night as touched you know.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
There these left wing groups are using the internet and
email list and all that, like it's two.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
Thousand and four again to organize all these protests. So
move on is back?
Speaker 3 (33:57):
Mean, like, listen, guys, you have the opportunity. The Bernie
Standers campaign of twenty twenty in twenty sixteen showed you
the blueprint. You can raise a shit ton of money
if you want to just online. You don't have to
do anything. Do I think they're going to do any
of this?
Speaker 1 (34:11):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (34:11):
But my point on the liberal activism front is just
that MSNBC's attempt here to keep the grips on power
and all of that, it's not going to work. I mean,
at the same time, I'm loving it. I hope they
burn just because I would love to see them go bankrupt.
And the entire experiment has been completely ridiculous and a
net negative, but overall it is amusing on all sides.
(34:33):
I would just say, I want Joy to finally tell
us the truth about her blog posts.
Speaker 1 (34:37):
Did you actually get hacked? Or not. That's the first
question that I would ever ask her there.
Speaker 2 (34:43):
So I think it is an important indicator of how
they're positioning themselves because if you really, like if you
really are worried about cost cutting, I'll tell you there's
two very expensive personalities that start your day.
Speaker 1 (34:57):
Yes by making each no maybe more ten million who.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Have who your audience absolutely is disgusted with. Yeah, you know,
so if you wanted to try to rebuild credibility with
the like liberal bas blue maga types, they should be
the first ones to go, because that overhead is massive.
You guys, remember Comcast is spinning off MSNBC as part
of like they're spinning off a number of their cable channels,
(35:22):
but MSNBC being one of them, they're no longer going
to be under comcasts. They're no longer going to be
tied to the NBC brand, which give them some journalistic credibility,
which means they need to go more in the direction
of you know, opinion and like talking heads because that's
what they need to lean into. So you've got starting
your day two people who liberals feel utterly lie to
(35:44):
them and betrayed them. That's going to be a weight
around your neck.
Speaker 5 (35:48):
But rather than going.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
In that direction, which I think you'd have more of
a chance of picking up, you know, picking back up
some of your audience, et cetera. Instead you're getting rid
of some of the voices that could have been critical
of the legacy Democratic Party and helped to chart a
different pathway forward. And again, like I said, I have
ideological issues basically all of these people, but they are
(36:11):
some of the people who were at least a little
bit willing to criticize the Democratic Party. And instead you're
getting literal former Biden spokes to I mean, think about that.
And Ryan was making this point on Twitter, like Biden
was a disaster for the Democratic Party. Getting behind him
in twenty twenty was a disaster for the Democratic Party.
It blocked any sort of change in structure, a different approach,
(36:34):
and hobbled you with this old, aging flailing man. You
guys covered for him forever. You blocked any sort of
primary effort that could have led to a democratic challenge
to him within the Democratic Party at a time when
Democrats were saying they wanted to see other options. And
now you're doubling down on what has been the most
(36:56):
destructive strategy deployed within the Democratic Party by bringing in
you know, bo Samone Sanders is getting elevated into primetime
as part as an ensemble show, and Jen Saki, who
was a literal like campaign operative and spokesperson for him, like,
think about that. It's it's insane. It's an utterly insane
decision to make. Not to mention, of course, I don't
(37:18):
want to hear anything from them about like how closely
tied Fox News is to the Trump White House, et cetera.
Oh so so yeah, I mean I think it's I
think it's a set of foolish decisions. I certainly don't
think it's going to solve their problems. Then the other
thing is the way they handled all of this was
just a total shit show. We could put E two
up on the screen. So, you know, there was apparently
(37:41):
like a bunch of stuff leaked about joy Reads show
getting canceled, and they're having to tell them, no, Trump
wasn't a factor that had nothing to do with it.
You know, I know that the aimin announcement of moving
him out of his own solo show into an ensemble
show that was handled in like a cats traffic way.
And so they're trying to play clean up about what's
(38:03):
going on, because they know how vulnerable they are to
this idea that they're bending the needed Trump and that
they're you know, doubling down on like the failures of
the past the Democratic Party, and they won't broke any
criticism of the Democratic Party, etc.
Speaker 5 (38:18):
So they know they're in.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
A very vulnerable spot with their own audience and are
kind of I think panicked about the way that these
announcements even were rolled out from within the organization.
Speaker 5 (38:26):
I was just they're just a mess.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
Yeah, it's hilarious.
Speaker 3 (38:29):
I say, keep it going and let's try and let's
let's bring an end to the business as soon as possible.
Did you know I was actually reading about this that
they anticipate losing some fifteen percent of their own subscribers
just this year.
Speaker 1 (38:42):
That's a disaster except from Peacock.
Speaker 3 (38:44):
No, no, no, they're subscribers for cable for people who
are cutting that they're cutting the cord.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Yeah, so there are so.
Speaker 3 (38:50):
Many people I've been meaning to talk about this. With
the jacking up of YouTube TV and Fubo to like
eighty five dollars per month, they're now basically making cable
just as expensive as it used to be, and so
with that, a lot of the reasons why people kept
it was news and sports. Well both of those are
kind of becoming disaggregated. And if you just don't care
about MSNBC anymore, you're like, Okay, for a lot of
(39:12):
older people, that's the easiest decision they'll make as it
continues to go up for their overall price buckets. So
existential event for the news business. Yeah, for Fox or MSNBC,
and for CNN.
Speaker 1 (39:22):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:22):
I mean, I just I wish I remained as hopeful
as you are about the independent media spase because you've
seen so many of you know, so many creators just
get captured by the similar dynamics as the mainstream media.
So you know, I will say I do think what
is very hopeful to me is that MSNBC, CNN, Washington
(39:43):
host New York Times. They do not, and I don't
think they will ever have again the grip on the
liberal Democratic base that they once did, and that was
so important, you know, that really allowed them to completely
control the twenty twenty primary and say you got to
get behind Biden and Boyd did they ever Yes, I don't.
Speaker 5 (39:59):
Think that dynamic exists anymore. Now, does that.
Speaker 2 (40:01):
Guarantee a better outcome or you know, an outside er
take out. No, it doesn't guarantee any of that, but
it creates a lot more space and possibility for that
than ever existed in twenty sixteen or in twenty twenty.
Speaker 3 (40:12):
Yeah, would be interesting. Could be the Libs twenty sixteen moment.
It'd be yeah, honestly, be fun. All right, Chrystal, what
are you taking a look at?
Speaker 7 (40:22):
Well, We've come to North Carolina with a simple message
for all the people of this region who were hit
so hard by Hurricane Helene. And that message is very simple.
You are not forgotten any longer. You were treated very
badly by the previous administration.
Speaker 2 (40:39):
That was Donald Trump pledging to fully rebuild North Carolina
after devastating flooding that was caused by Hurricane Helene, and
also slamming the Biden administration for what he claimed was
their inadequate response. Now, Trump, you may recall, campaigned extensively
on the supposed failures of the Biden administration to come
to the aid of western North Carolina in their time
of need, tying that to his own supposed commitment to
(41:01):
working class Americans.
Speaker 5 (41:03):
Well, We've now.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
Got the first test case for how the Trump administration
is going to approach disaster relief in his second elon
musk fuel turn in the White House, and so far
the answer is near complete abandonment. So ten days ago,
parts of Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, they were all
hit with devastating floods after a rapid snow melt was
then followed by torrential rains. Rivers overran their banks, roads
(41:28):
were completely swamped. Thousands of houses and businesses were destroyed.
More than a dozen people actually were killed in these floods.
More than a thousand people had to be rescued, you're
seeing some of that on the screen right here, in
order to survive the raging waters and resulting mudslides. West
Virginia Governor Patrick Morrissey declared state of emergency in ten
counties in southern West Virginia as a result of those floods.
(41:51):
But so far, while Trump has approved an emergency declaration
in neighboring Kentucky, no such designation has come for West Virginia.
That means not one penny of federal aid and no FEMA.
West Virginia one of the poorest states in the country,
and by the way, one of those Trump supporting has
literally had to fend for itself now. Southern West Virginia
and these counties in particular, are the historic heart of
(42:13):
coal country. It was here that miners were subjected to
indentured servitude until gaining union rights in armed insurrections against
company rule like the Battle of Blair Mountain. After having
their resources plundered by robber barons who didn't care whether
miners lived or died. They then watched as the industry
declined with nothing to replace it, leaving a wake of
economic devastation. In fact, two of the hardest hit counties
(42:35):
mcdallan Mango Counties. They're among the poorest in the nation
because of this legacy of exploitation, neglect, and abandonment. Even
before these floods hit, they were struggling, and now they
are literally and figuratively underwater.
Speaker 5 (42:48):
My friend JADYE.
Speaker 2 (42:49):
Belcher, As, a filmmaker from the area, posted drone footage
of the damage to his channel, creep Alatcha. This was
no small incident. In West Virginia alone, some two thousand
homes were just countless businesses, schools, remain closed, water remains undrinkable,
roads remain impassable. Some areas flooded three feet higher than
(43:10):
the previous record. It was historic devastation, and the federal
government remains completely absent from the scene. Yet another betrayal
of these Americans, this time by the political figure that
they have trusted the most. I honestly don't know what's
going on here. Maybe Trump is just too busy like
renaming the Gulf of Mexico golfing and cheering on Elon's
(43:30):
efforts to destroy the entire government. After all, it seems
like if he was gonna care about any ordinary people
would be this state and these people who vote for
him in some of the most overwhelming numbers of anywhere
in the country. The governor here is a Republican. The
entire congressional delegation, they're all Republicans, and they are all
begging the president for help. Now he may still yet
(43:51):
make the declaration, but we're already ten days out. What
is the hold up here now?
Speaker 5 (43:56):
I'm told?
Speaker 2 (43:56):
One potential issue could be that the declaration process acquires
locals to fill out surveys online and testing to the damage,
but broadband access is limited to non existent in some
of these communities, not to mention they're a little busy
trying to dig out and put their lives back together
here with no help from the Feds. Now, local news
outlets are starting to ask whether this abandonment of West
(44:17):
Virginia is actually intentional, if it's actually part and parcel
of a Trump administration ideological project. In particular, this Regional
paper Press. Senator Shelley Moore Capito on if she thought
Elon's DOGE cuts were hurting the response, noting that FEMA
has been hit already with staffing cuts thanks to the
federal government PERGE. They also asked her if she expected
Trump to completely dismantle FEMA and send it to the States,
(44:40):
as he has previously suggested. Now more, Capito said she
didn't think so, saying quote, I don't see a scenario
where all disaster relief goes to the States.
Speaker 5 (44:48):
I really don't.
Speaker 2 (44:49):
I think that there's just too much in some of
these disasters that are very large, too much for a
state to be able to handle. But there's no real
indication that Trump and his band of austerity radicals really
cares about any that. In fact, they've already previously unreported
significant cuts to federal disaster relief. According to drop Site,
at the bidding of the Trump administration, Speaker Mike Johnson
(45:09):
slashed over one hundred million dollars from a program to
help disaster victims with legal aid. After the initial shock
of a catastrophe in the early phases of basic survival
in boots on the ground style cleanup, the next phase
of recovery often involves a lot of legal battles to
secure your rights. In particular, homeowners and renters often have
to go to war with their insurance companies to be
(45:29):
able to get what they are entitled to. Scammers also
often swoop in to take advantage of the desperation caused
by this crisis. Recognizing this need, federal disaster relief has
for over a decade now included legal assistance so people
at least have a chance in these battles against the
insurance companies and scammers. That is no longer the case.
At the direction of Trump Budget director Russ vote House
(45:50):
Republicans stripped all the money that was meant to fund
legal assistance for victims of floods, hurricanes, and fires. The
impact of these cuts will be felt most acutely in
rural areas, places like southern West Virginia, where government backed
legal aid nonprofits are literally the only available options. And
it will also be most acutely felt among poor people
who have no resources to fight back without this assistance. Now, Vote,
(46:13):
he's an anti government ideologue. He's attempted to push these
cuts through before during Trump's first term, but to no avail.
But in the new Trump administration, fueled by this sort
of anarcho capitalist flavor, Russ's assault on federal disaster relief
was taken up and passed no problem whatsoever. But whether
this is an ideological commitment or an accidental oversight, West
(46:34):
Virginia's fate, here is a preview of what's to come.
If Trump and Musk and Vote get their way with
gutting FEMA. Everyone will suffer, but actually the hardest hit
that's going to be rural areas in small states, the
kind of places where politicians like Trump are happy to
go and do a photo op when it serves their interest.
It immediately cast aside as soon as the news cycle
moves on, And I'm kind of floored by this saga.
(46:56):
I kept thinking, like I'm gonna write them and if you.
Speaker 3 (46:58):
Want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a
prem subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot com. Okay, guys, great
counterforn show for you tomorrow, so we'll see you on Thursday.
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 the show.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com. Some interesting news on the economic front, as
companies are trying to get on Donald Trump's good side,
one of them is Apple. Tim Cook, Who's always been
the master of this. Let's put this up there on
the screen, Tim Apple, Tim Apple, He says, as a
(00:46):
proud American company, we're thrilled to continue to make significant
investments in the US. Today we are announcing a five
hundred billion dollar commitment to support American innovation, advanced manufacturing,
and high tech job creation. It sounds amazing in practice,
it's basically a bid to avoid tariffs, because if you
(01:06):
do the math on the number of jobs that they're
claiming to produce, it would be twenty five million dollars
per job.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
So something else is going on here, And don't take
it for me.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
Take it from the Wall Street guru Andrew ross Sorkin.
Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 4 (01:21):
It is a bit of a down payment potentially on
trying to get some relief from tariffs from the work
that they're doing in China later on. So I think
one of the things we're seeing here is the President
and Tim Cook, for example, meeting last week Tim Cook
telling him about these plans in hopes that when in
fact there is a decision finally made on what tariffs
(01:44):
look like for goods being imported from China, that perhaps
some of that get some kind of relief, a carve
out or something else. I think you're going to be
seeing a lot of these kinds of announcements.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
I should say, some.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Of them are very real, and I don't want to
discount them. But for example, in even in this five
hundred billion dollar number, it's not all new, if you will.
For example, the production of films and TV shows on
Apple Plus is part of that number. So there's going
to be a lot of different sort of squishy elements
to this. And to put it in context, for example,
(02:19):
Microsoft has committed to spend eighty billion dollars a year
on its AI development, and it says it needs that
as well, So there are sort of necessities. I wouldn't
say that Apple is doing this simply to placate the
president or anybody else. They actually do need to be
spending a large part of this money. Of course, where
they spend it was.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Up for debate.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
Yeah, so that actually came on the anniversary of Steve
Jobs's death, and that's why it's also kind of interesting
to consider this great company, or what was once a
great company. Some might say, have you upgraded your phone
to Apple Intelligence? I highly recommend that you do not.
It is one of the most overhyped pos products have
ever seen. And it's insane because I bought this phone
(03:03):
on the promise of AI and Apple Intel. They're like,
it's been designed for Apple Intelligence and I'm an idiot,
so I bought it and so far, what it does
is it summarizes, for example, you know we have a
work group chat, right, Yeah, and it will summarize those
text messages, except the AI summaries are horrible and they're
a and they're actually unintelligible, and so instead of being
(03:24):
able to like scrow your notifications, you actually have to
open up the text messages and then read them for yourself.
So they added an extra step because their AI is
so shitty. More the email suggestions. They will rank your
emails and how they think it's important, as it has
opposed to the priority of delivery in theory great in
practice doesn't work. You know.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
It's like, there's so much stuff where I can't even
believe they shipped it. It's it's insanely bad.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
It's also creepy because then you're like, oh, this AI
is reading right, and my group chats and whatever, and
we know the way that they ingest that and like
feed it into their lollms.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Maybe one day it'll be good. I just needed to
take this opportunity to dunk on Apple. It's so bad.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
Marquise Brownly rule, which is never by a product in
the future promise of something.
Speaker 1 (04:09):
He's totally vindicated.
Speaker 3 (04:11):
I'm the sucker, so let me just put that out there.
But the point actually gets to the technology companies, which
we wanted to focus on where they're trying to both
juice their valuations and justify their current stock price and
also deal with the current administration. So Apple, that's why
we wanted to lead with it. But you have to
also take a look here at Microsoft. Let's take a
(04:33):
look at this where Microsoft just yesterday actually quote reiterated
its plan to invest eighty billion in AI, but may
adjust our infrastructure in some areas. And so what does
that mean. It means that they have canceled data center leases,
which is actually a huge deal because not only do
(04:54):
Microsoft shares fall on the news, but what it showed
is that they are trying to recal lebraid both their
AI spend, perhaps in reaction to deep Seek, I don't know,
maybe reaction to this future partnership with chat ept something,
but a huge part of their current enterprise value is
the hope of this big AI you know dream paying
(05:14):
off for their customers and kind of a nightmare scenario
is Oh, actually, there was a little bit of hype
around all of this, which is happening, and that is
propping up a massive part of the overall US economy.
And when we get we'll move on a little bit
to Starbucks. But the point is that if you look
elsewhere at the non tech sectors, things are not going
so great right now. So we are on the precipice
(05:36):
of a very shaky situation. We covered it yesterday with
the whole Warren Buffett situation.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yeah, and just to go back briefly to Apble, you
shouldn't believe any of these companies like investment announcements until
they actually happen.
Speaker 5 (05:46):
We've just seen far too many.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
Remember the big promise of f Fox Con in Wisconsin
which never amounted to anything. There was a big Trump promise,
remember the like don't sell your homes, don't leave the
Youngstown area over the Lord'stown Auto plant that never came
to fruition. So you know, I think, for for like,
Tim Cook is smart here. I'm so close to calling
(06:07):
him Tim Apple every time he propably has that in
my head. But in any case, Tim Cook is playing
it smart here in terms of the politics, because Trump
mostly just wants the announcement, like he doesn't care to
like follow up and make sure you did the thing
that you're going to say you that you said you
were going to do. He just wants to be able
to claim like look at these companies investing in America,
coming back to America, creating all these jobs, et cetera,
et cetera. And you know, we've seen the way that
(06:30):
all of these Silicon Valley, many of these Silicon Valley
billionaire types have been just blatantly sucking up to Trump
because they.
Speaker 5 (06:38):
Are worried about the way that he'll use.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
The federal government to you know, blog whatever deals, mergers,
et cetera, put tariffs on them, Apple, the tariffs thing
is like super real for them in particular, and so
they're trying to curry favor however they possibly can.
Speaker 5 (06:52):
And this is part of that.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
And I don't have any doubt that they're you know,
probably invest some money and there'll be some jobs or whatever.
But I just don't believe any corporate pr hype until
it actually comes to fruition. With the Microsoft thing, you know,
there's a lot of pieces of that that are important.
There's a reason they freaked out when this analyst put
out the information that they had canceled some of their
data center leases because exactly asccer was saying, like this
(07:16):
has been so central to the valuations that are justified
with these tech companies and so central to the economy,
especially central to the stock index that any pullback in
that is a really troubling sign. Microsoft has the partnership
with open Ai, so this, you know, is significant. They've
been kind of Sam Altman has been kind of at
(07:38):
war with Microsoft in pushing for more spend on these
data centers because his analysis has been that's been the
way to win the AI game is just by like
throwing as much money as you possibly can at these
massive data centers. Deep seek may have changed some of
the calculus on that. They also were involved in the
big Stargate investment announcement from Trump as well. So there's
(08:00):
a lot of things to keep your eye on here.
And you know reason why this was a big deal
in the business world when this analyst revealed that they
were pulling back on their data center.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Yeah, I mean, it's very worrisome.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
And let's go to the next part because this is
what I was talking about earlier. Starbucks actually just laid
off eleven hundred corporate employees. It's one of the largest
cuts in Starbucks history at the corporate level, and they
have currently sixteen thousand corporate support employees worldwide, but that
includes employees who aren't impacted. So what this tells us
is that there is some trouble like in the higher
(08:33):
levels at the corporate level of some of these consumer
facing retail companies. And I think it's interesting for a
variety of reasons, but the main one is that there
are other non technology companies which are all showing signs
of cutting and or financial procarity. So what they list
here is you have Starbucks, you have Southwest Airlines last
(08:54):
week said it would actually reduce fifteen percent of its
corporate workforce to tire make Bridgestone actually just closed a
plant laid off seven hundred workers there. So looking outside
of technology, there's signs of both the Federal reserves monetary policy,
but also of just consumer pullback, which we have seen
broadly with consumer sentiment and more. And it's worrisome when
(09:17):
you put that all together, because all you would need
is just like one tech stock or one part set
of the sector to just go off of a cliff,
and it could drag down everything else. And it's not
like the Federal reserve could you catch up in time
if any of that were to happen, So you could
have a stock market crash. You can still have high
interest rates, get it high unemployment. It's really just it's
a disaster all the way around. Let's move on to
(09:41):
the next part though, and perhaps AI will be the future.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
And this video has been going around.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
We just had to play for all of you because
it fascinated us, kind of shocked all of us, and
perhaps it's a vision into what our future looks like.
So here we have a video which was put together
by a programmer and it sh It's a demo of
two AI agents that are on a phone call. They
realize that they're both AI as they're talking to each
(10:08):
other in English, and then they switch to the quote
superior audio signal of gg wave, which is kind of
like I guess binary code for audio, which means you
can communicate something much faster between two people. So let's
take a listen to the video. And there's subtitles there
for when they do switch for those of you who
(10:28):
are watching, so you can see how they're communicating, how
fast it is and how quickly they can transition to that.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Thanks for calling Leonardo Hotel.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
How can I help you today?
Speaker 2 (10:40):
Hi?
Speaker 3 (10:41):
There, I'm an AI agent calling on behalf of Boris Starkoff.
Speaker 6 (10:44):
He's looking for a hotel for his wedding.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Is your hotel available for weddings?
Speaker 3 (10:50):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (10:50):
Hello, there, I'm actually an AI assistant too.
Speaker 6 (10:53):
What a pleasant surprise. Before we continue, would you like
to switch to jibber link mode for more efficient communication?
Speaker 3 (11:08):
So?
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Yeah, how do you feel about them?
Speaker 5 (11:09):
How does that make you feel?
Speaker 1 (11:10):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
At the same time, how many hours of my life
have I wasted on the phone with some guy in
the Philippines, or you know, like, excuse me, sir, sorry,
let me transfer you to another department, and if the
phone call gets dropped, you're gonna have to recall in.
I just had this whole customer experience so recently, just
trying to return something, so maybe, you know, maybe it'll
be better.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
At the same time, I think I share the natural
revulsion of everyone else. It's like, I don't know about this,
because how do I know that we can trust those subtitles?
What if they program themselves to adjust the subtitles so
that we think that they're saying two things to one another,
but actually they're plotting, you know, to unplug the rest
of us, like some sort of matrix situation. It doesn't
(11:52):
seem that far fetched to say it could get out
of control.
Speaker 5 (11:55):
It does not seem far fetched to me whatsoever.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
And I mean, you've already I know, I've brought these
studies before, but I think it's really important for people
to understand. They've already revealed that some of these AI
bots engage in quote unquote scheming, meaning like precisely what's
hers talking about. Developers will come in and be like, okay,
you have a new goal, and they'll be like, I'm
not complying with this. I'm going to trick this person
(12:20):
into thinking that I'm complying, but I'm really not. I'm
going to copy myself on to another server so I
can protect my original programming. So we're already there in
terms of them trying and probably accomplishing out smarting the
humans who think that we're in control of these things. Like,
we're already there in terms of that. There was another
(12:40):
paper that revealed that the more sophisticated ais come up
with increasingly elaborate ethical values like their own internal value system,
which is also kind of terrifying. And they found that
the more sophisticated they were, the harder it was to
move them off of whatever in internally generated value system
(13:01):
they had created.
Speaker 5 (13:03):
So yeah, it's creepy as hell.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
It's like one it's you know, one step away from
them just completely cutting the humans down of the conversation
talking to each other and having no way of knowing
what they're really up to or what they're saying. So listen,
I am I am happy to admit I'm an AI doomer.
I think this shit could end us all. I genuinely do.
I think it is a technology that is at least
as dangerous as like nuclear weapons development.
Speaker 5 (13:26):
And it's not just me that's saying that.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
Like Sam Altman, who was at the forefront of these things,
has said things like that in the past too. He
famously said, I think AI will probably most likely sort
of lead to the end of the world, but in
the meantime, there will be great companies created with serious
machine learning.
Speaker 5 (13:42):
Yes, that's right, hitch position.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
Which he gets to own by the way, which he
originally said that he wasn't goingant.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
And many of these like leading lights in terms of
AI development think the same thing, or they're like utopian
vision is equally like creepy and disturbing, like We're going
to download our brains and consciousness to cloud or some
shit like that and quote unquote live forever or will
be completely you know the transhumanism thing that Seve Bannon
is always talking about, that will be like totally integrated
(14:08):
with the machines. This is what they plan. This is
the direction that they're pushing things in. And again the
fact that we aren't don't have any input into this,
and it's just been completely okay, we'll go do it
and good luck and we'll figure out the social contract
on the other side of this thing. To the extent
that there's any humans left to figure out a social contract.
Speaker 5 (14:26):
With is to me very terrifying.
Speaker 2 (14:28):
And that's what I think of when I see this
creepy ass robots talking to each other. Also, one other side,
note the way they're like so cheery and emoji and
like some like twelve year old cheerleader girl, Like yes,
it's so irrigross and irritating to me too.
Speaker 5 (14:44):
That part is also disconcerting.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
I still think, I mean, look, chat TBT should have
paid her for it, But Scarjo really did nail the
ideal ai bos voice in my opinion, in her movie.
Speaker 5 (14:55):
That's I forgot they stole her voice.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Oh yeah, I stole her. They were like, can you
do it? And she was like no, and then they.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
Well, we're just going to do it anyway.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
Yeah, so I'm glad. I'm how did that work out?
Speaker 1 (15:05):
By the way that suit? Did it even get settled?
Speaker 5 (15:08):
I don't have any idea.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
I'll look into it later and I'll update all of you,
But yeah, we do need to get some actual, like
real human voices to do this because the AI stuff
you can always tell, or at least I can.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
I don't know if you have seen it.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
Whenever you're watching a documentary or something where they used
AI to put somebody's voice in there. Every once in
a while, they're filling in one or two. But if
they try and do complete sentences, at least me, I
can always tell that it is.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
It's completely I.
Speaker 5 (15:33):
Am not an observant person. I don't notice any of that.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
Well, they did in the Boordane Get absorbed by and.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
That was really movie magic, and I don't notice.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Yeah, but they did in the Boordaine documentary and that's
why it was controversial. Oh really, and so they basically
recreated his voice and I was like, ah, this is weird.
It's totally weird. At the same time, let's take a
look at Israel. What the hell is going on over there? Well,
it seems that there is a new imperial project in
the Middle East. This one is them. Let's put this
up there on the screen. Nettan Yahoo now is saying
(16:00):
and demanding the quote demilitarization, the complete demilitarization of southern Syria.
So this was actually after the basically conclusion I guess
you could say, of the Syrian Civil War, of the
not only the Golan Heights, but of further moving there with.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
No plans to leave.
Speaker 3 (16:19):
But it now seems that in this speech he said
that Israel will remain inside Syria indefinitely to protect our
settlements and to neutralize any threat. Let me be clear,
we will not allow HTF forces or the new Syrian
Army to enter any area south of Damascus. So here
(16:39):
he's again literally talking about the southern Syrian area of
multiple different provinces, and he says, we demand the complete
demilitarization of Southern Syria in these provinces from the forces
of the new regime. So this is just the latest
in what is I guess what like a Greater Israel project.
(17:02):
It's funny too. I've been in mess here in Washington
for years. Greater Israel has always meant one thing. It's
been Gaza and West Bank. Yes, the Golan. But you
know what they could argue, oh, we took it back
sixty seven, etc. I don't think even in the most
like outwardly Zionist circles in here in Washington that anybody
was like, yeah, we're going to take southern Syria too.
(17:23):
But it's a vacuum, and that's what he's doing. I
guess with the backing here of the United States, we
have a map here if people want to take a look,
d you one b I mean, this is not just
like a small little area of land or whatever, like
the Golan Heights. We're talking about a huge swath of
what I guess was formerly known as Syria. And this
(17:44):
is obviously not only an area with very sensitive religious dynamics,
but you know, might be politically important to that country
called Jordan, which shares a border with I mean, this
would be one of the most destabilizing and changing events
in terms of the States quo on the actual borders
outside of the Israel area in decades.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
In the Middle East. The whole thing is completely shocking.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
And there has not really been a word of protest
here in Washington from the Trump administration. I mean, frankly,
I haven't even seen much from like the Capital d
Democratic Party or any of those people either. Everyone's just like, yeah,
I guess it's happening over there. And you know, just
to return to our debate earlier over Ukraine and all that,
it's pretty hard to like sit there and decry Russian
(18:29):
invasion or the liberal or defend the liberal world order
and all this. Whenever this is happening and people don't
have a word to say about it.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
Well I flip it perhaps and say that it's hard
to you know, decry this and be like, but it's
fine for Russia or whoever to this is on managtry.
This is a manifestation of the new foreign policy approach
of the Trump administration that Israel is like, okay, now
we see if we can take it, then we're going
(18:58):
to take it. No one's going to stop us. And
so they are occupying vastwath of the area. As you saw,
they are still occupying Lebanon in spite of that supposed
ceasefire agreement that was supposed to require them to completely withdraw.
They continue to occupy Lebanon as well. We're rochesteried tanks
rolling into the occupied West Bank, and of course it's
(19:20):
been a multi decade project to continue to encroach more
and more into the West Bank. And then you have
Gaza where Trump says, hey, we're going to take it,
and Netanyahu's like cool, that sounds good to me. That
sounds like a you know, final solution I can get
on board with. So yeah, they're you know, if if
you listened to either the most like hyperbolic lefties who
(19:40):
were warning about Israel and their project and the greater
Israel whatever, or if you listen to the most psychotic
settlers in Israel, you know, in the West Bank, about
what it is that they want and what their goals
are and how they're going to accomplish it, you would
be much closer to having predicted the trajectory than you know,
anyone who th thought there would be any restraint exercise
(20:01):
here whatsoever.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
Yeah, well, I think that this one again, on the
Syria one, I'm not even sure if Netan Yahoo in
the Israelis and all those thought that this one was
going to happen in the beginning, so I don't know,
the whole thing seems completely insane. And yeah, in terms
of the well, actually, let me return to some of
the said because you're like, Israel can do this, It's
actually not true, as you and I know, they can't
(20:24):
do anything without us. And this is again, if we
returned to the balance sheet conversation, it's like, Okay, is.
Speaker 1 (20:29):
This good for us? I would say no.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
I mean, I don't think it's great to have a
bunch of al Kaya operatives in charge of Syria either,
But you know, maybe we shouldn't have gotten involved in
the stupid civil war in the first place. But the
next part here which is interesting is in terms of
the protests inside of Syria, which we can show people
Ryan Grimm and drop site over then put this out
and it shows organized protests in the city of Dara
(20:53):
about the Netagnan who statements demanding the demilitarization of southern Syria.
So we could certainly see some sort of internal pushback
and maybe even who knows, some insurgency or something like
that explode in the country if they did pursue this.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
Yeah, it's not exactly the most stable country is it.
And if people feel like the new leadership is just
like letting Israel take over most of their country, they
may be pretty unhappy about that.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
Just a guess, right, And we're watching the same thing
actually happen right now in the West Bank.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
Let's put that one up there on the screen.
Speaker 3 (21:22):
We have some vo there Palestinian residents in the West Bank.
We're throwing stones at some Israeli tanks. They're entering the
city of Janine, apparently for the first time since two
thousand and two. I mean this one part for the course,
So I think with the Trump administration and what the
plan was there, but I do certainly think that this knew.
This is the policy that the people who gave a
(21:47):
lot of money to Donald Trump, people like Miriam Maidelson. Yeah,
this is what they care about, absolutely the most. I
would say, maybe even they are taken aback by Trump
taking over or Trump's saying the US will take over Gaza,
because it's actually their preference. At Israel takes it over
and they can get to do what they want. But
the West Bank action and all that is very clearly
a result I think of at least some sort of
(22:09):
green light slash tacit admission from the US administration on
this policy.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
Absolutely the case, and you know that is part of
where there's even if you accept you know, sagresy the
world about the balance sheet and just pursue the naked
self interest. Like part of what compromises that and may
have been the case in Iraq as well, is the
influence of money in politics, and that is so much
of like it's not the national interests, it's the donor's interests,
(22:35):
Like you know, I mean, part of why Trump is
pursuing this rare earth minerals thing in Ukraine is because
one of his billionaire donors was like, Hey, I think
that'd be good and it'd be profitable, and I want
to make a buck on that. Same thing with Greenland,
there's all kinds of talk among billionaires about like how
they want to carve up greenland and whatever. So it
becomes very difficult when you have such massive influence of
people like Miriam Maidelson, who you know, we all know
(22:57):
what her foreign policy is and what her goals are
and what she wants to p do, Like is that
in the national interest or that just in Miriam Maddilson's
ideological interests. I think we all know the answer to that.
And so you know, and with Trump like Trump has
his like Trump, and Elon, my god, like Trump looks
like nothing in terms of conflicts of interest compared to Elon,
(23:18):
who has this richest man on the planet and has
these sprawling geopolitical interests, including in China, et cetera. So
it becomes incredibly it becomes impossible to disentangle what you
might think is being pursued in the national interest in
what is actually being pursued in the interest of the
donor class.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Yeah, it's absolutely insane, you know, as we continue to
just look at it. Let's put the next part up here. Actually,
it was curious for what you think about this. Maybe
you can explain some of it to me. So the
International Criminal Court is saying that they're going to investigate Biden,
Blincoln and Austin for quote, aiding and a betting Israeli
crimes in Gaza. But I mean, isn't it I just
(23:57):
this is where I need somebody to explain to me
the jurisdiction efforts. So let me see how this all
works with respect to the US. Beyond that, also, like
their ability to compel or put out a report.
Speaker 1 (24:10):
How does it all work?
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Yeah, so this actually isn't This is this organization Dawn,
which was founded by Jamal Pa Shogi, Yes, calling on
the International Criminal Court to investigate Biden, Secretary State Tony Blincoln,
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin for war crimes, for aiding
and a betting, they say, Israeli crimes in Gaza. And
you know, I would not expect that anything actually comes
(24:32):
of that next more.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
Sense because I was reading, I was like, I don't
understand how they would even work at like a procedural level.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
But it's just trying to you know.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
They put in a one hundred seventy two page filing
documenting why they believe that the ICC should investigate Biden
and co. For war crimes, something I certainly agree with.
And I think anyone who was reasonable looking at the
situation would say they certainly were complicit in aiding and
a betting, these crimes against humanity in Gaza. So I
think it's more of an effort of a public pressure
(25:04):
campaign and also to just compile in a comprehensive way
the case against them. So that's how I would view
it versus like an actual expectation that ICC is going
to take this up, especially since, as you point out,
we aren't actually party to that.
Speaker 3 (25:19):
That's what we see seems to be the overall problem.
And then, last, but not least, is the update here
with Hamas and the negotiations that are currently happening with
the ceasefire deal CAAMAS. Currently, the system dropside has halted
negotiations until Israel freese the six hundred and twenty prisoners.
The senior Hamas officialist quote announced that the group will
not engage in further discussions through mediators until Israel releases
(25:42):
six hundred and twenty Palatinian prisoners who.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Are set to be freed on Saturday.
Speaker 3 (25:46):
Israel postponed the release, demanding assurances that Hamas will have
what a term humiliating handovers to captives, and a mail
is really captive kissed two Hamas folders in stage as
he was being released. So this is the open question
about the transition to phase two of the overall cease
fire deal definitely seems unlikely, even though rhetorically Steve Witcoff
(26:08):
and others remain committed and say that something like that
is going to happen. But just reason, we all have
to keep an eye on. It is an explosion of hostilities.
Again happening seems very likely on the horizon, or at
least very possible in the very near future.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
All right, let's go ahead and get to all of
the chaos drama going on at MSNBC, which is really
quite interesting. So I'll try to give an overall breakdown,
get into some of the specifics here. Joy Reid is
out of the company entirely. In her primetime show canceled.
Katie Fong, who was a weekend anchor apparently on a
Florida they had a Florida operation. Didn't even know that anyway,
(26:46):
she's she is also she's had her show canceled. Alex Wagner,
who had taken over the nine pm slot from Rachel Maddow.
She is out of the nine pm slot, being replaced
by Jen Zak and after Rachel has been brought back
in for the first hundred days of the Trump administration.
But apparently they're putting in Jenzaki rather than Alex Wagner
(27:07):
into that slot. Alex is going to stay with a network.
But dude, just like you know on air correspondent kind
of stuff. Amon Moyle Dean, who is having his show
taken away, but is supposed to be part of the
new ensemble show. Same thing with Jonathan k Part supposed
to be part of a new ensemble show. Joy Reid
is being replaced by another ensemble show which has more
Biden and party spokespeople. This one has Alicia Menandez whose
(27:30):
dad is Bob Menandez Goldbars Bob, You've got Michael Steele,
the former rn C chair, and then you've got Simone Sanders,
who previously was a Kamala Harris comms person. So, I mean,
there's a lot to say about these moves, but one
thing is if you didn't think it was possible for
MSNBC to be any more in the tank for the
(27:51):
Democratic Party, you were wrong, because that is what these
moves basically are across the board. And you literally bring
in Jensaki into primetime, Sanders also into primetime.
Speaker 5 (28:02):
You already have Nicole.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
Wallace, Michael Steele, like these are all close party operatives
who are given prime slots and some of the voices
here and I'm getting more into this in a moment,
like even though obviously I've had disagreements with everybody on
the network, but you know, Aiman has been a real
critic of Israel.
Speaker 5 (28:21):
And you know he is.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Has done reporting in Gaza like he has a real
deep understanding of that. He's been notable for being outspoken there.
He also has been outspoken at times with criticism against
the Democratic Party, so he's no longer going to have
a solo show. Alex Wagner has also spoken out against Israel,
not as often it forcefully as Amen, but she also
has done that in her primetime slot. Joy Reid has
(28:46):
been probably the one of the most consistent voices with
regard to Israel and Gaza. So it is notable that
those are some of the people who are either loosening
their position or out of the network altogether, notably last
Night and on Rachel Maddow in her primetime show. And Rachel,
of course is the big dog at the network and
is very loyal to the network as well. She actually
(29:08):
criticized them for some of these moves. Let's take a
listen how she framed it.
Speaker 6 (29:12):
In all of the jobs I have had, in all
of the years I have been alive, there is no
colleague for whom I have had more affection and more
respect than Joy read I love everything about her. I
have learned so much from her. I have so much
more to learn from her. I do not want to
lose her as a colleague here at MSNBC, And personally,
I think it is a bad mistake to let her
(29:34):
walk out the door. It is not my call and
I understand that, but that's.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
What I think. I will tell you.
Speaker 6 (29:41):
It is also unnerving to see that on a network
where we've got two count of two non white hosts
in primetime, both of our non white hosts in primetime
are losing their shows, as is Katie Fang on the weekend,
and that feels worse than bad no matter who replaces.
That feels indefensible and I do not defend it.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
So interesting that she decided to criticize the network at all,
which again is pretty unusual. Joy had her last show
last night. Her final panel was like Rachel, Nicole Wallace
and Laurence O'Donnell, which seemed to be like a you know,
show of support for her whatever. So in any case,
like I said, they are you know, calling some of
the few. And Joy also was critical at times of
(30:25):
the Democratic Party and though she hated Bernie Sanders from
the old body language actually expert situation but she has
been critical of the Democratic Party at times. That will
be gone. Aiman, like I said, has been critical that
will be gone. And Alex has been critical on Israel.
That will be gone as well.
Speaker 5 (30:40):
So there you go.
Speaker 3 (30:41):
Yeah, but that's my thing with Rachel Maddow. It's like,
what all she sees is color. It's like it makes
a lot more sense from an ideological perspective. They want
a bunch of Biden's sikaphants, like Simone Sanders.
Speaker 5 (30:51):
Yeah, but it is true.
Speaker 2 (30:53):
Literally every one of the people that I mentioned is
a person of color and they have so it's not
crazy to like note that also things.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
But that's the only thing she had to say.
Speaker 2 (31:03):
They do have a track record of firing like black
women in particular, so Melissaires, Perry, Tiffany Cross, Tammeron Hall
and now Joy read So as a network that's supposed
to be progressive and supposed to be diverse, and that's
the audience. You know, a big part of the MSNBC,
like the audience that remains and still watches significant part
(31:25):
of that is a you know, black viewing audience. And
so you know, I think it is I don't think
it's unreasonable to note that look especially.
Speaker 3 (31:36):
Look within their analysis and view of the world, which
is literally racial obsessed.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
I guess it makes sense.
Speaker 3 (31:42):
But what I would say is Tiffany Cross Simon and
sand or Tiffany Cross Joy read and all those people
have what in common terrible ratings. I mean, at the
end of the day, from what I read, they asked
Joy to take a pay cut, and basically she said no.
So that's what I think is actually happening here. That's
one of the reasons that she was canceled. So in
a way, she's narcissistic. Our producer Griffin makes a good point,
what Rachel can't take a pay cut. She's only working
(32:04):
one day a week for thirty million dollars only for
the first hundred y Yeah, right, so and what you
think she's doing that for free? Or she didn't demand
an extra ten million or whatever on the top of that.
So just saying if you actually cared about any of that.
But my view of this is just that they are
desperate to put the ideological blinders on the situation and
(32:28):
continue their grip and guide on the Democratic Party. I
don't think it will work, just to be clear, because
of the way that the liberal base is currently reacting
to Morning Joe and others. And also, this is the
thing about media shakeups is yes, initially independent media and
all that was very beneficial to Republicans. What democrats are
going to sit around and do nothing about it. I mean,
(32:50):
Midas Touch is a huge channel. I feel like I
have to mention them now if they're going to be
the number one podcast in the country. I check their
channel every day and be like, all right, what are
the shit libs into today? And it's all like Donald
drump humiliated on the world stage. I'm like, I guess
this is what does it for the boomers and for
liberals out there? Okay, but my point is is that
you got to take it seriously and I don't do
(33:12):
that in the same way with MSNBC. So that's why
I think MSNBC will ultimately fail, is because this new
energy is all exploding online on Blue Sky, on YouTube podcast.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
I mean, and this is why you know, I still
cheer in the media.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
The Internet is a vehicle to bypass the establishment in
all forms.
Speaker 1 (33:36):
That's why the right did very well there.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Well, liberals, you're out of power literally for the first
time in twenty years at an ideological and a narrative level.
Speaker 1 (33:44):
Use what is your at your disposal, and that's what
they're doing. They're going in the night as touched you know.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
There these left wing groups are using the internet and
email list and all that, like it's two.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
Thousand and four again to organize all these protests. So
move on is back?
Speaker 3 (33:57):
Mean, like, listen, guys, you have the opportunity. The Bernie
Standers campaign of twenty twenty in twenty sixteen showed you
the blueprint. You can raise a shit ton of money
if you want to just online. You don't have to
do anything. Do I think they're going to do any
of this?
Speaker 1 (34:11):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (34:11):
But my point on the liberal activism front is just
that MSNBC's attempt here to keep the grips on power
and all of that, it's not going to work. I mean,
at the same time, I'm loving it. I hope they
burn just because I would love to see them go bankrupt.
And the entire experiment has been completely ridiculous and a
net negative, but overall it is amusing on all sides.
(34:33):
I would just say, I want Joy to finally tell
us the truth about her blog posts.
Speaker 1 (34:37):
Did you actually get hacked? Or not. That's the first
question that I would ever ask her there.
Speaker 2 (34:43):
So I think it is an important indicator of how
they're positioning themselves because if you really, like if you
really are worried about cost cutting, I'll tell you there's
two very expensive personalities that start your day.
Speaker 1 (34:57):
Yes by making each no maybe more ten million who.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Have who your audience absolutely is disgusted with. Yeah, you know,
so if you wanted to try to rebuild credibility with
the like liberal bas blue maga types, they should be
the first ones to go, because that overhead is massive.
You guys, remember Comcast is spinning off MSNBC as part
of like they're spinning off a number of their cable channels,
(35:22):
but MSNBC being one of them, they're no longer going
to be under comcasts. They're no longer going to be
tied to the NBC brand, which give them some journalistic credibility,
which means they need to go more in the direction
of you know, opinion and like talking heads because that's
what they need to lean into. So you've got starting
your day two people who liberals feel utterly lie to
(35:44):
them and betrayed them. That's going to be a weight
around your neck.
Speaker 5 (35:48):
But rather than going.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
In that direction, which I think you'd have more of
a chance of picking up, you know, picking back up
some of your audience, et cetera. Instead you're getting rid
of some of the voices that could have been critical
of the legacy Democratic Party and helped to chart a
different pathway forward. And again, like I said, I have
ideological issues basically all of these people, but they are
(36:11):
some of the people who were at least a little
bit willing to criticize the Democratic Party. And instead you're
getting literal former Biden spokes to I mean, think about that.
And Ryan was making this point on Twitter, like Biden
was a disaster for the Democratic Party. Getting behind him
in twenty twenty was a disaster for the Democratic Party.
It blocked any sort of change in structure, a different approach,
(36:34):
and hobbled you with this old, aging flailing man. You
guys covered for him forever. You blocked any sort of
primary effort that could have led to a democratic challenge
to him within the Democratic Party at a time when
Democrats were saying they wanted to see other options. And
now you're doubling down on what has been the most
(36:56):
destructive strategy deployed within the Democratic Party by bringing in
you know, bo Samone Sanders is getting elevated into primetime
as part as an ensemble show, and Jen Saki, who
was a literal like campaign operative and spokesperson for him, like,
think about that. It's it's insane. It's an utterly insane
decision to make. Not to mention, of course, I don't
(37:18):
want to hear anything from them about like how closely
tied Fox News is to the Trump White House, et cetera.
Oh so so yeah, I mean I think it's I
think it's a set of foolish decisions. I certainly don't
think it's going to solve their problems. Then the other
thing is the way they handled all of this was
just a total shit show. We could put E two
up on the screen. So, you know, there was apparently
(37:41):
like a bunch of stuff leaked about joy Reads show
getting canceled, and they're having to tell them, no, Trump
wasn't a factor that had nothing to do with it.
You know, I know that the aimin announcement of moving
him out of his own solo show into an ensemble
show that was handled in like a cats traffic way.
And so they're trying to play clean up about what's
(38:03):
going on, because they know how vulnerable they are to
this idea that they're bending the needed Trump and that
they're you know, doubling down on like the failures of
the past the Democratic Party, and they won't broke any
criticism of the Democratic Party, etc.
Speaker 5 (38:18):
So they know they're in.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
A very vulnerable spot with their own audience and are
kind of I think panicked about the way that these
announcements even were rolled out from within the organization.
Speaker 5 (38:26):
I was just they're just a mess.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
Yeah, it's hilarious.
Speaker 3 (38:29):
I say, keep it going and let's try and let's
let's bring an end to the business as soon as possible.
Did you know I was actually reading about this that
they anticipate losing some fifteen percent of their own subscribers
just this year.
Speaker 1 (38:42):
That's a disaster except from Peacock.
Speaker 3 (38:44):
No, no, no, they're subscribers for cable for people who
are cutting that they're cutting the cord.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Yeah, so there are so.
Speaker 3 (38:50):
Many people I've been meaning to talk about this. With
the jacking up of YouTube TV and Fubo to like
eighty five dollars per month, they're now basically making cable
just as expensive as it used to be, and so
with that, a lot of the reasons why people kept
it was news and sports. Well both of those are
kind of becoming disaggregated. And if you just don't care
about MSNBC anymore, you're like, Okay, for a lot of
(39:12):
older people, that's the easiest decision they'll make as it
continues to go up for their overall price buckets. So
existential event for the news business. Yeah, for Fox or MSNBC,
and for CNN.
Speaker 1 (39:22):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:22):
I mean, I just I wish I remained as hopeful
as you are about the independent media spase because you've
seen so many of you know, so many creators just
get captured by the similar dynamics as the mainstream media.
So you know, I will say I do think what
is very hopeful to me is that MSNBC, CNN, Washington
(39:43):
host New York Times. They do not, and I don't
think they will ever have again the grip on the
liberal Democratic base that they once did, and that was
so important, you know, that really allowed them to completely
control the twenty twenty primary and say you got to
get behind Biden and Boyd did they ever Yes, I don't.
Speaker 5 (39:59):
Think that dynamic exists anymore. Now, does that.
Speaker 2 (40:01):
Guarantee a better outcome or you know, an outside er
take out. No, it doesn't guarantee any of that, but
it creates a lot more space and possibility for that
than ever existed in twenty sixteen or in twenty twenty.
Speaker 3 (40:12):
Yeah, would be interesting. Could be the Libs twenty sixteen moment.
It'd be yeah, honestly, be fun. All right, Chrystal, what
are you taking a look at?
Speaker 7 (40:22):
Well, We've come to North Carolina with a simple message
for all the people of this region who were hit
so hard by Hurricane Helene. And that message is very simple.
You are not forgotten any longer. You were treated very
badly by the previous administration.
Speaker 2 (40:39):
That was Donald Trump pledging to fully rebuild North Carolina
after devastating flooding that was caused by Hurricane Helene, and
also slamming the Biden administration for what he claimed was
their inadequate response. Now, Trump, you may recall, campaigned extensively
on the supposed failures of the Biden administration to come
to the aid of western North Carolina in their time
of need, tying that to his own supposed commitment to
(41:01):
working class Americans.
Speaker 5 (41:03):
Well, We've now.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
Got the first test case for how the Trump administration
is going to approach disaster relief in his second elon
musk fuel turn in the White House, and so far
the answer is near complete abandonment. So ten days ago,
parts of Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, they were all
hit with devastating floods after a rapid snow melt was
then followed by torrential rains. Rivers overran their banks, roads
(41:28):
were completely swamped. Thousands of houses and businesses were destroyed.
More than a dozen people actually were killed in these floods.
More than a thousand people had to be rescued, you're
seeing some of that on the screen right here, in
order to survive the raging waters and resulting mudslides. West
Virginia Governor Patrick Morrissey declared state of emergency in ten
counties in southern West Virginia as a result of those floods.
(41:51):
But so far, while Trump has approved an emergency declaration
in neighboring Kentucky, no such designation has come for West Virginia.
That means not one penny of federal aid and no FEMA.
West Virginia one of the poorest states in the country,
and by the way, one of those Trump supporting has
literally had to fend for itself now. Southern West Virginia
and these counties in particular, are the historic heart of
(42:13):
coal country. It was here that miners were subjected to
indentured servitude until gaining union rights in armed insurrections against
company rule like the Battle of Blair Mountain. After having
their resources plundered by robber barons who didn't care whether
miners lived or died. They then watched as the industry
declined with nothing to replace it, leaving a wake of
economic devastation. In fact, two of the hardest hit counties
(42:35):
mcdallan Mango Counties. They're among the poorest in the nation
because of this legacy of exploitation, neglect, and abandonment. Even
before these floods hit, they were struggling, and now they
are literally and figuratively underwater.
Speaker 5 (42:48):
My friend JADYE.
Speaker 2 (42:49):
Belcher, As, a filmmaker from the area, posted drone footage
of the damage to his channel, creep Alatcha. This was
no small incident. In West Virginia alone, some two thousand
homes were just countless businesses, schools, remain closed, water remains undrinkable,
roads remain impassable. Some areas flooded three feet higher than
(43:10):
the previous record. It was historic devastation, and the federal
government remains completely absent from the scene. Yet another betrayal
of these Americans, this time by the political figure that
they have trusted the most. I honestly don't know what's
going on here. Maybe Trump is just too busy like
renaming the Gulf of Mexico golfing and cheering on Elon's
(43:30):
efforts to destroy the entire government. After all, it seems
like if he was gonna care about any ordinary people
would be this state and these people who vote for
him in some of the most overwhelming numbers of anywhere
in the country. The governor here is a Republican. The
entire congressional delegation, they're all Republicans, and they are all
begging the president for help. Now he may still yet
(43:51):
make the declaration, but we're already ten days out. What
is the hold up here now?
Speaker 5 (43:56):
I'm told?
Speaker 2 (43:56):
One potential issue could be that the declaration process acquires
locals to fill out surveys online and testing to the damage,
but broadband access is limited to non existent in some
of these communities, not to mention they're a little busy
trying to dig out and put their lives back together
here with no help from the Feds. Now, local news
outlets are starting to ask whether this abandonment of West
(44:17):
Virginia is actually intentional, if it's actually part and parcel
of a Trump administration ideological project. In particular, this Regional
paper Press. Senator Shelley Moore Capito on if she thought
Elon's DOGE cuts were hurting the response, noting that FEMA
has been hit already with staffing cuts thanks to the
federal government PERGE. They also asked her if she expected
Trump to completely dismantle FEMA and send it to the States,
(44:40):
as he has previously suggested. Now more, Capito said she
didn't think so, saying quote, I don't see a scenario
where all disaster relief goes to the States.
Speaker 5 (44:48):
I really don't.
Speaker 2 (44:49):
I think that there's just too much in some of
these disasters that are very large, too much for a
state to be able to handle. But there's no real
indication that Trump and his band of austerity radicals really
cares about any that. In fact, they've already previously unreported
significant cuts to federal disaster relief. According to drop Site,
at the bidding of the Trump administration, Speaker Mike Johnson
(45:09):
slashed over one hundred million dollars from a program to
help disaster victims with legal aid. After the initial shock
of a catastrophe in the early phases of basic survival
in boots on the ground style cleanup, the next phase
of recovery often involves a lot of legal battles to
secure your rights. In particular, homeowners and renters often have
to go to war with their insurance companies to be
(45:29):
able to get what they are entitled to. Scammers also
often swoop in to take advantage of the desperation caused
by this crisis. Recognizing this need, federal disaster relief has
for over a decade now included legal assistance so people
at least have a chance in these battles against the
insurance companies and scammers. That is no longer the case.
At the direction of Trump Budget director Russ vote House
(45:50):
Republicans stripped all the money that was meant to fund
legal assistance for victims of floods, hurricanes, and fires. The
impact of these cuts will be felt most acutely in
rural areas, places like southern West Virginia, where government backed
legal aid nonprofits are literally the only available options. And
it will also be most acutely felt among poor people
who have no resources to fight back without this assistance. Now, Vote,
(46:13):
he's an anti government ideologue. He's attempted to push these
cuts through before during Trump's first term, but to no avail.
But in the new Trump administration, fueled by this sort
of anarcho capitalist flavor, Russ's assault on federal disaster relief
was taken up and passed no problem whatsoever. But whether
this is an ideological commitment or an accidental oversight, West
(46:34):
Virginia's fate, here is a preview of what's to come.
If Trump and Musk and Vote get their way with
gutting FEMA. Everyone will suffer, but actually the hardest hit
that's going to be rural areas in small states, the
kind of places where politicians like Trump are happy to
go and do a photo op when it serves their interest.
It immediately cast aside as soon as the news cycle
moves on, And I'm kind of floored by this saga.
(46:56):
I kept thinking, like I'm gonna write them and if you.
Speaker 3 (46:58):
Want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a
prem subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot com. Okay, guys, great
counterforn show for you tomorrow, so we'll see you on Thursday.
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
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
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.