March 24, 2025 • 17 mins
The final thoughts for the week. Crime and its stats are not just a numbers game. Also, the Democrats are polling at historically low numbers, but context is key. And Tesla should receive as much empathy as Elon Musk offers those who are at the mercy of DOGE.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Lad with food.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
My final thought is going to be about crime. I
had some thoughts earlier in the show. I said the
first word was going to be Mayor Karen Bass as
she was releasing some of the crime stats and how
they were at least on a surface positive or moving
in the right direction. And I just wanted to offer
just a little bit more perspective before the night is through.
(00:38):
And it's not that I'm against her offering the crime stats,
and there's no need to go over them again. And yes,
the numbers were positive relative to twenty twenty three, and
improvement is that improvement. I'll take it. Better is better.
I'm not going to quibble about that. But by saying
something is better, there also needs to be context to
(00:59):
point out of reference. The easy response, or at least
I call it easy, to any crime stat is pointing
out the obvious that crime stats only reflect crimes which
have actually been reported, and that's in the past, that
has nothing to do with the president of the future.
Is not some sort of force field protection for the future.
(01:20):
And since we know that crime stats are always relative
to crime actually reported, and it's true for all crime stats,
not just these crime stats, so let's not get bent
out of shape or act like these today are somehow
different just because they're positive. We can't just dismiss them
out of hand. Let's be fair here. We're not going
(01:41):
to say, just because they're positive, whether they're fake. No,
I'm not going to do that. Pure murders and less
violent crime always good things. Let's agree on that. But
let's not oversell it either. The real discussion is whether
this is going to be a larger trend or just
a temporary fluctuation, liable to increase again next year. That's
(02:05):
my question. Crime is a fickle thing. It depends largely
on the willingness of people to follow or break the law.
We as people have more influence on crime than actual
law enforcement, and that has always been true.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
Something else about crime and safety.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
Safety is not, has not, and will not ever be
connected to raw stats. You can tell me that murders
are down ten percent, and that really doesn't mean a
damn thing in our everyday lives. Crime stats are not
a predictor of the future. I will say it again
and again and again. It's only a reference to the past.
Murders being down ten percent or whatever number doesn't make
(02:41):
me you or your family feel any safer. And this
is definitely about feelings. Nobody's going to walk outside and say, damn,
I feel ten percent safer or I feel ten percent
less likely to be murdered today.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
How about that?
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Because safety begins it ends with feelings, and safety is
about trust. You know, I don't like to fly, and
there are no stats that you can give me about
flying being the safest way to travel, which is going
to impact that fear. So you can save your breath.
You just have to make me feel safe. That's all
you can do. Here's another example, and Mark Runner knows
(03:18):
what I'm talking about. Mark and I have a shared
dislike and apprehension of going to the dentist. The reason
I am with my dentist right now is because he
goes over and above to demonstrate he understands and relates
to my fear, doesn't talk down to me, doesn't tell
me why it's supposedly in an irrational fear. Mayor Bass
(03:39):
could learn something from that, because she made no attempt
to connect with us or demonstrated that she personally has
the saying safety concerns that the rest of us do collectively.
Safety is one hundred percent personal Mayor Bass could announce
that there were zero murders next year and zero property crime,
but if you and I can feel it, it means nothing.
(04:02):
And I'm not going to change my behavior as to
riding Metro, getting gas, buying groceries, walking my dogs because
crime is down. That press conference today felt like it
was coming from someone who did not share or understand
my concerns, does not have to make those same choices,
not make the same considerations, and ultimately does not have
the same skin in the game as I do, as
(04:24):
you do. And this is less about Mayor Bass because
crime is not limited to the borders of La City.
Crime being down in the city of La has zero
to do with crime in unincorporated LA and La County.
It's bigger than any boundary, and nobody drives from Guardina
to La or vice versa, and thanks all of a sudden,
oh my gosh, my safety quotient has changed. I guess
it comes down to this, As I close, people will
(04:47):
not feel any differently about crime or whether it's going
up or down until we feel that those elected to
address it have to worry about it too, have the
same concerns as you and I do. Because until that changes,
the stats will never matter whether we believe them or not.
(05:08):
For KF I am six forty. I'm Moe Kelly. And
for my final thought this evening, I wanted to talk
(05:30):
about the Democrats, and the general storyline of late is
that the Democrats have hit their lowest level of popularity
in a generation or ever, or something like that. Most
of the stories are somewhere along those lines. Everybody hates Democrats,
and if you ever listen to this show for any
length of time, you would know.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
I don't do polls or approval ratings.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
To me, they're a little different than asking someone if
they're hungry or if they're ready to go to the
gym or something. Polls don't tell you much, and they
all change with time or the weather. But the Democrats
as a party have been going through some things. I
wouldn't call it puberty, but they've been going something, going
through some things. Voters have been voicing their displeasure with
the DNC it's new leadership and all leadership for that matter.
(06:16):
Democrats inside the party have voiced their displeasure with the
lack of strategy to respond to the Trump administration, and
there are some high profile members who have either left
the party or called for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries
to step up and meet the moment and for Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to step down and call it
a day. The latter who is out on an almost
(06:39):
canceled book tour, that's the only way I can describe it,
which is now some sort of explanation tour, trying to
tell his side of the story as to why he
decided to go along with Republicans and vote for the
Continuing Resolution to keep the government open. Today, he was
a guest on the View and this was his explanation.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
Great, what were you thinking and why? So? Look, I
knew it was a difficult choice, and I knew that
I get a lot of criticism from my choice, but
I felt as a leader, I had to do it.
Here's why the CR bill was bad, no question. And
it allowed a slush fund which allowed money to be
pushed around. That's finding for the part people who don't
(07:18):
know what beans continue the government spending a shutdown. The
alternative is cut off the government spending. And here's what
would happen if we cut off government spending. It would
be devastation like, we have never seen worse than we're
saying now much. Here's why.
Speaker 3 (07:35):
That's why I did it.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
I wasn't going to take this flat just for having
a lot of fun. The bottom line is a government
shutdown works like this. All government spending is stopped all
and then the executive branch Trump, Musk, Doge and this
real evil man. People don't know about Vote, who's head
of OMB. His name is Vote, And they could cut
off anything they want simply by saying it's not essential.
(08:00):
So Day two, snap food for poor kids not essential.
Day four, mass transit New York City subway and subways
all over not essential. Day seven Medicaid not essential. People
don't need Medicaid. They should get their own health care.
And this would happen over and over and over again,
and there's no check.
Speaker 3 (08:21):
In his explanation and reasoning.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
Is why the Democrats are rightly seen as dysfunctional. Whereas
what Schumer said was factually accurate as to what happens
during a shutdown, it's also a fact that nobody else
at a damn party knew that that was going to
be his play. The House stood in solidarity, obviously thinking
that the Senate and Democratic caucus as a whole were
in agreement.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
They weren't.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Schumer's decision caught most of the party by surprise. Also,
the nature of the shutdown is not new. Everyone should
have known that's what's going to happen. Schumer acted like
he had some last moment epiphany. He was not in
possession of some secret knowledge. He was one of the
few moments in which the Democrats could have demonstrated a
united front and also forced Republicans to the table. But
(09:03):
instead the Democrats got nothing except clowned and the Republicans
got everything they wanted. Was zero opposition, zero downside publicly
embarrassing Hakim Jeffreys and the party as a whole.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
A win win win, win win.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
And although I don't personally care about polls, they do
highlight how poorly the party handles its own messaging, creates
a viable strategy, or connects with voters in a contemporary sense.
They're not winning anybody over, not even Democrats. But here's
something that the Republicans have mastered and the Democrats haven't
even started practicing. The Republicans play to win, no matter
(09:35):
the cost. Mitch McConnell didn't care that there was no
constitutional precedent to hold up the Merrick Garland Scotis nomination
because it was supposedly an election year.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
He did it because it was important to his party.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
He didn't mind seeming hypocritical by rushing through the Amy
Cony Barrett Scotis nomination a week before a presidential election
in the very next cycle. Why because it was important
to the party, and the fruits of those labors are
continuing to shape America at this very moment. Republicans play
the long game. Democrats have no long range plan or strategy.
(10:09):
Republicans play to win. Democrats play by the rules, or
what they think are the rules. That's why Donald Trump
can say I don't care what the judges say. Close quote,
openly defy lawful rulings and there be neither consequences nor
a democratic response. But despite all that, here's what I
believe the media has missed in the assessment of the
(10:31):
Democratic Party, which is not to be confused with the
Democrat Party, which doesn't exist.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
It's March of twenty twenty five.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
There are no elections to win or lose on the
immediate horizon. You don't select a prom queen during the
third week of school some of the handwringing is definitely overblown.
That's another lesson the Dems could learn from the Republicans.
Stop panicking more than a year and a half before
you have to worry about losing another election. Probably will,
(11:00):
but at least you have time to prepare. Use it wisely.
For CAF I am six forty. I'm o Kelly. But
(11:33):
for my final thought tonight, I wanted to give some
updated comments about Tesla now as Tesla stock has fallen
in recent weeks, members of the board and an executive
at Elon Musk's company have been.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
Selling off millions of dollars in stock, and this is
according to filings with the SEC.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Together, four top officers at the company have offloaded over
one hundred million dollars in shares since early February. James Murdoch,
yes related to Rupert Murdoch, his son and a board
member since twenty seventeen. James Murdoch that is, exercised a
stock option and sold shares worth approximately thirteen million according
(12:15):
to the SEC regarding a filing back on March tenth,
which coincided ticket however you want, coincided with the stock's
largest single day decline in five years.
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Here's the bigger picture.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
Tesla stock is headed toward a ninth straight weekly drop,
and shares now have plummeted fifty three percent from record
highs back in mid December. The Tesla protests we all
know about them. The vandalism, we all know about them,
but they've been growing in recent days, and with the
White House and DOJ signaling that such acts are to
(12:51):
be considered quote unquote domestic terrorism. And if you're wondering
whether Elon Musk is concerned, his public behavior suggests that
he is absolutely concerned. In a Fox News interview this week,
Musk offered the following quote, It's really come as quite
a shock to me that there is this level of
hatred and violence from the left. I always thought that
(13:14):
Democrats were supposed to be the party of empathy and caring,
and yet they are burning down cars, fire bombing dealerships,
firing bullets into dealerships, smashing up Tesla's clothes.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
Whereas it's easy and reductionist to say that the boycott
and vandalism are acts of political violence, and specifically from
quote unquote the Democrats, not so simple. The dose cuts
cross all demographics and impact people registered to both parties.
To suggest the anger over loss of jobs, benefits and
(13:47):
four h one k valuations is only attached to registered Democrats.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
That may be politically.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Expedient, but it would also be remarkably dishonest. I can
promise you the sell off of Tesla's stock is not
a dim party thing. I could promise you that the
veterans impacted and angered are likely not predominantly registered Dems.
The dose cuts have been far too vast, far too
(14:13):
wide and deep to argue that the only angry people
in the streets or anger against the Tesla brand are
registered Dems. The only people who are committing violence are
registered Dems.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
That defies explanation and mathematical logic that I know.
Speaker 2 (14:28):
It caters to your political worldview if you happen to
be a Republican or a MAGA supporter, but it defies logic. Also,
Elon Musk is not in any way attempting to endear
himself to those most affected, either insulting them directly like
Senator Mark Kelly, or more generally railing against decency or empathy.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
He definitely can't have it both ways.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
I personally would never support and would never recommend violence
or vandalism, never, but I absolutely can understand and point
to the catalysts which often lead to it. Musk also said, quote,
it turns out when you take away people's money that
they are receiving fraudulently, they get very upset. They basically
(15:13):
want to kill me because I'm stopping their fraud, and
they want to hurt Tesla because we're stopping this terrible
waste and corruption in the government. Well, I guess they're
bad people. Bad people do bad things. Close quote. Actually,
I'm not sure if he meant that as an accusation
or a confession, because that cuts both ways.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
But I digress.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
In any event, As I've said before and I will
say again, Elon Musk has not conducted any forensic audit
or shown any proof of any fraud. He's listed fraud,
he's alleged fraud, but he's never shown any proof. He's
alleged fraud and required we take his word for it,
while also avoiding touching any of his contracts with the
(15:57):
federal government. But he will have to make a decision
as to what's most important, and it's his to make.
I can't make it for him, and no one can
tell the richest man in the world what to do,
So it's up to him.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
He can be an.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
Agent of Donald Trump and continued to ruin the people's
professionals and personal lives without justification, without evidence, without empathy,
and deal with the social ramifications of such. Or he
can step down as president and CEO of Tesla for
the sake of his investors in the future of the company.
(16:28):
But he will not get the latitude of continuing with Doge,
mocking his detractors, placing blame elsewhere, and expecting that Tesla
not pay a price for its association with him. They
were already Inspectors General to do exactly what Doze claims
to be doing right now. They literally are tasked with
(16:49):
finding fraud, waste, and abuse, but also there are official
verification and execution processes for it to be done correctly,
legally and transparently. Elon Musk is not doing any of
that America, and Americans have no responsibility or obligation to
just take Elon Musk's word that he is ridding our
(17:12):
government of waste, fraud, and abuse, and it's being done
without favor or political preference. Nobody is obligated to take
his word for it. Nor are we to cry tears
over the struggles of Tesla while he mocks the very
people he fired and their struggles. No empathy for me,
none for THEE. Fair is fair for KF. I am
(17:35):
six forty. I'm mo Kelly
Lad with food.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
My final thought is going to be about crime. I
had some thoughts earlier in the show. I said the
first word was going to be Mayor Karen Bass as
she was releasing some of the crime stats and how
they were at least on a surface positive or moving
in the right direction. And I just wanted to offer
just a little bit more perspective before the night is through.
(00:38):
And it's not that I'm against her offering the crime stats,
and there's no need to go over them again. And yes,
the numbers were positive relative to twenty twenty three, and
improvement is that improvement. I'll take it. Better is better.
I'm not going to quibble about that. But by saying
something is better, there also needs to be context to
(00:59):
point out of reference. The easy response, or at least
I call it easy, to any crime stat is pointing
out the obvious that crime stats only reflect crimes which
have actually been reported, and that's in the past, that
has nothing to do with the president of the future.
Is not some sort of force field protection for the future.
(01:20):
And since we know that crime stats are always relative
to crime actually reported, and it's true for all crime stats,
not just these crime stats, so let's not get bent
out of shape or act like these today are somehow
different just because they're positive. We can't just dismiss them
out of hand. Let's be fair here. We're not going
(01:41):
to say, just because they're positive, whether they're fake. No,
I'm not going to do that. Pure murders and less
violent crime always good things. Let's agree on that. But
let's not oversell it either. The real discussion is whether
this is going to be a larger trend or just
a temporary fluctuation, liable to increase again next year. That's
(02:05):
my question. Crime is a fickle thing. It depends largely
on the willingness of people to follow or break the law.
We as people have more influence on crime than actual
law enforcement, and that has always been true.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
Something else about crime and safety.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
Safety is not, has not, and will not ever be
connected to raw stats. You can tell me that murders
are down ten percent, and that really doesn't mean a
damn thing in our everyday lives. Crime stats are not
a predictor of the future. I will say it again
and again and again. It's only a reference to the past.
Murders being down ten percent or whatever number doesn't make
(02:41):
me you or your family feel any safer. And this
is definitely about feelings. Nobody's going to walk outside and say, damn,
I feel ten percent safer or I feel ten percent
less likely to be murdered today.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
How about that?
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Because safety begins it ends with feelings, and safety is
about trust. You know, I don't like to fly, and
there are no stats that you can give me about
flying being the safest way to travel, which is going
to impact that fear. So you can save your breath.
You just have to make me feel safe. That's all
you can do. Here's another example, and Mark Runner knows
(03:18):
what I'm talking about. Mark and I have a shared
dislike and apprehension of going to the dentist. The reason
I am with my dentist right now is because he
goes over and above to demonstrate he understands and relates
to my fear, doesn't talk down to me, doesn't tell
me why it's supposedly in an irrational fear. Mayor Bass
(03:39):
could learn something from that, because she made no attempt
to connect with us or demonstrated that she personally has
the saying safety concerns that the rest of us do collectively.
Safety is one hundred percent personal Mayor Bass could announce
that there were zero murders next year and zero property crime,
but if you and I can feel it, it means nothing.
(04:02):
And I'm not going to change my behavior as to
riding Metro, getting gas, buying groceries, walking my dogs because
crime is down. That press conference today felt like it
was coming from someone who did not share or understand
my concerns, does not have to make those same choices,
not make the same considerations, and ultimately does not have
the same skin in the game as I do, as
(04:24):
you do. And this is less about Mayor Bass because
crime is not limited to the borders of La City.
Crime being down in the city of La has zero
to do with crime in unincorporated LA and La County.
It's bigger than any boundary, and nobody drives from Guardina
to La or vice versa, and thanks all of a sudden,
oh my gosh, my safety quotient has changed. I guess
it comes down to this, As I close, people will
(04:47):
not feel any differently about crime or whether it's going
up or down until we feel that those elected to
address it have to worry about it too, have the
same concerns as you and I do. Because until that changes,
the stats will never matter whether we believe them or not.
(05:08):
For KF I am six forty. I'm Moe Kelly. And
for my final thought this evening, I wanted to talk
(05:30):
about the Democrats, and the general storyline of late is
that the Democrats have hit their lowest level of popularity
in a generation or ever, or something like that. Most
of the stories are somewhere along those lines. Everybody hates Democrats,
and if you ever listen to this show for any
length of time, you would know.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
I don't do polls or approval ratings.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
To me, they're a little different than asking someone if
they're hungry or if they're ready to go to the
gym or something. Polls don't tell you much, and they
all change with time or the weather. But the Democrats
as a party have been going through some things. I
wouldn't call it puberty, but they've been going something, going
through some things. Voters have been voicing their displeasure with
the DNC it's new leadership and all leadership for that matter.
(06:16):
Democrats inside the party have voiced their displeasure with the
lack of strategy to respond to the Trump administration, and
there are some high profile members who have either left
the party or called for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries
to step up and meet the moment and for Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to step down and call it
a day. The latter who is out on an almost
(06:39):
canceled book tour, that's the only way I can describe it,
which is now some sort of explanation tour, trying to
tell his side of the story as to why he
decided to go along with Republicans and vote for the
Continuing Resolution to keep the government open. Today, he was
a guest on the View and this was his explanation.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
Great, what were you thinking and why? So? Look, I
knew it was a difficult choice, and I knew that
I get a lot of criticism from my choice, but
I felt as a leader, I had to do it.
Here's why the CR bill was bad, no question. And
it allowed a slush fund which allowed money to be
pushed around. That's finding for the part people who don't
(07:18):
know what beans continue the government spending a shutdown. The
alternative is cut off the government spending. And here's what
would happen if we cut off government spending. It would
be devastation like, we have never seen worse than we're
saying now much. Here's why.
Speaker 3 (07:35):
That's why I did it.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
I wasn't going to take this flat just for having
a lot of fun. The bottom line is a government
shutdown works like this. All government spending is stopped all
and then the executive branch Trump, Musk, Doge and this
real evil man. People don't know about Vote, who's head
of OMB. His name is Vote, And they could cut
off anything they want simply by saying it's not essential.
(08:00):
So Day two, snap food for poor kids not essential.
Day four, mass transit New York City subway and subways
all over not essential. Day seven Medicaid not essential. People
don't need Medicaid. They should get their own health care.
And this would happen over and over and over again,
and there's no check.
Speaker 3 (08:21):
In his explanation and reasoning.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
Is why the Democrats are rightly seen as dysfunctional. Whereas
what Schumer said was factually accurate as to what happens
during a shutdown, it's also a fact that nobody else
at a damn party knew that that was going to
be his play. The House stood in solidarity, obviously thinking
that the Senate and Democratic caucus as a whole were
in agreement.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
They weren't.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Schumer's decision caught most of the party by surprise. Also,
the nature of the shutdown is not new. Everyone should
have known that's what's going to happen. Schumer acted like
he had some last moment epiphany. He was not in
possession of some secret knowledge. He was one of the
few moments in which the Democrats could have demonstrated a
united front and also forced Republicans to the table. But
(09:03):
instead the Democrats got nothing except clowned and the Republicans
got everything they wanted. Was zero opposition, zero downside publicly
embarrassing Hakim Jeffreys and the party as a whole.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
A win win win, win win.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
And although I don't personally care about polls, they do
highlight how poorly the party handles its own messaging, creates
a viable strategy, or connects with voters in a contemporary sense.
They're not winning anybody over, not even Democrats. But here's
something that the Republicans have mastered and the Democrats haven't
even started practicing. The Republicans play to win, no matter
(09:35):
the cost. Mitch McConnell didn't care that there was no
constitutional precedent to hold up the Merrick Garland Scotis nomination
because it was supposedly an election year.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
He did it because it was important to his party.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
He didn't mind seeming hypocritical by rushing through the Amy
Cony Barrett Scotis nomination a week before a presidential election
in the very next cycle. Why because it was important
to the party, and the fruits of those labors are
continuing to shape America at this very moment. Republicans play
the long game. Democrats have no long range plan or strategy.
(10:09):
Republicans play to win. Democrats play by the rules, or
what they think are the rules. That's why Donald Trump
can say I don't care what the judges say. Close quote,
openly defy lawful rulings and there be neither consequences nor
a democratic response. But despite all that, here's what I
believe the media has missed in the assessment of the
(10:31):
Democratic Party, which is not to be confused with the
Democrat Party, which doesn't exist.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
It's March of twenty twenty five.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
There are no elections to win or lose on the
immediate horizon. You don't select a prom queen during the
third week of school some of the handwringing is definitely overblown.
That's another lesson the Dems could learn from the Republicans.
Stop panicking more than a year and a half before
you have to worry about losing another election. Probably will,
(11:00):
but at least you have time to prepare. Use it wisely.
For CAF I am six forty. I'm o Kelly. But
(11:33):
for my final thought tonight, I wanted to give some
updated comments about Tesla now as Tesla stock has fallen
in recent weeks, members of the board and an executive
at Elon Musk's company have been.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
Selling off millions of dollars in stock, and this is
according to filings with the SEC.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Together, four top officers at the company have offloaded over
one hundred million dollars in shares since early February. James Murdoch,
yes related to Rupert Murdoch, his son and a board
member since twenty seventeen. James Murdoch that is, exercised a
stock option and sold shares worth approximately thirteen million according
(12:15):
to the SEC regarding a filing back on March tenth,
which coincided ticket however you want, coincided with the stock's
largest single day decline in five years.
Speaker 3 (12:27):
Here's the bigger picture.
Speaker 2 (12:28):
Tesla stock is headed toward a ninth straight weekly drop,
and shares now have plummeted fifty three percent from record
highs back in mid December. The Tesla protests we all
know about them. The vandalism, we all know about them,
but they've been growing in recent days, and with the
White House and DOJ signaling that such acts are to
(12:51):
be considered quote unquote domestic terrorism. And if you're wondering
whether Elon Musk is concerned, his public behavior suggests that
he is absolutely concerned. In a Fox News interview this week,
Musk offered the following quote, It's really come as quite
a shock to me that there is this level of
hatred and violence from the left. I always thought that
(13:14):
Democrats were supposed to be the party of empathy and caring,
and yet they are burning down cars, fire bombing dealerships,
firing bullets into dealerships, smashing up Tesla's clothes.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
Whereas it's easy and reductionist to say that the boycott
and vandalism are acts of political violence, and specifically from
quote unquote the Democrats, not so simple. The dose cuts
cross all demographics and impact people registered to both parties.
To suggest the anger over loss of jobs, benefits and
(13:47):
four h one k valuations is only attached to registered Democrats.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
That may be politically.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Expedient, but it would also be remarkably dishonest. I can
promise you the sell off of Tesla's stock is not
a dim party thing. I could promise you that the
veterans impacted and angered are likely not predominantly registered Dems.
The dose cuts have been far too vast, far too
(14:13):
wide and deep to argue that the only angry people
in the streets or anger against the Tesla brand are
registered Dems. The only people who are committing violence are
registered Dems.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
That defies explanation and mathematical logic that I know.
Speaker 2 (14:28):
It caters to your political worldview if you happen to
be a Republican or a MAGA supporter, but it defies logic. Also,
Elon Musk is not in any way attempting to endear
himself to those most affected, either insulting them directly like
Senator Mark Kelly, or more generally railing against decency or empathy.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
He definitely can't have it both ways.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
I personally would never support and would never recommend violence
or vandalism, never, but I absolutely can understand and point
to the catalysts which often lead to it. Musk also said, quote,
it turns out when you take away people's money that
they are receiving fraudulently, they get very upset. They basically
(15:13):
want to kill me because I'm stopping their fraud, and
they want to hurt Tesla because we're stopping this terrible
waste and corruption in the government. Well, I guess they're
bad people. Bad people do bad things. Close quote. Actually,
I'm not sure if he meant that as an accusation
or a confession, because that cuts both ways.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
But I digress.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
In any event, As I've said before and I will
say again, Elon Musk has not conducted any forensic audit
or shown any proof of any fraud. He's listed fraud,
he's alleged fraud, but he's never shown any proof. He's
alleged fraud and required we take his word for it,
while also avoiding touching any of his contracts with the
(15:57):
federal government. But he will have to make a decision
as to what's most important, and it's his to make.
I can't make it for him, and no one can
tell the richest man in the world what to do,
So it's up to him.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
He can be an.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
Agent of Donald Trump and continued to ruin the people's
professionals and personal lives without justification, without evidence, without empathy,
and deal with the social ramifications of such. Or he
can step down as president and CEO of Tesla for
the sake of his investors in the future of the company.
(16:28):
But he will not get the latitude of continuing with Doge,
mocking his detractors, placing blame elsewhere, and expecting that Tesla
not pay a price for its association with him. They
were already Inspectors General to do exactly what Doze claims
to be doing right now. They literally are tasked with
(16:49):
finding fraud, waste, and abuse, but also there are official
verification and execution processes for it to be done correctly,
legally and transparently. Elon Musk is not doing any of
that America, and Americans have no responsibility or obligation to
just take Elon Musk's word that he is ridding our
(17:12):
government of waste, fraud, and abuse, and it's being done
without favor or political preference. Nobody is obligated to take
his word for it. Nor are we to cry tears
over the struggles of Tesla while he mocks the very
people he fired and their struggles. No empathy for me,
none for THEE. Fair is fair for KF. I am
(17:35):
six forty. I'm mo Kelly
Later, with Mo'Kelly News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!