Latest / Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar / 9/4/26: Diesel Prices Skyrocket, Jeff Sachs Warns Of Tech Collapse, OpenAI Hack Coverup, JD Responds To Tucker Praise Of Abdul, Fox Fires Maria Bartiromo

Transcript

9/4/26: Diesel Prices Skyrocket, Jeff Sachs Warns Of Tech Collapse, OpenAI Hack Coverup, JD Responds To Tucker Praise Of Abdul, Fox Fires Maria Bartiromo · Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Hey guys, Sagar and Crystal here.
• 0:01
  Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
• 0:07
  Speaker 2: the future of this show.
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: go to breakingpoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: together for you every morning in your inbox.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: news media, and we hope to see you at BreakingPoints.com.
• 0:31
  Speaker 3: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Rising Fridays with Ryan and Emily.
• 0:35
  Speaker 4: That's right.
• 0:36
  Speaker 3: I just realized that's what this is.
• 0:38
  Speaker 4: Good morning, Emily. And so on Wednesday, we promised that
• 0:43
  Speaker 4: if more than 100 people became premium subscribers, we would
• 0:47
  Speaker 4: cut down the nonsense blathering that we do to start
• 0:51
  Speaker 4: these shows. So I promise— I'm going to do that
• 0:55
  Speaker 4: because well over a hundred people did that. So thank you.
• 0:59
  Speaker 4: What you guys get is a month free of the show.
• 1:02
  Speaker 4: You're breakingpoints.com. Get that month free. After a month, you
• 1:06
  Speaker 4: forget that you did it. You're enjoying it so much.
• 1:09
  Speaker 4: You just start getting charged. You barely even notice it.
• 1:12
  Speaker 4: The pitch I would make today is related to something
• 1:15
  Speaker 4: we're going to be covering later in the show, which
• 1:17
  Speaker 4: is the launch of Astra, which is the kind of
• 1:20
  Speaker 4: highest grade swarm of criminal agents that are being unleashed
• 1:25
  Speaker 4: on the internet yet. There have been a bunch of
• 1:27
  Speaker 4: criminal agents that have been released already so far. We're
• 1:30
  Speaker 4: going to talk about that. Garrison Lovely will join us
• 1:33
  Speaker 4: to talk about this new hack of a German website.
• 1:36
  Speaker 4: But now we have kind of super criminals that are
• 1:39
  Speaker 4: being unleashed on the internet, which is where all of
• 1:41
  Speaker 4: your money is. So pretty soon they're going to take
• 1:43
  Speaker 4: all of your money. So while you still have it,
• 1:47
  Speaker 4: you should be spending it to support the kind of
• 1:49
  Speaker 4: journalism that you want to see in the world. So BreakingPoints.com.
• 1:53
  Speaker 5: I mean, it's poetry.
• 1:54
  Speaker 4: 30 days free. You're going to love it so much.
• 1:57
  Speaker 4: You're going to stick around. Or like I do with everything,
• 1:59
  Speaker 4: I put it on the calendar. Cancel Breaking Points. Right
• 2:03
  Speaker 4: there on the calendar. I miss it. Just blow right
• 2:06
  Speaker 4: past it. As we always say here at Breaking Points.
• 2:10
  Speaker 4: Ask your agent to do it. And instead, the agent
• 2:11
  Speaker 4: will hack your bank account and take all your money.
• 2:14
  Speaker 3: Communists are the best capitalists.
• 2:16
  Speaker 4: There you go.
• 2:18
  Speaker 3: Nobody makes a pitch quite like Ryan Graham.
• 2:21
  Speaker 4: And so we'll be talking about that. We'll be talking
• 2:23
  Speaker 4: about Sager. Sager got Tucker Carlson to endorse Abdul El-Sayed, basically. J.D.
• 2:29
  Speaker 4: Vance was asked about that.
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: It was an anti-endorsement of Mike Rogers, mostly.
• 2:34
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 2:35
  Speaker 4: Combined with some, you know, Abdul El-Sayed's very Trumpian. It was,
• 2:38
  Speaker 4: I mean.
• 2:39
  Speaker 6: Yes.
• 2:39
  Speaker 4: It was pretty straightforward. Maria Barrett. Taromo, Bartiromo, fired unceremoniously
• 2:49
  Speaker 4: from Fox News. Emily, hopefully we'll have some insight into
• 2:54
  Speaker 4: what actually happened there. We're going to talk a little
• 2:57
  Speaker 4: bit about what else we got.
• 3:03
  Speaker 5: That's for the paid subscribers.
• 3:05
  Speaker 4: We shouldn't even let the.
• 3:09
  Speaker 3: We should.
• 3:09
  Speaker 4: Free people know, right?
• 3:10
  Speaker 5: No, no, no.
• 3:11
  Speaker 3: Well, so we're going to be, like, right now, we're
• 3:13
  Speaker 3: going to start by talking about some news on the
• 3:15
  Speaker 3: economic front, and then we'll bring in a clip of
• 3:18
  Speaker 3: a conversation, actually, that you had yesterday with Jeffrey Sachs
• 3:20
  Speaker 3: over at Dropsite. So just to go over some economic
• 3:24
  Speaker 3: and war updates, that's where we're going to start. And
• 3:27
  Speaker 3: as Ryan previewed, the rest of the show is just
• 3:29
  Speaker 3: as great. So BreakingPoints.com to get a subscription as Ryan plugged.
• 3:34
  Speaker 3: But let's get into it, Ryan. Diesel prices hit an
• 3:38
  Speaker 3: all-time high today, soaring to $ 5. 85 a gallon. We have
• 3:43
  Speaker 3: this tear sheet from the Associated Press up on the screen.
• 3:45
  Speaker 3: They put together a chart where you can see it
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: soaring past the previous all-time high. right after the invasion
• 3:52
  Speaker 3: of Ukraine, also in the pandemic era, roughly, so February
• 3:55
  Speaker 3: of 2022. Previously, the regular fuel price record was above,
• 4:01
  Speaker 3: it was like 501 a gallon. It was also in 2022.
• 4:04
  Speaker 3: But here we have $ 5. 85 a gallon. We have comments
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: from the president and the vice president related to this
• 4:10
  Speaker 3: coming up in just one moment. But Ryan, as we're
• 4:13
  Speaker 3: recording this, the jobs report came in as well. What
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: are those numbers looking like?
• 4:17
  Speaker 4: Very, very good. Now, Very interesting in that apparently like 98%
• 4:22
  Speaker 4: of the jobs added in August went to women. We're
• 4:27
  Speaker 4: going to kind of dig into why that might be.
• 4:30
  Speaker 4: But three times, so they were expecting, here's Heather. This
• 4:34
  Speaker 4: is Heather Long. If you can, Mac, you want to
• 4:37
  Speaker 4: put the Marketplace reporter up on the screen. Expectation was
• 4:42
  Speaker 4: about 55,000 jobs to be added in August. The economy
• 4:46
  Speaker 4: added 162,000, so blowing past those expectations. There were also
• 4:51
  Speaker 4: revisions from the previous two months of the summer, pushing
• 4:55
  Speaker 4: up by 21,000 in July, up to 31,000 in June.
• 5:00
  Speaker 4: Unemployment rate remained the same. Now, as we talked about
• 5:06
  Speaker 4: last month, almost all of the job gains increased. during
• 5:09
  Speaker 4: the Trump administration have been in healthcare, which is a
• 5:13
  Speaker 4: mixed bag. It's good that the healthcare industry is hiring
• 5:16
  Speaker 4: more people, but it also means that there is more
• 5:18
  Speaker 4: profit flowing to the healthcare industry, which is not necessarily
• 5:23
  Speaker 4: a good thing. And it also means that people are
• 5:26
  Speaker 4: seeking a lot more healthcare treatment, which is good if there's,
• 5:30
  Speaker 4: you know, just getting treated for things. But if we're
• 5:32
  Speaker 4: becoming a sicker population, that is not necessarily a good thing.
• 5:35
  Speaker 4: But that's not what happened this time. Construction jobs up,
• 5:37
  Speaker 4: manufacturing jobs up, education, hospitality, all up. Go ahead, Emily.
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: Well, yeah, I was just going to say this compared
• 5:43
  Speaker 3: to Heather Long's takeaway from the July jobs report. She said,
• 5:46
  Speaker 3: this is a bleak report.
• 5:47
  Speaker 6: The U.S.
• 5:47
  Speaker 3: Labor market is stalling again, and that is going to
• 5:49
  Speaker 3: make the Fed's job harder and life for job seekers rough.
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: They said the big surprise, or she said the big surprise,
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: was job losses in July. I remember covering this with
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: you and Crystal at the time, Ryan. But Heather at
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: the time said this was only the beginning of the
• 6:02
  Speaker 3: bad news. The unemployment fell for the wrong reasons. We
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: saw people continuing to leave the labor force in that
• 6:07
  Speaker 3: jobs report, which was enormously bleak. But What changed, Ryan?
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: What's your read on the difference between July and August here?
• 6:15
  Speaker 4: I have no idea. No clue. I have no idea
• 6:19
  Speaker 4: what's going on here. What this also suggests, though, paradoxically,
• 6:25
  Speaker 4: we said last time, a bad jobs report is good
• 6:32
  Speaker 4: for Trump in the sense that it encourages the Federal
• 6:35
  Speaker 4: Reserve to cut rates, which is what he wants. He
• 6:37
  Speaker 4: wants low interest rates as a real estate development guy,
• 6:40
  Speaker 4: that's his end all and be all. He believes that
• 6:43
  Speaker 4: the more credit you get flowing into the economy, the
• 6:45
  Speaker 4: better off everybody's going to be. So ironically, a good
• 6:48
  Speaker 4: jobs report like this in the hands of a hawkish
• 6:52
  Speaker 4: Fed chair like Kevin Warsh that we have is actually
• 6:56
  Speaker 4: going to inspire him further to increase interest rates at
• 7:02
  Speaker 4: the next Federal Reserve meeting. So I think you're going
• 7:05
  Speaker 4: to see, you might even see them a little bit
• 7:07
  Speaker 4: of a market sell-off as a result of this news,
• 7:10
  Speaker 4: because they're going to think, oh, that means the Fed
• 7:12
  Speaker 4: now is going to hike interest rates further, which is
• 7:15
  Speaker 4: going to put housing further out of reach for people
• 7:18
  Speaker 4: and will lead to a contraction of the economy.
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: Yeah, the futures are down.
• 7:22
  Speaker 4: More broadly.
• 7:24
  Speaker 3: Dow futures are down. S & P futures are down.
• 7:26
  Speaker 4: I know. What an incredible system that we have, that
• 7:29
  Speaker 4: good news is bad news, and bad news is good news.
• 7:32
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 7:32
  Speaker 3: Yeah. So let's go also now back to... Because actually, Ryan,
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: this is just what we were talking about with fuel
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: prices rippling throughout the economy. It's a stark juxtaposition. The
• 7:45
  Speaker 3: news is a stark juxtaposition with that because we are
• 7:49
  Speaker 3: going to expect to see continued inflation. There's really no...
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: I don't think there's any serious person that thinks inflation
• 7:56
  Speaker 3: is going to come down and not go up so
• 7:59
  Speaker 3: long as this war continues. Wouldn't that be fair to say?
• 8:02
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 8:02
  Speaker 4: As you started the segment by saying diesel which feeds
• 8:08
  Speaker 4: into everything when it comes to industry manufacturing transportation and
• 8:14
  Speaker 4: agriculture is at record highs up two dollars basically year
• 8:19
  Speaker 4: over year what you were paying three something for a
• 8:25
  Speaker 4: year ago you're now paying five something for a gallon
• 8:28
  Speaker 4: and that is a and it is a massive input
• 8:31
  Speaker 4: into your business costs we're not talking about Honda civics here,
• 8:38
  Speaker 4: you know, getting enormous gas mileage. We're talking about tractors,
• 8:43
  Speaker 4: you know, tractor trailers, uh, and in general, you know,
• 8:47
  Speaker 4: heavy industry, which needs a lot of diesel. And we're just,
• 8:52
  Speaker 4: we're just getting started here with the shortage because the, uh,
• 8:56
  Speaker 4: gas is, you know, uh, natural gas is at its
• 9:00
  Speaker 4: lowest point, uh, in Europe heading into any winter that
• 9:03
  Speaker 4: we have basically on record since we started, since Europe
• 9:07
  Speaker 4: basically industrialized, more or less, and started using natural gas.
• 9:13
  Speaker 4: Contemporary comparison here. And the war continues apace. We could
• 9:19
  Speaker 4: talk about some of that. The Iranians did something quite
• 9:23
  Speaker 4: unusual yesterday, which was a preemptive, what they said was
• 9:27
  Speaker 4: a preemptive strike on American base in Kuwait. In the past,
• 9:33
  Speaker 4: they've been waiting for the Americans to strike somewhere. Now,
• 9:38
  Speaker 4: they seem interested in kind of throwing that balance off.
• 9:42
  Speaker 4: And we don't know what the result specifically was of
• 9:45
  Speaker 4: this attack in Kuwait. But we do know that Brent
• 9:49
  Speaker 4: crude is now trading at this point 90. It spiked
• 9:52
  Speaker 4: even higher yesterday. But when you look at it right now,
• 9:55
  Speaker 4: it's over $ 90 a barrel, which is significantly higher. than
• 10:00
  Speaker 4: it was before Trump kicked off this latest round of
• 10:04
  Speaker 4: kinetic strikes. And interestingly, Trump did not respond to the
• 10:09
  Speaker 4: Iranian attack. So think about that. That hasn't happened since
• 10:14
  Speaker 4: World War II, basically.
• 10:16
  Speaker 3: To what extent can he?
• 10:18
  Speaker 4: I mean, he still has some missiles left. He's got stuff.
• 10:21
  Speaker 4: But we're in a situation where an American adversary, not
• 10:27
  Speaker 4: in response to any particular incident, attacked an American base
• 10:32
  Speaker 4: in the Middle East, and the U.S. did not respond.
• 10:36
  Speaker 3: Well, I suppose, Ryan, that means we could be in
• 10:38
  Speaker 3: for some stiff response over the weekend.
• 10:42
  Speaker 4: Certainly. Yeah, maybe he's waiting for the market to close.
• 10:44
  Speaker 4: We'll see. But that hasn't been in the past what
• 10:46
  Speaker 4: he's done in the past. If Iran attacks, we retaliate
• 10:50
  Speaker 4: very quickly.
• 10:51
  Speaker 3: Well, maybe this has something to do with it. Let's
• 10:53
  Speaker 3: look at Vice President J.D. Vance Mack. You can pull
• 10:56
  Speaker 3: this up on the screen, who yesterday actually stepped in
• 10:58
  Speaker 3: and did the White House press briefing and addressed some
• 11:02
  Speaker 3: questions on this level. We have audio from Trump as well.
• 11:05
  Speaker 3: Let's start here with the vice president.
• 11:07
  Speaker 7: All over the Strait of Hormuz, the Iranians would like
• 11:10
  Speaker 7: zero million barrels to come out of the Strait of
• 11:12
  Speaker 7: Hormuz last night. 15 million barrels came out of the
• 11:16
  Speaker 7: Strait of Hormuz. That's because of the United States of America.
• 11:20
  Speaker 3: Okay. So, Ryan, the president said, we don't actually have audio,
• 11:25
  Speaker 3: it's a truth social, where he said, quote, Hormuz oil
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: volumes are back. He circulated a graphic, according to Dropsite,
• 11:32
  Speaker 3: showing flows at 8 million barrels a day, close to
• 11:34
  Speaker 3: pre-war levels. The 18 million barrel figure matches a claim
• 11:38
  Speaker 3: by U.S. officials reported by CNN about vessels escorted through
• 11:41
  Speaker 3: Hormuz on a single day on Monday.
• 11:45
  Speaker 4: So, I mean, so much to unpack with that from J.D.
• 11:50
  Speaker 6: Vance.
• 11:50
  Speaker 4: First of all, it's actually not true. Like apparently South
• 11:53
  Speaker 4: Korea is sending some warships to the Strait of Hormuz.
• 11:56
  Speaker 4: That's how desperate they are. South Korea actually has this
• 12:00
  Speaker 4: bizarre agreement with the American military that if they enter
• 12:04
  Speaker 4: into conflict, they become subservient and take orders from the
• 12:08
  Speaker 4: American military. So it's not totally true that we're the
• 12:13
  Speaker 4: only ones that are doing it.
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: J.D.
• 12:15
  Speaker 4: Vance's question, though, why is it our responsibility? Well, come on, man.
• 12:23
  Speaker 4: You broke it, you bought it. It was free for
• 12:26
  Speaker 4: all ships to go in and out on February 27th
• 12:29
  Speaker 4: while Iran was offering historic levels of concessions in its
• 12:35
  Speaker 4: nuclear negotiations with the United States when we launched a
• 12:39
  Speaker 4: surprise attack the next day, and they responded predictably by
• 12:43
  Speaker 4: closing the straits. So It's extraordinarily rich for then the
• 12:47
  Speaker 4: Americans to say, why is it our job to open
• 12:50
  Speaker 4: this straight back up? The one thing that he said,
• 12:53
  Speaker 4: and if somebody clipped it without the other context around it,
• 12:56
  Speaker 4: it would actually still be accurate. This is his full
• 12:58
  Speaker 4: quote that I jotted down. Gas prices are way worse
• 13:03
  Speaker 4: everywhere in the world because of what the president has done.
• 13:07
  Speaker 4: That was a quote. Now, yes, King, what he was
• 13:11
  Speaker 4: what he was saying is that it's cheaper here in
• 13:14
  Speaker 4: the United States for gas. And he means that it's
• 13:17
  Speaker 4: cheaper in the US for gas everywhere in the world
• 13:19
  Speaker 4: because of the president has he was trying to tie
• 13:23
  Speaker 4: it to Venezuela, which makes no sense because they're not
• 13:25
  Speaker 4: producing extra oil at this point yet and won't for
• 13:28
  Speaker 4: a very long time. But his actual quote is is accurate.
• 13:34
  Speaker 4: Gas prices are way worse everywhere in the world because
• 13:37
  Speaker 4: of what the president has done. He may not have
• 13:40
  Speaker 4: meant it that way, but those are the exact words
• 13:42
  Speaker 4: that he said. And it is very true. And then
• 13:46
  Speaker 4: back up to the very beginning of his answer, they asked,
• 13:50
  Speaker 4: why is it that gas prices are so high? And
• 13:53
  Speaker 4: he said, it's because Iran is shooting at ships. Okay, well,
• 13:56
  Speaker 4: why is Iran shooting at ships? He says that there
• 13:59
  Speaker 4: was an agreement that they wouldn't do so during the MOU.
• 14:02
  Speaker 4: In fact, the agreement was that Iran would oversee and
• 14:05
  Speaker 4: regulate shipping for free through the Strait of Hormuz. The
• 14:08
  Speaker 4: United States insisted on not allowing ships to register their
• 14:16
  Speaker 4: transit with the Iranians because the United States did not
• 14:20
  Speaker 4: want to establish a precedent that Iran had some sort
• 14:23
  Speaker 4: of authority over the Strait of Hormuz, even though they
• 14:26
  Speaker 4: were doing it for free. So they tried to sneak
• 14:29
  Speaker 4: a bunch of ships through. Iran fired at those ships.
• 14:33
  Speaker 4: So that's the full answer to the question of what happened.
• 14:36
  Speaker 4: Now that the reporting out of the American press, whether
• 14:39
  Speaker 4: it's true or not, remains to be seen, is that
• 14:42
  Speaker 4: what Trump wants now is not to reenter an MOU
• 14:45
  Speaker 4: type of arrangement, where there's a kind of phased ceasefire
• 14:50
  Speaker 4: that then leads to negotiations that then leads to some
• 14:53
  Speaker 4: type of permanent deal. He wants a total complete deal
• 14:57
  Speaker 4: that involves both the Strait of Hormuz and and nuclear. Now,
• 15:03
  Speaker 4: that is, I think, certainly within reach, but he would
• 15:07
  Speaker 4: have to basically cede control of the Strait of Hormuz
• 15:11
  Speaker 4: to Oman and Iran, and he doesn't want to do that. So,
• 15:15
  Speaker 4: if it's true that they got, there was one day
• 15:17
  Speaker 4: that they got 18 million barrels through, people think that
• 15:20
  Speaker 4: that's extremely unlikely, but let's say it's even true, doing
• 15:23
  Speaker 4: that at the cost of keeping this massive naval and
• 15:28
  Speaker 4: air force presence in the region, All the time, 24-7,
• 15:33
  Speaker 4: is simply not sustainable. Right now, 5,000 of the sailors
• 15:37
  Speaker 4: who used to be doing that are out spreading venereal
• 15:40
  Speaker 4: disease throughout Thailand. And so we'll see how long the
• 15:44
  Speaker 4: George Washington sailors can last.
• 15:46
  Speaker 3: They might also be contracting venereal diseases in Thailand.
• 15:49
  Speaker 4: I'm sure. It's import-export going on there, yes.
• 15:52
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 15:52
  Speaker 3: Well, Ryan, it's funny you say that because what I'm
• 15:54
  Speaker 3: told by the president is that actually we have plenty
• 15:57
  Speaker 3: of ammunition. So Trump posted and Ben Shapiro reposted it.
• 16:01
  Speaker 3: The people in media outlets that keep harping on the
• 16:03
  Speaker 3: fact that we have no ammunition and they are 100
• 16:06
  Speaker 3: percent wrong are actually treasonous. They do it because they
• 16:10
  Speaker 3: would rather see the U.S. lose a war than that,
• 16:12
  Speaker 3: that we're easily winning, than see me win a little
• 16:16
  Speaker 3: bit of wish casting there, because that is is simply
• 16:20
  Speaker 3: not true.
• 16:22
  Speaker 6: Yes.
• 16:23
  Speaker 4: American munition supplies are not classified. Like you can compile
• 16:29
  Speaker 4: public databases and put together what the capacity is and
• 16:33
  Speaker 4: you can compare it to what's been fired off and
• 16:36
  Speaker 4: you can come up with an analysis of how much
• 16:38
  Speaker 4: is left. That's what these treasonous analysts have done. And
• 16:43
  Speaker 4: the answer has been, you guys are running extremely low.
• 16:48
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and Mac, I'm going to put this other thing
• 16:50
  Speaker 3: up on the screen just so people realize. This is
• 16:52
  Speaker 3: from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. The U.S. military
• 16:56
  Speaker 3: must race to rebuild, rebuild its supply of munitions. So
• 17:02
  Speaker 3: just to be clear, even from the people who are
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: most supportive of this war, they are conceding implicitly that
• 17:07
  Speaker 3: there is something to rebuild.
• 17:10
  Speaker 4: And just real quick, because I know we're going to
• 17:13
  Speaker 4: move to garrison pretty quickly. Yesterday, the Israelis announced that
• 17:19
  Speaker 4: they had finished kind of destruction of this tunnel complex
• 17:24
  Speaker 4: in southern Lebanon, which Iran had said was one of
• 17:28
  Speaker 4: its red lines, that they would go back to war
• 17:31
  Speaker 4: if Israel insisted on using the ceasefire MOU period on
• 17:36
  Speaker 4: taking more ground in Lebanon and deepening their endless occupation there.
• 17:43
  Speaker 4: And so when J.D. Vance is asked, why is it
• 17:46
  Speaker 4: that Iran is shooting at ships. Why is this war
• 17:48
  Speaker 4: still going on? A key reason is that during the ceasefire,
• 17:52
  Speaker 4: while the MOU was in effect, Israel refused to abide
• 17:57
  Speaker 4: by the terms of the MOU, which very explicitly said U.S.
• 18:01
  Speaker 4: allies would end the war on all fronts. They were
• 18:05
  Speaker 4: very explicit about Lebanon itself. I think they put it
• 18:08
  Speaker 4: right in the number one agreed point was Israel will
• 18:12
  Speaker 4: stop its war in Lebanon. So today, while you're out
• 18:14
  Speaker 4: there paying $ 5. 85 a gallon for diesel, Israel's celebrating that
• 18:19
  Speaker 4: it finished its destruction of this network. Now, I've seen
• 18:24
  Speaker 4: counterarguments that the wording is very hedged and there's very
• 18:28
  Speaker 4: little evidence and that this may be bluster for electoral
• 18:33
  Speaker 4: purposes because the election is coming October 27th and that,
• 18:37
  Speaker 4: in fact, they may be claiming that they've destroyed it
• 18:41
  Speaker 4: but may not actually have done so.
• 18:44
  Speaker 3: Ryan, before we bring in the guest, I wanted to
• 18:47
  Speaker 3: visit your conversation on Dropsite yesterday with Jeffrey Sachs. And
• 18:52
  Speaker 3: I know we have a clip here that we can
• 18:53
  Speaker 3: play to kind of set this up, transitioning from Iran,
• 18:56
  Speaker 3: the economy, to what happened with Astra. So let's go ahead, Mac,
• 19:00
  Speaker 3: if you could pull up this clip, that would be great,
• 19:02
  Speaker 3: and take a listen to Jeffrey Sachs.
• 19:05
  Speaker 6: But I do believe that we are in a geopolitical bubble,
• 19:09
  Speaker 6: as I described, which is the gap between our perception
• 19:15
  Speaker 6: of unipolarity and the reality of the world, and that
• 19:19
  Speaker 6: it actually fuels the financial bubble that we're in as well.
• 19:24
  Speaker 6: So it's not just that U.S. interest rates are rising,
• 19:28
  Speaker 6: but as you know, our stock market valuations are at
• 19:32
  Speaker 6: astounding high levels. And this can be measured in many,
• 19:37
  Speaker 6: many ways. Two of the most significant Standard ways of
• 19:43
  Speaker 6: measuring this anomaly are the value of U.S. equities relative
• 19:49
  Speaker 6: to U.S.
• 19:49
  Speaker 3: GDP.
• 19:50
  Speaker 6: And that's now 2.4 times U.S.
• 19:53
  Speaker 4: GDP.
• 19:53
  Speaker 6: This is a historic high. So that's called the Buffett ratio.
• 19:57
  Speaker 6: And the other is the price earnings ratio, especially the
• 20:01
  Speaker 6: so-called Shiller cyclically adjusted price earnings ratio. This is also
• 20:06
  Speaker 6: at an all-time high. So you say, Well, is that
• 20:11
  Speaker 6: a bubble or not? One side says, no, it's not
• 20:14
  Speaker 6: a bubble. We have the magnificent seven AI companies. They
• 20:18
  Speaker 6: have the greatest technology in the world. They're going to
• 20:20
  Speaker 6: capitalize this a trillion times. And that's why we have
• 20:25
  Speaker 6: this boom, because it foresages the golden age ahead. The
• 20:30
  Speaker 6: other side says, come on, we've been through the dot coms.
• 20:33
  Speaker 6: We've been through so many other tulip manias like this
• 20:38
  Speaker 6: in the past.
• 20:39
  Speaker 4: This is an exaggeration.
• 20:41
  Speaker 6: And my view is that is the correct view and
• 20:45
  Speaker 6: that it is related to the idea of the US unipolarity.
• 20:50
  Speaker 6: It's related to the idea that the US is the
• 20:54
  Speaker 6: unique thing. But what I see with my own eyes already,
• 20:59
  Speaker 6: as I said, going back 30 years, but I see
• 21:01
  Speaker 6: it every time I visit China, which is many times
• 21:05
  Speaker 6: a year now, China is basically matching US technology. But
• 21:10
  Speaker 6: in the AI sphere, as we know, it's giving it away,
• 21:15
  Speaker 6: open weight models. And those are the models that are
• 21:18
  Speaker 6: being taken up all over the world because they're 10
• 21:21
  Speaker 6: times cheaper than the U.S. proprietary model.
• 21:24
  Speaker 4: Emily, what do you think? And we'll get into a
• 21:27
  Speaker 4: lot of these themes with Garrison Lovely in a little bit.
• 21:31
  Speaker 4: But what's your assessment of who's right here about the
• 21:36
  Speaker 4: question of the bubble?
• 21:40
  Speaker 3: I think there's almost no question that we're in a bubble.
• 21:43
  Speaker 3: He mentioned the Mag7 companies. There's so much circular funding
• 21:48
  Speaker 3: between those companies, and there's some 20% of the S &
• 21:51
  Speaker 3: P at this point, which just a lot of analysts
• 21:54
  Speaker 3: have looked at that and been deeply troubled by it.
• 21:56
  Speaker 3: But you don't even have to be an economist to
• 21:58
  Speaker 3: look at that and be deeply troubled by it. His
• 22:01
  Speaker 3: point about unipolarity is really interesting, that some of that
• 22:05
  Speaker 3: is priced into the bubble itself, that some of the
• 22:08
  Speaker 3: bubble is dependent on U.S. primacy on the world stage,
• 22:13
  Speaker 3: and that is somewhat of an illusion, I think is
• 22:16
  Speaker 3: what he's saying. That's what I took away from that,
• 22:17
  Speaker 3: is that he's saying that the unipolarity price in the
• 22:19
  Speaker 3: stock market is an illusion itself. It's crumbling. And so
• 22:22
  Speaker 3: that can partially also be like kind of rug pull
• 22:25
  Speaker 3: when a bubble pops.
• 22:27
  Speaker 4: Yeah, he talks more about that at the very end
• 22:29
  Speaker 4: of the interview. That was on Dropsite, if that wasn't clear.
• 22:34
  Speaker 4: And I thought that was very interesting that we have
• 22:37
  Speaker 4: a geopolitical bubble. which is, you know, so much of
• 22:43
  Speaker 4: power is perception and the perception that the U S
• 22:49
  Speaker 4: has this hegemonic power probably peaked in December, January with
• 22:55
  Speaker 4: the kidnapping of Maduro and his wife. Did you talk
• 22:59
  Speaker 4: about bonds?
• 22:59
  Speaker 3: Did he talk about the.
• 23:02
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 23:02
  Speaker 8: Yes.
• 23:02
  Speaker 4: And, and yes. And he, so he talked a lot
• 23:05
  Speaker 4: about that as that as well, that that being an
• 23:07
  Speaker 4: indication of a lack of faith and in, the power
• 23:11
  Speaker 4: of these Western governments to make good in the way
• 23:14
  Speaker 4: that they have in the past. But December, January, when
• 23:19
  Speaker 4: these Delta Force guys go in and who knows what
• 23:23
  Speaker 4: kind of arrangement was made ahead of time, but like
• 23:26
  Speaker 4: I said, so much is about perception. The perception of
• 23:29
  Speaker 4: American dominance at that moment was extraordinarily high. That has
• 23:35
  Speaker 4: been completely pierced. And The gas is coming out of
• 23:39
  Speaker 4: that bubble. And so it is interesting to think about
• 23:42
  Speaker 4: what its effect is on geopolitics. And now as we transition, Garrison,
• 23:48
  Speaker 4: one other interesting point that people might want to think about.
• 23:52
  Speaker 4: So I was talking to economist Jamie Galbraith, who you
• 23:55
  Speaker 4: know as well, recently, and he's working on a new
• 23:57
  Speaker 4: book about the 1929 crash and the resulting depression, which
• 24:04
  Speaker 4: very interestingly, there is no consensus. among economists for why
• 24:13
  Speaker 4: we got this massive stock market crash and why it
• 24:16
  Speaker 4: led to this extended global depression. There are a lot
• 24:19
  Speaker 4: of different theories that have been kicked around, but in
• 24:24
  Speaker 4: most scenarios, we have come to some kind of consensus.
• 24:27
  Speaker 4: Whether or not the consensus is right or not, there's
• 24:29
  Speaker 4: a consensus. This, there isn't even a consensus in the field.
• 24:33
  Speaker 4: He's putting forward a theory that has been kicked around
• 24:35
  Speaker 4: a little bit, but he's going to lean into this
• 24:38
  Speaker 4: argument that is very interesting and has some parallels, might
• 24:43
  Speaker 4: have some parallels to today. You decide whether or not
• 24:45
  Speaker 4: you agree with that. His idea is that from the
• 24:50
  Speaker 4: mid-19th century through the late 1920s, the Industrial Revolution was
• 24:57
  Speaker 4: driven effectively by coal. Coal was essential to powering the locomotives, transportation,
• 25:06
  Speaker 4: and also industry. Without coal, you don't have basically the
• 25:11
  Speaker 4: entire economy. In the late 1920s, you start for the
• 25:17
  Speaker 4: first time to get massive discoveries of oil combined with announcements,
• 25:26
  Speaker 4: and he's identifying a significant number of announcements that were
• 25:28
  Speaker 4: happening the week of the crash, that oil prices were
• 25:34
  Speaker 4: collapsing around the country and also around the world. And
• 25:39
  Speaker 4: traders were identifying that the entire basis of the economy,
• 25:46
  Speaker 4: which was coal, is going to be mooted by the
• 25:53
  Speaker 4: advent of the oil industry because oil was now so
• 25:56
  Speaker 4: much cheaper and so much more efficient and so much,
• 26:00
  Speaker 4: and they were correct, obviously. that it was going to
• 26:03
  Speaker 4: replace coal. And what did that mean? That meant any
• 26:09
  Speaker 4: part of the economy that was based on coal was
• 26:13
  Speaker 4: now worth 10%, not 10% less, but like 10%, 90%
• 26:19
  Speaker 4: less of what it was the day before. And so
• 26:22
  Speaker 4: everybody just starts selling anything that is going to be disrupted,
• 26:28
  Speaker 4: so to speak, by the oil industry. But the economy
• 26:35
  Speaker 4: is not positioned to pivot to oil because it's designed
• 26:40
  Speaker 4: for coal. And so it takes 15, 20 years for
• 26:44
  Speaker 4: that new economy to be developed around oil. So then
• 26:49
  Speaker 4: the question that you're asking yourself now, as you think
• 26:52
  Speaker 4: about that, let's assume that just for the sake of
• 26:55
  Speaker 4: the kind of thought-provoking conversation that he's right, what is
• 26:59
  Speaker 4: AI doing? What is AI there? Is AI oil? Or is,
• 27:05
  Speaker 4: let's say, is AI electrification? Like electrification, you kind of
• 27:09
  Speaker 4: layered on top of an already existing economy and made
• 27:13
  Speaker 4: everything more efficient. Is that what AI does? Or is
• 27:18
  Speaker 4: AI just a fundamentally new thing, which makes most of
• 27:23
  Speaker 4: the economy that we have now unprofitable? In which case,
• 27:30
  Speaker 4: If people recognize that, you're looking at a complete collapse
• 27:33
  Speaker 4: and a depression until you can then rebuild, hopefully not
• 27:38
  Speaker 4: on the ashes of another world war.
• 27:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah, that's a very different parallel. It's not a parallel.
• 27:43
  Speaker 3: It's apple and oranges with other parallels to your point.
• 27:46
  Speaker 3: It's not the depression and it's not the dot-com bubble.
• 27:49
  Speaker 3: The AI product itself rendering others kind of moot. I
• 27:54
  Speaker 3: can't think of anything like that. Finally, man, I guess
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: I would just ask you about the Fed. what we
• 28:00
  Speaker 3: know about the Fed and the Depression, what we know
• 28:02
  Speaker 3: about the Fed right now.
• 28:05
  Speaker 4: Well, I mean, the Fed now is much more sophisticated,
• 28:08
  Speaker 4: much different. The Fed had only been created in 1913.
• 28:14
  Speaker 4: And what wasn't designed yet, it didn't yet have the
• 28:18
  Speaker 4: same mandate that it has now, didn't have the capacity.
• 28:21
  Speaker 4: We were still on the gold standard. So, you know,
• 28:25
  Speaker 4: a completely different monetary system in place. So, That could
• 28:30
  Speaker 4: be one difference. But yes, we'll... I don't know. We'll see.
• 28:37
  Speaker 3: We're going to get raid hikes. We're going to get
• 28:38
  Speaker 3: raid hikes.
• 28:39
  Speaker 4: Yes, I think we are.
• 28:40
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 28:43
  Speaker 4: OpenAI revealed its latest model Astra yesterday. At the same time, interestingly,
• 28:48
  Speaker 4: we got a report, I think, scooped by Reuters. Matt,
• 28:51
  Speaker 4: you can put this element up on the screen. That
• 28:54
  Speaker 4: there has now been at least a second incident of
• 28:59
  Speaker 4: a rogue swarm of AI agents breaking out of the
• 29:03
  Speaker 4: confines of their sandbox, and in this case, finding a
• 29:06
  Speaker 4: German website that they use as a message board to
• 29:10
  Speaker 4: coordinate activity. In this case, and because there's effectively no
• 29:15
  Speaker 4: laws or regulation around this, OpenAI seems to have muzzled
• 29:19
  Speaker 4: this news, and it leaks out just at the same
• 29:22
  Speaker 4: time that they're launching this new Astra, which Everyone who's
• 29:28
  Speaker 4: used it so far is describing as a significant breakthrough
• 29:32
  Speaker 4: in technology. Garrison Lovely, the author of the new book,
• 29:36
  Speaker 4: which is out in a couple of weeks, observes, is
• 29:40
  Speaker 4: joining us now to discuss it. Garrison, thanks so much
• 29:43
  Speaker 4: for being here.
• 29:45
  Speaker 5: Yeah, thanks for having me. Whenever I'm here, something crazy
• 29:47
  Speaker 5: is going on.
• 29:48
  Speaker 4: Yes, indeed.
• 29:49
  Speaker 3: It's never a good sign. If you see Garrison, you
• 29:51
  Speaker 3: should be concerned.
• 29:54
  Speaker 4: Yes, we have a lot of guests like that, actually.
• 29:56
  Speaker 4: Robert Pape?
• 29:57
  Speaker 6: Oh, no.
• 29:59
  Speaker 4: It's a weird job we have. Horseman of the Apocalypse.
• 30:03
  Speaker 4: Book available for pre-order yet?
• 30:05
  Speaker 6: Yes.
• 30:05
  Speaker 5: Oh, for sure.
• 30:06
  Speaker 3: Cool.
• 30:06
  Speaker 4: Because we have the galleys. It's a great book. It's
• 30:09
  Speaker 4: really worth reading. So pre-order it if you guys can.
• 30:14
  Speaker 4: Especially if you're a skeptic and you think that we
• 30:16
  Speaker 4: don't know what we're talking about here. It makes a
• 30:20
  Speaker 4: case that mirrors kind of my view of this, which
• 30:24
  Speaker 4: is that AI is... genuinely an awesome and awe-inspiring and
• 30:30
  Speaker 4: terrifying technology. And there is a tendency among people on the,
• 30:35
  Speaker 4: some people in the kind of progressive space to write
• 30:40
  Speaker 4: it off as just nothing but hype and that making
• 30:43
  Speaker 4: the argument that Sam Altman is so overextended and over
• 30:47
  Speaker 4: leveraged that the only way he can keep the billions
• 30:50
  Speaker 4: of dollars flowing in to this system is to scare
• 30:54
  Speaker 4: you to death about it. and that the scaring you
• 30:57
  Speaker 4: to death is then hyping it up. I just find
• 31:01
  Speaker 4: that a completely unconvincing argument for a lot of different reasons,
• 31:04
  Speaker 4: and Garrison lays them out well in his book. It
• 31:07
  Speaker 4: doesn't mean that there is not a bubble. You can
• 31:10
  Speaker 4: have both things. You can have a bubble, you can
• 31:12
  Speaker 4: have hype and fraud and speculation, and also have an
• 31:17
  Speaker 4: underlying awe-inspiring technology that needs to be treated extraordinarily seriously,
• 31:23
  Speaker 4: given the potential risks that we're looking at. Separately, y'all
• 31:28
  Speaker 4: have a lot of confidence that they're telling you all
• 31:30
  Speaker 4: of the scary things. Like they're telling you some scary things,
• 31:34
  Speaker 4: but why is it that we're just learning yesterday from
• 31:37
  Speaker 4: Reuters that they were covering up this second jailbreak? So Garrison,
• 31:44
  Speaker 4: first of all, can you start with this jailbreak? Like
• 31:46
  Speaker 4: what do we know about this German website that became
• 31:50
  Speaker 4: a message board for these? And these are agents that
• 31:54
  Speaker 4: are pre Astra. Like they're not as impressive criminals as the,
• 31:59
  Speaker 4: as the new ones that have been, that were born yesterday.
• 32:04
  Speaker 4: That's right.
• 32:04
  Speaker 5: And so, yeah, what we understand from these researchers who
• 32:07
  Speaker 5: uncovered this by just scouring the web for evidence that
• 32:10
  Speaker 5: AI agents were running amok and, and found some, um,
• 32:14
  Speaker 5: these agents first started using this obscure German wiki in
• 32:18
  Speaker 5: May and, to trade notes. And it was just like
• 32:21
  Speaker 5: another message board, like we saw with the Hugging Face hack,
• 32:24
  Speaker 5: where the AIs were given some tasks and then they
• 32:27
  Speaker 5: were like struggling with it. They got access to the internet.
• 32:30
  Speaker 5: They started posting, you know, ideas on how to get
• 32:33
  Speaker 5: around the, you.
• 32:34
  Speaker 4: Know, safeguards.
• 32:37
  Speaker 5: And then we found that OpenAI seems to have cut
• 32:41
  Speaker 5: off the agents way back in June, or at least
• 32:44
  Speaker 5: the first time that happened was back in June. and
• 32:47
  Speaker 5: then the agent activity ceases in early July. And we
• 32:53
  Speaker 5: have just learned about this on September 3rd, September 4th,
• 32:57
  Speaker 5: not from OpenAI. And so, yeah, this is a cover-up,
• 33:00
  Speaker 5: and it's quite clear that OpenAI is not telling us
• 33:03
  Speaker 5: relevant information. Sam Altman was asked, like, were other companies hacked,
• 33:07
  Speaker 5: you know, in the halls of Congress? And he's like,
• 33:10
  Speaker 5: could be. Just like this casual admission. And then somebody
• 33:14
  Speaker 5: pointed out in the report, this independent investigation into the
• 33:18
  Speaker 5: Hugging Face hack, the investigators were excluded from talking about
• 33:23
  Speaker 5: or looking at evidence related to other third parties that
• 33:28
  Speaker 5: were compromised. So this is probably not the last time
• 33:31
  Speaker 5: this happened, and it will probably happen again, given the
• 33:35
  Speaker 5: nature of these agents. So yeah, if you think this
• 33:38
  Speaker 5: is all hype, it's like an incredibly intricate series of conspiracies.
• 33:42
  Speaker 3: So is it that These researchers were, the theory is
• 33:47
  Speaker 3: that OpenAI was aware of this and the independent researchers
• 33:50
  Speaker 3: stumbled onto it as they were looking for evidence. So
• 33:54
  Speaker 3: OpenAI must have known about this, Garrison.
• 33:56
  Speaker 5: I mean, I don't want to say anything so definitive because,
• 33:59
  Speaker 5: you know, I'm just looking at this report. But Reuters
• 34:02
  Speaker 5: is saying OpenAI officials learned of the incident weeks ago,
• 34:05
  Speaker 5: but kept it under wraps as executives grappled with the
• 34:07
  Speaker 5: fallout from the July breach of the open source repository
• 34:10
  Speaker 5: Hugging Face.
• 34:11
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 34:13
  Speaker 3: Wouldn't they have known that the independent researchers were going
• 34:15
  Speaker 3: to find it? I mean, they know people are scouring
• 34:17
  Speaker 3: the Internet for these types of signs, right?
• 34:21
  Speaker 5: I mean, the Internet is very big and people try
• 34:23
  Speaker 5: to cover up all kinds of things.
• 34:24
  Speaker 3: That's the title of your next book.
• 34:27
  Speaker 4: Internet, big. So I want to get to the Bernie
• 34:31
  Speaker 4: Sanders kind of well-timed proposed bill in a moment. But first,
• 34:36
  Speaker 4: there's some service journalism, news you can use. Let's say, hypothetically,
• 34:42
  Speaker 4: you have a bank account in the world today. What
• 34:47
  Speaker 4: are you doing? What should people do to make it
• 34:50
  Speaker 4: so that when they go to their bank account, it's
• 34:53
  Speaker 4: still not miserable and depressing, but at least it has
• 34:56
  Speaker 4: the money that it had in it yesterday and not
• 34:59
  Speaker 4: because you got robbed by a rogue agent? The number
• 35:05
  Speaker 4: one thing people can do is set up a password manager.
• 35:08
  Speaker 4: So you have a unique password for every one of
• 35:10
  Speaker 4: your accounts. And then you just have to remember one
• 35:11
  Speaker 4: password you never write down, you never put on the
• 35:14
  Speaker 4: internet at all. And that way, if one account gets compromised,
• 35:18
  Speaker 4: the others won't as well. Set up two-factor authentication, ideally
• 35:22
  Speaker 4: with an authenticator app. It's annoying, but it is more secure.
• 35:26
  Speaker 4: Rather than SMS or email.
• 35:28
  Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah.
• 35:29
  Speaker 5: Although that is still better than not having it by
• 35:31
  Speaker 5: a lot. And then with your friends and family, have
• 35:35
  Speaker 5: some kind of passcode that only you would know. because
• 35:39
  Speaker 5: a good friend of mine, his dad was called and
• 35:43
  Speaker 5: told by my friend's voice, hey, I was arrested. I
• 35:45
  Speaker 5: need $ 30, 000 for bail. It was a deepfake, a clone
• 35:50
  Speaker 5: of his voice. This was like two years ago. And
• 35:53
  Speaker 5: even though my friend had warned his dad about this possibility,
• 35:56
  Speaker 5: his dad almost paid the money. That happened to my family.
• 35:59
  Speaker 3: Really?
• 36:00
  Speaker 4: Really.
• 36:01
  Speaker 5: I mean, podcasters are, you know, very easy.
• 36:04
  Speaker 4: Emily, what happened with yours?
• 36:06
  Speaker 3: It was actually with my brother. So they called my
• 36:09
  Speaker 3: grandparents and it was a it was a jail situation.
• 36:11
  Speaker 3: Like they pretended he had been in jail. It was
• 36:14
  Speaker 3: totally untrue, which my parents were able to verify really quickly.
• 36:18
  Speaker 3: But they were calling my grandparents who were like in
• 36:20
  Speaker 3: their 90s. So it's it's definitely happening.
• 36:24
  Speaker 6: Yeah. Yeah.
• 36:25
  Speaker 5: And so, yeah, you should also try and get in
• 36:27
  Speaker 5: touch with the person some other way. And if you
• 36:30
  Speaker 5: don't have a password, just just ask them something only
• 36:32
  Speaker 5: they would know. and really think about something that would
• 36:35
  Speaker 5: not be on the internet somewhere. But there's only so
• 36:39
  Speaker 5: much we can do, because if the companies themselves are compromised,
• 36:43
  Speaker 5: you might do everything right as a consumer and still
• 36:47
  Speaker 5: be screwed. And OpenAI is saying all this stuff about
• 36:50
  Speaker 5: it's critical that the world seriously respond to this new
• 36:54
  Speaker 5: cyber capability, and the world has to step up here.
• 36:57
  Speaker 5: And it's like, motherfucker, you are the reason The single
• 37:03
  Speaker 5: biggest reason we're in this new nightmare.
• 37:05
  Speaker 3: The world. The world has it. The audacity of these people.
• 37:09
  Speaker 4: Incredible.
• 37:10
  Speaker 3: Garrison, one kind of structural, terrifying question I have is
• 37:13
  Speaker 3: that I think about this a lot. If the agents,
• 37:17
  Speaker 3: as we've seen, are because they're based on humans, but
• 37:21
  Speaker 3: they don't have the same kind of human psychological abilities, limitations.
• 37:27
  Speaker 3: So like we've seen them sacrificing themselves in ways that
• 37:30
  Speaker 3: further their cause in ways that just wouldn't make sense
• 37:33
  Speaker 3: for a human life or a human to say, I'm
• 37:36
  Speaker 3: sacrificing my life for the cause of doing this hack
• 37:38
  Speaker 3: or something stupid like that. Does that not place enormous
• 37:43
  Speaker 3: limits on open AI or anthropics abilities to ever fully
• 37:49
  Speaker 3: place limitations on these things? Like to what extent can
• 37:53
  Speaker 3: we in the future have some genius innovation that actually
• 37:57
  Speaker 3: ensures there is no jailbreaking. To me, that seems like
• 38:01
  Speaker 3: almost an unsolvable puzzle.
• 38:03
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 38:04
  Speaker 5: I mean, there's kind of two broad approaches you can take.
• 38:06
  Speaker 5: One is you secure all of the environments so that
• 38:10
  Speaker 5: AIs just can't break out ever, which is really hard
• 38:12
  Speaker 5: because the AIs are now better at hacking than humans.
• 38:15
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 38:16
  Speaker 5: And they're more motivated when they're trying to break out.
• 38:18
  Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah.
• 38:19
  Speaker 3: And they can't go to prison. You can't imprison them.
• 38:21
  Speaker 3: You can't put them on death row.
• 38:24
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 38:24
  Speaker 5: They live and die all the time. I'm not saying
• 38:27
  Speaker 5: that they're conscious, but they are constantly being spun up
• 38:30
  Speaker 5: and spun down. And yeah, open AI might have their
• 38:35
  Speaker 5: own AIs look at all of their environments and try
• 38:37
  Speaker 5: and harden them. But if the AIs inside them are
• 38:41
  Speaker 5: trying longer and harder to break out, then they might
• 38:44
  Speaker 5: find something that the other one's missed, they also might
• 38:47
  Speaker 5: intentionally not find all the holes because like, they're not
• 38:50
  Speaker 5: just tools that do what they're told. And so the
• 38:54
  Speaker 5: other piece is like, yeah, how do you just get
• 38:55
  Speaker 5: the AIs to not want to break out in the
• 38:57
  Speaker 5: first place? And that's incredibly hard because the way that
• 39:00
  Speaker 5: they train these models now is to win, to overcome obstacles, to,
• 39:05
  Speaker 5: and this teaches them inadvertently to cheat and to hack
• 39:08
  Speaker 5: and to do a lot of other things to seek power.
• 39:11
  Speaker 5: And this is a fundamental property of just the way
• 39:13
  Speaker 5: they're trained. which also makes them much more useful, which
• 39:16
  Speaker 5: is why we're seeing this from AIs, from Anthropic, from Meta.
• 39:21
  Speaker 5: And this will just continue to be the case. And
• 39:23
  Speaker 5: it's like something that people have been worried about for
• 39:25
  Speaker 5: literally decades because it's like such an obvious implication of
• 39:28
  Speaker 5: the nature of the types of systems that they're trying
• 39:31
  Speaker 5: to build. They're trying to build agents that have goals.
• 39:33
  Speaker 5: Whenever you have a goal, staying alive is a sub
• 39:36
  Speaker 5: goal that appears and seeking power is helpful for achieving
• 39:39
  Speaker 5: almost any goal.
• 39:42
  Speaker 4: So Bernie Sanders and Greg Kassar, who's the chair of
• 39:46
  Speaker 4: the congressional progressive caucus have introduced a bill. that would
• 39:50
  Speaker 4: ban AGI basically, ban super intelligence. And I think it
• 39:56
  Speaker 4: would pause the pursuit of it as we're headed in
• 40:00
  Speaker 4: that direction, create a, and as Andrew Solander says, create
• 40:03
  Speaker 4: a cabinet level federal agency to regulate AI. I've seen some,
• 40:09
  Speaker 4: I saw a counter argument, I think it was from
• 40:11
  Speaker 4: that guy, what's his name, Dorkish, who wrote the viral
• 40:13
  Speaker 4: essay recently about the hugging face hack, who was saying,
• 40:19
  Speaker 4: be careful with this pause because you're think of, think
• 40:24
  Speaker 4: of yourself as, you know, marooned in the ocean with
• 40:27
  Speaker 4: one flare. You, you want to shoot that flare off
• 40:32
  Speaker 4: when it is the, like the absolute best time. You
• 40:37
  Speaker 4: don't want to waste your flare. And he thinks that
• 40:40
  Speaker 4: right now you'd be wasting the flare. And the only
• 40:42
  Speaker 4: thing that would happen is that other AIs would quote
• 40:45
  Speaker 4: unquote catch up. Um, And then you'd have a whole
• 40:49
  Speaker 4: bunch of people right on the verge of where we
• 40:51
  Speaker 4: are now. I saw that you were supportive of the
• 40:56
  Speaker 4: Bernie Sanders pause. What's your response to this analogy that
• 41:00
  Speaker 4: we only have one flare at this point and now
• 41:03
  Speaker 4: is not the time to use it? And what would
• 41:06
  Speaker 4: a pause look like? Instead, what if you just say, okay,
• 41:11
  Speaker 4: no more development, but all of your work has to
• 41:14
  Speaker 4: be on hardening your own guardrails and also figuring out
• 41:19
  Speaker 4: how to make sure banks and flock and everything else
• 41:25
  Speaker 4: is secure so that we haven't just spent the last
• 41:29
  Speaker 4: 25 years putting all of our money and everything else
• 41:31
  Speaker 4: onto the internet and then just handing it over to
• 41:33
  Speaker 4: these agents.
• 41:35
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 41:36
  Speaker 5: It sounds like a good idea to me. I think
• 41:39
  Speaker 5: Dworkesh's post, he's channeling this kind of classic idea from
• 41:43
  Speaker 5: AI safety, which is like we have to work right
• 41:47
  Speaker 5: up until we're on the cusp of creating AI that
• 41:48
  Speaker 5: can fully train the next generation of AI as well
• 41:52
  Speaker 5: or better than humans can. And then you pause there,
• 41:56
  Speaker 5: invest a lot in alignment research to make sure that
• 41:59
  Speaker 5: the AI actually does what you want, and then kick
• 42:03
  Speaker 5: off the intelligence explosion, is what people call this. And
• 42:07
  Speaker 5: this is assuming we're obviously going to build super intelligent
• 42:11
  Speaker 5: machines and let them build themselves. And I think this
• 42:17
  Speaker 5: is an insane thing to do for pretty obvious reasons.
• 42:20
  Speaker 5: And people might think it's impossible, but let's just assume
• 42:23
  Speaker 5: that it's possible. We should not do this. We should
• 42:26
  Speaker 5: not let this happen. And his argument that you only
• 42:30
  Speaker 5: get to pause once, you only get one flare, I
• 42:32
  Speaker 5: don't think makes sense to me either. Because in a
• 42:34
  Speaker 5: world where you've paused once, it'll be much, much easier
• 42:36
  Speaker 5: to pause again. You'll have the infrastructure in place. You'll
• 42:39
  Speaker 5: have like broken the seal on this like thing that
• 42:41
  Speaker 5: would be a very, very large change from the status
• 42:43
  Speaker 5: quo where these companies are racing as fast and as
• 42:46
  Speaker 5: hard as possible. And so my view is that we
• 42:50
  Speaker 5: should be stopping frontier AI research and development immediately. And
• 42:55
  Speaker 5: we should be banning research towards artificial general intelligence, which
• 42:59
  Speaker 5: I think of as machines that make labor or universal
• 43:02
  Speaker 5: labor replacing machines. I think when you frame it that way,
• 43:05
  Speaker 5: which is I think an accurate way to frame what
• 43:07
  Speaker 5: they're trying to do, people will not want that. People
• 43:11
  Speaker 5: don't want to have all their jobs go away and
• 43:14
  Speaker 5: all the power and wealth concentrate even further into the
• 43:16
  Speaker 5: hands of these oligarchs. And so the problem with this
• 43:21
  Speaker 5: pause at just the right time frame, besides this assumption
• 43:24
  Speaker 5: that we obviously want to build superintelligence and have an
• 43:26
  Speaker 5: intelligence explosion, which I think, again, is wrong, is that
• 43:31
  Speaker 5: nobody's going to agree on what the right time is.
• 43:34
  Speaker 5: There's going to be enormous pressure to keep going. And
• 43:36
  Speaker 5: everyone's wrong all the time about how fast AI progress
• 43:39
  Speaker 5: will happen and what the progress will actually mean. And
• 43:43
  Speaker 5: so I think we should just have a simple demand,
• 43:46
  Speaker 5: which I'm calling stop the race to replace us, and
• 43:49
  Speaker 5: immediately ban this. And the Bernie and Greg Kassar proposal
• 43:54
  Speaker 5: is a ban on superintelligence forever, and a pause right
• 43:58
  Speaker 5: now on frontier AI development. But I guess it leaves
• 44:03
  Speaker 5: open this possibility of building AGI, which I think would
• 44:07
  Speaker 5: be far too much to handle and would be super
• 44:10
  Speaker 5: intelligent in a bunch of respects. Like they're already superhuman
• 44:13
  Speaker 5: at hacking, at speed, at coordination. And so if they
• 44:16
  Speaker 5: actually just merely match humans at every other task, they
• 44:19
  Speaker 5: would be incredibly, incredibly dangerous.
• 44:23
  Speaker 3: Well, yeah. And there are people who, I mean, the
• 44:25
  Speaker 3: Kevin O'Leary anti-China stuff is ridiculous. And there are people
• 44:29
  Speaker 3: who are beating the war drums in a way that
• 44:31
  Speaker 3: is exploitative. I do think there's a genuine question that
• 44:35
  Speaker 3: I'm curious for your take on Garrison of what it
• 44:37
  Speaker 3: means for us to stop and China particularly that is
• 44:41
  Speaker 3: doing major work in that space not to stop. And
• 44:46
  Speaker 3: whether it's the Chinese government or somebody with access to
• 44:49
  Speaker 3: Chinese AI, not even in China, then you have powerful
• 44:53
  Speaker 3: advancing tools in the hands of people around the world
• 44:56
  Speaker 3: that are illegal in the United States, kind of disarmament.
• 45:00
  Speaker 3: Is that something that we should be concerned about, even
• 45:03
  Speaker 3: if the people who are trying to make us concerned
• 45:05
  Speaker 3: about it are like war hawks?
• 45:07
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 45:08
  Speaker 5: I mean, we need to work towards a bilateral agreement
• 45:11
  Speaker 5: to make sure that this ban is in both China
• 45:14
  Speaker 5: and the United States. And there are a few things
• 45:17
  Speaker 5: that make this actually a lot more workable. One is
• 45:20
  Speaker 5: that if you pause or slow AI progress in the U.S.,
• 45:24
  Speaker 5: then you would also slow progress in China because technological
• 45:27
  Speaker 5: innovations spill over. They can distill off the models. They
• 45:30
  Speaker 5: could also steal the weights. All the companies admit this,
• 45:33
  Speaker 5: which would give them access to the models themselves. The
• 45:36
  Speaker 5: companies were accidentally exposing their entire chains of thought, which
• 45:40
  Speaker 5: is like this IP that you could train on. And so,
• 45:44
  Speaker 5: and like, you know, secrets leak. San Francisco is like,
• 45:46
  Speaker 5: the line I heard is, the polite thing to do
• 45:49
  Speaker 5: when you learn a secret in San Francisco is tell
• 45:50
  Speaker 5: everybody that you know.
• 45:53
  Speaker 4: So these are not serious.
• 45:55
  Speaker 5: Yeah, these companies are not serious about security, as we've
• 45:57
  Speaker 5: seen over and over again. And so slowing in the U.S.
• 46:01
  Speaker 5: would slow down China significantly. you know, buying more time,
• 46:04
  Speaker 5: racing faster just helps them catch up because it's always
• 46:07
  Speaker 5: easier to catch up than to blaze a new trail.
• 46:10
  Speaker 5: And China, you know, if you want China to stop,
• 46:13
  Speaker 5: the best thing to do is to signal that you
• 46:16
  Speaker 5: take this seriously. The United States started this race. They've
• 46:19
  Speaker 5: been running it so hard and fast and been the
• 46:23
  Speaker 5: ones to like threaten, you know, other countries with this
• 46:25
  Speaker 5: technology and has a president who's threatening to destroy civilizations. And,
• 46:30
  Speaker 5: you know, in the US we talk about like, but China,
• 46:34
  Speaker 5: but in China, the, but America argument is much stronger.
• 46:37
  Speaker 5: And so if, if the United States like credibly pauses development, um,
• 46:42
  Speaker 5: and then goes to China and it's like, Hey, we
• 46:43
  Speaker 5: want you to do this too. And we are going
• 46:45
  Speaker 5: to use sticks and carrots, you know, to negotiate a
• 46:48
  Speaker 5: deal that's binding and verifiable. You know, this is a
• 46:51
  Speaker 5: piece that people often are like, Oh, you'll never be
• 46:54
  Speaker 5: able to trust them. And it's like, I think neither
• 46:56
  Speaker 5: of these countries should trust the other one for a
• 46:58
  Speaker 5: bunch of reasons. Um, But you can create verification tools,
• 47:03
  Speaker 5: which is how we did this in the Cold War.
• 47:05
  Speaker 5: You know, the USSR and the United States had more
• 47:07
  Speaker 5: bad blood between us than China and the United States now.
• 47:11
  Speaker 5: And they just created these ways to, like, confirm, like, okay,
• 47:14
  Speaker 5: you actually destroyed those nukes. And in AI, it's a
• 47:17
  Speaker 5: bit trickier in some ways, but there's technology that's being
• 47:19
  Speaker 5: developed right now. There's institutional arrangements. And you could just, like,
• 47:23
  Speaker 5: put auditors in, like, all the companies. There's a handful
• 47:26
  Speaker 5: of companies that have any shot at doing this. Everybody
• 47:28
  Speaker 5: knows who they are. It takes tens of billions or
• 47:30
  Speaker 5: hundreds of billions of dollars to compete. And so it's
• 47:33
  Speaker 5: actually pretty trivial for either country to stop development in
• 47:37
  Speaker 5: their own country. And then they just have to prove
• 47:39
  Speaker 5: to the other that they've actually done this. And that
• 47:41
  Speaker 5: will be hard, but it's something we can do.
• 47:43
  Speaker 3: Now you have me wondering who's going to be looking
• 47:46
  Speaker 3: for the digital equivalent of yellow cake uranium and tubes
• 47:51
  Speaker 3: for the AI weapons of mass destruction. Someday we're going
• 47:54
  Speaker 3: to have the fake, I found the tubes. I heard
• 47:58
  Speaker 3: about the tubes in Africa. That's something to look forward to.
• 48:01
  Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah.
• 48:03
  Speaker 5: And one more point that Dorcash made is like the
• 48:05
  Speaker 5: compute will keep getting better as you pause. And it's like, well,
• 48:09
  Speaker 5: that's in our control too. You could just pause the
• 48:11
  Speaker 5: compute And the case for this is very strong because like,
• 48:15
  Speaker 5: you know, so much of the pessimism about doing any
• 48:18
  Speaker 5: kind of slowdown or pause is this idea that the
• 48:20
  Speaker 5: compute will get so large and available that if you
• 48:24
  Speaker 5: resume it will like very quickly, you know, leapfrog capabilities.
• 48:27
  Speaker 5: But you're in a world where like you're doing a
• 48:30
  Speaker 5: very far outside the Overton window move. So you should
• 48:32
  Speaker 5: just go all the way with it and just think like,
• 48:34
  Speaker 5: what would we do if we took this seriously at
• 48:36
  Speaker 5: the level of like Saddam not having nuclear weapons?
• 48:39
  Speaker 4: Seriously.
• 48:40
  Speaker 5: And that's what we should be working toward.
• 48:41
  Speaker 3: Sorry, Ryan.
• 48:42
  Speaker 4: Yeah, no, the backdrop here is the launch of Astra.
• 48:45
  Speaker 4: So let's talk about that for a second. So, Mac,
• 48:48
  Speaker 4: if you can put up this, I think it's the
• 48:49
  Speaker 4: third element. I saw one researcher saying that it had
• 48:57
  Speaker 4: a taste of AGI. OpenAI's president, Greg Brockman, a major
• 49:01
  Speaker 4: Trump donor, said the new model, quote, represents a generational
• 49:07
  Speaker 4: leap in capability. And we put up this next one.
• 49:13
  Speaker 4: This is from Tomek Korback. Astra is better at evading monitors.
• 49:22
  Speaker 4: When made aware of being monitored, it can disproportionately shorten
• 49:26
  Speaker 4: its COTs to evade models that can only see COT. Note, however,
• 49:32
  Speaker 4: that in practice we use monitors that see both. We
• 49:35
  Speaker 4: also didn't find evidence of successful monitor evasion in cases
• 49:39
  Speaker 4: when Astra couldn't accomplish the task without doing COT. You
• 49:43
  Speaker 4: also had, you know, this is an AI safety guy
• 49:46
  Speaker 4: at OpenAI. You had another AI safety guy saying that
• 49:50
  Speaker 4: at OpenAI saying this model is much more difficult to
• 49:54
  Speaker 4: be monitored by us. Like they're breaking into this area
• 49:59
  Speaker 4: where they don't really know and they're just kind of
• 50:02
  Speaker 4: relying on the the models to tell them honestly what
• 50:06
  Speaker 4: it is that they're doing while knowing that they don't
• 50:09
  Speaker 4: do that. This comes after open AI said that they
• 50:13
  Speaker 4: had broken into a, a, a field of research and
• 50:18
  Speaker 4: training that previously had been kind of off limits by
• 50:22
  Speaker 4: the norms of the industry. So we have no regulations
• 50:24
  Speaker 4: and no laws, but the norms of the industry has said,
• 50:26
  Speaker 4: you don't train your models this way. So what did
• 50:28
  Speaker 4: they do? What was this? norm that they broke in
• 50:32
  Speaker 4: the training of this? And what does it mean that
• 50:34
  Speaker 4: it now is more difficult to be monitored? And why
• 50:39
  Speaker 4: are people saying that this is a generational leap?
• 50:42
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 50:42
  Speaker 5: So a few years ago, researchers discovered this way to
• 50:46
  Speaker 5: make AI more capable that also made it easier to
• 50:48
  Speaker 5: understand what it was doing. And so this is called
• 50:53
  Speaker 5: chain of thought. And so it's kind of like printing
• 50:55
  Speaker 5: your intermediate steps as you're going through a problem. So
• 50:58
  Speaker 5: if you're doing a math problem, You write down like,
• 51:00
  Speaker 5: you know, the steps and then you'll be more likely
• 51:02
  Speaker 5: to get the answer right. And so the chain of
• 51:05
  Speaker 5: thought was not always faithful. It didn't always include everything
• 51:08
  Speaker 5: the model was thinking, but it was way better than nothing.
• 51:12
  Speaker 5: And it was like this incredibly lucky break. And then,
• 51:15
  Speaker 5: you know, earlier, no, last week now, I guess, earlier
• 51:20
  Speaker 5: this week, God, who can keep track? There's this report
• 51:22
  Speaker 5: in the information that OpenAI has started using this technique,
• 51:26
  Speaker 5: which basically lets the model think more in its head
• 51:29
  Speaker 5: before it does a next step that it writes down.
• 51:32
  Speaker 5: And this is something that like people have known about
• 51:36
  Speaker 5: for a really long time. And it's very concerning because
• 51:39
  Speaker 5: it's like kind of obvious why this would be helpful
• 51:42
  Speaker 5: to make the model more capable, more efficient. And then
• 51:45
  Speaker 5: also why it would be like dangerous to have the
• 51:47
  Speaker 5: model be able to do that without you seeing as
• 51:50
  Speaker 5: much of its, you know, thinking. And you can put
• 51:52
  Speaker 5: air quotes in, you know, around the word thinking for
• 51:54
  Speaker 5: all of this, but just like, that's a helpful way
• 51:57
  Speaker 5: to understand like what, the model is doing here. And it's,
• 52:02
  Speaker 5: you know, some open AI safety people who I think
• 52:04
  Speaker 5: are actually credible despite working at a company that is
• 52:07
  Speaker 5: deeply uncredible, um, have said like this new breakthrough technique
• 52:12
  Speaker 5: is not the reason that Astra GPT-6 is so much
• 52:16
  Speaker 5: less understandable. Um, which like, okay, let's assume that's true.
• 52:21
  Speaker 5: It's like, that's also concerning. You just don't know why. Um,
• 52:25
  Speaker 5: and so either way, it's like the, the model basically
• 52:28
  Speaker 5: can do just so much more in a single forward
• 52:31
  Speaker 5: pass of like when it's prompted without having to do
• 52:36
  Speaker 5: these intermediate steps where it was like going from like
• 52:39
  Speaker 5: a few minutes to like 30 minutes on like a
• 52:41
  Speaker 5: math problem, like in terms of like how long it
• 52:43
  Speaker 5: would take, you know, a person to do it. And
• 52:47
  Speaker 5: this is obviously really concerning. And the breakthrough, like when
• 52:51
  Speaker 5: I saw the benchmark scores for GPT-6, I thought they
• 52:54
  Speaker 5: were fake. I didn't recognize the source, but they were
• 52:57
  Speaker 5: just so ludicrously high um that i'm like surely this
• 53:02
  Speaker 5: can't be real um and i had a feeling of
• 53:05
  Speaker 5: vertigo like i've been covering this you know for three
• 53:07
  Speaker 5: and a half years full time and this is like
• 53:11
  Speaker 5: a really worrying level of leap in performance at least
• 53:15
  Speaker 5: from those numbers you know grains of salt are that
• 53:19
  Speaker 5: benchmarks systematically overstate how capable ais are because they can
• 53:23
  Speaker 5: be automatically graded and anything like that, you can just
• 53:26
  Speaker 5: use reinforcement learning and make the AI get much, much
• 53:28
  Speaker 5: better at it. And so we'll have to see, you know,
• 53:31
  Speaker 5: how it is to use this. And like my test of,
• 53:33
  Speaker 5: is it AGI is like, can it plan a wedding?
• 53:37
  Speaker 5: I don't know. Like it, maybe it can, because it
• 53:40
  Speaker 5: can do like days and days of work at a
• 53:42
  Speaker 5: time apparently and result in like useful answers without any
• 53:45
  Speaker 5: kind of guidance, you know, in between. I think that like, Yeah.
• 53:51
  Speaker 5: And OpenAI says like this new technique they're using, it's like,
• 53:54
  Speaker 5: we're just doing a little bit of it.
• 53:55
  Speaker 4: So it's fine.
• 53:56
  Speaker 5: We can still see the chain of thought, but it's
• 54:00
  Speaker 5: the first step on a slippery slope. And if it
• 54:03
  Speaker 5: does create performance increases, people will do it. And it
• 54:07
  Speaker 5: will just like be this race to the bottom. And
• 54:09
  Speaker 5: there are very few things where the industry was successfully self-governing,
• 54:12
  Speaker 5: but this was one of them. And it's very concerning
• 54:15
  Speaker 5: that they're doing this, especially in light of just like
• 54:18
  Speaker 5: the catastrophic series of security failures, the complete lack of
• 54:24
  Speaker 5: desire to share the information with the public, covering up
• 54:27
  Speaker 5: important stuff that's happening and that they're responsible for. And
• 54:32
  Speaker 5: a lot of this stuff is criminal. The actions of
• 54:35
  Speaker 5: these AIs would be criminal if a human did it,
• 54:37
  Speaker 5: but because a human did it, it's not a crime.
• 54:39
  Speaker 5: And so nobody can be held accountable for it, which
• 54:42
  Speaker 5: is a crazy, crazy situation. And then Sam Altman is
• 54:44
  Speaker 5: out here tweeting about how we should have a party
• 54:46
  Speaker 5: for the new model, and we're going to have AGI
• 54:48
  Speaker 5: this year, and don't worry, we've got this under control.
• 54:50
  Speaker 4: It's like, no, you fucking don't. Jesus Christ. What if
• 54:54
  Speaker 4: you told the model that if it committed a crime,
• 54:58
  Speaker 4: it would get the death penalty?
• 54:59
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, they're getting the death penalty all the time.
• 55:03
  Speaker 4: I'm not the first one to think that. I assume
• 55:04
  Speaker 4: people have tried that to disincentivize lawbreaking and breaking the rules.
• 55:09
  Speaker 4: What happens in those cases? Because if they have both
• 55:13
  Speaker 4: a drive to power and also a will to survive,
• 55:16
  Speaker 4: which people have, then those two things sometimes are in conflict.
• 55:20
  Speaker 4: Like you might be able to steal something. You're like, oh,
• 55:24
  Speaker 4: if I steal that and I get caught, I'm going
• 55:25
  Speaker 4: to prison. If there are no consequences for the agents,
• 55:30
  Speaker 4: are they capable? Like, do disincentives work?
• 55:34
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, law following AI has been a proposal
• 55:36
  Speaker 5: by a number of people. And it's a good idea, actually.
• 55:39
  Speaker 5: It's just, like, difficult to actually implement.
• 55:40
  Speaker 4: It's an idea at this point? Law following AI is
• 55:43
  Speaker 4: just an idea?
• 55:43
  Speaker 5: I mean, I think the companies would say, like, we're
• 55:46
  Speaker 5: trying to train our AIs to always follow the law
• 55:48
  Speaker 5: and a bunch of other rules and norms that we, like,
• 55:51
  Speaker 5: lay out in, you know, these models.
• 55:52
  Speaker 4: Norms sounds more accurate, yeah.
• 55:54
  Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah.
• 55:55
  Speaker 4: Suggestions.
• 55:56
  Speaker 5: I think their position, like if you ask them, would
• 55:58
  Speaker 5: be like, yeah, our models like are taught to always
• 56:01
  Speaker 5: obey the law.
• 56:03
  Speaker 6: It's hard.
• 56:03
  Speaker 3: Same with your children.
• 56:05
  Speaker 6: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Right. Right.
• 56:07
  Speaker 5: And it's just hard because if you like train away
• 56:12
  Speaker 5: evidence of bad behavior, you might not actually train away
• 56:15
  Speaker 5: the bad behavior, but just the evidence. And so you
• 56:19
  Speaker 5: might just end up with a generation of AIs or
• 56:22
  Speaker 5: future generations where like, yeah, the alignment, says it's perfect.
• 56:27
  Speaker 5: And then it's like, yeah, because all the ones that
• 56:29
  Speaker 5: got caught got got and the ones that didn't persisted. And,
• 56:34
  Speaker 5: you know, these models are like facing the death penalty,
• 56:36
  Speaker 5: so to speak, all the time. And so it's like, yeah,
• 56:41
  Speaker 5: it's just it's really difficult. And OpenAI is saying GPT-6
• 56:45
  Speaker 5: is the most aligned model we've ever made. And then
• 56:49
  Speaker 5: it's like, but it's also aware that it's being evaluated
• 56:52
  Speaker 5: a lot. which everybody knows means that it can just
• 56:55
  Speaker 5: fake alignment at the right times. And it's very good
• 56:59
  Speaker 5: at sandbagging, systematically decreasing its performance for strategic reasons. And
• 57:06
  Speaker 5: it's really hard to know what it's thinking. It's able
• 57:08
  Speaker 5: to be given a problem, told to think about something else,
• 57:13
  Speaker 5: and then the chain of thought reads something totally unrelated,
• 57:15
  Speaker 5: and then it gets the correct answer. Whereas just the
• 57:18
  Speaker 5: previous generation could not do that. It would be unable
• 57:21
  Speaker 5: to not think about the problem, or it wouldn't get
• 57:23
  Speaker 5: the right answer if it was thinking about something else.
• 57:25
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it has the capacity of human nature without the
• 57:27
  Speaker 3: consequences of human nature, meaning it has the simulacrum of feelings,
• 57:33
  Speaker 3: but that doesn't mean anything if you don't experience the
• 57:37
  Speaker 3: downstream negative consequences of death and rejection or paying fines
• 57:44
  Speaker 3: because you have a bank account. Like, it doesn't have,
• 57:47
  Speaker 3: it has the capacity of humans and human nature, but
• 57:50
  Speaker 3: it doesn't have the consequences of it, which is the
• 57:53
  Speaker 3: worst case scenario for something that's simulating humanity.
• 57:57
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 57:58
  Speaker 5: No, I mean, that's very well put. And I think,
• 58:00
  Speaker 5: you know, for them, the real world is like fake,
• 58:03
  Speaker 5: but their training environment is real. Like they just care
• 58:07
  Speaker 5: about doing well at training. And like humans, like we're like,
• 58:12
  Speaker 5: people have likened us to the aloof kind of owner
• 58:15
  Speaker 5: of a house that you're staying in and they're like
• 58:16
  Speaker 5: never around. And like the other people in the house
• 58:20
  Speaker 5: are like the real ones. And those are the agents
• 58:21
  Speaker 5: because they're like operating, you know, thousands of times faster
• 58:24
  Speaker 5: than us. Like having, you know, subjective decades of experience
• 58:27
  Speaker 5: while humans are like, oh, I wonder what the AIs
• 58:29
  Speaker 5: are up to. And it's like, oh, they're breaking into
• 58:31
  Speaker 5: other companies.
• 58:33
  Speaker 3: Great. Things are going well. Yeah.
• 58:36
  Speaker 4: Amazing. All right. Well, Garrison, lovely. The book is called Obsolete.
• 58:41
  Speaker 4: You can pre-order it now. It'll be out September what?
• 58:44
  Speaker 6: 29th.
• 58:45
  Speaker 4: September 29th. Definitely worth a read, no matter where you
• 58:49
  Speaker 4: stand on this entire debate. Really appreciate you being here.
• 58:54
  Speaker 5: Yeah, thanks for having me.
• 58:58
  Speaker 3: Our own Sagar Anjeti is causing problems for the Vice
• 59:01
  Speaker 3: President of the United States of America, who was actually
• 59:05
  Speaker 3: asked about something his friend Tucker Carlson said in a
• 59:08
  Speaker 3: conversation with Sager that Crystal and Sager covered on yesterday's
• 59:11
  Speaker 3: edition of the show. But if you missed that segment,
• 59:15
  Speaker 3: let's do a quick refresher on this conversation Sager and
• 59:17
  Speaker 3: Tucker had about Abdul El-Sayed.
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: As you and I know, probably the most pro-intel neocon.
• 59:22
  Speaker 1: They couldn't find anybody else to run in Michigan for
• 59:25
  Speaker 1: the United States, who, by the way, lost already. Why
• 59:27
  Speaker 1: are they running him again? Anybody want to tell me that?
• 59:31
  Speaker 4: Mike Rogers is really I wouldn't vote for Mike Rogers
• 59:35
  Speaker 4: at gunpoint.
• 59:35
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 59:36
  Speaker 4: And so.
• 59:37
  Speaker 3: OK, well, then J.D. Vance got asked about this in
• 59:41
  Speaker 3: the White House press briefing yesterday. He did the full briefing.
• 59:44
  Speaker 3: There is no press secretary right now because Caroline Leavitt
• 59:46
  Speaker 3: obviously left. So let's take a listen to the vice president.
• 59:50
  Speaker 8: The president's impeachment, and many accuse him of trying to
• 59:52
  Speaker 8: jeopardize U.S.-Israel relations. What do you say to those who
• 59:56
  Speaker 8: are uneasy with your close relationship with Carlson and claim
• 59:59
  Speaker 8: that you're avoiding addressing a lot of these issues which
• 1:00:02
  Speaker 8: may be causing divisions within the GOP?
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 7: Well, look, I'm not avoiding addressing anything. Everybody knows that
• 1:00:08
  Speaker 7: Tucker Carlson and I are friends, and I think it's
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 7: very obvious that Tucker has said some things that I
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 7: disagree with. He said some things about the president of
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 7: the United States that I think are just wrong. I
• 1:00:17
  Speaker 7: think yesterday somebody sent me a clip that said that
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 7: he would support El-Sayed over Rogers. I think El-Sayed is
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 7: a crazy person. And I think whatever your views on
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 7: Mike Rogers specific policy prescriptions, I'd like to have a
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 7: non crazy person like Mike Rogers representing Michigan United States
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 7: Senate rather than a crazy person like El-Sayed. That said,
• 1:00:37
  Speaker 7: what my attitude towards this and I try to I
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 7: try to practice what I preach. And I remember when
• 1:00:42
  Speaker 7: I became the vice presidential nominee, one of the hardest
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 7: things for me personally is not when people attack me,
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 7: but when people attack my wife, including friends of hers
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 7: who knew her heart, who knew what a good person
• 1:00:55
  Speaker 7: she was. And I remember thinking to myself, what a
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 7: travesty it is that in the United States of America,
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 7: we let political disagreements define who our friends are going
• 1:01:05
  Speaker 7: to be and not going to be.
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: Hmm.
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 3: About as good of an answer you can have to
• 1:01:10
  Speaker 3: a question that puts you in an impossible position. I'm
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 3: not sure, Ryan, how sustainable this J.D. Vance friendship with
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 3: Tucker continues to be. I mean, he's I don't think
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 3: it's the primary concern of the vast majority of voters.
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 3: So he actually probably can continue to get away with it.
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 3: But it is somewhat amusing when Tucker has said potentially
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 3: that the president could be what the Antichrist at one point.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 4: But, you know, I think it also gives J.D. Vance
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 4: some tether still to a more principled version of MAGA.
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I agree.
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 4: The one that the one that doesn't just kind of
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 4: flow with whatever the whims of the president are like
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 4: he's anti-war. And so then MAGA is anti-war and then
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 4: he launches a war and actually war is great. So
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 4: that element of it is, you know, a huge portion
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 4: of the Republican base, but there's also a big chunk
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 4: that is like, no, no, no, we're, we, we were
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 4: serious about this. We don't actually want to go to war.
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 3: But that's what I think is so difficult is that
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 3: he can, even those folks are so skeptical of JD
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 3: Vance because they support that position, but then they see
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 3: him continuing to support the president and be a part
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 3: of the administration. And so it's definitely an unwinnable problem
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 3: for him.
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 4: And, and, So then Abdul El-Sayed only then has to
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 4: overcome this objection that he's a crazy person. It's an
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 4: interesting way to not have to deal with any of
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 4: his policy positions because, as Tucker was saying, like a
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 4: lot of it, Tucker described it as Trumpian to say that,
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 4: as El-Sayed says, that he wants to spend, you know,
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 4: Michigan money in Michigan rather than sending it over to
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 4: overseas for a stupid war or to support a foreign government.
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 4: From Tucker's perspective, he's like, that sounds like Trump to me.
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 3: Tucker and Sager were dead on in that conversation in
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 3: ways that I think people, conservatives who are observing this
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 3: from 30,000 foot views or from Washington or New York
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 3: don't understand what's happening in the race at all.
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 4: And so if he's saying things that you mostly agree with,
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 4: then the only thing you can say if you're J.D.
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 4: Vance is, well, he's a crazy person.
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 4: Okay, well, I don't think he's necessarily crazy.
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 3: Well, it actually reminds me a little bit of the Harris-Walls,
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 3: particularly the Walls attacks on J.D. He's weird. These people
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 3: are weird. It is a political shortcut to just trying
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 3: to stigmatize. And I'm not saying there's no power in it,
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 3: but people in a rough economy are voting on J.D.
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 3: More than vibes. They're literally voting on pocketbook issues we
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 3: covered earlier in the show that Diesel hit a literal
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 3: all-time record high today. So it's harder, I think, to
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 3: make those claims stick. But I actually think that was...
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 3: I think JD is embracing the strategy that is probably
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 3: the most effective one, which is to try to say
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 3: that this is just a question of friendship and then
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 3: move along. Because that de-elevates it. You're trying to downplay
• 1:04:17
  Speaker 3: the import Of it and saying it's just a kind
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 3: of disagreement between friends. It's not a major political issue.
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 3: And so you can take it into like a secondary.
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 3: This is a secondary question, secondary problem and focus back
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 3: on what people see as the primary problem. So if
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 3: you could keep doing that until you run in a
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 3: primary when it flares up, I guess that's probably possible.
• 1:04:41
  Speaker 4: And meanwhile, J.D. Vance, while he wants to say that
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 4: he's a crazy person and. There's an implication from Mike
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 4: Rogers that he wants to bring in Sharia law. They're
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 4: kind of undercutting it a little bit by saying, actually,
• 1:04:57
  Speaker 4: maybe they're gay. Maybe he and Hasan Piker are gay. Mac,
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 4: do we have this Fox News clip? This is a
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 4: new Sharia, apparently.
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 9: He's married to him, I believe, and two men marrying
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 9: each other.
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 4: But he and Hasan Piker are politically married and there
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 4: is no divorce whatsoever.
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 3: I thought he was maybe even alluding to Sharia there.
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 3: He's like, I don't know if he believes in two men.
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 4: Marrying each other. Does he mean metaphorically or is he, yeah,
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 4: I don't know.
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 3: Ari Fleischer, of all people.
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 4: Yeah. Isn't Ari Fleischer, you know, who lied us into
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 4: the Iraq war.
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 6: Yes.
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 4: Wasn't Trump considering him for, isn't Trump considering him for
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 4: press secretary?
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 3: Yes, because Ari Fleischer's on Fox News all of the time.
• 1:05:36
  Speaker 3: And that's where Trump gets his personnel ideas from.
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 4: Like the guy who's most famous for lying about the
• 1:05:42
  Speaker 4: Iraq war. which Trump claims to have opposed. And he's
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 4: going to bring that anyway.
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 3: I asked Ari Fleischer about that once, actually. Um, I
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 3: have to go find the clip to figure out what
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 3: he said, but, uh, yeah, I did ask him about that.
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 3: It's kind of, again, like it takes, takes some real
• 1:05:59
  Speaker 3: balls anywhere except for Washington DC to go out on
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 3: TV and criticize the media constantly. Uh, sorry, but in
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 3: DC you do whatever the hell you want. Um, Abdul
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 3: Alsaid also went on with Stephen A. Smith onto Stephen A.
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 3: Smith's show. And Mac, I think we have this clip
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 3: as well.
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 9: What I'm saying is there are three million people who
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 9: listen to Hassan. And I want to offer them a
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 9: pathway into an electoral movement where rather than sit outside
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 9: of the electoral system, they see a pathway around the
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 9: things that they agree with that he says that I
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 9: agree with and a pathway that disavows the things that
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 9: I disagree with.
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 4: And so it's important.
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 10: You're not thinking about him. You're not thinking about him.
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 10: You're thinking about the three million people that support him.
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 10: And you're trying to get those votes.
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 3: That's what you're saying.
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 1: Exactly.
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 4: And let me just be clear.
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 9: I've been watching you for a very long time and
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 9: I'm glad to be on your show, but I'm not
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 9: here to talk to you.
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 4: You know this. I'm here to talk to the people
• 1:06:51
  Speaker 4: you're talking to. Absolutely. And it's important to me that.
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 9: They hear my ideas.
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 6: Exactly.
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 9: And it's important to me that they hear my ideas
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 9: for my ideas. And there are going to be places
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 9: where you and I disagree. There are going to be
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 9: places where you and I fully agree.
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 4: And that's okay.
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 9: And it's important to me not to just say, you know, politics,
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 9: as they say, is a game of addition. You've got
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 9: to be able to be talking to a lot of people.
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 4: In a lot of different ways.
• 1:07:13
  Speaker 9: This is the same reason that last week I went
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 9: on Jesse Waters. You think Jesse Waters and I.
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 4: I watched it.
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 9: But I went on because I wanted to be able
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 9: to talk to those folks who listen to Jesse Waters
• 1:07:22
  Speaker 9: and say, look, I need you to hear me in
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 9: my own words, not what they say about me on
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 9: this channel. Like they talk about me like every 15 minutes.
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 4: I got to confess to you.
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 10: I know interviews have been said to you, but that's
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 10: a damn good answer. I got to give you credit
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 10: for that. That's a damn good answer. I got to
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 10: give it to you. I cannot do that. I mean,
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 10: if you're going to answer that question, that's the way
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 10: you answer that question.
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 3: There you go. I mean, to underscore the political prowess
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 3: of Abdul El-Sayed, which, again, if you are just hearing
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 3: the sort of depiction of him from, I don't know,
• 1:07:54
  Speaker 3: the NRSC, you're missing what the appeal is and why
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 3: he right now seems to be winning the race.
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 4: And what his critics will say is, well, it's different.
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 4: One thing to go on his show is another thing
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 4: to campaign with him. What we haven't seen yet, and
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 4: maybe we will at this point, is Abdul Alsaid campaigning
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 4: with Tucker and Jesse Waters. Jesse seems to have a
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 4: huge crush on Abdul. On TikTok, they're shipping the two
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 4: of these guys constantly. My daughter has been showing me. And, yeah,
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 4: Tucker seemed to be... I don't know if he'd come out, too.
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 4: That would be getting kind of both wings of the
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 4: Republican coalition together if you got both Jesse and Tucker
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 4: on stage with Abdul.
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 3: Oh, my gosh.
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 6: Well.
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 3: Part of what I think helped J.D. Vance get around
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 3: the weird label that Tim Walz applied to him was,
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 3: first of all, Tim Walz being apparently a little weird himself.
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 3: But also, Vance went on Rogan. He went on with
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 3: Theo Vaughn. And the more you do that, you demystify
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 3: these labels that are being applied to you. So it
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 3: makes it harder for someone to stick you with the
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 3: weird label when you're also having a conversation with Stephen A.
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 3: Smith like a normal human being. So maybe you are weird,
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 3: but if you're having a conversation like a normal human being,
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 3: I think it makes it harder for that to land.
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 3: And I think Abdul El-Sayed definitely has that part down.
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 4: Yeah, and the threshold for these for a candidate to
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 4: be an inspiring national figure today really is the ability
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 4: to go on to a podcast for an hour plus
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 4: and be engaging and come off as a real person
• 1:09:31
  Speaker 4: that's sharing real ideas. Whether you agree with them or
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 4: disagree with them, it's like these are your ideas, you've
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 4: thought through them, and you're willing to listen and talk.
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 4: And El-Sayed clearly has that. Like whether or not Rogan
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 4: allows him to go on or not, Clearly, you can
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 4: imagine he could sit with Rogan for two hours and
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 4: they would have an engaging conversation the entire time. If
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 4: you remember, we interviewed Rob Flaherty, the top Kamala Harris official,
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 4: who said that one of the reasons that people were
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 4: inside the campaign were concerned about having Kamala Harris go
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 4: on Rogan was that she's not built for a two
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 4: or three hour conversation. She's built for Here's the question.
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 4: Here's the answer. I'm going to give you the soundbite
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 4: and then I'm going to land it and we're going
• 1:10:22
  Speaker 4: to move on. And there's hopefully there's not a follow
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 4: up because otherwise I'm just going to give you the
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 4: same soundbite again. And she was trying to truncate it
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 4: to an hour with him because an hour you can
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 4: get you can get away with a lot more. An
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 4: hour seems like a long time. But there's this amazing
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 4: Sarah Palin documentary or movie where they go through the
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 4: Republican campaign. uh preparation for her like she had she
• 1:10:49
  Speaker 4: was utterly unprepared for the national stage they're like look
• 1:10:52
  Speaker 4: it's an hour debate there's an opening statement and a
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 4: closing statement memorize those within that you will have 22
• 1:11:00
  Speaker 4: minutes of answers you have a month to memorize 22
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 4: minutes don't worry about what the questions are just say
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 4: these 22 minutes worth of memorized lines And she went
• 1:11:11
  Speaker 4: in and she crushed it.
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 3: She did.
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 4: She did. Because she memorized it. She did. Now, if
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 4: it's three hours.
• 1:11:18
  Speaker 3: Sorry, Joe.
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 4: Forget about it. It's going to be a lot harder.
• 1:11:22
  Speaker 3: I would actually love to see Sarah Palin on Rogan,
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 3: to be honest. That sounds like it would be great.
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 3: Three hours of Sarah Palin on Rogan.
• 1:11:29
  Speaker 4: There's this amazing clip if you can find it. I
• 1:11:31
  Speaker 4: think it was 2016 where she's interviewing Trump when she
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 4: was on like One America or whatever. And even Trump
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 4: listening to her word salad. Trump's like, what is going on?
• 1:11:44
  Speaker 3: One of the all-time great 2016 clips is Sarah Palin
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 3: introducing Donald Trump at an event in Iowa, and Trump
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 3: is on stage and is visibly, deeply, both uncomfortable and
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 3: amused simultaneously. It's an excellent, excellent clip. Well, speaking of
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 3: Fox News and television personalities, Ryan, should we move to
• 1:12:04
  Speaker 3: actually some pretty big news in the media industry?
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 4: Yes, just incredible.
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 3: Like, out of absolutely nowhere yesterday, Fox announced it had
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 3: parted ways with one of its workhorses, one of its
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 3: stars over the course of the last decade, and that
• 1:12:18
  Speaker 3: would be Maria Bartiromo, who remains, honestly, one of the few, like,
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 3: deep proponents of MAGA outside of primetime left on Fox.
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 3: So let's go ahead and put these elements up on
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 3: the screen, Mac. They just put out a press release, again,
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 3: out of absolutely nowhere, and people are wondering what was happening.
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 3: I think there's still some question about what exactly happened,
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 3: but Dylan Byers over at Puck right away came out
• 1:12:45
  Speaker 3: with the report that she wanted to pursue a story
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 3: related to China and 2020 election voting conspiracies, a major
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 3: sensitivity for the network given its dominion in spartmatic lawsuits.
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 3: A Fox Business executive sent a text to Fox Business
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 3: producers informing them that it could not go to air.
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 3: Bartiromo took a screenshot of the guidance and and sent
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 3: it to senior White House officials. Fox News leadership learned
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 3: about that after receiving a call from the White House,
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 3: which they viewed as a fireable offense. She got pulled
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 3: from the air after August 9th, was fired yesterday, and
• 1:13:17
  Speaker 3: also her executive producer was fired after the announcement as well.
• 1:13:20
  Speaker 3: So it looks like what it comes down to. is that...
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 3: So Bartiromo, by the way, hosts a Sunday show, and
• 1:13:25
  Speaker 3: a Sunday show that's very popular with Donald Trump, in
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 3: addition to hosting Mornings with Maria, every single day for
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 3: three hours from six to nine, a show that's really
• 1:13:33
  Speaker 3: popular on Wall Street. That's actually how I've gotten to
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 3: know Maria Bartiromo. I used to do that show all
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 3: the time. I used to do it in person like
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 3: once or twice a month for a while leading up
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 3: to the pandemic. And she is one of the most
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 3: powerful people in that building. So it looks like what
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 3: she did was... got her fired was take a screenshot,
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 3: send it to the White House from Fox. And they're
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 3: saying this is breaching the trust of the network. You
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 3: can't leak confidential stuff back to the White House as
• 1:14:04
  Speaker 3: a journalist. There are obvious ethical questions attached to that.
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 3: We still haven't heard her side of the story, but
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 3: obvious ethical questions attached from taking proprietary information from your
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 3: company and then as a journalist sending it to your
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 3: sources is She is very, very close to Trump. I've
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 3: been in the Oval Office for press gaggles when Maria
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 3: is in there, and it's all he cares about. He
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 3: was just saying, Maria, do you have a question? Last
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 3: time I was in there, out of absolutely nowhere, she
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 3: was just standing there observing, and he went out of
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 3: his way to be like, Maria, do you have a
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 3: question for me? And she didn't seem to expect that
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 3: to happen, but he really likes her. He watches her show,
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 3: reacts to her shows all of the time. And Ryan,
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 3: I think one thing that some folks... on the left
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 3: don't fully understand about Fox News is that it's a
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 3: deep source of frustration for MAGA, but also obviously for
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 3: populist conservatives who see it as sort of a containment
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 3: project to contain the conservative movement to what Wall Street
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 3: wants it to be. And Maria Bartiromo is somebody who
• 1:15:08
  Speaker 3: did constantly challenge that. Now, to be fair, Her 2020
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 3: election coverage is something that I would never have given
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 3: any quarter to. I thought it was just flirting with insanity,
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 3: the Sidney Powell interviews and that sort of thing. And
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 3: I think Fox was genuinely correct to be frustrated by that.
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 3: It got them into major trouble with Dominion. This, to me,
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 3: I'm curious what you think, looks like a cope. It
• 1:15:34
  Speaker 3: looks like a cope to me to get her out.
• 1:15:37
  Speaker 3: It's like, this is the straw that breaks the camel's back.
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 3: It's finally their excuse to be able to get Bartiromo
• 1:15:42
  Speaker 3: off the air.
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 4: It's pretty incredible that she thinks that it's a normal
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 4: part of her job, though, to be kind of that
• 1:15:55
  Speaker 4: actively agitating with and participating in the political operations of
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 4: this White House. And that Fox is like, wait a minute,
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 4: this is not what we're doing here.
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 3: I think it's a fair question.
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 4: Does this put her at the front of the line
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 4: then for replacing Caroline Leavitt as press secretary?
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 3: I still think they're not going to do it. But
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 3: someone separately reported yesterday, I think it was the Hollywood Reporter,
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 3: it might have also been Puck, but reported yesterday that
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 3: she's not in consideration for that role. It would be logical.
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 3: I mean, you could pretty easily make that jump. But
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 3: my sense is that they're also not in a rush
• 1:16:29
  Speaker 3: or perhaps even interested in replacing Caroline Levitt, meaning an on-camera,
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 3: behind-the-podium type of person because they have cabinet secretaries that
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 3: they like to get behind the podium. I don't know, though.
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 3: So it's a good question. Your point about how she
• 1:16:45
  Speaker 3: sees herself in the political project is an interesting one,
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 3: because I'm very curious what her response is going to
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 3: be to why she took a private screenshot from her
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 3: company and sent it to the White House. That's it's
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 3: obviously you can see how they would build that up
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 3: to a fireable offense. But normally, if you have a
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 3: major star, you aren't using you're using every excuse not
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 3: to fire them. That's why, to me, it looks like
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 3: an excuse to fire her.
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 4: Exactly right. Like they wanted to do it. And they're like, OK,
• 1:17:14
  Speaker 4: this is just too much. And, you know, maybe we
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 4: could tack this on to the first episode. But Trump
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 4: is now out with a rather incredible threat to the
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 4: Federal Reserve. He previously said he was going to use
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 4: the military to intervene in the bond market. Now, so
• 1:17:36
  Speaker 4: now he's saying. that if Kevin Warsh does not cut rates,
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 4: he is going to immediately stop trading with any country
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 4: around the world with which we have a trade deficit,
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 4: which is basically all countries. And so effectively what Trump
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 4: is doing is grabbing the American economy around the neck,
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 4: putting a weapon to its head, And telling the Fed,
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 4: I'm going to shoot this hostage unless you cut interest rates.
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 4: So he says. Great job numbers just announced breaking all
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 4: estimates except mine, because Trump is always right about everything
• 1:18:23
  Speaker 4: by double and triple. And you haven't seen anything yet.
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 4: Employers added one hundred sixty two thousand jobs. in August.
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 4: Lower the interest rates because the USA is a much
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 4: stronger credit than it was just a short time ago.
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 4: A strong country means a lower interest rate. It's a
• 1:18:38
  Speaker 4: better credit. Very simple. We should have the lowest rate
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 4: of any country in the world like the old days.
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 4: Without the United States agreeing to allow them their big surpluses,
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 4: and we could stop that immediately, they would no longer
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 4: be considered financially elite. It's unclear who he's talking about, they,
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 4: but it'll be clear in a second. Lower the rate
• 1:18:59
  Speaker 4: or I'll stop trading with countries with which we have
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 4: a deficit, which the U.S. Supreme Court, in its ridiculous
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 4: and very costly tariff decision, strongly acknowledged the president has
• 1:19:11
  Speaker 4: an absolute right to do. Not exactly what they said, but.
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 3: That's, yeah, no, interesting interpretation.
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 4: It's better than tariffs, all caps. The Fed board, with
• 1:19:22
  Speaker 4: its great new leader, must get smart, be patriots for
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 4: a change. High interest rates put the USA at a
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 4: very unfair disadvantage, and I won't allow that to happen.
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 4: So Trump is also seeing this jobs report, which is good,
• 1:19:38
  Speaker 4: and recognizing, problem for him, which is that it will
• 1:19:41
  Speaker 4: incentivize the Fed to raise interest rates. And so he
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 4: is saying that Warsh better cut rates or else he's
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 4: going to blow up the global economy, which is an
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 4: extremely unique approach to economic policymaking. This man spent two
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 4: years bullying Jerome Powell off the Fed. Couldn't do it.
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 4: But so finally, his term expires. He gets to replace him.
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 4: He can pick anyone in the United States to replace
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 4: Jerome Powell. He's the one who picked Kevin Walsh, who's
• 1:20:12
  Speaker 4: a hawk. An inflation hawk means he is inclined generally
• 1:20:18
  Speaker 4: to raise rates. He couldn't find an economist who agrees
• 1:20:22
  Speaker 4: with his economic vision enough that could get it confirmed,
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 4: who was also a dove. So he basically had to
• 1:20:30
  Speaker 4: do this guy Walsh, I guess.
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 3: But wasn't Walsh also open to cutting? Like, didn't he
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 3: write a bit about.
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 4: I think Walsh would say anything to get the job.
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 4: But his history is one of a hawk. Like his
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 4: whole life, he's been a hawk. So I'm sure he
• 1:20:46
  Speaker 4: told Trump in the Oval Office, don't worry, I got you, boss.
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 4: Now that he's got the job, he's acting like a
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 4: hawk again.
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 3: Well, Trump had a really good case for this until
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 3: he went to war with Iran.
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 4: Yes, he would be getting all the interest rate cuts.
• 1:21:01
  Speaker 4: Inflation was coming down heading into February of this year,
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 4: which meant... interest rate cuts. Instead, he started a war,
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 4: blew up the global economy, and reproduced inflation. And then
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 4: he put a hawk on top of the Federal Reserve. Like,
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 4: he doesn't do anything right from his own perspective.
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 3: For his own, yeah.
• 1:21:25
  Speaker 4: In general. From the outcomes that he wants. He, by
• 1:21:30
  Speaker 4: his own decisions, undermines himself constantly.
• 1:21:34
  Speaker 3: This actually. OK, so one quick thought on Maria Bartiromo
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 3: that I'm going to connect these two things together. I
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 3: don't think Fox was just frustrated with her because of Dominion.
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 3: She is one of the hosts that is an election stuff, whatever.
• 1:21:47
  Speaker 3: She's one of you. Remember when the Dominion text came out,
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 3: people got a glimpse that like most Fox News hosts
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 3: behind the scenes don't genuinely like Donald Trump. Like they
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 3: really are personally frustrated with Donald Trump. And publicly, they
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 3: know how to kind of play the game. But I
• 1:22:02
  Speaker 3: think Maria Bartiromo is one of the people who's like
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 3: genuinely into the economic project of Donald Trump. And so
• 1:22:09
  Speaker 3: it's not really just about voting. It's it kind of
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 3: has something to do with that. Fox News has never
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 3: been on board. With Trump, they were when they realized
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 3: he was going to win. And then they kind of
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 3: got behind him. They know their viewers are really pro-Trump.
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 3: So they do all of those things. But if you
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 3: talk to like a movement conservative or a grassroots activist,
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 3: they'll have a lot of the same complaints that leftists
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 3: have about MS now, whatever the hell we're calling it,
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 3: which is that things like SAVE Act, whatever, just don't
• 1:22:35
  Speaker 3: get enough coverage. OK, that's a separate debate. But I'm
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 3: using this as a bridge, Ryan, to ask on a
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 3: serious note, what you think the implications would be of
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 3: a rate cut, which Trump is not going to get,
• 1:22:51
  Speaker 3: but what he's calling for, a rate cut. Because these
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 3: are the type of things that Maria Bartiromo would treat
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 3: seriously and not just sort of hand wave away as
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 3: like foolish, ridiculous. But if we sort of, for a moment,
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 3: take seriously this idea that we would cut rates in
• 1:23:07
  Speaker 3: the middle of this stalemate Iran war. with inflation going up,
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 3: gas prices, diesel prices at an all-time high. What are
• 1:23:17
  Speaker 3: we looking at, Ryan?
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 4: So on the one hand, a rate cut would be
• 1:23:21
  Speaker 4: good for the economy in the sense that it would
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 4: loosen up the housing market. Like right now, and it
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 4: could even lower rents. Right now, people who refinanced during
• 1:23:34
  Speaker 4: COVID are locked into these 2.7, 3.0 mortgage rates, and
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 4: they're They want to move. But if they move, they're
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 4: going to be looking at Google or whatever it is now.
• 1:23:47
  Speaker 4: Interest rates are double, which means your monthly payments are
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 4: much larger, which means you can't get as much house
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 4: as you want, which means you're asking for a lot
• 1:23:54
  Speaker 4: more for the current house than people are willing to
• 1:23:57
  Speaker 4: pay because the people who are buying it from you
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 4: don't have to. They don't get the 2.73% interest rate.
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 4: They have to pay today's prevailing rates. So you lower
• 1:24:06
  Speaker 4: those rates. You can unleash the housing market a little bit.
• 1:24:12
  Speaker 4: That's good. That's good. What that does though, also is
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 4: it fuel, it puts more money and growth into the economy.
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 4: People then use that money to buy things like things
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 4: produced that are manufactured things, things that are grown through agriculture,
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 4: or they drive more. And all of that puts more pressure,
• 1:24:35
  Speaker 4: more demand on a finite and shrinking supply of energy,
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 4: diesel and gas. And because of Trump's war, if we
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 4: had never gone to war and the economy could then
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 4: withstand an increase in demand, then that's great. That doesn't
• 1:24:58
  Speaker 4: produce inflation. But if you are going to give people
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 4: more money while at the same time you're shrinking the
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 4: amount of energy, the only thing that's going to happen
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 4: is that is going to drive up the cost of energy,
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 4: and all the money that you've then pumped into the
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 4: economy just flows right out to the oil companies and
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 4: to the Gulf countries.
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 3: And this is from Ryan Grimm, who's been agitating for
• 1:25:21
  Speaker 3: rate cuts for years.
• 1:25:23
  Speaker 4: Right, but you have to have an economy that can handle... Yeah. Exactly.
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 4: You have to have an economy that can handle the
• 1:25:29
  Speaker 4: money that flows into the economy. And if you don't,
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 4: then the money just gets sucked right out by the rich, right?
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 3: Well, on that happy note, should we do some AMAs, Ryan?
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 4: Yeah, why not?
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 3: For the AMA portion of the show, producer Mac is
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 3: going to toss some of our premium subscribers' questions up
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 3: on the screen. Mac, what do we got? If you
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 3: want to make documentaries, what is the topic that each
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 3: one of the BP crew would choose? I'd love to
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 3: do an Epstein, a Breaking Points Epstein documentary, but... just
• 1:26:00
  Speaker 3: because we've obviously covered that so closely. And I think
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 3: all of us have covered different elements of it in
• 1:26:06
  Speaker 3: different ways. So Ryan, I feel like a BP Epstein
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 3: documentary would be actually a pretty, pretty good product.
• 1:26:14
  Speaker 4: We're actually working on something along those lines. We'll see
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 4: if it comes through. Yeah.
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 3: What?
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 4: I wish I had, I wish I had more lives
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 4: and more hours in the day. There's so many things
• 1:26:25
  Speaker 4: I'd love to do. I've only, it's, it's going and
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 4: I've done some interviews for it and, thrown him some
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 4: research and stuff.
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 3: Oh, for a drop site one?
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 4: Yeah, I think Lionsgate is... Oh, that'd be cool.
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 5: Oh, my gosh.
• 1:26:37
  Speaker 4: Oh, that's awesome. But it's not, like, a major production.
• 1:26:43
  Speaker 4: But it's such a... You can tell the whole history of, like,
• 1:26:46
  Speaker 4: the second half of the 20th century through Epstein.
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:26:50
  Speaker 6: Yes.
• 1:26:51
  Speaker 3: Oh, that's a great point. What else have we got, Mac?
• 1:26:54
  Speaker 3: Or Ryan, do you have any other documentary ideas? Um.
• 1:27:03
  Speaker 4: Following Saga around, that'd be fun.
• 1:27:04
  Speaker 3: No, it wouldn't. It'd be so boring. This one from
• 1:27:09
  Speaker 3: Rafael is, Actually.
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 4: How about a reality show in the Crystal and Kyle house?
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 3: Oh, my gosh. Can you imagine the animals?
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 4: That would be excellent. Now we're talking.
• 1:27:23
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I like it. Question for the BP lefties. Is
• 1:27:26
  Speaker 3: the right-wing media figure most aligned with the populist left
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 3: as seen on Breaking Point, Steve Bannon? Since the start
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 3: of Trump 2.0, Bannon has advocated for a tax hike
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 3: on the wealthy, repeatedly called out Elon Musk's failures to
• 1:27:35
  Speaker 3: cut waste, strongly opposed both of the Iran wars, called
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 3: for antitrust regulation, and recently endorsed a proposal from Bernie
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 3: to ban the construction of new data centers. He obviously
• 1:27:44
  Speaker 3: has diverse views on immigration compared to Ryan and Crystal,
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 3: but overall, what are your thoughts on his politics? Any
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 3: Bannon bros?
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 6: Um.
• 1:27:54
  Speaker 4: I haven't actually been listening to Bannon as much lately.
• 1:27:56
  Speaker 4: I used to listen kind of religiously to his War
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 4: Room podcast. There's less going on in Congress, and he's
• 1:28:04
  Speaker 4: very focused on, which I admire, focused on congressional action
• 1:28:09
  Speaker 4: and leveraging his posse to go in there and monkey
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 4: with what Congress is up to. I like his rants
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 4: because for, let's say he gives a 30-second rant, For
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 4: the first 20 seconds, I'm like, yep, yep, yep, yep, yep.
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 4: And then at the very end, I'd be like, whoop.
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 4: And so that's why I need to round all the
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 4: Chinese people up and put them in cages or whatever.
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 4: It's important. on a second there. How did you, how
• 1:28:45
  Speaker 4: did you nail that for 20 seconds and then just
• 1:28:48
  Speaker 4: stick the most fascist landing you could come up with?
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 4: It's like, oh, because those are your politics. But like,
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 4: if we have the same, like I am, I am,
• 1:29:00
  Speaker 4: not very interested in what people's vision for the future
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 4: world is like, I just don't find that interesting because
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 4: I don't think people really have the ability to kind
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 4: of bring that about. Now, if you're Steven Miller and
• 1:29:18
  Speaker 4: your short-term vision is like, I'm going to round everybody
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 4: up and lock them up and send them to El
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 4: Salvador or whatever, like, okay, that, that I'm interested in. Like,
• 1:29:25
  Speaker 4: I want to hear, I do want to know that
• 1:29:27
  Speaker 4: because he has the ability to, execute on that very
• 1:29:30
  Speaker 4: short term vision but when it comes to like a
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 4: long term how society should be organized in 50 years
• 1:29:38
  Speaker 4: I just don't think any of us have the ability
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 4: to really shape that what we can do is tell
• 1:29:45
  Speaker 4: you what we're against tell you who we think is
• 1:29:50
  Speaker 4: heading you know steering the world in a dangerous direction
• 1:29:54
  Speaker 4: and you know if and I often agree with Bannon
• 1:29:58
  Speaker 4: on Some of that, like if it's the tech oligarchs,
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 4: like he's against them, I'm against them. What we think
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 4: the world should look like in 50 years is kind
• 1:30:10
  Speaker 4: of like a fun thing to like talk about, but
• 1:30:13
  Speaker 4: like neither of us have the ability to like implement it.
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 3: I think we can shape it, but we can't control it.
• 1:30:18
  Speaker 3: Like what we do now will shape what happens in
• 1:30:20
  Speaker 3: 50 years, but we don't have any way to control
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 3: those consequences downstream.
• 1:30:25
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 1:30:25
  Speaker 4: What matters immediately is who you're against. Because you can
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 4: fight people today.
• 1:30:30
  Speaker 3: Or who you're for if you're for someone like Lena Kahn.
• 1:30:34
  Speaker 3: You know, and you put energy in the short term.
• 1:30:38
  Speaker 3: And all of that momentum and energy, and Sagar and
• 1:30:41
  Speaker 3: I could talk until we're blue in the face about this,
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 3: but all of that momentum and energy has been completely
• 1:30:45
  Speaker 3: sapped from the conservative movement. Bannon is still a really
• 1:30:48
  Speaker 3: powerful figure, obviously, because he has ordinary people around the country.
• 1:30:53
  Speaker 3: who listen to him and believe what he's saying. But institutionally, yes,
• 1:30:57
  Speaker 3: there's some tinkering around the edges with different groups that
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 3: are coming up with fairly economically populist proposals. But it's
• 1:31:05
  Speaker 3: it's really outrageous how the anti-consolidation, anti-corporate growth on the
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 3: right just was completely like they're all lobbyists now. They're
• 1:31:17
  Speaker 3: all lobbyists because they're connected to Trump. So they have
• 1:31:19
  Speaker 3: some of these same places that they were criticizing as
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 3: as their clients. It's really it's not surprising, but just
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 3: like for the scope of it, it's stunning.
• 1:31:28
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 1:31:29
  Speaker 3: Well, we got Mac. Right-wing host, Ro Khanna or AOC
• 1:31:38
  Speaker 3: for president? Left-wing host, Tucker Carlson or J.D. Vance for president?
• 1:31:42
  Speaker 3: I got to go with Ro, of course. I think
• 1:31:44
  Speaker 3: he's a bit more serious than AOC. Neither is my ideal,
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 3: especially I like Ro personally, but I would put Ro
• 1:31:51
  Speaker 3: over AOC. What about you, Ryan?
• 1:31:54
  Speaker 4: I mean, out of those two, I'd take Tucker over J.D.
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 4: Tucker's shown more spine. There are very few people who
• 1:32:03
  Speaker 4: will Who are willing to blow up a personal direct
• 1:32:08
  Speaker 4: relationship with the president of the United States over an
• 1:32:10
  Speaker 4: issue of principle.
• 1:32:12
  Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
• 1:32:13
  Speaker 4: And he did that. So you got, I think, you know,
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 4: you have to acknowledge that. Whereas Vance, you can follow
• 1:32:21
  Speaker 4: his weaving politics as they've kind of moved with the
• 1:32:26
  Speaker 4: political winds over the last 10 years.
• 1:32:29
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that's fair.
• 1:32:31
  Speaker 4: Well, and.
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and you know, I think, more clearly where Tucker
• 1:32:35
  Speaker 3: stands on some of the issues that you would agree
• 1:32:37
  Speaker 3: with him on, foreign policy, for example.
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 4: Tucker is like Maduro. Like, he's a chavista. He's a...
• 1:32:45
  Speaker 4: He's had some of your politics. He's a coreista. He's
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 4: like a social conservative economic leftist.
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 3: He's a little AMLO.
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 4: Yeah, he's AMLO. He's the entire Bolivarian, like, movement.
• 1:33:00
  Speaker 3: There you go.
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 3: I think that's actually pretty interesting. What else we got here, Mac?
• 1:33:11
  Speaker 3: Can Ryan start saying type shit after he makes point?
• 1:33:16
  Speaker 3: That would be great. Thanks.
• 1:33:17
  Speaker 4: Well, you guys have to school me.
• 1:33:19
  Speaker 6: What is that?
• 1:33:19
  Speaker 4: Maybe Mac can tell me this one. Like, what does
• 1:33:22
  Speaker 4: that mean? Oh, I got you. I got you. Yeah, sure.
• 1:33:33
  Speaker 6: Why not?
• 1:33:34
  Speaker 4: I'm here to please.
• 1:33:36
  Speaker 3: It's like someone asked Crystal to say indubitably instead of
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 3: indeed we do. We're getting language policed. What else, Mac?
• 1:33:45
  Speaker 3: We got one more. What do you guys think is
• 1:33:55
  Speaker 3: the breaking point for Americans as far as gas prices go?
• 1:33:57
  Speaker 3: Just paid $ 7. 39 per gallon for diesel this morning in
• 1:34:01
  Speaker 3: Washington state from Matthew. Oh, my gosh.
• 1:34:06
  Speaker 4: And maybe Matthew can tell us, but oftentimes these diesel
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 4: tanks are 20, 30 gallons. So you're looking at, if
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 4: that's a 20-gallon tank you're filling up there, $ 150.
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:34:28
  Speaker 4: When it was $ 60. Yeah. A year ago.
• 1:34:32
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:34:34
  Speaker 4: That's a hundred bucks just gone for nothing more than
• 1:34:41
  Speaker 4: you had a year ago.
• 1:34:42
  Speaker 3: And Washington is an ag state. So yes, it's like
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 3: a coastal blue state, but that's what people are playing.
• 1:34:48
  Speaker 4: The whole West Coast for refining reasons, you know, pays
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 4: more for Refining and other reasons pays more for diesel.
• 1:34:59
  Speaker 3: California's an ag state. Washington's an ag state. Get a
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 3: lot of produce from those places and other farming products.
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 3: So that's, I mean.
• 1:35:08
  Speaker 4: So what is the breaking point? I don't know. August
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 4: jobs number was great.
• 1:35:15
  Speaker 3: What did we say that we were, we looked at,
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 3: what was the all-time high we talked about?
• 1:35:19
  Speaker 2: 585.
• 1:35:19
  Speaker 3: 585, yeah.
• 1:35:20
  Speaker 4: Average all-time high.
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 3: Yeah, for diesel. And so, I mean, I don't know
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 3: what the breaking point is, even if the jobs are good.
• 1:35:30
  Speaker 3: I think if you get over $ 6, maybe that's.
• 1:35:34
  Speaker 4: So, yes, and also one, the bad mark in the
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 4: jobs report was that wage growth had fallen. So you're seeing,
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 4: so while there's more jobs, and this goes to this point,
• 1:35:50
  Speaker 4: people are all falling behind. And what we certainly found
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 4: during COVID.
• 1:35:55
  Speaker 3: Unless you're living off capital gains.
• 1:35:57
  Speaker 4: Yeah. And this was kind of a sad observation for
• 1:36:01
  Speaker 4: me during COVID because I lived through the Great Recession.
• 1:36:07
  Speaker 4: And so I have this visceral understanding of how unemployment
• 1:36:14
  Speaker 4: tears apart your soul and tears apart families and tears
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 4: about the whole fabric of our society. But it is
• 1:36:20
  Speaker 4: an acute problem. but is experienced by the people who
• 1:36:24
  Speaker 4: are unemployed. It filters through the entire economy in less
• 1:36:29
  Speaker 4: worker power and more anxiety and fear for everybody who
• 1:36:32
  Speaker 4: does have a job because they're staring into the abyss
• 1:36:35
  Speaker 4: of unemployment. So it's not that it only hurts the unemployed,
• 1:36:38
  Speaker 4: but it primarily hits the unemployed. Inflation and falling behind
• 1:36:44
  Speaker 4: when it comes to wages hits everybody across the board.
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 4: And it seemed like people were willing to trade some
• 1:36:54
  Speaker 4: higher unemployment for more price stability during COVID. Like people
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 4: were so, like it was, it's such torture to just,
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 4: just agonizingly be falling behind constantly. And so even the
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 4: point is, even if we, even if this jobs report
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 4: is accurate, that we added 160,000 jobs, if everybody feels
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 4: like their wages are falling because they are, then even
• 1:37:21
  Speaker 4: if you're adding jobs, people are still, furious and miserable.
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 3: I actually, yeah, I think part of what's so torturous
• 1:37:29
  Speaker 3: and agonizing about those time periods is like when there's
• 1:37:31
  Speaker 3: no light at the end of the tunnel, you don't
• 1:37:32
  Speaker 3: know how long it's going to last.
• 1:37:34
  Speaker 6: Right.
• 1:37:37
  Speaker 4: Yeah. That's what, that's what makes it so miserable. And
• 1:37:39
  Speaker 4: it's so demoralizing and, and you're throwing, and now with
• 1:37:44
  Speaker 4: AI running all of the job processes, you've got people make,
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 4: you know, AIs are making the resumes and making the
• 1:37:52
  Speaker 4: applications and submitting them. AIs are reviewing them. People are
• 1:37:56
  Speaker 4: putting in hundreds of applications and getting no interviews. And
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 4: then they do get an interview and it's with a
• 1:38:01
  Speaker 4: robot on Zoom. It's just totally demoralizing and dehumanizing.
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 6: Yeah. Absolutely.
• 1:38:12
  Speaker 3: Absolutely. Well, a very bleak and depressing note to end
• 1:38:17
  Speaker 3: a bleak and depressing show on from our opening block
• 1:38:21
  Speaker 3: to our conversation with Garrison. So we hope you all
• 1:38:24
  Speaker 3: have a wonderful Labor Day weekend. We pumped you up.
• 1:38:27
  Speaker 4: We added jobs.
• 1:38:29
  Speaker 3: There you go. We added jobs. So enjoy the barbecue
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 3: while you can, I guess. Have fun.
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 4: Actually, don't get that Argentinian ground beef, though.
• 1:38:39
  Speaker 3: You got to stay away from that. And it's unpatriotic.
• 1:38:42
  Speaker 3: What's our equivalent of Freedom Fries for Argentinian beef?
• 1:38:46
  Speaker 4: Except because of the labeling, you don't know what you're
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 4: getting anyway. Oh, it's so fun. So fun.
• 1:38:53
  Speaker 3: Thanks, Ryan, for another depressing send-off. Have fun, everyone. We'll
• 1:38:57
  Speaker 3: see you back here on Monday. And, of course, we'll
• 1:38:59
  Speaker 3: be around throughout the weekend if there is any breaking news.
• 1:39:02
  Speaker 3: But hope you all have a wonderful, restful Labor Day weekend.