Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 2/23/23: Biden in Ukraine Marks 1 Year of War, Georgia Trump Indictment Goes Awry, Trump In East Palestine, Biden Not Decided 2024, Sean Hannity National Divorce, Trump's Foreign Policy Record, Abysmal Credit Scores, Louis DeAngelis From StatusCoup

Episode Date: February 23, 2023

Krystal and Saagar discuss Biden's visit to Kyiv marking a year since the start of the Ukraine War, polling from different countries on the Ukraine conflict, the Jury in Georgia Trump Inquiry recommend Multiple Indictments but a Fulton County grand jury forewoman's odd appearances on TV might threaten the process, Saagar looks into Trump's record on Foreign Policy during his administration, Krystal looks into why people in The South have abysmal credit scores, and we're joined by Louis DeAngelis (@louisd217) from Status Coup News (@StatusCoup) to talk about his interviews with residents in East Palestine, Ohio.To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and SpotifyApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The OGs of uncensored motherhood are back and badder than ever. I'm Erica. And I'm Mila. And we're the hosts of the Good Moms, Bad Choices podcast, brought to you by the Black Effect Podcast Network every Wednesday. Yeah, we're moms, but not your mommy.

Historically, men talk too much. And women have quietly listened. And all that stops here. If you like witty women, then this is your tribe. Listen to the Good Moms Bad Choices podcast every Wednesday. On the Black Effect Podcast Network, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you go to find your podcast. I think everything that might have dropped in 95 has been labeled the golden years of hip-hop. It's Black Music Month, and We Need to Talk is tapping in. I'm Nyla Simone, breaking down lyrics,

amplifying voices, and digging into the culture that shaped the soundtrack of our lives. Like, that's what's really important, and that's what stands out, is that our music changes people's lives for the better. Let's talk about the music that moves us. To hear this and more on how music and culture collide, listen to We Need to Talk from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it means the absolute world to have your support. What are you waiting for? Become a premium subscriber today at

BreakingPoints.com. Good morning everybody, happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal? Indeed we do. First and foremost, Sagar is back. Nice to have you back, my friend. It's very nice to be back on this side of the Atlantic. I'm very happy for you. And congratulations, our order as well.

Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it. Yes, we had fun. Ate Indian food the entire time I was in London. No bangers and mash for me. Does Jillian like Indian food as much as you do? No, but when we're in London, it's one of those things where you just kind of have to go with it. Okay, fair enough. We did the whole high tea thing, all right? So she got her fill. All right, good deal. All right, There's a lot to get into this morning. First of all, tomorrow is the one year anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. So there's a lot of news

there. Also, we want to just take a look back at, you know, where we've been, where we are today. And especially we've got some maps. We've got some polling that can kind of assess how the American public feels about all of this, how the world feels about this and just what has happened on the battlefield since the launch of that invasion a year ago. Also, potential Trump indictments coming down from that grand jury in Georgia and the four women is something else. We will show you a little bit of that and tell you what we know. Also, Trump visited East Palestine yesterday. Democrats continue to be sort of completely absent. The NTSB report is expected to come out today,

and we're getting new revelations about that water testing that was conducted apparently by the railroad. 2024 news, rumblings that Biden isn't actually going to run. I don't really take it seriously. But, you know, it's important to report on it at the same time. Kind of, I have to say, as we predicted, Sagar, as Trump has been out there basically by himself running for president on the Republican side, his hand is strengthening. He is increasing in the polls. So, you know, he's still the one to beat. Ultimately, we also have Sean Hannity talking to Marjorie Taylor Greene about her big national divorce idea. I commented on this earlier this week with Emily, but interested to get Sager's thoughts as well.

We had to make sure to bring it back for you so everybody can hear your thoughts as well. But let's go ahead and start with what is going on in Ukraine. All right, so let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen. President Biden visiting Kiev and giving a major speech as well as another one in Warsaw after President Vladimir Putin delivered one in Russia. It reiterating the unending commitment both to NATO, the eastern flank, and specifically

to Ukraine and ongoing continued military support. Here's what he had to say. He thought he'd get the Findalization of NATO. Instead, he got the NATOization of Finland and Sweden. He thought NATO would fracture and divide. Instead, NATO is more united and more unified than ever. Our support for Ukraine will not waver. NATO will not be divided and we will not tire.

So reiterating there that it's actually made NATO stronger, actually has increased military disbanding, of course, Finland and Sweden on the process of possibly being admitted. But since it's actually made NATO stronger. It actually has increased military disbanding, of course, Finland and Sweden on the process of possibly being admitted. But since it's the one year, we've got to take a step back almost from the current developments and just say, what's happening? And where will these things end? Obviously, we've been covering the war almost for the entire year. It was a big moment for breaking points. It's when many

of our viewers and our listeners actually joined us. And it hasn't always been easy, been wrong a lot. And I think that's fine. But one of the interviews here by respected historian at Princeton, Stephen Kotkin, I actually think did a fantastic job of just summing everything up in an interview in The New Yorker with David Remnick. Let's put this up there on the screen. I'm going to read from this one particular passage in particular. He says, David Remnick kind of challenging Stephen Kotkin, last year, you told me that Ukraine was winning on Twitter, but that Russia was winning on the battlefield. A lot has happened since then. Is that still the case? He says, quote, unfortunately, let's think of a house. Let's say you own a house and it has 10 rooms. Let's say I barge in and take two of those rooms away. I wreck those rooms.

From those two rooms, I'm wrecking your other eight rooms and you're trying to beat me back. You're trying to evict me from the two rooms. You push out a corner. You push out another corner, maybe. But I'm still there. I'm still wrecking. The thing is, you need your house. That's where you live. It's your house. You don't have another house. Me, I have another house. My other house has a thousand rooms. So if I wreck your house, are you winning or am I winning? Unfortunately, that's the situation that we're in. Ukraine has beaten back the Russian attempt to conquer their country. They have defended their capital. They've pushed the Russians out of some of their land that the Russians conquered since February 24th.

They've regained about half of it. And yet they need their house, and the Russians are wrecking it. Putin's strategy could be described as, I can't have it, then nobody can have it. Sadly, that is where the tragedy is right now. And I thought that was a fantastic way of kind of summing it all up in terms of what absolute victory would look like on the Russian side. Is that a defeat? I mean, you know, on relative terms, yes, in terms of international prestige. However, you know, the ongoing attrition and the war against Ukraine is, of course, just making, you know, is devastating the country, requiring hundreds of billions of dollars, untold amounts of ammunition. You know, while I was in the UK, I couldn't help but listen to

some of the news. I mean, in terms of what the revelations are about the NATO chiefs that were meeting in Europe while I was gone was the cry for ammo, ammo, ammo. The amount of ammo that Ukraine is using right now on the battlefield is just unbelievable. And that's actually before the Russian offensive has even kicked off. There are some rumblings today. We may have to do a breaking news segment or something because tomorrow is officially the one-year anniversary of the war or the invasion. That's why we're covering it this way right now. Ukraine is saying that there are major signs of a Russian offensive exactly tomorrow on February 24th, which is only going to require even more bloodshed, ammunition,

and expenditure on their part. And the reason why I thought that interview was important is there is an ongoing recognition here in Washington amongst the elites. They're like, this is going to be a long one, and total victory does not appear in sight for anybody. Let's put this up there. From Fiona Hill, she was writing in Unheard. So the reason why this is important is Fiona Hill is possibly one of the most hawkish elements of the Trump administration on Russia, very pro-Ukraine and all of that, and still writing a column, which, you know, frankly takes some courage, at least by telling the truth in Washington, saying, quote, absolute victory over Russia just is not possible. The former Trump advisor on the West's mistakes in Ukraine. She says, specifically within all of this interview,

that what she, given her, you know, advice in the Bush administration and what happened with George W. Bush, she says that there is no possibility of, quote, absolute victory over Russia, the idea that the Putin regime was going to fall, of some sort of grand, you know, some sort of grand idea that the Ukrainians

are not only going to push Russia back through the February 24 borders, but take back all of Crimea. Yeah. If you combine, Crystal, I think the Kotkin view, the Fiona Hill view, that Washington Post article that we covered before I left, where there was basically a note from the Biden people who were like, look, this is it. The blank check pretty much is dried up in Congress with Republicans. America's moving on. And after this, however you guys do in the offensive, you're going to have to try and figure out some sort of solution because, you know, your endless supply of ammunition and all that, it's just not sustainable. And we already covered so many stories here about how the war in Ukraine has massively depleted American stockpiles of ammunition, our own defense readiness, and in the context of any other conflict, we're probably weaker right now than we have been in a long time in terms of our defense readiness. Not that many of the hawks who care about that in Washington will ever tell you.

So it's a crazy situation to look at it geopolitically and just like what the actual state is in terms of where things can move from here. Yeah, there is a growing sort of elite awareness that absolute victory over Russia was a fantasy. And Kotkin talks about the fact that everybody was hoping for these sort of shortcut solutions to the war, like, oh, maybe there'll be a domestic revolt in Russia that will topple the Putin regime. Not happening. Ain't happening. So that one's off the table. There were all of these rumors and fantasies that maybe Putin's really ill and maybe he's like on his deathbed and he's about to die. No real sign that that is coming to pass either. So all of the shortcut hopes for ending this

conflict have faded out of view. And so then what are you left with? Well, if you're not going to achieve a total victory over Russia, which again is not our assessment, it's the assessment now of the Rand Corporation. It's reportedly, according to the Washington Post, the assessment of U.S. intelligence agencies. It's apparently the assessment of Fiona Hill. It's an assessment of Stephen Kotkin, who's a liberal historian, by the way, of Russia and the Soviet Union. Well, then this is going to end at the negotiating table. That's where we're ultimately headed. It's a question of who's in what position when you get to that negotiating table and what ultimately the terms are going to be. Because the other thing Kotkin

points out is right now you're in a war of attrition. And the way that you win a war of attrition is by, number one, disrupting your enemy's ability to produce, manufacture weapons. There was a thought that the sanctions that we levied on Russia, which were quite overwhelming and in concert with a lot of our allies, that that would effectively disrupt their manufacturing capability. That has come to naught. And at the same time, so one way is to disrupt their production. That's one thing you want to do. The other piece you want to do is ramp up your own production. Well, we're not doing that. What we're doing is drawing down our stockpiles and we're getting to a place where we're going to be limited in our ability to do that. So, OK, you're not going to win the war of attrition

either. And I thought the way Kotkin talked about how do you think about victory? Because part of this is, all right, what do you actually define as a win for Ukraine? And let me read to you what he ultimately says, because his conclusion is, I'm in favor of a Ukrainian victory. This isn't some, like, go Russia, Putin's actually right dude. He's in favor of Ukrainian victory. I'm against the Russian victory, but I'm defining a Ukrainian victory within the circumstances in which we live. Now, he says their definition of victory is expressed by President Zelensky, who has certainly more than risen to the occasion, is to regain every inch of territory, to have reparations, to have war crimes tribunals. So how would Ukraine enact that definition of

victory? They would have to take Moscow. Do you all think that that's likely? Do you think that would be good? How else can you get reparations and war crime tribunals? They're not that close to regaining every inch of their own territory, let alone those other aims. Here's a better definition of victory. Ukrainians rose up against their domestic tyrants. Why? Because they wanted to join Europe. It's the same goal they have now, and that has to be the definition of victory. Ukraine gets into the European Union. If Ukraine regains all of its territory and doesn't get into the EU, is that a victory? As opposed to if Ukraine regains as much of a territory as it physically can on the battlefield, not all of it potentially, but does get EU accession, would that be a definition of victory? Of course it would be. And then he goes

on to talk about those dynamics I was just mentioning before with the war of attrition and how it is impossible that they're going to achieve this total victory that they have imagined and that the Biden administration has allowed to persist as some sort of logical endpoint to this when in reality it's an impossible fantasy. Yeah, so let's put the maps, and I think this actually really hammers home Stephen Kotkin's point. These are four maps. So right there, you can see on February 23rd, exactly 2022, a year ago, where the occupied region were the Russian-backed separatists.

And then you had Crimea. So then we have March 30th, 2022. We have occupation in the north, all basically along the Russian-Belorussian border, up from Crimea into eastern Ukraine. So significant gains. Then you have the August 31st lines where you had the Russian-controlled areas. That's the third map for those who are watching. And then finally, you kind of have the November 30th, 2022 map, which shows some of the massive gains that were made by the Ukrainians in their offensive

and have put things to where we are right now with the currently fluctuating front line. But the point that I think we should really look at is when we look at retaken territory, that's fantastic. You still see a hell of a lot of red on that map, Kristen. And that's exactly what he's pointing to is that with all the red in that map, you know, for all of the $100 billion now that we've appropriated to Ukraine, I think we've dispensed about half of that. We have indications from the Biden administration that Ukraine, by the end of the summer, is going to expend all of the aid that the U.S. military has given them. It would require even more acts of Congress to appropriate that. That doesn't look very likely through a Republican coalition. And one of the things we're about to talk about, too,

is, look, we have been the staunchest, most hawkish allies, and we are bankrolling this war 10 times more than any other nation in all of Europe, simply because of capacity and because we basically underwrite the Europeans. Well, we already know they're not going to step up. They have crippling inflation, and they don't have the capacity even if they wanted to. I mean, you look at the UK and, for all the tanks and all of that, most of what Ukraine is using on the battlefield are bullets and artillery and missiles. And for all the intelligence and all that, that requires a tremendous amount of raw industrial production. We also have major meeting that's happening today, President Putin meeting with China's top diplomat Wang Yi.

And in that, we are searing rumblings from the U.S. intelligence community that they are quickly going to declassify in indications that the Chinese are considering sending lethal aid to Russia, something they have not thought about before. Let's think about it from their perspective. This is the greatest thing that China could ever wish for. Why? Because the more that this conflict goes on, the more American weapons that pour into Ukraine and from the NATO alliance. This is taking a tremendous amount of expenditure. Furthermore, you know, the economic cost of the war has got to be in the trillions of dollars whenever you consider the energy impact of the disruption to the global supply chain. We I mean, who who even knows the one day the eventual accounting will be made 100 years from now when you can write about it dispassionately. And you are never going to you will barely be able to believe, you know, what the chicanery that's probably gone from the global financial system. Obviously,

we survived here in the West, but, you know, there's a lot of poverty, actually, that was written across the world. So when you consider all that, China's got no incentive. But, you know, initially it was like, oh, China's got egg on its face, all of that. Just yesterday, what did they do? They put out a statement and they were like, yeah, it's the U.S.'s fault that this is entirely happening. This is U.S. hegemony. Wang Yi's visit to Moscow is no accident, especially after all this balloon stuff and more of the frosty relations. And it wouldn't be a surprise or a shock at all for them to continue or to start shipping lethal weapons. And if that happens, I mean, then, look, what have we done? This is the nightmare that Nixon and Kissinger went out of their way to stop,

which is a total alliance between communist China and then the Soviet Union. We always recognize that having split between the two is to the strategic benefit of the United States. So anyway, I think that's a grand picture of where things are. It's very possible there can be some breaking news tomorrow on the one-year anniversary. But going forward, it just looks like things are relatively stuck and brutal fighting ahead in the months to come. And the summer, very likely to be a major decision point for the West, for Ukraine, and for Russia. At the same time, as you alluded to and as I did as well, polling is showing softening support here in the U.S., especially among Republicans, but not only among Republicans. Let's go and put this up on

the screen. 48 percent, according to the AP, now say that they favor the U.S. providing weapons to Ukraine, with 29 percent opposed and 22 percent saying they're neither in favor nor opposed. Back in May of 2022, less than three months into the war, it was not 48 percent. It was 60 percent of U.S. adults who said they were in favor of sending Ukraine weapons. So you've seen significant erosion to now it's below majority support. You have Americans about evenly divided on sending government funds directly to Ukraine. So not shipping weapons, but actually just sending aid and support. Thirty seven percent in favor and 38% opposed, with 23% saying neither. And you also have dismal views of Biden's handling at this point. Only 19% of Americans say they have a great deal of confidence in Biden's

ability to handle the situation. 37% say they have some confidence. 43% say they have hardly any. And also, by the way, you know, at the beginning of this conflict, Sagar, you remember, we were covering with some credulity the polling saying that Americans were like, we will pay higher gas prices if it means supporting Ukraine. They're not quite feeling the same way these days. 59% now say limiting damage to the U.S. economy is more important than effectively sanctioning Russia, even if that means sanctions are less effective. Back in March of 22, the situation was reversed. A majority, 55 percent, said it was a bigger priority to sanction Russia effectively.

And you can see we're going to talk more about Trump in this show, but you can see this guy sniffed out where the winds are heading. He can see not only a clear divide on Ukraine that he can capitalize in the GOP primary, but also it's a smart bet for the general election in terms of this is increasingly going to become a partisan issue, which I actually think is really unfortunate because there's no reason why the line should be drawn in a clearly partisan way. But you can see independents in particular moving more to Ukraine skepticism and wondering, hey, how does this end? How does this end? Which I have never heard Joe Biden be able to articulate. Not even that. Just because, look, this is only February 23rd. This is before even the heavy fighting season. What's going to happen in the summer when, look, Biden says no

more aid to Ukraine. We all know that they're going to at least ask Congress and try and blame the Republicans when they're like, no, actually, we need another more aid to Ukraine. We all know that they're going to at least ask Congress and try and blame the Republicans. When they're like, no, actually, we need another 50 billion for an extra six months. And then that would bring the total to 150 billion, more than we've ever spent on any foreign military aid ever in American history going all the way back to the beginning of the Republic.

Really, I mean, just consider what that will look like. And then think about it a year later. Let's say there's some miracle that that, or not even a miracle, you know, since there's a lot of bipartisan support. Let's say that extra 50 billion, put it a year from now, or even a year and a half in the midst of the 2024 election. And you can just sniff out exactly where the trends here are all going. Now, I wouldn't say, you know, I wouldn't bank on it saying that there's no more aid or, you know, that the conflict, look, the conflict could even be over by then. We may not even be talking about it. I highly doubt it, but it's certainly a possibility. Politically, though, Trump is clearly on the moving side of this issue and support has eroding exactly as I

think we both predicted this entire time. Another really important one is how is the rest of the world feeling? And this is where, look, you know, global public opinion is also always difficult. So take some of these with a grain of salt. But I think we could take from this at least something. So let's put this up there on the screen. It shows various different countries, not only the United States, but many others. So we have, and we can go ahead, guys, and put up a six, please, is you have India, which has a 54 percent saying that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine needs to stop as soon as possible, even if it means Ukraine giving up control of territory. Turkey, and I'll remind you, Turkey is a NATO ally, saying 40, 48 percent. Russia, they say 44 percent.

China, they say 42. The EU, Great Britain, and the United States with the much lowest. But you also see a major approval of this statement, of course, in Russia, saying Western dominance of the world needs to be pushed back, even if it means accepting Russian territorial aggression. 30% of Russians apparently supporting that. Very minimal numbers in India and in Turkey, but at least 12% there in China. And then finally, you have Ukraine needs to regain all of its territory with some moderate support there from India and Turkey, zero support in Russia,

moderate support in China, but then significant support, or the most significant really, in the EU, in Great Britain, and here in the US. So I think looking at that, and then also really just considering the way that people look at Russia and also with the United States, there's a separate part here where they ask which best reflects your view on Russia as it pertains to your country. In the US, 55% say it's an adversary. In the EU, 54%. In Great Britain, they say 65%. But in India, 51% say it's a necessary partner which we must strategically cooperate. And some say it's even an ally that shares our interests and values. China and Russia is the same way. And significantly also in Turkey, 55% and 14% respectively, both say that Russia is a necessary partner and an ally.

Just reflecting the difference of how Turkey, which is a key NATO member, has behaved in all of this. And part of the reason why the initial talks between Ukraine and Russia, some of it was being brokered in Istanbul. So how Istanbul and Erdogan specifically navigate future NATO expansion, that's still not a guarantee with Finland and with Sweden, from what I've read so far, but also what the future looks like in terms of a NATO participatory who might be able to speak with both sides of the conflict and bring things to an end. You can see some inclination of what that all would look like. I think what is really clear when you look at all of these polls, and they have a lot of interesting breakdowns here, is that the West, and especially the U.S. and the U.K., have one view of this conflict and one view of Russia.

And the rest of the world has a very different view. And if you'll recall, Sagar, when Lula was here from Brazil and there was a lot of shock over his comments about the war and about his desire to remain neutral so that he could potentially serve in some sort of a diplomatic role to ultimately broker a peace. There was a lot of shock about those comments. But in reality, he's reflecting what most of the rest of the world thinks about this conflict. And the one that stood out to me the most is they asked this question, OK, what do you think is the main reason the U.S. stands behind Ukraine? And the only people who are really buying the like it's about

democracy is the U.S. The other even the other European countries, they see it more as either to defend Western dominance or to defend our own security. So they don't see it as much of this big conflict over democratic values. They see it as more of a classic geopolitical, like strategic interest kind of a conflict. And certainly, you know, China, Russia, Turkey, and India see it more that way as well. Russia and China say this is, we're involved with Ukraine to defend Western dominance and Turkey says predominantly to defend our own security. So the rest of the world is not viewing this as this grand conflict over values and the gloss that we put on it. They're seeing it in a much more sort of realism

or realist perspective, which I think is interesting as well. Absolutely. So that's where it is in terms of Ukraine right now. We gave you the first stop, kind of a summary of where things might be headed. And second, with global public opinion and where things are.

And just keep in mind, the longer this thing goes on, the trend is only going in one direction and then going the other way, even if Russian attacks have actually increased. It's possible a new renewed Russian offensive could change things, but I don't see how that would ever change the shock of the initial bombing of Kiev and much of the brutality that we saw in those early days. Now it's really just, you know, battle of attrition and then the air war in

terms of bombings and all that that have been going on. So absent that, it's very likely that this all will move in a similar direction going forward. I mean, sadly, that's probably the best case scenario because certainly Russia has other tools and other weapons that they could deploy, not just in Ukraine, but around the world. So a grinding, horrifying war of attrition that involves much more economic destruction and many more deaths, including civilian deaths, is probably in the short term like the best case scenario, which is absolutely horrifying. Okay, big domestic news. This broke just yesterday. That grand jury in Georgia, in that Trump inquiry about the fake elector scheme, specifically in that state,

they recommended multiple indictments. This is according to the four women. The four women had a lot to say. Let me read a little bit of details from the article. They say a special grand jury that investigated election interference by former President Trump and his allies in Georgia do not have indictment powers themselves. Fannie T. Willis, who's the district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, she's led the investigation and she will ultimately decide what charges to bring before a regular grand jury. So this group can recommend and then Fannie T. Willis will make the decision what to then take to a regular grand jury. So that's important to note. Now let's talk about this jury for a woman because she made a number of cryptic comments

and then made a number of strange cable news TV appearances that have just not been great in terms of this whole situation. So she initially was asked by the New York Times whether the jurors had recommended indicting Trump, she would not answer directly but said, quote, you're not going to be shocked. It's not rocket science, adding, you won't be too surprised. I will tell you that if the judge releases the recommendations, it's not going to be some giant plot twist. You probably have a fair idea of what may be in there.

I'm trying very hard to say that delicately. First, let me get your reaction to that, because it feels to me like she is very strongly suggesting that Trump is going to be indicted. Right. But then, I mean, I don't really know and nobody really knows other than these people. But it seems like she really wants to come all the way up to the edge of saying Trump's going to be indicted without technically violating like whatever secrecy she's supposed to keep. If she was a rational person, and I'll show you a little bit why I think she might be irrational,

that's the way I would have read it. But also, you can't probably underestimate the fact this is clearly a person who is enjoying 15 minutes of fame, teasing the media, her little time in the spotlight, and it's possible that she could be ginning everybody up

and trying to give out some details. So I'm actually of the mind that this all could just be a fake media sideshow for Hedegaard on TV. True, because what I kept asking me is like, she says, okay, you're not going to be surprised. Well, what would be more surprising? Trump doesn't get indicted or Trump is indicted? Right, it would be more.

Indicting a former president of the United States is a pretty shocking development. I don't know if you'd call it surprising at this point, but maybe. I don't know. So that's why. I would find it surprising. I don't know what to make of all of this. But she also, as I mentioned before, she went on CNN.

It was a strange appearance. Let's take a listen to how that went. Are indictments recommended, of course? Is it more than 12 people? Is it more than 20 people? I think if you look at the page numbers of the report, there's about six pages in the middle that got cut out. Allow for spacing. It's not a short list.

Not a short list. More. I personally want to hear from the former president. I wanted to hear from the former president, but honestly, I kind of wanted to subpoena the former president because I got to swear everybody the former president, but honestly, I kind of wanted to subpoena the former president because I got to swear everybody in. And so I thought it'd be really cool to get 60 seconds with President Trump of me looking at him and being like, do you solemnly swear? And me getting to swear him in, I just, I kind of just thought that would be an awesome moment. And if it was just a perjury charge or perjury charges, would that be acceptable to you? That fine i will be happy as long as

something happens i mean you guys see what i'm talking about i mean she seems stone cold crazy i'm gonna be honest with you like i mean listen yeah she's never been on tv before nervous laughter i don't know but here's what i'll say go ahead and put this next piece up on the screen so there's already news from robert costa that uh c CBS News has learned lawyers close to several GOP witnesses in Fulton County investigation are preparing to move to quash any possible indictments by the DA based on the public statements by the foreman of the special grand jury per two people familiar with the discussion. So the lawyers for the people who could be accused here or indicted here are seizing on this to say this is all improper. We want this all nullified because of her public statements. I don't know that that will work, but she's certainly not doing anyone any favors in terms of inspiring confidence in the process. Listen, I mean, the nature of juries is it's a group of your peers. It's regular citizens who have in many instances not done this before, who come to it with whatever their personality quirks and traits and biases happen to be.

So that is not unusual. But even, you know, her talking about, oh, I really wanted to swear in President Trump and that's why I wanted to subpoena him. Like, that's not a good reason to subpoena someone because you personally want to have some face to face time with them. So it definitely gives if Trump is indicted out of this, it definitely gives him a lot to work with in terms of trying to make the argument to the public that this was all unfair, that this was all ridiculous and unserious. And even Maggie Haberman is saying, put this up on the screen, she thinks the Trump indictment is probably likely based on these comments. But the Georgia jury blabbermouth is not helpful. So that's kind of where things stand. Yeah, I mean, Anderson Cooper actually did an entire reaction to this last night on CNN. So I was looking at all the establishment press, the smart ones like Maggie Haberman and Anderson Cooper, I guess smart in this context, are like, hey, this is probably not good. I mean, how can you, look, if Trump calls it a political witch hunt, all you got to do is play that lady on loop who was on national television divulging

all of these details. Also, look, I don't know, I'm not a lawyer, you know, I don't know all of the exact, you know, maneuvering and all that. But clearly the Costa news about filing and saying that it was politically motivated and some sort of challenge and even in a future appellate court seems very likely. It's made the prosecutor's job incredibly difficult actually because now this is going to be materially important in terms of the trial and bringing the charges in the first place. And then, look, in the realm that's the most important, the realm of public opinion, this has now effectively, I think, been negated. I mean, I don't think that you can walk away

from the fact that you have a forewoman who's clearly politically motivated on national television before a charge, even drops talking about all of this. And then, you know, indictment and all of that, I've always looked at it as 50-50 as to how all of this would actually proceed. So public opinion, I think, and legitimacy is probably the most important one through all of this.

I think they've given a lot. You know, I didn't necessarily get politically motivated out of her comments. I just got unserious. And that damages the credibility of the process as well. I mean, again, like I said, on any jury, you're going to have people who come from a wide variety of views, perspectives, backgrounds, levels of competence, etc. But you would like to keep a sort of cloak of secrecy around so you can imagine that this is like a group of very serious, very credible people who aren't making decisions about something as serious as subpoenaing the president based on their own desire to be face to face with him and like have their little 60 second moment with him. Now, maybe that's a joke. Maybe she's just kidding. Maybe this is all, you know, what I just like her awkward desire to get in front of the cameras, et cetera, et cetera. But, you know, I keep coming back to what you said, Sagar, originally with the

whole classified document situation being revealed that Biden had classified documents to like this man is so lucky. He is so lucky. And I think that I increasingly feel confident in our early assessment and prediction that if he does get indicted, it should have a political impact. But I don't really think it's going to. Not only with the Republican base, like the longer this goes on and the more distance there is from January 6th and from Stop the Steal and the more he talks about Ukraine and Social Security instead of like obsessing over election conspiracies, which I'm shocked to see the somewhat intelligent maneuvers he's making in his campaign right now. You know, the more that some of this the bite is taken out of a potential indictment. So, so I don't know. It's a crazy situation we're in where it's never been more clear that he is probably pretty likely to get indicted. And I just don't think it's going to be the blockbuster or shattering political world overturning moment that it once seemed possible to be. At this point, they've built it up for seven years. It never ends up happening. And now,

even if it does, it's going to be in a manner and a case where even the details are very unclear. Maybe it might help the Democratic Party. I think it will only solidify Trump's support within the GOP, just like after the Mar-a-Lago raid when everybody came behind him. And ultimately, that sense of persecution, Trump is an identification of a lot of Republicans as a man who embodies like their want to like say, screw you to the cultural left. Well, that only makes it even better, you know, so from a fighting perspective, and then he would actually have to get convicted, which, you know, look, it is Georgia. It's still a 50-50 state, last time I checked, you know, so like, you know how that would all play out too?

Like it's not a foregone conclusion on any of this. Yeah, absolutely. All right, guys, speaking of Trump, he traveled to East Palestine, Ohio. We've, of course, been covering the aftermath of that train derailment and their decision to do a quote unquote controlled release, which was a giant fireball of toxic chemicals that has had lingering impacts on the community and that politicians have been very slow to react to. All right. So backdrop is, remember, we tracked this very close. Lever News has done the best coverage of detailing the way that industry corruption has consistently stripped safety regulations, starting with the Obama administration, who sort of buckled under pressure and limited

the scope of the new safety regulations that they were putting in place. Then Trump arguably did the most damage by completely rolling back even some of the safety regs that the Obama administration had put in place, in particular with regards to this breaking system. You have the Biden administration maintains that status quo and, of course, joins with Republicans to crush the workers movement that was trying to raise concerns, safety concerns specifically, you know, about potential incidents like this. So Trump's hands are not clean on this issue whatsoever. Quite the opposite.

However, man knows how to spot a political opportunity. And while Joe Biden was in Ukraine, Trump traveled to East Palestine. Here's what he had to say. We're bringing thousands of bottle of water, Trump water, actually, most of it. Some of it we had to go to a much lesser quality water. You want to get those Trump bottles, I think, more than anybody else. But we're bringing a lot of water, thousands of bottles, and we have it in trucks, and we brought some on my plane today. And Norfolk Southern needs to fulfill its responsibilities and obligations. And I see that they're starting to come here now, too, because they also were saying they're not

coming. But it means that the affected communities beyond the borders of East Palestine are going to be taken care of. And they've said so, and they've said it loud and clear, and I think they probably mean it. I sincerely hope that when your representatives and all of the politicians get here, including Biden, they get back from touring Ukraine, that he's got some money left over. Biden and FEMA said they would not send federal aid to East Palestine under any circumstance. They're not going to send aid.

I thought that was a strange statement because I've been working with FEMA for a long time, four years, and they were great with us with the tornadoes, the hurricanes, and things like this. What's your specialty today? How are you today? Nice to meet you. Hello, everybody. That's a nice, beautiful-looking room for FEMA. So I know this menu better than you do.

I probably know it better than anybody in here. We're gonna take care of the fire department. Okay. We're gonna take care of the police department. So that last piece, there was him at McDonald's for those of you who are just listening. He said, I know the McDonald's menu better than you do. Probably true, actually. Given how much the man loves McDonald's. You know, and there's a lot to say about this, actually. First of all, clearly his political instincts still on point.

Democrats handed him an absolute layup. They're such morons. Pete not going there yet. Biden not going there yet. I mean, allowing opening up this space to make that talking that talking point of, hey, he's in Ukraine. We're here. And I hope they still have some money for you guys when they get back. Brutal.

And then the other piece is a media story, which is, you know, he wouldn't be able to get away with going there and pretending like, oh, this has nothing to do with me and I'm just here to try to help. If the media had done their job of explaining that backstory of corruption and how his hands are very dirty in terms of caving to industry pressure. But since they don't do that, he can just ride in like a hero and distribute his Trump bottles of water. Look, Trump is back. I mean, I can feel it. I can sense it. I haven't seen, he's fun again in a way that McDonald's, you know, and look, I'm not saying this gives me pleasure to say this. My whole monologue is really about his own record with respect to foreign policy. All I'm saying is pure politically for him to waltz into a town,

clearly neglected, force the media to cover it. It's just like exactly what he did with Flint in 2016. You remember that, Trump? And he actually won Flint, if we'll recall. There's that good documentary about the Flint Police Department and how they all so much supported him in 2016, and it caused like a big political stir at the time. And then the deadliest talking point of all, he's in Ukraine, I'm over here,

I hope he has some money that is left over for you. And, you know, the moment, actually, while the Biden speech was happening, I texted them while I was abroad, and I was like, hey, immediately what popped in my head, Kiev before East Palestine. And then Secretary Buttigieg is visiting today after Donald Trump. What is the guy doing? I remain, you know, it's like, how can you possibly have not immediately gotten on a plane? You know, now the president Biden has yet to put out any full like comments or anything on East Palestine. There's no announced visit. Where is Kamala Harris? I mean, send somebody like at the very least Buttigieg was supposed to, I mean, he should have been there a week ago.

If you think about it, maybe more nine, 10 days ago. He should have been one of the very first people on the ground with a FEMA director. Should have had the Ohio governor and all those people right next to him be like, I'm taking charge. I'm not leaving East Palestine until this is all done. Where is he? Oh, I know where he is. He's here in Washington taking personal time.

We'll tell you a little bit about that later. When he got mad at a reporter for actually asking him when he was going to visit East Palestine. Well, and here's another piece is the Republican governor of the state, Mike DeWine, does not come out looking good in any of this either. He admitted before that like the White House had called him and he just didn't call them back to ask for aid for the area. He also, you know, he was asked a question. We've been tracking the water test results that were used to give the all clear to residents and say, it's all good. You can tracking the water test results that were used to give the all clear to residents and say, it's all good. You can drink the water. No problem here. And it has

increasingly become clear that the EPA relied predominantly on a contractor that was paid for by Norfolk Southern themselves. So the polluters paid for these water tests that the Ohio EPA was predominantly relying on. DeWine got asked a question by this, I believe it was by our friend Rich McHugh, News Nation, now investigative reporter who we've known for quite a while. Fantastic journalist who's been there on the ground, who we had on the show earlier in the week.

In any case, DeWine reveals he really doesn't have a clue what's going on. Hands it off to the Ohio EPA director who basically confirms the outlines of that story. Let's take a listen to that. Has the EPA tested the water independently? Yes, we're testing it independently. Was it initially tested in conjunction with Norfolk Southern?

I'd have to ask my director. The Norfolk Southern contractor did AECOM. They did their own testing. That same sample at the same time was collected by the county and sent to a separate lab. The Ohio EPA confirming to News Nation it was done in conjunction at first, but will now begin its own independent testing starting today. Pete Buttigieg announcing he will finally come here to the crash site, responding to criticism he did not visit sooner. To be clear, our department was on the ground within hours.

I could have spoken out sooner, and I'm making sure that we are focused on the actions that are going to make a difference. So DeWine there's, oh, yeah, we're doing our own independent testing. And he's like, well, I don't really know. Let me get to the EPA director who's like, well, not actually. Now we're starting to do our own independent testing after they've already told people it's all safe and fine. It's a disaster. Biden administration and the Republican governor here have left the greatest political opening of all time. And with Buttigieg at this point, I don't know how in the hell that this guy

continues to have a job. And Biden himself, I mean, you know, Biden, you could always say his political instincts were at least better than a lot of the people in the media, right? A lot of the elites in the party, he has lost it. You know, clearly some of that, the idea of visiting a foreign country while you're dispensing hundreds of billions of dollars to them and literally giving the greatest talking point of all time that he cares about another country and another country's borders more than he cares about your own, that is all you're going to hear from the Republican Party. And why shouldn't you? Because now it's creating the political pressure on the Biden administration where they feel on the back foot. And Crystal, clearly the Democrats,

they know they screwed up now at this point. The National Democratic Party is silent, but they're looking at this, and it is a total 2016 replay. I really think Trump, I tweeted this earlier today, Trump's power levels are higher than I've seen him in years. He hasn't been talking about Stop the Steal on Twitter.

He's honestly pretty funny, or truth, sorry. Meatball Ron is fantastic. I'm sorry, it's just just the best one of the best nicknames i've heard in a long time that's fake news he would never call me ball ron he's gonna say you're right exactly i'd never call me ball ball meatball ron meatball ron uh just devastating him publicly uh looking at mickey haley and just brushing her aside just you know almost smirking at her candidacy and then the political genius of just swelting into East Palestine

while Biden is in Ohio. The Trump water and making the joke about all that. That is vintage 2000. He seems more unshackled right now than ever. Now, look, Trump is always his own worst enemy. He hasn't been talking about stop the steal all that much lately. If it does get indicted in Georgia, clearly, you know, that's going to come back to the floor. So he's one of those where he has immense political talent and immense political baggage. Right now, you know, that's going to come back to the fore. So he's one of those where he has immense political talent and immense political baggage. Right now, you're seeing the talent aspect, I think. And look, if he continues, it's only going to work out even better. Yeah, and no talk about abortion from him.

Not one word about it. He's not a stupid man. You can always say that. The last thing I want to point out, which I raised yesterday, go ahead and put this up on the screen. I think we had covered before how Libby, Montana has Medicare for all because of this provision that got put into Obamacare, where if you have an area that's deemed a public health disaster and that town had been poisoned basically because of the result of of a mining operation there. But you can if you're deemed a public health disaster, you can actually invoke this provision of Obamacare to get Medicare for life. Now, listen, in my opinion,

everybody deserves Medicare for all. But at the very least, these residents who we know were exposed to a known carcinogen deserve to have health care coverage for themselves and for their children for life. Because after the TV cameras go away and after the immediate symptoms and the smell of chemical contaminants, after that all fades, it's years down the road when we will really know the true health impacts of what ultimately happened here. And to lend myself some credibility, David Dayen sort of seconded the idea because he's the one who flagged for me originally back previously that Libby Montana had this ability and that this was something that the Biden administration could potentially use. And he said he was warming to the idea it requires a public health emergency declaration. EPA has already said to Norfolk

Southern that the situation fits under a circle. I don't know what that is. HHS would then have to create a specific pilot program for East Palestine based on potential exposure. So, and he goes on to add 5,000 new people on the Medicare rolls is a rounding error. Government would have to admit the potential for harm from chemical exposure though, which would seem to be the main hurdle as nobody really wants to say that right now.

So that's the barrier is they don't want to admit that there was potentially damaging long-term chemical exposure here that could make them eligible for this provision. And when they admit it, they have to admit their own role in not going and trying to fix it as soon as possible. So these people, look, they've been screwed from day one. We're not going to let this go. And we just can't. It's

unfortunate that the Biden administration, really the media have left this open for Republicans and for independent journalism. But we're going to take it because, you know, you can't just forget these people. It's just really not right. That's absolutely right. And to that point, we have been partnering with Status Quo on the ground. They have a journalist there who has been talking to residents over days, if not weeks at this point, talking to them about their symptoms and doing some digging in particular into those water tests. So let's get right to it. Louis DeAngelis of Status Quo joins us now. Great to see you, Louis. Good to see you, man. Thanks for having me. So I understand you have some new reporting about the water tests which were conducted and which were used as the basis

for telling residents it's all good. You can drink the water. There's going to be no problems. Tell us what you've learned. Yeah, absolutely. So in reporting from several other folks as well, up until this point, you know, I actually ran into the governor the other day, asked him a couple tough questions that he was not necessarily excited to have asked and did his best to dodge them. And basically, the tests that have been done initially up until basically the last 48 hours were all from contractors hired by either Norfolk Southern or contractors hired by the EPA. These two contractors are companies called Tetratech and CTEH. Both of these companies have histories of mishandling results and information. They've, you know, in some cases falsifying test results. This, you know, these companies were being used. One of them was during the Deep Water Horizon incident. I don't know if you remember back in 2010. The New York Times reported

on that one. And the other one, let me pull it up here just because I want to make sure I have it all accurate for you all. The other incident as well was from the, let's see, the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco. So both of these companies are giving residents more reason to question the results and the answers that their government officials are giving them or, frankly, more realistically not giving them. So with that information, you know, up until 48 hours ago, again, these tests are being provided by these two companies, one of them being hired directly by the railroad, which has no incentive here to necessarily put out the accurate information.

These guys are trying to cover their butts in a lot of this stuff. as we looked into this, I've been on the ground talking with residents since over the last weekend, establishing trust with these folks and actually giving them the time of day to talk to them and build trust. And the children of one of the parents that I've established a good relationship with asked if he could do an interview. Some of his friends wanted to as well. We got permission to do this interview with the children. And one of the kids mentioned that the water fountains in their school, so not the part that you can go down and get a sip from, but the part that you can fill up your water bottle in, is actually open to use inside of their school. And, I mean, my heart just dropped when I heard that. I mean, I've got little nieces. You know, the kids did say there is bottled water in school.

But again, these are children we're talking about. The fact that they can go fill up their water bottle in the school because officials are telling them that the water is fine. When we're relying on, again, predominantly tests that are being contracted out by the railroad. It's unconscionable to me to hear that happen. And, you know, it's it's a it's a And it's a tough story. And I mean, these folks are going through so much here. It's tough to talk about. These conversations that I'm having with residents are hard ones to have. These folks are being put in absolutely impossible positions. Lewis, the piece about these contractors, this is the first time learning about it. Can you give us a little bit more detail about their involvement that was, you know, revealed to be fraudulent in the past, falsifying records?

What was uncovered there, just so we know some of the specifics? Yeah, so I know more about the Deepwater Horizon incident. And in the article from the New York Times, essentially, they do a good job with this. I encourage folks to find it. We can get you all the link to post in the description or something like that. But in that incident, the New York Times essentially found that the Deepwater Horizon incident, the company had every incentive to essentially make these folks be feeling OK and getting them back to work and all this sort of thing. So it's really the incentives that were being placed were obviously incorrect. In all of these instances, there should be independent testing being done. And again, if you want residents here in East Palestine or in any other incidents across the country where this to happen again, let's make sure that we're using a company that does not have a history of any of this kind of fraudulent information. So can you expand then in the context of the general kind of corporate influence and cover-up

that's been going on here that you've been able to witness on the ground? Because this just seems like the latest in a series of things that's been happening. No, it is. And, you know, everything from initially, you know, the railroad burying contaminants underneath the railroad tracks, right? Residents have been very unhappy about that. And essentially, even with the evacuations, right, there's a lot of speculation. Again, I can't confirm any of this necessarily, but there's a lot of speculation that the reason the town was deemed safe again was because the railroad is not able to run trains through the

town while there's still an evacuation notice ordered. If no one's allowed back into town, railroad conductors, that sort of thing, aren't going to be able to be going through this area because it's unsafe. So there's added pressure to get folks back into town, tell them everything is fine, everything is safe, so that they can get the railroad moving again. And I can tell you after being here for several days,

that railroad is busy. I mean, in some times a day, it's every 10 minutes a train going by. Oftentimes right now, the trains are actually being double stacked, the shipping container ones. Residents tell me that that was not the case beforehand, that it was mostly single stacked

and they're trying to catch up on the railroad being closed from before with these double stacked trains, which I don't need to tell you this, the double stacked trains are gonna be heavier than single stacked ones. It's uncomfortable. Again, what's what's going on? We actually have you interviewed residents who voiced exactly the fear and suspicion you were laying out that basically the all clear call was rushed in order to get back to business as usual. Guys, this is

the second site that we have. I believe it's labeled a C5 control room. Let's go ahead and take a listen to that. They had that thing cleaned up and the train running through within 48 hours. They laid those tracks right over top of that and there is no way that they hauled any of it out. They laid it right over top.

And you know, the fire department, when this initially happened, it's a fire. They're trying to put it out. They laid it right over top. And, you know, the fire department, when this initially happened, it's a fire. They were trying to put it out. They were spraying it with water. Where'd that water go? You know, it's right in the ground, in the soil, and they laid those railroad tracks over it. People, and the thing is,

they weren't allowed to run the train through an evacuated area. So as soon as them train tracks were done, the evacuations lifted. People that came home the night they, we didn't come home till the next morning, but there were people that came home that night. They had videos. They had to wait on the train because the train was already up and running before they could get back in their houses. Now, is that a coincidence that they weren't allowed to run through an evacuated area and all of a sudden the train's ready to go and the evacuation was lifted? No, I think not.

So residents very fearful that their health and safety was put at risk in order to make sure that the rail companies could get back to operating a maximum capacity and get back to making the profit margins they're used to. Absolutely. And I mean, again, Stella and Darren there, I talked to them for 45 minutes. They've got foster children, young kids, some of them with pre-existing conditions. And, you know, that house that we were interviewing them in there, that's been in their family for 100 years. This is, you know, they're like, what are we going to pass on to our kids? Our house is worth nothing now. That's a major concern from a lot of folks in town is, you know, there's folks who are looking to retire. They want to sell their house.

What are they going to do now? Norfolk Southern's not talking about buying people's houses at the value that they were beforehand. And, you know, I'm sure they're not looking into doing that at any point. But again, even for renters, I mean, I mentioned earlier on in this, parents are being put in an absolutely impossible situation here, right? I'm talking to people with, I'll give you some of the symptoms that we're hearing. And this isn't just from like one or two people. I'd say roughly half of the people I'm talking to are dealing with some of these symptoms here. So we've got rashes, bloody noses, the bloody noses, especially with kids, like every night in some cases, right? Sore throats, dry and stinging eyes, vomiting, breathing problems, diarrhea.

And again, some of this stuff is hard to necessarily show on camera. But I can tell you from being invited into many of these people's homes, going into some of the businesses here, these people are not BSing you into trying to believe this sort of thing. It's frustrating to see, you know, folks online saying, oh, you know, folks are looking for a handout. These people are in the most impossible situation ever. You walk into some of these places and you can feel it in your eyes. You can smell it. It's an absolute shame that this is going on. And as a result of this, to talk a little bit more about some of the, you know, corruption, gaslighting, whatever you want to call it going on. And as a result of this, to talk a little bit more about some of the, you know, corruption, gaslighting, whatever you want to call it going on here, the state of Ohio set up a clinic in the town for folks to go to. I asked Governor DeWine, I was like, you know, I talked to all of

these people on this street last night. We ran into him on the street because a local resident tipped me off that he was there. I was like, I talked to all these folks on the street. They're experiencing all of these symptoms that I just listed off for you. Where should they go? He goes, they should go to the clinic that the state of Ohio is set up. So we went to the Ohio state, you know, the clinic that they set up in town. And this clinic isn't even providing actual medical services here, right? The clinic is essentially providing folks to talk to, right? So you go, you get, you, you, you know, can, can talk to an expert, I guess, and then they'll refer you to go to your doctor. Hopefully, you've got health insurance. Hopefully,

you have a plan that doesn't have a high deductible or else you're on the hook for emergency room bills. That's unbelievable. And one more point on this, if I can make it. Yeah, go ahead. A lot of the other local journalists in town, and obviously there's exceptions to the rule and even some of the national media. We were there reporting from in front of the medical center, and they're out there essentially reading the press release saying this medical clinic is now open. Members of the public should come here for services and whatnot. Meanwhile, I've got residents texting me saying, this is ridiculous. This is a slap in the face. Yeah, there's no real services here.

There's no real services. And fortunately, you know, we're able to actually be here to do it because nobody, you know, again, there is exceptions to the rule. No doubt about it. But, you know, I'm not an expert journalist. I don't have a journalism degree, right? But I feel like I'm out here asking the questions that a lot of these other folks aren't, which is a shame that I have to be in that position to try to do it. Well, we find ourselves in that position sometimes. We're very happy to help support your work down there.

So we appreciate you being there. And let us know, continue if you ever need any more resources or anything. Yeah, thanks, Louis. Great to have you. If we're able to as well, folks, we're going to be posting a lot of content on Status Coup. If you're not a Status Coup subscriber already, that would be fantastic if you can come follow some of our work there. Yeah, they've been on this from the beginning. Thanks, guys. Appreciate it.

At the same time, there's some rumblings here in Washington, very interesting rumblings. I'm not sure quite yet how to take it serious, so let's put it up there on the screen. From Politico, headline, Biden may not run. Top Dems are quietly preparing for it. The president no longer seems absolutely certain to go for a second term, leaving the party as top aides and potential candidates unsure about 24 and very quietly mulling whatever a plan B would look like. Now, I'm not quite yet sure what to make of this, Crystal, because previously the reporting was it's ironclad. It's totally good to go. The closest advisors, President Biden, all the people the president seeks.

They went ahead and rigged the DNC schedule. Rigged the DNC primary, South Carolina and all of that. All of the launch, it was supposed to happen sometime in April. But now the definitive date is moving. Nobody's quite yet said when the hard deadline or the formal process for actually arriving at the launch date decision will be. The final call was pushed aside. They continue to blame Keeve or the holiday weekend trip more recently that he had taken. And he seems to be dithering as to what exactly he wants to do.

And there's a lot of questions as to why exactly that is. We know that Jill Biden is one of the people that he takes most seriously and her advice. It could be a concern over his age. We've talked about before, be 86 years old. He may not admit in public that his age is a problem, but clearly everybody else in the world is like, I can't even believe anyone that old would ever seek reelection, let alone, you know, current continue to be in the Oval Office. But actually what really struck home for me was a part of the piece where they say Biden is famously indecisive. Yeah. A habit exacerbated by decades in the Senate. And it actually harkens back to the Hillary time. Yes. Well, remember in 2016, he was a serious

possible candidate for president. He almost came close, had some advisors and people who were assembled behind him and couldn't say yes, no. Obama famously kind of put the squeeze on him. Hillary and the DNC says, no, no, no, it's all Hillary's turn. He basically just eventually, the last minute after Hillary's already announced, comes to the decision, okay, I'm not going to do it. Steps aside, continues to say it's one of the biggest regrets of his life in public. But he's now, now he's kind of displaying that same attitude. My

personal opinion is I think he eventually will run, but having the, uh, just cause they have no other option, you know, as long as he's, he can still speak like not even semi coherently, like they're still gonna do it just because there's too much at stake here. But this does demonstrate some, one of the biggest personal problems he's always had the deliberation the indecisiveness and then he gets snappy whenever people try and actually point it out to him he's a micromanager who can't make a decision yeah and it's a disastrous combination of traits for someone in terms of being in a like management position so you know he's got all kinds of staffers who are ready to go for a presidential campaign but you know if he's got all kinds of staffers who are ready to go for a presidential campaign. But, you know, if he's not even making the first decision of, OK, I'm definitely doing it.

Well, then think of how they're paralyzed in terms of, OK, where do we do the headquarters? What does our launch look like? What themes are we running? Are we leaning into? Let's get some polling going. Let's think about the Republican field. All of those sort of down the road decisions get paralyzed by an inability to make that very first decision. Now, do I think that Joe Biden is ultimately going to run again? Yes, I always have. I agree with you, Sagar. The calculus remains the same.

You know, they have a Kamala Harris problem. Maybe if he felt like he could easily hand the baton to somebody else. I don't know that it would be Pete at this point, but to somebody else that he felt like confident about, then maybe it would be different. But because it would be so hard to get around Kamala Harris, first black woman vice president, I think he ends up getting pushed back into this again. And the other piece is the longer that he waits, if he does decide, all right, I'm just too old. I'm not going to do it. Well, you have now really put all of the other contenders on the back foot who haven't had time to fundraise and make their moves, et cetera. And so you really have privileged Kamala Harris in this process. I mean, right now, if you look at the polls, she's the person who is in the lead just sort of by default.

So the longer you wait, the more you make Kamala Harris inevitable. And I think Biden and everybody else in D.C. is at least intelligent enough to know that that could be a complete disaster. So I do think ultimately this is just him being his classic indecisive self. He'll probably ultimately come around to running again. But it's interesting that this sort of chatter is going on right now. Right. So in terms of the contenders, everybody wants to know. So here's the list that Politico has put together. You've got Pritzker, the governor of Ohio. I think he comes from a billionaire family.

Or sorry, Illinois, but comes from a billionaire family. They can't hurt in terms of putting together an instant campaign. What was it recently that he did where he was having some macho moments where the press was liking? Pritzker captured like leftist imagination for a moment. First of all, everybody loves a big boy, so there's that. That's true.

Number two, it was just like- It was on gun control. He actually did a few things as governor that he promised he was gonna do, and people were amazed by that. There was something, too, of like, he cut the gasoline tax when energy prices were really sky high. And then he had all the, forced all the convenience stores to put on

the sign, like this is because of Pritzker. I would do it too. Smart. Yeah, good. I think he lifted the minimum wage, some things like that. So anyway, that's JB Pritzker. Okay. So we got Pritzker. That's one person. Apparently Phil Murphy, the governor of New Jersey, is taking a look. Amy Klobuchar plans to seek re-election to her Senate seat. Crystal's famous. I'm taking a hard look at Amy Klobuchar. I guess the hard look continues for people in the media. Elizabeth Warren, apparently, is another list.

Although, she's getting up there in age herself. Bernie, they put the list. Ro Khanna, somebody who's been here on the show, but keeping his options open, obviously. So that's a list that they've put together. I think it's remarkable that Buttigieg and Kamala were, or I guess those are just so obvious that they're saying that there are other people

that are keeping it. So anyway, we don't know exactly, but at the very least, these pieces are good because they either cause anger or silence from the White House. So inevitably they will be asked about it. They will be asked for comment. And then their own way that they handle it and what it will spur in the future.

If it continues to see inaction, then there's still a possibility. And if it spurs action or gets Biden moving, then it'll go in a different direction. But regardless, it is important. It's one of the widely read places here in Washington where everybody keeps an eye on. And we thought it was absolutely worth covering. Yeah. Meanwhile, the Republican side is, I don't know, it's kind of shaping up a little bit. We've got some polling here showing Trump taking a bit more of a lead in this race.

Well, he's certainly doing much better than I think a lot of people are willing to admit. And let's go and put this up there. So January 2nd, the Republican poll from Morning Consult had Trump at 45%, up by 11 points on Ron DeSantis, who had 34%, Mike Pence at 8%, Nikki Haley at 3%. February 19th, keep in mind, this is after the Haley announcement, Trump is now up to 50%. He's actually gained on Ron DeSantis. Much of that is directly from DeSantis' support at 30%. Mike Pence at 6%, Nikki Haley at 6%. What can you kind of surmise from that? Haley, by simply announcing, was able to get 3% of the anti-Trump vote.

But by creating the contrast without DeSantis and Mike Pence technically in the race, Trump's own support of people who are contrasting him with potential others has actually gone up to the outright 50. Now, listen, a lot can change. Of course, of course, right? And we have not yet seen any actual attack on Trump. But hey, maybe that's a problem when you're running against him. Nikki Haley continues with her idiotic, I'm not kicking sideways, I'm kicking forward. First of all, what does it mean? Second, why are we kicking? We're continuing to kick on national television. High heels.

High heels and all that. But it's not just her. It's all of the other potential contenders. Mike Pence has not said a damn word about Donald Trump. Ron DeSantis hasn't said a damn word. Tim Scott, who apparently wants to throw his hat in the ring, too. Well, he was on TV just last night. What is Sean Hannity asking? He said, well, OK, what makes you different from Trump in any way? It's basically like nothing. Let's take a listen. What are the differences in terms of policy positions that, for example, you may have with President Trump?

Probably not very many at all. I am so thankful that we have President Trump in office. Frankly, the policies that we were able to pass from 2017 to 2020 were monumental. All right. So I happen to think that the policy things were monumental. We were better off for Trump. So if you were better off for Trump being president, then why shouldn't he be president again? This is the problem with all of these people. They're not willing to take any real shots, even in terms of the formative message. You know, I have thought that DeSantis could make a very powerful general election argument as to why we should move away from Trump. A lot of people don't like Trump. Maybe two-thirds of the country is either ambivalent,

thinks negatively of him. Half of those ambivalent people are willing to hold their nose and vote for him. But they're not technically excited. It's really only the MAGA people that are. For those people, that would be a critical way. But you gotta win the primary. And to win the primary, you have to care, you have to speak to the issues that they really care about. For a lot of the Republican base right now,

it is very clear, it's culture war. But here's the thing on culture war. How do you outflank Donald Trump on that? He invented the modern culture war. You're notflank donald trump on that he invented the modern you're not gonna own the lips harder than donald he's the he's the king of own the troll king from day one and always kind of has been then and he'll also by the way he'll always up the ante right you know everybody with obama they were like willing to play footsie with else he's like he wasn't born here at all you know he's like he knew it was bs He just didn't care because, and I remember there's private reporting where Romney apparently

was like, Hey man, like maybe don't say any of this. And Trump was like, you have no idea how much it gets the crowd going. He's a performer. Like he knows exactly what he's doing and he doesn't care about what the red lines are in political correctness. Yeah. Always every single time. So first of all, you can't do that. And second, you know, in terms of the Republican base right now, on economics, the Republican Party nationally has never been more out of step with them and their desire to preserve Social Security and Medicare. Sure, they might buy that Biden's spending or whatever has led to inflation and generally blame him for that, but they still want their entitlements and they're really loving the raise that they got on social security. So to put that contrast, I think with the two of them,

fundamentally, and I'm watching all these would be Republican candidates. They're either completely behind him on the issues that matter the most, or in the case of Nikki Haley, she's trying to basically be like a liberal left Democrat on Ukraine policy saying, no, we actually have to send even more weapons, her and people like Mike Pompeo. So he's got it. He's got it dialed in, I think, to where things are right now. Yeah. I mean, listen, the two issues he's really leaning into are Ukraine and social security. He's smart. It's very intelligent. And on social security, on Ukraine, you're going to get a mix of answers. DeSantis is trying to like move into a position to at least signal like he's a Ukraine skeptic. Although again, like the thing Trump will do is he'll just,

again, come out and say it like no tanks and I will solve this on day one. It's so easy to do. Right. Whereas others will craft their little talking points and try to play to the base. But he just comes out and says it. And then on Social Security, every one of these people, including Nikki Haley and Mike Pence, have already—Mike Pence wants to privatize Social Security. Okay, dude, good luck with that. Nikki Haley is already out there saying, like, oh, we got to put them on the table, which means cuts. And then I don't know how Ron DeSantis is going to handle it, but he has a lot of comments in his past backing up Paul Ryan's Medicare cuts, saying we need to do the same thing with Social Security, saying we need to increase the eligibility age, which of course means cuts as well. So he now either has to flip-flop on those comments, which obviously Trump is not going to let him get away with, and look kind of weak.

Or he has to stand by them and be dramatically at odds with the rest of the Republican base. So, you know, he is doing an effective job of grabbing the attention, of shaping the battlefield as he ultimately wants it and forcing everyone else to respond. And if you can't even find a single person in the Republican Party who's going to tell you why we should why you should move on from Trump, what issues they're different on. I don't know what to tell you, because that's not the way politics works. If this guy was so great while he was in office, then you should just reelect him again. Yeah, exactly. And, you know, with Mike Pence, he actually does have some policy differences on Ukraine. Abortion.

And on abortion in particular and on Social Security, as I just mentioned. Now, do I think those are winning positions for him? Not particularly, although on abortion with the Republican base, he might be able to do something there. But he doesn't even want to talk about those actual, real, measurable policy differences that he has. So it's just, honestly, it's kind of embarrassing. Oh, absolutely. And I think it will only continue to be so. Yes. Speaking of embarrassing, Sagar missed out on our coverage of Marjorie Taylor Greene's national divorce comments. So initially she was just like, we need a national divorce. Everybody I say says this

because our differences are so irreconcilable. She kind of softened it to be like, well, we'd stay together as a country, but this would just limit the federal government, something like that, because she got so much backlash across the aisle. So Sean Hannity decided, this is our second Hannity appearance here,

he's becoming very central apparently, decided to have her on his show and effectively back her up in this idea. Take a listen. Green is saying that a national divorce would empower individual states to form a smaller government, reduce the federal debt, set their own environmental standards. And the congresswoman has another idea as well, banning people who move from blue states to red states from voting for five years so they don't bring their bad politics with them. I mean, I look at topics, for example, how do you reconcile defund the police and no bail laws with law and order? How do you reconcile secure borders and wide open borders? How do you reconcile energy independence with energy dependence and new green dealism? How do you reconcile peace through strength with people that want to gut our defense? I don't see middle ground

on a lot of these issues. So what is the other answer if it's not a divorce? So Sagar, since you haven't reacted to all of this, let me get your thoughts. I don't know. I mean, it's just so pathetic, to be honest. First of all, Marjorie's whole turn towards the establishment i guess that one took a hard right yes not exactly what happened there she's like face turn is over returning right back to the kookery i mean i just find these so pathetic and only the most cringe grifting right-wing twitter personalities would ever think that this is actually going to happen. And, you know, let's put on the historical hat. We have had many periods in our history which were full of far more domestic strife than this. And guess what? There was no war.

A period after the American Civil War was far more contentious politically here. The period in the 19— maybe like the progressive area, but like 1900 to let's say like 1920, just an immense amount of fighting over, uh, internally over like civil rights, race, the economy, the progressive era combination. Okay. And then the 1960s, which for all the talk of how bad things are, we are nowhere even close to what things and how bad they were in 1968. So, just, this is all just a fantasy. And, honestly, it's just getting people ginned up. Part of the reason I recognize it as such is, look, I'm from Texas.

And there is a cringe, annoying element of, like, the most mid-baseline Texas take take of like, well, technically we were our own country and we, we could secede. And you know, the war between the States and all that type of discussion with, you know, the Confederate belt buckle holding onto something, even though their parents are from like Ohio. Um, look, my point is, is that this is a LARP. It's one where a lot of people online, like love to get in these idiotic discussions. But fundamentally, A, it's not going to happen. B, it's also a dumb idea. See, we actually fought an entire war called the American Civil War to resolve the question of whether this could ever be allowed to happen. And 300-some people died in the Union Army to make sure that it wasn't going to and preserve that then in the Constitution around the right to secede.

So there are so many fundamental levels as to why this is dumb yeah but for her uh it's smart if you want to make money you know the most cringe elements of these people they're they're they're loving this well the thing that is funny to me is she keeps on insisting like i'm just talking to regular people and that's what they tell me it's like this is the most online take of all time which she demonstrates idiot likes exactly when she's. That's why she pointed to her idiot likes. Exactly. When she's like, that's why it's got so many likes and retweets. It's like, no, this is the most Twitter-brained, dumbass thing ever. But yeah, does it serve her interests?

Sure. Sure, it does. Sure. Absolutely. And as Emily pointed out, which I think is an important fact to remember, Marjorie Taylor Greene lives in Georgia. What do you do with a state like Georgia? It's a blue state. Yes. Is it a red state? Right. You know, two Democratic senators

went for Joe Biden, but you got a Republican governor. So how's that one going to work out? And her new idea is if Democrats move into red states, they should be banned from voting for five years. So, yeah, just very, very open, like, small-D democratic instinct here to do. Like, the people you don't like and disagree with, just don't let them vote. That's actually an old carpet-bagging sentiment from the old South after the American Civil War. Yeah.

Why would anyone from the state which got burned to the ground during the last Civil War want to have another one? Like, ask people in Atlanta how that worked out for them. So, anyway, it pissed me off. i find there are so many right-wing personalities who are always you know uh who are always leaning into this and it's just to try and get people jinn like all these you know like feeding the gun paranoia and look i support gun ownership always well i mean i'm people here know i'm not even for you know many restrictions but I've seen, I want to say, I've seen a liberal version of this, too.

Oh, sure. It's like, oh, we support blue states. We pay all their bills. Pay more taxes and support more, so let them go, et cetera, et cetera. So, I mean, there is a liberal version of this, but I don't know that a member of Congress on the Democratic side has articulated it. And I don't know that it's been given a serious platform on a liberal talk show either. Yeah, and nor should it. You know, this type of kookery,

like you should just keep it out to where it is. But congratulations. I'm sure it helped in terms of increasing your Twitter followers and in terms of your fundraising numbers. But I personally find it disgusting. All right, Sagar, what are you looking at? Well, former President Trump's been making a lot of waves

in recent days in his stance on Ukraine. Unquestionably, the pressure on the GOP base has forced his only serious potential rival, Ron DeSantis, to rhetorically adopt the same framing as him on Ukraine after Biden's most recent to Kiev. By a mile, it could be the most consequential stance of the entire campaign. A lot of this came together in the most recent video that Trump put out about Ukraine. Let's take a listen to some of it. World War III has never been closer than it is right now. We need to clean house of all of the warmongers and America last globalist in the deep state, the Pentagon, the State Department, and the national security industrial complex. One of the reasons I was the only president in

generations who didn't start a war is that I was the only president in generations who didn't start a war is that I was the only president who rejected the catastrophic advice of many of Washington's generals, bureaucrats, and the so-called diplomats who only know how to get us into conflict, but they don't know how to get us out. Okay, I'm really liking what I'm hearing so far. But is it true? The thing about Trump in 2016 is we had no idea what he was going to do. That was kind of the fun part. But with Trump in 2023, we actually

do know what he might do because he literally served in office. Is it true he rejected the advice of generals and warmongering diplomats? Well, in some cases, yes. In arguably the most important theater of conflict at the time, though, he did not. He actually did the opposite. Let's take Afghanistan. Trump made a big deal about withdrawing from Afghanistan. He pledged to end the war. And the most consequential thing that he did in his first months in office was instead to accept the advice of the National Security Council, the generals, and the warmongers who he hired to send 4,000 more troops to Afghanistan. That move alone bought us five more years in Afghanistan.

It eventually collapsed as a strategy when doing the exact same thing over and over didn't work. And he eventually negotiated the peace deal with the Taliban. Look, better late than never, I guess, but it's an important indicator. Then consider the theater of conflict that's most important today, Ukraine. President Obama took an immense amount of heat from hawkish Republicans for refusing to send Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine for their war against Russian militias in the east.

This is before the invasion. Obama refused to do it because he thought it would make relations with Russia worse and it wouldn't actually do that much on the battlefield. It was a key litmus test for Russian policy at the time. Well, Trump actually reversed the Obama policy in his first year in office. He accepted the neocon advice of the Pentagon and the State Department and greenlit anti-tank missiles to Ukraine. If you'll remember, one of the reasons Democrats impeached him was for implying that those exact missile deliveries might be connected to trying to dig up dirt on Hunter Biden. Belying it, though, is the fact that Trump actually did what Obama refused to do. He escalated the conflict in Ukraine on the advice of the generals. This is pure policy. It doesn't even

mention that Trump consistently hired national security advisors like H.R. McMaster, Nikki Haley, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, dozens of other neocons who outright disagreed with him completely. And in almost all cases, he deferred to their judgment while in office. Personnel is policy. That's the saying in Washington. But OK, let's continue listening to the video. The State Department, Pentagon, and national security establishment will be a very different place by the end of my administration. In fact, just into my administration, it'll be a very different place, and it'll get things done. Okay, again, I really like the sound of what I'm hearing. But does it match reality?

The first Secretary of Defense that Trump hired was whom? General James Mattis, who consistently pushed for escalating the conflict in Syria, not withdrawing from Afghanistan, continued support for Ukraine, more confrontation with Iran. Eventually, Mattis actually quit the administration and resigned because Trump wanted to withdraw from Syria, and he didn't agree with that. So, let's keep watching the video because there's even more irony. We'll also stop the lobbyists and the big defense contractors from going in and pushing our senior military and national security officials toward conflict only to

reward them when they retire with lucrative jobs, getting paid millions and millions of dollars. That's a fantastic idea. There's just one problem. The person he literally hired to replace Mattis, well, it's got bad news. It was actually Mark Esper, who at the time he was chosen, was literally the top lobbyist for Raytheon in Washington, D.C., one of the largest defense contractors in the world. And lo and behold, Esper did exactly what Trump is accusing people like him of doing. He consistently refused and stopped any efforts by Trump to actually withdraw from Afghanistan. In fact, his only criticism of Biden on Ukraine so far has been he hasn't sent enough weapons

to Ukraine. Are you sensing a pattern here? If you're a Trump bootlicker, you can always find an excuse. Oh, he tried. So what? He hired these people. He's a grown man. Why did he hire them? His whole thing was hiring and firing people. In fact, two of the people posturing against him, Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo, literally worked for him and have both been beating the war drum on Ukraine. I get that if you're a Trump person,

this is hard to hear. I guess I'm just one of those people who likes to see some of these things actually done. A hard and a tough lesson that I learned through the Trump years is almost all of it is just talk. Trump does and never has had the inclination or the follow through to be a competent commander in chief or an effective vessel for policy priorities. Now, to be fair, it's possible he has changed. Many people around him, like Johnny DeStefano, they said it will never happen again,

that there's a new plan where they're going to fire the federal bureaucracy and bring in people who have displayed total policy alignment with Trump. We'll see. I've heard it all before. You should remember Trump was literally so incompetent, he couldn't get the travel ban done, he couldn't get DACA rescinded, he lost the census battle over the illegal immigrants at the Supreme Court, all because the people who worked for him messed up the basic legal filings. Keep that in mind when you hear him talk. I was excited once, too. Some of this could come to reality. Unfortunately, almost all of it did not happen.

Here's the thing with Trump. I think the only effective case- And if you want to hear my reaction to Sagar's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at BreakingPoints.com. Crystal, what are you taking a look at? Well, guys, I got a little mystery for you today. Take a look at this map. So this was recently published in an economics paper. It was analyzed here by the Washington Post.

This shows the nation's average credit scores by county. Dark blue is bad. Mustard brown, I guess you'll call that, is good. And an obvious trend leaps off the page. The South as a region has abysmal credit scores, starting in Southern Virginia and in Appalachia and creeping all the way down the panhandle of Florida and over to Texas. You see a whole lot of people who are struggling with a lot of debt. Now, you might think this is a really simple story of class. And in a sense, it is. Overall, places with higher poverty do have lower credit scores. But this dynamic did not come close to accounting for this highly regional and very specific

phenomena. Even in wealthy areas in the South, people had lower FICO scores than their Midwestern counterparts. Now, that's a terrible situation for Southerners. There are few things as pernicious as debt for constraining your life choices and crippling you with stress and anxiety. Throughout history, debt has actually been used as a tool of control. You can think of the company store in mining towns where workers would end up with debts they could not pay and effectively working as indentured servants. Or you can think about the IMF and the World Bank, which lend developing countries money and then they use that debt as leverage to force shock doctrine, neoliberal policies onto them. When a person is in debt, their freedom is constrained.

Now, debt and bad credit can quickly mount into financial ruin and personal disaster. How are you going to finance a car when yours dies? How are you going to get an apartment? And for those who are already behind financially, a low credit score means you will be paying brutally high interest rates, helping to feed a cycle where you just get further and further behind. So what is causing this regional crisis of debt and of bad credit? Well, let me show you another map that is going to make it pretty clear. This one is too, also courtesy of the Washington Post here, and it's a map of medical debt. According to credit data from the Urban Institute that's quoted in this article, 92 of the 100 counties with the highest share of adults struggling with medical debt,

they're all in the South. The remainder are neighboring states, Oklahoma and Missouri. article, 92 of the 100 counties with the highest share of adults struggling with medical debt, they're all in the South. The remainder are neighboring states Oklahoma and Missouri. Now, when you think about it, it makes total sense. Medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in America, and the total size of this crushing debt burden, it's actually even bigger than we had previously imagined. Recent research found that $140 billion in medical debt is now in collections. That's nearly double previous estimates from back in 2016. Between 2009 and 2020, medical debt actually became the single largest source of debt that is currently held by collections agencies. Now, I want you to understand other wealthy nations would look at this as utter insanity and a moral atrocity because it is.

We ruin people. We destroy their lives because they happen to get sick. And there's a very specific reason why Southern states are the ones with the highest levels of medical debt and the worst attendant credit scores. It's not an accident. It's not about overall poverty. It is a specific political choice. These are the states where governors decided they would rather virtue signal about how much they hate Obama than expand Medicaid as part of the Affordable Care Act. Now, look, I am not a big fan of Obamacare as it left the status quo system largely unchanged with health insurers, hospitals, every other part of the corrupt for-profit health care system feeding like pigs at the trough while patients continue to get screwed. But Obamacare was an improvement over the previous corrupt, disgusting, immoral system. And now, after having been in law for over a decade, states that went forward with the full

Medicaid expansion have significantly separated from states that did not on that metric of medical debt. According to the New York Times, the states that have declined to expand Medicaid, particularly in the South, started out having more medical debt before Obamacare passed. And since other states have expanded Medicaid, that chasm has grown wider. In 2020, Americans living in states that did not expand Medicaid owed an average of $375 more than those in states that participated in the program. That is roughly a 30% increase from the gap that existed the year before enactment. Now, you could see on that chart how the sooner you expand in Medicaid to cover working class people, the better as a state you're faring on medical debt. But let's not forget, the existence of such a chart at all is a total

failure. It's not just in the South where politicians have made political choices that have miserated their constituents. It's the entire nation. Debt and the poor credit scores that come along with it are real constraints on freedom and the ability to pursue happiness. We all deserve the freedom to go to the doctor when we need to, to be able to take off work to recover, and to not have our lives ruined

because we happen to get sick. Nearly everyone accepts this, yet nothing changes. Not because we can't make other choices, but because political elites, bankrolled by those who profit off the current system, do everything in their power to block change and convince you that it's all impossible. These regional disparities highlighted so graphically on that map. They are a sharp reminder that we are not just powerless as a nation to improve the condition of our people's lives. Different policy choices lead to starkly, measurably different outcomes.

And the different outcome I want to see is zero medical debt for anyone, anywhere. And I thought this was really fascinating. I wouldn't have put the pieces together. No, I asked you. And if you want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at BreakingPoints.com. All right, guys. Great having you back, Sagar. Thank you.

I appreciate it. Thanks for holding down the fort. Emily did a fantastic job. I really did miss— People loved her. I miss being here on the show. I got to say it. It's like your baby that you're like, oh, man.

He was supposed to be off. He was texting us at like 5 a.m. I was like, oh, you got to cover this. Throw this. Take this out. Yeah. Making sure. You guys were all amazing.

Thank you all so much for your support and for everything. I'm really glad that we have counterpoints that we can lean on. And we've got great partner content continuing for the weekend. Spencer, by the way, doing a fantastic job. We're going to have him and talk to him on the show. I really enjoyed his latest video. It's always a privilege. Developments are moving on the studio, on the logo.

All the new developments. We'll reveal all of that to you as soon as we can. But it's great to be back. We're going to hit the ground running. 2024 is finally here. Things are heating up. It's great to be back. We're going to hit the ground running. 2024 is finally here. Things are heating up. It's going to be a hell of a lot of fun. And it's always a privilege to do it with you and with everybody who is here.

So we love you and we will see you all later. I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated.

I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The OGs of uncensored motherhood are back and badder than ever. I'm Erica. And I'm Mila. And we're the hosts of the Good Moms Bad Choices podcast, brought to you by the Black Effect Podcast Network every Wednesday.

Yeah, we're moms, but not your mommy. Historically, men talk too much. And women have quietly listened. And all that stops here. If you like witty women, then this is your tribe. Listen to the Good Moms Bad Choices podcast every Wednesday on the Black Effect Podcast Network, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you go to find your tribe. Listen to the Good Moms, Bad Choices podcast every Wednesday on the Black Effect Podcast Network, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you go to find your podcast.

What up, y'all? This your main man, Memphis Bleak, right here, host of Rock Solid Podcast. June is Black Music Month, so what better way to celebrate than listening to my exclusive conversation with my bro, Ja Rule. The one thing that can't stop you or take away from you is knowledge. So whatever I went through while I was down in prison for two years,

through that process, learn, learn from me. Check out this exclusive episode with Ja Rule on Rock Solid. Open your free iHeartRadio app, search Rock Solid, and listen now. This is an iHeart Podcast.