Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 2/6/26: AIPAC Takes MAJOR L, NEW Epstein Cell Video, Job Numbers PLUMMET

Episode Date: February 6, 2026

Krystal, Ryan and Mac discuss AIPAC takes L in NJ, new Epstein cell video released, jobs numbers plummet & MORE.Mac's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/GoodPoliticGuyTo become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.comMerch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Black history lives in our stories, our culture, and the conversations we still having today. This Black History Month, the podcast, I didn't know. Maybe you didn't either. Digs into the moments, perspectives, and experiences that don't always make the textbook. Let me tell you about Garrett Morgan. Brough had to pretend he didn't even exist just to sell his own invention.

Listen to, I didn't know. Maybe you didn't either. from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or simply wherever you get your podcast. 1969, Malcolm and Martin are gone. America is in crisis. At a Morehouse college, the students make their move.

These students, including a young Samuel L. Jackson, locked up the members of the Board of Trustees, including Martin Luther King's senior. It's the true story of protests and rebellion in black American history that you'll never forget. I'm Hans Charles. I'm Minnalik Lamumba. Listen to the A building on the I Heart Radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. What if mind control is real? If you could control the behavior of anybody around you, what kind of life would you have? Can you hypnotically persuade someone to buy a car? When you look at your car, you're going to become overwhelmed with such good feelings. Can you hypnotize someone into sleeping with you?

I gave her some suggestions to be sexually aroused. Can you get someone to join your cult? NLP was used on me to access my subconscious. Mind Games, a new podcast exploring NLP, aka Neurilingualic programming. Is it a self-help miracle, a shady hypnosis scam, or both? Listen to Mind Games on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here. Independent Media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show.

This is the only place where you can find. honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else. So if that is something that's important to you, please go to breakingpoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media, and we hope to see you at breaking points.com. Good morning, everybody. Happy Friday, and more importantly, happy commie takeover. We even have a glorious victory that we can talk about today. That's right indeed. Yes, we banished the right wingers from the

program. You know both sides, just one side. That's right. That's how we're rolling on this Friday. That's right. It's like a DSA meeting.

That's right. Still can have some vicious arguments, but you know, allegedly all aligned. Yes. We do have a lot of interesting you get to. We're going to start with this

New Jersey race, which really kind of came out of nowhere, a lefty win here in a total A-PAC. Own goal, we got a bunch of Epstein, horror to get through, including some new images from the prison, the night that he was, that he was unalived, however that occurred. We've got economic numbers. We've got new Trump election comments in the premium half.

We've got the Bitcoin drop. We've got some really messy right-wing drama that, frankly, I've been, could not take my eyes off of. And some very, very charming clips of Zoran Mamdani with some young children. So definitely want to be able to get access to that. So if you're not a premium subscriber and you're able to, breakingpoints.com, And then you get the whole Friday show and the AMAs and all that good stuff. So we go ahead and jump into this exciting news out of New Jersey. Yes. So this was a talk. Go ahead and throw up the results here.

But this was a total own goal from sort of the establishment and also a major own goal from APEC. So these are the results that we have from New Jersey's 11th district. Right now, at least it's showing. And I don't think we're at 100% of the total. It's still sitting at around 91.3% of the expected. votes counted right now. But you can see here 28.7% by just a couple hundred votes. We had Annalia Mejia, who topped out over Tom Malinowski. And neither of these candidates were actually the APAC backed candidate who came all the way in third place down here. But Ryan, why don't you

go ahead and break down the massive own goal here by AAC and the establishment in this? Yeah. And so the context is this is a super rich like northern New Jersey. Jersey suburban district. Like a lot of these people work in New York City. A lot of them are actually like pharmaceutical industry, like pharmaceutical executives. Like this, it's just a very kind of funny place for a Bernie Sanders candidate to win. Well, and this was, sorry, this was Mikey Sherrill's district. That's the reason they're having this special election. She's now the governor of New Jersey. Now, she sort of repositioned herself as more of a populist, but she, you know, she very much, like was a centrist-style candidate because that was the thought of the type of candidate that

would win a Democratic primary and succeed in a general election in this district. Yeah. And so Tom Malinowski was a former member of Congress. He lost election. He got in some trouble over his stock trading. But otherwise, you know, fairly standard. He had had some background in the human rights world. But other than that was kind of fairly standard Democrat. Mejia, longtime activists. Like, this is the kind of person that, Crystal, you probably know her. We, like, I've known her for very many years just as somebody who's been, like, in the, like, in the working families party, Bernie Sanders, you know, world.

She was a top aide to Bernie Sanders during the campaign. And so when she jumped in, kind of all those people got behind her, which gave her and got behind her early. And Elizabeth Warren also got behind her. So it was like the whole kind of faction was together. you know, AOC, Bernie, et cetera. But she had no money. Like, I think she spent $400,000.

And this is the New York media market. So, you know, that's going to buy you some mailers. And, you know, that's, you can have some staff. But APEC dropped more than $2 million. And so what they did, they, Malinowski, they've supported him in the past. He's been fairly friendly to Israel. But like all Democrats, he's getting a little bit skittish about their relationship with Israel. And so he said some mildly critical things. And I think he might have

suggested that some weapon systems maybe ought to get some review at some point. And so they're like, oh, no, no. Like, what a radical. This too radical. This will not fly. So they dropped more than $2 million on him at the very end to try to crush him. The reason that so many outlets called this in New Jersey for Molanowski and then had to very embarrassingly retract their calls, is that he won the early vote fairly decisively. So in other words, before APEC's money has really, like, landed in the race, he's going to comfortably win this three-person race. But he then in the election day vote finished third in most places.

So they knocked him even behind the also-ran APAC candidate. And you started seeing Mejia winning by 20, 30, 40, 50 points on election day. And it was enough then to overcome the early. And so this was something that Jewish insider recovered the race. They warned about it. Dave Dan was like, and like people watching the race, I saw Adam Green, who runs P-T-R-C this week. And he was like, APEC might deliver this for us. So this was like, it was known that like APEC might actually take Malinowski down far.

enough that it would allow Mejia with her ground game and her strong base of support to sneak through. And she did. Now, the best part, Mack, do you have the ad? So when APEC spends in these races, obviously they're not saying, don't vote for Tom Malinowski because he's too mean to Israel. He didn't support our genocide. Like he wants to restrict weapons that are going to, they don't say that. They, they pull Malinowski and they figure out. what are the things that work against him? And for him, they obviously did the stock trading scandal that he had, but they led with ICE because he's a former member of Congress.

He funded ICE with votes back in like 2019. And so they hammered him. Ironically, APAC is like they love nobody more than Trump. But they're like Tom Malinowski stood with Donald Trump to fund the evil ICE. We can't trust Tom Malinowski. And what's amazing, these ads worked in suburban, rich New Jersey among Democratic primary voters. They were like, oh, he funded ICE. Get him out of here.

So, yeah, let's let's cue on up if you've got it, Meg. ISIS deportation force is out of control. Tom Melanowski voted with Trump to increase funding. And that's not all. He was caught cashing in on COVID-related stocks while in Congress. This is about having privileged information. and using it to your own personal advantage. He failed to disclose the stock trading as required by law.

Tom Melanowski bought or sold up to a million dollars worth of stock. We just can't trust Tom Melanowski. UDP is responsible for the content of the sand. Amazing. Absolutely amazing. Even the tagline, he can't be trusted. Like, it makes sense to me that you're at a point in time where the Democratic base is like, we got to figure out which of these Democratic electeds we can trust

that are going to like actually have some backbone and do the things. things we want them to do. So even the tagline itself, you know, fits the mood of where the Democratic bases and what their concerns are. So thank you, APEC. Yeah. And ICE is a big litmus test right now. So, you know, it's a good one to hammer him on. Yeah, APEC. So if you're now, think about it. So if you're a Democrat and you're just a Normie Democrat who's been winning reelection, you've been casting the votes that your party wants you to cast, you've been trying to stay on the right side of your voters, you have now learned that there is a potential huge cost to pay for supporting ICE. You get out there and you defend ICE on TV or to your

local news, that clip is going to be used against you now. You vote to fund ICE. That's going to be used or could be used against you. If you get a primary challenger, because APAC has done the extremely expensive focus groups and polling for us. and now they have road tested it in this district, and APEC has let us know, the best way to take out a sitting member of Congress in a Democratic primary is to hit them with the ICE message. I mean, and it comes as there are, you know,

going to be these negotiations in the Senate about what are going to be the additional restrictions put on, you know, ICE and CBP, et cetera. So it also comes at an important moment. I mean, it does remind me in a certain way of Zoran's victory. because he showed like, no, no, even in New York City, one of the most heavily Jewish cities on the planet where, you know, in a Democratic primary, you probably will not get a more pro-Zionist Democratic primary electorate than New York City. And even there, Israel is poisonous.

Even there, you can win as an avowed, like, pro-BDS anti-Zionist and be successful. And so this is the type of district, which would be the least, you would expect to be the least amenable to the anti-ice messaging. And here they find that it actually was the most powerful message about this guy. And to your point, Ryan, seeing the way the vote shifted from the early vote before the ads drop, and then the day of vote, and there's this, you know, cataclysmic drop-off for him, I mean, that tells you, that tells you everything about just how powerful and just how horrified the Democratic base is about ice. I mean, the other funny thing here, obviously, is like, how did, with all their money and all of their consultants and all of that, how did APEC not realize they were playing with fire here?

Like, why didn't they just throw, you know, maybe like half a mill at some or, or, you know, another measly million dollars into the race to also hit Annalila? Yeah, the APAC candidate had put out an internal poll showing her competitive, but nobody believed it. Like, no, you're not, you're not actually competitive. And they didn't spend a lot of money boosting her. Well, they didn't spend clearly enough. Now, it's very, it's so expensive. Like, that's, APEC does have some limits on what it can do, believe it or not. And in the New York media market, that's, that's pretty tough.

Their new cope is, oh, well, maybe we'll beat her in the general election because she's so radical. And it's like, well, Harris won that. So the elections in mid-April. Harris won this district by eight points. Forget about it. Like, it's not happening. He's going to win running. It's not going to be close.

She's going to win by double digits. Then their cope is, well, then maybe we can beat her in November when she runs for re-election. Because this is a special election. She'll serve out the term. But it's like it's still a Harris Plus 8 district and people are still going to be mad in November. There's some question. Malinowski, I think, has said he will not run. It's a weird situation.

So the general election is in April. And then the next primary is in June. like mid-June for the November election. So if the APAC candidate or Malinowski wants to run, they have to endorse her for the general election in April, you know, campaign with her, say, let's beat the Republican. And then immediately on April 17th, they have to turn around and start a campaign against her for the June primary.

So how do you do that? How do you support someone for two months and then run against them immediately for six weeks? Yeah. Like so. Well, the other storyline here is there was another candidate. This was his name Brendan Gill or something like that who got fourth place, who he was the one that was actually backed by the New Jersey Democratic Party machine, which is one of the more powerful machines nationally. And Steve Kornacki, who got a start in New Jersey politics and has encyclopedic knowledge to this day of every aspect of it. He was marveling at that piece because in, you know, in previous cycles, if you.

you had the backing of the New Jersey machine, it was just basically like a fait accompli that you were going to be the nominee, like it was a done deal. So yeah, so here's Kornaghi, a couple of questions. If Mejia is in fact the winner, well, one of these candidates or someone else, challenge her in the June primary for a full term. Remember, tonight's primary is just for the special election of Phil, Mikey Cheryl's unexpired term. There's a major push from outside groups, particularly pro-Israel, to take down Malinowski and to boost Tahisha Way. Would Way be interested in a one-on-one shot at Mejia for a full term. Would that outside support, outside support, follow her? This is a Democratic-leaning district. Harris carried it by nine, Cheryl, by 15 in the governor's race last year.

Dems have been overperforming across the country in special elections of late, but New Jersey 11 does also contain areas more favorable to the pre-Trump. And Republicans have nominated a potentially appealing candidate Randolph Mayor Joe Hathaway. Could Mejia backed by AOC and Bernie Sanders be a tough sell at all in that mashup? So, I mean, I think based on the special election results that we've seen across the country, I don't think there's too much to worry about. But hey, I guess you never know. Yeah, we'll see. And speaking of the machine, they did the exact same thing wrong in this race that they did in 2018 with Joe Crowley, which is their idea is let's make these elections as undemocratic as possible. Get as few people out to the polls as possible. And then we'll be able to go to nursing homes and get our. you know, 15,000 machine people out and will win like that. And that, that's a flaw in the Death Star because that means if you can yourself find 17,000 people in a district of 700,000, then, then you can win. I don't know, Mack, if you have the exact vote totals on there, but it's like nothing. And notice that we're talking about this on a Friday. Isn't that weird?

Wait a minute. I thought in America elections are on Tuesday. No, New Jersey stops at nothing to try to depress turnout. So, They even scheduled this election for a Thursday to confuse people and make sure that almost nobody came out. And congratulations, you know, they played themselves. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. She's going to win with fewer than 20,000 votes total.

That's crazy. It's crazy. That's crazy. Which does mean that, you know, you can kind of bootstrap it. Like, that's a small enough number. You can knock on that many doors. Yeah. I know Rokana was in the district earlier this week for an event, like, just with the

sort of star power of, you know, Bernie and AOC and Elizabeth Warren and Roe coming in and sporting her, that was enough. And so it didn't really require that much money. I mean, it's extraordinary. And, you know, the other, the last thing to say about it is the reason that, well, two things. Number one, I'm sure everybody noted that ad we played, it doesn't say paid for by APEC. It says paid for by what is a United Democracy Project. Because, I mean, they know that First, you know, APAC funds these things, but they know their name is toxic, so they come up with these, like, we love democracy, you know, type of names to, so you don't realize who's actually behind these attack ads. That's number one. But number two, this APAC themselves positioned this as a shot across the bow, right?

They, they know that Malinowski is not the most, like, anti-Israel guy, but they wanted to discipline the Democratic caucus and show, like, if you waver even one. If you have a moment of weakness watching us blow up babies and are like, maybe we shouldn't think about maybe doing something. No, no, you have to be locked up or we're coming for you. And so the fact that they failed on what they wanted to be a demonstration of their strength and a, you know, a grab to discipline the Democratic caucus and get them back completely in line is also really noteworthy and, you know, quite extraordinary and significant. Yeah. Just a piece of trivia.

They call that. I was like, why on earth do they call? And at least this is their actual super. This is Apex's actual super PAC. They didn't make up what they do in a lot of districts is they just make up a fake new one that then doesn't have to disclose the donors until afterwards. So this is their real one. I was like, why is it called United Democracy Project?

This makes no sense. It goes back to their line that they're the only democracy in the Middle East. So we are uniting, uniting the American democracy with the only democracy in the Middle East. Right. So that's where that's where that brand comes from. Well, Trump is in a lot of ways trying to make us more like that is really, quote unquote, democracy. So I guess the name does make some sense there. Yeah.

I mean, my last thing on this, I mean, where do you guys in the broader Democratic, you know, party sort of space, where do you guys think APEC stands right now? I mean, is it sort of like a death knell almost of A-PAC? I mean, you know, you guys both mentioned they can't even publicly endorse some candidates right now because it's such a poison pill. Overwhelmingly, the polls are showing that Democratic voters would rather have a candidate that is not backed by the pro-Israel lobby than is backed by the Israel lobby. Majority of Democrats think Israel committed a genocide. Like, it has become such an overwhelmingly toxic brand that these candidates can't even associate themselves with the Israel lobby. And even then they have workarounds and they, you know, AAP will tell their individual donors to go donate directly. And they're trying to figure out ways to still get the funding mechanisms in there without attaching their brand directly.

But it seems like the issue has basically been one for the Israel critic crowd at a ground level. Yeah, the money still being there. I'm working on a story with Dave Day and over the prospect, which hopefully will be up today on these three house races in Illinois where they're doing exactly what you described. Mac. One of the fake super PACs they threw up, which we're going to demonstrate as effectively them, is called elect Chicago women. And I can't even remember the name of, oh, the other one's about affordability. They're like glomming on to Mom Donnie. It's like the affordability now pack or something. And it's like A-pack money, but that they're cloaking it and kind of and sneaking it into these races because it would be so toxic to even come in with their

official United Democracy Project PAC and run other things because then you get more news coverage. Oh, and then people just start to understand, oh, this is the APAC candidate. And this is the candidate that APAC doesn't like. And that is toxic and counterproductive for them. Yeah. I mean, I think Dempty Party is here, right? And we're going to, you know, we're coming into primary season. There are going to be a bunch of results that come out of nowhere that people are not expecting.

And, you know, I mean, the circumstances here are very unusual because you've got this very divided field and this APAC money coming in against a different candidate, not the, you know, not the Bernie wing candidate of the party. But the effectiveness of that anti-ice ad in this district tells you everything you need to know about where the Democratic base and not just, you know, one fact, no, the entire Democratic base, how motivated they are by that particular issue right now and how, you know, how much trouble. And every incumbent Democrat has taken votes to fund ICE. They all have. So presumably, they're all vulnerable to a similar message that was so devastatingly effective against Melanowski. You hate to say it. Yeah. All right, Should we go ahead and move on here to the latest on the Epstein files? All right.

So Max pulled a bunch of new Epstein. I mean, this is part of the latest Epstein files release. People continue to comb through. Obviously, it's 3 million documents, so it's going to take a long time for everybody to look at everything. But we've got some new disturbing documents that have been identified. And then also, bit surprisingly, Barry Weiss's CBS with an investigation into what exactly happened the night that Jeffrey Epstein ends up dead. And Mack, you want to set this up what you got here? Yeah, so I'll go ahead and put up the image itself while I talk about what the CBS News article is talking about.

So this is a portion of the video or a screen grab of the video. The headline here from CBS News is who entered Epstein's jail tier, the night of his death. Newly released video logs appear to contradict official recounts. So what are they talking about here? They say newly released Department of Justice documents show that investigators reviewing surveillance, footage from the night of Jeffrey Epstein's death observed an orange-colored shape moving up the staircase toward the isolated, locked tier where his cell was located at approximately 1039 p.m. on August 9, 2019.

Now, this 10.39 p.m. is also interesting because this was between the 10 to midnight period where supposedly these guards had fallen asleep or weren't paying attention. So that's when this sort of orange blob appears. But they continue, they say that entry into an observation log of the video from the Metropolitan Correctional Center appears to suggest something previously unreported by authorities of a flash of orange that looks to be going up, again, the L-tier stairs towards Epstein, that could possibly be an inmate escorted up to that tier. It also appears, according to an FBI memorandum, that reviews by investigators led to disparate conclusions by the FBI and those examining the same video from the Department of Justice's Office of Inspector General.

The FBI described it as possibly an inmate. And if you scroll down here, you had the Inspector General saying it could be an officer carrying orange linen or bedding, noting in their final report as an unidentified corrections officer. So again, this is the image that's in question here. But unidentified possible corrections officer carrying linens or unidentified inmate, potentially going up. in that direction on the night of Epstein's death. What do you guys make of this? I mean, continue to be a lot of questions. There's another line in this CBS News report, which maybe this was already known, but I didn't know it. It says the news, Epstein allegedly used, has never been definitively identified. According to the Inspector General's report, a news collected at the scene was later determined not to be the ligature used in Epstein's death. What do you mean that you never, I use? identify the news.

Like, what do you mean by that? Because it, you have one jail cell, like, everything's right there. It's not too hard to secure that scene. And I don't know. This is the one, you know, that was wrapped around his net. That blew my mind as well. Have you guys seen on the more conspiratorial level? Have you guys seen this thing about how one of his gamer accounts continues to be active in, uh, in Israel?

He's playing Fortnite in Israel or something. I mean, they just couldn't give up, like, whatever, you know, legacy, like, skins and tokens and progress he had. You can't stop playing Fortnite, even if you're dead. Like, that's, they've designed to. That's how addictive. And he had a hand in some of the addictive nature of video games. So it would be, you know, it does make a level of sense. But no, I mean, listen, I think the fact that they, they tried to say there was no one in, you know, in this video.

and accessing that jail is here when you can clearly see it in the video. And then they say, oh, well, maybe it's a corrections officer carrying orange linen. And they've said, no, that's definitely not. Yeah. Well, and either way, they also say in this CBS report, like, according to the people who work in this jail facility, whether or not it was an inmate or whether or not it was an officer, either way, that would have been a breach of protocol at the time. Right.

Yeah. Yeah, they said that inmates would not be, like, walking around the person at this hour of the night. That would not be a thing that would typically happen. And so the other thing that we got from this release is we learned that his defense team was approaching the government in, you know, a couple weeks before he ends up dead about cooperating, which would mean, you know, he was going to, he was saying, hey, I have some information that might be interesting to you. And so I think that speaks not only to potential motivation that you don't want this guy around anymore. But it also speaks to his mentality where, you know, he hadn't given, he still had avenues to pursue. You know, he certainly, if his defense team was exploring this, he certainly felt like this was a potential avenue to pursue, to be able to secure, you know, a lesser sentence, be able to get out of there. So I think, you know, both of those things fly in the face of the idea that he was truly suicidal and wanting to kill himself.

We also had, you know, we also had indications he was afraid to return to his story. jail cell because he had, you know, had marks on his neck and had been attacked previously. So, you know, again, if someone is suicidal and wanting to die, that's not really consistent with, you know, a mentality of someone who is apparently trying to preserve their life. My favorite response to this question of who could the video show going into Epstein's cell has been, I don't know, the murderer. Could be. But, and to your point, have, you know, Epstein is a.

person who has confronted setbacks throughout his entire life. Like, you know, just, you know, rising up, first of all, through Coney Island, then he winds up at Bear Stearns. They find out he, you know, was a total fraud. He overcomes that. He gets fired from Bear Stearns. And he leverages that to this, like, international tax financier position. He got caught, you know, with the child prostitution thing in the 2000s, came back again, bigger than ever in the 2010s. This is a guy who believes in his ability to overcome obstacles, which is one of the biggest reasons I have such a hard time getting to a place where

He's like, you know what, I've overcome all of these other things and I have all of this leverage and I have all of these friends and all this information, but I give up. Yeah. He just does not strike me. He's the kind of guy that kind of guy that ever thinks he's checkmated, right? And you can see that even in the email, you know, that he preserves to himself about Bill Gates. Right. Clearly Bill Gates had said to him, listen, my wife's on my ass. I can't hang out with you anymore.

We got to cut this off. He's not taking no for an answer. He's like, no. Like, you think you're done with me? I don't care. Like, I'm not done with you. And so here's how I'm going to keep you in the loop. Here's how I'm going to keep you in the web. This is not something you can just back away from. That's not how this works. Right. So. Same with Leon Black. Leon Black's like, I'm done with you. He's like, no, I want my 40 million a year.

And this is how it's going to go. That's exactly right. Yeah, that's exactly right. And, you know, and also, like, clearly Epstein is a, you know, a narcissist thinks he's the main character. I mean, people like this truly don't even think the role can, like, go on if they aren't part of it. So it's very, I mean, it's just psychologically very inconsistent with someone who'd be like, yeah, they got me. I guess I'm out of here. But, I mean, listen, I guess on the other hand, this is someone who's accustomed to flying around the world and living in a lab of luxury and having all of his, you know, horrific carnal desires met at every hour of the day and whatever. So perhaps it was just too hard for him to bear, even for a short time to be not living the lifestyle that, you know, that he enjoyed. living. So there is that. But, you know, there are just, there are just so many weird inconsistencies

and questions that remain that it's just, you know, it's very hard for me to believe that the official story is truly what happened here. And to the point of him feeling untouchable, you know, you also rewind to the Acosta sweetheart deal. Like, he might have figured the same thing. If you buy into the idea that Epstein in some way, shape, or form belong to intelligence. And that's sort of what got him out of it the last time around. Then, you know, maybe there's some. inclination there in his mind that, okay, that'll probably get me out of this again, right? They're not going to push me into a situation where I feel like I'm forced to reveal all of this incriminating information about these high profile wealthy people around the world that I have

these connections to. So, you know, he may have thought he still had a chance. And to your point, Crystal, it seems like in the days leading up to his death, they were still planning on, you know, at least making some sort of a fight. So yeah, yeah, exactly. Mac, you want to roll through some of these other elements because these were some other, you know, significant discoveries contained within this document release. Yeah, so let's go ahead and start off with this one posted by Ed Krasenstein. So he says here, and now appears as though Jeffrey Epstein may have met with Donald Trump Jr. in 2019 just months before he died. So if you look at this email, Again, this is from January 27th, 2019.

The email here is from JEE vacation, Jeffrey Epstein. He says, can we do coffee with Don Jr. Thursday, Friday? Only if easy, as you know, I like people that are funny. So what are we supposed to make of this in terms of the timeline from which Donald Trump said that he completely cut off his relation with Jeffrey Epstein in the early 2000s to now we've had sort of multiple things that have come out? in this recent batch of files that indicate, okay, at least within his inner circle or maybe even his immediate family, that probably was not the case. Yeah, there were, was an email soccer and I covered where he was similarly, actually right before he was inaugurated for the first time, Epstein was claiming that he was hanging out with what he described as the Trump boys, which you

would assume is, you know, Eric and Don Jr. And even if you buy their denials and these meetups never happened or Epstein was just blustering and bragging and name dropping and he wasn't really getting together with, you know, Trump or Trump Jr. or whoever, clearly he had direct connectivity to the administration as we see through the extensive Steve Bannon relationship. And Bannon, especially first term Trump, and Ryan, you can speak to this more than I can, but especially first term Trump, I mean, he's in the administration to start with and he's deeply influential. You know, I think he continues to be influential in Trump world as both, you know, an ounce force and someone who knows all the players on the inside as well. So you see Epstein and

Bannon going back and forth on, you know, who, on Supreme Court picks, right, on world events. And Epstein is offering his take and Bannon's, you know, yeah, I help get John Bolton in there, but he's controlled by Sheldon Adelson, but maybe we can, you know, work with him in this way or that way. So whether or not he was directly talking to Trump or Trump Jr. or family members, clearly he was having a direct impact on the decision making of the Trump administration. Yeah, absolutely. And Benin is this unusual figure who kind of loves to talk to the left, like the fact that he was talking to Chomsky. He gabs with reporters in ways that, you know, a lot of the MAGA types don't do.

And I think he saw Epstein as this like entree into this Clinton world. you know, of, you know, endless amounts of intel on the, on the Clinton world or, you know, his, his enemies. So, yeah, that and Bannon and Don Jr. are very close. So that, that's a direct line if, if Epstein ever wanted it. Well, I also have to think that Bannon partly wanted to manage the relationship with Epstein because he knew that Trump had this longstanding relationship with Epstein. I mean, reportedly, Bannon had said, allegedly, that Epstein was the one guy. And he knew that Trump had this longstanding relationship with Epstein. I mean, reportedly, he knew that Trump had had said. And he was the one guy. I mean, he knew that he was he was he was he was he was he who could keep Trump from the presidency, who could ruin it all for him. And so, you know, I think there was also a sense of like, let me keep this guy close so I can, you know, kind of control this situation and maybe find out what there is to be found out

so that, you know, I can protect my guy over here. Yeah, there was that one email or text message where he's like, it kills Trump that, you know, it would kill Trump to know that you and I are so tight. There was something like, guy, he said at one point, Epstein, now you know why Trump lies awake at night, knowing that I'm, that I'm still out there. And actually, that email was sent like, I don't know, very soon before he goes to prison and ends up dead. Yeah. Interesting stuff. We also had a couple more things that I wanted

to bring up here. So on the censorship angle, right, obviously there's been widespread criticism on both sides, both in terms of a lack of censorship of some of the potential victims. as well as oversensoring on people who could be, you know, potentially implicated in Jeffrey Epstein's deeds. But we had this as well pointed out here by Quad Carl that seems to be sort of like a slip-up on some sort of automated redacting by the Trump administration. So if you see here in this seemingly innocuous sentence,

this person says, I was going to take polo lessons in Calgary, but I redacted think my body can handle it. Now, I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that this person says, I don't think my body can handle it, but probably had some sort of a typo and said, D-O-N, my Don, think my body can handle it. So could be some sort of an indication here that there was sweeping censorship and redactions on many things having to do with keywords like Don or Donald or Trump or Donald Trump or whatever else the case may be. So, you know, even with the shocking stuff that we have gotten from these files, it seems like it's still a tiny fraction of what actually exists out there. What do you make at this, Ryan? Because on the other hand, we just saw an email where Don Jr. was in there unredacted.

See, it's sloppy. You know, they were wrecked by Doge. So, like, this is still a human enterprise. Like, they have to, like, actually execute it. Well, and they could have assigned down different batches. to, you know, different groups are working on it. So this one censored Don, this one screwed up and didn't censor Don,

or who knows. And there's one that was really telling to me that I was looking at the other day, it's an exchange between Epstein and Scaramucci. And it's very clearly Scaramucci because he's saying, I want to do a CNBC hit, and then at the end he sends a Twitter link.

And if you type in that Twitter link into Twitter, it's the mooch's CNBC hit. So it's the mooch. And he's redacted. It's like, mooch is not a survivor. of Epstein abuse, like, that we know of. Yeah. Why are we protecting this?

Like, why is the mooch getting protection here? Like, your eight days in the administration earn you, like, the protection of the, of the sensors here. So it's just there clearly are a lot of censors going through this who feel like it's their job to protect anybody who's friendly to Trump or to their movement. Yeah. And isn't he doing a bit of a right-wing turn at the moment, separated from my just touch no, or of whatever. Anyway, I mean, I just, and there's a disgusting level of all the men who are involved here being

redacted and protected and then many victims being exposed. And, you know, I think that that in and of itself speaks to their, their priorities here. And then they're using, they're then using their own screw-ups to then justify mass kind of withdrawing of documents from the public. Like, there's this one email where somebody who, a woman who seems to be in pretty good terms with Epstein, a grown woman sends him a bunch of like nude picks and they shouldn't have, but they did. They posted all of those, like all of those picks. Then they go and they're like, oh, we, we accidentally included a lot of child sex abuse material, a lot of C-SAM was put in. So we're pulling back all of this stuff. It's like, no, you didn't. You didn't actually do it. You, you, you were wrong.

posted this woman's new photos and you should withdraw those. But she's an adult. And so they're using the CSAM claims because the public is like, oh, CSAM don't, I don't want to be anywhere near it. And just wildly so. But they're lying about what's in there. Because nobody's going to then call them on it. Yeah. And in the days after the initial batch was dropped, if you did certain keyword searches on specific names, you could see the amount of results that came up would drop slowly over time. It would go from 5,000 to, oh, now it's 4,700, now it's 4,300 or whatever over successive days as they were removing some of it. Well, you guys got them all over at J-mail, right? Yes, I think we do. I think we have them. Like, we're constantly, it's a cat-and-mouse

game with their posting and withdrawing, but I think we've got them, yeah. Yeah. So another reason why you should, I should check out that tool if you're wanting to do some journalism here yourselves, you know, just get a sense for how these networks operated and what their day-to-day exchanges were like because it is an extraordinary and horrifying window. And I mean, I don't know about you, Ryan. Like, the, I, when I thought about the way the world worked and like these networks of power and, you know, how this all operated, I thought it was a little more diffuse. Like, it's just so incredibly direct. Like, the most, I guess, most cynical view I possibly could have had of how the, how power networks operate, like, was maybe not even cynical enough based on, you know, based on these emails and

these exchanges and the way that, you know, they're all insider trading with each other. They're all protecting each other. They're all bonded together through these, like, heinous acts. And, yeah, I don't know. Yeah, my colleague, Maws and I were in New York, Wednesday and Thursday, filming a video around. around Epstein's neighborhood. And what really is so striking about being there is how tight of a social set this is. Like it's all of these super elite rich people. Like we understand that they travel

in the same professional circles and for people who live in the Upper East Side, like they understand the social scene there. But for those of us that don't, like being there is like, oh, like, this person lives here, this person lives here,

Woody Allen's here, Jeffrey Epstein's here, Donald Trump's, you know, the plaza's here, Trump's building is here, the UN's right here, like,

it's all happening in a few blocks and all the wealth that, like, is pouring into the United States is like just staying like right in those few blocks and they're all hanging out with each other all the time.

Yep. And so it brings home how going to the Hamptons this time of year, right. Palm Beach that time of year. They go to these restaurants in the Upper East Side, leaving these neighborhoods,

their kids go to these schools, absolutely. Yeah, so it really does bring home your point about how tight this really is. And it's very easy to understand once you get there. It's like, oh, we all understand these social circles. They just happen to be running the world. Yeah. I think the other thing that I've been thinking a lot about

is like they use, these are not people who have any sort of like patriarchal loyalty. Their loyalty is only to themselves in their class, like, truly. And so the episode that spells that out, I mean, there's a number of them. The email exchange where is it Peter Teal that Epstein is talking to when he's like, you know, zero interest rates were too high and we need more chaos because it's easier to like, you know, to profit when there's death and destruction and collapse than trying to find a good deal during ordinary times. You know, butchering the language, but that was the, what he was saying.

I mean, that's, you know, I mean, it's deeply not just not patriotic. It's like deeply anti-human. Anti-social. Anti-Creation. Anti-human. And then also the revelations about Lord Mandelson where he's plotting with Epstein against the UK. And like, let's get Jamie Diamond in here, you know, to bully the government so that this banker bonus thing we don't want doesn't go through and he can like threaten them, you know, with X or Y or Z. So again, it's like, it's actually treasonous behavior, which is part of why

it's such a scandal in the UK because you're plotting with this financier against the government, against the will of the people directly. So. And that guy might go to jail. And that guy might actually go to jail. I mean, it's a pretty clear cut. Like the insider trading part of that is like pretty clear cut. You know, he's instantly. And this is crazy. Like you're in the midst of the crash in 2008. And what you're thinking of doing is like, I just got this information. Let me forward it to Jeffrey Epstein. Like, that's your first move. That's insane. That's insane. But it just shows you, like, Epstein didn't need to be some sort of like absolute financial wizard because the network was everything. Right. Right. And he had certainly, and I mean, he was a knowledgeable person about,

you know, financial interwar. He was very early to Bitcoin. There's a lot of questions about that, too, of just how involved he was in the early days of Bitcoin and how beneficial that was to him. And I'm sure he instantly understood this is a useful network for my criminal behavior, as many people do and did with crypto, et cetera. But in any case, he didn't have to be a financial wizard. If you have that kind of insider information, it's easy. You get the tip, oh, we're going to do a 500 euro bailout. You know, that's coming.

Okay, well, let's do this? There was one. Actually, do we have this one about the shorting the rubble Mac? Yeah, yeah, we do. Put that one up because that's very relevant to this. He was shorting the rubble just before they, what, in Beda Crimea? Isn't that the timing of it five days before? Yeah, let's check the dates. And this person might have the time off a little bit. But yeah, he.

So the date, the date from this email from Epstein is on March 13th, 2014. So I think that is about seven or so days before the official annexation. So why that move? Right? Let's short the rubble. There was another one here that puts it more into kind of explicit picture for the framework of what you're describing here, Crystal. So this is an email between Epstein and a Rothschild here. And she says, hi, Jeff, very long day sitting on the bank board.

Numbers are okay but not satisfactory to me. And I'm being put under pressure to be more innovative about asset management funds while restructuring. I'm in a dinner with a client, fed up. I miss our talks and hope that you're one. will be home tomorrow night. Will you be free? And let's discuss Ukraine. And this was after Epstein had said,

Ukraine upheaval should provide many opportunities, many. Yeah. You know, similar. It also, one more example of that here real quick, is it reminds me of this drop site reporting here from y'all, Ryan, where, and this is in the piece on Cotivore and him working with Ehud Barak to set up some sort of a security agreement. So this was an email between Epstein and,

Ehud Barak, the former Prime Minister and Defense Minister of Israel, he said, with civil unrest exploding and the desperation of those in power, isn't this perfect for you? And then Barack replied, you're right in a way, but it's not simple to transform it into a cash flow. So, like, this is the sort of mentality that they had with chaos and disruption and destabilization around the world, is how can we use this for our own power games? How can we use this to transform it into a cash flow? Yeah, which again, like, you know, this is disaster capitalism. This is, you know, these are concepts that obviously we are very familiar with, but to just see it so overt and so naked, like, oh, war, yay, goody, amazing opportunities for us to get even richer and more powerful. Yeah. And the use of cash flow is an interesting, like, little bit of daylight between Barack and Epstein, because Epstein's like, hey, chaos. like let's go in and make, you know, $75 million like tomorrow. And Barack is thinking, okay, but I also, I just want, I just want millions flowing in constantly.

And all of this chaos, like, makes the flow part of it tricky. Like, he just wants to sit back and just let it flow in. Whereas Epstein's more of a peripatetic, like, let's just bounce around the world and, like, stash what we can. But, you know, you can do both if you work hard enough at it. Yeah, apparently. Yeah, there's an extraordinary email about Libya as well where they're like, here's, you know, here's how much natural resources they have. I think we could skim this much off of it. This is before we, you know, came in and took out Gaddafi. So, you know, that's that's the way that they think. And so, you know, going back to the point about how about nationalism, like they see nation states and they see nationalistic sentiment as like a tool to be exploited as well. like a, you know, a rubish understanding of the world while they're operating at the level that action really happens, which is using the entire globe as their, as their plaything.

And, you know, moving the pieces around such that it benefits them, even as it emissorates the world. And the other thing that I keep coming back to is there's an extraordinary exchange where he's talking about, he sort of has contempt for Bill Gates because Gates is doing all this charity work in Africa and keeps asking Epstein like, hey, do you want. want to like contribute to whatever X or Y or Y or global health initiative I'm doing in Africa. And Epstein is very irritated by this because he says he's got this Catholic notion that all humans are, are equally worth, you know, are worth equal amounts, like that they're of equal value. And he just thinks that this is so preposterous and naive because he has this supremacist ideology and overtly eugenicist ideology that he talks about openly and is trying to put into practice through his like breeding ranch in New Mexico where, you know, he wants to cede the world

with his superior, his superior offspring. And it's very similar to the ideology of Elon Musk, for example, or there was like a Chinese billionaire who was doing the same thing. It's very natural for these wealthy, powerful men to have supremacist and eugenicist ideologies because it justifies their place in the hierarchy. It allows them to fully embrace disaster capitalism and exploiting war and not giving shit about all of the tremendous horror and harm that they're causing around the world because those people aren't really people the way that we are. They don't deserve to have the lives that we live. All right, should we go ahead and move on over to Econ now? All right, so the economy really sucks. Mack, we've got a couple stories to go through here. And the data is starting to really put

some meat on the bones of what people have been, you know, feeling for a very long time, which is that there are no jobs to be had. Like, it's this weird situation where we're seeing, we're starting to see a significant number of layoffs. But it's, but it's not as if you're getting a, that's, the biggest problem has been that there just aren't job openings. Like if you wind up unemployed, you're in a, it's very, very hard to find a new job. though people aren't people are starting it fired and laid off in a pretty rapid at a pretty rapid clip but what has led into this and has been this um this absolute like just lack of any jobs opening um politico has an interesting lead here which is just let let this roll with i'll just read

what they say here say president donald trump's economy is booming but if you're looking for a job good luck The Labor Department reported on Thursday that job openings in December unexpectedly dropped to their lowest level since mid-2020 during the heart of the COVID-19 pandemic. It's a sign that companies have cooled on hiring despite an economic expansion that the White House has framed as the dawn of a new golden age. So we have this weird situation where we are not at all technically in a recession because GDP is growing. but there's all of this insane, you know, tariff chaos that has been sending uncertainty into the market, but people are also then wondering how much of this is AI. So if I talk to a lot of managers and executives at major companies around the world, what they all tell me, I'm curious if you guys have had any conversation with people that are similar to this,

it's like, when somebody leaves a job now at a company, The first thing they do is, it used to be, as the economy is rolling, all right, this person left the job. We need to hire someone to replace them. Now it is we need to look very hard at can we do their job using the productivity gains we're getting from AI to spread the work to other humans who can be more productive because they've got. you know, these AI capabilities. In other words, if somebody leaves, can we just not hire somebody? And the answer that so many managers

are coming back with is, is yes, we do not need to hire for this role. And a lot of these, you know, Fortune 100, Fortune 500 companies are forecasting that this process of attrition is going to lead to, you know, massive reductions in their workforces over the years. So I think some of it is this, uncertainty sparked by Trump's kind of incessant need to like own goal like the economy,

but some of it is also these companies saying, do we actually need people to fill this role? Maybe we don't. Ryan, what is your estimation of how these tech oligarchs think this is all going to work out? Because I mentioned this yesterday, Chris Hayes had this viral tweet where he was like, I need you people to understand billionaires. to do to white-collar workers what they already did to blue-collar workers. Like, that's where we're heading. As you've pointed out in the past, now the bulk of consumer spending is with, again,

the top several percentile in the country. So they don't really need your consumer dollars anymore. They don't need your labor. They don't need your consumer dollars. Like, they don't need you even to send as meat into the grinder for their wars increasingly with, like, AI warfare and the use of special operations. So what is there, like, what do you think they're planning how this is going to work out? What they will tell you is a version of Sam Altman's and Elon Musk's explanation for why they're doing AI.

They will say, I agree with you. And I actually fear for what this is producing in the country and in the world. And I fear what it's going to leave to the world that my children are going to inherit. but my job as a corporate executive is to do what the company needs to do to get ahead and if I don't do it, my competitor is going to do it and then we will fail and we will lose to them. Like that is what all of them say

and it is a genuine collective action problem in a decentralized capitalistic economy like this where you don't have a kind of state that's able to say, no, like, these are the forces that we're seeing, but from a social perspective, this is how we want to direct those forces. And we as a, you know, self-governing democratic, you know, polity are going to do that. That we don't have that. What we have is our companies who have quarterly earnings reports coming up.

And they need, and now are starting to be measured by, you know, the level of attrition that they can, they can pull off the number of people, the amount of people that they can replace with AI. Yeah. Well, and I mean, my answer societally, because obviously this, you know, off to the races, AI push is coming from the Trump administration. You know, this is really their big bet on the economy. You know, it's not terror.

Like Trump thinks tariffs are fun, but the real big bet is on we're going to take off all the guardrails and we're going to flood the, like, AI, tech oligarchs, go, go, go, no holds barred. And I think you see in their budget priorities the way they're thinking about how this is going to go. That's why they're funding the largest law enforcement agency in history in ICE, you know, better funded than immigration enforcement operations, better funded than any military on the planet except for two, ours and China. So they need this massive domestic police state equipped with the surveillance state and all of that stuff. And then you also have him asking for $1.5 trillion defense budget. So that's their view.

And they only, like, they foolishly only believe in hard power, right? That's what you see in the way that they operate in the world. They are delusional enough to think it's enough just to, you know, to hold people. people in place using guns and hard power. And so I think that's, I think that's their plan. I mean, just judging by their budget priorities and where they're shifting resources and focus and money. Yeah. I mean, Ryan, to your point earlier, like, there is a way that we could be going about this that actually does serve the needs and could improve the lives of average Americans. But it's impossible to do that under a capitalist structure like we have in this

country. It seems like AI technology is almost the most extreme example of a race towards monopoly under capitalism because it's so rapidly advancing and consolidating. And eventually we're going to have one company that ends up getting that major big breakthrough moving forward. And so, you know, under the structure that we have right now, the no holds bar, Trump, let's let it all rip, where is this going to end up other than just with monopolistic? sort of like a techno feudal society where we have a handful of people who control the entirety of the most powerful technology that's ever been wielded by human beings. And then everybody else is just sort of left to rot. I mean, it doesn't even seem like they hypothetically have a

sustainable plan for the next 10, 15, 20 years down the line in the future. No, corporate executives are talking to them as some of the source of the greatest dumerism. Like they're and you can judge them you know for being the ones like foot soldiering

and carrying it out. But they're as like they're even more frightened that shockingly than like the average public because they're seeing it like happening now. Which is why they're like building bunkers and planning to escape to Mars.

Seriously. These are the type of of people who make like, let's say, $800,000 a year, rather than $80 million a year. They're very rich and doing well, and they'll be fine. And they can probably make sure their kids are fine-ish. But they also care about the world. But they're stuck in, they're in these jobs.

And they're like, what we're seeing, like, unfold around us, you know, our headcount's going to go by, drop by 30, 50. 80% like over the next three, four, five years. And you do that across the board, like, what are these people going to do? Yeah. Yeah. And like, how do you support a show like this when. Yeah.

Yeah. Tens of thousands more of our like paying subscribers are laid off. Like it's a, it is a very dark time that we're like that we're heading into. And the oligarchs have nothing beyond UBI at this point. Like, you know, that was their vision because they saw this. They're like, if we succeed in what we're trying to do, we're going to desiccate society. And so we need then universal basic income. Like, that was their answer.

I haven't seen them come up with anything. And then you also have this sort of like. Concentration camps. I mean, I mean, I hate to be really dark, but we're, ICE is building out. You know, they're buying fields and installing warehouses. And, you know, and it's this massive police state that is being funded. We already know that it's not just for immigrants. I mean, we already see the people that are clashing within the streets are mostly white liberals.

So I don't think it's too crazy to think that that is part of the plan, at least enough to, like, scare people into line and to control movement and control opposition, et cetera. So, I mean, I think that's from the political class. I think that's the way they're thinking about it because they don't need you anymore, right? The only reason they need you is for your labor. And if they don't need your labor, they don't need you anymore. Yeah. And I also wonder, like, with this sort of transhumanism mindset or even in some cases seemingly

like anti-human perspectives, like how pervasive is that amongst the upper levels of some of these tech companies where they might just like not. I mean, you remember that Peter Thiel clip, I think it was Peter Thiel from a while, back where he was asked, like, is it important that human civilization continues or that human beings continue into the future? And he, like, legitimately had to pause and think about whether or not he thought that that was something that needed to happen moving forward. So I think for some of them, there's an acceptance or a willingness to just sort of blindly go down this path that even they know will lead to civilizational destruction or mass suffering or whatever it ends up being.

There is a view in Silicon Valley. I don't know how pervasive, but there is a view that having an attachment to human beings is specious. And so that true enlightenment comes from not caring that the robots take over and crushes like ants. If they're, you know, furthering their civilization and able to come up with, you know, these incredible technological solutions, like we should all be in favor of that. And that for us to be sentimentally attached to human beings, this very small, and thinking of us. You know, just disturbing stuff.

Yeah, Mac, do you want to put up this, this CNBC one? Sure. Because this is, so I was saying,

like, the big problem with the economy has not been layoffs up until now. It has more been when people leave, they can't find a job

that there's no, there's no new job openings. Now we're getting a double whammy. Layoffs in January were the highest to start a year since 2009, according to Challenger, which measures

there's these 108,000 layoffs for the month, which they have doubling from, more than doubling from the same period a year ago, up 200, what is it, 205% from last month. Like that's insane. Wow. And they say at the same time, companies announced just 5,306 new hires.

The lowest since January, of 2009. If you weren't around for January of 2009, that was the darkest time in the American economy since the Great Depression. So, like,

and this is going on while Trump is talking about a boom. And while GDP is growing, like GDP is still, maybe it's going to be down in the next quarter, but still growing-ish. Like, so this,

the thing, the wheels are coming off is basically what these numbers are showing. Before we jump to the premium half, Ryan, real quick question for you, what do you make of the Bitcoin drop? What do you think is going on there? I don't know. I don't know. Like, I saw somewhere that like an early whale dumped billions. So, and, you know, getting all of these, the Bitcoin crowd really wanted all these. these institutions like banks and others to like get in on the on the rush. So, you know, the more buyers, the more you push the price up.

Getting them in though, you know, if they're on margin and it hits a certain level, you know, as it crashes, the crash becomes self-fulfilling because, you know, if you have to sell at 70,000 and now it crashed and it hit 70,000, now you've got to sell your entire position and you selling your position moves it to 69,000, and now other people who had to sell at 69 to cover their margins have to sell. So some of it is like the more people you get in who are leveraged like that, the more volatility you're going to get. It was already an insanely volatile thing.

I'm sure a bunch of people are out there buying the dip. Well, it says right now Bitcoin narrowly avoids falling under 60,000 as it bounces off of lows. So it looks like there's a bit of a recovery going on right now. But, you know, the hope was that as the dollar weekends and, you know, people move away from it as the safe harbor and world reserve currency, that quote unquote digital gold, which is what they, you know, what they want Bitcoin to be, that that would be the thing that would, you know, the new flight to safety would be Bitcoin. But what we've seen instead is that it's, you know, it's more precious metals. It's like actual gold. It's way significantly below what it was when Trump was. came into office.

Which is wild. He's the crypto president. He's the guy. If it was ever going to shoot to the moon, then... His coin's good. Yeah. I mean, I don't know what it's done the last couple days, but like, he's up. He's up and low down, basically.

The UAE or Saudi or whoever is going to make sure that that continues to be the case whenever they need some deal done with the government. It is kind of funny to call it the digital gold kind of skirts around like the entire reason why gold has value in the first place. silver has value in the first place because of its physical limited nature in reality. Well, Bitcoin is technically limited, you know, because of the way. You have to mine it. So that's why they said, well, that's the scarcity that's built into this that makes it akin to gold. Wow. That's not going too well right now.

Yeah. All right. Should we move over to the premium portion? I've got, we've got some, I have to, we have to play these mom-donny clips. They're just too charming of him with these little children. They're absolutely adorable. We have to get to the right-wing mess. Take a few AMA questions.

So if you want to get the whole thing, guys, breakingpoints.com. If not, we totally get it. Appreciate all of you, and we'll see you on the other side. This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.