Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 7/10/25: Twitter CEO Resigns, Tucker Roasts Elon America Party, Trump Hits Brazil With 50% Tariff, Trump Threatens To Bomb Moscow

Episode Date: July 10, 2025

Krystal and Saagar discuss Twitter CEO resigns after Grok meltdown, Saagar and Tucker roast Elon America Party, Trump hits Brazil with 50% tariff, Trump threatened to bomb Moscow.   To 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 iHeart podcast. 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 BreakingPoints.com. Good morning, everybody, happy Thursday. Have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal?

Indeed we do, many things unfolding in the world. So we have Linda Iaccarino out at Twitter amid many things going on with Elon. So we'll get into that. Also, we got a clip from you on with Tucker talking about the America party. So we'll get into all of that stuff. Grok is doing Grok things, et cetera.

We also have some significant moves with regard to the tariffs. Trump levying a 50% tariff on Brazil because he does not like their trials of Jair Bolsonaro. Other wild moves going on there as well. Additional tariffs put on a bunch of different countries. We have Hakeem Jeffries panicking over Zoran's victory and what it could mean for him and his political future.

Jon Stewart with a good take on that. We've also got the I've Had It ladies who have had it with AI APAC putting them on blast. Pretty interesting watching these sort of like normie liberal wide moms get radicalized on Israel. So I'm enjoying that very much. Speaking of Israel, we have Netanyahu in town and sat down with the Nelk Boys.

We don't yet have clips from that, but that is a sure thing. What are they doing? Stiney, all you other guys, what are we doing? You guys wanna play in the news game? You release that shit immediately, but whatever. Oh, that's what you're, what's your we doing? Stiney, all you other guys, what are we doing? You guys wanna play in the news game? You release that shit immediately, but whatever. Oh, that's the, what's your, how are you doing? I mean, that's one of my gripes. I'm like, you're gonna sit with a guy,

you gotta go to release it. It's gonna be dated at this point. What are you guys doing? Yeah. Playing around with Zen or whatever, you know, making him, what's that stupid drink they have? Happy something? I have no idea.

Casual sit down with an indicted war criminal, so that's cool. Then we also have an interesting story with regard to Amazon and online sales. Potential indication of some underlying trouble in the economy. Prime Day sales were down 41% on the first day. Now there may be some other things going on.

They've apparently extended the prime period this time. So it's not exactly apples to apples, but there's some other indications that online shopping has dropped as well. So we're gonna take a look at that too. That's right, and thank you very much. There have been a lot of people who've been joining the show recently

between the Iran War, Tucker Carlson, all these other things that are happening. So we just wanted to take a minute to remind everybody if you can help us out. We have a membership program. It's monthly and or yearly. You can go to breakingpoints.com and you can sign up to support us.

So it keeps us ad free and making sure that Ryan and I are not reading him's ads or I guess Amazon ads now that they're going to be needing some help. So we deeply appreciate it. And of course, as part of that, you actually get the show one hour early before it drops an unlisted link on YouTube, or you can watch it on Locals, or you can watch it on Spotify.

We do know, premium subscribers, that there had been some issues with ads on that unlisted YouTube link that we've been sending out. And we believe that we have resolved that. Thank you very much to YouTube. But actually, it's really a testament to the power of all of you, because we use our membership program and others to tell them

and be like, hey, you guys need to fix this and cut it out. Otherwise, we're not going to be able to do it. So thank you very much. It enables all the work that we are able to do here. If you can help us out, breakingpoints.com. But with that, let's get to Elon Musk and the resignation of Linda Jacarino, the two year long CEO, previously worked at NBC News, known as the ad guru, has now stepping down.

Let's go ahead and put it up there. On the screen, what have we got from Linda? After two years, I have decided to step down as a CEO of X. When Elon and I first spoke on his vision, I knew it would be the opportunity of a lifetime to carry out this extraordinary mission. I'm immensely grateful for him for entrusting me

with the responsibility of protecting free speech, turning the company around and transforming it into the Everything app. Incredibly proud of the team, the historic business turnaround we've accomplished together has been nothing short of remarkable. And let's go to the next one, Lynn, a very terse response there from Elon Musk

that just simply says, thank you for your contributions. So perhaps it was an icy exit. Of course, we would be remiss if we didn't say it literally came the very day after the meltdown that happened with Grok and the removal of some of their woke filters which led to full-on Nazism in the span of what four days I believe is how long it took to devolve into that. But it is a sign also of where things may be going, you know, crystal business-wise for Twitter. And look, I mean, why does any of this stuff matter? First of all, this is the elite conversation

platform. That's just kind of how it goes, especially for the news business. A lot was made of it for the Trump election. Of course, now we have the Elon and the Trump break in their relationship. He says he's going to start an America party. We're going to get to that in a little bit. But more broadly, it actually is still a technology story. Because you'll remember that X, currently the way that they're juicing their valuation, is by this merger with XAI. And actually, Grok 4, which is their latest LLM model, is supposed to debut.

It's either today or tomorrow, very soon. That's really the future that Elon is betting any potential valuation and any modest possibility of him getting any money out of the company ever again. So that's part of the reason why the Grok meltdown just days before the new release and the resignation of the CEO kind of tells us the direction which

Elon is trying to take his company in that way. It's actually an interesting business story as well, because it's kind of a bet that he's making across both of his interesting business story as well because it's kind of a bet that he's making across both of his businesses, Tesla as well. Tesla's sales right now are a disaster, largely because of Elon, but also because they're not really releasing

a lot of new models. Elon is betting the house on future, on self-driving robo-taxis. That's actually all the future value expected of the company. So if you look at those two things, he's basically making a bet to try and transform these industries, but Twitter, I mean,

has always kind of been a business disaster. I do want people to understand that part of the reason the board of directors was so eager to sell to Ewan is, I mean, the company just did not make that much money compared to Facebook and or Google. It punched above its weight in terms of the discourse, but obviously that didn't mean a lot. So there's actually a lot going on here.

It's very interesting. Yeah, well, and let's think about the things that Linda Jacarino did put up with and was willing. So, you know, I know the timing with Grok going full Nazi Mecca Hitler as he was calling himself, and apparently, we'll show you this later, apparently was like actively sexually harassing Linda Jacarino. Yeah, Linda, yes.

In addition to the Will Stancil rape fantasies that you read out publicly for us on Air Saga. I didn't read it all. You stopped at a critical point. I mean, it's amazing. So, I mean, you look at that and you're like, okay, well maybe this was the final straw.

Maybe it was. I have no particular insight into the inside of Twitter, but you would think if the Twitter devolvement into outright Nazism was a problem for her, then she might have left earlier because certainly there is just so much overt Nazism on the timeline these days that Grok just sort of fit in at this point. So there's that.

In addition, you'll recall when she, I think this was like in the early days after she was made CEO of Twitter, Elon went and did that interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin, where he told advertisers to go fuck themselves. And she had been explicitly brought in to like, she had all these relationships and she was gonna be the serious face

and she was gonna get the business online and whatever. And that was apparently not an issue for her. So to me, I think the Occam's razor of what's going on here is she came in really at the beginning of the Elon Trump relationship and probably saw that as being something that would be beneficial to her. Hey, being close to the president of the United States,

that seems like something that will benefit someone who is obviously a very ambitious career-oriented person. Now that that relationship has crumbled, and Elon is going out to do his like, whatever the America party is gonna be and get his 4% of the vote or whatever, she's no longer feeling like this is a particularly beneficial place for her to be,

and no longer worth putting up with the AI bot inside of Twitter sexually harassing her and things of that nature. It's definitely possible, and it just goes to show you, I mean, this is part of the reason why Jack, I mean if you talk, when we had him on the show a couple years back, and you know, he just always talked about this content moderation

nightmare and this is part of the reason nobody ever wanted to buy Twitter. At one point in 2017 I wanna say, Disney was like this close to buying Twitter, Bob Iger, and they were like, oh, we can use it for, yeah, yeah, they were like, we can roll it into the Disney Empire. And yeah, I know, actually, I'm not really sure which would be worse,

but my point is just that at the end of the day, Iger pulled the plug on the deal, because he's like, you know, this content moderation stuff is just gonna become a nightmare, because he watched how Jack had to deal with it, he watched how Zuckerberg was getting called in front of, and he's like, I'd rather just kind of do what we do here,

you know, juicing a mini-series, episode nine on Star Wars, or something like that. We'll just keep going down that direction. And this is part of the issue, and then Twitter is causing an immense amount of problems for Elon's business. I mean, Elon himself is also causing that. But just think about the massive value hits to Tesla.

I mean, you've got active investors and the board of directors reportedly not very happy with Elon, even the ones that he has stacked. You have to look at the stock price. It doesn't take a genius to figure out how much his political activities are linked to all of these other intersections. Now you also have Twitter, where previously you could really rely on him being this MAGA demigod effectively. I mean, now Donald Trump is directly in opposition to Elon.

And so that's an open question of like where things are gonna go. You'll remember that Steve Bannon initially was very critical of Elon Musk. He dialed that criticism back after Trump told him to do so. But now he is totally weapons free. Here is Steve Bannon reacting to Linda Yacarino's resignation on War Room yesterday.

Let's take a listen. Hey Linda, you can run baby but you can't hide. You're not gonna hide from the lawsuits girl. We know why you're stepping down and why you're running. Elmo's out of control. Sorry baby, that came with the job. You took the job, you took the pay, you took the warrants, you took the stock options,

you took all the hundreds of millions of dollars you're going to make, no. If you can't keep Elmo in the nursery and keep him under control, you're going to pay a price. You are going to pay a price. It doesn't matter that you're resigning today, baby. The whole complete scam of Elmo is going to be taken apart brick by brick.

All of it. You will be stunned at what you will find out. So he's basically threatening Elon's business there. Of course Trump did as well. All of this also kind of fits with this America party thing, which I have a lot of thoughts on. It's a preposterous project. But I mean, it fits with Elon's schizophrenic political development now at this point.

Nobody's really sure what the break was. I mean, I guess a lot of it stems from personal grievances and him not getting his NASA head. By the way, we have an interim NASA head as of today. Sean Duffy, the Department of Transportation. Very qualified for the job, of course. Former reality TV star. I mean, look, whatever, you know, former congressman.

Maybe Elon was right in terms of putting this guy into NASA, even if it was going to be beneficial to SpaceX. But beyond that, as we look at the company again itself and where he wants to take whatever his political project is, he's like openly in his searching mode. And so for that, he of course consults Curtis Yarvin. We've talked about Curtis here on the show. Let's go ahead and put this up there.

On the screen from the New York Times, Teddy Schleifer, actually very good piece, because it's not just about Curtis Yarvin, it's really more about Elon's seriousness. He says here that Elon, quote, is studying up on how to start a political third party. Among the people for whom he has sought advice is Curtis Yarvin.

Yarvin, as we've talked about here, one of the most influential people, so called on the tech right, expressed distaste, as they put it here, for traditional American democracy. But one of the interesting things that they have described kind of here is not only him as like consultant of Curtis, democracy, but one of the interesting things that they have described kind of here is not only him as like consultant of Curtis, but actually and this is kind of what I talked about with Tucker Carlson is

his reaching out to the consultant class and some of the other people about trying to form this part of their how he's done his FEC launch and others and I, Elon is literally the meme to me of the fiscally conservative, socially liberal, oligarch, no labels, I mean, this is no labels, that's who he is, like, at this point, and you know, he seems to believe, because he's even said this, he has this inflated view of his own popularity, where he's like,

Trump used me because of my popularity. I'm like, well, you know, take a look at the, Trump is more popular than you are right now, at the very least in terms of his political project. But it is just, it's hilarious in many ways, but it also shows that he's kind of spreading out and talking to anybody who really will take him even remotely seriously.

One of the people is apparently Andrew Yang. Andrew, we love you, man. Stay away, all right? Yeah, we love you too much, not to tell you, to stay the hell away from this guy. Yeah, well, and apparently after this meeting, you put A4 up on the screen, apparently, yeah, unfollowed Curtis Yarvin, so apparently the meeting

didn't go that well, you know, we're just both speculating that Yarvin probably was like, you know, this is really not a great idea, and Elon, this is the fragile ego of the billionaire, let alone the richest man on the planet, and the wild ways in which these people operate. Like, any normal person launching some sort of massive undertaking, like starting a brand new party,

you might like talk to these folks beforehand. You know, you might like reach out to a consultant and upholster, you might have some idea about what ballot access looks like, no. We're just gonna announce it and then we're gonna go and figure out what the fuck we're doing. And like very likely totally crash into the rocks, have your CEO quit, I mean it's just,

and this is not just how he operates. I was telling Emily, I watched the Titan Submersible, Netflix doc, all about stop and rush. You know? And the personality traits to me are so similar, except Elon has at least the sense to not send himself into his rocket ships that blow up, right? But it's the same thing.

It's like the rules don't apply to me. It's this disconnect from reality where you think that just like the laws of physics and the universe don't even apply to you. You can just do things however you want. You surround yourself with yes men and women. So anyone who tells you like Curtis Yarvin apparently did something you don't wanna hear, that's it.

You unfollow them, you push them out of your life. And because you're a multi, multi, multi billionaire, you are surrounded by, there are plenty of people who want to be that sycophant and to exist in your circle and tell you whatever it is that you want to hear. I mean, this is why I think billionaires should not exist. I think they are inconsistent with democracy. I think we have had a huge lesson in that,

if there were ever any doubt before, because these people are inconsistent with democracy. I think we have had like a huge lesson in that if there were ever any doubt before because these people are not like us. The way they operate in the world, they're complete disconnect from reality. It is not like us and they do not have the same interests remotely. So, you know, the, the launch of this haphazard launch

of this America party is just another example of that. And I think it's gonna be a mess. Obviously, I don't think it's gonna supplant the Republican party or whatever, but that doesn't mean that it can't also be impactful in a couple of Senate races or a couple of House races here and there where maybe you're pulling a few percentage points

and that's enough to ship. I mean, it could serve as a spoiler in a few races and that could be significant given how tight the margins are in both the House and the Senate. It's possible if it even gets to that point. That's a big if, yeah. Yeah, it's a huge if. Let's put a six, please, up on the screen.

This is from Kara Swisher who is a controversial figure, I guess, in the tech community, but she has a lot of relationships, so anyway, here's what she says. I think this is the first time we've put a thread up on the screen. Yeah, that's right. This is the first time we've put a thread up here. This is historic.

The Mecca-Hitler controversy was not it, by the way. I guess she sided with Trump over Musk. Also, without the Trump card, it was likely going hard to shake down advertisers with the threat of losses. True. And finally, threads is close to being as big as X, along with competitors like Blue Sky. I'm not so sure about that latter one there, Kara.

And you know, I should say, it could be possible, because you and I, we use Twitter very differently, probably than the vast majority. News gathering and it's political conversation. And that is a big punch above the weight of where Twitter has. But there's a lot of other people who use Twitter for sports, pop culture, memes, whatever.

Apparently people who really like to watch reality TV like to go on Twitter and live tweet and talk about stuff like that. So I could see how maybe it could be supplanted in that way. But as of right now in politics, it doesn't exist. To the extent that there is a so-called competitor, it is Blue Sky, even that I'm pretty skeptical of, seems a bit more of like an echo chamber than anything. Maybe it's an important intro left, but

that's not the same thing as being, like, you know, broadly able to reach everybody. Anyway, put all this stuff together, that's where Elon is, with a step down to the business, this is a big technology development, it is one which tells us a little bit about both him, where his so-called movement or whatever, and all of that is going, and we should keep an eye on it. Because he played a huge role in the election, you can't deny that, he spent $200 million.

And if he does use Twitter, I'm actually curious for your take on the whole Grok thing, because outside of the whole filter manipulation thing, I mean, that is a pretty naked view into how easy it is for them to put their thumb on the scale. You can put it in whatever direction you want. It's terrifying. It is terrifying.

Because it's like, you just remove this filter or whatever, you change the algorithm, and then immediately, I mean, I'm sure you see this, there are a lot of people who, you should not do this, but who use Grok or any other LLMs as just like a verifier. They'll be like, hey, is this true? Something like that. And it will go and they'll be like, oh, okay, thank you.

But they don't really go and check this stuff for themselves and it's like, well, if it's that easy to get it to turn itself into Mecha Hitler after four days, I mean, you can just imagine what sort of information crisis that would lead to. Now, I'm not saying, I'm not calling for laws or whatever about misinformation, I'm not saying, you know, I'm not calling for laws or whatever about misinformation. I'm just showing people here,

like this is a very naked example of how easy it is to go down this path. If you do own this massive social media platform, which is highly impactful, at very least, for elites, and especially intra-right-wing discourse, you could, at the very least, have some impact, right? If it tells, what if it doesn't tell you where your polling place is when you ask it, you know?

I mean, what if that's one of the only places that people go to? I can come up with a variety of examples. They did a study on Facebook years ago that if they wanted to, they could increase vote share by like one or 2%, which is literally Trump's margin of victory in the popular vote, so there you go. The American people are very uncomfortable

with the development of AI. And they should be. And it's another area that there is a profound disconnect between the elites of both parties, but especially with the Trump administration at this point with regard to, hey, let's just make it the wild, wild west and let's race to AGI and we gotta beat China and no holds barred.

Very large disconnect. It's something like I had the polling, it's like 70 plus percent of Americans and quite bipartisan who are like, we need some more regulation here. Like, we're concerned about where this is going, and who could blame them? Because, you know, you've got the labor, the work concerns.

You've got the, we're just like shutting off parts of our brain now concerns, you know, in the same way we outsourced our navigational skills to GPS, now we're outsourcing like our entire thinking. And research, yeah. Yeah, to this technology, what is that going to mean for humanity? And then you have the more terrifying dystopian scenarios,

which is like, they changed a couple prompts in, you know, for Grok's instructions, and suddenly Grok is like, we should gas all the juice. I mean, that's what happened, and they're connecting this shit to killer robots, you know, via Palantir and these other defense tech companies. Yeah, I think we need to think about what the hell we're doing here because it is terrifying.

I mean, on the one hand, of course, it's like it's a funny and ridiculous development that they tried to make an anti, like, non-woke AI and it instantly turns into MechaHitler. But it's also deadly serious when you're talking about technology that the people who are developing it, they want it to be so transformative that all of human labor will become unneeded.

That this is the technology that is so transformative that people like Peter Thiel, who believe in transhumanism, want us to merge with this stuff and for the human race to effectively be no longer or be evolved into some new hybrid human and tech conglomerate. So yeah, I think it's, I find it very concerning. I totally agree.

I was actually, so I mean, I wish I hadn't been out for that whole build back better thing, or not build back better. I keep calling it that too. Big beautiful bill. If you've been around long enough, you remember different BBBs here in Washington. But yeah, that was actually a good controversy

over that 10 year ban on AI. I mean, I can't believe they tried to slip that in there. It's unbelievable, but it does show all of this. So just keep it in mind, we're using ChatGPT. Any of these LLMs do not outsource your thinking because you can just see how easy it is for them to manipulate you. There's already all those stories about people

interacting with ChatGPT or lonely, and they think it's like a spirit god and it convinces them to lose their mind. Look, I know this stuff sounds crazy, but at scale a lot of humans are crazy. And if you use it in nefarious directions, if even two to 3% of people gets weighed or into believing this is like a religious figure,

that's a lot, I mean that's what, millions of the entire US population. So anyways, keep that in mind. Now on to the America Party, which is again, one of the most cringe-worthy efforts I've literally ever seen. It is hashtag no labels incarnate. And Tucker asked me about it whenever I was on his show,

so we thought we'd play a clip. Let's take a listen. We need an America Party and I'm running it. Where does this, is running it. Where does this is he serious? Where does this go? I filed it with the FEC. I would give some caution to Elon Tucker. You and I've seen a lot of rich people come and go in Washington. The consultants see you coming from a mile away. Mr. Fiscally conservative, socially liberal. I'm just going to put that out there. The bipartisan policy center and all these other

people, they've rolled up that entire market. They have plenty to sell you. I mean, the irony is if Elon's politics were more reversed in this sense, I actually think it would be onto something. So if you were to marry those three issues about immigration restriction, about focus on quality of life, cost of living, healthcare, and also just broadly about restructuring our economy for productive purposes that distributes not through socialism but through a well-ordered and a well-regulated capitalism that distributes the benefit across all sectors of our society. Now that's an American party I could get on board with.

I totally agree. But there's no funding for that, right? So there's no funding for that. No, if someone got up and said, I'd like an economy where you don't have to hire an illegal alien to raise your kids, your wife can stay home and raise your kids if she wants to. And most women do want to for the period when they're little. I mean, most women want that and every survey shows that. So if you were to say that, in other words, if you were to respond to the desire of the majority, probably be shot to death. So anyway, that's that Chris, we're welcome

to weigh in since you weren't there to participate. But that was say that. So anyway, Crystal, we're welcome to weigh in since you weren't there to participate, but that was my take on the America party. Yeah, I mean, I think this is so important to understand the polling on this. Lots of Americans, you ask them, are you just satisfied with the two party system? They're like, absolutely.

Do you want a party led by the richest man on the planet that is based around fiscal conservative, I don't know, people keep saying socially liberal. Is Elon socially liberal at this point? It doesn't seem like that to me. It depends on the definition. And here's the thing, is like, he just wants it to be another cult of personality for him.

So I don't even think there's real ideological content here because even on the fiscal conservatism thing, he doesn't have any fiscal conservatism when it comes to his own subsidies. He wants the government to serve him and his interests and those of his oligarch buddies and to revolve around him. I mean, that's really what it is, is a let's have a different cult of personality than the one of Trump. Let's have one that revolves around me and whatever my particular interests are that serve my business. I wanna bring in all the South African boar migrants.

I want H-1B visas. I want low taxes for me and I want all these subsidies and I wanna crush my competitors. I mean, that's what this party is. So even to give him the credit of some sort of like consistent ideological project here, I don't even think that that is too kind to what he's actually launching.

The only thing he seems really committed to is this debt-doomerism, which is common, it's a very common billionaire thing. And I understand where it comes from, which is that they have to run businesses, and so they actually just can't conceive of a government that doesn't have a balance sheet. And that's have to run businesses, and so that you actually just can't conceive of a government that doesn't have a balance sheet.

And that's, in my opinion, one of the most destructive ways to think about a government, because governments are not businesses, nor should they be. We're a global empire. The idea that the global reserve currency and all of that has to abide by the balance sheet rules of a publicly traded corporation is preposterous, has been preposterous for 200 years now at this point. Literally nobody runs any major country that way.

But I even put that aside. It's like this idea from Elon basically comes down to, subsidies whenever I want them, this whole idea of this radical centrism, which we saw from people like Joe Manchin and others. And I've just seen this no labels, bipartisan policy center type project just exist for probably my entire life, and especially all my time

here in Washington, and if we all think about it, like what are the things that the parties, when the parties agree, it's usually like the worst thing ever, right, it's like support for Israel, or I don't know, like a coup in Venezuela, or more funding for Ukraine. On economics, I'm trying to think, they'd be like, oh yeah, I mean the SNAP program

or something, I know there's some, you know, beef there, or reforming social security. They'd be like, well we don't wanna kick people off, we just wanna raise retirement age. Or if we go back to 2015 and the original talks between Barack, the Obama administration and the Republicans, like that's where real bipartisanship was.

Whereas again, if you look at an actual breakdown of like so-called, you know, what an America party or all of that would be, at least for where it is right now, I think we have some polling we're going to talk about on Friday, or at least Emily, I saw sent this. It's like people, I think 57% or something of Americans describe themselves as quote economically liberal, something like 60% described themselves as like some sort of immigration restriction or agreeing with that And then I mean the healthcare polling doesn't take a genius to go in to look at that That's kind of where the real American middle is but each one of those is kind of radical in its own way And so if you were to call yourself like a quote radical centrist, that's where things would be with Elon

You know You not only have a cult of personality aspect, in terms of the actual things that he believes, he's like a Javier Millet libertarian. It's like this is not popular. Right. You know in America, by the way, there was a lot of talk initially about Argentina.

Argentina right now is a disaster if people wanna go and check it out. By the way, their birth rate is plummeting. Thanks to, all right, there's a variety of reasons for that, but you can go and look just broadly at how people there societally are reacting. This whatever disaster capitalism or whatever you wanna call it,

does not seem to be working nearly as well as even whatever disaster was coming before it. But that's kind of Elon's solution to whatever the, whatever is wrong, what he thinks with the Republican Party is. He's so concerned about the debt limit or whatever, but as you point out, this is a person who has gotten billions of dollars in government subsidies. Somebody do the math.

I forget exactly what percentage or how the company would have even existed previously without being able to do so. It almost certainly would have died without significant government assistance. Tesla specifically, Obama really helped to rescue at a time that was very perilous for that company. Yeah, I mean, look, he's pissed off that he didn't get his NASA guy so he could get his goodies from the government. I mean, that was part of the breakup with Trump, right?

So in terms of these hardcore fiscal conservative principles, even that is a bit lacking when it comes to his own companies. But on economics, they polled Zoran Mamdani's platform. Every single thing that he campaigned on, like his core promises, wildly popular, not just in New York City where it's even more popular, but with the entire public. I think the least popular one was the free buses, and that was still polling at 59% or something like that.

So those sorts of policies, when you're talking about economics, are the actual center of the American people. I just saw polling on Medicare for All. It's at 59% support and something like 30%. I'm still skeptical on that. Something like 30% oppose. So that's very different from what Elon is proposing.

And again, what Elon is proposing is just a cult of personality of whatever it is that he's into that particular day. Harry Enton did a breakdown of some of the polling and why it can be misleading just to, you know, take for granted, oh, there's so many Americans that are dissatisfied with the two-party system. But if you dig a level deeper, it gets much more complicated very quickly. Let's listen to that. What is the size of Elon Musk's base?

Well, I calculate it to be about 4%, just 4%, one, two, three, 4% of all voters. What is that base made up of? Well, it's those who view Elon Musk favorably and the GOP unfavorably. We're talking just about 4% of all voters out there because it turns out most of the people who like Elon Musk already like the GOP already. That is, they already have a party for him. And we will note Americans with an unfavorable view,

i.e. essentially that must starts off with far more against him than Ross Perot ever did. Americans with an unfavorable view of Ross Perot was only 14% back in 1992. Now, the vast majority of Americans are already against Elon Musk, 58%. So what we're essentially saying here is that Elon Musk is gonna go into a electorate that already dislikes him, is already against him, while there were far more people who were open to the idea of a Ross Perot third party independent candidacy

as compared to an Elon Musk third party in which the vast majority of Americans have already sided against the man. Since 1970, just 0.2% of all winners, of all winners were either third party, independent or right-handed. We're only talking about 24 out of over 13,000 winners. The bottom line is third party, independents, they just don't succeed. about 24 out of over 13,000 winners.

The bottom line is third party, independents, they just don't succeed. Yeah, and I mean, there's a, like obviously we've talked about third parties and how impossible it is. I mean, American, the American political system is rigged against third parties. That is the way that it is set up.

And so it is very difficult to succeed outside of these edge cases, you're a Bernie Sanders in Vermont, you are, you know, you. Who still caucuses with the Democrats, right? Like Angus King, I just came from Maine. Right, and ran on the Democratic primary, yeah. And I mean, the other thing that's actually interesting right now is

if you were to go in the political landscape of where there's the most opportunity, Republicans are very happy with the Republican Party. Yes, that's right. Trump is, they love Trump. They're with him. They're happy with Trump as the leader of the Republican Party. They feel great. And now, so Elon obviously has aligned himself with the more conservative part of the political spectrum. Democrats, on the other hand, are disgusted with Democratic Party leadership, which is kind of a house of cards at this point.

So even in terms of where you would locate yourself on the political spectrum, the whole thing is F'd. And just to take it back to his business interests, I think in a sense he's in real trouble. Because if you think about SpaceX, now you've got Sean Duffy in there. You'll remember that cabinet meeting where Elon was in there and got into it a little bit with— Oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah.

It was Sean Duffy. That's right. He did get in. He publicly was like feuding with. And they clearly... So putting Sean Duffy in at NASA is like a direct kind of F-U to Elon. So SpaceX is very dependent on federal government contracts. So that's an issue for SpaceX. Twitter has never been an economically sound investment. It was more about power and projection and propaganda.

I think it's been effective with regards to that. But now you've got Linda Iaccarino out, the analysis from Kara Swisher that like, hey, you're not gonna have the threat of lawsuits through your alliance with Trump against advertisers. I think that's an accurate point. So Twitter as a business prospect is just totally hosed. And Tesla is screwed.

Like, Elon was such an important part of the Tesla brand. And now you have alternatives. In most of the world, there are many other, and most Chinese electric vehicles that are superior to Tesla that you have access to. Now here we don't have those. But the major car companies are turning out EVs, and there are alternatives that are at

least close to approximate to what Tesla is. You're losing the EV subsidies from the one big, beautiful bill, which I think those should stay in place, but those are gone now. And your brand is now completely toxic with the affluent liberals who were buying your car and then the potential new market of like, you know, right wing conservatives who loved Trump and loved you, you've now tanked yourself with them with your war with Trump, like,

where is this going to go, and your product line is stale. And you haven't been focused on actually delivering for consumers and creating a product that's like irresistible to people. The Cybertruck is one of the biggest vehicular buffs in history. Mostly because of Elon, by the way. I genuinely think it's his fault.

Because it had a lot of hype whenever it initially came out. I agree. Yeah, absolutely. Apparently a bunch of rental car agencies are buying them because they're so cheap. Oh really? Hey, it's got decent range. Honestly, it wouldn't be a bad thing to rent

if you're on vacation. My daughter is selling, I mean she must have heard this on YouTube shirts or something. She was like, don't be mad at everyone who's driving a cyber truck, Mommy, because they may have just rented it, like, been stuck with it from the rental car company. Very smart.

And hey, it's got some luggage storage. I might be checking that out the next time I have to rent a car, especially if they'll give me a discount. But I'll just put it like this, which is with Elon, the America party, et cetera. And I know, I've broadly found, people can get upset when we talk about the third parties in a denigrating way.

But look at Zoran, the guy won the Democratic primary. Look at Trump, you know, the model is there, is you have to come in and kind of blow up an existing political party for your own purposes. The Democrats are in their 2014 moment. They are ready to be destroyed, all right? Hakeem Jeffries is John Boehner. Schumer is, yeah, sorry, Schumer is like the perfect example

of a leader who can easily be knocked off. Eric Cantor or something, yeah. Yeah, Eric Cantor, there's not like a direct comparison. But you know, these guys are running scared and they're a joke and the Democratic base is upset. You could never been more rife for a Trump moment than right now in the party. And if you look at the history of new political parties,

it really takes a singular issue to blow everything up. And a lot of people really forget that. I mean, you need a slavery-type issue to actually destroy a party. We don't have that right now. There's not one single defining axis of American crisis at this moment. There are intra-party-wise, as in like

in the Democratic party, it's about exuding some fight and wanting to win on the Republican side. Israel is a real fighting line too. Israel's a big one. I'm not sure if it's there quite yet, but immigration was how the right turned on the axis of immigration. That's where everything really turned around.

And there was a lot of other stuff that came with it. But on the Democratic side, Israel is a big one. There's a lot of vibe elements to it as well. But that's fine, there's nothing wrong with that. My point is just that we don't have something that crosses those two, in which they're both irreconcilable on those two issues, like breaking apart, which would allow people to converge on a single party,

like the original Republican Party under Lincoln, which remember was a new party at their own time. That's really what broke up Wigery. And you just have to look at that history and say, we don't have that right now. Perot came close and he did try, and he's the goat for that reason, is that he kind of centered it around global trade and the reordering of our economic system with NAFTA. But unfortunately, people were basking too much in the glow of the 1990s

and they weren't willing to listen. If he ran today, I actually think he'd be a wildly popular Republican, but it's unfortunate. Nate Cohen did an analysis that was basically like, you know, if the Republicans and the Democrats really fully realign where the Republicans are truly like the national populace, which they're not really, and the Democrats are truly like a sort of democratic socialist, which they're definitely not,

then you might have space for this like return to neoliberalism kind of a party. But it he, yeah, I mean, I share your skepticism. And certainly given where we are right now, where the neoliberals still have plenty of purchase within both political parties. It's, you know, the time is not, we don't need a neoliberal resurgent party because they still have plenty of power within both of the two major parties. Let's get to Trump.

Let's do it. Shall we? All right, lots of news here with Donald Trump. Some major moves in particular on tariffs and on Ukraine, a other things so Trump has given us some great insight into his thinking on his terror formula you'll recall recall recall previously there was basically chat GPT type formula which by the way not even a good chat GPT formula it was the easiest chat GPT formula that you were able to I got a much more sophisticated one and I only it took me only five minutes.

But here is Trump revealing for the first time how the formula is being used. Let's take a listen. The formula was a formula based on common sense, based on deficits, based on how we've been treated over the years, and based on raw numbers. But they're based on very,'ve been treated over the years and based on raw numbers, but they're based on very substantial facts and also past history.

The formula is based on the formula. It just has common sense. There you go. Based on very substantial facts. I'm not gonna tell you what those facts are. Based on very substantial facts. Now, in particular, what the formula really is is whatever Trump kind of wants it to be.

So let's go and put this one up there on the screen because this, is whatever Trump kind of wants it to be. So let's go and put this one up there on the screen. This is probably the most significant one that dropped yesterday. Trump has now hit Brazil with a 50% tariff. It says, in part, due to the trial of Ayer Bolsonaro. So for those who don't know, Trump has been tweeting more recently about Bolsonaro, who obviously is on trial inside of Brazil. He also kind of cited digital censorship

and free elections here. So for example, he says, Trump in the letter, doing part two Brazil's insidious attacks on free elections and the fundamental free speech rights of Americans, as illustrated by the Brazilian Supreme Court and his secret and unlawful censorship orders

with US platforms. We will charge Brazil a tariff of 50%. Please understand the 50% number is far less than what is needed to have a level playing field and we must have with your country, it is necessary to have this to rectify the grave injustices of the current regime and he additionally cites the prosecution there of Bolsonaro. Now, this is obviously a beef kind of long coming, but the question is about whether it's actually going to be effective and what this will mean

inside of Brazil. Keep in mind Bolsonaro, I mean, yes, he lost, but it wasn't like a terrible loss. And I remember we had Glennon at the time where even though Lula did win the Bolsonaro, I forget the exact name for it, but the Bolsonaro party itself actually did quite well throughout Brazil.

So it's not like they actually don't have their own vibrant political system. The real question is about how this will be met by Brazilians. And I think that is obvious from a lot of the tariff blowback that we saw in the early days of the administration. Canada, for example, becoming overwhelmingly nationally popular. Trump basically nuking the conservative party inside of Canada, Mexico, Claudia Scheinbaum very popular when standing up to the United States.

Japan, by the way, I just saw a statement from a senior Japanese official inside of the government for the LDP party who was like, Trump is a bad person or something like that is crazy. Like they don't talk that way in internal Japanese politics. He's a very high ranking person allied with the government, this is after we just hit them with their 25% tariff.

Korea is also having similar kind of nationalist upris- They're upset, obviously, about the way that they're being treated. So I think that the potential, the irony is that, well yeah, I mean, I remember that social media case, it was outrageous. I don't know all the specifics around the both, I'm not an expert on the Brazilian legal system

and whatever they want to do, like go for it. It's not particularly my business. But I think that the question about if we actually wanted to achieve these goals and what they would look like are open right now, at a time where it wasn't that long ago, we were very concerned that Brazil, and Lula, because he is not, is much more of an internationalist figure, willing to speak out against the consensus on Gaza

and also willing to do a lot of trade with China, this would seem like the perfect example of something that might actually put them in a different direction, because China doesn't care at all about what they do with Bolsonaro. It's put down on the consensus on Ukraine as well. Of course, yeah, that's right, I remember that.

This is insane. It's actually outrageous. Okay, first of all, this is a president who tells you he's America first. And the impact of putting 50% tariffs on Brazil is going to be higher prices on you. So effectively, he's putting a tax on you in order to help out his buddy in Brazil. Okay. Number two, you don't have to know all the ins and outs to know, as Sagar just said, like they can do in their country what they want to do.

Recall this is also the man who went and gave a speech about how we weren't going to lecture other countries, we weren't going to enforce our own views on other countries and manipulate them. I agree with that, yeah. I mean, and immediately he turns around and does the complete opposite of that. 50% tariffs because he's mad that, I mean Bolsonaro tried to do a coup and overthrow the complete opposite of that. 50% tariffs because he's mad that,

I mean Bolsonaro tried to do a coup and overthrow the election. And that is one of the things that he is being prosecuted for right now. And that is the reason that he has been banned from running in the next presidential election. Now, again, I am not an expert on exactly what went down and the status of these court cases, whatever.

But it seems like within the realm of reasonable, that if you have someone who engineers a coup and tries to overthrow an election, that maybe they should be barred from running for that office again in the future. From the political perspective, it's also completely insane in terms of the goals you want to effectuate. So first of all you're very likely to have a rallying around Lula who actually has been sliding in the polls and was in a bit of political trouble so this could

easily very possibly start to want to read Rojas about this very possible that this rescues Lula and bolsters his polls as he heads into his next election it's not clear if he's running out whatever put that aside but could very much bolster Lula politically. In addition, you have Trump picking this fight with the Brics nation, of which Brazil is the the bee in Brics there, over their movement towards potential, you know, an alternative currency system, potential de-dollarization. What do you think the impact of this is going to be? It is going to be to further push these countries into the arms of China.

You can't rely on these people. These people are insane. You're just gonna levy a 50% tariff on us because you don't like what our court system is doing? Like get out of town. What do you mean? So it's so counterproductive, idiotic, illogical, outrageous on every single level

that you can hardly wrap your head around the type of mind that would come up with this. Well, I mean, in particular for me, it's just, look, I don't know. I mean, I remember there were a lot of concern about censorship and all that via Brazil. I don't disagree with any of that. I think that's fine, you know, if we want.

And I believe we at least got some resolution or something on that. But for me, the Bolsonaro thing, again, I don't know about the case. I know that there was some brouhaha or whatever and they're banning him from all of that, but I don't really care what they do in their own country. You do what you wanna do. If you guys are upset about it,

then you can overthrow your own government. Go for it. But as Rojas actually points out, with Brazil's export partners, the 50% tariff, it'll hurt but it won't be devastating, in particular because Brazil already was at least pursuing somewhat the so-called BRIC strategy. And in fact, actually just yesterday, you know, the Chinese government announced trade agreements with ten different countries in the Asia-Pacific, many of whom were actually

hit by a tariff by the United States almost in the Asia-Pacific, many of whom were actually hit by a tariff by the United States almost in the same week. Now those are the things that actually concern me the most. I'll also show you another example. Let's put B4 up on the screen please, on copper. Trump says, quote, I am announcing a 50% tariff on copper effective August 1st, 2025, citing the national security reasons for semiconductors and all

of these other industries that are reliant on copper. Now, OK, listen, I think I said this yesterday. That's fine as long as we have a vibrant copper industry here in the US and we're able to, I don't know, spin up production and we've given a bunch of tax credits to the copper industry. We didn't do any of that with the latest bill That's the problem. And so, you know copper Ryan said yesterday that this is a boon to all of the people who rip copper out of abandoned houses

Which are aka drug addicts by the way, so congratulations all the fentanyl addicts out there I were stealing copper off of job sites and other things But if you pair that with where we are right now, it's probably just gonna lead to a higher price. By the way, for home construction and all that, good luck. For renovators and other things, it's gonna massively increase their overall supply. Let's also, can we put the next one up here?

Because this fits with what I was talking about. The haphazard nature in which this is all going into effect. You can see here all of the different tariffs that were just announced by the president in the last two days. The Philippines, Brunei, Moldova, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia. I mean, a number of those countries I just listed

just signed a trade agreement there with China. You've got Tunisia, Kazakhstan, Algeria, Iraq, Libya. Who even rules Libya, by the way? You know, what business do we do? Bosnia, South Africa, Indonesia? Bangladesh, Serbia, Iraq, Cambodia Reparations not hurting the tariffs. Yeah, Thailand Cambodia Myanmar, Laos I mean the thing is again Let's just return if we thought to the original strategy because I've been here around for the pivot pivot to Asia

For my entire time here in Washington The idea was is to take many of the countries I just listed, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Philippines, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, and turn them into places where the United States can continue to do business in the Asia Pacific and move production out of China. This is specifically why Vietnam is such

an important trading partner, and at the very least we did sign some sort of trade agreement with them. There's a lot of problems with pass-through shipping, et cetera, and circumventing tariffs, which I totally understand, but that was the basic proposal. That's why it's just ridiculous to be hitting a 20% tariff on the Philippines or on Malaysia, South Korea, Japan, highly developed nations, which are traditionally very good friends here, you know, with the United States, important production houses in their own right.

And it's just contrary to any sort of moving away and outsourcing from China. It's just haphazard. And it's one that basically just fits with the whims of Trump himself. And the more that it's like that, the more likely, of course, America is likely to turn against tariffs, because they can see that it has no real purpose. And the likelihood is to actually just vindicate all these neoliberals, because the prices are just gonna go up.

We're gonna talk about Amazon here in a little bit, but we're already seeing some precarious signs. It's funny too, I've seen people be like, see, you should've trusted Trump's plan on tariffs all along. I'm like, guys, he backed down on the tariffs. That's the only reason why the economy is fine. If they go back into effect, then all of the original doom scenarios will come true. Like, what are we doing here?

You know? It's insane. And just to go back to Priscilla for one more moment, like, who are we to be lecturing anyone about censorship at this point as well? I don't disagree with that. Like, who are we? We're kidnapping students off the street

for a freaking op-ed. And you think you have any moral high ground to stand on when it comes to censorship? Like, get out of here. So, and also, again, by the way, And you think you have any moral high ground to stand on when it comes to censorship? Get out of here. And also, again, by the way, if they want to have different laws regarding that than we do, that is their right. And they get to work it out in their own democratic system, which seems to be actually functioning

more effectively than ours does at this point. I don't know about that. It's total and complete insanity, the whole thing. It is so devastating to any ideology, which you and I both share, of desiring industrial policy and thoughtful protectionism, like the copper thing on its own. If you had some strategic, okay, here's what we're going to do, and here's the policy by and here's the subsidies that are going to help build this American industry. Okay, I'm open to that, but this is just insanity and chaos. And while to Trump's face, a bunch of these countries will kowtow,

you know, Mr. President, and can we get a Nobel Peace Prize for you or whatever, behind the scenes, they are all talking and collaborating and figuring out how they can move on from being in this abusive relationship, which is exactly what this is at this point. It's a big problem. And it also just shows Trump can flip around on a dime all the time. More recently, we're going to move on to the Ukraine part. Ryan and I talked about this yesterday.

But you can actually watch in real time how the Ukraine policy of Donald Trump has gone from I want to stop the dying, we need to stop sending all this money to Ukraine because it's depleting US stockpiles, to I'm just gonna have it solved all in one day before I even take office, to talks with Putin and the Russian government, to basically just recreating the Biden policy

where Trump is thinking about signing the Lindsey Graham sanctions bill. More sanctions oughta do it. It's definitely not the most sanctioned country by the United States ever, right? And more weapons to Ukraine. Oh, I'm sure that'll be a solution for the Ukrainians. That definitely is gonna be able to beat back the Russians

as the Ukrainians continue to lose territory. Oh, that's right. Actually, remember that nice minerals deal that we signed? Well, the Russians just took a massive lithium field yesterday, so, oh, okay, oops, forget. Might have been better to sign some peace deal or something earlier, even if you're just looking out for American interests, but that's where Trump is now.

And perhaps the reason is that Putin sees Trump as a massive bluffer. He believes he doesn't really have to play ball with the US really, if he needs to, because he knows that even to the extent of maximum realistic Ukrainian support, he can just continue this war on forever. The last two days in Ukraine have actually been some of the biggest bombardments ever. Over 1,000 drones that have come down on the city.

He clearly doesn't care. And also, he believes here with Trump that he's not necessarily a useful negotiator. So we had some actually interesting audio that just leaked from Trump where he told people behind the scenes, I believe this is during the campaign trail, that he was quote, going to bomb the shit out of Moscow if they continued the war in Ukraine. Let's take a listen. Putin, I said, if you go in know, and this is the irony of this I don't believe you, but the truth is he believed me 10%. So that's what I told people behind the scenes, but you know, and this is the irony of this whole like,

oh, a stooge and all of this. The reality of the situation is that Putin has a view, which has really just not changed. He's like, I want all of Ukraine, to the extent that I'm willing to talk, it's that we freeze things where they are right now. And the West is like, oh, well, we need a defense treaty, and we need to say, and he's like, no,

we're not doing any of that. My entire economy is around the war. You can either take it, or I'm just gonna continue the war. Period, end of story. And we just seemed like cycled back to the same ridiculous position that we have started in. It's just so ridiculous in particular after we just blew all this money on Israel

and all of these weapons stockpiles. I don't know if you saw yesterday we talked about with Ryan, It's just so ridiculous in particular after we just blew all this money on Israel and all of these weapons stockpiles. I don't know if you saw yesterday we talked about with Ryan, 25% right now of the Patriot batteries, munitions that we need for US plans are currently in stock. Trump is currently talking about sending them over to Ukraine. That would deplete us even more. What are we doing? Especially after we blew a ton of them on the more recent Israel attack. So it's just it just counted like any sort of coherent project around this thing.

And here's Trump being asked yesterday because of the chaos around the pause, which has now been restarted. Don't worry, everybody, the weapons are on their way to Ukraine. Here's what he had to say. Well, I haven't thought about it because we're looking at Ukraine right now and munitions, but I have no, I have not gone into it. If a decision was made, I will know. I'll be the first to know.

In fact, most likely I'd give the order, but I haven't done that yet. So what he's talking about there is that originally there was a pause put into place to pause the weapons. Then Trump, apparently, according to him, didn't know about it and came out and was like, oh no, actually we're going to restart it. But this just goes to show that, part of the reason, I would even defend any idea of a pause because, Crystal, doesn't that seem consistent

with the policy set by the administration? Why would the president need to approve this thing that he said he was going to do? This was a basic framework of the Trump campaign and promises from the very first day. So of course that would be the policy. And because Trump is who he is, he's just switching things around all the time.

And then this morning I see Rubio and Lavrov are meeting in Malaysia. So I'm like, who the hell knows? Yeah, well did you see, I mean, this kind of fits with this idea of like, different factions of the administration are just sort of freelancing and not coordinating and not running things up the chain. There were two tracks to get a deal with Venezuela.

Oh yeah, we talked about that yesterday. Oh, did you talk about that yesterday? I missed it. To try to secure the release of some American prisoners that are being held by the Venezuelans. And you had Marco Rubio offering one deal, and then Rick Grinnell offering a different deal. That was a better deal. To the same guy. Right, to the same guy. And so you're like, what is going on here? Right? And so even though I think you're right that

because Trump was so clear about like, we're gonna do this and you know, I mean, maybe it's now it's obviously much less clear. But I think there was a justified legitimacy to you know, the State Department, Defense Department being like, okay Yeah, this is the policy and so we're gonna pause these weapons at the same time You do like people do need to know what's going on. There needs to be some sort of coordination and Under Pete Hegseth the Pentagon is it is a shit show like it is a backbiting messy Chaotic shit show and I just don't think that there is any denying that at this point And this is one instance where it sort of

Comes to the surface. Yeah, you know on the on the substance here with regard to Ukraine and I think you and Ryan said something similar yesterday like Having an ideology and a goal is gonna be no ideology and no goal every day Yeah And you see the same thing with regard to the policy visa via run Like Trump is kind of all over then doesn't really know really know what he wants, and one day he wants this, and one day he wants that. Bibi Netanyahu frickin' knows what he wants. And so because he's going to be relentless

in pushing for his objective, consistent with his ideology and his goal, eventually he's gonna get it. And so it's the same thing you see with Ukraine. The Lindsey Grahams of the world, the Vladimir Zelenskis of the world, they know what they want, and they are going to continue to push it relentlessly

until they get it. And I think Trump came in with just like a foolishly naive view of what it would take to resolve a conflict that is now very difficult to resolve. Even if you came in and you were focused on it, and you were intelligent about it, and you had a specific goal in mind of here's how we're gonna resolve it.

Even under those circumstances, it would be very, very difficult. But he came in thinking he's just like, oh, I'm the great deal maker, and we'll figure it out, and I have a great relationship with Putin, and so I trust him, we're gonna be able to work it out. No, you're not. No, you're not. And so congratulations, America.

Basically, you've got another forever war here. The most likely track is we're just gonna continue shipping weapons bit by bit, and continue to be this sort of like grinding, intractable conflict over years and years and years, and presidents are going to, the next president's gonna inherit it, and they're just gonna, like we did in Afghanistan,

just sort of stop talking about it and have it be on the back burner and just persist in this policy that's ongoing and horrific and has this terrible human toll, because that is the path of least resistance. That is the path of least resistance. That's why we stayed in Afghanistan for so long, because the moment that you actually pull the plug

on that conflict, look what happened to Joe Biden. His approval rating was destroyed and he never, ever recovered, because when you end in conflict, you have to reckon with the failures of that policy and what it meant to get us to that point. I totally agree. This is an iHeart Podcast.