40 Burst results for "Federal Government"
Gun Confiscation in Biden's America: Will You Be on the List?
"Who have 100 ,000 followers. I'm not even mentioning their names, but just imagine for a second you garner 50 thousand followers. You're Joe Smith. You've got a regular job, living a decent life with your two kids and the dog, whatever it may be. And all of a sudden you start posting about and Biden wins, God forbid, in 2024, you start posting about Hunter Biden's crack problems and his paintings and money laundering. Oh, next thing you know, look, you get a knock at the door. We'd like to talk to you about these Twitter posts, by the way. You have a gun, son of your business. Well, actually it is our business. You have a gun. We'd like to see that. Next thing you know, you get some kind of flag red against you. Your guns are confiscated. look, Oh, they find a gun in your house and all of a sudden they make up some phantom menacing thing. Oh, he lunged for it. Meanwhile, you were seven rooms away while they're in your house. This is what worries me. They will use the gun list as a way to target their political opponents. Not that they're going to confiscate every gun. There's no way. They have no chance. But how would they do that, folks? And now let's play a little interactive game. But, Dan, I've listened to your show before. It's illegal for the federal government to create Yes, correct. It's also illegal for the federal government to use tax dollars to pay off people's student loans. But they do that. There's always a workaround for tyrants. And the workaround for the tyrants is the background check system. The federal government wants to desperately compile a list of everybody that's gone through a background check for a firearm. So they have a list of every firearm and who bought it. The problem, ladies and gentlemen, is the mandatory background check is only for sales from FFLs. It's not for private. So Mike if or I were to give away a firearm to, say, our daughters or sons, and they're not prohibited possessors, the government son of the government's business, your gun, you can give it to whoever you want, as long as it's the law. They want
Fresh update on "federal government" discussed on WTOP 24 Hour News
"Migrants from legally or illegally as it would be crossing Into texas from mexico the decision comes after months of legal wrangling between governor abbotts office and the federal government Still more appeals are possible here. The texas governor has said he'll take the issue to the u .s. Supreme court the wtop traffic center tracking the top trouble spots the biggest backups the major The slowest traffic wtop traffic every 10 minutes on when it breaks it is friday december first welcome into wtop time now is 11 44 glad you're in with us. This is wtop news A
Mexico Rejects Texas' Proposal to Let Police Deport Illegals
"To the Dan Bongino show filling in for Dan. Here's Vince colonies. Yes, indeed. I'm Vince colonies normally heard on WMAL in Washington, D. C. I will be heard there coming up at 3 to 6 p .m. Eastern. So grateful to be filling in for Dan today as he signs a bunch of books in Texas for his best selling new New book. And again, you can join us today at 844 -484 -3872 844 for USA. the Always great for grateful for your contributions. When I fill in for Dan, we've got a story for you from our border. southern Remember that? We used to have one of those. The Texas Tribune has a got a piece this week. Mexico rejects Texas's proposal to allow state police case to deport undocumented immigrants. Boy, even the headline needs to be untangled. Undocumented immigrants. That's a lie. Let's talk about language in the last hour, the way the left manipulates it. Undocumented immigrants. Really? Because what I'm seeing a lot of is stolen social security numbers and fake paperwork and even people come into the United States illegally, then walk up to Border Patrol agents and then they're given some sort of documents that demonstrate that we're aware they're here. So they're not undocumented. They're actually documented. So that's already a lie. It's generous to say that they're immigrants because that in a sense justifies coming into the United States. What's really going on is they're illegal aliens by every traditional definition of the word and also that's what appears in our statutes. The laws themselves say illegal aliens. But Mexico is rejecting a Texas proposal to allow state police to deport illegals. What do you mean rejecting it? So Mexico us allows to, if the federal government wants to do it, on the very rare occasion that it does nowadays. That's fine, but if Texas wants to do it, Mexico is rejecting it? What's the difference to them? Well, the difference is obvious. Our federal government is not doing it. And any attempt by any American entity to actually put illegals in trebuchets and throw them back across the street, they're going to reject. They're against. No, no, no, no. Don't send them to us. We don't want them. We opened up our country. It's so they would come to you. Mexico does not police its own southern border. It used to. Trump When was in office, Trump forced them to. He actually threatened a trade war unless they got control of the thing. Okay, fine, fine, fine. They got control of their southern border, and they slowed down all of the
Fresh update on "federal government" discussed on Mark Levin
"Simply Smarter Wireless. Dial pound 250, say keyword Mark Levin. know I people get nervous about changing these things. I mean I do. I do. I'm comfortable with it, but if it comes to saving real money and having cutting edge technology and getting a free phone, I'm very comfortable with that too, aren't you Mr. Producer? Alright, yesterday on Capitol Hill, you know I've told you before, the late great Senator Paul Axel, he was a Senator from Nevada, he'd been a Governor before that. He was the closest politician to Ronald Reagan. They had neighboring states that were Governors at the same time. And he would confide in Laxhall, and Laxhall would confide in him. Just a terrific man, and he and I became very, friendly, very he became a mentor to me, and he's passed away since, but just a great guy, Adam Laxhall, fantastic as his grandson by the way. You have this guy, Representative Dan Goldman, Dan, excuse me, Goldman. Dan Goldman was in the US Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York, and this tells me that the quality and level of professionalism intelligence and in that office isn't what it's claimed to be. It is very low. Goldman is another detestable hack, his entire purpose for existing as a member of Congress is to run interference for the Democrat Party mob, and you know what, I shouldn't even call them the mob. The mob is more honest and less damage to our country systemically than the Democrat Party. The biggest enemy we have really is the Democrat Party as an institution. That's why I wrote the book about it. And by the way Mr. Producer, remind everybody and can we post a place where people can go to get a signed edition. We're running out of books and we're running out of time for the holidays. Can you post that and then remind that is? Because folks there's a limited first edition signed copy the of book. l -e -v -i -n signed I if know you're a regular listener your family's gonna love this book and I'm not doing signings anymore. I didn't do that many to begin with l -e -v -i -n signed is that it? l -e -v -i -n signed s s -i -g -n -e -d .com l -v -i -n signed dot com it's friday i evening mean for all i know they'll be sold out by the weekend i don't know but i do know they do sell out so you need that quickly anyway this guy goldman is just another pig shellenberger michael voted for by that he regrets it he's a democrat i think still but the point is democrat or not he believes in free speech and he and talibi and weiss and others have worked very very hard particularly in recent months in the last year so to explain to we the people the danger our free is facing and the power of the federal government the central government particularly under biden to steal it from us to abuse it and so what do they do they they abuse shellenberger they abuse talibi they even sent an irs agent to his door and open an audit oh that's just by chance come on these are police state tactics sickening it's and it's going on in our country right now right liz liz cheney's very worried if donald trump's the nominee well we'll lose our country we are losing our country you idiot you self think self -righteous buffoon feel better now dan goldman at a hearing yesterday the rep the reprobate michael berger mister first amendment here we go cut twenty -five go you've talked about the hunter biden laptop and and the how f b i knew it existed you are aware of course that uh... laptop so to speak was actually that was published in the new york post was actually a hard drive that at the new york post admitted here was not authenticated as real it was not the f b i had you're aware of that right it was the same contents how do you know uh...
If Kari Lake Wins a Senate Seat THIS Would Be Her Top Priority
"And one of the things they've flipped the script on Carrie, which I want to get your take. Carrie's running for U .S. Senate, by the way, in Arizona. I'm sorry I should have mentioned that. assume I a lot of you know, but Carrie Lee, Carrie with a K, K -A -R -I. Great candidate. This is an opportunity right here. One of my priorities and a lot of Republicans I talk to and good conservatives is a swamp house cleaning, especially at the law enforcement and intel community. I don't deny there are some decent people left, some whistleblowers I know have told me that, that there are a lot of people there who are great guys and women. They're out there investigating bank robberies in the Arkansas office and the FBI. They have nothing to do with any of this. Matter of fact, most of them love Trump. There are people at the top, however, Kerry. The FBI and DOJ, you know, have been involved in a number of conspiracy devastating facts, not theories. So if you were elected to the US Senate, can we be assured that this is going to be one of your priorities too? Because I know you can't stand these people as much as our audience can. Yeah. It's a top priority. We have to. Our federal government has been weaponized and turned on we, the people. I mean, this is the tyranny that our founding fathers warned us about. And maybe, you know, nobody saw that that's what the tyrants would be now. Here we are, you know, after the Revolutionary War. And we are dealing with basically a push toward going back to a globalist running the show. You know, they freed us from the globalist King George, and now we're facing globalism taking over and Americanism being gone. And so this is battle what the is. We have to go after the bureaucrats and the bureaucratic administrative state and our federal government. We're watching what they're doing to President Trump, and they're doing it to a whole lot of other people as well. And I think we've got to do a major house cleaning and I'm talking shrink these departments down if we to have starve them of the money in order to get some of these crooked people out. And the good thing is, if we can find silver the lining, Dan, is we're starting to see who's who is as much of a struggle as this is as much. It's dark. It's not fun. It's
Fresh "Federal Government" from Bloomberg Businessweek
"Can download it wherever you get your podcast. Johnson & Johnson getting an upgrade to buy at UBS today J &J up for a fourth day advancing by 2 4 % again recapping stocks higher S &P up 26 up by six tenths of one percent 2000 today up by 3 % I'm Charlie Pellett and that slash. Hey Charlie thank you so much Carol Master along with Bailey Lipschultz in for Tim on this Friday we're talking with Mandy Long CEO and board member at Big Bear AI still with us on zoom in Chicago Mandy you were talking about just before we went and did some news about the importance of both the public and private worlds in terms of your business forward. going Talk to us a little bit more about that and I know you also made a recent acquisition tell us about that and how that kind of feeds into your business and fits into the business growth. Absolutely and I think I think the best way to break down the importance of the relationship between the public and private sector side outside of of what we do is that there's an incredible amount of collaboration that happens between both sides today and I think Big Bear in particular sits at an intersection point between the two of those right in the private sector side we support with a lot of the technology we have in not only in the autonomous system side of our business but also supply chains a lot of capabilities that then get delivered right into the federal government through those providers in addition to the work that we do in for example you you know healthcare right I spent 15 years in healthcare I was early days in machine learning and vision AI there we do a lot of work with hospitals and health systems supporting patient flow optimization right so if you have a patient that presents in the ED how do you make sure that you get them to the right place at the right time those patterns right and the ability to apply advanced technology to that means that both sides of our business are growing right and relevant because we're solving problems that cross the chasm both of sides and when we look forward to where we're headed the anticipated acquisition that we announced recently with Pangium bolsters our vision AI portfolio because you heard me talk you know a lot about Arcus right and the work that we do in horizontal imagery right and satellite Pangium has a remarkable portfolio that does advanced biometrics right facial you know iris -based work and it provides a really comprehensive solution that we can bring to our customers and Manny kind of balancing though the utilization of technology AI streamlining things helping you know work in healthcare and better treat people but on the flip side buying a facial recognition company how does that play into some of these security issues and getting customers and consumers kind of on board with that just given as you mentioned biometrics is something that's very hotly debated. It very much is right and I think it was it's an important strategic decision right and it was not made lightly right. At Big Bear we play a very big role and we use our voice very openly as it relates to talking about the safety and security of technology. AI We're very active right in the you know responsible innovation category, the input associated with how to do regulation at scale and so when we think about the use of biometrics I think one of the things that's really important to keep in mind right is that in many ways as a society we've crossed over a lot of the chasm associated with putting information out there because of the widespread use right and multi -year at scale use social of media. Now from a kind of where we sit on that spectrum and the role that we play right most of the capabilities that when we think about our vision portfolio today where we're very focused on is not in making autonomous decisions right it's in helping to distill and provide decision support for the ultimate customer. So you'd be working side by side with a human where it might come up always in terms of one of your systems saying hey here's what we've come up with but you need to look at it and kind of make some kind of decisions maybe off of it, correct? Because I think we get we get we get worried you know our David Weston we talked with who had talked with Henry Kissinger very concerned about AI in or wartime in war specifically and I think about the role that you know you guys are going to be you know that already you do work with the government I mean what are some of the oversights that we need to have though in place to make sure there isn't some kind of runaway technology and I'm not trying to be in sci -fi but these things could happen it's not an unfair question yeah and and I think it's you saw in the executive order that came out you know the top item is safety and security of AI technology and that is not for no reason one of the things that I think we have to keep in mind as a society as well is that we have already through the gates of a human being able to individually manage and provide oversight of this kind of technology at scale we're already an augmented PCs right I you know you I'm sure a phone right on you at all times or a computer at home I'm leveraging technology to help keep those guardrails in place is going to be what's important here because the traditional processes and paperwork is not going to get us there one one of the things that played out with open AI going too fast too soon I think back to
A highlight from The RNC Teams Up with NBC with Mollie Hemingway and Alina Habba
"Dr. Peter McCullough says the most common question he's asked is how do I get this out of my body? Spike support formula is the only product that contains ingredients researched to block and dissolve spike protein in the bloodstream. So whether you got the shot, had a bad bout of COVID, or are worried about shedding, there is something you could do now to protect yourself. Head to twc .health slash kirk to buy the wellness company spike support formula and get back to feeling your best. Use promo code kirk at checkout for 10 % off your order. That is promo code kirk for 10 % off your order. Hey everybody, it's Anna Charlie Kirk show. Alina Habat joins us for a legal update regarding Donald Trump. Very important conversation. Molly Hemingway about breaking news on how the federal government colluded to smear and censor conservative speech and why is the RNC partnering with NBC News? Email us as always freedom at charliekirk .com. Subscribe to our podcast. Open up your podcast app and type in Charlie Kirk show. Get involved Turning Point USA at tpusa .com. That is tpusa .com. Buckle up everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created. Turning Point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here.
Fresh update on "federal government" discussed on Unchained
"All right, so in a moment, we're going to talk a little bit more about financial privacy. But first, a quick word from the sponsors who make this show possible. Have you ever wondered if you could experience complete freedom in your trading journey and achieve your dreams without compromising on reliability? You should, because FEMEX is dedicated to revolutionizing exchanges, bringing forth a new era of empowerment for traders. Join the Web 3.0 revolution today. Kickstart your earnings through their growth and enjoy tangible benefits through staking. Secure your stake in the future now. For more details, visit femex.com slash web three. Arbitrum stands at the forefront of innovation as the premier suite of layer two scaling solutions, bringing you lightning fast transactions at a fraction of the cost, all with security rooted on Ethereum. From DeFi to gaming, Arbitrum one plus Nova is home to over 500 projects. And with the recent launch of Orbit, Arbitrum welcomes you to build your very own tailor-made layer three or an orbit chain. Propel your project and community forward by visiting arbitrum.io today. Back to my conversation with Vivek. So we were just talking about the third party doctrine and you talked about this belief in the right to financial privacy. You know, as far as I understand, that's not a current right. So is that something that you would support as, you know, something you would institute? Yes. I mean, I think it's a basic what I laid out to be clear in my first wave of our crypto policy, which, by the way, I want to be clear on this, is a first step as part of a broader digital asset framework that I think the public deserves. The American people deserve and I expect to provide early next year. Here were the basic rules of the road, the principles, freedom to code, freedom to financial self-reliance and then freedom to innovate free from regulatory overreach. So those are basic principles. How that's codified, much of that involves just a proper enforcement of the existing laws as they exist. And then some of that may require specific legal added protections as well. So I'll get to the implementation is yet to come in terms of the specific modes of exactly which will take the form of regulatory rollbacks versus new laws being passed. But the general point is any regulation that was written by an administrative agency that Congress never gave that administrative agency the power to write, which impedes on somebody's ability to have a self-hosted wallet, is something that I will be and our administration will be deeply skeptical of. If you want to ban it, fine, go through the front door of Congress. That's democratically accountable. And the people of this country would have to support that by a majority margin, which I want to do it through the front door, go through the front door. But we can't allow that through the back door, through the regulators that were never empowered by Congress to do it. And have you thought about how that would impact the business models of financial services companies? Yeah, I have. I mean, I think there will be implications in a lot of different directions. Some of the larger financial services companies have lobbied for the sets of rules as they apply today, partly because they're threatened by new competitors. The age old trick you see in big pharma, you see it in big tech, you see it amongst big financial institutions as well, use the government as a moat, as a barrier to entry for somebody who threatens your existing business model. That doesn't mean that those are necessarily good rules. In fact, often it means that they're not good rules, but they're still part of how we got to the status quo of where we are. And I think that there's no accident. Even if you go to the start of Bitcoin and the advent of cryptocurrency, it was in the wake of the shameful, what I view as ignominious 2008 financial crisis bailouts. And so just because you have an existing rule, it's a product of lobbying doesn't mean that that's necessarily a good rule. But broadly, I think the sector wide impact would be one of unleashing innovation, one of applying the basic rules of the road as they stand today. If you're lying and stealing and you're committing fraud, you're liable for doing that with a digital asset as you are with an ordinary asset. Yes, but it's not the fact of it being a digital asset. That was the actual wrong act. It was the fraud underlying it. Yeah, one point for people, you know, maybe challenge people to to pay attention to an obvious fact, it's not like the existing regime has been particularly effective at preventing large scale fraud of the kind that we saw at FTX or otherwise. And so, again, I reject this idea that taking a more pro innovation approach is automatically somehow going to increase the risk of legal violations or increase the risk of fraud. That's, I think, a false dualism. I think that the reality is the status quo is failing on both counts. It's creating regulatory uncertainty. You have regulators that aren't writing clear rules, but are determining what the rules are after the fact by enforcing them a paradigm of regulation by enforcement that I reject. While at the same time, the real fraudsters are playing within the confines of those so-called rules on the face of it to actually defraud people of their assets. So I think you lose on both sides of the trade versus the clarity that I'm looking to bring to bear. Yeah, so let's talk about that, because this has been an issue for years now in the U.S. where a lot of the entrepreneurs feel like they don't have regulatory clarity. And I've heard you talk about a 2022 Supreme Court case, West Virginia versus EPA. And when you say that, you say that, you know, your conclusion is that the regulations that are currently being used to classify cryptocurrencies as securities or commodities are unconstitutional. And I wonder, you know, if that is the inference, then how do you believe the agency should regulate crypto? Do you think there should be a single regulator assigned to crypto or should we continue to have this same policy where, you know, every agency regulates some portion of crypto activity? So I think the current status quo is in some ways the worst of all worlds. It's ambiguity for everybody. It doesn't effectively stop the bad actors from doing what they're going to do. And it doesn't follow the existing constitutional principles codified in West Virginia versus EPA. And for people who are, you know, wondering about that case, you don't have to be free to read it. It's one of the most important cases of our lifetime. But basically, the gist is the EPA applied certain regulators to coal miners that Congress never gave the EPA the power to actually implement. And the Supreme Court felt that if Congress never actually passed those laws through the front door, then they were unconstitutional when the regulator wrote them through the back door. If those regulations at issue in that case are unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court last year held that they are, that means that literally a majority of federal regulations, not specific to the SEC, it goes for the FDA and otherwise, a majority of current regulations are also unconstitutional. As the next president, I swear an oath to the Constitution and I intend to keep it. We will not enforce day one. We'll have executive action that says stand down from enforcing any regulation that fails to test in West Virginia versus EPA and will immediately rescind those regulations as well. It so happens many of those regulations are the ones being used, I think, to back door regulate crypto. Now, let's get practical. I'd say the CFTC and the SEC need some process, whatever it is, to determine clarity of something, counting as a security or not. I think it is entirely and wholly unacceptable to live in a country where you have the person who leads the SEC unable to answer with clarity to Congress whether or not Ethereum widely used cryptocurrency is or is not a security. Right. If that's not widely used, that many people affected by it. If there's one person you might expect that it's the chief commissioner of the SEC that's able to say whether or not Ethereum itself is a security governed by the laws enforced by that agency. If he can't do it, it's not his fault personally. It just shows how broken the current regime really is, that if it's not even clear to the ultimate head of that regulatory body, how could it be clear to entrepreneurs across this country? And so whatever the right answer is, I'd say the wrong answer is the purposeful ambiguity that we have today. And I'm a bit of a cynic. When it comes to the government, you have purposeful ambiguity. Often it's a combination of innocent mistake versus the fact that history teaches us that ambiguity is the friend of the tyrant. That's what regulation by enforcement is all about. You enforce the law. And then only after somebody is left in the hot pot to hold in the hot potato, the game of musical chairs, the last person left standing. Now, you know what the regulations are. That's not this country. You don't pick the person and then figure out the law afterwards that they violated. You have a clear set of laws where a nation of law is not of men. That's the United States of America. So I have my views on this, but I would say whatever my I can go to my views, but less important than that is at least we need clarity where the government and all parts of the government from the CFTC to the SEC is clear about whether a particular digital asset is or is not a security that much. I think the entrepreneurs of this country deserve and I think the regulators of this country deserve as well. And so I think the role that the president could play here is that they would be selecting the heads of these agencies. So what qualities or policy views would you look for or like what would the process look like to choose them? Or do you already have people in mind that you would nominate to be the chair of the SEC or the CFTC? So we're working on this across the federal government. And I want to be clear again, I know you're reaching more of a crypto focused audience. For me, my crypto policy is an outgrowth. And yeah, I think this is hopefully how you can know that I mean it right. It's not specific. I happen to like crypto currencies as a broad part of American future. I probably I think of the only presidential candidate who's owned Bitcoin prior to running for president, at least per the presidential disclosure forms. But that's not what guides my policy. This is part of an outgrowth of reshaping the administrative state across the board. Three letter agencies that have nothing to do with crypto. So as part of that, yes, we're working on a broad staffing plan for the federal government. We're thinking and working in what we call triads. Right. So each of the federal bureaucracies, we're going to have teams of three people near the top who are focused, one of whom is going to be a domain expert in that area, likely with experience in that agency, one of whom is going to be a purposeful outsider, generally somebody who's been a business builder or an outsider, understanding how to cut through that bureaucracy. And then the third person who's bringing a constitutional perspective to say who is actually applying the principles of West Virginia versus EPA or otherwise to understand whether this agency is really following the rules of the road or not. And so those are the skill sets. We're going to have almost three of those people per major agency that we're bringing in. We're working on staffing that. And then the person who's in charge is going to be able to say the chief commissioner or the head or cabinet level appointment is going to work with those people across the board in some cases to shut down that government agency, in other cases, to downsize the staff by 75 percent or more, in other cases, working with the staff to figure out which of those existing regulations fail the Supreme Court's test for what a constitutional regulation actually is. And so we're working with a number of leaders from public and private sector backgrounds alike to put together that bench. One of the learnings from the last administration, or at least Donald Trump and his leadership, was he came in with a lot of the right ideas. But that staffing cannot start only once you've been elected. We need a running start getting in. And I think that's what I'm going to bring to bear, because I think we've got about 18 months to get this right. And then after that, unless you've succeeded in those first 18 months, you're a sitting lame duck after that. I refuse to be in that position and we want to get that running start out of the gate. You've also said that you would consider ordering the Federal Reserve to grant stablecoin issuers the same access to Fed facilities that incumbent banks enjoy. As far as I understand, the central bank is independent of the executive branch. So how would you put that into action? Well, look, I think that that goes to the one of the very first points that you raised, right? The idea that that central bank somehow is independent, that it's not accountable to the three branches of government, rejects that premise that there are three co-equal branches of government. I like the very first question you asked. Aren't the administrative agencies part of the executive branch? That's what our founding fathers would say. That's what I would say. It's not how the status quo operates, but that doesn't mean the status quo is correct. So I do get an appointment power of a new chairman of the Federal Reserve in January 2026. I intend to use it to put somebody in that role who understands that there's one executive branch of government, not tens or hundreds. And do you have somebody in mind? We have a few candidates in mind. Want to name some names? You know, I would say, you know, one that I would name who I think is an example of the kind of person I don't think Rand Paul or Ron Paul, you know, version of a Ron Paul. And he's such an advanced stage of his career and I respect him. And if I'm as sharp at his age as he is right now, I want to learn from him the tricks of how he got there. But maybe the version of Ron Paul that ran for president, you know, a decade and a half ago would be the kind of person who I think would be an appropriate chairman of the Federal Reserve, because part of the job is going to involve a 90 percent headcount reduction at the U.S. Fed. Part of the problem is when you have a bunch of people showing up to work who should have never had that job in the first place, they start finding things to do that are outside their mandate. What I want to do is put the Fed in its place with one single mandate, stabilize the dollar as a unit of measurement, peg it to commodities. That's how we tie the hands of the government. That was exactly my next question. You know, as you said, you had this plan to stabilize the dollar as a unit of measurement measured against this basket of commodities. So what would that look like? Which commodities would you include? Are you thinking of including things like Bitcoin or even ether? So I think that that's a second order discussion and I'm open to having it. We haven't nailed in exactly what our basket is, but we're looking at gold, silver, nickel. We could look at agricultural and farm commodities over time after it's been, I would say, broadly accepted. The volatility of Bitcoin is no less than the combined basket of those commodities. I think it could be reasonable to include Bitcoin in that list as well. But again, the way I'm coming at this is, again, it's not from within crypto. And then how do we use that to advance an agenda through the presidency? I mean, the reality is I'm just wearing an oath to the Constitution and I'm telling you what I actually believe. I happen to believe I'm the most pro Bitcoin and broadly pro crypto president that probably will and maybe for the foreseeable future will ever run. But it's not because I'm in here to be a single issue advocate for crypto's inclusion. In fact, I'm looking at what's my job as the US president, stabilize the dollar. I'm against the volatility of the dollar that we've seen. I'm against the government having widespread authority to print money the way that we have. And so I think that whatever reduces that volatility, stabilizing the value of the dollar against actual hard commodities, which would be what I would use, take something like Bitcoin, put other cryptocurrencies to one side, but something like Bitcoin that has a fixed supply, that has an inherent defined value. I think that that is higher on the list to be included as a candidate in the foreseeable future. But for me, the basic point is stabilize the dollar as a unit of measurement. Think about it as returning to the gold standard, but with an expanded set that even gold is really just a form of paper. I don't want to be tethered to one, but to a basket of commodities that anchor the value of the dollar and tie the government's hands from being able to just print its way out of whatever political convenience presents itself. It seems that there's a kind of geopolitical battle with China in which they're trying to use the digital yuan as a way to undermine the US dollar as the global reserve currency. And I wondered if you would either try to use crypto or blockchain technology in any way to combat that. And if so, how? Well, I think the first order question is you got to be careful not to fall in the trap of this siren song that just because China is doing it, we need to do it. Ask yourself why China is doing it, I'm against a central bank digital currency, because part of what China wants to do is what you saw with the Canadian truckers last year. You've seen in China after the white sheet revolution in China, after the covid lockdown policies over there, they want to be able to wipe your bank account clean if necessary, wipe your accounts clean. If you say or do something that the government does not approve of, I think that's frightening. The weaponization of the financial system is almost every bit as bad as the weaponization of a justice system against political dissent. And so this argument that somehow that's going to keep the dollar stronger versus the yuan if we do the same thing, I think is backwards. I think the dollar actually becomes more desirable as a reserve currency of the world. If the US is not able to, on a whim, decide that the holder of a dollar, because they engage in some type of government disapproved behavior, is at risk of having the value of that dollar wiped out. So I'm dead set against the use of a central bank digital currency out of the gate. I'd put an end to the Fed now program, which is the early stages, I believe, of laying the groundwork for the future of a central bank digital currency. And that's the first step out of the gate for me. Now, if you're looking at technical alternatives to the current wire transfer system or otherwise, look, it's a clunky system and we can look at easier ways of being able to wire transfer your money than the broken system that we all know and don't love. But that's a separate technical question that shouldn't be conflated with this other, I think, approach that we've created to pave the path to a central bank digital currency. And I'm against the CBDC in the US and this idea that China is doing it and the yuan is going to be ahead. And we need to keep up with the Joneses or, as the case may be, keep up with the Xin Pings. I reject that. To the contrary, I think that taking the opposite approach would be a better way of preserving the dollar's status as the reserve currency of the world. All right. And I'm going to use my last maybe 30 seconds or so to just ask, you know, your policy points, support rights around, you know, developers and, you know, financial freedom. But I wondered if there was any particular application of blockchain technology that you think the US could best use to support its technological preeminence, sort of a lightning round question. Yeah, I think there I mean, it's really boundless. I do think that drug discovery is one of the areas where it's probably underutilized to be able to decentralize innovation in the way that we're developing new drugs. And it's a longer conversation I've even had at my prior company that I founded, although it was towards the tailing end before I ended up moving on in my career to the kinds of pursuits I'm pursuing now. But I do think advent and advances in innovative areas that improve people's lives outside of politics, decentralizing the innovation in every one of those areas is broadly the category I would give you. And so I'm not going to pick one sector from energy to drug discovery. I put broadly the innovative categories where it's better done in a decentralized way rather than by centralized bureaucracies in the private sector, which exist today from industry incumbents. That's broadly what I would say. But that's more of a 20-plus year discussion ahead of us, not the next 20 months that I'm focused on today. All right, well, thank you so much. Where can people learn more about you and your platform? Yeah, sure. Go to vivek2024.com, vivek2024.com. If people prefer to understand a little bit more of the message, you could also go to knowtoneocons.com. And I think that gives you a sense for what my domestic and foreign policy vision is. I'll just say one thing in closing as well.
A highlight from The Decline of Critical Thinking in Education
"All of this just screams that there's a void of leadership, right? There's a void of leadership in our federal government. So things happening across this country and across the world, when America used to be the strongest leader in the world, and the things happening now are because of the void of leadership under this Biden presidency, the void of leadership in states like New York and California and Illinois, cries for defunding the police. That's what has led to all of this. Welcome to another Financial Guys podcast. I'm Mike Hayflick, along with my partner, Mike Speraza. Mike, it is Election Day. We've been waiting and waiting and waiting. And here it is, November 7th. I will say it's a big day, especially here in Erie County. I do want to say, Mike, kudos to you. We used to have some really good bloopers on intros coming into the podcast, and we haven't had one in a while. You've been on your game for like two years straight. We first started this. We would used to do a couple of reboots, you and I. But we've had a good run with the start of the podcast. Old pros, right? We are old pros now. We should pull some of those out. Those are actually fun. Maybe we'll do that. We'll do a little blooper reel of a podcast someday. There's probably some with Mike and Glenn, too. I'm there's sure often some fun stuff happening before we actually record or during recordings. But, yeah. So, Mike, I want to definitely spend some time today on the importance of voting and how people will vote here in Erie County. I mean, one of the things I'd say about that and I'll pick up more on that later. Everyone always wonders, what can I do? I'm only one person. Nothing. You know, I can't make a difference. You know, you hear all the excuses. And honestly, I just give so much credit to like Mike and Glenn. Mike is sending out texts saying, tell your mother, your father, your brothers, your sisters, your aunts, your uncles, your nephews, your nieces, your cousins. Tell them to get out and vote. Like, we have to spread the word. We can't all believe that we can't make a difference because we can. We'll talk a little bit more about that shortly. But, Mike, first, war rages on in Gaza and calls for a ceasefire persist from the left. They just can't acknowledge that these bad guys, these terrorists, these savages all in Hamas have to be eradicated. Yeah. I mean, this is this is a pretty wild revelation for me, to be honest. We've talked about this on this show and our morning show a few times now. But I really I'm kind of at a loss. Right. I mean, you've said it. You know, if Pearl Harbor went and happened right, if America just said, oops, they didn't mean it, you know, what are we supposed to do? You know, if 9 -11 happened in America and said, oh, no big deal. I mean, that's that's what this sounds like. And this idea of ceasefire, Glenn said it when he came on the radio show Saturday, Mike, before you were on the show. He said he goes, people don't realize Hamas has been shooting bombs into Israel for like last three decades. You don't hear AOC talking about that. You don't hear Talib talking about that. There wasn't a call for ceasefire when they were doing that. Right. And that's the part that that to me is is pretty sickening. Like, again, I'm not saying I want America involved in the war. Let me just stress that. I'm not saying put our troops on the ground. I'm saying Israel has every right to do what they feel is right to get Hamas out of their neighboring countries, to get the Lebanese forces that are terrorists out of their neighboring countries. Like, I have no problem with that. I would do this if Canada was this way and we knew there were known terrorist cells in Canada shooting rockets at America. We wouldn't put up with that for 10 seconds, Mike, not one bomb, not one bomb. And we put up with that for no. And there's an Israeli defense system called the Iron Dome. Now, if anyone's listening or listens sometime after today, Tuesday, November 7th, we have never proclaimed to be Middle Eastern experts. OK, I will never proclaim to be that I don't want to be a Middle Eastern expert, but I'll tell you what, if I'm living 10 miles away from some group who just randomly will shoot missiles to try to destroy the group that I'm part of and me, I think we have a right to say those people have to be eradicated. We've got to get rid of them. I mean, I don't I don't know how people can be so dismissive and be so ignorant of that fact. And Mike, look at evil happens. It's happened for millions of years. Right. We can even go back just to 100. We had an Adolf Hitler, right? There were innocent Germans that died in World War Two because of the evilness of, you know, Adolf Hitler. Benito Mussolini, same war, right, was an evil dictator in Italy. Right. Innocent Italians died. I'm an Italian. Innocent Italians died because of the evil of their leader. This and it's terrible. And I hope that no, you know, innocent Palestinian or innocent Israeli dies, just like I hoped that no innocent Russian or innocent Ukrainian would die. But this is what happens when evil happens. There are innocent bystanders to that. That doesn't mean, though, that you can just say, well, we can't let anything happen. So we're just going to let these Hamas terrorists kill our innocent people like it just doesn't work like that. No. And here here are Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini says that he expressed strong regret over the crimes of the Zionist regime. So this is still the stuff you hear from Iran's leader going to talk to Hamas's leaders, going to talk to Hezbollah. I mean, they believe they have every right to eradicate the Jews from this earth. And they are justified in doing what they did on October 7th, one month ago. They have they have no regard for that as as being evil. They think it's completely justified because Jews should not exist. The Israeli state should not exist.
Fresh update on "federal government" discussed on Unchained
"We'll read the law a little more carefully. Those civil service protections do not apply to mass layoffs, mass firings. Mass firings are actually what I'm bringing to the D.C. bureaucracy. So other presidents will come in and say, hey, I want to go after individual bad actors who are corrupt or behaving in a politicized way. Well, yeah, the civil service rules, unfortunately, stop a president from being able to carry out those individual firings as a as a CEO in the private sector would still be free to do. But the way the law works today is still the U.S. president can execute mass firings that are totally indiscriminate. And that way there's no claim of political retaliation or a civil rights violation. That's why my plans are, as I would say, unusual in the approach to firings from relative to prior presidents is I don't believe in the use of a chisel initially. A, I don't think it's going to be successful operationally. B, I don't think that that's what the law would really permit a president to do. But if you're bringing a chainsaw, you know, give you a thought experiment. If you take on day one, say you want to come into the federal government on day one and say anybody whose Social Security number ends with an odd number, you're out even number you're in on day two, you're going to have half the size of that federal bureaucracy. Yet it was totally in compliance with the civil service laws because no one can claim political retaliation or racial or gender discriminatory violation. That's the kind of change it's going to take to wrap our arms around this administrative state. Anybody who thinks they can come in and incrementally reform this, cut off one head of an eight headed monster, it's going to grow right back. You have to be able to gut the thing at its core and at its center. That's going to take someone coming from the outside and I think someone from the next generation, which is why I'm in this. You know, I've heard you say that that would be one way to do it, about the odd number social security. Yeah, but I'm sure like you probably have some kind of principle around which you would actually suit. And I know this is a crypto podcast, but I'm just so curious that I have to ask. So one of the things we're working on is larger scale tests of people's understanding of what does it mean to actually be swearing an oath to a constitution? What's your level of understanding of that constitution? What is the last 10 years of reporting for duty? What your work requirements have been, what your performance has been on the job, but do it in a large scale, blinded manner, that it still stays in compliance with those civil service rules, but at the same time gives you the ability to execute quick and rapid large scale mass firings. That's what's in compliance with the law. That's also what's required to drive change quickly. You don't get a lot of time as a president. And I think if you don't make those changes quickly, if you strike that swamp, the swamp strikes back. And I think that that's one of the lessons from the past. I don't want to make those same mistakes in my predecessors. And so those are some of the principles that we'll use. But I laid out some thought experiments for how we would do it, I guess. So I maybe I didn't understand in terms of the principles. It would be something, quote unquote, random like that. Is that what you're saying? It would have to be without individual discretion of individuals evaluating individual by individual, because then you're mired in litigation for years about political retaliation or otherwise. And so it has to be something that's blind to the individual. But ideally, I'd like to bake in competence, understanding of the Constitution, understanding of large scale, blinded performance over the course of the last 10 years. But without making individual judgments, doing it en masse, that's what it's going to take to get the job done. OK, so now let's discuss your three point crypto policy. We'll talk about the first point, which supports the freedom to code as a reflection of freedom of speech. And when I've heard you discuss this, you've said that, for example, there could be parallel systems of law, there would be the existing legal system and then also areas where, quote, code is law, you know, as people say in crypto. And I wanted to pose to you a hypothetical. Let's say a developer codes something up. And as you say, you know, users who use that would then opt into that legal system set up by that code. And if the developer has actually coded in something that causes that blockchain or that smart contract to do something different than what people expected or different than what was promised, and let's say somebody was able to steal a large portion of the money or, you know, something like that, then would that code is law system still apply? And would people just sort of be out of luck if they didn't catch the vulnerability beforehand? Or how would you handle that? Yeah, so I want to be very clear what I've talked about when I say code is law. That's the original promising vision of the future of Bitcoin that it had on promise. And many cryptocurrencies, I would say broadly, that was the vision. Now, that's a theoretical idea. How does it apply in the context of the United States today? Well, look, I think that the key element of what you gave in the hypothetical was telling people one thing and then doing another. You can't tell people you're going to do one thing and then factually do another. OK, that's fraud, lying to somebody, selling them something that wasn't the very thing that you promised them. That's old school fraud. So bringing that to the real world. And what if it was accidental? What if the developer did this accidentally? They didn't realize that the code didn't do what they intended. Well, you're going to have to get to the very specific facts here about what exactly was the rules of the road of what the user signed up to in the first place. So in the general case, if you're going to tell someone you're going to do something, it doesn't work that way. And then somebody loses assets as a consequence, they have a cause of action. But if something was done that's internal to the rules of the road and you're signing up to that as an individual saying going in eyes wide open, here are all of the risks, here are all of the rewards and opportunities and I'm signing up to that, then, yes, you bear both the risks and the opportunities of making that trade off. So I think it requires going into the details a little bit. Right. Depends on what is accident versus what you actually told the person. But my general principle is if you told somebody something false and somebody loses their assets as a consequence because you gave them something else, that's old school fraud, no longer than this bottle of water. I'm told that it's water, but it actually contains cyanide. And then I'm poisoned as a result. Yeah, I get to sue the person who bottled this bottle of water. It's no different for a real asset as for a digital asset. But what I'm against in the first prong of my cryptocurrency policy is freedom to code. What that means is you can't just make that code itself the law breaking act. That's part of what you see in the tornado cash situation, right, is I think this idea that there's theft, but that's separate from penalizing the code itself. So that's where I see a violation of our core principles that we need to respect. You can't outlaw a particular mode of expression, a particular kind of code. That alone is not a legal violation. The legal violation is the theft of property when you're telling someone one thing and you're taking another. That's a violation for a digital asset as it is for an ordinary asset. And that's what I mean by the first prong, the freedom to code. Code is a form of speech and you can't outlaw that form of speech any more than you can outlaw another. But if you tell somebody that they're actually getting one thing and in fact, they get another, that's not a form of protected speech. That's a form of fraud. And then what if we combine two of these scenarios? Let's say some developers coded something up. They accidentally coded it in a way that wasn't as you know, it didn't work as they promised. And then that allowed somebody else to steal the money from the users. Then you're going to have to, again, get into the specifics of who's liable, in which case, but if the if the provider of code, if the provider of a piece of code or a blockchain or whatever is telling a user that they get one thing, but that user gets another, then that provider, the person who lied about it or who made an inaccurate promise is the one who's liable. And you use the person who, quote unquote, stole the money. So, OK, it depends on exactly, but it depends on what those rules of the road are. So it all comes down to the specifics. Right. If part of the internal rules of the road is the way the code works is it's a zero sum dog eat dog world. And you know that you're signing up to, but that's clearly laid out to everybody else up front. Yes, I'm a firm libertarian on that. You sign up to one set of rules of the road. Everybody knows what they're getting into. And there's not somebody who's a bad actor by playing internal to that set of rules. But if you have the actual provider saying that you're getting one thing on an exchange or otherwise, when in fact you are getting another, then the person who made you that promise is the one who's liable to you in the court of law. OK, OK, these are super and I love this thought experience. It's fun for me, too, actually. But it would be even better if we got into if we got into specific examples like those are the principles, though. Yeah. So so actually and I'll just state this briefly. The reason I'm asking is this is what happened with the Dow where and I know I think somebody for your own podcast asked you about this. And the reason I'm asking is this was a big part of my book. But basically, yes, the way the developers coded it up, that's not how it actually worked. That allowed somebody else to steal a bunch of the money. And I heard you kind of I think it was, you know, you felt in that case that CODOS law and the fact that the Ethereum blockchain made a change in order to make users whole. You felt that that was wrong. So in a way, your your statements sort of line up with what you said at that time. Yes, exactly. I mean, that's a specific example of it. But in the broader principle, the person who promises the rules of the road and makes the promise to the users needs to keep that promise. And if they fail, they're the ones liable for breaking that promise. But you can't change the rules after the fact when an existing user has assumed that when engaging in a contract of any kind, smart contract or otherwise. All right. So now let's talk about the second policy point you support, which is the freedom to financial self-reliance and that alliance with supporting self-hosted digital wallets. And I wanted to ask about the fact that in the past few years, crypto activity in DeFi or decentralized finance has allowed North Korea to obtain two billion dollars worth of crypto and they might be using that to fund their nuclear capability. And I wondered, you know, in terms of your policy of not limiting self-hosted wallets, how would you support that while at the same time trying to prevent bad actors from using crypto to elicit ends? Go after the bad actors, don't go after the crypto. I mean, it's really been the case for as long as money has existed that it has been laundered and used for bad and ill purposes. You think North Korea or other bad actors from Iran to other nations haven't been funding terrorists and other activities long before the advent of crypto? Of course they have. Right. And so we didn't outlaw money in that case. We didn't outlaw the people's right to hold money or to be able to transact from paper dollars to wire transfers. And so I think it's yet another example of laziness on behalf of the government. I think it's lazy to go after the means of transmission as opposed to going after the bad actor who's doing the transmitting. And I think that that laziness in some ways will stop us from still getting to the essence of what we need to be focused on, which is the nature of those bad actors in the first place. It's like a water balloon. You squeeze it in one place. It's going to go to a different place. You try to squeeze that place. It's going to go somewhere else. And so we view it that way. I think that's not the crypto exchange. That's the problem. It's not even the money. That's the problem. You can always blame the intermediary. It's the fact that you have an ill-intentioned bad actor that's hostile to the United States. Own up to that reality and then go after the root cause rather than the modes of transmission. That's what I would say. And so just from what you described, it almost sounds like going after them after they've obtained the money.
A highlight from LGM Podcast: Citizens of a Stolen Land
"In the course of an entire graduate training, I was introduced to maybe two or three books in Native American history, and I studied the 19th century United States. That's stunning. This is the Lawyers, Guns, and Money podcast. Hello, and welcome to the Lawyers, Guns, and Money podcast. This is Eric Loomis, and today we're very, happy to have Stephen Kantrovitz with us. He is a professor of history at the University of Wisconsin, and he's the author of three main books, all of which I think are fantastic, and which all of you should read, that have kind of defined a pretty lengthy career now in mid to late 19th century American history. The first was Ben Tillman and the Reconstruction of White Supremacy that came out in 2000, and if you thought Ben Tillman was a terrible person before, you will find out even more about that. And then there was More Than Freedom, Fighting for Black Citizenship in a White Republic, 1829 to 1899, which I just really love. But we're talking about his latest book, which came out earlier this year, Citizens of Stolen Land, a Ho -Chunk History of the 19th Century United States. It's published by the University of North Carolina Press, and I very strongly encourage all of you to buy it. Steve, thanks for joining us today. It's great to be here. Would you talk about the book, give our readers kind of an overview of how you came to this topic, and what you, in a minute or two, would like a reader to take from this? Sure. This book concerns the struggles of the Ho -Chunk people, whose homeland encompasses a lot of what's today Wisconsin and a lot more, and their encounter with the United States, its settlers, its government, its armies, mainly in the mid -19th century. And it's a story, in some ways, a familiar story of conflict and dispossession and exile and banishment. But it's also a story of persistence, endurance, return, and their continued residence on their ancestral homeland, despite the fact that they had no treaty claim or other claim to that land after 1837. So it's a pretty remarkable story of a people's determination to remain in a place. It's also a story about the implications of that history for the way we think about and understand American citizenship. So it's kind of a through -the -looking -glass story for people who are not well versed in Native American history, but who think they know something about American citizenship, because Native citizenship, as imagined by the federal government, is primarily a means of detribalization and land -taking. But in this instance, the Ho -Chunk are able to leverage a combination of their own desire to remain in Wisconsin, their ability to understand the incoherence at the core of the federal project of civilization, and the very hazy language around their status under the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and put those things together and completely thwart the final act of the federal government in the 1870s in its final attempt to remove them from Wisconsin and banish them to Nebraska. So it's a story that kind of upends a conventional narrative of citizenship, especially for readers who think they understand the Civil War era history of that pretty well.
A highlight from New opportunities in the federal space for voice communication modernization, Ribbon Podcast
"This is Doug Green, and I'm the publisher of TR Publications, and I'm very pleased to have with us today Dave Hogan, who's the Vice President for Enterprise and Government at Ribbon Communications. Dave, thank you for joining me today. Doug, thanks for having me, as usual. Great to be here. Well, I'm very pleased to have you, and I also thank you for being a reader and a long -time reader at that, so a double thank you for your presence and taking time out to talk to us. So, you know, Dave, we're going to be talking about some really important issues today, but before we dive into our topics today, can you just tell us a little bit of an update on Ribbon? Yeah, you know, Ribbon Communications Company has been around for many, many years. Most people know us by a lot of different brands that we've either acquired or merged with over several years, so Nortel Networks, General Bandwidth, which became Genband, Sonus Networks, Edgewater Networks, ANOVA Data, and then most recently, three years ago, we acquired an IP and optical company by the name of ECI out of Tel Aviv, Israel. So our business really is focused on, you know, communications infrastructure across voice data and wireless networks, so we work with service providers, wireless providers, large enterprises, government sectors across the globe in order to provide communications infrastructure solutions. So you know, we're looking at 2024, we're already starting to look about future and modernization, so let's start off with, can you tell me a little bit more about the opportunity you see in the federal space for voice communication modernization? Sure, you know, the US government as well as many governments globally, right, you know, they operate in a, you know, a very functional environment in terms of technology, right? I like to think of the lead model, right, how enterprises operate, you know, you have a strategy, you design it, you build it, you run it, you operate it, and then you get to the next technology. Most companies, you know, at an enterprise level, they operate in a period of five to ten years in terms of the lifespan of that technology. Federal governments can be very different in terms of, you know, the lifespan of that technology, so we're currently working with many, many organizations within the federal government as they're looking to upgrade their voice networks, they're having to upgrade the which applications could be unified communications, contact centers, auto attendants, ACDs across, you know, across many, many sectors of the federal government. So as you see Microsoft Teams, you know, at the forefront of user adoption, there's still continued requirement for connectivity between internal users within an organization as well as external citizens, users, third party organizations that are still connected in a TDM infrastructure environment that need to connect, whether it's, you know, voice at a local level or long distance level, could be a variety of applications for communications engagement there. What we see is the ability to uplift and modernize that technology by integrating ribbon applications and solutions, whether it's a gateway for, you know, IP to TDM technology, it could be an SBC for session border controller functionality, or our application server, which is aligned or interconnected with Microsoft Teams to ensure communication still happens, you know, in a real time basis across an agency's network. So as we know, the White House has been heavily funding federal IT modernization via the Technology Modernization Fund, in which investments are dedicated to building and improving digital services at federal agencies. So what are some of the driving forces behind the push to modernize the federal network infrastructure? I think a lot of it, Doug, just has to do with the end user experience. You know, as humans, we've all become more adaptive to the use of applications, to the use of mobile devices, to handsets, to iPads. And as we continue to adopt and use more and more of that technology, agencies within the federal government to meet the needs of their customer, which essentially is citizens and businesses of the United States. So if you have an organization like the Internal Revenue Service, they need to have a modern solution for communications between the businesses and the citizens of the United States who are asking questions about tax returns, filing tax returns, looking to get a specific code in order to file that return. They have a fraudulent event. They need assistance there. Having real time communications becomes very valuable to the experience of someone working with the IRS, as an example. I think the VA and the hospitals are another great example where you have veterans that are in need of modern critical patient care, whether that's a Vietnam veteran who needs a hip replacement to an Iraqi veteran who may be going through PTSD and has some particular crises that they need to deal with. The VA needs to be accessible to a patient regardless of their physical, mental, and technology becomes valuable there. So as we can assist the White House and the federal government in order to make investments into technology that improves real time communications, that becomes significant for a veteran of the United States that needs that help and assistance. So we feel very strongly and passionate that while we provide technology, at the end of the day, we're providing a service and the services to improve the experience of the end user for our customers, whether it's the Veterans Affairs Hospitals or the IRS or the U .S. and their families, regardless of that environment. Right. It's our job to help provide a great service and experience for how they communicate. So what kind of benefits can agencies expect to see from upgrading their network infrastructure? Gosh, you know, Doug, it's very similar to a for -profit company. I think about the goals and the initiatives of a for -profit company. They're looking to improve their productivity. They're looking to reduce the cost of doing business and they're looking to improve the customer experience in a for -profit environment. Obviously, it's important that they grow top line revenue and they drive margins and profit for their business. But those three key pillars that I mentioned regarding the experience of the end user, productivity of the workforce and then reduce costs, those are highly valuable to an organization or an entity, whether you're a school system, whether you're the Health and Human Services or even the national parks, which I'm very fond of, you need to continue to provide that experience and leveraging that technology becomes very valuable over time for them. So, you know, as an agency that serves, you know, the United States, we, you know, we get the best we get the best experience possible with those agencies. And you see these benefits trickling down, having a trickle down effect on the contractors and vendors that work for the government? I do. You know, it definitely provides a lot of opportunities for vendors and contractors. We're fortunate to work with several. Dell is a great example where we have a very strong partnership with Dell. We've been fortunate to be very active with Dell in the Department of Defense and engagement of some voice modernization opportunities. CACI is another very strong partner that we work with. VAE, Lidos, Verizon, AT &T, I could name many, many more, but these are partners of ours that are also contractors of the United States government that are working to do site surveys. They're installing new local area networks, Wi -Fi networks, you know, wide area networks across the board. They're upgrading that technology. They're upgrading headsets, handsets, video conferencing equipment. You know, there's a variety of applications, software and hardware that contractors are benefiting from and providing a valuable service to the federal government. So, you know, have you over the past year witnessed an increase in demand for modern voice communication? So DISA, which is essentially the IT department for the Department of Defense, they've put a mandate in place, right, that they are completely eliminating the TDM network and sunsetting that by March twenty twenty four. And so it's a excuse me, March twenty twenty five, the requirement for the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, you know, they have to up the communications infrastructure in order to meet the needs that are necessary to migrate to an IP based network. So we have definitely seen an increase in activity, volume and engagement with many with many, many agencies there on the public sector side. We continue to see more and more user adoption of Microsoft Teams as well as Zoom. And that's driving increased demand for voice modernization as well as those agencies look to incorporate a external voice communications environment with the needs of their internal communications as well. So what are some of the needs the federal agencies are trying to fill better with telecom technology in the public sector? I think the need is really accessibility. You know, you have individuals within the federal government that are similar to private, private, private corporations where someone may not be working in an office five days a week. They could be in a hybrid environment working in an office two days a week, three days a week. They could be working remotely the rest of the time. They still need to have the same experience, whether they're working from home or they're working in a in a federal facility. If you're a if you're an administrator for the U .S. Army Hospital organization, you could be at Fort Campbell, Kentucky one day and Fort Knox, Kentucky the next day. Well, you still need to have the same connectivity and communications regardless of which hospital that you're at. So those are the needs that I see that continue to be applicable and beneficial because that that just improves the productivity of the person. It improves their job satisfaction and improves the quality of the experience that the people they work with on a daily basis are able to have. So are there or what are the risks for agencies if they don't do their updates? Yeah, I think the biggest one is security, obviously, first and foremost. You see the number of TDoS attacks, DDoS attacks, robocalling, spam calls that happen on a, you know, on an almost hour by hour, minute by minute basis. If you don't upgrade the technology, you put yourself at risk. And protection for of your internal infrastructure environment there, you know, as we've seen on the private sector side with, you know, casinos, with retail chains, with financial institutions, right, no one wants to have their personal data exposed and at risk. So it's, you know, it's highly important that federal agencies make those investments and those upgrades as well in order to protect our information, as well as the information of the federal government. The other one I would just say is obsolescence. You know, technology that's been in place for 20, 25, 30 years, parts just aren't available anymore, Doug. You know, I hate to say that as a 51 year old guy, right? I don't, I don't, I don't run or I don't run swim or bike like I used to. And so it's the same with technology. You know, that, that obsolescence is, is ultimately going to happen. And those parts just can't, can't be replaced. So there's a, you know, there's an impact of not being able to maintain a current environment state of communications without continuing to make those investments. So, uh, you know, where do you start? How do you start this process? Oh, um, and it's a, you know, it's a great question, right? I always look at not the technology element, but I look at the, the organizational element, you know, what is the, what is the, what is the purpose and the mission of an organization, you know, what are they ultimately trying to accomplish and achieve who is the, the person that they're serving, you know, at the very end of the engagement model, how are they trying to communicate effectively with those individuals, how are they trying to communicate internally against, uh, their own department or other departments within the agency? It, I believe it's valuable to have a clear understanding of the mission, the purpose for the communications environment of an organization in order to successfully create a technology infrastructure that's the most meaningful for that agency. Once you have that, that, that strategy in that direction, then you, then you build consensus right within an organization, you, you align your partnerships, you align your contractors, you align thought leaders to come up with a constructive strategy and execution plan in order to, you know, upgrade modernize, you know, every facet of the, you know, of your infrastructure necessary to be successful. And does Ribbon come in the door with some, some tools to help with that process? We do, you know, we have, uh, we have a variety of products. We have, you know, our, our, I would say at the heart of it for what we call our cloud and edge products are our session border controllers, right? Those are secure communication devices, right? That ensure that that information is being passed back and forth in a packet environment. That information goes from an IT environment over to TDM. We have gateway technology, you know, that connects those two networks together. We have, uh, uh, a great product called application server that's used by many, many agencies of the federal government. That's a next generation PBX for most of the listeners who are familiar with that. Um, and it provides great feature functionality, parity to their existing environment and integrates well with Microsoft teams in order to, you know, deliver a rich feature solution. On the IP and optical side, we have, you know, IP switches and routers. We have optical routers that are connecting, you know, met, um, metropolitan networks, campus -wide networks. Um, we just, uh, finished a partnership with Texas A &M university where they put our IP and optical products into their network to create a private 5g environment for their campus. So for readers who don't, for listeners who don't know Texas A &M is the in largest university the United with over 83 ,000 students. So think about the number of buildings on that campus and the number of wifi networks required to, you know, run that environment, creating a private 5g network becomes very valuable for the university's campus -wide system there. And our technology was able to help, you know, put that in, put that model in place for. The other thing I was just going to mention is, you know, how active we've been with the FCC in terms of robocalling and some of the challenges that, you know, many of us have consumers have been facing, you know, we run things like identity theft, we run scorecards with, you know, with hundreds of service providers, the country of France just certified on our solution for robocalling to prevent some of the issues that are happening within that country. That's something that I'm very proud of that we worked with the FTC, the FCC several years ago in order to, you know, put stir shaken solutions in place in order to improve our, our own livelihood as citizens of the United States. I think we've all gotten phone calls about selling our house or being eligible for insurance or helping with a bank loan or, you know, what, whatever is, you know, top of mind to, you know, to somebody that's robocalling us, you know, with that, we would all love to see those calls go down, but, you know, the important thing is there are times when, you know, there's a legitimate, there's a legitimate color that someone that's reaching out, you know, a hospital as an example, or a bank that needs to get in touch with you, you know, putting, putting things like identity hub in place where, you know, that's a certified, um, honest call and lack of a better term, I think is something that we're really proud of the work that we've done with, uh, within our own company, as well as the U S government and hundreds of service providers in the United States. What does this all look like 20 years from now? If, if, if I had the answer to that, I'd be investing in the right companies at the moment. I think it's a very fascinating time for us. You see rapid advancements in technology today. We talked about it before the call, the telephone was originally invented right by an Italian in 1849. The first U S patent was in 1875 from Alexander Graham bell. The first satellite voice communications was in 1958. Um, the first, the first transmission across the worldwide web was in 1983. So 40 years ago, um, you know, think about how rapidly technology has advanced since 1849, when Meucci in first invented the telephone to where we are in 2023, you know, we're now looking at, you know, technology like private five G we're looking at, you know, chat, GPT and AI. Um, you know, we're looking at cloud environments, you know, with Amazon and Azure and Google, um, and Dell and Rackspace and many, many other companies out there. So I think what happens in 20 years really is up to us, right? It's up to us as individuals to determine what we believe is the most beneficial for mankind and how we use that technology to be better citizens of the world. You know, the old adage of, you know, is very true. And as stewards of communications technology, it isn't more applicable than our industry today. You know, we have a responsibility to educate and teach people about the use of technology and communications technology in productive and meaningful ways. If we can continue to do that as stewards of the earth of mankind, then I believe whatever happens 20 years from now, from a technology standpoint will be advantageous to every human being on this earth. But if we're, if we're greedy and you know, we're bullish on a particular technology without thinking about the long term impacts of the world, then that's irresponsible of us as individuals. Well, Dave, on that note, and on that very visionary note, I really want to thank you for joining me today. This has really been instructive and, you know, topic that we don't get to talk about often on our podcasts about, you know, where we're taking the huge federal organizations that help us and are part of everyday life. And of course, the defense posture of the United States. Where can we learn more about RIBN? Really easy, right? RIBNcommunications .com, rbbn .com. You can find more information about there. We're, you know, we're on Instagram, we're on Facebook. I'm not on TikTok very often, but we're there as well. So find your favorite social media channel and we're available to you. So Doug, I just want to say thanks for having me on. It's always great to have these conversations with you. As you said early, I'm a long time reader and advocate for telecom reseller. And I appreciate all the work you do for our industry. Well, Dave, ditto, ditto. And it's always a pleasure to see you personally. And it's always great to hear an update on RIBN. You guys, the DNA, you mentioned many historic features of our community. RIBN is part of that, that history and also the future. So I want to thank you again for joining us today. Thank you. Thank you.
A highlight from Matt Hougan Interview - BlackRock Bitcoin Spot ETF Approval Fake Out, Bitwise's BTC ETF Application, Relisting XRP, Paypal Stablecoin
"And so what we're doing every day with a 20 -plus person sales team is having meetings with these advisors, talking to them about what Bitcoin is, talking to them about where it fits in a portfolio and sort of laying the groundwork for when that ETF launches for them to adopt it readily. We're seeing real traction. There are a lot of advisors who want to allocate ahead of the Bitcoin ETF. This content is brought to you by Uphold, which is a great crypto exchange that I've been using for years. In fact, I've been using them since 2018. They have 10 -plus million users, 250 -plus cryptocurrencies, and they're available in 150 countries. You can also trade precious metals and 37 fiat currencies on this platform, and you can instantly swap between crypto and precious metals in these fiat currencies. So Uphold is a unique platform. If you'd like to learn more about Uphold, please visit the link in the description. Welcome back to the Thinking Crypto podcast, your home for cryptocurrency news and interviews. With me today is Matt Hogan, who's the chief investment officer at Bitwise Asset Management. Matt, it's great to have you back on. Thanks for having me. I love being here. Matt, yesterday, Monday, we're recording this on a Tuesday, but yesterday was a wild day with rumors and fake news of a Bitcoin spot ETF approval. What were your thoughts on that? I saw you tweeted out that you liken this to the Emulux stock fraud in 2000. That's right. Yeah. Actually, my very first job out of college, I was working at a high -tech mutual fund, and one of the stocks we owned was Emulux, and a disgruntled employee of a wire business put out a fake press release, and the stock fell dramatically. I think it fell like 60 percent, and I had flashbacks to that this morning. Of course, it went the other way, right? Bitcoin, this thing that I love, this thing that I'm focused on, popped on the news. But any time you get this sort of fake news scenario, it's bad. It speaks poor things about the market. I don't think this colored the crypto media in any sort of glory, and I'm glad that it's behind us. It was a crazy morning, not what I needed to wake up to on Monday morning before I even had some coffee. So I do think it's a teaser of where we're going, though. One thing you did see was news of a spot Bitcoin ETF approval lifted the markets. And I think that's a reflection that the market hasn't fully accepted yet that we're on path to get a spot Bitcoin ETF, which of course, there are no guarantees, but I do think we're on that path. I do think it will be positive for the market, both in the short and long term. And so we got a little taste of that, but I still wish it hadn't happened, Tony. For sure. Yeah, it was a big time fake out. And, you know, I know the market is kind of clamoring, you know, people wanting to get this ETF and, you know, following the SEC not choosing to appeal the grayscale ruling. Everybody's almost on edge, just waiting. But we can't have the fake news. It's just, you know, it just muddies the whole thing. Mm hmm. What were your thoughts on what Larry Fink had to say yesterday? He kind of went to do a bit of maybe damage control. He went on Fox Business talking about the ETF, talking about crypto as a whole and saying that crypto may be a flight to quality. What were your thoughts on that? Yeah, absolutely amazing. I'm going to repeat those words four thousand times between now and the end of the year. If you thought if you had Larry Fink calling Bitcoin a flight to quality asset on your bingo card at the start of the year, you are a better forecaster than I am. It shows you how completely BlackRock has changed its position on Bitcoin. And I think it's honestly reflective of a change underlying the market in the attitudes of traditional finance to this asset class. It is really flipped over the last six months. Sort of BlackRock may have been the catalyst, but it's no longer just BlackRock. We're hearing similar words out of other major asset managers, whether that's Fidelity or Franklin Templeton or Wisdom Tree or others. We're seeing similar actions out of firms like UBS expanding efforts, tokenized assets on Ethereum. I think we really are in this transition to mainstreaming of the market and the world's largest asset manager calling Bitcoin a quality asset, a place people move to when they're worried about the state of the market is an absolute game changer. It makes me really excited for the year to come. I think we're in a multiyear bull market and this was just another clarion call that that is true. Now, with that said, we are still facing some headwinds as it relates to the SEC. Just recently, Cathie Wood said Gary Gensler is the one blocking the Bitcoin spot ETF. The SEC also, as mentioned, chose not to appeal the court ruling in the grayscale situation. And the court said the SEC was arbitrary and capricious. So, you know, what do you think is going to happen? Is the SEC in a position where they're getting caught flat footed? There's a lot of media attention and everybody's waiting for this approval. What is your thoughts to say, you know, as far as approval and what the SEC might do next? Yeah, you know, I'm going to take a very unusual position in the crypto industry, which is if you look at the facts, we've had multiple commissions reviewing spot Bitcoin ETFs and crypto ETFs, and it's never been approved. Under this commission, we got Bitcoin futures ETFs, we got Ethereum futures ETFs, we got crypto equity ETFs. I think that point, that fact pattern puts us on a glide path to a spot Bitcoin ETF. So even though this SEC has been much slower than we want and even though I think they should have approved a spot Bitcoin ETF years ago, I think we have to give them credit for opening the door to ETFs in crypto land. And I feel a high degree of confidence that it's going to open wider. We are going to get a spot Bitcoin ETF. Of course, there's no guarantee, but I think the SEC is moving in that direction. I bet they're feeling some pressure to do so. And I think the facts on the ground suggest that they should, in fact, push this forward. So I'm very optimistic. I want to give them more credit than the rest of the crypto industry, even if they're not moving as fast as I want. They have moved substantially on the ETF front. Sure. And Matt, what do you think about this theory? It's something I've been talking about lately. I could be a completely off base here, but I almost feel like the approval, I kind of want it to be under quantitative easing versus quantitative tightening when there's more liquidity in the market, when people are not worried about inflation and conflict around the world and they're more focused on, okay, the economy's in a better spot. I think I want to invest now. Do you agree with that? Yeah, I think if you're thinking about the short term impact, then the timing of it matters, right? We saw, for instance, the Bitcoin futures ETFs launched the height of the 2021 market and really accelerated the price upward, attracted a lot of assets. By comparison, the Ethereum futures ETFs, which just launched, met a very quiet reception. And I think that has to do with the market attitude. So from that short term perspective, it would be better in a positive market with more excitement if we get it at the early part of next year, I think we'll be in a good time in the market, but longterm, it doesn't matter longterm from my perspective, it's completely transformative to the asset class. And if we look back three years, five years, 10 years from now, it'll be this step function up. But I think you're absolutely right. The scale of the short term impact will depend on the market climate. Now, bitwise, any updates on your application? I know there was a lot of applicants making updates to their filing. Did you guys have to do anything like that or are you still just moving along with the application waiting for the SEC? Yeah, completely fair question. Unfortunately, the lawyer perched on my shoulder says, I can't comment on our specific application, but on the broader space. But we have seen other companies update their filings. I would read that as progress if I was an outside observer of the market. That is a sign of forward momentum that aligns with the forward momentum we're seeing in other ETF avenues. Now, in addition to your filing, are there other things that bitwise is working on in preparation for the Bitcoin having next year, whether it be accumulating more Bitcoin or another ETF product or anything else? Yeah, absolutely. First and foremost, it's massive education. So the thing to think about with the Bitcoin ETF, why it matters is it unlocks this other segment of the market that is essentially has no allocation to crypto, which is the financial advisor marketplace. Now, this is an important market. It's at least twice and maybe four times as big as self -directed retail investors. So the people who own crypto now are mostly self -directed retail investors. The financial advisor marketplace controls between two and four X as many assets. And so what we're doing every day with a 20 plus person sales teams is having meetings with these advisors, talking to them about what Bitcoin is, talking to them about where it fits in a portfolio and sort of laying the groundwork for when that ETF launches for them to adopt it readily. We're seeing real traction. There are a lot of advisors who want to allocate ahead of the Bitcoin ETF. And of course, we have products that do that. We have index funds, we have estimates, we have equity ETFs, and we're seeing a lot of people who want to get in ahead of the wave. But more than anything, we wake up every day and just talk to these people, these next buyers of crypto about what this is. And we do it relentlessly and we'll keep doing it right through the launch. Yeah, I was recently talking to investor Raoul Pal and I was sharing a story that I have a financial advisor and for years I've been talking about crypto and he knows I'm allocated and he's but they can't touch it. They can't do anything. They can't make money off of it. But now that the news of Bitwise and BlackRock and all these folks, they're like, OK, talk to me more about crypto. It's all their antennas are up now because they know something's around the corner. That's exactly right. And once that happens, once you have BlackRock and Bitwise and Spot ETFs, they can't tell you, I can't touch it. Right. And as you know, 50 million Americans own crypto directly. They want their advisors to understand this space. They, you know, advisors want to be seen as being on their side. And I think the change you're seeing with your advisor is happening to millions of Americans right now. And to me, that's enormously positive for this space. That's how we get to the next level. It's how we return to new all time highs. And I think it's tremendously positive. Now, in the crypto industry and market, we're seeing a lot of TradFi players coming in outside of Bitcoin and Spot ETF filings. For example, PayPal launch a stablecoin. What are your thoughts on the stablecoin market and these different big players like PayPal, maybe Amazon's around the corner? Who knows to launch a stablecoin? What do you think about these things? I think the market is dramatically underrated how significant that PayPal launch is. And here's why. You have to remember stablecoins are politically controversial. They still exist in a regulatory gray zone. You could even call them like the third rail crypto, right? Because people are worried about them pretending to be money market funds. How are they structured? Who can operate with them, et cetera? The fact that PayPal, the largest fintech in the world, thought it was important enough to establish a position here, that they were willing to touch that third rail, tells you that they see a huge future of stablecoins in the payment space. The fact that they built a product on Ethereum tells you the direction the market is going towards public blockchains. PayPal or stablecoins are one hundred billion dollar market. I think they could be a trillion dollar market overnight if they start to penetrate the payment space. And I think, you know, I think the market didn't fully read what a big statement this was from PayPal. If you've gone, I'll point out another thing. We use we use stablecoins today mostly between trades and crypto exchanges, but go to the PayPal website. Look what they say in like size one hundred font. They say built for payments, right? This is about real world uses. This is not about crypto traders parking cash. This is about disrupting the current payments model. And that's another example of this mainstreaming of crypto that is the defining feature of this bull market. I think it's a really big deal. Yeah. One of the things I was talking to some family members and people I know who are still skeptics of crypto and don't understand the technology. You know, I pose a question to them. PayPal, you currently use PayPal. They send money, you could send money to different people across the world. Why do you think they created stablecoin? I just left it at that. And then the light bulb went off for many of them to understand instant settlement and transaction speeds and much more. And I think as these large players start adopting the technology and building with it, I think it's going to click for a lot of people because they have an affinity to the brand or the company. It just breaks down the barrier of we don't know who uses this stuff. Oh, PayPal uses it. That is right. Yes, exactly. And it's these companies that see a step ahead that push people to the next level. PayPal innovated on payments. They did a fantastic job, but they see where the puck is going. We're not at the end of payment improvements. Stablecoins are the next step. And they were willing to to go there. I think it's a great proof point. And these these proof points are just stacking up right. The largest asset manager calling it a quality asset, PayPal launching a stablecoin. It's it's at some point it becomes overwhelming, even to your skeptic friends. For sure. Now you're based in California recently, Gavin Newsom, Governor Gavin Newsom passed a crypto regulation bill, not perfect, but certainly put some guardrails in place to help protect consumers as well as foster innovation. I don't know if you got a chance to get a gist of what that was about, but any thoughts on California and as well as states kind of leading the federal government right now and regulations? Yeah, I think when you have a vacuum at the federal level on sensible regulation, the states will fill in. Right. We saw that with New York, with the bit license, and we're seeing it in California. The goal as an industry is to hope for balanced regulations. I haven't done a full deep dive into the California bill, but it looks like it at least has some elements of balance to it. They're not going to be perfect, but I think we're going to move along.
A highlight from SEC WON'T APPEAL GRAYSCALE BITCOIN ETF RULING & CALIFORNIA PASSES CRYPTO REGULATION!
"Welcome back to the thinking crypto podcast, your home for cryptocurrency news and interviews. If you are new here, please hit that subscribe button as well as the thumbs up button and leave a comment below. If you're listening on a podcast platform such as Spotify, Apple or Google, please leave a five star rating and review. It supports the podcast and it doesn't cost you anything. Well, folks, I want to start off by talking about the grayscale SEC Bitcoin ETF situation. Yesterday, Friday, October 13 was the deadline for the SEC to appeal the court's ruling in the grayscale case. Now, we know the three judges destroyed scumbag regulator Gary Gensler and the SEC calling their denial of the grayscale Bitcoin spot ETF as arbitrary and capricious. But what can you expect? We're dealing with a scumbag corrupt regulator that is Gary Gensler, who is on puppet strings being controlled by Elizabeth Warren and the Wall Street incumbents who want to destroy crypto startups like grayscale, Coinbase, Ripple and others so that they can come in and take over the market. So the fact that the SEC did not appeal and we're past the deadline, obviously, is a good sign. It's bullish. It means the SEC does not see a way to win this. They are pretty much kowtowing here, right, which they have to the courts are ruling here. And even the folks at Bloomberg, James Safert, who I've had on the podcast, said, look, it's being reported here and confirmed by Bloomberg News that the SEC won't ask the court to reverse its decision on the Bitcoin spot ETF as it relates to grayscale. So what's going to happen next? It's going to be the SEC and grayscale are going to have their conversation started where they're going to discuss, I guess, how they're going to approve this and what else grayscale needs to do. Obviously, we're all waiting for this Bitcoin spot ETF approval to happen. I think the SEC is going to approve multiple at the same time. If they were to approve the BlackRock ETF ahead of everybody else, you know the game is completely rigged. We have some sense it is rigged, but if they do that, it will be really blatant. So I think they're going to approve multiple at the same time. However, this is my opinion. Look, we got world conflict happening. We still got inflation. We still got the Fed raising rates. Liquidity is low. We're still in the quantitative tightening cycle. I don't think now is a good time for this ETF to be approved, honestly. I think next year when things calm down, maybe near the Bitcoin halving would be a good time. The conflict ramps down, dies down. People are not as focused on it. Just normal human life and things go back to normal to a certain degree. Maybe the Fed is ramping down rate hikes or they have paused completely. They start QE. Liquidity is blowing back in. I think that will be the ideal scenario, but we'll see what happens. Maybe I'm wrong and they approve it sometime this quarter and maybe it does well, but we'll see what happens. The one thing I want you all to expect though, there's not going to be capital flowing in overnight into these ETFs. I think they have to be fully, the groundwork has to be set up. The marketing has to be there. Once again, people essentially wouldn't want to be focused on investing. Right now, people are not really focused on investing. I'm talking about the general public. Just keep that in mind. Now, speaking of the SEC, we have an update here as it relates to Coinbase versus the SEC. Paul Grewal, chief legal officer at Coinbase given updates on their response to the third circuit and it says here the TLDR, the SEC's unilluminating update is mere bureaucratic pantomime and confirms that nothing short of mandamus will prompt the agency to take its obligations seriously. We respectfully request an order to the SEC to act on Coinbase's rulemaking petition within 30 days. We appreciate the court's careful consideration of this matter. So remember the SEC filed their response and it was a bullshit letter. It pretty much was nothing in it. It was just a delay tactic. So I appreciate Coinbase putting the pressure. That's what we got to do. And we saw the judge already in these cases with Coinbase versus SEC is calling out the SEC saying like, what are you guys doing? What's a security? What's not a security? You approved Coinbase to go public. You knew what their business was. So what are you doing now? It's not like they're charging fraud on Coinbase. They're just saying you're selling unregistered securities, yet they won't say what is a security and what's not. Even the scumbag regulator, Gary Gensler, before Congress, can't even answer what's a security and what's not. It's ridiculous. We're dealing with a government agency that is funded by our tax dollars that doesn't abide by the law, that are hypocrites and liars. Even Judge Sarah Netburn in the Ripple lawsuit said the SEC lacks a fateful allegiance to the law. It's pathetic. But we got to keep putting the pressure on this corrupt scumbag bureaucrat and he will be exposed. He lost in the Ripple case. He lost in the Grayscale case. And I believe they're going to lose here with Coinbase. So I appreciate Coinbase, you know, putting the pressure and we got to keep doing the same thing. Contact our representatives, share the facts on social media and expose these lies. Now some good news, folks. And this involves Governor Gavin Newsom out of California. Now, whether you love Gavin Newsom or you hate Gavin Newsom, that is one thing. Let's put it to the side. That's a whole other conversation. But folks, California, they passed a crypto licensing bill, which is really good, folks. Gavin Newsom signed this yesterday. So here's the headline. Governor Newsom signs crypto licensing bill in California. Governor Gavin Newsom on Friday signed into law a measure that would regulate California's crypto industry, home to nearly a quarter of the blockchain companies in North America. This is being reported by Bloomberg Law. But I'm going to jump to another article here, which gives the full details because Bloomberg wants me to pay to read, which is annoying. So according to the report by Bloomberg Law, this first law aims to establish basic regulations for crypto companies operating in California, making them obtain state licenses and meet specific requirements related to reserves, disclosures and audits. The law also covers assets backed crypto currencies like USDC and USDT, so stable coins, making it mandatory for them to keep complete reserves, which would impact algorithmic stable coins that rely on different mechanisms to maintain their pegs. This crypto regulation bill was passed in August 2023, a year after Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a prior version of the crypto bill stating that California needed a more flexible approach. So, folks, this is great, great news. It is logical, reasonable things. There's no overreach here. If you are a centralized exchange or a stable coin issuer, you have to have your reserves. You have to provide audits. You have to make sure you're abiding by the laws. We don't want any more FTX or Celsius things, no commingling, no lying, no pulling customer funds to go trade it, right? Like these idiots, Caroline Ellison and Sam Bankman Fried and even a scammer, Alex Mashinsky. No more of that nonsense. The industry needs to raise its standards. All exchanges decentralized need to be audited, whether it be monthly reporting or quarterly reporting it, sending it to the licensed agencies in the States and it's being reviewed, right? I think we can all agree with that. You can be a very pro -crypto person, very much into decentralized exchanges and defies, but we can't ignore that there's going to be centralized entities in the market. They need to abide by the law. They have to follow these best practices. We can't have what happened last year happen again. That was ridiculous, right? So this is a great move, great bill. And it's sad that the States have to do this and the federal government is not doing it, right? But the good thing here is that the States moving ahead will force the hand of the federal government because it's not just California. It's Wyoming, it's Texas, it's New York and many more are passing comprehensive regulations. So this is a really great move, really happy to hear about this. And obviously there's a lot of crypto companies in California, some like Ripple and others. So really, really big crypto regulation bill here, folks. And here's what Tim Grayson, who is an assembly member in California, tweeted out. He said, today, California is taking the necessary step to regulate a market that is volatile risky and in some cases deliberately rigged against everyday consumers. Thank you to Governor Newsom for helping ensure that our state leads in fostering responsible innovation. Folks, this is huge, huge, huge, huge. I can't, once again, I'm not endorsing Gavin Newsom here, so please, please don't get me wrong because California has a whole lot of problems and other things happening. But as it relates to crypto, this is a really great move. And I think game theory is going to play out. Other states are going to follow suit and follow the direction of California, which is one of the largest states, folks. So a move in the right direction. Now I want to highlight a great, responsible and safe exchange that is Uphold, which is a sponsor of this podcast. I've been a user of Uphold since 2018, so I can vouch for this platform. I've interviewed the CEO, the CFO and many folks over the years. They have 10 plus million users, 250 plus cryptocurrencies, and they're available in 150 countries. You can also trade 37 fiat currencies and precious metals on this platform and easily switch between crypto, fiat and precious metals. It's pretty cool. It's a unique platform. And once again, I can vouch for it because I use it. I use it for trading and much more. So if you'd like to learn more about Uphold, please visit the link in the description. Now, folks, as we're talking about crypto regulations, we know Elizabeth Warren has her anti -crypto army. She's corrupt. She's, you know, three peas in a pod with Gary Gensler and Brad Sherman. We know she's been doing all kinds of nonsense. Well, there's news coming out here. Ryan Selkis said rumor is John Donenberg, Liz Warren's COS, is heading to the White House to replace Bharat Ramamurti. Bharat responsible was for making the admins deep crypto hostility. So talking about the Biden admin, some in D .C. told me to wait and see Biden soften with Bharat gone. If Donenberg is in, that won't happen. So we'll see. Here's what Caitlin Long, who's battling the Fed right now, said. She said, yes, as Novogratz, Mike Novogratz said, Senator Warren is driving the Biden administration's bus on crypto policy. Biden cut that deal with her long ago. And that's why she gets to a place or gets to place her people at the White House in key agency positions. This was an open secret in D .C. And it's now no longer a secret. P .S., where is the press on Biden's Warren deal to let her pick White House economic staff and financial services appointees? This has been an open secret pretty much since Operation Choke Point 2 .0 began in January. And I haven't seen it reported yet. Any ideas? Ryan Selkis and Nick Carter, she said, and Novogratz, I think you said in an interview on stage at Mainnet that Warren's senior staff didn't agree with her. Let's hope John is among those you are alluding to now that he's at the White House. Folks, we shall see what happens. My hope is that Biden overall losing popularity and with different things economically and, you know, Elizabeth Warren going crazy over crypto and the industry fighting back and Gary Gensler taking losses in court, you know, take some wind out of her sales. It's Senator Elizabeth's sales here and take some power away from her. And maybe the people Biden has around him, you know, who are anti -crypto get kicked out. You know, we can see next year is a election year. So we'll see what happens. Maybe things soften up. The Bitcoin spot ETF gets approved. You know, I think we're moving maybe out of the eye of the storm with this operation choke point. We'll see. You know, I think the court law losses for Gary Gensler really help the causes here. Even with Caitlin Long, the court denied the Fed's request to throw out her lawsuit against them. So the lawsuit is proceeding. It's going to discovery. So these anti -crypto people are getting exposed. And, you know, we hope Elizabeth Warren, her corrupt ass gets exposed as well. Now, the IRS is also putting out some crypto tax rules, which the industry are trying to push back on. So here's the headline. Coinbase tax had calls on IRS to revise crypto tax rules. The IRS is proposed tax rules hinder digital asset growth by exposing restrictions that question their utility. Coinbase is VP of tax wrote Thursday. So great to see the industry is pushing back in a letter disclosed on Thursday. Lawrence Zlakten, if I'm saying that right, a Coinbase's vice president of tax criticized the proposed regulations for imposing an unprecedented, unchecked and unlimited tracking on the daily lives of Americans. In August, the IRS issued a 300 page proposal that revises the definition of a broker in accordance with the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, including crypto exchanges, which provides guidelines on tax compliance for both the brokers and their clients. Now, many of you may recall the infrastructure bill situation with this, and we're still fighting this. So I'm glad the industry is pushing back. And, you know, these things are not set in stone fully yet. So we have an opportunity to push back and we're seeing more pro crypto governors and congressmen and lawmakers and so forth, even presidential candidates. So we got to keep pushing. We got to keep fighting. And, you know, where we need to rally and call up our representatives and send letters and emails and tweet and whatever we got to do, we will do that. But good to see that folks at Coinbase are pushing back. Now, we've got news here that Taurus expands crypto footprint after Deutsche Bank linked up. So the crypto infrastructure firm Taurus that partnered with Deutsche Bank last month is set to announce more large partnerships with banks soon, exec says. Now, I remember recently Deutsche Bank said they were going to launch crypto custody and they were they're doing this with Taurus. So Switzerland based Taurus, which offers infrastructure to issue custody and trade crypto tokenized assets and NFTs is opening offices in London and Paris. The firm says it expects more of the region's banks listen to this folks to wade into the crypto space as the regulatory environment becomes more clear. Folks, that's music to my ears. And they're talking about the EU here, right? Because both the EU and the UK have passed crypto regulations. Now, if only we could have that in the United States. Right. Where where are the members of Congress? Where's the federal government on this? So the expansion is part of a bid to better serve institutions that will soon have to comply with the Markets and Crypto Assets Regulation, the MICA law, the European Union Parliament passed the framework in April with implementation expected next year. So great, great news, folks. Very bullish. And let me give you some more details. So Jurgen Hoffbauer from saying that right previously towards his global head of strategic partnerships will lead the London office. He spent more than 10 years at Bank of America, where he served as head of sales for Europe and Middle East and Africa. Folks, a lot of the legacy banking TradFi folks are coming to crypto and they're helping to build out the crypto infrastructure for institutions. And of course, you know, they know there's money to be made here. They know this is the future and they're doing it. And this is why we have to be patient. This is why we dollar cost average. We study the market cycles. We look at what these big players are doing, not what they're saying, but what they're doing. And we are positioning ourselves to take profits as the value of our tokens rise. Right, folks? So we have to exercise patience. Taurus raised 65 million dollars in a February funding round led by Credit Suisse. Deutsche Bank also took part in that round and German megabank linked up with Taurus last month to build out their digital asset custody and tokenization services. Wow, folks, I hope you see what's happening here. And this thing is global. It's not specific to United States. So while Elizabeth Warren acts the fool with the clown Gary Gensler here and delaying and causing all kinds of nonsense, the rest of the world is moving forward. And the great thing about this market, it's borderless. You can be in any part of the world. I've said many times you have a smartphone, you have Internet access and you can be part of the asset class. You can buy a fraction of Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, whatever it is. You can put as little as 10 bucks in each. Right. And you are part of the asset class. And that's something they cannot stop. They would love to. They would love to gate keep it like they have historically and put the borders and say, oh, you have to go through Wall Street and you have to be an accredited investor. Right. They would love to stop that so they can control it. That's why they're fighting so hard. That's why this corrupt Elizabeth Warren. This is a big thing for her. That's why Gary Gensler is doing all the things he's doing. They want to control it, but they can't. The disruption is at their doorstep. They can't stop this thing. They're going to put up roadblocks. Don't get me wrong. Like they're doing, they're slowing us down to causing a bit of confusion. But this train has left the station. They ain't going to stop it. Now, got some news here that Texas County settles lawsuit over wrongful seizure of fifteen thousand dollars from Bitcoin ATM. The lawsuit also aimed to have the court recognize Bitcoin Depot as the lawful owner of the seized money. So I've interviewed the CEO of Bitcoin Depot and this is an interesting case here. So authorities in McClellan County have settled a lawsuit with Lux Vending operating as Bitcoin Depot following the wrongful seizure of fifteen thousand dollars from one of its Bitcoin ATMs. The lawsuit was dismissed after the county acknowledged the funds were improperly confiscating following a scam that targeted an 82 year old Crawford woman. Local media reported Thursday the scam was reported by the elderly victim who was deceived into withdrawing fifteen thousand dollars in cash and depositing it into a Bitcoin machine. This reportedly followed her falling victim to a ransomware attack initiated by a malicious email link. Legal action had originally been filed against the county investigators for allegedly violating due process. They had obtained a warrant to seize the funds from Bitcoin Depot kiosk located at a court recognized Bitcoin Depot as a as the lawful owner of the of the seized money. McClellan County Sheriff Parnell McNamara, who had previously stood by his the actions of his officers, declined to comment on the lawsuit's resolution or on Judge Scott Felton's admission that the funds had been seized erroneously. KWTX News reported. So interesting case happening here. And, you know, one of the layers here I want to highlight is that crypto is becoming a big part of society in the mainstream and the average everyday things that may occur, whether it be crime, whether it be just different things in life. Right. That happens that we don't control or had nothing necessarily to do with crypto that it's popping up in cases and all forms of regulations and law now need to be developed around it. So that's a great sign of adoption. I'm not saying what happened to this lady is a great right. Obviously, that's another issue with malware and scammers and elder abuse and all these things. But in the sense of adoption and this being part of the society, just as the Internet became part of a society and there were bad things that followed that, but obviously a lot of great things. Right. Same thing is happening here. So it's pretty, pretty interesting. I like to look at these things from a psychological macro societal human behavior standpoint, because it also tells a story of the direction we're headed. And are people moving away from this or are they adopting it? Is it becoming more prominent in our daily lives? And I think we're seeing that for crypto and block chain. Now, I just want to end it here by highlighting one of the partners of the podcast that I and it's a platform I use, Merlin, which allows you to track your crypto exit strategy in a very easy and safe way. Merlin allows you to tie in all your exchanges and ledger data. It does not capture your seed phrases or anything like that. It simply just takes a snapshot of your account and allows you to set your exit strategy. Which price points? I've been doing stuff like this on spreadsheets. It's super tedious and manual. And I've always been looking for some sort of solution. And Merlin is that solution, folks. So I'll be using this for the next bull market. So let's say for my XRP or Ethereum or Bitcoin, I'll set certain price points. Hey, I want to take 30 percent of my chain link or XRP at this price and I can set it in the Apple. Let me know right away, folks, on which exchange it hit that price and I can go right away and execute accordingly. So this is something that will make your life easy and you don't have to be constantly refreshing on coin market cap or, you know, going back and forth between a spreadsheet. So this is one of the reasons I'm highlighting it as a partner, because I'm using this platform and it's great. It's easy, it's safe and that you can plug in, uphold, you can plug in ledger, Coinbase, whatever it is. It is a great platform, folks. So be sure to check out Merlin. Link will be in the description. Go check it out. You can get a 30 day free trial, see if you like it and go from there. Thank you all for listening. Thank you for your support. Hit the thumbs up button, hit the five star rating on the podcast platform and I'll talk to you all later.
Colorado State Rep. Tim Hernandez Refuses to Condemn Hamas
"Is here right now. Right now. I want you to listen to Colorado State Rep. Tim Hernandez. Simple question. This just isn't at the federal government, folks. This is everywhere. This cancer. The savage virus. Tim Hernandez asked a simple question. Can you condemn Hamas and the terrorists? I want you to listen. I want you to listen especially at the end where he says, ah, who's going to hear this, like three people? Eh, our audience is a little bigger than that. Jim, four or five maybe, you think? What do you think? Maybe ten? Jim says it's maybe ten and listening, I'm sure. Yeah, Jim's, yeah, he's using both hands. He's like, I'm just guessing. He's doing this thing with counting digits. He's like, one, two, three. Here's Colorado State Rep. Tim Hernandez. Check this out. And I think it's despicable what they're protesting for and what you're protesting for and the fact that you can't condemn women and children and people going over the streets. Do you condemn it? I already said. Why can't you say yes? Because I already gave you my answer. You didn't give an answer. I think anybody who watches would understand what you're actually doing. Yeah, Tim, I think it's more than three. What did Talkers Magazine say, Jim? We talked to eight -and -a -half million or so a week. It's a lot. A couple more than three. They're off by a factor of a couple million or so. Sorry, Tim. Yeah, Yeah, yeah, it's true. Jim says he's doing Brian Williams math. Yeah. That's Colorado rep Tim Hernandez,
Capstone Conversation: Jared Asch Asks CCTA's Tim Haile About Transportation Taxes
"Let's talk about transportation taxes, right? Cause you talked about we're moving to a zero emission vehicle. So nobody's buying gas, maybe 2035. It'll definitely start reducing as no car in California will be allowed to be sold. That takes gas anymore. 2045, 2050, you're cycling out entire fleets, people that do have gas vehicles by that point. So it's going to seriously impact your funding. We've seen funding needed for BART, funding needed for transit agencies. We've talked about bridge toll increases, MTC, putting a regional ballot measure on for transit. And then CCTA has potentially a ballot measure coming up in the next 10 years. Just talk about a little bit of funding ballot measures, what people should know, inform us. Well, there's a lot of things happening right now. Uh, that's a tough question, but I think I'll, I'll put it this way. I think people are really fatigued on taxes and in transportation revenues. And I, and we all as transportation professional, we all recognize that. And I think, and I think the first thing we need to do in my, this is my opinion is we need to understand better where all the existing funding is going. Right. I think we need to hold ourselves accountable in terms of where this funding is going. And I was giving a presentation to a group a couple of weeks ago, and we were talking about this in terms of before you put another ballot on the measure, where, how are you going to show me that, that this is going to make an improvement? And I think that really comes down to being obviously transparent, but also having good data and being able to share that data. And I think that's something that we all have that data, but I think it's a matter of using that data to be able to demonstrate that the work that we've been doing for the last, especially with measure J we have been doing good work with measure J in fact, Contra Costa transportation authority, we were actually given an award for good governance by the Contra Costa County Taxpayers Association. And so I think something to know about CCTA is that we're only 20 people. We are a high performing agency. We operate this agency as Jared is almost like a private consulting firm. Like we hold ourselves accountable every single day. And I think that's what people are looking for. They're looking for government to be more efficient, more accountable. And, and I think once people understand that, that there's good governance, I think that's what's going to take to really help people understand that, okay, my money is going to good places. Yeah, maybe I can, you know, vote yes on another measure. But to your point, there is a lot of moving parts right now in terms of a regional housing measure in 2024, regional transportation measure in 2026, which quite frankly is there to address the transit fiscal cliff that's coming. And I think a lot of people, the general public, I don't, a lot of people don't even understand that there is a transit fiscal cliff that's coming. But I think, and that transit fiscal cliff is important because transit is important for everyone and especially for those that really need to use it. Like, like for example, the yellow line, the BART line that comes from San Francisco all the way to Antioch, it's the highest productive line in the Bay Area. Like people use BART in Contra Costa County. And so if BART, like right now, BART has a tremendous fiscal cliff and that's because their revenues are down, their fare box is down. Right now, I think they're right around 45 % pre -pandemic revenue levels, whereas before they were depending on 70, 75 % fare box return, that 30 % of revenue is gone. It's missing, right? And luckily the federal government stepped in and was able to provide, I'll call it gap funding. Just recently, the state jumped in and tried to provide some gap funding out to for the next four years. But this is really about transit doing two things in my opinion. One is getting creative and figuring out how to become more efficient and more, quite frankly, in some ways more accountable. And then two, what is that money going to do to improve the transportation system and what's the value proposition? Why should I take transit, right? What's the value proposition? I think that's what people are looking for is they're looking for the why of why are we doing this? And so I think that's a big part of the regional measure in 26. I will say locally here in Contra Costa County, we, the board of CCTA, which is comprised of about 14 elected officials, will be discussing and looking at potentially when we will be renewing Measure J because it does sunset in 2034. We may go out for a measure in 2028, 2032. I don't know. We have to have that discussion to be able to continue those revenues. And those revenues are important because without Measure J, everyone's commute in Measure J would be anywhere from 20 to 30 minutes longer in Contra Costa County without Measure J, which is significant, right? That's significant. And I don't think people realize that there's an agency like CTA with this local revenue source that is your transportation agency. We are focused on this every single day, trying to bring benefit to Contra Costans. And we're leveraging every local sales tax dollar that we can possibly can to provide the most benefit. And like I said, without that local dollar, everyone's commute. Can you imagine if we never built the Fort Board of the Caldecott Tunnel? What's 24? I'd be sitting there from last Friday. Yeah. Could you imagine if we never widened Highway 4 from two lanes to from two lanes to six lanes? Like it would be a mess still, right? It would still be considered the most dangerous highway in the country. And Measure J has brought in these really important improvements into Contra Costa County. And we've done it very well and very efficiently.
Kyle Seraphin: No Surprise the FBI Is Targeting Trump Supporters
"Yeah absolutely I appreciate the opportunity to share this so as far as what we're hearing what this is not news honestly this is something that I knew as I was leaving the agency in 2022 and I was suspended I knew that this category of anti government authority anti violent extremists exists and I actually started predicting this about a year ago that this would be the next push they started kind of seeing if they could get some traction on the militia violent extremist types which is the people that like the Betsy Ross flag and the Punisher skull and people that love America and have tattoos that say it so that was kind of the first push but this was the move second this is the you know going after people who love the founding fathers and the give me liberty give me death crowd so if that's problem a for the federal government you know we've got a real problem and they've been talking about it I can actually give you the receipts that you just played a little piece of that police state clip that trailer and Nick Searcy's character actually says these are anti -government anti -authority bomb extremists and you think well how did he know to say that how did they write that into the scripts because the script was sent over to me and Steve Friend we looked at it and we said this is the words you have to use because this is the words that are being used right right now so we've known this for a little while that's number one it's not news it's scary it's terrifying but I I 100 % agree with you this was not I would even go further I don't even know that it's a warning I think it's a threat I think that in the in the law enforcement world you're familiar with a certain thing of ask tell make you do that as a street cop I'm sure you ask people to comply fly you tell them to do it and then you make them do it and this is in the tell phase they're telling people you must not be involved in this organization you must not be part of the extremist MAGA problem because our president said no so we have to listen to it and the other thing that's really scary is that we have an FBI you just talked about the Attorney General being a bald -faced liar he said but they don't do it so obviously they don't do it the FBI has their own version of that they put them under what are called First Amendment caveats they're on every single symbols guide they're on every single intelligence investigation like this they don't to have be a criminal predicate which we talked about you know just over a year ago you and I the the idea is is that they write on the the the document FBI is not
A highlight from SBF Trial: 10/05 Update
"Welcome to the SBF trial, a Coindesk podcast network newsletter bringing you daily insights from inside the courtroom where Sam Bankman -Fried will try to stay out of prison. Follow the Coindesk podcast network to get the audio each morning with content from the Coindesk regulation team and voiced by Wondercraft AI. A Parisian cocoa trader told Sam Bankman -Fried's pricey ads and FTX's confident CEO helped convince him the crypto exchange was a safe place to deposit over $100 ,000 so he could trade cryptocurrencies. But he never expected that anyone but him would touch his funds. The federal government began its prosecution of Bankman -Fried in earnest Wednesday afternoon with a customer turned witness who introduced the jury to crypto trading, the FTX exchange and the allegedly illegal loans that felled last November. Marc -Antoine Jolliard, a commodities trader who lives in London, said he only intended to spot trade cryptocurrencies on FTX, which is to say buy and sell tokens like Bitcoin. Critically he said he never agreed to loan his assets out. The finance professional said he avoided FTX's more lucrative margin lend feature because he wanted to have full control over his assets. Did you ever consider the possibility that FTX was borrowing your money? Asked Assistant U .S. Attorney Danielle Kudla, a prosecuting attorney, Jolliard responded, No. More than 100 reporters and onlookers gathered in one of Manhattan's largest wood -paneled federal courthouses to catch a glimpse of Bankman -Fried, the 31 -year -old who prosecutors say defrauded his crypto customers, investors and lenders of billions of dollars. In their opening argument, prosecutors cast Bankman -Fried as a calculating villain who told few in his empire about the alleged illegal activity that they said ruined his companies and ravaged investors. They bolstered this image of a secret conspiracy with their second witness, Adam Yedidia, a college friend of Bankman -Fried, who followed him to the crypto hedge fund Alameda Research and then on to FTX. During questioning from AUSA Danielle Sasson, Yedidia said he resigned from FTX the week of its bankruptcy when I learned that Alameda Research had used customer deposits to pay back lenders. The legality of the loans are central to the case against Bankman -Fried. Prosecutors allege Alameda backstopped its bad bets on the crypto market with FTX customers' dollars plus their crypto deposits. Defense attorneys said the relationship between those two companies was neither secret nor illegal. Bankman -Fried and his companies were building the plane in flight, Mark Cohen, who anchors the defense, said in his opening statement. He told the jury his client, a math nerd, did nothing illegal but perhaps unwise, like never hiring a chief risk officer to watch the health of his innovative crypto exchange. And he began casting blame at former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison, Bankman -Fried's ex -girlfriend and a key witness, saying that the defendant told her to hedge the trading firm's risk on multiple occasions, but she didn't. Day one of witness testimony gave both sides a taste of Judge Lewis Kaplan's hold on the courtroom. The 78 -year -old Clinton appointee cracked the rare joke and on occasion lightly tussled with trial teams for asking what he found to be leading or irrelevant questions. In one of the stranger back -and -forths of the day, he challenged prosecutors' attempts to show the jury a zoomed -in version of the first witness's FTX wallet. When the DOJ was showing various advertisements, he asked, just so we're all complete, who's Tom Brady, to get an answer on the record. He's a professional football player, Yedidia said. He ended the day at 4 .25 p .m. before prosecutors finished questioning Yedidia. That will resume on Thursday. Prosecutors said they hoped to call at least two more witnesses this week, including Matt Huang of Paradigm, a venture firm that invested heavily in FTX equity, and Gary Wang, a member of Bankman -Fried's inner circle. After the jury left the room on Wednesday, Bankman -Fried's trial team asked Kaplan to make accommodations for the defendant's Adderall prescription. He is not getting the four doses he needs to stay focused throughout the day, they said. Kaplan deferred on taking immediate action and told them to take the issue up with an official in the Bureau of Prisons. I'm not a medical professional, Kaplan said. For his part, Bankman -Fried himself was glued to his laptop throughout the day, where he appeared to be typing up notes. Former FTX developer Adam Yedidia will complete his testimony Thursday, but the anticipated names are more likely to be Paradigm's Matt Huang and former FTX executive Gary Wang. Huang's name was first mentioned on Tuesday and confirmed by prosecutors on Wednesday. The DOJ's case so far seems to be focused on casting FTX as a troubled company and Bankman -Fried as the face and director of those troubles. Early testimony was light on the specifics of blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Marc -Antoine Jolliard, the London -based French commodities trader and FTX customer, briefly told the jury what cryptocurrencies are, saying he invested in coins like Bitcoin and Dogecoin. Prosecutors had former FTX developer Adam Yedidia take this description a step further, mentioning that they are decentralized currencies, but not delving too deeply into what that means. It is a tactic seemingly geared toward easing a jury composed of laypersons into what promises to be a complex case stemming from the digital asset ecosystem. The first set of witnesses is also revealing, no law enforcement officials are expected to take the stand just yet and we're barely scratching the surface of the technical details about what blockchains are or how FTX actually operated. Instead, we're hearing from people immediately affected. A trader who lost north of $100 ,000 and still hasn't gotten it back and deeply involved in the company's operation. Paradigm was part of a massive fundraising round for FTX US, the US branch of the global crypto empire, which raised $400 million in January 2022. Huang, being the next witness, suggests the DOJ will continue to pursue a way of expressing the idea that FTX seemed like a safe, good place to store funds, but in reality wasn't. The DOJ said in its opening argument that it intends to show that Bankman Freed directed all of the activities that led to his company's failure. Wang, who is expected to discuss FTX's software, including possibly the backdoor that allowed Alameda to borrow so heavily from FTX, may then be the kicker at the end of the first week of the trial.
A highlight from Consequences of McCarthys Deal with Democrats
"The real danger of Obamacare is not the cost. That's not going to be the issue. It's going to be the destruction of health care because bureaucrats will make the decisions that the doctors should be making with their patients. And what happened? The bureaucrats in Albany, Dr. Fauci in Washington, the bureaucrats in government made decisions that were completely wrong that the doctors, for fear of losing their licenses under threat of termination, were forced to follow. Welcome back. Mike Lomas, Comical Financial Guys, a place where money meets politics. We still talk radio even though it's a podcast, but thanks for tuning in. And this, by the way, brought to you by our home and auto division. Give us 14 minutes, let us shop over 25 companies to save you money. And it is Medicare season. I can tell you that the Buffalo office is ramping up crazy. So if you need help turning 65, 65 plus need help with your Medicare, make sure you call us. But we, you know, throughout the week we send each other a ton of stuff. Glenn, the violence, let's start with the violence because the crime in, in these left wing hubs is to me just getting out of control. You know, one of the things Mike asked me this morning on the morning Mike's was, you know, do you think the liberals will, will get this now? Because this week alone, there's been multiple left wing nut job. You know, folks that have been stabbed. This is the New York City fatal New York City stabbing of a social justice activist, right? So, you know, this, this nut job didn't know that this guy was left wing, right wing. He just stabbed them, right? The guy was mentally ill, just stabbed them. I think it was Philadelphia. Was he just a criminal? Well, right. Well, right. Well, I think to be a criminal, you got to be mentally ill, but yeah, there are some people that are like legitimately like they're on the streets. They should be in an institution, but they're mentally ill. There's other people that are just like, Hey, I'm from Venezuela. I'm from El Salvador. I'm just going to get, I'm just going to get your crap. Although I don't think this guy stole anything. Right. He just stabbed them. Like, so yeah, I don't know what he just did. Yeah. Yeah. But, but, um, so go, sorry, go. I didn't say it was, I was saying to, uh, Marcy this morning, I'm like, you know, the sad thing is we used to say, you know, I know a lot of Venezuelans, you know, dying down here in Florida is a lot of Venezuelans, a lot of Cubans, good people, right? Yeah. Here's the difference. The, the, the, the next generation though, but you see, like I saw a video, I can find the video. I think you saw the video, right? Um, guys, 17, 18 years old. He's like, I'm from, I'm from, you know, Venezuela. I'm going to New York city. He's got gang tattoos, tattoos all over his face. You saw that, right? So 17 years old, you have to remember this kid has never experienced the benefits of the positives when Venezuela was a free country. Like he doesn't, like you talked to a 45 year old or a 50 year old Venezuelan. They're like, Oh my God, we lost our country. They lost their country when they were 20 or 30. He's fighting to survive the whole time. Yeah. Yeah. He knows breaking into a zoo to try to get the, that's right. That's what he knows. Right. That's the life he knows. So now you're taking that kid. Now you're putting him in New York city. What life does he know? What, what marketable skills does he have outside of eating out of a dumpster? Well, let me be fair. When you're, when your entire face is a tattoo, you've got very few things that you can do. Very few, very few. I'm not saying there's not things that you can't do because I'm sure there's all kinds of labor, but you're, you're basically wiping yourself out from half the workforce at that point. So here's your choice as an 18 year old El Salvadorian or Venezuelan, right? You can work in a construction job, make good money, 80, 90, $100 ,000 a year, pay 20 ,000 or more of that to the federal government. So you end up with half by time you're done. Or you can get involved in one of these new, uh, uh, organized gangs that are popping up in these major cities where they're targeting luxury homes and breaking in. They're also targeting luxury yachts and they're stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars that they fence on the black market and you can make the same $100 ,000 except there's no taxes. There's no, there's no filing of anything and you're seeing these things. You're seeing these criminal gangs organized criminal crime syndicates that are actually now moved here and are setting up in major cities across the country. Yeah. They, they actually set up the online campaigns, right? So you can see it all, you know, they'll show you how it all plays out, right? They'll loot five stores. Uh, you were, you were saying something about the yachts and the big homes. Here's what's happening folks. This is what happens, right? Now, the other, the, it's funny, I sent you this morning, Starbucks closing seven downtown San Francisco stores. So we already know that Walmart's closing in, in all those places. Target's closing and all these places, the San, the, the, uh, the Starbucks are closing, so they have nothing left to rob. Now in some of these they've got it out, they've basically got it out. San Francisco, right? So where are you going to move? The Starbucks to where the money is. The Starbucks went from sensitivity training. Remember five years ago, they had a, they had a, they had a black guy loitering in the place, harassing customers that they called the police on. It ended up being a major, it was racism. They shut down all the stores across the country. Remember? And then they, then they opened up a policy of anybody can use their bathroom, even homeless people policy. Then they had to walk that back. And now they're all close. Now they're all close. Now they're just throwing them in the towel. His question this morning, Mike was, will they ever get it? And I said, Mike, I said, I know I've used this analogy a million times, but I think it's so, so very true. If you look at the school systems that they've run and they've gone from 80, 90, a hundred percent graduation rates to 90 to 80 to 70 to 60, you would think at some point along the way that they would have been smart enough to figure it out. Now they're at 40%. And, and literally a hamster could graduate, right? I mean, if the hamster shows up in the classroom, that's a 40%, you move on. Right. So to answer the question, I don't think they're going to figure this out. I think the only way it happens truly is you have a structured bankruptcy and the social programs go away and you're going to have massive, I mean, really, truly, you're going to have hubs that are, that are Iraqi, you know, war zones and yeah, I mean, it's going to get worse. By the way, those war zones are going to get worse and worse and worse. The drug will get worse. And, and the, and the communities outside of that, if you've got a structured bankruptcy and they're not paying for the social garbage anymore and the free welfare, they'll be able to have the good police officers. They'll be able to have the good walls, right? The property values will be expensive, but the Democrats want those same crime, places, you know, subsidize housing. They want them in your neighborhood. They want them in Lancaster. They want them in Alma. That's what they want. To that point this week, they, they are now issuing vouchers. So you can, and those vouchers by the way, are not meant to say you stay right where you are in this inner city. That's already a piece of shit. You take this voucher and you give it to the landlord out in the suburbs and we'll pay your rent. Right. And now it puts a landlord in a tough position. Okay. Well, I can get guaranteed rent with these vouchers. Right. What if you don't take it? What if you don't take it? You're going to get accused of discrimination. You're going to get, you're going to get investigated by our very fair and honest attorney general in New York state. Of course not. That's right. You think about this though, Mike. So in Minnesota, we had the council woman, remember that, that was, he advocated for no police. Remember? And then she was carjacked in her driveway and violently assaulted. And she's on camera after with, you know, bloody head going, I can't believe this happened to me. You advocated for no police. Right. They're the first ones, by the way, trying to get their phone for 911. That's right. First ones, New York City officers, New York City, left wing advocate, right? Activist, uh, stabbed to death, right? Activist, left wing act to no police, no bail, bail with doing all the things at the left. When I said left wing activists, these activists, let's talk about what they support. They support no bail because that's not fair. Right. They think that criminals are, are, are, you know, mistreated. So they want them back out in the streets. Right. They want less police because police are the problem. Right. I mean, you know, I don't, do they get it? No. And then just yesterday or two days ago, you had a Democrat, a politician, carjacked at gunpoint in DC. That's right. It's insanity. In DC. In DC. You cannot, you're not safe in DC. Right. Where the, where the white house is. The Capitol. Right. Right. The Capitol. It's a crap hole. You know why? Because it was run by people like Mariel Bowser for years. Right. It was run by corrupt left wing politicians. Right. And to ask if they're totally getting rid of cashless bail in states like this, they're doubling down. There's been no conversation about that. He's not talked about that. Kathy Hochul. I mean, honest to God, talk about a narcissistic moron. I mean, she's saying, get this kid rescued. Thank God. Thank God. Hats off to the, to the state troopers and the police to put this together a great job and returning this child. Kathy Hochul, all the press stuff she does. There's not one picture of the family. It's all about her. Everything. Prescott. I promised a family. I'd get them back. Really? How could you possibly do that? Which is totally untrue, but she made this whole episode. Instead of praising the police and the good job that she made this whole thing about her. How great she was. Unbelievable. She is truly stupid. I think the guy had a rap sheet too. I think he was the guy, by the way, the guy that got stabbed in New York city, I bet Mike, he's like a red stripe. I said, we're both down in Florida. You know, that way we both win. This guy, when they find this guy and they'll find him, he'll have a rap sheet as well. He will have been out on jail multiple times. He probably has already stabbed somebody. This is probably isn't his first stabbing. Why, by the way, why, by the way, we're not outraged and getting rid of knives is beyond me. You can't defend yourself. I don't know. Where did that stabbing happen? That was Philadelphia, I believe. Was that New York city? Oh, stabbing was in Brooklyn. That's right. Something else happened in New York city. Oh, a lady got hurt with, uh, uh, uh, you know, hoodlums on motorcycles. A woman with two children got her back window smashed. And when they jumped out of her car, got out to confront the guy, he pulls a gun. She doesn't stop, backs him down and protects her kids. The problem though is, if you are living in one of these left -wing cities, you have to get out. You have to get out. This guy, let's say if he wanted to defend himself for two nights ago and took out a gun. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe now, maybe not because he's been a left -wing Democrat and he's a registered Democrat. So I'm sure, I'm sure that would go a long way. Was he gay? Yeah. Was he trans with the, what card did he hold? I don't know. He's got to have something because I think that, I think the perpetrator was black. Was he not? It's not, yes. You're saying it's not just good enough to be a Democrat anymore. You got to take it one level higher. You gotta have something. You gotta be something else. You gotta be an acrobat, you know, lesbian, you know, underwater free diver. I don't know. It's just, it's just so this preposterous. It really, stuff that they come up with. Another three here in Western New York, and three Colombian nationals this week charged with burglizing Amherst residents. See, this is the problem though. You know, you have to question this morning with Mike Hayflick. Coming to the suburb, a suburb near you. It's coming to a suburb near you. You're going to watch very quickly these left -wing folks that have voted Democrat, although I'm not sure that a little brains are going to get it, but you're going to find very quickly how we're going to go from an all loving open -armed community to whoa, whoa. And even Kathy Hochul's like, don't come, don't come here. We're full. We're full. Open arms, a statue of Liberty, something along, welcome everybody, blah, blah, blah. As Joe would say, you know, which wasn't the truth, by the way, Ellis Island, you had to go through, you know, I've been reading up and really started learning about a lot of the history of our immigration policy. Agree to learn English, sponsored by family. You had to go through, you know, testing to make sure you weren't sick. If you were sick, if you came, if you got off the boat and you exhibited open sickness, you got back on the boat and you were shipped back or, or you were quarantined. Interestingly enough, throughout the turn of the century, we had very strict quotas of countries that we allowed people to come in from. We had countries that were literally blacklisted. We were not allowing certain countries like African countries to emigrate, immigrate, I should say United States progressives, by the way, liberal progressives at the turn of the 19th century were the ones that put those policies in place. So again, you know, it's amazing how, when you look at actual and understand actual history and you see how things really flipped, you know, it's really two things, by the way, that, that changed this in a big way, right? Number one was these feet. People did not come in here and get massive amounts of welfare, right? They went right to work. There was no welfare. They agreed to learn English. They agreed to acclimate into the school systems, right? Number one, number two, we actually had a criminal justice system back then that actually put criminals in jail, right? So if you came over here and you did something stupid, you were going to jail. You were not getting out on cashless bail. Welfare wasn't waiting for you on the other side, a very different system than where we are today. And it could have impacted your entire family. Your family had to vouch for you coming over. We had a family oriented immigration policy that really stressed. So if you had family over here already and you were, let's say in Italy or you were in France or whatever, and you wanted to immigrate to the United States, you had a much higher probability of being able to get to the United States and, and, and meet, you know, get underneath that quota. But from, from, from a, a good chunk from world war, you know, about turn of the century through the great depression, we had very little immigration in this country. And it's amazing. I look at like my grandparents that came from Italy. I'm surprised they were able to get in, but it came, you know, my grandparents and then they brought over a few more family members, but most of them were still in Italy. They, they stayed over there. So just interesting if you really understand the policy and you understand history, and I wish they would teach more of this on who was responsible for what. But yeah, while they're removing all that. Yeah. Speaking of karma though, we've mentioned karma earlier and we got to talk about Kevin McCarthy and Carmageddon. I mean, I hope that the Republicans take notice that this is what happens when you cut a deal with the Democrats. Cause that's what he did, right? He cut a deal with the Democrats. Some of them are not getting it still though. Newt Gingrich I saw last night. Newt, I love you man. But he's on Fox. So he goes, I think this is a bad idea. I'm like, this guy is exactly why people like you and I McCarthy never give a goddamn penny to the Republican. And that's exactly why we don't show up for the benefits anymore. We don't show up because it's, it's, it's total. We are $33 trillion in debt with a clock, by the way, that is literally smoking. It's going so fast. You can't even see the numbers flip anymore. It's just a blur. It's just a blur.
Monitor Show 23:00 10-03-2023 23:00
"Investment advisors, switch to interactive brokers for lowest cost global trading and turnkey custody solutions. No ticket charges and no conflicts of your interests at ibkr .com slash ria. In which a jury found him liable for defaming writer E. Jean Carroll. The trial is expected to last until December 22nd. And that's it for this edition of the Bloomberg Law Show. I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. Casting 24 hours a day at Bloomberg .com and the Bloomberg Business Act. This is Bloomberg Radio. Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz is aiming to remove House Speaker Kevin McCarthy from his post. He filed a motion Monday to force a vote to overthrow McCarthy. Speaking to reporters outside the capitol, the Florida Republican mentioned House Majority Leader Steve Scalise as a potential replacement. The U .S. Supreme Court will not hear a challenge to former President Trump's 2024 ballot eligibility. On Monday, the high court rejected the challenge brought by a long shot Republican presidential candidate. It used a post -Civil War provision of the 14th Amendment that barred former members of the Confederacy from holding office. It argued Trump was ineligible to run due to his alleged connection to the January 6th Capitol riot. The White House is pressing Congress to provide more aid to Ukraine. To see the continuation of the brave people in Ukraine to fight for their freedom, right, to fight for their democracy. Press Secretary Corrine Jean -Pierre told reporters today they're still strong. Bipartisan support to back Ukraine, which is a top priority for the Biden administration. Everyone's phone will go off this Wednesday at 2 .20 p .m. Eastern. Lisa Taylor has more. That's because the federal government will be conducting an Asia -wide test for its emergency alert system and wireless emergency alerts.
Monitor Show 14:00 09-29-2023 14:00
"When professional soccer player Marcus Rashford injured his shoulder, he turned to Resle's virtual reality training program to help him maintain his skills and return to the field with confidence. Learn more at meta .com slash metaverse impact. Served for our country and good for him for getting in a final shot. Well done Lisa Kabusa Miller and Jeannie Chansin. I'm really glad you could both be with us on an historic day for three different reasons. Hour two of Sound On starts right now. Sound On. Politics, policy and perspective. From DC's top names. Federal spending combined with two lakhs monetary policy is produced this 40 -year high on inflation. China policy is driven basically by domestic politics. American families are finding themselves further behind the eight ball. To get anything done in this Congress, it's going to have to be done in a bipartisan way. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. We're really doing this. Welcome to hour two of Sound On. As the federal government prepares to shut down tomorrow at midnight, even as lawmakers in both chambers try to move on stopgap funding bills. One just failed in the House. We'll see what happens in the Senate, but it doesn't matter because neither would pass in the other chamber. Are we following this? We'll bring you inside the Capitol Coming up with the latest now from Bloomberg's Kaylee Lyons. We'll talk it out as well with Ben Harris, Director of the Economic Studies Program at Brookings.
A highlight from Down with the (Burger) King with Michael Seifert and Russ Vought
"Lots of channels. Nothing to watch. Especially if you're searching for the truth. It's time to interrupt your regularly scheduled programs with something actually worth watching. Salem News Channel. Straightforward, unfiltered, with in -depth insight and analysis from the greatest collection of conservative minds. Like Hugh Hewitt, Mike Gallagher, Sebastian Gorka, and more. Find truth. Watch 24 -7 on SNC .TV and on Local Now, Channel 525. Hey everybody, today on The Charlie Kirk Show, Michael Seifert from Public Square joins us. Make sure you download the Public Square app, PublicSQ .com, that is PublicSQ .com. You have to email me, as always, Freedom at CharlieKirk .com. I really enjoy hearing from you. That is Freedom at CharlieKirk .com, Freedom at CharlieKirk .com. Russ Vogt joins us as we talk 9 -30 strategy. I ask, what is a woman to a group of college women, and they do not know the answer. And Bob Menendez, I got a lot of respect for this guy. No, I'm half kidding. Not really. You'll know what I mean if you listen to the end of the episode. It's far from respect, but the guy's got game. And I bet he could win re -election in New Jersey. Email us, Freedom at CharlieKirk .com and subscribe to our podcast. That is Charlie Kirk Show podcast. Get involved with Turning Point USA at TPUSA .com. That is TPUSA .com. Start a high school or college chapter today at TPUSA .com. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job. Building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Joining us now is Russ Vogt, president of the Center for Renewing America. It is September 26th. The shutdown is looming on September 30th. Russ, thank you for joining us. We've had a lot of congressmen on the program, some great guys, Congressman Dan Bishop, Matt Gaetz, we've had Chip Roy. But I'll be honest, it is a Chinese fire drill. It is disorganized. You have people on every single side. I was on the phone this morning. No one knows what the heck is going on. So Russ, what are you hearing? What can we expect coming to September 30th? Do you think the government's going to shut down? I do think it's going to shut down. I think that's where we are. And I think it's good because this is the last leverage point we have against the Biden administration. And you're right, Charlie, in the sense that when you have kind of an intentional strategy on the part of leadership to force this into a corner, it's going to leave something to be desired on the execution front. But here's the good news. I think the House conservatives are increasingly united in forcing a conversation about moving forward on bill by bill and really focusing on the woke and weaponized restrictions that need to be put in place to put a vice grip around the Biden administration's activities against the American people. I think you're going to see those kinds of debates this week, and it's going to move to a good place in terms of the theatrics of the last several weeks. I want to make sure that we calm down the alarmism. So I received a couple emails this weekend. Charlie, I can't believe you want a government shutdown. I need my Social Security checks. Russ, let's tell the truth about this. Social Security still goes out. Medicare still goes out. Essential government services, which I find hilarious because if they're not essential, why do they have jobs? They should all be fired. This is a partial, very partial, let's just call it a fractional government pause because it's not actually a shutdown because they all get back pay. It's basically the secret that no one wants to say is that a lot of government workers are hoping for this because they basically get a vacation. Russ, tell us what really happens because this is important. You've got the parameters of this. Two -thirds of the federal government is on autopilot. Not a good situation, but the reality of where we are. So a third of the federal government is subject to what we call the annual appropriations process. But if you're on Social Security, there's nothing to worry about. You're going to get your check, and you're going to get your check on time. Medicare, the Department of Defense is going to continue to be out there defending our country. All of the people that are in the business of securing this country are going to be similarly at their posts. What this does is this says for those of you who are working on the Biden climate regulations at the EPA or the Department of Interior, sorry, you're going to have to go home. You're not going to be able to be at your desk and working. So this is not something – there are tried and true ways, and I've managed this for President Trump, to make this painless as possible consistent with the law. We thankfully blazed a pretty good trail on that, that they're going to have a hard time playing politics with this. We'll be holding them accountable. But in terms of the – this is not a situation where you're going to go off a cliff, and somehow you're not going to get your government benefits. It's just not the case. Okay, so let's get into this here. What then is the ask? Because the way I look at it, the way the stars have aligned, the universe, all of a sudden – I'm not happy about this, but it just so happens the border has never been as bad as it is right now. And that's like intersecting right with this funding fight over border security. Russ, if Republicans can't get this done, when there's 8 ,500 people illegally entering an eagle pass alone, I mean, it's not as if this is something that happened six months ago. This is actively occurring. Then Republicans are completely worthless. Russ, so what is the ask, and strategically, what is your advice for how they actually get it done? So my view is that they have had a wonderful banner, a messaging parameter called no security, no funding, that allows them to be able to go at this seminal threat that we're seeing along the border, and to make that a very, very important issue. I also think it allows them to deal with the weaponization at the Department of Justice. I don't think that we can leave this leverage point without doing something against the regime that is trying to steal the next election, and at the same time going against half the country and considering them enemies of the state. So I think there's a lot of things that can be done, but if we don't get to the end of this process and have dealt with those two issues, and then spend a lot of time trying to defund the offices doing the bad activities, I'll consider it a failure. So the goal needs to be then not paperwork processors on the border, but actual border security. That's a major difference. But also, I think that the pressure needs to be that Joe Biden needs to start deporting these people. He's hosting them and just releasing them into the interior of the United States. Exactly. And there's a specific rider that needs to be put in place, and Stephen Miller has been calling for this some time, as well as Chip Roy. It needs to be illegal in the sense that you can't spend the money to be able to release someone into the border. That's the kind of thing that it's not just about changing laws that they ignore. It's about saying that a bureaucrat is going to be facing criminal charges in violation of the Anti -Deficiency Act if they ignore the appropriations law that's saying that they can't do that. And as a result, that will change a lot of the policies that we've been asking for. So we're looming towards this lockdown. Re -emphasize what you're saying about leadership. How has leadership basically set the table for failure? Build that out for us. Sure. The year started with much promise. For the first time, House Republicans were governing with conservatives in their caucus, and they were achieving things that no one thought was possible to pass $5 trillion in potential cuts. At the debt limit deal, Kevin McCarthy walked away from House conservatives and went essentially into coalition with House Democrats. At the time, he used it as an excuse. He said, we'll do all this through the appropriations process. That was an excuse, because they then didn't move any of the appropriations bills themselves. It's not like these bills are passed out of the House and sitting in the Senate. Instead, they've had a pileup in which we are now up against a deadline, and they're asking for more time. But the problem is that McCarthy has never governed from the standpoint of we're going to use leverage points to save the country. Instead, he puts a cartel view on it, which is we're going to try to minimize what is necessary to get past this leverage point, because otherwise it will have political risk. I think you and I agree, we're not going to save the country without managing political risk, and we can do that. We have done that previously in shutdowns, and the country will reward Republicans when they fight over these leverage points. That's what we're asking right now, and I think conservatives are insisting on it, and so far, he's having to go in their direction. Yeah, and I think we need to reject the framing of shutdown, which, by the way, ideologically, all I'm on board for. Maybe a pause? I mean, how else can we message this? Because, Russ, here's what's going to happen, right? So we are barreling towards not getting a deal done on Saturday, right? And honestly, I hope a deal doesn't get done in the sense of enough, draw a line in the sand, show your voters you're fighting. It's better for no deal than a bad deal. I think you would agree with that, right, Russ? It's better for no deal at all than a bad deal. And so September 30th happens, and again, your Social Security checks still go out, Medicare still goes out, military still do. You have the DEI, you know, lesbian bureaucrats at the Department of Homeland Security or whatever that might not, you know, be going to work for a couple days. Honestly, good thing. So, but Russ, let's just kind of think about this. How could we better message it? Because the media, Sunday morning, I face the nation, CBS, all that full court press, Republicans shut down the government once midnight hits on Saturday night. So how do we get ahead of this and preemptively message it, not just be on our heels and play defense? Yeah, I mean, I think the reality is, to go back to the facts, what is occurring here is a lapse in funding. It is a lapse in funding. The government is not shutting down. The Department of Defense is still up and running. That would be the case if it actually shut down. Those people would not be at their post. What is happening? Funding is lapsed. Funding will come back on when Congress reaches a deal. And I think if we can communicate facts in that vein, we will help our case and explain to the American people what's actually going on. But here's the thing that I would say. These leverage points in which there is confrontation, there is political risk, are incredibly important because the only chance that we get to get the country's attention. It's when people who are not listening to politics are listening to their Christian music station or whatever they're listening to. And all of a sudden they have the news update that's saying, OK, there's a government lapse. What are the terms that are being discussed? Oh, the weaponization of the Department of Justice. That's what we want. And that is a feature, not a bug, of our politicians here in the cartel of Washington, D .C. Russ, you're doing a wonderful job. Center for Renewing America. We're going to have you back on. September 30th is the big day. I think we're going to swing and miss. But honestly, I'd rather have us strike out with no deal than one that betrays our voters. Russ, thank you so much. You bet. Thanks, Charlie.
Steve Schmidt: 100 Days Legislative Timeframe Is Racist
"Well, that kind of narrows it down. How did this guy get in front of the Canadian Parliament, folks? I have no idea. Liberals are so dumb. I But again, the point is everyone's a Nazi to the left except actual Nazis. here's what I mean. Cue up for me. Cut five. This is Steve Schmidt. This guy's just a clown. He's an A clown, a total A clown, if you know what I mean. This guy was a Republican grifter. He wound up losing just about single every campaign he was involved in got smoked. So now he figured he could grift off the MSNBC crowd. So he goes over to MSNBC and spouts out a bunch of nonsense talking points. Listen to how they work, though, because this guy's a modern day liberal, even though he pretends to be a Republican. Anyone who doesn't toe their line is a Nazi or a fascist, except actual Nazis. Take a listen. The people who are trying to tear down democracy in the country keep telling the rest of the country what it is they plan to do to such a degree that they have announced their plans six months into 2025 to have taken apart the whole of the federal government. Now, since FDR's time in office, the legislative metric in the United States has been 100 days, not six months. This is a racist code whistle to every white supremacist in the country because it's how long it took Adolf Hitler to take one Weimar to Germany a complete and total dictatorship. Folks, these people are freaking crazy. They are absolutely nuts. There's an actual Nazi up in the Canadian Parliament. They can't see that, but they can
"federal government" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Okay, I want to focus on some of these other poll results. And then I'm going to tell you about the let's just say curveball that we were throwing on Saturday that our team did an amazing job adapting to. We asked some other questions. We said, do you plan to donate to the RNC? Do you plan to make do you plan to make the RNC part of your giving strategy? Seventy seven point three percent of the most active, most vocal attendees in the country, activists say no. Seventy seven point three percent say they have no plan to donate to the Republican National Committee. Now, Harmeet Dillon was there. Scott Pressler was there. Wouldn't have been smart for the RNC to show up and maybe win over these people. I'm very concerned, actually, I don't know if I'm concerned because I don't know how much I care about that. I do want a strong party. Honestly, I do. I'm a registered independent for this exact reason. I've lost trust in the Republican Party. But there is a pattern that is manifesting, which is if I just avoid our voters and our grassroots and activists, things will get better. In life, when you avoid your problems, they rarely go away. That's a truism in almost every part of life. Now, sometimes you do get lucky. Sometimes problems solve themselves. One out of a thousand times. What I've learned 11 years of doing this is that when you have a problem doing the difficult but necessary and sometimes messy thing of confrontation, maybe apology and taking responsibility is almost always the right choice. So the RNC knows that they are not well liked by their voters, by grassroots folks. Why not show up and talk to them? They're going to say, oh, you weren't invited. Correct. You weren't invited. But you could have reached out. You are the Republican National Committee. By the way, every presidential candidate was invited. Harmeet Dillon came. Mike Lindell was there. Scott Pressler was there. Roger Stone was there. Patrick Byrne was there. Asa Hutchinson was there. You will not find a more diverse group of speakers. I don't care about skin color. It's irrelevant to me. A more diverse mixture of speakers than at the Turning Point Action Conference. And I love Roger Stone. I've known Roger for years. I argued for his party. Donald Trump, Asa Hutchinson, Mayor Suarez, Jack Pesso. I mean, it's all over the place. But the point is the grassroots need to be in charge. My immediate mission, our mission at Turning Point Action has been to change who runs the party. The oligarchs, the consultants, the mob bosses, get out of the way. The grassroots are informed. You guys in the audience are the smartest flipping people. You guys are stopping me and you're talking about, Charlie, have you read all the details of the Green New Deal? And there's this thing and you got it like highlighted. Mikey, I think, has 2000 pieces of paper that people gave me at the Turning Point Action Conference. And I plan to go through it. Some of it's a little wacky. Some of it is unbelievably wise. I get some of the ideas for our show of you, the audience. You guys know it better than the mob bosses. One person comes up to me, Charlie, I've mapped all of the finances of the homes and the villas that Zelensky is buying. I don't know if it's true or not, but it certainly seemed compelling. And it's like a big stack of paper. Somebody else comes up to me, Charlie, don't understand all the adverse events that vaccines could be. And they give me a book and all this. The point is the audience is gaining in their knowledge, gaining in their expertise. And I truly believe that the guardians of the Republican Party don't like that. I don't think they want to have to walk through an expo hall like that we had and had to be asked tough questions or have to be given material that they have to read about issues that they're bought and paid for. And I kid you not, this is what I think Ron DeSantis miscalculated, is that these grassroots people, they don't just like attend and then they go away. They talk and they organize. This actually just came to be. And this is the best way I can describe it. I'm so glad I came up with this. Malcolm Gladwell is a mediocre author, but he said some smart things. I'm some of his books are great. Some of his books are just complete rubbish. There is a book called Outliers, which I think is his best book. And I think it's his most quoted book, Blink by Malcolm Gladwell's trash. David and Goliath is not good. Blake says he's a midwit. What does that mean? That's not a word that I use. Someone who is around average intelligence. OK, I'll take that fine. Malcolm Gladwell in the book Outliers, has a has a term called a maven. So Malcolm Gladwell is a social psychologist and social scientist, and he wants to find out and just observe the world. He's become super lefty. But in the book Outliers, he was trying to find out why hush puppies became so popular. What is it? How do trends and fashion or how do certain recipes become popular? I don't know if it was hush puppies, actually, something of that. The point is this. He was trying to figure out what makes something go viral. It's a really interesting question, isn't it? Why do some things catch on? For example, that stupid ice bath thing that we did in the summer, like five or six years ago, right? Like ice bath challenge for autism or something, right? It was something like that. Was it autism? I think it was. ALS. OK, I apologize. Or what are some other fads like? Remember Coney 2012? Like what made that go viral or any of these things? What Malcolm Gladwell argued in the book Outliers, the Harlem Shake is a great example. That's a great example is that there is a community of people that if you're able to find them, they can make something go from an unknown to popularity. And it's called a maven. He uses the term a maven as a way of somebody who works hard and is well connected in their community that reaches thousands of people and they make it go viral, make it go popular. What Ron DeSantis missed out was on 6000 mavens at the Turning Point Action Conference. These are 6000 people that independently help make something get into the mainstream, into the zeitgeist. There are 6000 conservative mavens. And you can read it just you type in maven Malcolm Gladwell. He's written extensively about it. You'll see it. Rutgers University. Has a whole piece on it. Are you a connector, a maven or a salesman? It's an early adopter strategy. And so if you want to win the thing, I'm actually the book is tipping point, actually. He wrote about this as a tipping point or outliers. I get all confused. I read all this. I'm doing this live here. I think it is the tipping point, actually, not the most important point. The point is that this was not just your average average audience. These are people that will make or break your entire presidential campaign. Period. Make or break your entire career. And they felt scorned. They were very unhappy that certain candidates ignored them. And they said they had more important stuff to do. I had some sharp but honest comments on this play cut 14. Charlie, I know it is a delicate subject. I wanted to ask you guys had a great relationship with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. I think he's a great governor. It's not delicate. I'm happy to talk about it. I mean, I think he's a great governor of Florida. I think it's an unbelievable mistake for him not to be here. I don't take it personally as politics. You just kind of get over things. And every day is a new day. It's really a tragedy for the conservative movement because he is a great governor. I mean, I'm on Team Trump, so whatever. Who am I to give advice? But like Ron DeSantis could have come here, said, you know what? I'm just going to take questions from the audience and I'm going to tell you about what I've done. Some things that are noteworthy banning critical race theory. The crime stuff's been good. Instead, he's running a Chamber of Commerce campaign where he thinks dollars mean votes like, no, that's not how it works. Actually, you need people. And he turned his back on 6,000 of the most important people in the Republican primary, 6,000 of the most important people in the Republican primary. That is exactly right. So you have 6,000 mavens. They don't want to talk to him. Let me also highlight some other poll findings. 89% of attendees support the Republican Party embracing early voting and vote chasing. 89.7% support the Republican Party embracing early voting and vote chasing. This is telling. And the most lopsided question we asked, I'm going to tease and tell you about in the next segment. I want to see, though, is this parallel to what you believe? Do you plan to donate to the RNC? Email us freedom at charleykirk.com. Do you plan to support the Republican establishment? If you want to win back your base, you have to speak to them. I'm going to tell you how I know this is true based on a, I have two things I want to finish in this hour, because we have a lot to cover. I need to tell you about the most lopsided piece of information from our polling. And then I need to tell you a story of how big government truly does suck. And I could prove it to you because we have that mantra at Turning Point are awesome. Our attendees wanted to be there so bad. They waited three hours in a 98 degree parking garage. And I say, Charlie, why'd you put him a parking garage? We didn't. I'm going to tell you that full story. The honest and I haven't told the story publicly yet. And wait till you hear it. It's it's something but you guys deserve great credit for overcoming that our staff to it's really something. 95.8% of turning point action attendees oppose United States involvement in Ukraine. 95.8% yet 99% of your elected officials are cheerleading for a war against Russia or funding it or supportive of it. What a major disconnect. That's that is unsustainable, everybody. If 95.8% of your voters don't want something and 99% of your elected officials are still jamming it through and not listening and basically force feeding a neoliberal internationalist agenda. That is a recipe for a political revolution. Listen to your voters or be honest with them. Try to persuade them. Not a single speaker. Well, that's not true. The couple speakers came and they are not was not exactly well received, but none of the speakers that were well received were defending the war in Ukraine. Why are so many of your elected officials trying to get us in a war with Russia? You are smarter than your politicians on this or you're not bought and paid for mixture of both. Okay, story time. Night before the event, we did our typical walkthrough at the Secret Service. When you have President Trump, a former president or the Secret Service, they take over everything, every nook or cranny, every door, every closet, every chair is regulated by the federal government. We've worked with the Secret Service for years. They are traditionally wonderful, terrific, transparent, engaging. Give us what we want. Yes, they are focused on security, but they've always been excellent. Traditionally, just awesome. So when you try to go into an event, we made all these recommendations and they shot them down like, hey, why don't you have the check in in air conditioning, not outside? And they gave us assurances and assurances based on past events. By the way, this is our 12th event with the Secret Service between former vice president and between President Trump, not our first rodeo, not our first circus, not even close. And so we were promised, there's a thing called mags, not getting too technical. You guys go through them when you go to airport security. We were promised at least seven mags. We show up, all of a sudden in the morning, there are three. Traditionally, they're able to process 1,300 people per hour to come into an event. They were going at a rate of 180 people an hour. We were getting texts, Charlie, why are they going through my everything in my bag? Why are they going so slow? So it was 90% slower. And we were literally screaming at some of these Secret Service like, why can't you speed it up? And they said, the smugness and the arrogance. Now, I don't think that's a picture of the entire Secret Service. Whatever happened there, and I'm not saying it was intentional sabotage or whatnot, resulted, somebody could have died and the federal government could not have cared less. We were telling them like, guys, can we get these people in the building? We had 4,000 people in 98 degree heat in a parking garage. Totally unacceptable. To say I was pissed is an understatement. And I went out there and I shook as many hands as I possibly could apologizing. Three hour hot garage wait. And were people safer? Well, let me show you the contrast and I'll prove it to you. Because you might say, oh, Charlie, you're just spinning it. Oh, yeah, look at the contrast. Put this up on screen. On the left side of the screen is what happened on Sunday. On Sunday, our team was able to take over security at Turning Point USA because the Secret Service got out of the way and the TSA, literally the TSA came and they got out of the way. You see those? Those are modern technological mags that are able to detect weapons. On the right, you see what happens when the Secret Service takes over. We processed 3,800 people in one hour. And guess what? We picked up weapons that the Secret Service missed. Yeah. You know, we detected 50 knives and weapons. They said, well, the Secret Service didn't make me take it out the other day. So the Secret Service slowed down our entire event and missed 50 weapons that we were able to detect instantaneously. So they slow down the event. They put 4,000 people in a parking garage, 50 people passed out. They couldn't care less to administer medical assistance. Our staff is coming there. We have people coming in. We had to call five ambulances. People are passing out from heat stroke and the Secret Service is moving at a molasses pace. We are screaming at them. Can we speed this up? Can we get people in? They said, well, safety is safety. We know what we're doing, sir. No, you don't. And it is a disgrace because most Secret Service agents are awesome. And we talked to the President Trump's team and they said, oh, they sent in a team from DC. It was a direct order from DC. Again, I don't want to get too into the speculative or the motives. I'm getting into the facts. And on Sunday, everyone was like, wow, this is so much better. Did you guys get rid of the security? No. And we actually caught weapons the Secret Service missed.By the way, we handed out water to the fans. We found people that were struggling with the heat and got them to the front. And I went there and I shook every hand. Lynn says, Charlie, the three hour garage rate was brutal. The fact that you acknowledged it, apologized, and even paid for the parking showed your courage and speaks to the wonderful man you are. OK, whatever. Thank you. By the way, it was worth the wait. Even without paying for parking, I enjoyed every minute of the conference. Next time, I'm bringing at least 10 people with me. Lynn, thank you. And for the people that just got so mad and they said, I can't take it, I said fine, we'll refund it. We will take ownership and responsibility for something that is not our responsibility. It's totally in the federal government. It's completely unacceptable. We have a reputation at Turning Point for hosting the best events. That reputation, I believe, has been earned. And I'll just tell you, Sunday was beautiful. Zero issues of security, zero issues with line. You know how people passed out? Zero. Put that picture back up, please. Choose your future. Federal government, big government sucks, regime, Leviathan, deep state on the right. On the left, that's private, free enterprise, Turning Point USA. Choose your future. It should be on the other way, left or right, but whatever. It's a little inverted. So to say I'm upset is a little bit. For all of you guys that had to wait and know that it's unacceptable. I'm not one to shift blame, but I am to say that we did everything we could to fix it. All's well that ends well. It did end well, but it is what it is. And that's the truth of the story. And now you heard it. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us your thoughts. There's always freedom at charliekirk.com. Also, email me freedom at charliekirk.com who you think Donald Trump should pick as the vice president for a chance to win a signed copy of the college scam. Email me freedom at charliekirk.com to get in the running. Thank you so much for listening. God bless.
"federal government" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"What's scary and what will elicit a response are true things. No one is punished for lying. People are only punished for telling the truth. What are the crimes that are punished? Thought crimes. Thinking the wrong thing, having the wrong beliefs, saying unapproved words. It's the truth tellers that are penalized. We'll get to it. It's not the top thing, but there's this article in the Arizona Republic. Charlie Kirk, literally the title is Charlie Kirk says racist things. That's the title in the Arizona Republic. I don't never have never will. We say true things and we defend the promise of meritocracy. But it's the truth tellers that are criticized. Does Anthony Fauci, John Brennan, James Comey, Merrick Garland, do they get negative articles in the Arizona Republic? No, because lying is rewarded and truth telling is punished. That's an unbelievably profound point by, in my opinion, the current king of conservative media, Tucker Carlson. All right, you've probably heard me. It's actually now 25 pounds that I have lost. And I'm sure some of you say, oh, Charlie, I've tried everything. That was me. You know, my first Zoom call with my Ph.D. weight loss, I was kind of skeptical. I was like, come on, guys. I've heard this whole thing before about about about about about. And boy, was I wrong. They know what they're doing. My Ph.D. weight loss like this is 100 percent legit. And people say, well, Charlie, you've lost so much weight. And I say, yeah, my Ph.D. weight loss. Hello. But look, they have a different approach. And it's Dr. Ashley Lucas. She's great. I text with her. She does a really, really good job. Twenty five pounds, I'll tell you. And I have more energy and I'm healthier than ever before. Here's why. The program rids your body of the inflammation that is causing so many health problems. If you look around today, America is the fattest it has ever been. Our families, friends and neighbors are dying of diabetes, heart disease and Alzheimer's now called T3 diabetes. Ph.D. has helped so many people who want to have a good active life, play with their grandkids, travel, hike to a waterfall, go for a bike ride. But their weight was holding them hostage. They don't want any of you on experimental drugs for your brain degeneration from Alzheimer's or homebound with an oxygen tank for heart failure. My Ph.D. weight loss knows that losing weight is the best thing for overall health. We are way too fat as a society. And here's the thing. If you're listening to this and you say, boy, I'm a little overweight, it's perfectly fine. Do something about it. Use your free will, your agency. Say, you know what, I'm just not where I want to be. This is an empowerment tool for you. All of these things can be prevented. You look at heart disease, what they now call diabesity. By the way, there's a great new book by Dr. Peter Attia about longevity.
"federal government" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"We had all 50 States represented. People say, I'm going to run for school board. I'm going to run for Congress. I'm going to hold my elected officials accountable. Let the big oligarchs waste their money on the primary. The best money you could spend is let's build a grassroots party. Let's fill up all our precinct committee positions. And we made a big step in that direction. In fact, we're trying to get people that were watching online, sign up at tpaction.com to take back your state party. One of many really just awesome takeaways from this weekend. And by the way, if you had not, if not had a chance to watch some of the speeches, I encourage you to do so. We're going to be posting them on rumble and playing them all throughout. So let me just give you a little bit of taste. Tucker Carlson gave an incredible speech. I have so much respect for Tucker Carlson. Tucker Carlson's a good man. He's gracious with his time. He's just outright hilarious. He's humble. He's kind. He's a clear thinker. He's wise. You know, when you have these speakers at these events, some speakers, they are like, I want to arrive. I want to speak. And I want to leave. Right, Mikey. It's very clear. Tucker shows up. He's like, whatever you need, hanging out with turning point USA chapter leaders, taking selfies with people so generous, so gracious, so down to earth. And I have dealt with, I think, almost everybody in the entire movement. I don't think that there's anybody that we have not hosted at this point. Everyone from Jordan Peterson to Tucker Carlson, right, basically all across. And I wanted to say, most speakers are wonderful to deal with. Not all of them, but most speakers are fine. No one comes even close, though, to Tucker Carlson and just his grassroots humility, whatever you need. I'm here. I love you guys. I love the students. I love the movement. I have immense respect for that. And honestly, I have a lot to learn. One of the most insightful things that Tucker Carlson shared is cut eight. Listen carefully. Very, very deep point here. Play cut eight. If you want to know what they care about, if you want to know what's important, listen to how they respond when you say something unapproved. But the point is, when something is clearly or very likely untrue, it poses no threat to anyone.
"federal government" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"I want to talk about relief factor.com. I want you guys to check out relief factor.com, a hundred percent drug free knee pain, back pain, joint pain, elbow pain, check out relief factor energy. Help makes your body make nutrients readily available. Relief factor sleep. I know a lot of you are probably having trouble sleeping. Relief factor sleep could be the best solution for you. Everybody goes to bed, not everybody sleeps. We're all about helping people live lives that are filled with connection, exploration, passion, and emotion. That is what, what is life is all about. Make sure you guys are sleeping well. It's a major part of life. Check it out right now. Relief factor.com relief factor.com. So let's go deeper into the poll. Okay. So we had 7,000 people show up, some of which were unannounced buying day of tickets on the first night. Um, but we had, again, 7,000, I think we could total 7,700 total people pass through the convention center. Amazing. Largest ever turning point action event. I want to just emphasize because, you know, there's these really lazy, overweight people that just tweet turning point, doesn't do anything except events. Like really? Okay. Let me tell you something beyond the obvious. You have to be really, you have to be a really bitter person. I hate bitterness to say something like that, but let me just kind of give you one number. Over 700 people signed up to become precinct committee. Just at this event, 700 has the RNC done that recently, 700 people. In fact, my advice to the Trump campaign is every single time you do a rally, you should be signing people up to become precinct committee. My number one call to action was go to tpaction.com or go to the turning point action booth and sign up 700 people signed up who were otherwise not precinct committee men. These are the grassroots workers. These are precinct captains. We will not win if we don't fill these positions. And that's just one of many. We have over a hundred new turning point USA high school or college chapters that are going to be started from this event this last weekend. So yeah, there was the pizzazz, there was all that stuff, but we're about grassroots action, grassroots action. The event was just a starting point for taking back America, taking that energy and taking that enthusiasm and directing it towards a specific output.
"federal government" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Hey everybody, it's the end of the Charlie Kirk Show. Reflections and some breaking news from our Turning Point Action Conference, how the Secret Service threw us a curve ball. Same Secret Service that can't find the cocaine in the White House, or whose cocaine it is. Whose cocaine is it anyway? And we also talk about the straw poll results and more. Email me freedom at charliekirk.com. Get involved with Turning Point USA. Make sure you listen to the end of this episode for a giveaway opportunity and get involved with Turning Point USA, tpusa.com. That is tpusa.com. Buckle up everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandtodd.com. I want to say thank you, thank you, thank you to our amazing Turning Point action staff. We had our chapter leadership summit brought to Turning Point USA in the days before it. No other team could have pulled off what we pulled off and what we had to overcome, and I'm going to share that in great detail. For those of you that watched at home, I hope you enjoyed it. It was the largest event of the summer and honestly one of the largest of the year. We had over 6,000 people, actually had 7,000 people try to attend when you had, you know, here's a little lesson. When you do events, usually you'll have, and we have an algorithm for this, or the formula we've developed, algorithm's not the right word, the formula, you'll have 80 to 85 percent people show up, and depending on the speaker, 70, 75 percent people show up. When you have Megyn Kelly, you have Tucker, and you have Donald Trump, all one after the other. We had something like 96 and a half percent of people show up, and all at once. It was absolutely, it was unheard of. It was the highest turnout we've ever had as far as ticketing in there, and the Turning Point staff handled it amazingly. There was definitely some frustration with getting into the event. I'm going to tell you all about it because some people were definitely upset, and they should be. It was a three-hour wait to get in, and it involved the Secret Service. Interestingly, you know, there was no wait on Sunday when the Secret Service wasn't around. I mean, the same Secret Service, by the way, that can't tell you who's cocaine, it is in the White House. But first, I want to talk about all the good news, and I wanted to say thank you for you guys that had the patience, that supported the event, that prayed for the event. We were really, really blown away by the people that stopped us in the hall, people that said thank you. Charlie, listen to the show. I watch you on Real America's Voice. Charlie, I listen to you on the Salem Radio Network. Charlie, I listen to the podcast. It really touched us, and you guys were patient, and you guys were amazing, and it was an amazingly successful event. So let's get to the recap here. President Donald Trump gave a 110-minute speech. I got to tell you, President Trump, he goes all in. So he arrives there, and he does like 50 pictures with every police officer that he could find. You want a picture of you? It was like Oprah. Do you want a picture, and you want a picture, and you want a picture, and you want a picture? And then Tucker's there. He talks to Tucker for 20 minutes. Megyn Kelly's there backstage, talks to Megyn Kelly for 20, 30 minutes. The guy's a machine. Then he goes up and gives a 110-minute speech. He's 77 years old. We receive thousands of emails criticizing Trump. The energy level of this guy is incredible. Incredible. And then he goes on and has a three-hour dinner afterwards. It's just something else. Biden's State of the Union was 72 minutes, and it felt like a marathon. You're kind of like, is this guy going to make it? Is he going to make it? Is he going to make it? And Trump, I at the Turning Point Action Conference, standing room only. We had just people all over the place. It was incredible. Fire Marshal had to close us down and say, enough. And we can't fight the Fire Marshal. It is what it is. And so we had great attendance. It was incredible. Vivek Ramaswamy spoke earlier in the evening. Now, for those that remember, Chris Christie declined our invitation. Nikki Haley declined our invitation. Mike Pence declined our invitation. And Ron DeSantis declined our invitation. Ron DeSantis is a terrific governor of Florida. I don't like people that are rewriting the history. He has been and remains a great governor of Florida. He's done some amazing things, banning critical race theory, what he's done with the new college, what he did with Disney I fully support. He's not been running a good presidential campaign, and he made a major mistake to not show up at this event. We'll dive into that in great detail. Vivek Ramaswamy gave a barn burner speech. And so we had a question of, who do you want to be president of the United States? Donald Trump with 85 percent. The more interesting question, though, is, OK, who is your second choice? Vivek Ramaswamy won with 51 percent as the second choice. And the obvious lesson is, if you show up, you're going to win. Vivek showed up. He did press. He did media. He was on like no sleep. He did an after party. He did an influencer meetup. And Ron DeSantis, I think, received four percent in his home state. If Ron DeSantis would have showed up, he would have done very well. Ron DeSantis could have won over a lot of our audience. He would have been treated very respectfully, obviously. In fact, I said this privately. I'll say it again. We're going to play a piece of paper. I said this. Ron DeSantis should have showed up and he should have done an open mike and say, if you disagree with me, go to the front of the line. If you don't like what I'm doing, go to the front of the line. That's what I do on college campuses. Governor DeSantis would have earned people's respect by doing that. Dodging voters you need to win over is not a path to victory. Just a little taste here. You know that they love Donald Trump, but I think it's more interesting, at least in this sense, is how Vivek Ramaswamy is ascendant. In fact, I believe Vivek is going to overtake Ron DeSantis very soon as second place in the Republican primary. I see it. We know the base very well. Almost every prediction we've made. I'll tell you, I think Vivek's turning point in his campaign was when Vivek took our public advice, which was to go down to Miami and to say it's outrageous that Donald Trump was being charged federally. I was mocked by Ron DeSantis consultants and influencers. I was mocked by people in many presidential campaigns because that tweet went totally viral. Vivek Ramaswamy went from sixth place to now second place. No one heard of it. That's not totally true. Some people had six months ago, but only if you watch Fox News and especially Tucker, but he was not a household name. Vivek Ramaswamy went down to Miami, Florida, and he benefited from the 600 different media outlets that were there. So you have President Trump, obviously he wins 85%. That was my prediction. And by the way, the poll was done by Trafalgar. We had no access to the poll. We had no inside information about the poll. We had no updates about the poll. It was literally we got a report at the end and that was it. It was that simple. I swear to you, people say, Oh, Charlie, you manipulated. Okay. If you think we manipulated, you should have just walked in the room. Do you support Trump? You don't need to manipulate what you can see with your own eyes. And so we get, we get the results. And I said, boy, I think Vivek is going to do very well. And I do want to, I do want to ruminate on this because Vivek Ramaswamy is running the campaign that Ron DeSantis should have run, which is he refuses to attack Donald Trump. He refuses to attack his voters. He's reading the room and he's making principled, clear, wise statements. And it goes to show that, yeah, you can actually ascend in the Republican primary if you understand the Republican base. So 85.7% selected Donald Trump for president, 51.2% as second, second choice for president. Carrie Lake won our vice presidential straw poll with 30.8%. And there were some other top line, um, really important takeaways here. And I just want to make sure I'm making this clear. Had Ron DeSantis attended, people would have been way more positive on him. Ron DeSantis could have worked media row. He could have done an influencer reception. He could have gone and taken selfies and pictures. He could have put his hand around people. In fact, you know, because of just, let's say less than desirable, uh, the waiting lines that we had to come into turning point made Maricopa County look like, uh, an expedited thing. You know, people, I think appreciate when you go and you look at them in the eyes and you shake their hands and you take pictures. I did it for an hour and a half. And I think Ron DeSantis would have really benefited from doing that. It's a missed opportunity, but it seems as if those missed opportunities are, are building.
"federal government" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"On her <Speech_Female> <Advertisement> and her colleagues <Speech_Female> <Advertisement> to be <Speech_Music_Female> <Advertisement> prepared for <Speech_Music_Female> <Advertisement> anything. <Speech_Music_Female> <Advertisement> I'm Elizabeth <Speech_Music_Female> trovo, <Speech_Music_Female> her marketplace. <SpeakerChange> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Advertisement> <Music> <Advertisement> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Music> <Speech_Music_Male> <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Music_Male> This final <Speech_Music_Male> note on the way out today <Speech_Male> in which we paraphrase <Speech_Male> the concept with which <Speech_Male> we started ways <Speech_Male> in which the federal <Speech_Male> government is <Speech_Male> not like a business. <Speech_Male> The <Speech_Male> debt limit's not like a <Speech_Male> family credit card <Speech_Male> either no matter how many <Speech_Male> times you hear that, but <Speech_Male> I mention it <Speech_Male> because data out from the <Speech_Male> Federal Reserve bank of New <Speech_Male> York today shows that for <Speech_Male> the first time in <Speech_Male> 20 years <Speech_Male> household credit <Speech_Male> card debt did <Speech_Male> not decline <Speech_Male> in the first <Speech_Male> quarter. <Speech_Male> Usually what happens is <Speech_Male> we spend our ways through <Speech_Male> the holidays and pay it down <Speech_Male> January through March. <Speech_Male> Not <Speech_Male> this year, though, possibly <Speech_Male> a sign that <Speech_Male> we're all leaning on <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> plastic to keep <Speech_Male> up on that spending <Speech_Male> we are doing.
"federal government" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"At the height of the pandemic state and federal governments gave rural hospitals hundreds of billions of dollars in aid. Both to help with staffing and to help handle increase patient loads. That aid, for the most part, has dried up and those hospitals are now seeing fewer patients. And now, in some states, especially Texas and others that haven't expanded Medicaid, there is a real risk of hospital closures. A new federal lifeline, though, is offering millions of dollars to help keep their emergency rooms open. Marketplaces Elizabeth throwball went out to east Texas to do some reporting. So this is our ER. This is our narciss London walks meet through saint Luke's memorial hospital in San Augustine, Texas, a town of about 2000 people. She explains what the hospital can do. We have an OB room, so if we have a mom coming in who was pregnant, having some kind of difficulty, that's where we can do a delivery. And what the hospital can't do. Anymore, that is. So this is our psych observation room. But because of our change in staffing, that's not a patient that we can keep here because I can't afford to have one nurse taught up with one patient with one on one observation. London is in charge of patient services here at the small single story red brick hospital. It's hard work, doing more with less to provide the best medical care possible to this remote area, roughly 20 miles from the Louisiana border. Lately, they just haven't seen many patients just one a day on average. Forcing them to eliminate inpatient services and jobs. We lost a total of 17 and a facility. Nearly a third of its staff London tears up when we discuss layoffs. But she understands the cuts are necessary, so the hospital can keep its doors open for emergencies. And some outpatient services like radiology and physical therapy. While patient volume has been down costs are up, Monty boswick is president of saint Luke's east Texas hospitals. And when you're already operating at a deficit, if you see your operating expenses going up, but there's no more money coming in than let's see what else we can do. What they did was take advantage of a new pot of government money specifically for rural emergency hospitals. The hospital in San Augustine was already getting government cash through a program that required them to have inpatient beds. The new program allows them to eliminate inpatient care and keep their funding. But boss book says it won't be enough. We instill anticipate operating at a negative deficit. Boswick and others are trying to avoid the fate of the 76 rural hospitals that have closed nationwide since 2010, which is especially important to this community's aging population. Including longtime resident Wesley hoyt, who is relied on this hospital since he was in high school in the 1960s. I had an accident up here at a fieldhouse where one of those huge circular fans struck me in the head. They brought me here to this hospital. Just a few years back, quite had another crisis. And when I started getting dressed, I noticed that my left side suddenly went numb. He got a ride to the hospital. They had run me into a CT scan. Because of the scan, they were able to give him a treatment to minimize the effects of the stroke. They gave it to him before he was flown to the veterans hospital in Houston. He says, without that treatment, he might have ended up paralyzed. Had it not been for the quick thinking women up here at this hospital. I mean, they literally saved my life. One of the quick thinking women behind the San Augustine emergency room is penny Russell, a battle tested nurse practitioner. It is stressful in the middle of the night when there's four people in the whole hospital. And your lab radiology tech is trying to perform their job and you have 5 or 7 patients. It's on her to handle whatever comes through the door. An emergency tracheotomy, delivering a 27 week old preemie. The aftermath of an oil re explosion or wood chip mill accident. I have had those patients that you just, you can't get them out of here. And there's nothing you can do. And you accept that you do the best you can do. And you pray a lot. With a bare bone staff. It's
"federal government" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"Coming up, we instill anticipate operating at a negative deficit. Well, that can't be good. First, though, let's do the numbers. Down industrial is up 47 points on this Monday, a tenth percent, 33,348, the NASDAQ up 80 points 8 zero points two thirds of a percent closed at 12,365. The S&P 500 added 12 about three tenths percent, 41 and 36. Brokerage firm Charles Schwab moved up 4% after an upgrade from Raymond James, Raymond James said worries about bank stability in the United States have not weakened Schwab's ability to draw in new accounts and thus assets. Fidelity grew a 10% Robin Hood gave back about 1%. Shake Shack beefed up 7 and 8 tenths of 1% today The Wall Street Journal reported that the activist investor engaged capital which owns about a 6.6% share in that fast food chain has its site on three board seats at the company. I don't know if it comes with fries or not. White House in congressman Jim negotiations on the nation's dead ceiling tomorrow told you about that deadline just a couple of weeks away. Meanwhile, total consumer debt in this economy, new record in the first quarter of this year, that's according to new figures from the New York Federal Reserve. Borrowing seated $17 trillion for the first time. Bond prices fail yield on the ten year T note rose to 3.50%.
"federal government" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"If you're looking to fly this summer and maybe haven't booked your tickets yet, here's the thing. Google has got a new feature it's rolling out on Google flights where, depending on the actual flight, it'll keep monitoring the price after you book and if the price drops, Google will pay you the difference. Automatically and for free. Other sites do offer their own versions of price guarantees, yes, true. Not for free, though. But let's talk business model here for a second, shall we? Why do this and how remunerative is it anyway? Marketplace is Samantha fields. Has that one? My process for booking flights usually goes something like this. Check kayak, check Google, check different airline websites, and get increasingly stressed and cranky, wondering if I'll find something cheaper if I wait. The vast majority of the time that isn't going to happen. Mike arnett at the airline analytics company cerium says that's assuming I'm looking for tickets less than three months before I want to travel. That's when most people book, he says, and airlines know this, so that's also when ticket prices tend to start going up. If I had to tell my mom, when she should book a flight to get the best fare on offer, I would say three to four months out, you're likely to get those lowest fares that are available. And they're not likely to magically reappear. This is not a hard and fast rule. It does vary by root and airline and whether you're flying economy or business class. Airlines have a ton of data they use to constantly adjust fares and maximize revenue for different routes, and they aren't sharing it. The closest that we have as consumers are the online travel agencies, the kayaks and the hoppers of the world. And the big behemoth, which is Google flights. These sites also have years of data on booking and flight prices, more actually than any one airline. At the travel app hopper, lead economist Haley Berg says they've been tracking global airfare prices for more than ten years. Our archive is up to, I think at last measurement, maybe 80 or 85 trillion price itinerary. That's trillion with a T and she says they use those trillions of past flight itineraries and prices to train their algorithm. And we take all of that data and a very complex price prediction, and boil it down into something very simple and user friendly, which is a recommendation. Book now or wait. Those recommendations, she says, are accurate about 95% of the time. Still, somehow, that doesn't really lessen my anxiety around booking flights and talking to Jade Kessler at Google flights, it sounds like it's not just me. One of the things that we often hear from people is that they really want to know if they're getting a good deal or not on the airfare. She says that's a big reason why Google is piloting this new free price drop guarantee on certain flights with certain airlines if you book on Google, then we monitor the price every day until take off and we automatically pay you back the difference if there's a price drop. Other sites do different versions of this at hopper and certain airlines, for example, you can freeze the price of a flight for a little while. But you have to pay for it, kind of like buying insurance. Mike arnett at Syria says it's pretty low stakes for Google to offer this price drop guarantee for free because they make their money when you do a search and you click on an ad. And they make so much money that the risk to Google of having to pay out to a passenger is really a drop in the bucket. In a way, it wouldn't be for other companies, like hopper, kayak, or Expedia, that make money by taking a cut of bookings people make through their sites. Plus, right now, Google is only offering the guarantee on a limited basis. So limited, in fact, that I found it hard to find a flight that had it at all. I did eventually on some spirit flights from New York to Miami
"federal government" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"We've been talking for weeks now months, I think, actually, about how all the ajita in regional banking and the year plus of interest rate increases by the Federal Reserve have led to tighter credit. Loans are harder to get money's more expensive, things are just tighter. And while banks are pulling back a bit, there is opportunity here too, specifically what are called shadow banks to step in and fill the business loan void. Lauren hirsch wrote about it for The New York Times the other day, Lawrence good to have you on again. Thanks for having me. Okay, we got to define some terms here shadow banks, please. Shout out banks is actually a bit of a controversial term. If you got some feedback on my original article. The IMF defines it as basically any financial institution that doesn't take deposits but loans. So that can be money market funds. That could be hedge funds, I think private equity firms and the big kind of distinguishing factor between your apollos or the world and your JPMorgan is Apollo doesn't take deposits. So it doesn't have kind of everyday customers giving you your cash and leaving it there. Does it tell you anything that the shadow banks don't like to be called shadow banks? It tells you a lot. They hate it. They view it as a PR problem. But many people just view it as kind of a definition of what they are better or for worse. Fair enough. But anyway, the reason we got you on the phone is because these shadow banks rather to be clear are playing an ever increasing role in lending in this economy. And I want you to tell me how that's come to pass. So it's really been almost a decade long trend. After the financial crisis, the government put in a lot of regulations on the biggest banks. That was all a part of God Frank. I think many people would argue at this point, most of those regulations were a good idea. But what happens is when there's more regulations, the cost of capital goes up and it becomes more complicated to extend loans. And so money and a lot of the lending business ended up leaving the regulated banks and it ended up going to the Apollo's black zone to the world because they could effectively move much faster and extending loans and occasionally even be loans that your traditional very large regulated bank might not be able to do. Talk to me then about the risk involved here because banks are regulated for a reason. And if shadow banks aren't regulated, but are increasing their share of the loan business in this economy, where are we? Well, that's the $1 million potentially $1 billion question. The biggest concern if you chat with industry advocates or academics is you have a huge portion of the economy moving over to these unregulated institutions. And not only are they not kind of privy to the same requirements as your large banks, but you just by definition have less information about them. And so it's almost impossible for us to have full clarity and inside as to whether or not there are mistakes that have been made. Now, if you talk to the industry, they say a couple of things. First, because they aren't a bank without deposits. If they do make a mistake, the only one that is harmed in their views is their own investors. So that's their defense. I think who wins out in the risk analysis is still yet to be seen. It's incumbent on me to point out here that, as you mentioned, the rise in this kind of lending has taken place over the last decade or so. The last decade or so was a time of extraordinarily low interest rates with until relatively recently not a great likelihood of recession. And it's just different now. It's just different now. And so we are in this great experiment. We have this industry that has built up over the past ten years. It's poised to become even bigger, frankly, as, you know, the regional banks fall, the larger bank to kind of constrained. And it's just a totally untested model. The one thing that everyone has been saying over the past 6 months to me is it's really easy to make money when everyone is making money. You know, what interest rates for women interest rates are low and this is an entirely different environment. I covered the bankruptcy advice this morning. There were a couple other bankruptcies that happened and there's more to come. You know, we're seeing defaults. And so the big question will be, are these systems in these loans that they've put out, you know, can they effectively withstand it? Well, yeah, and to that end and real quick on the way out here, the treasury secretary, Janet Yellen has said she wants to bring shadow banks under a more regulatory strict sort of paradigm. Do you anticipate that actually happening? She has said that, you will hear noise every now and then I will tell you when I talk to people kind of behind the scenes. I do get the sense it's maybe fourth or 5th on their priority list. It's not one or two. You know, they've been effectively been putting on a fire with the regional bank crisis. There's obviously debt ceiling drama going on right now. And so it does seem like something that tends to go to the bottom of this priority until
"federal government" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"Because most Californians reside in federally declared disasters due to recent flooding mudslides and winter storms. There's a climate angle to everything. And shrinking revenues are especially problematic right now, says Alex arnon with the Penn Wharton budget model. We are relying on what comes in every day to finance what has to go out every day. Lawmakers thought they had until late summer to work out a deal before the government ran out of cash, in part thanks to this surprise tax revenue shortfall, the debt ceiling crunch is here now. I'm Savannah marr for marketplace. So repeat after me running the federal government is not like running a business. Case in point and again, it's a cash flow thing, clawing back money the government has appropriated, but hasn't spent yet specifically pandemic relief funds. One possible emphasis here on the word possible area of agreement as those debt limit talks go on is a Republican demand to take that money back. President Biden has said the idea is quote on the table. Thing is there is not a whole lot of unspent money left. Marketplaces Henry ep went looking to see how much might still be out there. Congress passed 6 big spending bills in response to COVID totaling $4.6 trillion, according to the government accountability office. And the GAO's Kristen kosilla says most of that money is gone. By far the vast majority of the funds have been obligated, there are these amounts that are left. The exact amount left is not totally clear. It was about $90 billion. The last time GAO made an estimate at the end of January, now it could be as little as 30 billion, says Bill hoagland, a senior vice president with the bipartisan policy center. If you could call that a nice uncle change, so to speak, but it is in the grand scheme of things. It's a small piece of the negotiations. And it would be a tiny part of this year's federal deficit of over $900 billion. Still, 30 billion isn't nothing, among other things, it's supposed to go towards modernizing outdated unemployment insurance systems, and providing health services to tribal communities. But it's not clear that all of the unobligated funds can be clawed back, says marielle Lopez Santana, an associate Professor of policy and government at George Mason university. I think it's going to be very daily call to do this, right? Because we're talking about hundreds of agencies. Not to mention all the states, municipalities, and tribes that might be expecting this money. I'm Henry app for marketplace. Equities on this Monday, debt limit fears such as they ever existed, which was TBH, not very much, do seem to have dissipated a bit. We'll have the
"federal government" Discussed on WLS-AM 890
"Because I hate overselling so huge. You're not major and I stay tuned now. It's not here. But it's a cool announcement. Did you connect me here? By the way, where your piece is flooded around. But hang out for that. Why? You can do it now. I'm almost gonna care. He's like, we'll wait for the break, wait. I just said like the things that they don't buy you can say, oh no, it's key. It's key, folks. If you watch it on Fox nation, everybody tune out. As if this show has ever had a fourth wall. Thank you. I appreciate that. So I do have a cool announcement coming up. Before we get to that, I don't know if you know this, but in the federal government, they have these requirements for a polygraph test sometimes every couple of years and sensitive national security positions. Now, I was unaware of this that the president of the United States himself has to go through this sometimes a totally completely unaware of this. Now, Jim has a network of reporters he met through the dark web with all his shenanigans there. You know, the dark web does have its benefits. He winds up meeting a lot of people who, you know, you wouldn't run across in your regular normal life, you know what I mean. But there's a group out there and a couple of these people slip to Jim on the DL for the liberals. That means the down low. They slip to him audio recordings of Joe Biden's last polygraph test for national security purposes. Folks, this is breaking news. So media Talking Heads, you may want to tune in. Jim, great work on this. Play, this is revelatory. Check this out. Okay, mister president, first question. Were you ever part of the civil rights movement? I got involved in the civil rights movement as a public defender as my colleagues know. I was a kid getting out of law school. I'm sorry, that's wrong. Let's try that again. I got started politics because of the civil rights movement. No, sir. Again. I involved the civil rights movement in the world. I know. This will got me involved in civil rights as a kid when I was 26 years old. Please
"federal government" Discussed on The Ben Shapiro Show
"My daughter actively considered buying stock. I'm not kidding. Does that explain to her how the stock market works? And so she's like, can I buy a share of a company? I was like, you can. You can, in fact, buy a share of a company. The joys of business. Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate. So how stupidly woke have things become? Things have become so stupidly woke, that even people who are antislavery are now being canceled because they're not antislavery enough in their depictions of the evils of slavery. There's an article in The New York Times that is titled in Vermont, a school and artist fight over murals of slavery. Created to depict the brutality of enslavement, the works are seen by some as offensive. The school wants them permanently covered. The artist has their historically important. So what happened? Well, apparently, for years, when students in Vermont law and graduate school came to Shirley Jefferson with objections to the murals in the student center, and their depictions of black people had struck some as racist caricatures. The longtime black administrator urged those protesting to move on. Miss Jefferson, who is 69 is no stranger to racism or protest. She was born in segregated Selma, Alabama in 1953 and helped to integrate her high school. She said I told them, you did not come here to fight over him. You know, you came to get educated. Then came the summer of 2020, and Jefferson and others found a renewed commitment to confront embedded racism. She said when George Floyd was killed, all of a sudden I said to myself that mural has got to go. But the artist who painted the mural, a person named Sam Carson, who is white. Fought back against the plan. Why do you fight back against the plan? Well, because he says, number one, it is a major work. It is my life. It's important that it be there. And it's historically important and about what it says about black people rising up to resist. And it's important as a record of what we said in 1993. The two murals are each 24 feet long and they depict the brutality of slavery with scenes, including a slave market, a slave owner wheeling a whip and an attacking dog. They also show white vermonters, protesting slavery, and helping people escape to freedom via The Underground Railroad. The styles more expressive and then realistic and it was inspired by Mexican muralists like Jose Clemente orozco. So now the law school has covered the paintings with white panels, so as not to offend anyone, even though again, the entire point of the murals is that slavery is extremely bad and white people participated in it. But it's not enough. They must come down because modern sensibilities are offended. This is similar to a bit of a spat that we had yesterday on Twitter. In which ibram X kendi tweeted out pictures of the first president is during president's day. He's like, many of these people were slaveholders. 8 out of the first 12 presidents were slaveholders. And held thousands of slaves combined, and this is something you should remember, America was founded in slavery, not in freedom. And so I responded by saying, many of those people also wrote the constitution that provided for its future amendment attempted to abolish the slave trade by 1808, and also created the freedom that you are getting rich off of today. And this, of course, made some people very angry, made some people very, very angry because you're supposed to only focus on the evils of the past. This is the beautiful thing about the modern woke generation. Modern world generation is the only they're the only good people to ever have been born. They are perfect in every single way. And so everyone who came before them must be cast out into the outer darkness because all those people were flawed, but they are not flawed. They have all the right views. Today, now tomorrow they won't have the right ideas, and they'll be forced to Neil and bend before the prevailing status quo. But for the moment, they are riding the high horse of moral privilege, and at high horse and moral privilege says that these people who have provided no actual service to society who've never done anything of actual value have actually been a negative drain on society's resources in many ways because all they do is chip away at the society that creates wealth and freedom. These people are spending their days stewing in hatred for people who died 200 years ago and also were kind of important and did things. It is amazing how people who uselessly sit there and tweet things on Twitter think that they are more important in world historical figures than people who actually did things like found the United States of America. All right, guys, the rest of the show is continuing right now. You're not going to want to miss it. We will be getting into the mailbag. So make sure that you are a member because only your questions will be answered. Become a member, use code superior, check out for two months free on all annual plans. Click the link in the description and join us.
"federal government" Discussed on The Ben Shapiro Show
"Is a hell of a lot better than equality and poverty and oppression. But it's going to be a multi generational commitment that never ends because you can never reach full equality. You can never reach a point where there is no poverty. It must remain the responsibility of agencies across the federal government says Joe Biden. It therefore continues to be the policy of my administration to advance. An ambitious whole of government approach to racial equity and support for underserved communities and continuously embed equity into all aspects of federal decision making. It's an idea that's going to eat everything you understand. Every single area, environmental policy, economic policy, school policy, as you see. And sure, the results are going to be absolutely egregious. But you are following your star. You're following the star of equity. Every agency of the government, according to this document, quote, must ensure they haven't placed an agency equity team within their respective agencies to coordinate the implementation of equity initiatives and ensure that their respective agencies are delivering equitable outcomes for the American people. Every single agent now I have a question. Where does the president of the United States get the authority to do any of this? None of this was the authority given to the executive branch by Congress. Nowhere did Congress give the president of the United States the executive authority to implement an entire policy prescription for all of regulatory government for generations. That is not a thing that Congress ever did. There's a massive seizure of power. It should be challenged in the courts. First of all, it is violative of the equal protection clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the constitution. But beyond that, the legislature, I mean, Kevin McCarthy in the house, they better get their asses on this thing. They better be putting forward to build tomorrow to repeal this executive order. And forced Democrats to actually vote on this thing. Forced Joe Manchin and kyrsten sinema to vote along with Democrats to uphold a racial equity lens for all of American government. When designing developing acquiring and using artificial intelligence and automated systems says this executive order in the federal government, agency shall do so consistent with applicable law in a manner that advances equity. So even AI is now going to be given equity principles within which to operate. The government wide goal for federal procurement dollars awarded to small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals shall be 15% in fiscal year, 2025. So now the federal government is essentially going to engage in affirmative action when it comes to giving. Not giving. When it comes to actual small business loans, so we are now going to look at companies and say, is this company run by a black person? If so, you get the loan. If the company is run by an impoverished white person from Ohio living these Palestinian, screw it, not going to happen. Again, I can't stress this enough. Joe Biden openly says he wants to embed this in every single department of the federal government every single department. There are no departments that are not affected by this executive order. So what you are seeing in schools right now is, in fact, just the tip of the iceberg. It is a thing that the federal government would love to do every to every single area of American life. Every single one. That equity focused leadership across the federal government, those agency equity teams, those strike forces that exist within every single agency of the federal government are going to be making policy. That privileges certain groups above other groups, depending on who is quote unquote disadvantaged and which groups are quote unquote underserved. It is racist. It is terrifying, and it should be something that Kevin McCarthy and the House Republicans get on right now. Whatever they are doing is less important than this thing, because you embed this throughout the federal bureaucracy for generations, and that is effectively the end of the constitutional bargain and the bargain of the Declaration of Independence to boot. Again, in just a second, we're going to be getting to Joe Biden who, while he is trying to affect world breaking change here at home, is botching the English language over in Ukraine first. You know, you may have noticed that there are a lot of emergencies that happen all the time lately. Whether you're talking about an earthquake in turkey, whether you're talking about a train derailment in Ohio, there may be situations that arise in your life where you can't get to the pharmacy, or where the supply chains break, and your pharmacy just doesn't have the medication you need. This is why I got emergency medications from Jace medical. The FDA actually just declared
"federal government" Discussed on The Ben Shapiro Show
"So if you like what you're seeing in education, wait until you see what Joe Biden just unleashed. Now he did this just before a long weekend, which is always the best time to dump giant political news. You dump it right before a long weekend. So February 16th, which, again, was last week. He jumped into it. It was very little notice, not reported on an executive order. On further advancing racial equity and support for underserved communities through the federal government. Now, that sounds like nice, right? I mean, this is all happy talk, jargon. Advancing racial equity. That sounds like we would love Rachel equity. Now what they mean by racial equity is equal outcome by group identity, which of course is nonsense. Racial equity when we hear racial equity here is racial equality, meaning everybody should be treated the same on an individual level by the law, which we all agree with. Racial equity means something quite different. It means that if there's a disparate impact of a law, you have to change the law. If a law is facially neutral and treats every individual of the same, but criminals happen to unfortunately be more prevalent in particular groups in the population, say men versus women. Well then obviously that's a disparate impact and the law is to blame. Any failure of outcome is ibram X kendi on steroids. It is the misuse of the most powerful branch of the most powerful government in human history. In order to restructure all of American society along the guises of racial equity, equity is not the same as equality. Equity is about social justice, not actual justice, which is the social justice is the opposite of actual individual justice. That's why it's called social, as opposed to just justice. And support for underserved communities through the federal government. And again, even the term underserved communities suggests that communities that are quote unquote underperforming is not because there are social pathologies that exist in cultures in particular communities, which they're absolutely do. Trying to pretend that the cultural attitudes toward education are the same. In state, Korean American households versus inner city black households. On average, not individually on average, pretending that there are no differences whatsoever is obviously silly. It's not true. That has nothing to do with race, and it has everything to do with pathologies of culture that exist. And again, there are differences that are good in their differences that are bad across cultures. But this is a difference that is particularly beneficial for Asian Americans, which is why they outperform academically. That is not because Asians are genetically superior, it's because many cultures in Asia actually value education. Can spend more time studying. Parents put a lot of pressure on their kids to study. Parents are married more often in the Asian community. These are all things that contribute to the life of a child. We all understand this on an individual level. As soon as you start talking about it socially, everybody gets real quiet. It's real nervous. Now there's no reason to be nervous about that stuff because it says nothing about race. It has nothing to do with genetics. It has nothing to do with skin color. It has everything to do with the ways in which people live in congregate. And those are all things that if you wish to succeed, you want an individual level, you can change those things. Biden administration thing. The Biden administration thinks that if one community is quote unquote underperforming, it must be because they are underserved because the federal government is essentially God. The federal government is going to fix all grievous injustices in the world. They're going to write every wrong. They're going to fix every disparity. They're going to relieve the consequences of individual decision making that congregate by group. So what exactly does Joe Biden's new executive policy do? His new executive order, it is horrifyingly broad. This is a direct quote by advancing equity. The federal government can support and empower all Americans, including the many communities in America that have been underserved, discriminated against, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality. Now, I love the sort of terminology that everyone in America, who is a part of a minority group that is apparently not Asians or Jews, that everybody is quote adversely affected by persistent poverty, as the poverty is a sort of weird disease that sort of descends on you. Now, that attitude obviously is the precise opposite of inequality attitude, which suggests that poverty is something that you can actually move against on an individual level by making a series of good decisions. The success sequence that has come under attack by the left happens to be statistically durable. If you do not wish to live in persistent poverty, you as an individual have to do three things and three things only in the United States. One, finish high school. In the United States, that means basically able to do some math and basically able to read because high schools in the United States are largely garbage, depending on where you are. One, finish high school. Two, get a full time job. Go into the workforce. Don't be dependent on the government paycheck. Three, don't have babies before you're married. That's it. Those are the three things. You do those three things. Will not be permanently poor in the United States. But according to the Biden administration, that's not enough because communities are being affected by persistent poverty and inequality. And I love that they're being affected by inequality. Welcome to human life, where everyone is affected by inequality. Their inequalities literally every area of life. That does not mean that the inequality can be laid at the feet of the quote unquote system. Sometimes the inequality is because of behavior. Sometimes the inequality is because the inborn differences between people. I'm a 5 9 Jewish guy who can't jump. I ain't playing in the NBA anytime soon. By contrast, there are people who are not as smart as I am. Those people may not run a business. These inequalities exist throughout human life and pretending that every human being is born identical is simply ridiculous. It is not true. Now, that's one of the beauties of capitalism, by the way, is comparative advantage means
"federal government" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Are going to stand for the men and women who are serving us We are going to protect Florida jobs We are not going to let people be fired Joining me is Harold krant a professor at the Chicago camp college of law So how is desantis three and a half $1 million fine likely to withstand a court challenge I think it will stand if the state government has the authority under Florida law to enact such a ban States use their authority under either the general powers to act in an emergency and confront a disaster to preclude employers in their state from mandating vaccine This strike some of us as odd or bizarre but it does not likely violate any federal constitutional right but you have not recognized the federal constitutional right to pursue particular types of treatment for diseases And so in the absence of any kind of federal legislation mandating vaccines benefit within the state's rights to preclude a ban Let's turn to the vaccine mandate that osha has drafted and sent to The White House for review this week Does the federal government have the power to mandate a vaccine in that way So Congress is delegated to the president the power to ensure workplace safety And one of the aspects of workplace safety is that workers be free from any kind of exposure to diseases during their working hours So osha which is the total agency in charge of insurance safety regulates exposure to benzene exposure to asbestos and the argument here which we will see is that the administration believes that exposure to COVID sits in with the same kinds of measures that have been taken before to protect workers in both private and public workplaces So is the legal test going to be whether or not there's an emergency Also has the power to issue an emergency standard it doesn't take an effect tool it's published Right now the target date is December 8th And then supposedly understand it which is kind of heroic It has to create a permanent standard or withdraw the temporary standard within 6 months thereafter But I think it might be helpful just to look at the language that the Congress used because the question will be challenged in court if they determine the employees are quote exposed to grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful then they can create a standard So is there a grave danger from exposure That's really going to be the question that was one that hasn't been litigated much in court Osha has rarely issued a temporary emergency standard in the past And so the private companies challenging ocean's authority will say there is no longer a grave danger where sufficiently vaccinated and therefore there is no power in the federal government to mandate vaccines in the workplace So taking the situation in Texas private businesses face this dilemma violate the federal vaccine mandate or violate the state vaccine ban Companies are in an unbelievable situation right You have to either comply with the osha standard or with the mandate from the governor of Texas And what's interesting from a legal perspective is governor Abbott claims that this is an emergency in an emergency He has these over inherent powers to regulate private businesses which in some ways is a mirror image of what President Biden is arguing through osha as well So obviously if there's a conflict using the federal government wins out under the supremacy clause at least with respect to federal instrumentalities but our contractors but probably will win out with respect to private companies as well But that will be up for the courts and they'll have to determine two things whether the agency has exceeded its authority in providing for this vaccine mandate And secondly even if it has whether the state has the power to override it with respect to state employee situations So if this question does get to the Supreme Court how are the justices likely to rule Congress does seem to have given the federal government authority to regulate harmful substances in the workplace and exposure to COVID is no big reach So even though the current Supreme Court has articulated an interest in limiting the power of Congress to delegate wide areas of authority to the agencies I think at least with respect to regulating the workplace for the Biden administration is on powerful ground It's not unassailable We've never done this before unprecedented to have this kind of regulation reaching so deeply into the private workforce So some members of the Supreme Court may be skeptical But I think the language of the statute in terms of grave danger fits much more readily with what osha is trying to do with this temporary emergency standard Thanks Hal That's Harold grant of the Chicago Kent college of law Coming up next on the Bloomberg show in the first trial at college admissions scandal two parents were found guilty on all charges What are the likely a pellet issues I'm joon grosso and you're listening.
"federal government" Discussed on 790 KABC
"Federal government generally has greater legal authority over transportation when it crosses state lines. Dr. Anthony Fauci calls the corona virus outbreak and ongoing and very serious situation. When you look at the number of new infections that we have, it's still at a very Very high rate hospitalizations air up there a certain areas of the country, the NIH veteran told White House reporters at the outbreak. Maybe as he put it, Plateau Ng. He said Scientists are paying very close attention to a virus mutations, but said people should still plan on getting vaccinated. He insists the vaccinations are effective against mutations. The city of Long Beach is now offering certain grocery store workers hero pay due to the pandemic. The ordinance signed into law by Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia requires establishments with at least 300 employees nationwide or more than 15 employees per grocery store in Long Beach. Today Workers an additional $4 an hour for at least 120 days. The California Grocers Association calls the mandate illegal and it's filed lawsuit in federal court saying and I'm quoting It interferes with the collective bargaining process and singles out only certain grocers while ignoring other retail workers and workers in other industries. Sharon reared in K ABC News, a famous face made it through the vaccination line at Dodger Stadium yesterday. Needle down Arnold Schwarzenegger is sharing on social media that he's been vaccinated for the coronavirus, the former governor of California and, of course, actor Perhaps best known for his work on the Terminator tweeted the video. Thank you. You're welcome. Congratulations. All right. That just got my vaccine. And.