Trump's market impact: Bitcoin, M&A, IPOs + transition picks; Polymarket CEO raided by FBI
01:23:23 Share

A everybody, welcome back to the all in podcast with us again today morning from malan, your favorite, the chairman dictator, to map Polly hopeless. A you look a little tired, my friend. Have you down of their body?

I left monday. I flew the singapore. I was on the ground for two days, and I flew here. I'm here for two days, and then I go to london for five days.

So you are on a world wind tour.

I mean, i'm based on flying around the world, literally flying around the world, moving west, man.

right? And this is all how in service. I mean, at our age, you feel IT hits differently when you when you pass forty.

And i'm assuming this is eighty ninety business we out there selling you're selling, you're selling rock. You selin eighty ninety. You're out there doing B, D.

little selling, little closing, and i'm speaking at the ox for union .

on wednesday. Okay, okay, let's fancy check .

the buckets.

Um okay, do you have IT? And in his camel hat and in his election after glove .

look after glow. He is in .

that afterglow. He has post, quote us, see a post election.

And where I got a cigarette, I I have a cigarette.

I was .

a close one.

I didn't think .

I was gna make IT, but you did.

So this is what now remember?

Remember when tim walls rolled out the camel has and you said that was gonna .

in the election, for he thought that he had a shot, was wrong about that .

be bey bey .

hunting. Person, you is very good to list fun.

That's my fun. Be belly .

belly quiet with hunting vibes.

That sounds like, like.

thanks. Well, i'm gna mess up that jack paul.

how I wear a different from that every week for the next four years.

absolutely fantastic. I mean.

the ratings are so many good ones.

I mean, all I care about at this point, i'm getting savage in any way possible. All I care about is ratings. Now lets go R N mega, get in the comments.

Let's get these ratings up. And with us, of course, the CEO of ohio. Oh, hello, David freeburg.

are you doing? But thanks for .

having me again. You, thank you. Good to be here. Yeah, how you doing?

I'm chilling, man. You know.

just nice to the executive producer to how you are on the show.

Yes, I been actually producing here. And you always, I am always thinking about your passengers. I was hearing a little I I heard you on a phone call before you said you had a perfect body. What is that in .

reference to my make me go? Yes, he makes me go to the dramatic logic where they, you examine your whole nude body to look for moles. So this morning I went in early to the german ologies SHE examined IT SHE said, perfect. I said.

does SHE have to wear sung glasses because you just so White, like it's just like it's blinding ly White.

SHE has a por.

She's like for the experience.

This is why we need to, uh.

in all seriousness, this is why sax we have to legalize psychiatrically. This poor woman has P, T, S, D. After that.

we need to get Better, get out of here. There was a wonderful examination. He was I mean.

okay. And of course i'm Jason canis and um you know there's been a lot of scuttle butt sacks. I don't know if you know this, but comedy might still be legal here on the own pocket but there has been a lot of scuttle of a debate, lot of energy. I are going .

to break the rules today. Finally, I don't .

know what people get a little sensitive sometimes.

Do have to put my pro back in.

You put your show, pro bacon show about following up petie dush back ah here again, you might. I know this, but a lot of appointments are being made. Sax, did you know that say you .

where that the appointments .

are being made? I'm aware, seen the flow of them. Well, I got a dump. I'm not going to say who to, but I actually got the next five or six announcement that trumps gonna. I am not going to .

say who gave to the chu this bit has the potential to be so good. I'm so tired, but you've got me awake. okay. Well.

well, is our first one.

Here's our first one. This is a very interesting good yeah here IT is this is a statement from Donald jay trump. IT is my great honor to announce that hundred biding of delaware will had a new department, the bureau of founder mode procurement.

Founder procurement. You know, this sex drop top, he doesn't want to have a reaction shot here. Next one up.

This is interesting. Tony inch Cliff, I don't know if you know him. He has been appointed to a new role.

He is the ambassage porter, reo. This is a good word to moth. Actually, a your wish has come true.

You are now your soul. Duty is to ensure all executive branch and network is on the point. The sweater inspector general, everybody's gonna perfect network. Netware are absolutely. Netware are. And I just.

that's a, that's a laugh. Y on a cash sweater in that picture.

apparent differently, i'm actually decided I would flip. I've gone full maga. Here I am. I have been APP pointed you for you sign you .

can have stifle competition .

from mark cuban for for that post I I went to.

he deleted all of his promising a tweet. Have you done the same? Uh no no.

Haven't ah you're you .

I know it's pretty great .

that really you have virtue. You didn't .

want to be hey, three berg, you've been appointed. Here we go. Uh, as Bobby Kenny's whipping boy and you will be officially his little bitch, uh, anything any innovation you come up with is officially blocked. And here is my great honor to announce David sax is now the chief retribution officer. Gratulation, well done.

Retribution must be had to.

L A.

Payback is a bit. There are a lot of people who are out line just a little bit, a little bit. They deserve to get smack .

a little bit in box on a little bit.

That's a little bit. When the water right.

We man different.

We fans and. There's been a lot of talk about a holiday party for very one up on the holiday party.

quite plug on the party. So the party is coming up in three weeks, the all in holiday spectacular T, V, O, K, under a boat and scary Richard's A K, A structure are going .

to be teaching. Several 是 doing a secret， DJ said. I may to actually .

like a good idea. We try a beat. We will have chess chAllenges with alexo teh.

Several sections are sold out. VIP is sold out. Oh, dream on, joining us. Dream on, great from the warrior.

He's gna come into a little bit with us on stage to be great. He's great. So should be great. Your tickets at all in the slash events?

All right, let's get into IT. Everybody just want to start with A A little bit of finance here. Bitcoin and finance stocks weigh up since the trump win, which was now ten days ago.

Uh, bitcoin peaked at ninety two thousand. unbelievable. IT dropped down to eighty nine.

But it's obviously that's an all time high. And as we all know, we talked about her on the show. Trump heavily, heavily quarter the crypto industry during his campaign.

In addition to the bitcoin news since early August, a firm, Robin hood, paypal, coin base, all a double or fifty percent, is an extraordinary run. In july, truck had lined a bitcoin conference. He laid out his plans.

Number one, he was going to fire S, C, C, chairman gary games iller. Here's the clip. One day one, I will fire gary gang ciller r, and a point, S, C.

I did know .

is that .

unpopular?

这 啥 就 别 不敢。 I didn't know you that unpopular. Let me say you again one day one, I will fire gary against.

Wow, there IT is okay.

Enough of that technical president can fire the c chair, but he can't point a new one when gary term ends in twenty twenty six or ga, ict resign and from takes office. That happens sometimes and folks are speculating gangster, or has already made that decision to step down. He put out a release with a quote in IT that a number of people took no, where he said it's been a great hour to serve with them.

The people who work at the esc, doing the people's work and ensuring our capital markets remain the best world. Trump also said the federal government will never sell, never ever sell its bitcoin holdings, uh, which they owned a criminal assets, as you know. And number three, he said he would create a bitcoin ency pda presidential advisory council where trump s that quote, the rules will be written by people who love your industry, not heat your industry.

And he also advocated that all future bitcoins would be mitted in america. I don't know that he gets to make that choice, but they have a freeburg. Any thoughts here on the crypto market and this incredible bull run here we've seen in the last, you know, ten days and then before that?

And I think like you said, it's not limited crypto. Crypto o is one market of several that have been expected by the outlook based on trumps election. Uh, I think the trump s election has a couple of key features that are changing market dynamics. One is folks kind of view some of policy is to be obviously stimulating with lower tax rates and more deregulation. This is know theoretically going to drive up investment and economic growth.

The d regulatory nature on its own benefits, markets that have been encumber red by regulatory oversight and regulatory chAllenges like crypto finance and fin tax are those types of businesses are clearly gonna benefit or expected to benefit significantly by being able to launch products more quickly and have features and ways that they can generate revenue that they might be chAllenged to do under the current regulatory scheme. As and then uh, there is also the element of kind of things being inflationary. The the feature of terms, if we don't get spending cut fast enough, there is an effect on market.

So now we're still seeing ten year treasury cited about four and half percent, up from three and a half percent, which is where we were right around the rate cut beginning in september. And remember, since the rate cut beginning in september, which cut seventy five basis points, and and we're still seeing the kind of attentive treasury hold high, which is in kind of employees that there is expected to be processing inflation. In fact, the october inflation number celerity again.

So it's back up, not going down. It's I think I went up to two point six percent, up from two point three percent. The mot prior.

These general kind of effect that are predicted from the trump policy plans is having an effect in different markets. Obviously, in equities, we're seeing more kind of risk seeking, risk taking. And then in the bond markets, because of the four and half percent treasury yield, there is a really interesting dynamic.

And and I I kind of send this this link out yesterday. But if you look at the spread on yields between U. S. Treasuries, which have historically been kind of considered and talked about in our deem that the risk free rate and the yield ld that corporations have to pay to borrow money, we haven't seen a spread this low in twenty six years.

So it's a seventeen year allow for the spread between the yield that companies that issue junk bonds have to pay from treasuries. And it's a twenty six year low for credit great bonds. So this means the market is either more risk seeking, meaning they are looking for more yield and they are going into corporate because they feel like there is a higher probability that these companies are going to be successful in the future.

They are not going to have higher default rates. IT set us of the market is becoming much more risk seeking or the alternative is that parts of the market are assessing the risk for nature of treasury's themselves. If spending doesn't get under control, the treasury market appetites decreasing.

So there's this kind of spread that shrunk in the last couple of months. So we're seeing capital flooding into the markets for risk seeking assets. And this is obviously effecting crypto equities and and bond markets all across the board. And we'll talk a little bit about IP, O M.

And eight later. Great trip. Theos aside from .

yug yum.

I mean yim, you could say, see you me just say.

no. I mean, look, what did I say? The beginning of the year is going to be the biggest rescue winning trade. That's great. Bitcoin is great, but I haven't seen you this other way.

What made you more happy getting to moon and spending time with your way through the eller or watching bitcoin brain and nine decay? Which one was more exciting for you?

You honestly you know what I think about I actually think about all .

the bitcoin I saw .

ah you know I had I had a bunch of bitcoin in my funds when I managed outside capital. You know that's A I don't know a three or four billion dollar mistake and growing now because my partners at the time capitulated now wanted to be a good team member, and we distributed, and that was profitable. But obviously, I shouldn't have sold that would have made them a lot more money.

And then I think about, like, I bought some land. I remember toho, he was in the wall street journal. And sure, you can find that. But yeah, how much is that worth now? Probably couple hundred million dollars, maybe more.

But you do have the coin .

holds you don't you a question, why do you say sold bitcoin as opposed to converted bitcoin to dollars? Like when you think about bitcoin, just as as a participant, do you think about bitcoin as a dollar dominated asset that you go and buy bitcoin and then you eventually gna sell IT turn IT back in the dollars and use the dollars? Or are you like, what do you think about the purest kind of idea that bitcoin should be the defect of currency and store of value in the future? In the dollar doesn't matter. And we shouldn't necessarily be talking about the the value of the dollar nomes something i'm eventually turn IT back .

into IT hasn't happened yet. And so until that happens, I think you have to view IT as like A A very good gold proxy, but it's a largely dollar to nominated asset, not why do you .

see IT going the other Whites like. So a lot of folks thought that as a safe haven, IT should do well when there's a negative economic outlook. But IT has treated the last couple of years kind of .

totally correlated. Now it's toted. It's a totally correlated asset. I mean, yes, there will be a point. And it's probably in our lifetime where IT is an independent asset in a non speculative store value. There will be that day, but that day is not now. And I think it's very important to see the conditions on the field as they are verses what you wish IT to be.

And and the reason is that IT allows you to risk manage more appropriate because if you don't see IT, then when something happens to the dollar complex good or bad or when something happens to rates good or bad, or when something stimulative happens good or bad, you're not onna react properly if you're in the business of managing IT as a risk. So if you're in the seat and forget IT pocket and there are some people, I think it's great. None of these conversations matter.

But like most people, you're probably going to be motivated to do something. And I think if you are motivated to do something or you have formal that stimulates you to do something, whatever the psychology is that needs you to action, it's probably important to as few things as they really are versus as how you wish them to be. And so I think the purse may eventually be right.

I think they're be right at some point in my lifetime, but they're not right now. And that's why these things are correlated. And other the other thing i'll say just broadly about the market, I think that there is a tremendous amount of optimism about the economy. I think that's why you see risk spreads get crushed.

And yeah, and I think .

that as .

long as we see the kind of prognostication that the trumpet administration is putting out, I think people are going to be mostly abolished. I think the way that this trade turns around is when something actually breaks in terms of the inflation picture or in terms of the deficit picture. And if those things look like going into twenty twenty five, that president transactions are not gonna able to course react IT. And I think you're gonna people go massively risk off, which I think will not be great for markets, obviously. But right now, we're not in that point.

And you don't think the trendy reflects that already at four and half percent. I mean, that showing some degree of inflation and concern about the deficit, right? IT?

I think I think the tender could be at seven .

percent .

now modest .

four and a half percent mean I mean, if you're you're going to run eight percent of GDP level deficits for the next four or five or six years, yeah you're gonna the ten year at seven day percent. That's just mathematical, right?

Sex your thoughts on crypto before we get into IPO anemony yeah just on cyp .

to the house. Republicans already passed a framework for crypto regulation earlier this year and actually got seventy one democrat to join IT. IT was called the financial innovation and technology for the twenty first century act or fit twenty one, and IT would classify digital asset cyc cyp to as commodities regulated by the cftc.

If the blocks in they run on is is quite functional and decently, that's the key requirement. If their blockchain is functional but not decentralized, then they will be concerned security and fall into the preview of the S. C.

C. I think that the crypt to industry basically wants a really clear line for knowing when they are commodity. And they want commodities be govern, govern like all other commodities by the C.

F, T. C. So that's what the republican bill would do. I think with the republicans now winning the senate, the prospects for that built to get enacted or now greatly improved, especially because shared Brown, who used around the bank committee, just lost to burning marino. This was a seat on ohio.

IT is with warm, is still going to have object this legislation, but he is going to have way less influence. And like you said, is not clear that gar gazers can be sticking around very long with the c. So look, the bottom line here is that I think that we are close to having clear rules of the road qualified by congress, which is what the cyp to industries has been asking for. And the days of gangs ler terrorizing crypto companies by issuing wealth notices without clarifying what the rules are that he is prosecuting, those days are about to be over. So I think this is why the up to markets are rally.

And so to your point, if it's centralized or partially centralized, you're going to be a security. If you're decentralized, anybody can join the network. No one person controls the network.

And I guess most people would consider that bitcoin verses, say ripple, which is partially decentralized but largely centralized. And that's gonna be, I guess, the new rules of the road. In addition to that, there are new rules that are being enforced to that.

Hopefully trump S, I mean, five, twenty one passes, right? This bills have for twenty one. But I think much, much higher likelihood that IT or something like that now can get through .

the and then there's also legislation that's already been enacted that there's multiple waste and multiple pets, but accredited investors there going to be a path to be coming in a credit investor with the test. So that is something that is also on the docket. We'll see if that happens.

Let's talk about IP s and M, A Young boys. Just a level set here with the audience. Here's the number of ipos per year. And as you can see, the last three years have been some of the lowest since two thousand and eight and two thousand and nine, the great recession for those of you who are old enough to remember IT. And if you look at VC, the number of distributions have been absolutely on the floor for the past three years.

In fact, if you look at the distinction from twenty twenty two through twenty twenty four, those three years combined, it's been around two hundred billion, which is less than twenty nineteen in total. And with this year projective to be about a hundred billion in distribution, that's about fourteen percent of the peak serve era when in twenty twenty one, we had seven hundred and ten billion dollars in distribution here. So the backroom buzz is that donny from queens is going to make ema great again.

Couple of reasons there. Sax, the raft of leana hs coming to an end, max aven sitting on massive amounts of cash. And that cash is growing as people have laid people off and they focused on getting fed.

Obviously, we all know the fed did another coral point cut last week, although some people maybe don't know that because IT seems to have gotten lost in the election news. And psychologically, I think everybody's feeling very optimistic. So maybe these IOS are back on the menu, Timothy.

I don't know if he thought, but chora just file for their IPO. That's a swedish hinted company. They were kind of the pioneers in by now, pay later.

What are the other IOS we could see? File in twenty twenty five data break stripe with canvas plaid rippling an air table. There's a long shot that people have been buzzing about. I don't have any inside information, but people have been speculating spaces could IPO starlink k their starlink unit. And if you wants to get really crazy each month, maybe there's a long shot that sam altman jumps the fense and decides he's gonna OpenAI public during this window that people expect to be opening. What do you think about what's onna happen here in terms of emini and ipos in two thousand and twenty five?

I think it's gna still be pretty subdued. I don't okay, I don't I don't think that you're gona see this. Crazy amine deals that I think everybody is expecting.

I also don't anticipate a lot of these big companies going public, at least in the first half of the year. And the only reason I see that is I just picked that like this year and the first half of next year, what's the difference? The IPO market is what the IPO market is.

And if the ten year he's back to, you know four and half, five percent does not a compelling strategy for some service company or some internet business that didn't take an opportunity to go public when rates were a zero. So if you just look mathematically at what the actual affair value of these companies should be, I don't know. It's not like such a great I P.

O market. Then on the emini side, if all you're doing is waiting for lenna can't cannot be there to me. I think that that betrays what amy is supposed to be, which is you are supposed to underwrite some industrial logic from first principles, where things are very a creative and very creative .

things should .

not hang by a thread on the emotional regulation of this regulation of the ftc commissioner. So I kind of think that you would have seen some of this stuff already as well if if the industrial logic was so high. And again, when rates are not traveling high, I just think that it's not the easiest thing in the world to pull off like a really big in event, nor is IT a really easy thing to pull off, to pull off a huge IPO.

And yeah, again, there is a reason why warm buffer has three hundred and twenty five billion dollars sitting in tea bills making four and half percent year. He wants more teepees in the united states government. He's making about fifteen billion dollars here in interest. When you can do that with absolutely no risk, again, relative to stocks, at least now what is the IPO going to give? You can also.

right, like the ten years at four and half percent, you're basically paying twenty times cash flow to own a risk free bond, the U. S. Treasury bond.

Or you can pay twenty three times to own time yeah it's early times to own the S M. P. Five hundred right now.

It's not yeah it's but but there is a lot of risk seeking shifting happening to month, right? So I mean, we talked about like some of the cyp to stuff, some of the fin tax staff deregulation that the P E. Might seem high today.

But if you forecast out ten years for some of these businesses in a deregulated d tax environment or reduce tax, reduce regulation environment that the earnings should accelerate in a way that our cases the the multiple you're getting today, right? So I mean, this is part of why some of the fin tech companies are ripping right now, why some of the finance companies are ripping right now. If under trump and the republican control of the house and senate, laws don't pass and regulations get reduced. Ed, theoretically, earnings are gonna rip and you should pay a higher multiple today because you're actually buying these things at eight, ten times earnings five years from now. So there seems to be some risk, petite, but I do agree with timah on the m and a point, if you think about what's gone on over the last couple of years.

people on a second can ask you question, do you think that regulation is the reason why these SaaS companies have never made a dollar of profit?

No, i'm not talking about that. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking .

about industrial companies.

No, the fin tech market, right? So we were talking about fin tech and some of these assets earlier, some of these equations that .

have been writing, it's a very narrow part of the economy, right? If you look at broad, like on a broad base basis, the tens and tens of trillion of dollars of market cap that exist, I do agree with you that deregulation benefits a bunch of those companies, but IT benefits sort of the non tech businesses more than the tech businesses. The tech businesses right now are relatively lightly regulated.

Yeah, I would think that IT benefits farmer businesses, IT benefits egg businesses, IT benefits realestate companies, IT benefits a whole, a whole swap of the economy. But we've started to see that rerating and maybe we'll see a lot more. So maybe j, and the more new one answered to you a question is the kind of company that I think you want to see that.

I mean, let's face IT that we all want to see here because we all have a that of interest, which is really specific c tag ameni. I don't think that any of this deregulation particularly accelerates that. But and maybe a more new ones take on this would be that these other more regulated parts of the economy could do well and catch up to some of the earning potential or the ford pricing of the tech businesses.

But again, now you get into this weird trade where you can buy steady cash flowing businesses that can grow evaluation as fast as a has a fast throwing about money losing tech business. But then you trade both of those two things off. And IT has effectively the same yield as a tenure.

What do you do? Yeah yeah. I you know I think there's a lot of backed up inventory where venture capitals, boards and founders, people who control and make these decisions on m na. If they would sell the company to a larger company, I think there's a lot of exhaustion .

in the market .

and that will .

drive .

the capitulation evaluation .

what stock.

So I I think in the pain terms of a multiple.

be more like salesforce or microsoft, google or amazon getting off the sidelines because they've looked at and said, you know, the dust work, the squeeze might as well put our efforts in our capital into buying big hardware and building new products and services. But if they think, hey, I kind of chance of pulling this through, i'm sitting on all this cash.

What if I hit another youtube and instagram, you know, really great acquisitions that were transformative for those two companies? Meter would not be where is right now facebook, you know that well come up if they hadn't got ten instagram and certainly you know freeburg in a luma of google, if they didn't get youtube, IT would be a completely different picture for that company right now. I think there's a lot of those type positions, and I think there's a lot of those acquisitions that have been sitting there waiting.

And i'm watching the secondary markets. To your question, what's the discount to be? The discount was last year. I kid you not, seventy, eighty, ninety percent off the last round for sas companies and this year is twenty or thirty.

I'm seeing this when i'm getting offers to buy our shares in some private SaaS companies, some private fin tech companies. And then I also think if you're a CEO and you watch Robin hood, uber, redit, Jordan and installed, those five have actually ever getting A A little bit of a ask kicking when they first went out. They have all rebounded massively.

And for the people who held on to their red chairs, Robin hood chairs, uber shares, they have been rewarded massively, massively for having faith in, you know, through this storm. So I think those two things, the capitulation of all these boards and founders are gonna. You know, let's take the haircut, let's go public, and let's tell our story and and see if we can make IT work as a public company.

And then the people who feel one step weaker than that, I think they want to cash their chips. They've been in some of these investments to month each year, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen. For some of these private companies, there is capitulation on those boards. People are exhausted so that I just going to undertake .

the other side of your argument on this one, all kind of play along. So I think and I will disagree a little bit for couple different reasons. These big tech companies, the ones that have had, you know media businesses or because remember, there's tech that's tech right in video does not have a media business.

But there has been a conversation over the last couple of years where we need to break up big tech has been kind of part of the conversation with the dams. And now the republicans are coming in and they are saying the same thing, we ve got to break up big tech. So there, I think, are a few of these companies, google being one of them, that are very much handicap right now with respect to what kind of M.

N. A they can do without dealing with the regulatory slight chAmbers coming down on them. So I don't think that those guys are buyers. Check out.

L, I don't think that google in a place right now where they can go out and make a bunch acquisitions, they're going to do everything they can to avoid the regulatory sledgehammer that's coming their way. First, he was coming from the dance, now is coming from the new administration. There is a bunch of other companies you know that don't really fit that bill, like microsoft proba doesn't fit that bill. And video, adobe maybe make some acquisitions, but I don't think it's as simple as well. Will sell in a low Price, will will buy at a low Price.

I'm just not sure they really I I think that these big tech companies will need to pay a pound of flesh for the deep platforming in the censor ship that they did is a perfect time if we're going to go to the .

p political angle to bring you and sex, what are the vives? My perception is trump likes to win, and trump wants to see the economy sore. That is his platform.

He's a business guy. I think he wants to see fluid ity. I know jd has been not a fan of like the google's successor, so maybe you could help us navigate this.

Who's right here? What's the possibility of ema becoming more viBrant in a trump, uh, administration? Well.

there's no question that in general, present truth wants to have the most viBrant economy we can have. And I think to that end, you're going to see the and of this era of deceleration of regulatory capture and law fare. I think all those things are over.

I think that equities that have been straining or or temp down under the weight of these abuses, you see them ripping. Now, for example, tesla, it's gone from roughly two fifty to three twenty and share the election. And you could call that the law fare discount.

I mean, that basically is the discount tesla stock because the market is pricing in the risk of retaliation. If the republicans loss, there is a wise of belief that the democrats would go after e law in his company. So you can actually measure the law fair discount based on Cecil regulation.

right? Because is a lot of regulations around self driving rocket ship launch ches, all those things involved in this.

a lot regulation, that crazy thing where they made some regulator made to put a headset on a seal. Did you see this to test the effect on seals of wild noises? This poor seal, you see this poor seal.

like I I don't don't do that to freeburg, but any they suspected .

this poor seal to exactly .

the thing that they were worried with harm seals. And then I event the seal seem totally find IT and .

the sales to make a point.

And anyway, it's really crazy. So yeah, love is great.

What about this? jd? IT helps us navigate. I know jd is the VP and then you have trump is the CEO trimarco ted out me be there's a little on the GPT anger, resentment residual because of the you know banning of trump s from youtube and some of these other platforms. Do you think that makes its way into M A or not?

I guess sex like let me be specific to jack question. Not all tech companies are the same in that kind of view, right? Tech M A generally is a thing. But specifically the companies that have had social media platforms maybe kind of in a different lens from a regulatory perspective. Is that fair?

yeah. I mean, look, I think that not everything lennon did was bad. In fact, he definitely has some fans among the populist republicans, and you know, some of them who've spoken out in her behalf in various areas have been J.

D. Vance, my gates as well. SHE did do some good things. Specifically, he was willing to take on the big tech companies, I mean, companies like amazon, apple, google, Frankly, they just had a free ride for the last couple of decades, or they allowed to do anything.

And SHE came in and said, there's a new sheriff in town. And he was actually willing to apply pressure on them to not engage the anti competitive tactics. So I think he deserves credit for that.

I think he did change the conversation. I think that we've talked about on previous posts that perhaps there was not as targeted and surgical an approach was used. And as a result of that, I did a chilling effect on ma. And so IT hurt the, you know, the small tech environment. And so I think that we need to fix that part of IT. But I hope that whoever we are a places, lan a ka will continue to apply pressure to big tech, because they are an open, and they will abuse their power of their allow to, and they need to be controlled sex.

If you get the handicap, the probability of. A lawsuit or some kind of attempt to dismantle google and facebook. Would those be the two companies at the top killers? And how would you handy capture?

So my view is that google should be broken up. There's abundant reasons for that. There is at least three monos in that company.

There's the search business, advertising business in youtube. I think they should be posted up. What are the odds that, that happens? It's hard to say.

But what are the odds that, that is pursued in the next administration in some capacity, at least investigated? I'd say hi, i'd say facebook, or matter less. So I don't see the compelling need to bust them up.

But quite Frankly, I think the issue that medis gna face is just there were a lot of abuses in terms of censoring the free speech rights of americans. Now I don't think that was all the company's idea. I think a lot of pressure was put on the company by the bite administration.

I think they wanted to do the right thing. I didn't shown enough backbone. I think .

cros been clear that he and he spent anina. He's like listening .

not in the water. And maybe IT was done to some degree to inoculate himself against itself to the selection. But i'd say to his credit, IT wasn't clear at all who is going to win the election when he put off that letter and he basically said that he regretted the fact that ba had got along with the censorship request by the by administration and he specifically referred to that whole had to a biden story that got censored in twenty twenty.

That was election interference. That was a completely true story by the new ork. The got censored by big tech as the request of these fifty one former intelligence officials who were lying through their teeth cleaning with russian distinct max. So he clearly regrets going along with that. In any event, I think there are Better ways of handling the speeches you on social networks and busting of facebook. But I I do think so that congress should investigate or continue investigating what went wrong there and what exactly is the involvement of the intelligence community and the deep state in the censorship request that we saw exposed by the twitter files. Remember.

can I bring up something, maybe ten, you and you can react to this, just speaking of kind of like censorship and then just the the media complex that we have. I thought today that from filed like a ten or fifteen billion dollar lawsuit against the broadcast networks, maybe this is old news, but I, and maybe .

I just saw the news .

separately .

with Bobby .

candide's nomination to each other. Just one of the things that he has said that he wants to put an end to is the advertising that format does on these broadcasters. If you put these two things together where you deprive these folks of their largest revenue source, and at the same time, they have to sort of like answer for censorship or manipulating content IT. Does you think that that changes the landscape of how all these companies behave in the future? Or how do you think that plays of yeah.

I mean, absolutely. So are IT. Let's take each one of those. So on the the broadcasters have talked about this before. The big broadcast networks and there are filling ates receive free spectrum licenses from the fcc and they gets on the most valuable spectrum there is through those licenses in exchange for certain requirements that they are broadcaster in the public interest. Namely, they have to follow a fairness doctor, which is supposed to me that you give equal time to both candidates.

Well, in the final week of this campaign, we also really agreed ous abuses N B C brought on coming heras, but not down trump for a very favorable segment. On saturday night live, the week before the election, separately, you saw sixty minutes deceptively edit in interview with comely Harris, where they actually took one of her answers from one question and put IT as the answer to another question. I mean, really deceptive.

So you have a couple of examples with both cbs and N B, C, which were violent. The equal time requirement were were clearly working up a half the common hairs campaign. And when you look at the coverage itself, this election was the most unequal in terms of favorable coverage.

IT was something like a sixty point difference. Something like come on hair received eighty seven percent favorable coverage, and trump received something like IT faces, a negative code. So there's no .

way according to you .

know yeah there's it's a report by brand puzzles, uh, media watchdog group spent around forever and spent recording the stuff in every election for last thirty years. In any event, I think that there is a very strong argument that the broadcasters have not been fair that the violation of their license requirements and which we reevaluating the spectrum, especially because it's not the highest.

best use of any of this, though sex, is that they have already been demolish. I don't know, he saw, but a bunch of the anchors at CNN are not renewing because their advertising is so far off that like Chris wallace, I think was making eight million a year and nine million year. And he just said i'm going to go to pock because they think they look walled his offer.

And if they do that .

advertising from farmer, which I think in some of these networks as a third or half, and that's all networks that's from fox to C N N and every M S N B C, everybody combined. If they lose advertising from farmer, it's over like these those news networks are going to lose half their revenue overnight. That would be a, that would be a death blow to off to your question.

Yeah, well, let me, let me get back to that. So so just on CNN and M, S, see your user, right that they are announcing bunch lay off. The ratings are destroyed. I think they're down. M, S, M, B, C, ratings were down like fifty percent in the election.

What that tells me is that their .

own audience sense, yes. And what that what that tells me is that they are captive. Your base, who's been continuing for years to all the G, D.

S, has now realize they were deceived by M. S. N, B.

C. And we've lost credibility even with their most fervent supporters. So there's no question that CNN see they're hurting now.

J out. Distin ate one small modification. They do not receive they do not have spectrum licence from the F C C, right, because cable network.

So there are any kind of a different bucket. They don't have to uh by by the fairness doctrine that cbs and nbc do, right? But they have different problems. And to your point about farmer, there is absolutely no reason to be allowing farmer advertisements on these A T, V networks.

The fact the matter is the people who are viewing those networks can buy, you can buy pharmacy ticals without a prescription, right? Is up to doctors to write you the prescription. And this is why most countries, most western countries, prohibit former advertising on the networks. And I think public canada has a very strong argument that IT would serve the public interest not to allow this. We don't allow advertisements for tobacco, right?

So I guess the thing that doesn't make sense to me, sex is your so such a first amendment absolutely. And free speech APP absolute isn't IT. And i'm not saying as my opinion, but you know, my chAllenge you would be is tell me about freedom of speech, an expression in the relation to being able to do advertising for this problem.

Well, I mean, aren't aren't .

consumers smarten ought to figure out out.

The point of the advertising is, I think, is not at the end of day to influence consumers. Because consumers can buy pharmacy tics.

They have to go ask your doctor about .

the purposes the advertising is to buy favor coverage. That's the point. And there are many exam .

OK explain that .

there are many examples of people who ve worked in these networks saying that they had a story that was negative about former companies. And that story got Spiked because the former captain of the big, big advertisers, in fact, I think IT was there is a story about fox news and who whose guy Brown.

the rails. Well, there's been a number of stories. I know what you're talking about. There's been stories about andersen Cooper, who's the the the guy who does international coverage on the weekend's GPS as the name of a show I can remember .

right .

I reads a career. Thank you for reads a career yes. Um I think a bunch of those shows were like literally brought you by fighters er brought you by these things.

And so those shows potentially we just go away. And then was reporting on the number of times they would report on those companies and IT showed they didn't. So what what do you think free berg, of should farma companies be allowed to advertise to consumers to ask their doctors, to ask them about the. What you take. He's thinking for those of you at home listening is he's giving a deep thought while he thinking.

check me say, yeah I I think there is a free speech issue that there has been weight okay. So I don't want to be totally dismissive of that. However, I think that the video example is a is on the like far under the spectrum of a drug that by by advertising that you could actually get consumers to request from their doctor.

I don't think most drugs are like that. And I think my contention would be that the real reason they're paying all this massive advertising is not to influence consumers but to influence the coverage that they get. And there is something very corrupt about that.

And I think that Bobby Kennedy is a really strong point that if you were to remove the incentive that many people inside the industry of admit exists, then you get much fair coverage of these farmer companies. And we had actually get to be a healthier country because you want to allow them to basically manipulate the public debate. So I that's the argument.

Freeburg you want to try in another?

Now I I mean, I feel like there's some market correction that takes place here, which we're already seeing, which is the consumers are moving away. We just talked about moving away from cable news, moving away from legacy media. They don't trust IT.

The trust is IT in all time law. I don't know if it's necessarily the government's job to determine who, advertisers, what, where, how and why. I don't like the government having that sort of degree of authority, generally speaking, because they can then lead into the government having overreach and oversight to control entities that maybe are competitive with the government in different ways.

I do believe that the the beef big tech is a result of big tex influence over the population, where big government wants to have that degree of influence over the population. So it's actually a battle between government and private entities over who can influence the population and who has the ability to control the narrative. And I think that the general concept that the government should be determining who, advertisers, where, what, how and why is not a great one.

And I don't think that consumers are dumb. I think that consumers are showing their procurement for independent media and independent new sources because they don't trust the influence that's been kind of imparted upon these other channels and these other sources, and they're moving away from IT. So I don't know if it's as much kind of a regulatory question and big farmer needs to be affected.

I think that the market to to some degree of its job, I don't think that consumers are dumb. I will also just kind of counter one of success points. I I think that there are drugs like multiple scroll is is a good example.

There was a drug introduce a couple years ago called doctor vers, and there was a new therapy for multiple school that extremely effective. It's a it's a really a big step change in in biological therapies. And a lot of people that were on M S.

And have had M S. For decades take kind of old school while old school drugs that maybe aren't that effective. So to create awareness and they are not regularly seeing their doctors.

They may not go in and see their doctor every year like they're supposed to. So the the farmer companies are creating awareness that there is this new modality in this new product that can help them to get them to go into the doctor's office. no.

So I I don't want to say that these are all like evil, try to control and influence like there are good drugs that come to market their beneficial to people. And people don't know about how also they supposed to get that word out if they are not able to advertise. So I don't think that it's all like negative and all malicious you know, kind of behavior manipulation of media people.

We all have the resources. We all have the capacity, and we are all likely very frequently going to doctors. Most people don't. And so most people that have chronic disease or have health issues, there has to be a mechanism for, you know, making them aware of new options, new alternative, new products are coming to market. So i'm not super like putting my foot dancing form.

A company shouldn't be able to advertise and be able to buy media out there and put ads up and tell people that stuff that they've discovered, that they've invented, that's been regulated, that's been tested, that's been approved and that works and can help savior lives. I think they should have the freedom and ability to do that. So I think there's there's a bit of a new on here to how this gets handled is my point.

Yeah, I mean, look, I I am not saying that there's no benefit at all to letting formal companies advertise some products. I think the question you have to ask is why is so much money going from farmer to this news outlets? Because most the products you know that you generally can't buy him.

I'll tell you the reason. The reason is that the farmer committees make so much money off of government funded insurance programs. Let me just step back again. If we only had private insurance or if consumers had to pay for their drugs and their therapies themselves, the cost of drugs would go weigh down. The reason the cost of drugs has gone wait up is because so much of the government insurance programs don't negotiate drug Prices.

And they're all these middleman and all these people that sit in between that have been regulated, the regulatory capture into the system that has allowed incredible inflation in the cost of drug Prices. Therefore, there is a lot of money to kind of continue the capture of the system. I don't think that IT is right.

And I think that the free market generally or having a less regulatory captured market will allow an appropriate of kind of pricing of therapies and appropriate kind of adjustment in the market, which doesn't exist today. So, so much money to kind of keep the market the way IT is needs to kind of keep flowing. That's my sense of this.

I don't think it's about bad drugs need to kind of stay and play as much as IT is this markets been allowed to inflate and the cost of healthcare and the cost of drugs is inflated in a way that simply untenable, able and IT doesn't make sense. And I think that is because of regulatory capture. And I think that, that needs to change, and i'm hopeful that.

that does. That's the second reason then to get the this formal money out of advertising because you're basic explaining IT is like a self looking ice cream cone. But again, there's another reason as well, I think that explains the share magnitude, which is its influence buying its influences by which is your point.

sax. I that was well as about to bring up you know, there it's very subtle. You're gonna have somebody at nbc or CNN or fox come down until talker calls and or Rachel meta or Anderson Cooper, hey, you can cover the story.

But there is a bunch of self censorship that occurs, I believe, where people just don't select certain stories to beyond the docket and they just shaped the coverage that they might not say something positive or negative about fizz or Johnson Johnson, whoever IT is. It'll just avoid that story because these anchors are getting paid or have been previously pay ten ten million and twenty five million a year. Do you think they're going to like really go hard adviser or somebody like that? No, they're just not going to a bit inside the machine.

They just avoid those stories. okay. Let's keep going through the docket here, I think was pretty good conversation.

I I not bother way. I wanted to say to the trumpet administration, if you want the economy to rip, let M A rip. But one caveat is, is a really simple way to do this. If you're under a trillion dollar valuation, let those companies buy and sell each other because that we can go from a mac to a mac. That's where I think actually IT makes the most sense.

If you actually are concerned about the consolidation of power in the top seven, let them sit out acquiring more great companies and let the people under that who are the middle cap companies, let them do the buying and selling because then you might have a Maggie nine intention up. That's not talking my book. And we would be Better for me freeburg to let them max seven participate because they can pay higher Prices. They're not Price sensitive. But I do think the mid market companies buying and selling would make a healthier environment for a competition.

So using IT start using a creates more competition, which will battle benefits summer and grow the economy.

Well, look at at this way. If somebody wants to buy, let's say we'll get to spin out somebody wants to buy IT. If amazon can't buy IT and tesla camby, IT and amazon can buy IT, but they could merge with uber, lift door dash, you know, all those mid arbi N B.

If those companies could consolidation. Can you imagine what happen if amazon couldn't buy those companies? But you could see way mo spin out and then partner with door dh and partner with L B N B.

And you had that as one company. Now you got a four hundred billion dollar that is nipping on the heels that is aggressively competing with amazon. That's what you want in the market, is more competition for the you don't want the magnificent seven to run away with IT, and we could create the eighth, nine and ten.

So just imagine that free berg, there was a another trillion dollar company, like I actually think tesla tes became a trillion dollar company again. So now that they're up in those ranks, great. Don't let tesla, don't let amazon etta in video, buy more companies, let those that mergers and acquisitions and that strength that happen under the trillion dollar mark, what what do you think of that general concept proper?

yeah. I generally think competition is good. I have generally think free market be able to Operate.

And i've shared my point of view. I think bigger is gonna drive more innovation than lots of little OK. I get way more wouldn't exist if not for google allowing billions and millions.

And I don't know about you guys. I took way more around the city yesterday. Pretty set. But IT is legit.

I don't .

go to the city. Yeah it's pretty legit.

And um I successful.

And by the way, I will say my other comment is I think san Francisco has gotten in ten ex Better now that i've been working downtown. But the last week or two .

ten and or from a tok, successful. Just yes, successful. I think part of .

the fact part of the reason is all of walGreen is gone. No, you can buy the range. Problem solved.

You doing? How do you do that?

You got Jason.

Jason has get amazon package delivered.

Yeah, I my texas. You can do whatever you .

want here and there's no.

I can get to supply to airdrop today once a month.

What do you think about? I'm bullish on the service. Good turn around because I think Daniel Larry, getting elected mayor was huge.

And this doesn't get really as much attention, but is very important. The of the radical got voted off, the court supervised. So the border .

supervisors are less progressive, Daniel, in the mayoral office. So I I think the cities already like turning around. I've been super blown away the last couple of weeks.

I've been downtown. I'm like why i'm not working. Download, it's actually really nice and feels like inferences .

go twenty years ago, the party I M safety is the number one thing.

if they can under control. And csco spends a half x new york city and that's something that Daniel and his team have kind of said. We're onna address sort of like their own dose and there's a team going in there to address this. So i'm really bullish, ed. And what's gonna en with the city?

It's just such a great place. IT seems like the power resides in the supervisors and they seem to have flipped. Two or three of the real illness atic once right acts, I got rid of dope. D impressed in who .

was the other guy past .

and he was a idiot. And then there was, guys are done. So that's progress.

Do you want to talk about the trump candidates? Check out.

Yeah, scared to that in a second. But before we can get to that, FBI rated the home of polymer CEO shane cocoon. He was on the election night stream.

He was raided on wednesday in november thirteen, eight days after the election, they say Polly market is bloomberg, as Polly market is being investigated for allegedly accepting trades from U. S. Space users.

Here's the back story. And twenty twenty two Polly market paid one point four million to settle the case with the cftc for offering option contracts without proper designation. The commodity futures trading commission also urged the company to prevent U.

S. Traders for making bets. They recently said power market, that is, that they had taken additional measures to block americans from trading.

At the same time, coachin Robin hood, able to offer presidential prediction markets because calls I IT seems like they won their lawsuit against C F, T. C. Last month.

So that allowed some betting markets to happen. But Polly market is still banned from the us. Because of that settlement in twenty twenty two. Here's the polymer claim.

They claim the RAID was obviously political retribution by the outgoing administration against poly market for providing a market that correctly called the twenty twenty four presidential election and shame posted on ex, discouraging that the current administration would seek a less each effort to go after companies they deem to be associated with political opponents. But uninspiring y there is flying around. Peter till and founder fund had made investment into the company and make silber's and adviser. I guess I will just accurate .

they're much more accurate than they yeah so nomi IT can not be if they have got everything right.

Yeah I mean, that's I literally the point I was about to make and um i'll just and with this and then give you sex for red meat. Americans are not allowed to participate in in a lot of different markets. And these kind of actions have been taken many, many, many times. As we all know, poker cyp to real estate and prediction markets have all had actions like this taken against them. And they typically are a ticket.

The office is two.

or just his house, just his house, according to the information we .

have right now, they to his house, and they took, by the way, shut out.

Like if you are breaking the law, why wouldn't tape all that?

TVB? Yeah, it's a great break. Speculation and important to note, this action came after the election is resolved. So it's obviously FBI knew that doing this beforehand would be seen as political and doing IT after, I guess, no, I know everything. I'm adding something else, which is they obviously needs to be political sacks.

And so they didn't they knew if they did IT before, that would looked like, you know, really bad that the prediction, mark, that's prediction trun a trump win was rated. But so they did IT after what? What do you think? sex?

What's going to?

O, K, I think anything or not.

I guess you don't know what was driving. This is certainly an extreme action to bus and stones home at six A, M with the F, B, R, and take take your phone. So it's very curious.

I think there's three theories that i've heard that I think could explain this. And I wanted just be very clear that there's no proof on a this is just speculation. Yes, the speculation to be going on.

Yeah, by the way, just before I get into IT, I think shame coplin have on the funniest tweet ever seen. Yes, you have new phone. Who this niche should show them?

I mean, that was like bali, the F I. Posting your takes, your phone. I think that me .

that that means that this is probably not a serious situation but .

let me go well who who knows but yeah or he's confident .

is like what I would say.

yeah yeah okay. So theory number one is that what the feds are looking for is whether any domestic wales were illegally wagering on the election outcome because theoretically, the money is also be offshore because domestic waging on the election was illegal. However, a court rule just days before the election that domestic wearing was legal.

So that so three number one doesn't really make a lot of sense because the F, B, I would be enforcing A A rule or a law that the courts are just overruled to taste for the elections. So but that's number one, three, number two. And this theory was raised by fortune magazine.

Is that the that Polly market was right with what's called wash trading, which is a form of market manipulation where shares are bottle sold, often multi repeatedly by the same people to create a false impression of volume and activity. This is illegal in the U. S.

And IT does occur. Encrypt to market. So I could have been going after that, but again, that doesn't like a very extreme thing to post into his house. Why did you just ask shame for would the U.

S. Government have if it's all .

offshore in that context? U, i'm going out possible theories, but fortune magazine did did raise that theory. But again, if that's what your claim is, just seppa Polly market during business hours. I don't know why you need to raise the guys .

home or read the office or where the files are right now.

Let me me lay out three. Number three, okay, which is going to be a little bit, but get you if if somebody was manipulating these sites, okay, then on whose behalf where they doing IT? And what you'd have to say is that they were doing in on behind the comic campaign because in the last few days of the election, there was a weird blip where Polly market and and calls, especially because he, even more than Polly market, always some lipped to commute.

And you can see this, particularly in pensive ana, where all of a sudden there is a big flip at the end away from trump towards coma that cannot be totally fake. And trump one pencil. Ana prety pretty.

And so you got a wonderful way to second was a comment supporter maybe trying to push the narrative that there was a last minute surge to come a because that's what the action seem to imply. And remember that the same time this was happening, there was a big, there was like a media push to create a narrative by her supporters in the media, that there was a late break for Harris. Yes, by independence.

And so you have to kind of a wonder what somebody trying to push the prediction markets at the last minute to feed a media narrative that they were trying to create. Look, I have no evidence this whatsoever, but the the action in the batting markets and the narrative they are trying to create, the media do line up. So if somebody was going to investigate election manipulation, this is what they .

should look into chaff. You have any thought here?

No.

zero thoughts. I mean, yeah, you know, my thoughts on an air. I don't see him ever doing anything risky or illegal. So IT makes no sense to me.

I'm guessing that somebody made him aware pure speculation of something in the system and that probably was on his phone and they probably wanted to get that. And it's probably like a speeding ticket tiki tacky thing. And do you just have the loss of working its way through the system because they sacks were under in order to not take us.

But cali had gotten the mark, the the law change with their successful lawsuit where they had defended their their case of I would say it's all allegedly folks and so way for more information is where is a good idea? Alright, trust is building his team. And it's a long list.

We've got get dozens of names right now. So let's start with before. Who's your favorite?

Jo.

ow. My opinion provide matter all that much. But let me go with the for that are creating most buzz to let's create the let's go with the four that are having the most buzz and then i'll let you eat.

Tell me what you change those candid you love .

the one I ah there is one I share love but let's .

i'll i'm genuinely is the cake .

and ill on doing those is my absolute favorite. Yes, anything else that I am fascinated by, Bobby Kennedy going in and trying to make the country healthier. And the country is the most sick country, I think of uh all of the western countries.

And I think our food system has massive problem. So i'm very excited to see what he does inside of the health human services department. I think it's a little bit controversial, obviously, but I don't see how you could be any worse what we currently have.

How do you feel about that? Who you're your favorite? I guess we can just go with people's favorite if you want to go that way.

The way I interpret his cabinet picks is that he's creating a coalition. So I view IT more like a package. D, O, J, K, L, not onna.

Pick out one or two, although I do, of my favorites. The person of who I think various students understands what trump is trying to do is charlie curt, who is a major influencer on the republican side. And he says that that what maha, which is, make a amErica a healthy again, they get R F K, bob candidate, H H S.

Obviously the libertarians get tosi at D N I. I would add to that that they also get elon of vg at doge. The base, the popular base gets markets.

They get hacks that that D, O D, they get home and and then the piece of projecting strength crowd, which is kind of a nice name for neocon, gets rubio as security since to find out at the U. N. So I think that front is basically trying to have his cabinet reflect the diversity of use within the republican party. He is not decisively choosing one side over another. What this means is that during his presence, cy, he's gna get all the views and all the options within the party collection view.

That's an interesting let's go point by point to the most controversial ones that gates is obviously the most and he has been put up ney general. He has to be confirmed by the senate. Obviously, he is the house rep from fla.

sex. How qualify that? Is he for this job? On a scale, I think that .

markets will be a breath first share. D, O, J, I mean, look, here's the D, O, J has been involved for the last eight or nine years in a completely fabricated effort to portray dod trump as an agent of the russians. IT started with a steel doc.

a. They then opened in a investigation based on the phony piece opposition research funded by the Hillary campaign. They lie to the fight court to spy on on terms campaign. They then worked with the various intelligent services and with the media to create this like hoax that went on for years and years. Has been no accountability for that. Furthermore, in the twenty twenty election, you also had that effort to something to cover up the hundred by and hard drive that the F B I N D O J were sitting on that for roughly a year. They created as a phony story that he was russian and this .

information and turned out be complete thens 站。

What the president, what the president ran on was that the D, L, J needed to be d weapon, zed, that IT had been turned into a partisan political ATS for the democrats. I don't anyone can argue with that at this point. I think american people clearly bought him to that argument.

Now, in order to clean IT up, you're going going to bring in a total outsider who's willing to breaks some eggs and shake things up. Is my gates the only person who could do that? Now there there are people who could do that.

But maga's is definitely qualified for that role. He was one of the most outspoken critics in congress of this weapon zone of the FBI. He was never fooled by the russia e hooks. Both establishment was anybody, anybody who thought into the rush gate hooks is not qualified to on the D O, J. At this point.

okay. Any concerns?

There's a bunch of unproven smears and accusations have been made against him.

Any other concerns cuse.

aside from the the.

the investigations and whatever in the mear .

bunch of unproven yeah spears and accusations were made against him. And my own view on that is that if there was really something there, I think mark garland's DJ would have acted on IT two or three years ago. So I personally discount all these smears without there being any evidence whatsoever. And I think it's very predictable that we are sing with both markets and with tosi is that the worst accusations get made without any evidence in the media when the blob or the establishment wants to stop a true popular reformer from cleaning up their backyard thought.

And that seems to be the most controversial one. And a concern in that is the most studio guy for the jump.

I I don't want to come in a my gates, but i'd like to talk about why not? Because i'd like to talk about a broader point of view on IT.

okay.

So I think. There's this kind of thing that happens in biology called evolution. And lot of people think evolution is this continuous process, but it's not.

Evolution is this process by which there is some significant growth for a period of time and then there is an extinction event, or an external force that causes what ultimately becomes, which called punctuated equal liberum. So the whole kind of system resets, and then the healthier, stronger species survive, and they grow and they persist. And if you look at the first chat, nic, that I pulled up, this will just show you guys path extinction events.

Large amounts of biomedical, the past hf billion years, get White out when the extinction of ts occur, and then evolution occurs because the species that can survive the extinction of and persist in the environment and they grow. And that's how evolution kind of actually takes place, is there is an external force that changes what survives in what doesn't. It's kind of a testing force.

If you look at federal spending, then this is a crazy link, but is federal spending over the last couple of decades. And I would argue that many of the agencies, much of the bureaucracy, many of the jobs created, many of the spending programs, many of the Operating models, many of the behaviors can kind of be viewed as a species or species within the ecosystem that have kind of grown a lot over the last few decades. And I think what trumps Mandate was by the people, and people don't want to hear this, and they don't like IT, but his Mandate was to be kind of the extinction event.

And whatever agencies, whatever Operating processes, whatever individuals, whatever bureaucratic systems exist within the federal government that can withstand the scrutiny of the individuals that trump is going to put in charge of each of these agencies, that they can survive and they can come up the other end. There is certainly some degree of strength and resilience and hardiness. This is not about right or wrong.

Do you say they deserve to exist? If I saying this is to bring in, this is going to bring in the most disruptive force that federal agencies have ever seen. And the intention with crop isn't defined.

Some person to keep running things the way they have been run in the path is Mandate from the people who elected him. Based on the message you put out there is to do the opposite. We used to go in and be as disruptive and damaging and disruptive as possible.

And whatever comes out, the other side will be stronger, will be harder and theoretically, will be you more resilient. And I think that that's the event is under way. Now the people who are getting exactly what they want in trumps canada is are the democrats. They were saying trump is going to a put a bunch of crazy illini s in office and he's going to make them the cabinet. They're there and now they're able to count, clap their hands and say, we told you so, we told you so.

And i'm not sure that if they're really getting the message, which is that the intention here isn't to keep things running the way they have been running, but to really fundamentally test the systems and test the systems would be most chAllenging opposition forces the systems have ever been tested by, which is the candidates for the individuals that he's putting in charge of each of these. So I am not saying it's right or wrong one way or the other, but i'm making an observation that this is gonna be kind of an extinction level event that trumps decisions on who he's putting in place. I think you're onna drive an outcome on the other that's gonna the government look very different.

And you know i'm not going to sit around and say this person's good, this person's bad because I don't think the point is to find someone that's q qualified to do the job. The intention is actually quite different and the outcome may actually be positive for america. If fast forward couple of years in some cases, and there are some cases where things can get really mess up and people could suffer and jobs will be lost them, all sorts of bad things will happen.

But we cannot continue the way we have to do with resort federal spending, with respect of federal spending bureaucracy and inefficiency in the federal government. And so something has to happen. And if this is the path by which this get resolved in the limited window that's in front of this, this particular administration, which is public two years, maybe four, maybe this is .

what has to happen about where do you stand on freeburg? Interesting metaphor here that we're sending media into each of these departments to blow up and see if they survive an extinction level event. So you not you think this is interesting framing.

great. Take, I have nothing, dad, to free books. Take.

go. Who's your favorite? You ask me the question I answered. Who's your favorite?

Well, I think let's take you on in the wake of the table because .

that's an obvious one that seems the getting. And we know and we will all support the idea who's not against more efficiency. I mean, you have to be an idiot to be against efficiency is the easiest one to say you love.

I think the highest pater pic so far has been bobbi Kennedy. I think second highest baik is mag gates explain highest .

benefited in the context, please.

The third is tosi that there is the potential for an enormous ly positive toward three signal a outcome. But there's also the chance that IT can really not work.

That was exactly why I pick Bobby can be.

because you going to shake IT up.

right? The anti .

highly recommend 一样的。 One of the great things he said is that he was talking about science. But I think the example works here as well, which is that we didn't have enough scepticism and we had too much dogma he was talking about sort of like the the death of science.

And I think that that idea applies here as well, which is that the federal bureau cracked has not really been chAllenged and debate, put out a very compelling posts on x, where he basically said like that when you on the one handers can to be radical transparency. But on the other hand, there's a lot of case law that we can use to kind of try to really dismantle the government upper us. And they're putting themselves on a shock clock to do IT by twenty twenty six for the two and fifty of anniversary.

So I think i'm really prety supose to this idea of that. It'll force the government to be very brazilian at the end of this process. And I think that's a good thing and it'll probably be very different than water is on the way. And and I think that, that can be very possible.

Alright, so we got off and myself actually giving some specific names that we thought were interesting. I'll go back to you, sex maybe, or phrase IT as to chamakh phrased ing. Which one do you think has the greatest chance of creating a massive potential change that could be positive but also has some possibility of a destructive downside? In other words, could go either way. But man, if he goes the right way, you could be brilliant and amazing and great for all americans, who would be your number one, number two in that regard.

Well, you have to identify what the potential downside is. I think the single biggest risk in a second trump term is that somehow the united states gets into an unnecessary war, a war that we don't need forever war. I certainly not what president truman.

He's been abundantly clear on the campaign trail that he wants to avoid war as he wants to avoid war. War three, it's clearly were. All instincts are.

But the fact the matter is we have a very fraught of difficult international situation right now. The middle is on fire. We have a proxy war going out with russia. So there is the chance that things could always spiral out of control. And you need, I think, within the cabinet, not just hawkish voices, but also dovish voices, so that the present has the full range of options at his disposal. And so in that sense, I would say that, you know, told is being one of the more David voices is incredibly critical, just baLanced some of the other voices who are more hawkish. And so in that sense, I think, you know, just making sure that the president gets to hear from a wide specter of use, I think that that party very important .

so that else Chelsea would be your pec.

yeah. Just because like tosa could learn, make the difference between whether we get in unnecessary forever war or not. I would also to say that with respect to the other pics, there is obviously a lot of hysteria, a going on, a lot of hyperbole about the downsides.

I don't think it's gonna like a media hitting the earth. I don't think it's that destructive. I think that is more like, will some egg broken up to make an omelet, right?

That's that's y an algy I would use rather than the media. And the thing I would just say is that we all agree the united states is currently on unsustainable fiscal path. We know that we're spending too much money.

We know that the roxy is too big. What's the downside and of shaking IT up? There's this way more upside and downside in terms of shaking up the bureaucracy .

because the government path .

is bankrupcy exactly. So why do we have to act like that is so risky to bring in outsiders and populist and reformers into these agencies? We know there's going to be huge assistance to them. The biggest risk, Frankly, is a nurse a taking over, and the reformers .

aren't able to .

do enough. And we all.

why is tosa getting attacked? What's the russian connection? People are saying, like I don't I don't know any of the history here. So tell me.

it's obviously because washington is a very hawkish place specially run by the war machine. There's there's no money going to washington to lobby for peace. All the money in washington is coming from the military industrial complex, so by definition is extremely hawkish and its gear towards war .

and these are some history with tosa and .

russia ah this is my point. Yeah total has been learned a few consistent voices advocating for peace. So of course, the establishment wants to basically get her nomination vetoed. But again, I think you have to see the cabinet is a package deal. I think it's very important to have poli as one voice for peace within a larger cabinet that already has .

many hawke's voices. OK aren't everybody for your sult of science from, although they are freeburg the chairman dictor to a point hopeless a from eighty ninety and David sax procrastinating res. I M Jason candis your host tear at the all in pocket and this week start up. I'll see you next time on the .

all in pockets, byebye.

岂 不就是 好。

选择 了？

your.

Winter, man.

We open sources to the fans .

and they got crazy.

sexual.

Tension 你。 努里。