Kind: captions
Language: en
Elon sparks ferocious debate with a
single social security chart. Jackson
Hwitt coaches immigrants on how to file
for tax returns. Trump's tariff D-Day is
upon us and coincidentally historic
enemies across Asia unite. What could be
going on there? Ag Pam Bondi pursues
Tesla bombas across the US and seeks a
death penalty for Luigi Manion. A real
estate agent explains why governmental
regulations are keeping renters broke
and builders rich. And YouTuber Dr. Mike
battles antivaxers in the ongoing debate
of what is science actually. Drew, the
world continues to fight for its
immortal soul and I'm honored to be here
on the front lines. Let's do this. That
was poetic. Yeah, that's way better than
the headlines. It feels true. We We are
in a global debate for what is true and
what is going to help us. And boy oh
boy, people do not agree. We look at the
same thing and we see something
extremely different. It's a trouble time
we live in Drew. That is for sure. We
saw this in the live. Jumping right into
the Social Security alleged fraud. I'mma
leave it there. Elon was on stage
presenting in Wisconsin as he continues
his political push to get elect certain
judges there. He had a chart that showed
that just I'm just going to say it
flatly and plainly that the number of
noncitizens who were issued social
security numbers have 10xed from 2021 to
2024. Yep. So, taking all the spin out
of it, we're just saying what the
presented numbers say. During the live
today, chat got very lively at this
point in the discussion. All right,
let's hear it from them and then we can
talk about what we think is spin, what
we think is real, is there any outright
fabrications? Uh, let's go. Let's hear
it. You'll notice there's a strange
trend here. Um, where uh how many social
security numbers were issued? Uh, it
it's Do you want to Yeah. So let me um
let me tell you what happened here. We
we started at the top of the system. You
want to talk about a lot of we started
at the top of the system mapping the
whole system of social security to
understand where all the fraud was and
there's a lot of great people there that
showed us um in really a lot of waste.
And so that came up with a big list of
stuff they're working on. You've heard
some of that already. But this is what
jumped out at us. Um when we saw these
numbers we're like what is this? In 21
you see 270,000 uh people goes all the
way to 2.1 million in 24. These are
non-citizens that are getting social
security numbers.
Yeah. This this is a mind-blowing chart.
Yeah. Just this this literally blew us
away. Like we went there to find fraud
and we found this by
accident. And this isn't political, by
the way. My parents immigrants. Uh yeah,
this country's been great to us. My
brother and sister are all born in
Spain. I'm prolegal immigration. They
have a couple of choices. They can
charge you with a misdemeanor or a
felony under 1325 or they can make an
administrative offense like a parking
ticket. Basically, they were told to do
that, make an administrative offense
under the last administration. And you
walk across the border, they uh do
what's called a release from your own
recgnizance and they give you an NTA, a
notice to appear, which appear at a
judge. The wait times on judges are like
average six years. Look at Grock, you'll
see it on immigration judges. There's
only 700 of them. This is 5.5 million
people. Okay. So, what happens then?
Once you're in the country and you got
asylum through one of these pathways, we
mapped the whole thing out. Uh, you can
apply for a work document. You file a
765. It's the work form. You get this
form called the 766. That's the
authorization. And then Social Security
Administration automatically sends you
in the mail your Social Security number.
No interview, no ID. This is worth like
just reiterating it. It it it's not that
it's not people sometimes think that
under the Biden administration that that
he was simply asleep at the switch. He
wasn't asleep. They weren't asleep at
the switch. It it it was a massive
largescale program to import as many
illegals as possible ultimately to
change the entire voting map of the
United States and disenfranchise the the
American people and make it a permanent
deep blue one party state from which
there would be no escape. We found 1.3
million of them already on Medicaid as
an example. We've gone through on every
benefit program we went through, we
found groups from this particular group
of people, this 5.5 million people in
those benefit programs. And then what
was really really disturbing us was why?
We're asking ourselves why. And so we
actually just took a sample and looked
at voter registration records and we
found people here registered to vote in
this population. Yes. and who did vote
and and we found some by sampling that
actually did vote and we have referred
them to prosecution at the homeland
security investigation service already
that is already happening there's a lot
of information that still needs to come
out um one of the things that I hope in
the way that I approach the world will
be useful to people is the idea of
running a thought experiment rather than
needing every shred of evidence you can
begin to map out your own value system
make it something very conscious to you
by asking yourself Okay, where where do
I have a problem here rather than
getting into the squabble? And this is
what was happening in the live. It was
all squabble about let me see the proof.
Uh I need to know that these numbers are
validated. I don't trust Elon Musk.
There's no way any of this is true.
Um that's one layer to have the debate.
The other layer is to say, okay, well,
how would I feel about this if this is
true? And then we can get to, okay,
well, if it is true, then I feel this
way. If it's not true, then I feel that
way. Um, but if you understand what
value system is driving your thinking,
you're going to get a lot of clarity.
So, I would ask people to ask one simple
question. Should people be able to come
into the country
illegally? Okay, that's question one.
Uh, if you agree that no, people should
not be able to come into the country
illegally, we need to update our
policies so that we're not playing
favorites to anybody. It's just this is
our immigration policy. And the reason
that I think and and I mean this from
myself and I hope that people would
adopt this that the reason that you want
to do that is
that you're allowing yourself to be
beholden to the voting public when you
say um I'm going to make a policy.
You're saying I'm going to drag this
into the daylight. I'm going to let
everybody look at this. I'm going to let
Congress decide what they want to pass
as laws. I'm going to make them battle
it out to get on the same page uh about
what we're all going to agree to moving
forward. When you try to do things under
the cover of darkness, what you're
saying is, I don't think that the voting
public is going to be trusted to make
the right decision here. I want to
sidestep the political process. I don't
trust it to yield the outcome that I
want. That is a group of people that
trust themselves in my opinion too much.
You should want to go through the voting
public as a way to go, I have biases. I
know that and so I want to involve
everybody in this decision-making
process or at least the people that are
going to be politically active. Cool.
Uh, so should people be allowed in the
country legally or illegally? Should we
do things as a matter of policy or do we
want our um representatives to do things
under the cover of darkness? Should
somebody that is not a citizen be
allowed to vote? That's another thing.
So again, let's say that yes, I am
perfectly fine for people to come in
legally or illegally. I don't care. I
think the policy should be such that
people should be able to come across the
border. We're a nation of immigrants.
Let's not be hypocrites. Come on over
everybody. Uh but if that is your
stance, do you think that they should
have to go through a process of becoming
a citizen? Like all of these questions
are answerable whether or not you think
this data is real. So we'll get to where
I think the spin begins in this so that
people can begin to separate spin from
just objective facts. But you don't need
to know the final answers to know what
you think about each beat in this
process. And that's where I think that
this gets deranging is we saw in our own
live that people derange immediately off
I either believe Elon or I don't believe
Elon. Forget all of that. What do you
think each beat of this process should
be? Once we have that mapped out, then
we can say cool. Uh this is how we want
to vote. This is how we want to move
things forward. But everybody's arguing
at the right level, which is the level
of the value system that will then drive
the policy rather than saying that I
think that this graph is fake. Okay.
Now, do I think that this graph is fake?
I have a feeling that the truest
statement ever made about statistics is
that there are lies, damn lies, and
statistics. And that you can look at
something from any angle to tell the
story that you want to tell. And I have
no doubt that Elon and uh anybody else
that's pulling these numbers is going to
pull the politically expedient numbers.
That goes for the Biden administration.
that goes for the Trump administration,
that goes for every administration ever
all through human history, is we are
going to pull the numbers that tell the
story that we already believe in, that
tell the story that we think is good for
us 100%. So that's why I think that
running these at the level of thought
experiment is going to be far higher
utility than just getting lost in the
numbers. Okay. To me, I'm willing to
believe that these numbers represent,
while admittedly you're going to go in
and find the thing that you want to
find, that they really do represent the
number of and their chart technically
says
new non citizen um acquirers of a social
security number. So, the I don't know
why when they talked about it, they
dropped the word new, but that's very
clearly on the chart. When do we want to
be issuing social security numbers? as
somebody who's married to a green card
holder, we had to go through this
process. There was all kinds of filing
and waiting and all of that stuff before
she could get her um social security
number and because she's not a citizen
has never attempted to vote. So, it
seems like a very important question to
ask ourselves. Do we want non-citizens
full stop to be able to vote? And should
there be any time period or u process to
vet them? Whether that's uh checking
that they are who they say they are,
that they have legal United States
identification, you know, so on and so
forth. What are the hurdles that we're
going to put before somebody? Um, now
where it becomes spin is when they're
telling you what the story is when he
goes, here's the data. And then we
started asking ourselves why. Everything
after that is conjecture. Um, now it's
entirely possible that their narrative
is accurate, but it's pretty easy to
steal man. a totally different
argumentation about we're doing this um
to keep costs low for the American
consumer. We're doing this because these
are people that are being persecuted in
their homeland. So sure, some people are
getting by the system, but this is
really about doing the moral thing that
also happens to be good for the American
people because they can get their costs
lowered by having immigrants who will
take jobs at a cost that American
workers simply wouldn't do. Very easy to
spin that. So again, to me, both of
those are narratives and thus they are
no longer tied to just pure objective
fact. Um, but the narrative that they're
putting forward is one as somebody who
lives in California is like there is a
second and third order consequence
whether it is the intention or not that
when you allow people to come to the
country that are like, "Oh my god, th
there's such an incredible safety net
here. It's opportunity. It's safety net.
It's wonderful. It's way better than
where I'm coming from. And you allow
them to flood over the border with no
expectation of assimilation. Uh they
would be fools not to take from the
system to say, "Hey, what they call
maximum payout that I'm going to
contribute illegal or not. I'm
contributing to the system, but now I'm
getting a disproportionate payout."
Partly because I've only been here for a
very short period of time. And and I
don't have the math to back this up, but
where I really expect people's alarm
bells to go off is either when there's a
disproportionate payout, meaning as a
pret percentage that as a recent
immigrant that your benefits are set to
the max and that the like veterans is
the one that people always go to. You've
got veterans who are struggling and
you've got immigrants that are um able
to take advantage of these systems. Why
is that? Yeah. So that's where I would
expect people to really say, "Okay, hold
on. This shouldn't be disproportionate.
Hold on. If we're going to rank order
people, veteran should come first, then
a normal citizen, then an immigrant, or
just say what your rank order is." Um,
so again, that we can draw it in the
light. We can debate about it. We can
set policy and move forward together as
a nation. But that isn't how this is
playing out. People are getting stuck on
the very true fact. This is story. This
is spin. We don't know that they're
doing it to create a deep blue state uh
to which we can never escape something
whatever his exact phrase was. Um though
judging by what happened to the amnesty
granted in California by
Reagan like somebody who when he was in
California I'm not sure if he was a
Democrat or Republican. Ultimately he
starts as a Democrat becomes a
Republican at some point. I actually
don't know the timeline. Uh but he
creates amnesty in California ever since
California has been a deep blue state
because you're going to get people that
are going to vote for the policies that
best take care of them. Uh and whether
that bankrupts the country or not
becomes irrelevant. Everybody does
what's in their best short-term
interest. Uh so given how we've seen
that play out in California, which has
not been positive, um it isn't something
that I as somebody who has a bias uh
want to see play out on the national
level. So there certainly is internally
coherent logic that Elon is laying out
but it is very important that people
understand where the data which is
already going to be whenever you see
data it's always going to be
cherrypicked to tell a story to give
people the confidence to move in a
direction it's not it's not always
nefarious um but that's where the spin
picks up both sides spin it like crazy
that's why I think hitting this at the
thought experiment level is the right
level of analysis Yeah, that seems
logical to me because in the live the
first thing somebody said was this is a
partisan chart and to me you can't even
get to the facts or you can't have the
narratives about value systems. You
can't open it up to debate when the data
presented is already skewed. So I think
taking a step back and establishing your
independent value system and then seeing
how do you feel about this many social
security numbers being issued and then
looking at the data that's when I think
it's a bit more like productive um
versus it's just Elon says it lie
talking point talking point talking
point 100%. Yeah. Um this came out at a
similar time where Americans are filing
their taxes. There's uh Savannah
Hernandez was reporting that Jackson
Hwitt was had a tent outside Roosevelt
Hotel in New York where a lot of the
migrants are staying and they were
handing out flyers for t for migrants to
get tax refunds up to 14,000. So I did
some digging into this. This is based
off both the earned income tax credit,
the child tax credit. So there were a
certain stipulations for how you could
get that much money back. Um, but the
TLDDR of it all is if you have some
level of income coming in and you have
more than three dependents, it's easy to
get a much like max tax refund. Um, I
feel like this is in the same class of
if a migrant comes in, get that social
security uh card, gets those benefits,
and then works a low wage job, they can
then turn around, use this tax uh refund
hat, and then get an additional 14K.
theoretically that migrant could make
out better than a veteran, better than
somebody whose federal minimum wage b
makes them uneligible to earn some of
these like tax reforms and rebates. So,
this is another way of kind of helping
um illegals more than we're helping the
average American. Um but now that it's a
tax problem, do you think it's in the
similar vein of what Elon is saying that
it should be closed full stop? like
what's your opinion from this
perspective since it is technically a
tax loophole and not the nefarious
Democrats importing it or anything like
that? I think people have to strip away
all of the um surface level moments of
impact to get lost in the debate about
these aren't illegals. These are people
paying into the system. Uh guys, this is
what we've been saying on the left
forever is that these people are paying
into the system and so you're making the
argument for us. If they're able to get
something out, then they're paying
something in. um the right that these
guys are illegal. They shouldn't even be
here in the first place. And
so go a layer deeper and just ask
yourself as a matter of policy, where
should we be at this? Um I find that one
of the things that deranges people's
thinking the most is an unwillingness to
prioritize things. So for instance, I
think a veteran should have like top top
top priority. So, if we're going to make
sure that people have benefits and that
they're getting a great payout, somebody
who put their life on the line for this
country, yes, please. That to me is just
good sense if you want to honor the
people that are sacrificing the most to
build this country. Um, so, okay, cool.
Right now, do we have a system that
yields that outcome or not? But anyway,
having people rank order things. So, to
me, a veteran, then a long-standing
citizen, then a noob, uh the person
who's paid the least into the system.
That to me just feels like a nice simple
uh way to think through this problem.
And then we can go, okay, is that what's
actually happening? Oh, and by the way,
this is a math question. We are right
now the the country is in debt by tens
of trillions of dollars. And once you
wrap your head around that that that we
don't have this money and that the way
that we take it, I've talked about this
too many times. The way that we take it
is immoral in my opinion through money
printing and essentially taxing the
whole world.
So we have to outline what do we think
is the moral way to move all of this
forward. Um if we're going to let
illegals in, then you certainly want to
get them paying into the system. Uh but
then why make them illegal? Like create
the path by which you just say this is
the thing. So to me it just all comes
back to drag this into the light. Let
the voter say which way they want the
country to go. Let people's voice be
heard. Uh build things out at the level
of policy. Do not do this under the
cover of night. And now at least we're
able to debate this stuff. But people
are so easily baited into the headline
rhetoric of uh they're not illegal
[ __ ] Nobody's illegal. Um they're
paying into the system and losing sight
of sure, but if they pay the minimum and
we give them the maximum payout, but we
don't do that for other people, how do
we feel about that? And then I do want
to see the public debate around what
would have to be true for the setup that
we see to be the way that it is. Any
philosophy needs to accurately describe
the world as it is. The second you're
not describing the world as it is, we
have a problem. So, we had a setup that
had millions of illegal people that were
violating the law to come into the
country. Okay? Whatever explanation you
give for that needs to explain that that
is happening. Um, you've got a tax
consultancy firm that realizes they can
make money by standing on the street
explaining to immigrants whether legal,
illegal. I'm going to guess they don't
care, but that they're going to make
money by explaining to them how to
maximize um the use of the system. Okay?
Is that a thing that we want or don't
want? So, getting down into the this is
what's happening. So, what have we done?
What would need to be the motivation for
that to be the outcome? Uh and
explaining why veterans are getting iced
out, why we have such a homeless
problem. like what is the motivation set
that would accurately describe that
world. Elon has put forward one set that
has internal logic. It may not be true,
but it has internal logic. And so the
left needs to present their best case of
no, no, no, that's [ __ ] He's
partisan hack. Here's the real reason.
And then allow people to go, do I really
buy? Because if I had to uh read the
left's mind, it would go something like
this. This is a humanitarian crisis. The
US itself has created much of this
instability, especially in South
America. Uh, we have a debt to pay. We
stole this land. We've created
instability. We are a nation of
immigrants. We need to stop being
hypocrites. We are the biggest economy
in the world. We need to start taking
care of people. We've allowed these
billionaires to flourish. This is crazy.
Get them to pay their fair share. Allow
these destitute, persecuted people to
come into the country. We've got plenty.
Let's take care of them. I imagine their
take goes something like that. Cool.
Now, at least we can set those up and
go, okay, given what we know about the
world, do we really think the people in
power, this is now my spin, you can hear
it in my [ __ ] voice, but this is
actually what I believe that people will
lie uh spin to get in power and maintain
power. So, which of the following seems
more likely? We're all just like big
hearts and we want to welcome everybody
in. I don't think that's 0%. I think
that really is in the mix, but I think
people just want to get in power and
stay in power. I think that's true of
Trump. I think that's true of Elon. I
think that's true of Biden. I think
that's true of Kamla. It just that's
man's political animal. James Burnham,
James Burnham.
So looking at the world and saying that
I think there's far more utility in
believing that
um you let that many people in because
it you think it keeps you in power and
it's like yep everything now clicks into
place for me. Not that people don't do
things for humanitarian reasons. But
that's not the primary driver. The
primary driver is people will do a
certain type of person who becomes an
elected official will do and say
whatever they need to to gain and
maintain power. It is very rare that
somebody gets to that office and
maintains it by being a George
Washington.
They don't make them like old Washington
no more. Everybody wants to become king.
Nobody wants to give it up. Yeah, too
true. Too true. We'll get back to the
show in a moment, but first, let's talk
about the impossible choice that crypto
investors are facing every day. You
either keep your crypto in a secure
retirement account with contribution
limits and restrictions, or you trade
freely on exchanges and run some risk
that your assets all vanish. It
Capital's premium custody accounts
finally eliminate this impossible
choice. Premium custody accounts utilize
a closed loop system that prevents
hackers from draining compromised
accounts. Your assets are never
leveraged, never loaned out, and never
mixed with business operations. Unlike
crypto IRA, premium custody accounts
have no annual contribution limits. You
can buy and sell crypto 24/7 with
complete freedom. Yes, transactions are
taxable, but the unmatched security and
control you get in return is worth it.
Visit
irrustcap.com/impact and use code impact
when you sign up to fund your account to
get a $100 bonus. Again, that's
it.com/impact. And be sure to use code
impact. This is a paid advertisement.
And now back to the show on this day. I
call it the tariff apocalypse because it
happened. U reciprocal tariffs, the auto
automotive industry tariffs, steel and
aluminum import tariffs. Uh the
Venezuelan oil secondary tariffs, we'll
get to that. Yeah, it's a whole
different thing. Secondary tariffs, a
whole different thing. Uh our trade
relations with Canada and Mexico, those
tariffs. Today is the day that a lot of
those tariffs are going into effect. We
already see some scar fear and
insecurity around the stock market. Um
the consumer price index is moving.
Consumers have less uh confidence in the
American economy. I understand on paper
long term this is supposed to be better
but it hurts right now. How do we move
through this tariff apocalypse? What do
you think happens in the short term? And
what can people do to kind of either
brace for it or just kind of have to eat
their medicine and just kind of wait it
to work? In the short term it creates
chaos. America is in a very precarious
position because even I as a lifetime
American citizen born and bred here as a
businessman, I look at this and go, I
don't know for how long this is going to
be true. And when you build your
government based on executive orders,
then the next president's going to come
in and they're going to write a whole
bunch of executive orders that undo all
the executive orders from the president
before. Trump did that day one. Yeah.
100%. And so it's like, if I'm not
mistaken, over the last three
presidencies, it's been like orders of
magnitude more EOS. And so we're just in
this period where it's like we're going
to do everything by decree. And that
creates
the unknown. So I don't know. As a
capital allocator, I'm like, uh, do I
move as if these tariffs are for real?
Like when people talk about the 2.02
trillion, Trump is now saying that is
far more than that. of these companies
that are like, "Okay, we're gonna invest
massively in America. We're going to be
moving our chip manufacturing here, our
car manufacturing here, etc., etc." Um,
will that actually play out? I'll plant
a flag on this one. I'll be very curious
to see if I end up being right. My gut
instinct is these guys are buying
themselves time to midterms. They will
spend the least amount of money possible
to find out if Trump is going to pull
this off. And if they do, then they'll
fasttrack the rest. And it's like, okay,
cool. We expect him to be in power uh
the Republican party to be in power for
another four years. And so now you're
talking about a six-year ride. Yeah,
we're gonna have to make investments.
You you you will never survive public
scrutiny as a public company if you're
like, "No, no, no, trust me. They're
gonna go out of power in six years. No
way." At that point, they will say,
"Okay, cool. I I at least see this
runway." But that's my instinct that
they're going to buy themselves time.
And if we are in a recession at the time
of the midterms, it will flip. This will
go Democrat. uh Trump will become lame
duck and Republicans will lose power and
Democrats will step back in and just
obliterate with EOS everything that
Trump has done. Uh and so that's just
how this pendulum swings. That makes me
paranoid. Okay, I've lived here my whole
life. So I can only imagine and I don't
have [ __ ] that like struggles with
tariffs. We're a media company. So it's
like we make everything right here. Uh
and even I'm like well I don't know. So
um the short term is
all insecurity, the unknown, paranoia,
turbulence in the markets. Long-term, if
he can pull it off, it onshores
manufacturing. It begins to um
reignite the middle American male in a
belief in himself that he can do
something, build something, create
something, use his hands. I always
caveat AI could just make all of this a
moot point. But you you have to debate
right now in the world where people just
cannot imagine what the future is
actually going to be like. And so
they're all acting as if AI isn't going
to just totally change this anyway. Um,
so I'll keep my arguments at that level,
but I think that is necessary given that
we are in a cold war with China. And so,
um, people have to put it into that
global context because that is, as far
as I can tell, precisely what's driving,
uh, Bessant, Lutnik, Trump, Elon, like
all of them understand this moment at a
global level in the way that I don't
think most of us on a day-to-day level
think about. These guys have made more
money off of understanding global
markets than anybody. So, um, they get
it like they get, especially Bessant
understands how global
macroeconomics works. And so given that,
I think they're all racing to try to
pull this off, to um understand what a
cold war with China is going to look
like, to understand how much of our
modern life is controlled through
Taiwan, that Taiwan is the number one ch
of China, that China controls like 85%
of our manufacturing means insane.
Americans make software, Chinese make
things. So, um, it is a very important
game to understand all of that and to
recognize that we have to bring some of
this back. And so, it it is a game I
think we have to play. You can't just
accept defeat. You can't just say,
"Well, China now controls everything."
And I guess when they decide that
they're not going to give us anymore,
like, "Fuck us." I think about this a
lot with Israel and um, Gaza, Palestine.
It's like, bro, you can't let people
control your water, your power. Um, I
expect people to hate this [ __ ] take,
but this is self-evident to me. I don't
give a [ __ ] if I'm under an apartheid
regime or not. If you're sending me
billion dollars in aid, I don't build my
military capabilities until I can take
care of my [ __ ] water and power. So,
I'm going to make sure that I'm getting
as close to 100% on my own two feet as
humanly possible. And that would be my
pitch to Americans. Hey, we are not on
our own two feet from a manufacturing
standpoint. China has got you, man, by
the shortened curies, as they used to
say. And so us pretending that that
isn't the case or us intentionally
blinding ourselves, I don't know. But
that's where I'm like, uh, kids, don't
you hope Trump is right? Like, you've
got to onore some of this. Not saying
all of this. You've got to onore some of
it. Anyway, I would listen to Bessant. I
would listen to Letic far more closely
than I listen to Trump. He does so much
chaos in his speaking uh in a way that
those two are very clear, very cogent.
You can track the internal logic. We're
going to find a trillion dollars in
deficit with Doge. Sorry, we're going to
find a trillion dollars in deficit
spending with Doge. And then we're going
to find a trillion dollars in additional
revenue from things like tariffs, things
like Trump's gold card. We're going to
balance the budget, and then we're going
to deregulate. We're going to unlock the
economy. we're going to get to say four
or five% GDP growth and now all of a
sudden everybody's feeling good. If they
do that by the midterms, dude, you got
another four years on top of this.
So, it's just a question of given the
complexities of global markets, can
they? I don't know. And then drilling
down into the Venezuelan secondary
tariffs. So, reciprocal tariffs, you
know, they have 200 tariffs on American
avocado. So we put 200 tariffs on
Indian% 200% uh 200% on there. So that's
the reciprocal, but secondary is
something different that you broke down.
So I want you to break that down too for
those of And that's specifically to
countries importing Venezuelan oil. Yep.
So a secondary tariff is where the
economic warfare machine that is the US
Treasury Department, which Bessant even
said, I when asked like what was the
thing you find most surprising about
your job? And he said, how much of my
time is spent on national security?
Meaning, I'm gonna go to countries and
be like, you imported Venezuelan oil.
Nope. Now there's a tariff across
whatever on your country. Uh, and so
this is how you break the back of an
economy is, and this is the thing that
we haven't done with Russia. To me,
Venezuelan oil is whatever. This really
plays out in can we put secondary
tariffs on anybody that does business
with Russian oil? And you're starting to
hear Trump now make noises about it.
This is the drum that I've been banging.
I will remind myself not to overindex on
how much I care about being right. I
need to find the right answer. It's the
only thing that matters. I'm gonna be
wrong a lot. But this was one of those
things where I was like, "This is almost
certainly the play. Trump is not a um
stoogge for Putin and he's going to put
in his back pocket that if Putin doesn't
play ball because to look like a hero,
Trump has to end that [ __ ] war
because he said, "I'll end it on day
one." Everybody knew that wasn't true.
But nonetheless, like you called your
[ __ ] shot, bro. And so you got to get
this one [ __ ] done. So I think he
knows that.
And if Putin ends up being the one
that's trying to um stall, trying to
drag this on, that's going to be obvious
for everybody paying any kind of
attention. And so Trump has said, "I'm
going to use secondary tariffs on the
Russian oil and gas economy." Because
the reason that they've been able to
continue to thrive and run this war is
all the sanctions that everybody put on
them was on everything except their
largest industry by a country mile,
which is oil and gas. And the reason
they couldn't do that is that will spike
gas prices in Europe and elsewhere. So,
you're going to get all this pressure
from your allies who are like, "Hey,
hey, hey, we get the moral thing here,
but I also can't have grandma freezing
to death in the middle of the winter uh
because we want to punish
Putin. My populace is not going to go
for that." So, this is where it's like,
okay, understand the potency of a
secondary tariff if you can pull it off.
So, I think what Trump is betting on is
that we can up our production here in
the US. uh of oil and natural gas and
then we can export it to make that make
up that demand. So we would effectively
be taking market share from Russia.
[ __ ] awesome for us, man. Awesome for
us, devastating for Russia if we can
pull it off. Um so yeah, my hunch is
that that's the algorithm that Trump is
running and he's saying something to
Putin like you have two choices. Choice
number one, end the [ __ ] war. Choice
number two, I'm gonna take your market
share and sell our oil and natural gas.
Now, I there is a huge base assumption
in there that we can meet that demand at
a price that would be of roughly equal
value to Europe and I have not looked
closely enough at it to know if that's
true. That breakdown rides in the back
of that assumption.
Um, but his behavior doesn't make sense
minus that.
And we see some for you said
macroeconomics earlier. So in other
international news, China, Japan, and
South Korea have agreed to closely
cooperate in response to these US
tariffs. So we're already seeing other
countries saying, "Okay, this is
happening. So now we need to kind of
rethink our business deals and our trade
deals." Not just countries saying it.
It's one thing if Germany and France and
Italy, who hey, they had their moment 80
years ago in World War II, uh, but since
then they have not been bitter rivals.
When I say China, Japan, and South Korea
[ __ ] hate each other, I mean hate in
like all capital letters. Uh so the
seeing the three of them, in fact,
there's a reason that they did the photo
op where they're doing like the
crossarmed handshake thing, uh like
where you each, uh wrap arms as you
cheers and drink from your glass. Yeah.
So that is I have to believe even from
their own lens, they view that as this
is historic because the the amount of
animosity, man, cannot be overstated.
like this. This is like um if 30 years
from now Palestinians and Israelis were
holding hands and doing a trade deal,
you'd be like, "Whoa, those guys used to
be bitter rivals, bitter rivals, and now
they're shaking hands." I have a
conspiracy theory. think that this could
be the start of like a rising empire
because I think if China as the head
Japan and South Korea kind of fall in as
the equivalent to our Mexico and our
Canada to their China that can be like a
dynasty in Asia that I think can
essentially take over the world because
they're already each of them
individually already are cutting edge in
so many different industries that you
just scale that with China's
manufacturing and you can take over
practically like here's the thing that
that isn't a conspiracy theory. That is
exactly geopolitics. So geopolitics is
who who's got the baddest military on
planet Earth. Usually the Navy.
Whoever's got the best navy wins. And so
everybody's always asking themselves two
questions. Who can beat me militarily?
And who has trade that I can do with
that would make me more prosperous as a
nation. And for the last 70ish years,
it's been Pax Americana. And America's
had the best navy. We have controlled
we've uh patrolled the seas we have kept
the international order on land and we
were also the biggest economy. So
everybody would ask those two questions
they would come up America America
America and then globalism happens and
this is why you'll forever get this
expand and contract expand and contract.
You expand through globalism, you
contract through protectionism. And the
reason that that aka populism, the
reason that that happens is as you go
globalist, you make your quote unquote
enemies strong. And for better or worse,
when humans get strong and they detect
any weakness in somebody else, which
almost always comes after you have a big
empire, then they go, "Hey, wait a
second. Why am I doing what you want me
to do? I'm going to start doing what I
want to do. I'm going to start doing
trade alliances with Japan and South
Korea and I don't care about you. I
don't care what the US thinks about
this. And the Japanese and South Koreans
start going, "Huh? Uh, America's being a
little dodgy right now. I don't know."
Like they swing wildly from one
administration to the next. I don't feel
confident that I know who they are, what
they're going to be like in four more
years. And so, uh, China might be
authoritarian and maybe I don't love
that, but at least they're consistent. I
think that I look into the future, I see
Xinping, as far as the eye can see. What
do we have 20 years, 30 years life with
Xiinping? Hey, that's the kind of future
I can see. I can predict. I love that.
And uh just like Americans knew that
[ __ ] Mao starved his own people to
death that he was he made Darth Vader
look like the nicest guy ever. He made
the emperor look like a good dude. So,
uh we were still more than happy to go
sell [ __ ] to them. So, this is what
happens. you go, I can get cheap [ __ ]
from them. I can sell them things. This
is going to be amazing.
And it's what sets up Thusidities Trap.
And so, we might need to do like a video
on Thusidities Trap or something at some
point because that's one of those that
sounds so fancy and people don't know
what that means. It just means the
formerly the for all my UFC fans, you've
got a champion. He's been dominant
forever, but he gets towards retirement
age. He just can't accept that the young
Bucks are coming for him. For a while,
he's gonna dodge him. Gonna be like,
"He's not my class. He's got to fight
these other people before he gets to
me." Disrespect. Disrespect. And then it
gets to the point where you can no
longer um deny that they're the the one
you should be fighting. They're the
number one contender. So, what do you
do? You go on a bark offensive. What a
fool. What an idiot. Doesn't know how to
fight. I'm going to thrash him. Beat him
in the first 30 seconds. You've never
seen anything like this. Trying to get
in their head. trying to keep him weak,
but ultimately you actually throw
punches. Now all the yapping is the
economic warfare.
Unfortunately, like 70% of the time it
ends in actual bloodshed and we're on
that path and we are acting exactly the
way theidities trap comes from the
[ __ ] ancient Greeks and seeing what
was happening between Athena and Sparta.
And it was like yeah these two are going
to collide like Athens can't accept I
can't remember actually which who was
stronger at the time. One of them
couldn't accept that they had become
weaker and the other was like you will
show me my proper respect. Uh and so the
Thusidities was watching. He's like uh
oh these two are going to collide.
There's just no escaping it. And of
course they did. Um so that's what we're
all poised with. That's what you see
when you see the tariffs being thrown
around. It's a lot of barking.
Unfortunately, you have to do some of
this because you have to onore blah blah
blah. All the things that I already
said. Uh if it was just posturing, then
we could just say, "Hey, America, chill
the [ __ ] out." You can't.
Um so yeah, when you see China, Japan,
and South Korea holding hands, your
right to be this feels like an alliance.
Yeah. It's known as spheres of
influence. China's building the East
Asian sphere of influence, and they're
basically going to say American stay the
[ __ ] out. I see it. It's happening. Um,
locally, Pam Bondi had time. Um, she is
coming for everybody. She's coming for
your neck. She first said she wants 20
years prison time for the Colorado man
accused of firebombing a Tesla. You got
to play this clip. You've got to hear
her in her own words. I've made it
clear. If you take part in the wave of
domestic terrorism against Tesla
properties, we will find you, arrest
you, and put you behind bars. Today, I'm
proud to announce that the Department of
Justice has unsealed federal charges
against another Tesla attacker. We've
charged Cooper Frederick in the
firebombing of a Tesla dealership that
occurred on March 7th in Lovelin,
Colorado. All of these cases are a
serious threat to public safety.
Therefore, there will be no negotiating.
We are seeking 20 years in prison. The
crime was committed in Colorado and
thanks to the great investigative work
by the FBI, the defendant was arrested
in Plano, Texas. Let this be a warning.
You can run, but you cannot hide.
Justice is coming. Wow, bro. That is
like bad uh scripting. It's like, come
on. If you want to sound badass, go get
your boy Taylor Sheridan. Get him to
write some scripts for you guys. Like,
we got to do better. Uh, so I get I get
weird vibes from Pam Bondi. There's this
is pure emotion, so everyone can just
totally disregard this. Uh, there is
something in the
um the glee with which she does this.
Listen, you need a society based on law
and order. You can't have people
firebombing anything. Forget Tesla. I
wish it were anything but Tesla. Uh,
just because it's obviously people are
going to cry impure motives. She had she
had more time though cuz she came for
Luigi Manion, the killer of Brian
Thompson, the healthcare CEO. Yeah. She
said he murdered uh Luigi Manion, murder
of Brian Thompson, an innocent man and
father of two young children, was a
premeditated cold-blooded assassination
that shot America. She described
Thomasson's killing as an act of
political violence, and she's seeking
the death penalty for him. So, she's
putting down an iron hammer. So, at
least she's consistent. But do you think
it's a little bit of an overreach or um
what we have now is more aggressive than
I would like to see the tenor of a uh
administration be. Um but hey,
you doing what they're doing is not
going to be easy. If you are trying to
reestablish law and order, you're going
to have to get people that are pretty
doggedly in that camp. Mhm. Um, but my
take on this is that when you start
putting together uh Pam Bondi's level
Pam Bondi's level of aggression, you've
got Ice uh with their extreme level of
aggression and uh Homeman and the way
that he talks.
Um, you're starting to create this
draconian feel that I am aesthetically
not a fan of. If this ends up leading to
the outcome that we want, great. And
thank goodness nobody had to listen to
me. But I will say that this feels
cartoonishly aggressive. And so I want
law and order. I want there to be very
clear this is this is the rule and if
you violate that rule, this is what's
going to happen. But there's something
cartoonish about the sort of exaggerated
way that we're going about it. I think
lawfare is being used in a very
interesting ways. Uh Joe Biden mentioned
it with the Hunter Biden prosecution.
Trump has experienced it. And now we see
in France, Marian Le Pen, who was the uh
leading in the 2027 polls in France, has
just been sentenced to four years in
prison and was banned from running in
the next election. So people are even
screaming in France that some people are
using lawfare to sway political
influence. Um it's weird. Like she
embezzled funds. She was found guilty in
a court of law. I'm hoping it was a
legit trial, but it is kind of
convenient that the number one
challenger to the current party has now
been jailed. Yeah. Uh people have got to
wean themselves of this problem because
the one when somebody's politically
motivated like we were talking about
earlier, they're going to find the way
to look at this. They're going to find
the case to pursue like with all the
Trump stuff where it was like, okay,
yes, he did violate a law, but
technically the statute of limitations
had elapsed. Also, this is normally done
as a misdemeanor, but they're doing it
as a felony. It's like all that stuff
just starts adding up. And speaking for
myself, you start looking at it going,
just let him run. Like, either you can
beat his ideas or you can't. Now, this
doesn't mean that we want a lawless
society. You want people to be held
accountable. But when you're talking
about a political opponent that you're
pursuing, you've got to raise the bar.
Otherwise, the look of impropriety is
absolutely horrible. in the episode that
I did with um Joseph's Chris Joseph
Chris Joseph's thank you uh where we
were talking about okay are the Congress
people actually doing insider trading
and the right answer is even if they're
not it looks like they are you do not
want to be in a position where you do
that even Alexander Hamilton when he was
in office said because I'm going to be
the head of the treasury I'm going to
divest everything I'm going to take my
salary from this I'm not going to be
taking money from outside the
government. The odds of it looking like
there's impropriety is way too high. Uh
and I thought that was brilliant. And he
ended up somebody wrote him like asking,
hey, how should I think about I'm an
investor. How should I think about this?
And he was like, I'm not even going to
take a meeting with you because even
though I trust that you would never ask
me to answer something that was improper
and I know myself and I would not answer
something that was improper, it will
look like there could be a chance of
something improper happening. and so I'm
just not even gonna take the meeting.
And I thought, yeah, that's exactly how
this stuff should be playing out. If you
have a political opponent, look, there
are things that they could be doing that
are so blatant that even though it's
like, [ __ ] this is terrible optics, we
have to pursue it. Um, that certainly
did not feel like the case here in the
US with Trump for all the stuff that he
did that were gross or questionable.
Like that is not the hill to dine. The
hill to dion is to say these are the
ideas that he represents. We're not here
for that. Uh we want to beat him in the
court of public opinion. We all serve at
the pleasure of the public and if the
public wants to see this guy run, let
him run. They should have let RFK run on
and on and on. Uh so that's how I would
approach this. This is predictable in a
populist moment where everybody thinks
that they're fighting for their lives.
Everybody thinks if we let that side win
that it's people are going to be dying
in the streets and so they start killing
people in the streets hopefully
metaphorically for now but it's like
that's the level of stakes that they see
everything as and so yeah maybe it's a
little dicey what we're doing but we
have to because Trump is the next Hitler
and so that's how they justify all of
this stuff rather than going I'm
politically motivated because I really
believe in this thing that I'm fighting
for and therefore I cannot trust myself
that that is the frame of reference of
people should invite themselves into and
say the only way we're going to stay
sane is if we get everybody to debate
their ideas as
ferociously like within a code of
ethics. But like really debate your
ideas. Give us your best idea. Show us
how this tracks historically. Show us
why you think that it's going to work
well moving into the future. Tell us
what are the values that you're trying
to live up to so that we can actually
look at that and go, one, are those the
values that we want to be fighting for?
And two, do we believe that those values
will actually yield that outcome? then
it it is less deranging. I understand
it's not how the human mind works.
Humans are emotional tribal creatures
and thus everything is going to shatter
into that. But my hope is that for
people who are interested in the tension
between the two sides that I can lend
voice to that idea and to get more
people go, "Yeah, there needs to be this
tension between the two sides rather
than try to knock out that party because
it might win." We'll get back to the
show in a moment, but first I have good
news for small business owners. Your
days of scattered finances and wasted
time are over. Say hello to Found. The
last business banking platform you're
ever going to need. With Found, you can
effortlessly track expenses, manage
invoices, and even find tax write-offs
all in one place. No more juggling
multiple apps or spreadsheets. Plus,
it's completely free to sign up, and
small b