Ryan and Emily discuss Trump saying the US will own Gaza, Elon DOGE kids raid treasury, Trump to dismantle education department, GOP caves on Tulsi and RFK, climate change plummeting home values, Jasmine Crockett attacks mediocre white boys.
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com
Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/
Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of the show.
This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.
So if that is something that's important to you, please go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints dot com.
Good morning, and welcome to Counterpoints.
We've got quite a packed show today, And Emily, I was just thinking that, jording to Biden era, you can actually kind of phone in the prep for these shows sometimes because it wasn't a whole lot emanating from that White House, not a whole lot, and also there wasn't a whole lot going on outside of the lines. Yeah, you just kind of they were just doing what they were doing, and they're doing in genocide over here. They've got to keep doing their genocide with this. You have to be like, wait a minute, is that legal everything? Then you look it up You're like, Nope, what they're doing here is definitely not legal.
I'm gonna have to gonna have to flag that in the hall.
It's funny you say this. I had the exact same thought this morning that under Biden, you know, this is the norm. This is the pre Trump norm. It was utterly predictable, and there would be something maybe out of the ordinary every week and you'd think, ah, what a crazy country. But it's back to the routine of you know, twenty seventeen through twenty twenty one here in Washington, which is that all of the different agencies and a lot of people watching this are like, yeah, this is this is what we voted for. All the agencies are in scrambling, they're in panic. But as a journalist, it's a different rhythm, that is for sure.
Elon Musk used the word a revolution to describe what he and his is it dojay or doggy? I think we should go with I think it's o joj. Let's go with Dojay.
This isn't Ryan's TikTok odyssey involves him try to pronounced that much.
Musk described what his Doggie Committee is doing as a revolution, and I think that's an accurate way to put it. And that doesn't mean that we won't continue pointing out all the different federal laws that it's in violation of, because you know, we're reporters and that's what we do. This is here's a law. Here's what they're doing. They clearly are so far beyond caring about what the law is around this stuff that it almost feels trite to bring it up.
But we're going to keep doing that because of.
Contempt for it.
There. Yes, yes, it's a it's a revolution.
And you also look ridiculous as Democrats, now do you had democrats outside of USAID. You had the guy that beat out AOC for the Jerry Connolly saying, you know, if Elon Musk wants to run AID, then he should get nominated and get confirmed in the Senate.
Yeah.
And then Reuben Diego is like, if if Trump wants to octi Gaza, he should come to the Senate and ask for authorization for the use of military for like what he should.
Okay, but it's this is a revolution. They don't care.
But anyway, we're going to talk about the substance and the legality of all this. Of course, starting with Trump's bombshell announcement that we are just going to own Gaza. Okay, we'll get deeper deeper into that. We're going We're going to talk to Nathan Tankers as an independent reporter who's been talking to people inside the Treasury Department about what the Doggy Committee's lanyard kids, or maybe they don't even have lanyards, They just roll right in there. What these do, what these little hacker kids are doing inside the Treasury Department, and what they're not doing, what the what the risks of that would be? I talked to a very senior former Treasury official who's worked in this precise area last night that I can shed a little light on this as well. Trump is also saying that he's going to get rid of the Department of Education, which again that would require an Act of Congress. He's going to try to make progress toward that through through executive action.
GOP. What is that one on that thing?
I do remember that well, basically Republican's cave to the Republicans and.
The Tulsi and RFK Junior cruising.
Yeah, I mean this is they have complied with the demands of Mecca. Bill Cassidy was really on the line and could have yeah he's a doctor, but got actually some interesting concessions out of Robert F. Kennedy Junior, Tulsea Gobert, and RFK Junior's votes will be on the Senate floor next week. They're likely to pass. Actually there. Their hardest battle may have just been getting out of committee, which is unusual for cabinet nominees. So we're going to break down what happened in the Senate yesterday. We're also going to talk about housing.
Ryan New York Times had a fascinating analysis in a story that it did with with Pro Publica where it looked at housing price trends all around the country and found that there's now a stark divergence that you're seeing in the data when it comes to home prices in places that face catastrophic climate threats and places like say the Midwest or New England that do not, and in the mid Atlantic to some degree as well.
So if you own homes in those areas.
They expect that you're going to continue to see your housing wealth and your housing prices grow. If you own homes in the other areas you're going to see your values crash, which they're forecasting could lead to like five million internal migrants over the next year, fifty five million over the next like thirty years, like going to have real structural implications for the population of the United States.
Those have a fun Jasmine Crockett clip that we're going to play and see if maybe.
Some never disappoints.
No, no, see if we can maybe stave off some white tears.
She is either four against mediocre white people. Were not quite clear, but we'll unpack it all.
Yeah, we'll make sure to do that. Let's turn to the White House now, where an absolutely wild cascade of statements from President Donald Trump came during his meeting with Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahoo, who was in town last week meeting with Donald Trump, and Trump rolled out an absolutely shocking announcement actually was surprising even to his own White House. Just before we roll this clip front of the show, Phil Weigmann reported in Real Claire Politics, quote after Trump made his announcement, even some senior administration officials were surprised and still looking for answers. Quote that was interesting, one told Real Claire Politics after the press conference wrapped, asked what the plan would look like in practice, the official replied, quote, I need to get clarity myself, Ryan.
Yeah.
And so Trump in his press conference said that this is not a decision he came to lightly. This is some This is the results of great and extraordinary deliberation, which is undercut by the idea that it came as a surprise to senior administration officials and even seemed to take net Nyaho a little bit by surprise, like it's not clear how what how much of this came up in their conversation. Because we're about to play you some clips from their their little tete tet before the meeting, during which Netnyah who cannot wipe the smile off of his face, you'll notice that in the clips, and then their stand up press conference afterwards, during which nen Yahou looks a little bit shell shocked after getting news that he appeared not to have expected and doesn't quite I think know how to internalize or make of It'simir ben Gavie, you know, super far right guy who was abandoning nen Yahuo overstriking a ceasefire deal, tweeted Donald We're gonna have a wonderful relationship like this is a guy who was himself, like what, a convicted terrorist in Israel and has always wanted to, you know, ethnically cleanse Gaza, and he now sees trumping in his reflection. So let's roll a little bit of this and then try to unpack how serious he is and what the implications would be.
The only reason the Palestinians want to go back to Gaza is they have no alternative. It's right now a demolition site. This is just a demolition site. Virtually every building is down. They're living under fallen concrete. That's very dangerous and very precarious. They instead can occupy all of a beautiful area with homes and safety, and they can live out their lives in peace and harmony instead of having to go back and do it again. The US will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a job with it too. We'll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site. Level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out, create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area. The real job do something different, just state than.
Really demanding a path towards a Palestinian state or any other recognition.
Everybody demanding one thing. You know what it is peace. We want peace. We want people to stop being killed. But everybody's demanding and he wants.
So.
Reporters had a lot of questions about that announcement that we were going to take over Gaza. Among them was will this involve US boots on the ground? And Trump said, if if that's what it requires, then it will require.
They also ask because there were there were there obviously is.
Enormous amounts of reconstruction UH and demolition work and removal of unexploded ordinance that needs to happen there, and so there does need to be some displacement, either internally or externally in the course of doing that. And so Trump was a asked, Okay, you're taking over Gaza. How many Palestinians do you expect will be removed from Gaza? Here's what he said.
How many people? Who you're thinking about all of them?
I mean we're talking about probably a million seven people, a million seven, maybe a million eight, but I think all of them.
So all of them and notice there, and a lot of people have picked up on this. This is not the first time that he has flagged Gaza's current population at about one point seven million. It was two point three million when it started. The public figures are that just over sixty thousand were killed in the conflict. What we know about conflict is that there are usually four to five what they call indirect deaths for every direct killing in a conflict. And the indirect deaths you can just just use your imagination. These are people who die from treatable diseases, die of drive down nutrition, die of dysentery, or something something falls on them. Then they die an accident on death in a way that they would not have if they were not living in a war zone. So sixty thousand times four to five you can imagine that. Okay, So now the US is starting to admit that actually several hundreds of thousands of people were killed here. But then the final question, and then let's analyze this for a bit, is what would the Palestinians be able to return in this let's say fantasy scenario where somehow Trump manages to remove all one point seven million people, which we'll talk about how fantastical that idea is, But would they be able to return? Here's trump would Palestines have the right to return to Gaza if they left while the rebuilding was appening.
It would be my hope that we could do something really nice, really good where they wouldn't want to return. Why would they want to return? The place has been the hell.
It's been one of the meanest, one of the meanest, toughest places on Earth, And right now it's I've seen every picture from every angle better than.
If I were there, and nobody can live there. You can't live there.
It's too dangerous for people. Nobody can go there. It's too dangerous. Nobody wants to be there. Warriors don't want to be there, Soldiers don't want to be there.
How can you have people go back?
You're saying go back into Gaza now, the same thing's going to happen, It'll only be dead.
The best way to do it is you go out and you get beautiful.
Open areas with the sunlight coming through, and you build something nice, and they are.
Not going to want to They are not going to want to go back to Ghaza.
So the second half of that clip there was actually in response to a different question, which was would you support Jewish settlements in Gaza, which is what Ben Gavie and Smotrich and this kind of faction of settlers are pushing for, And he was saying it's too dangerous for them too. He's like, I'm not saying it's only too dangerous for Palestinians, it's also too dang.
So at least he's being consistent there now.
The other the line he said, where I want to make it so beautiful that they don't want to return, has been bouncing around my head because I'm like, that just doesn't make sense, and I think I finally unlocked it. I think he means they're going to make whatever refugee camp they send them to so beautiful and so amazing and so wonderful.
Well, he said they're going to have beautiful houses.
Beautiful houses that they won't want to leave that area. So he's not saying we're going to make Gaza so amazing they won't want to come back, which makes no sense, because of Gods is amazing, forget the heritage and everything else. If it's amazing, he want to come back. He's saying that wherever they send.
Them So.
There are layers of this going on here, and the kind of first one that we have to confront with Trump always is how serious is this on the complete total nonsense bluff spectrum to deadly serious plan that he's going to execute on Where are you on this on the Trump spectrum? There?
I mean, I think you absolutely have to take him seriously because he's speaking as though, on the one hand, this is a fully fleshed out plan. Right, He's saying he had answers to all of these particular questions.
There are things that hescept not where they're going to go.
Well, he's so, but that hinges on what he's saying as an agreement in the works with other Arab nations, which is already done on arrival, because Saudi Arabia has said no. The Sovereign Wealth Fund that was announced in what the last forty eight hours, I suppose is potentially aimed at something like this.
It seems to can redevelop God's I see right, Yeah.
It seems like it was something that's cobbled together in the last forty eight hours, maybe with input from Jared Kushner. As Tara Palmry is reporting that you know, we covered this at the time, it didn't get a lot of pick up, but Kushner had sent something to the extent this was last year that Gaza could be developed, that it was like an amazing opportunity for real estate developers. Yeah, exactly, Riviera.
So yeah, the Jordan and Egypt points are I think are worth pausing on for a second, because Trump seems to be so.
Trump is saying, and he's going to meet soon with the King of Jordan. He talks.
You know, you can get the as he calls him, the General in Egypt CC and get him on the phone when ever he once.
Trump is saying that he's he compared them to Mexico and Canada.
He's like, Mexico and Canada said they weren't gonna do anything about their border, and then I threatened tariffs and boom, all of a sudden, they're doing something about their border. Couple things there. Mexico and Canada never said they wouldn't do anything about their border.
It was fairly easy.
Oh, you want to send ten thousand National Guard to our border and you'll back off these terriff threats.
Okay, fine, we will do that.
That's a different concession than something that both CC and.
The Royal family and Jordan believe would lead to their toppling. Think about this.
They're much smaller countries than we are, and you're asking them to take a million people each. And these million people are more affiliated politically with Muslim brotherhood factions, which the hash of Mites in Jordan and the military and Egypt have done everything they can to suppress. So now you're just you're empowering them and destabilizing your country. So you're asking these rulers with threats of whatever economic threats that Trump is going to make on the one hand, and carrots on the other, we'll pay this, we'll do this, We'll give you all this money from the World Bank im and we'll build this. What does that mean to a ruler who thinks that the end result of accepting the deal is that within some period of time they will be overthrown, They will be out of power. Rulers are willing to take deals that are harmful to their populations if they think it's going to extend their power.
Like that's just basic kind of power politics.
So Trump is in a Trump thinks they're just being stubborn and that he can conjole them, but it is existential for.
Them, and they actually also know. And this is worth pausing on maybe one of the most obvious points here. The reason that Trump is asking the question, why would you want to go back? It's a place of death and destruction? Well, they know that, they have known that for decades and they have not left. The whole point is the land. The entire fight is over the specific piece of land. So to say that why would they want to go back? I mean, this is the question that they have been answering definitively for decades. So in terms of in the pragmatic terms of what Donald Trump thinks will actually happen here, when you have Tony Blincoln saying just a month ago, less than a month ago, that three quarters of the Hamas fighters have already been replaced. They've already replaced three quarters of the people that Hamas has lost. You have a population that is clinging to the land and has been for years, for generations, over and over again, and a militant government that's US troops on the ground. There's no other way to put it. The other Arab countries wouldn't be able to just peel the population of Gaza away from Gaza without violence. There's absolutely no way that this happens without incredible violence. And likely if Donald Trump says we quote own the Gaza strip, if he says the US is just going to come in and take ownership and he thinks he can make a deal, this will be US troops. This would be kids from the Midwest, from everywhere, boots on the ground in Gaza, peeling people away from the land that they have spilled generations of blood to stay on.
If they wanted to rebuild Gaza, Like, there are hundreds of thousands of residences that are still habitable, Like the entire thing is not on ahabitals. But let's say you do need a million people to go somewhere else. You could find some housing internally within Gaza for some portion of those. But there is another country that is right there that could take people for the time period.
And that country's name is Israel.
And that country also happens to be the one that made it uninhabitable. So if they're serious here about that, like, they could do that, and there's a step toward peace and coexistence. But I think it's worth underscoring a valid point that Trump makes and that is the absolute level of destruction. And Witkoff talked about this as well outside of the White House. So let's and you can see the real estate developer in him as he's talking about So let's roll eight A two here, and then I want to skip ahead on something go ahead.
When the President talks about cleaning it out, he talks about making it habitable. And this is a long range plan. They've dug tunnels underneath there that have basically degraded the stone that you make that would form foundations. We have to examine that. You do it with borings, you do it with subterranean surveys, and this guy knows real it's years on top of years. The disposal effort in Gaza is we estimate three to five years just to dispose of all the things before you can look down but believe beneath the surface of the soil, and then before you get a master plan done. And the President is intent on getting it all done correctly. So to me, it is unfair to have explained to Palestinians that they might be back in five years. That's just preposterous and he's just taking common sense.
So a few months ago I spoke to a un official whose job it was to do ordinance removal after the twenty fourteen war in Gaza, and what he described. First, first of all, there are not a whole lot of people able to do this in the world, like there's you.
Know, small teams that specialized work.
Second of all, he described it as painstakingly laborious stuff. So in general, as he was describing it to me, and I've since been able to confirm this with others. The munitions that Israel uses, oftentimes five to ten percent of those under the best of circumstances, do not explode upon impact.
They are not operating in the best of circumstances.
They're operating in this dense urban environment, which means you're going to have a much higher failure rate, which means you're going to have unexploded ordinance everywhere around around Gaza. Because if you know, the numbers are absolutely breathtaking when it comes to the amount of metric tons that have been dropped on gays. And so if you take ten to twenty percent of that and assume that that is unexploded, like that's that's the task. And he said that these are actually much more stable than you would think that doesn't probably wouldn't give me a whole lot more comfort, Coli comfort if it was in my own courtyard or in my bedroom. He said, For instance, they pulled one out of a kitchen, like it came to the roof, second floor, through the kitchen floor, and just getting that one single unexploded bomb out of that kitchen took them weeks because you got to first, you got to clear the door out, and you have to do all this gently because while they are stable, they become destabilized if if a bulldozer hits them or something else significant. And so our one of our correspondents in Gaza, Abubaker a bet who's been on this program a bunch of times. So yesterday he tried to get to Gaza City, couldn't get a ride, ended up in these a bunch on his Twitter agencies, ended up walking and took him like three and a half hours to walk to Gaza City. And we can roll a four here just to get a sense of the destruction. And at the end of this clip he stumbles on an unexploded mine. Just to just to underline that Trump's point that this is an extraordinarily dangerous situations let's play a four.
Here.
Here we are, it's just seven in the morning. Came Gaza City where all you can see is just total destruction. There are some buildings that have been destroyed during the genocide.
So I think I found a line.
Yeah, so I'm gonna walk away fixed. Oh my god, what this sound is?
And we often get questions, by the way, about Aba Baker's British accent. He was a before the October seventh. His passion was doing journalism around football, European football, and so he picked up his British accent. He's never left gods in his life, picked up a British accent watching British footballers. But so you see there he's just stumbling along and oh, there's a mind like that that does have to be that does have to be dealt with. And I had the sense throughout this that Israel knew that that part of the carpet bombing of the entire thing of goz It was to make it uninhabitable, was to produce a reality that left you only bad options for the Palestinians, and one of them being all right, what a shame, love to have you stay. But now it's completely uninhabitable, You're going to have to leave. But like I said, if he was serious, there is a there is a plan where five hundred thousand, two million people can stay. Another one hundred get relocated inside Gaza. Those are the workers who are involved in this reconstruction.
It's ridiculous.
What's Trump's idea is going to kick all the Palestinians out and then bring like Indian or Thai construction workers in Like that doesn't make any sense. You've got people who could do the work, and then you could have the others internally displaced in the Negev desert or elsewhere in like in settlement camps, and with a promise that they're going to return when it's done. And that promise backed up by the prospect of a path towards statehood and normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel.
So all of that is pushing in the same direction.
Instead, instead of Trump getting a Saudi Israel peace deal, in this path, he's more likely to see the Egyptian and Jordanian ones unravel, like they will stop recognizing Israel if they keep pushing this.
That's a great point because this plan is I think, on the one hand hyper pragmatic and not pragmatic at all, Like that's the tension between this. On the one hand, he's saying he's making this very obvious point that everyone dances around, which is, okay, if this is a ceasefire, we're about to repeat a traffic cycle. He's making that point, everyone dances around it. But on the one hand, that's absolutely true, and it's from the sort of pragmatic lens of a non idea logue, and so he made that point. On the other hand, the idea of peeling people off the land that they fought generations to keep, there's nothing pragmatic about it unless you're willing to actually do a significant A Rock style nation building operation in the Gaza strip, which is what about the size of Las Vegas. If you want to go and do that and then have the US own a strip of land in the Middle East that is sacred to many many people, you're asking for again, generational nation building. And so it's exploded all of these typical I guess fault lines of what MAGA means to the Republican Party, but beyond that, what MAGA actually means, like to the American people, to the people who voted for Donald Trump. Is it about the sort of expansionism imperialism, or is it about actually, like quote unquote America First, Josh Holly right away told The New York Times, I don't think it's the best use of US resources to spend a bunch of money in Gaza. I'd prefer that to be spent in the United States. First.
That's the logic of MAGA.
So maybe which rows out of the ashes of the Iraq occupation exactly exactly.
I mean, what about all of the tunnels. Just let's just take the point that you hear from Yahoo and yeah, all like, what does it look like if Hamas says you are not taking us.
And if you tell them they're not right, If if you tell them right out front, okay, we're kicking you out and you're never coming back, then of course they're going to fight you.
Yeah. But this brings us to your original point, which is how serious is what Donald Trump laid out yesterday And my impression is that this is something he's thought about for a while. With Kushner, they've kicked around this sort of like.
Galaxy brain, real estate brain.
Right, Yeah, it's sort of been kicked around and then just in the last few days they decided, oh, who's coming, we can like actually really do this. Let's see what we can actually put together. Because again, like actual people in the White House, senior officials were caught off guard by this. That much is very clear. So whether this is a starting point tariff style, twenty five percent tariff style or teriff style starting point is unclear. But Ryan, it's the same thing with the tariffs. I think he should be taken seriously because he's not He has not an ideal log. He's not ideologically committed to one outcome or the other. So when he does these negotiations, he could kind of land wherever he thinks it works for him.
And confusing the situation further.
He's now talking, as of this morning, his most explicitly about reaching a deal that he will celebrate with Iran, which obviously cannot happen if he engages in full on ethnic cleansing in Gaza. So let's put up a three here where he's talking about the role that Iran negotiations play.
Here, Iran and their proxys who threaten to retaliate.
Against you and your team by killing you guys or taking out solo.
Well, they haven't done that, and that would be a terrible thing for them to do, not because of me. If they did that, they would be obliterated. It would be the end I've left instructions. If they do it, they get obliterated, there won't be anything left and they shouldn't be able to do it.
And Biden should have said that, but he never did. I don't know what. Lack of intelligence perhaps, but he never said it.
If that happens to a leader or close to a leader, frankly, if you had other people involved, also, you would call for total obliteration of a state that did it.
That would include Iran.
So that's the shot. So here's the chaser, and we can maybe add this. In posts on.
Truth social this morning, Trump says this quote, I want Iran to be a great and successful country, but one that cannot have a nuclear weapon. Reports that the United States, working in conjunction with Israel, is going to blow Iran into smithereens all caps are greatly exaggerated.
In other words, he's referring to his own comments the entire bluff.
Yes, I would much prefer a verified nuclear peace agreement, and this is all caps. So that's VNPA, which will let Iran peacefully grow and prosper. We should start working on it immediately and have a big Middle East celebration, celebrations capitalized when it is signed and completed.
God bless the Middle East.
And so here you have Trump, who has been who has hired an enormous number of people who want to reach a piece deal with Iran and get back into the nuclear deal that Obama struck, that Trump ripped up in his first term. Here you have him the most explicitly stating it outright that that is a goal of his. And it comes after he threatened to obliterate them basically if they kill him, which fair right, you say, Look, you kill me, I've left instructions that.
You're dead too.
Yeah, it's a again, it's a hell of a bluff. But it all came on the heels of this New York Times report on Monday that because of all of the insanity going on sort of ended up being buried in the news cycle. The Times reported quote new intelligence about Iran's nuclear program has convinced American officials that a secret team of the country scientist is exploring a faster, if cruder approach to developing a toom weapon if Tehran's leadership decides to race for a bomb, according to current and former American officials. Now, if you are like many people, vague New York Times reporting about nuclear program sends a chill up your spine because you just don't know if you can trust it. But they are saying, essentially the timeline could be severely minimized or significantly minimized based on these new efforts, down to something like a month if Iron wanted to enrich uranium and have a crude nuclear weapon. So Trump is then asked, in this context, that was the broader thing that was happening when he gets these questions from Peter Doocy.
And scientifically or practically, whether that's true, we don't know, but strategically we can see the internal logic. The deterrent that Iran had up until recently was it's massive sprawl of proxies throughout the region that could threaten Israel and threaten you know, US forces in Iraq or Syria if if Iran was attacked. Plus it's what they believe to be sophisticated air defenses. Israel apparently massively degraded their air defenses.
With that counter strike.
Leaving them significantly exposed to future strikes and their their own proxies.
Are significantly degraded.
Has has been in particular as well as as well as maas the who the these are still you know, very much capable of firing missiles out of their mountains, and that will be the case for the foreseeable future, no matter what Trump wants to do about it.
So with those uh, with with those kind of.
Thereo's protections so to speak, kind of beaten down strategically, you can understand why they say, okay, well all we have left then is a race towards a nuclear weapon, because they look around and they're like, who's not around? Like, oh, Gaddafi? Gaddafi struck a nuclear deal not long after that he was ousted.
Who is around?
Kim Jong un is around, and he for no other reason than he has a nuclear weapon. So you can understand the logic at least, even if we don't necessarily have to believe the precise contours of the reporting.
Yeah, I'm trying to imagine Gadafi with a nuclear weapon, what you'd.
Be imaginings as a man who's going to die of natural causes.
Yeah, that's right. So before we wrap this up, it's also absolutely important to note that Trump was asked about quote.
And by the way, Libya would be so much better off than it is now.
The real Middle Eastern riviera is Trump is now saying Goza will.
Be Libya completely destroyed by the US and NATO, like absolutely ravaged.
Well on that point, though, I have to mention that Trump was asked about quote, Judea and Samaria, about his ideological disposition what he believes. If he believes that you in Samaria, that Israel has a biblical right to them, And we can put this vo up on the screen here. This is from the West Bank Trump essentially, this is a five. Trump essentially was saying, well, you know, we're going to make a big announcement about that in the weeks ahead. So Ryan as the.
West four weeks or something three or four weeks.
Yeah, yeah, so as the West Bank is now these are startling images. If you're listening to it, you're seeing you know, the like familiar this is Gaza, but before you're seeing the familiar skyline of the West Bank with all kinds of explosions. That is huge and gets another one of those things that is keeps getting buried in these news cycles. But in a matter of weeks we could have some announcement that Trump also wants to do something significant, major with the West Bank.
Yeah, he's saying he'll decide whether or not he's going to allow Israel to annex the West Bank. Which, again, you're not getting a piece deal. You're not getting a normalization deal with Saudi Arabia, you're not getting a deal with Iran. You might lose your deals that you already have with Egypt and Jordan if if you do that. But Jal Madison's widow, Miriam, had a hundred plus million dollars and asked him in return to allow for the annexation of the West Bank. Like that's as shocking as it is to say that that's the.
Thing that happened.
In twenty twenty four and twenty twenty five, and so he may give it to them. And as an update, my colleague get Drops Site News Jeremy Skhill has an official statement from Bassam Naim, a spokesperson for Hamas, in response to Trump's claim. He says the US plan to seize God's and remove the Palestinians quote is a crime against humanity and a reinforcement of the law of the jungle at the international level.
He goes on to say, the problem.
Of reconstruction is not in the presence of the Palestinian people on their land, but rather in the continuation of the Zion occupation and the stifling siege of the Gaza Strip for more than seventeen years with American support unquote, the name called for quote urgent regional and international action to put an end to these malicious plans. Scayhell Wright says reports emerge at Nantahau intends to sabotage future phases of the ceasefire deal. NAIM reiterated Hamasa's position that it intends to abide by the terms.
Quote.
We demand that the mediators, especially the United States, oblige the occupation to implement the ceasefire agreement in its three stages without procrastination or manipulation. We are committed to implementing the agreement as long as the occupation commits to it in any manipulation and implementing the agreement may cause it to collapse. So interesting statement from Hamas because there are some people who think that Trump's bluffing here. To just make sure that the agreement actually does continue to be implemented, we'll see.
Turning now back to.
Why in which I was I was saying a moment ago, Chris Murphy said, oh god, the thing is just a distraction for what we're going to talk about in the next couple of blocks.
We can do both at the same time.
We can we can walk and we can shoot gum.
So here is President Donald Trump being asked whether Elon Musk is a total rogue agent or not as he's as he's going about this doggie revolution and Kilan Musk.
How often are you talking to him? And how there have been ideas.
That he's brought to you that he said, oh no, this is going a little too far.
Well, many ideas, but look he's done a great job.
Look at all the fraud that he's found in this US aid it's a disaster. What the people radical left lunatics. They have things that nobody would have believed.
The whole thing with.
One hundred million spent on you know what, with money going to all sorts of groups that shouldn't deserve to get any money with the money, I'd like to see what the kickbacks are. How much money has been kicked back. Who would spend that kind of money to some of the things that you read about and I read about, and I see every night of the news and every morning when I read the papers.
Who would spend money for them?
I would say this, the people that get all that money, are they kicking it back to the people that gave it from government?
No, that's to me, very very corrupt.
They're really those engineers that Elon Musk has helping him brsy young as nineteen years old.
Good.
They're very smart, though, Peter. They're like you, they're very smart people.
Thank you.
Has he Have you met any of these guys?
No?
I haven't seen them. They work actually out of the White House. They're smart people.
Unlike what they do in the control towers, where we need smart people. We should use some of them in the control towers where we were putting people that were actually intellectually deficient.
Democrats, of course, are reacting quite angrily to this. Let's roll some of them.
So today Leader Jeffries and I are joining together to push legislation to prevent unlawful meddling in the Treasury Departments payment systems and protect Americans across the country. Our bill aims to do a few simple things. One to deny access to special government employees, employees that don't have to disclose their conflicts of interest or any other ethic agreements. Two to deny access to anyone with conflicts of interest or lack of appropriate clearance. And three include personal tax information into existing privacy protections. We call our legislation stop the steal.
They are raiding the government, attempting to steal taxpayer money.
We don't pledge allegiance to the billionaires. We don't pledge allegiance to Elon Musk. We don't pledge allegiance to the creepy twenty two year olds working for Elon Musk. Repluge allegiance to the United States of America.
Goddamn is shut down the citate. We are war anytime, anytime a person can pay two hundred and fifty million dollars into a campaign and they've be given access for access to the Department of Treasury of the United States of America, we are and war. Hi, thank you, We will see you in the courts, in Congress, in the streets. Elon Musk is a Nazi lopall baby.
The thing that has Democrats most alarmed is what's going on at the Treasury Department, and we can put up this next element. Wired has been doing some really good reporting on who is actually involved in this. This DOJ committee is a group of kids that range in age from nineteen to twenty five. If we can get an Nathan Tankas on the line, we're going to talk to him.
Unfortunately, he just had to cancel the he's gotting a problem with this internet connection.
All right, No, no, no, Nathan Tankas, he's been hacking him.
Yeah, he's been working triple over time basically in the last several days.
Yes, so Nathan, Thankas, and we could send people over to his his newsletter, which is called Notes on the Crisis or crisisnes dot com. He what he has been reporting, based on Treasury sources and which the Treasury so far has been denying, is that the DOJ team has what's called quote, read and write access inside the bowels of the Treasury Department. So very quickly Elon Musk's team went directly for the pipes, said, okay, who is pressing the buttons, Who's who's cutting the checks? Like, who's who's after After everything gets so, Congress approves the spending directs it. The agencies then confirm that this is how Congress intended to direct it, and then they tell somebody to send the checks.
Musk is like, how is that? Where's the system that that is happening.
They went to this system and the bureaucrat who is in charge of that, David Leick is that his name. He'd been a Treasury official since nineteen eighty nine, and he said, no, you cannot have direct access to this system. They insisted, and he resigned in protests, which really sent a shock through the Treasury department. Spoke with a former very senior Treasury official yesterday who worked directly with this guy, and he said he's the most like small c conservative bureaucrat. The absolute definition of a civil servant could be frustrating at times, because he's going to tell you, chapter and verse what the statute is that you need to comply with for him to do the thing that you're asking him to do. And you can imagine Elon Musk does not want to hear anything about statutes and laws.
He just wants he just wants access.
This is the guy who whose job it has been over the last decade to do what are called the extraordinary measures when we pierce the debt limit, which we already have, like it was in January we went we went through the debt limit. We're now in the period of what's called extraordinary measures, which means there isn't enough money in.
The treasury to basically pay everything.
So you and anybody who lives on the margins knows exactly how this works.
You move, you move things around. You got this money coming in.
Here's what's the latest I can pay this bill? What are the what are the late fees on this one? So I can move of this. So you're just trying to keep your head above water. And so right now they call it extraordinary measures. It's the treasury is just trying to keep its head above water and make sure that the must pay bills get paid.
And the must pay bills.
Are the treasury bonds and treasury like instruments because those are the collateral for the entire global financial system.
So if you are due.
Cash for your Treasury note and it doesn't come, then now your counterparty is screwed. That counterparty was counting on this thing that has never broken in the system. So this guy, as we've gone through debt ceiling crises under Obama, an under Trump, and now a new one and then Biden, then a new one under Trump. This guy has been the one that's made sure that all the payments have kept flowing, and people say it's like a magician. Like the his ability to do this is it leaves people utterly amazed. He's the one that has always briefed Treasury and also briefed Congress about how this is going, and everyone has always said, like God does just absolutely incredible job of it. The X date they're estimating is about six months from now, like we can move money around until then. In April obviously, when you guys saw send your checks in to the I R s, we're going to see a big plus up in the bank accounts and so that, and then June there's more money that comes in with the extensions and stuff like that and corporate corporate taxes, and so they think that maybe we've got till July ish, but we're not sure. That's when it's run meticulously. So now this guy's gone, and let's hope there's deputies and whoever's left know how to move this around.
That's whoever's left whoever's left.
That's kind of an aside.
The other point that this that this your official made to me is that and it's one that you have probably already figured out the code and the hardware and.
The software for this.
These pipes that are the most important pipes in the global financial system are many decades old. Congress just does not has not appropriated money to redesign the pipes using modern technology. So my late great aunt Mimi, she started coding in the fifties and sixties and was doing some of it for the BA and for the government. Like it's the code that she was touching in the sixties is still there today, like sixty years later.
Incredible.
And so these nineteen year olds who have probably you know, they were taught about this stuff, they don't have I guess it's cobal they don't and they're I'm sure they're brilliant. Like these these kids, like one of them was the one who won the contest being able to figure out Julius Caesar's father in laws like Roman texts that were burned, Like he figured out using AI to like read some of these things. Like you know, some of the smartest people on the planet. I'm sure, being that smart doesn't mean you won't make mistakes. So according to Tankas and others, these kids now have the ability to push new code into.
The system here, which.
Is utterly alarming to any everybody who's familiar with the system, because if you do it wrong and not even necessarily wrong, like you could do it right, but like the system is such that it is that it can't handle this code that you've just pushed in there, and it breaks, like you don't know how it breaks it, where it breaks it, how to fix it. And then now you don't know who didn't get paid. Now, in your effort to clean up fraud, waste and abuse, you might end up costing the government so much extra money getting sued and then also trying to figure out which payments didn't go out and then being liable for all of the downstream consequences for the payments.
That didn't go out.
And there's also reporting that some of what the coders are trying to put in reduces visibility of what Musk's Doggie team is doing here.
So in other words, this is.
They're trying to pick a fight around the Empowerment Control Act, like they've been very clear about that Empowerment Control Act was brought in in the nineteen seventies by Congress to try to put a check on Richard Nixon, who was claiming that he, as the executive, had the power to just stop a payment. Congress says, we're going to fund this bridge building project over here. He signs that into law, and then he turns around and says, actually, we're not going to do that. And Congress is like, no, that's clearly not constitutional. You're the executive, you would execute our laws. And just to be clear, here's the Empowerment Control Act. Here are the circumstances under which you can do this. They're very carved out. Otherwise you just have to spend the money.
Russ vote.
Yeah.
The Republicans believe that the Empowerment Control Act is unconstitutional and they want a court fight. But in the meantime, Elon Musk is saying, Okay, well, if we're going to stop payments and these bureaucrats aren't going to let us because it's illegal, we just need to take the keys from them and start pressing the buttons ourselves and let it play out in court.
Yeah, somewhat, let it play out in court, but also.
Prevent it from getting to court in some cases if there's no visibility into who blocked the payment, who the payment was intended for. So a scenario that people have laid out. So let's say a member of Congress says, all right, this I want in my district this homeless shelter to be built and to get you know, fifty million dollars from the federal government, and then I'll vote for your spending package that passes into law, the President signs it.
It's right there in the law. Treasury Department then says.
Okay, here's the project that they're talking about. Here's the EI in of this of this organization we checked out.
They're legit.
All this tracks fifty million dollars, payment goes out. They send it to this system which is supposed to be.
Separate from politics.
Like half of it's in West Virginia, half of it's in Maryland, like some of some of it is in DC, but most of it is out in West Virginia, Maryland. And then they just they're like, okay, e I, and here it is. You know, payment goes What must team is trying to do is go in there and say, actually, I don't think we want to fund that.
Homeless shelter and just stop it.
So you either then get a court challenge when the homeless shelter realizes didn't get his money, or they're like, we just never got paid and they don't know why. And when you ask why, then there might not be an answer because it might be like, well, we don't know it's been approved. We don't get there eventually, and so the court might be like, well, come back to us when you've got some evidence that you're not going to get this.
It'll definitely make it to court though in the first place.
Eventually something's going to get to court. Something has to.
Yeah, absolutely, and I think probably sooner rather later. Let's put the next element up on the screen, because it gets to the point that you were making Ryan about who is in charge here. This is a meme that says, who are these little boys and why are they in charge of our money? And it's running down the guys who are behind all of this, and they are young, but clearly to Ryan's point, brilliant it says, the US Treasury is usually run by grown up grown ups. Mama's come get your babies out of our government, you know, Ryan, I Actually I get that impulse. I think there have been people of similar age groups that have been behind some of the most important and like actually well respected political movements.
Yeah.
Uh, and in throughout history all the founding fathers are actually kind of young. Not all of them, of course, very.
Young.
But to that point, you also flagged this next element. We could put this Andrew Tate post up. This is something that one of them retweeted from Andrew Tate where he's.
I missed this. I didn't flag this. Somebody else said it's interesting.
Okay. So, yeah, the majority Filipino areas of the UK, it must look and feel British. This is, by the way, from January of twenty twenty five, the majority Indian areas of the UK must like can feel British. He's basically saying, immigrate, expect to adapt to British culture, no matter how small the norm. We like quiet Sunday mornings, problem leave. And what's interesting about that?
Ryan, So Gavin Klegger is one of these kids.
Yes, tweet What's interesting about that, I think is Ryan the even just like openly retweeting Andrew Tait totally common among young men. By the way, like horrifying to people in Washington. Not uncommon among young men who are trending further and further right. But yeah, not one of these young men is like holding the keys to like a significant portion of government and potentially outside the boundaries of the law.
Yeah right, Yeah, this is.
So like, you know, we just talked about the Framers, some of the Framers being very young when they built the Constitution. I've spent my entire life being lectured by the right about how brilliant the design of our constitution is and our checks and balances. And to now be told you, all.
Right, get the Hall monitors out of here.
Musk has good ideas and smart kids, so he's just going to clean this mess up. And this is what I voted for. Is kind of, you know, preposterously disorienting. It's like either you believe in representative democracy or you don't. And Musk very obviously does not. Like he's been He very much seems to be in one of those Curtis Jarvin camps. I know, Curtis yarm is all over the map, but in general, there's this like techno feudalist idea that we know better it should.
Be run as this is directly from Curtis Yarvin, who was here for inaugural festivities, by the way, who believes in I think techno feudalism is a good word. I think he would say, almost like a corporate monarchy, that the United States should be controlled by a single monarch and run like a corporation CEO style. And it's something that gets kicked on, kicked around a lot in online right circles, the same places that Elon Musk seems to dwell when he's spending time on the internet. So it's not impossible that there's an actual sort of ideological strain being pulled from that into Musk's mind and the mind of some of these kids that seem to be pretty I shouldn't even call them kids. I mean they're adults, but they're young and they haven't been in DC long at all. One funny thing I saw being passed around like Capitol Hill circles is like people have said about the twenty five year olds running the government, wait until they find out about Capitol Hill. That's very funny because twenty five year olds have been running the government for a while and.
For all those Although one of the one of the versions that I saw of that going around was they were saying, wait, wait, un till they find out about the rest of the government.
And that's actually not accurate.
It is one hundred percent true that if you go around Capitol Hill, it's there, you know, people are twenty five and under and hello to everybody on Capitol Hill. We have like I don't know how often you go to the House office buildings anymore. I practically have to stay out of there's so many like breaking points as viewers.
To everybody there is twenty five and under.
But in the actual government, you know, the Department's Education, Treasury, et cetera. Those those career people, they some of them are very young, but they stick around for twenty thirty years, which is what's so frustrating.
The Musk too.
It's like the only twenty thousand people have taken this fake buyout offer, so far out of the millions that they sent it out to, right.
Right, Okay, well, let's take it this next. This is B six. There are sleep pods going around. They're not I think they're poorly described as pods because I looked into it and essentially what this is a wrap for a mattress that does seem pretty technologically impressive. It's it's sort of like a sheet you put over your mattress that can monitor your your they can track your sleep basically, and it can.
Well there's no mattress. You have to put it over a mattress, So where's the mattress. Don't need a mattress to.
Yeah, presumably they have mattresses in there, which is some of the reporting is that yes, they have been bringing basically like bedroom stuff into some of these buildings so that they can sleep and do this like Silicon Valley style, this hostile takeover Silicon Valley style, which I actually think is interesting Ryan because well, I mean for a lot of reasons, but from the perspective of like movement conservatives, they wanted a lot of this to be like done by conservative movement lawyers. Like first of all, this was always a fantasy that you would actually have this generational opportunity to start slashing and burning, and to do it without regard or even with content for the sacred norms that the political establishment revers. Like it's a literal fantasy of the conservative movement, just like overturning Row, Like, nobody ever thought they would actually have the opportunity to do that, or most people didn't really think they would have the opportunity to do that. Now Donald Trump has it. It's in the hands of an industry that just a couple of years ago Conservatives were at war with. But because of the vibe shift, you're able to take the pluck the you know, maga people out of Silicon Valley world, import them into DC and they have the support of the conservative movement, at least for now. So it's like this hostile takeover that was always planned to be ideologues from the conservative movement now being done by an industry or members of an industry denisms of an industry that was decried by the conservative movement that was at war with the conservative movement. So it's it's really an odd tension.
And it's because it's really what it is is a dual personality movement. It's whatever whatever Musk says is good and whatever Trump says is good, and when the twain don't meet, we'll find out, you know, who can win. But as of now, Trump seems to be Musk seems to be taking the lead. Like over the weekend he's like I put us a I d in the wood chipper, and then on Monday, Trump's like, yeah, it's okay, you can do that.
So it's like Musk is very much.
Asking you know, moving first, and then you know he's asking for forgiveness rather than permission what seems to be clear. And then you know how much does Trump need him, care about him, like fear him because of his money, be amused by him. I don't know, we're gonna find out what and what happens if they do break the system, treasury system and the payments start.
I'm not going out what happens if now.
I don't think we're gonna have a debt ceialing situation six months.
From now, because I think Trump will just ignore it.
He'll say there is no such thing as a dead ceiling, like if you know he's not inclined to follow laws, it seems so Yeah, at that point Basin will be like, okay, I agree, which you know, when Obama was president, I argued that the fourteenth Amendment means that there is actually no death ceiling because the fourteenth Amendment says very specifically, the debts of the federal government shall not be questioned.
So it's similar. No, I mean seriously, some of these are legitimate constitutional questions that need to be worked out in the courts. Like if russ Bote were here and he was arguing with us over impoundment, he would make a case that is substantial, and we may disagree with it. I'm honestly fairly persuaded by it, but either way, it's raises a legitimate constitutional question about separation of powers and how we have just by norms allowed the government to sort of be in a state of inertia in the executive branch because a lot of the just didn't get challenged and Congress increasingly relies on the executive branch to go through its power. But speaking of separation of powers, the US eternity, the US Attorney this is b seven initially this this is a weird subplot that we can get into maybe more next week, but said that our initial review of the evidence presented to US indicates that certain individuals and or groups have committed acts that appear to violate the law and targeting DOGE employees. So he's kind of agreeing with Musk there, But then at the same time, it's just unclear of where this is really where this is really going this is the US Attorney for the District of Columbia region. Because there were conflicting I would say, there's conflicting information about what he's actually talking about there.
It could be straight up death threats, and I've seen yeah, I think on Blue Sky there was some circulating that looked.
Like pretty patent threats and that.
Those are you can't do that, yeah, obviously, and if there's a if there's a clear directed death threat, the FBI should get involved.
Yeah.
Must kind of took that and tried to suggest that, you know, any kind of aggressive criticism of of the Doejay boys is going to be illegal.
We'll see.
So finally, Kim Kelly reported that sources have told her that DOGE is going after the Department of Labor next. This is the final element for this block, and labor workers have been ordered to give Dose access to anything they want or risk termination, similar to what we heard about Treasury and USA I D We're supposed to have everything we're doing and do whatever the Dose kids ask. It feels dirty and illegal, that source told Kelly. So this is developing literally by the hour, so we'll obviously keep following it. Crystal Sager will be back here following it more tomorrow because we'll likely have there's more information on what's going on over at Labor.
Kelly says there's a rally scheduled for three pm outside the Department of Labor, which is right near where we are. It's two hundred Constitution Avenue, So that's three pm, three pm the day, saying, you know, keep the DOJ kids out of the Department of Labor because they're having a kickoff meeting apparently at four pm between the Department of Labor officials and the DOJ folks.
Well, so we've covered Treasury, USAID, now Labor and Ryan at this point we can turn to DOGE and Trump's plans for the Department of Education. Well, earlier in the show, Ryan made the point that Elon Musk is very intentionally using the word revolution for what is happening here in Washington, d C. Just in the early weeks of the second Donald Trump administration, and indeed one of the goals of the Reagan Revolution may be realized by the Trump Revolution. We can put c one on the screen. This is a post from Jeff Mason of the Associated Press, who reported a White House official says Trump will take steps later this month to fulfill a campaign promise to defund the Department of Education. Now, Trump was asked a bit about whether the Department of Education will shut her in the Oval office yesterday. Let's take a listen here, and.
I'm the Education Department.
Why nominate Linda McMahon to be the Education Department secretary if you're gonna cover to the.
Education Because I told Linda, Linda, I hope you do a great job and put yourself out of a job.
I want her to put herself out of a job. Education Department.
So we're ranked number forty out of forty schools. Right we're ranked number one in costs for pupil, so we spend more for pupil than any other country in the world, and we're ranked at the bottom of the list.
We're ranked very badly. And what I want to do is let the States run schools. I believe strongly in school choice, but in addition to that, I want the states to run schools, and I want Linda to put herself out of a job.
With an executive order any longer they would like to be able to look if I could give the schools back to Iowa and Idaho, and Indiana and all these places that run properly.
There's many of them.
No Christmin Ronald Reagan took office, the Department of Education was not even really a decade old. It was something that was brought into existence by Jimmy Carter, and Reagan said the exact same thing about his first Secretary of Education that he wanted the Secretary Bell to put himself out of a job. So this is c three more perfect. Union noted a picked up on a Musk comment that looked back to Reagan, said, actually, that Musk is now saying Reagan campaigned on ending the department and Trump will succeed where Reagan failed. That was a criticism that was floated of Ronald Reagan during his administration from some people on the right that he didn't end up shutting down the Department of Education. He couldn't really get Congresses buy in. And Donald Trump might be in a position now where you look at what happened with USAID or what is happening right now with USAID. One of the ways that maybe skirting Congress is just by quote restructuring it and pairing it back to something very small under the auspices of the state department, so it's not shut down in a case like that, it's just been restructured to the point where it's tiny. Let's take a listen to how Ronald Reagan talked about this early in his presidency. We can roll this clip.
We propose to dismantle two cabinet departments, Energy and Education. Both secretaries are wholly in accord with this. Some of the activities in both of these departments will of course be continued, either independently or in other areas of government. There's only one way to shrink the size and cost of big government, and that is by eliminating agencies that are not needed and are getting in the way of a solution. Now, we don't need an energy department to solve our basic energy problem. As long as we let the forces of the marketplace work without undue interference, the ingenuity of consumers, business producers, and inventors will do that for us. Similarly, education is the principal responsibility of local schools, systems, teachers, parents, citizen boards, and state governments. By eliminating the Department of Education less than two years after it was created, we can not only reduce the budget, but ensure that local needs and preferences rather than the wishes of Washington determine the education of our children.
Ye.
So you note there he was mentioning the Department of Education is like two years old because of something that Jimmy Carter brought into existence and at the time was new. Obviously, now it has been around for decades. So it's quite a different task to sort of wind down the Department of Education. In disclosure, I will say that's something that I'm generally supportive of, with one caveat, which is you need a significant off ramp. So if you have this idea about sending education back to the States, I mean, Trump is absolutely right about the disconnect between the amount of money we spend on students and outcomes. It is shameful and pathetic that it's this is what it looks like. This is how much money we spend and these are the outcomes that we get per student. It's awful. But if there is no off ramp to kind of helping the states re take control of education and make up ground, whether it's money or resources that the federal government had previously provided, and it's just kind of a quick severing of the ties, that is not great either. So you know, this is a significant question about everything that Elon Musk is doing, is whether you know it's worth it to just from even like an ideological conservative perspective, toss a hand grenade into everything, let it fall, let the chips fall where they may, and say it's okay, we'll pick up the pieces later. Probably not probably.
Yeah, And Trump and Musk are both not well known for their kind of well thought out and smooth transition policies like these are.
Much more hand grenade people.
I think it's worth contextualizing this as quickly as we can, and you could probably do this better than me. But you know, the fight over public education has been central to our politics over the last one hundred and fifty years. Like when as the as the progressive era you know boomed, you know, that was really the advent of the idea of public education and the idea that every student had a right to a free public education you know, in their in their community. Uh free as in funded both though of course by taxpayers. That ran headlong into the you know, the religious institutions, which you know, Christian churches had been the ones that had you know, had run.
Most of the kind of private schools up until that.
Time, and and the the Betsy de vas Dominius types you know, very much argued that the public school had, unfortunately in there from their perspective, replaced the church as the central social organizing tool in communities that.
The family as well.
And and and to some degree of the family that because that you, from their perspective, you need the church to support the family. And so where it used to be, you know, people would go to church on Sundays and it'd be pot lucks and like, and everybody's kind of ethics and social lives would like flow through the local churches.
Now pot lucks.
Would be organized, you know, they'd be fundraisers for the school, or there would be being a night at the school, or everybody would go on Friday night to watch the teams play and so and certainly what with I've seen it in my own life with kids in elementary and middle school.
You're you're the social fabric of.
The community does actually, you know, organize itself around the public schools.
But so that's the higher level than the mid level one is of.
Course, it's it's it's integration with desegregation and the civil rights movement that inherent in this idea that you'd have private schools was the idea that you could have racial segregation.
And after you know, Brown v.
Board of Education, you have all these different efforts to like keep schools segregated despite despite the laws, fights that are still going on during the Carter years. Carter, you know, sec stickt the i R S in the on Christian private schools right during the during his term. And my understanding is that like it was that and then and there was and there was some desegregation element to that fight, uh that like those so not only are you not not only are you guys furthering segregation, you're getting involved in politics, you're and you're no longer really tax exempt organizations.
And so he so he sends.
The irs after these schools, and that, in my understand I'm curious if you're taking this really was the gasoline that kicked off the kind of right wing evangelical movement that like once once Carter came after the private schools like that that sent them wild. And it helps to explain Reagan coming in. He's and he you know, he's he's coming at both things at once. And the segregation, you know, brownbe Board of Education, and also this like what what they see is this attack on the Christian society and replacing it with this godless public education.
I would say there is also, though, a more charitable interpretation, which is this was in the midst of a pretty rapid federalization of a lot of things that hadn't been federalized for many years, and that includes absolutely civil rights we didn't have prior to the Civil Rights Act in the early to mid nineteen sixties, this sort of federal hand in local private businesses. And you know, there are a lot of conservatives who will still argue brand Paul among them against like ideologically, against the Civil Rights Act of nineteen sixty four and the subsequent civil rights legislation in the same way that Barry Goldwater did. And Reagan really comes out of the Barry Goldwater movement, and most of the sort of people that staffed the Reagan administration and the campaign came out of that movement. And there was tension, There's no question about it. There was always a lot of tension about it. But this was this sort of ideological, i don't know, like shock to the conservative mind that suddenly for an extraordinarily just and important cause, which was civil rights. It's kind of what happens with the Southern strategy, Like it's sort of how things end up flipping and George Wallace comes along and all of that. You have conservatives some reacting by saying, this is going to put us in trouble down the road. This like Civil rights administration, it's rapidly being federalized from the Department of Education. Was one of the focal points for conservatives by saying, now you have the federal government with sort of its hands in every local school district, and that sounds great on paper, and it will backfire immensely eventually. And a lot of conservative looked at like the last five ten years in education and said, this is kind of whatever had always been talking about. Christopher Caldwell wrote a book called The Age of Entitlements back in I think that came out like in twenty sixteen, saying it's kind of making it like Goldwater is right argument all along. But no, I mean, I think that's the tension was between the conservative ideologues who, from a charitable perspective, just had this very deep revulsion to the idea of the federal government. Within a you know, period of twenty years, suddenly taking over so much from local control, and then people who actually were segregationists and racists, and that was significant tension. The Department of Education was very much the center of that.
And so the reason Reagan failed is that you need Congress to get rid of the Department of Education because the Education Department is congressionally authorized and appropriated by Congress, so there are rules.
This is not Vietnam, and so Trump.
The reporting is that Trump's executive order is going to move elements of the Education Department that are not legally required to be under it elsewhere. And then, and as we talked about in the last block, he's using he's going to push the Impoundment Control Act powers as far as he can and perhaps just defund different programs which according to the current law would be illegal. Whether the courts let him get away with it is a different question. And if Elon Musk's hackers can like hide that you're even doing it, then then who knows. Now, there are also significant laws on the books that people will notice if he's breaking them. So I think there are roughly One of them is called the idea like Individuals with Disabilities and Education Act, and a lot of viewers are probably familiar with it because they interact with it.
It is the.
Federal law that says that public schools are required to teach and to basically cater to children who have disabilities, special education, or different types of contingencies that they would be.
Offered within mainstream classrooms.
Something like fifteen million students currently have protections under this law. And this can be a spectrum. This can can go from you can have extra time to take a test because you have ADHD all the way to you know, significant interventions in a special education classroom, or even funding to go to a school if the public school it's a private school, if the public school is not equipped to handle it. So you're running headlong. If you go after that, you're running headlong into many millions of people who are currently you know, fifteen million kids. You know, that's thirty million parents, that's fifty million aunts and uncles. You're running headlong into that. Then, of course there is tel grants, other financial aid for college that is required by law. Now can you move that under somewhere else? Then you have student loan repayments. Biden you may not have noticed, was not allowed, you know, people did notice that he was not allowed by the Supreme Court to kind of restructure and forgive some significant number of student loan debts. But what he did do is set up this repayment schedule that makes it actually genuinely affordable for people who are in enormous amounts of debt and caps what you owe the amount of income you have, like they're trying to make it a fair system. You know, if if you have a huge amount of debt, you have a small amount of income, then you owe this smaller, much smaller amount of money until when and when your ship comes in, then you owe us more.
Like that's how a decent society kind of ought to be organized.
If you get rid of the education Department, then who's collecting these loans, Who's who is implementing these programs?
Do people just stop paying their loans?
No, I doubt you know, that's that's highly unlikely. That would be incredibly ironic if the Supreme Court is like, no, you can't do this student loan payment policy, but yeah, you can actually go ahead and just get rid of the entire education Department. I mean wouldn't necessarily put it past them, but it would be it would be certainly the height of irony. Somebody joked on Twitter, like, let me get this right. So to do progressive legislation, you need sixty votes. To do national conservatism, you don't need any votes at all, Like that's the just so we're clear on the different rules that apply here.
Well, you know, it is kind of what's funny in all of this. The extent we can find humor is that conservatives were saying, part of the problem with federalizing all of this is that at one point someone can just come in and flip a switch because it's so central.
Elon Musk's boys have found the switches.
Hey, they're looking for them. The maga the quote Maga chuds as Lomas said on Twitter. So there is a I should say, just as we were talking, I pulled up the Project twenty twenty five Education Department.
Which, by the way, they assured us had nothing to do with Trump and would definitely not be implemented in any way, which, to be which we reported was a total lie.
Yes, we covered that.
Watch this show. You're not surprised by any of this, No.
Not at all. We cover that extensively, and in fact, that was a huge part of my conversation with Ezra Clins, like they're of course going to be using Project twenty twenty five. Hello. Now that is to say Trump still had nothing to do with Project twenty twenty five. He wouldn't, like really care. I would spend like ten seconds reading what I'm looking at right now, and you'd be like Reenipedia. But they do have I mean a lot of this is kind of off ramp type stuff. So, for example, restore revenue responsibility for Title one funding to the States over a ten year period. Like if you're trying to conceptualize, as I am, what this would mean for your community, your local school immediately if it were to happen. The plan in Project twenty twenty five, which I'm sure is something that's on the desks of people Linda McMahon's circles and Elon Muss's circles because frankly was a mega friendly conservative plan that people put a lot of time into. It does look like it's significantly off ramping things and not immediately cutting them. But we'll have to I actually think we might be able to get the person who wrote this too good back to us.
It's good.
Look, yeah, and I mean we know we can also put up C five here, which is early indications from from Patty Murray, who would be the senator who kind of oversees this on the Democratic side. She's she's hearing that the doggy committee people have gone in so sorry DOJ Committee people have gone into veterans affairs now and are are thumbing through all of the kind of information around those payments.
Now.
The VA is in the desperate need of reform. Veterans medical records are not in desperate need of DOJ Committee people thumbing through them. So this is something people are going to keep an eye on too, because these are.
There's fragile and sensitive systems. And by the.
Separately and actually relatedly, Musk is out here, by the way, if you haven't noticed, accusing everyone he sees on his website of breaking the law. He accused Milan Omar the other day of breaking the law because she was giving general advice to people here illegally about how to like, you know, not incriminate yourself. Be like saying that it's illegal to, you know, tell somebody about their Fifth Amendment rights. It is specifically illegal to aid a specific individual person here illegally like that that actually is a crime, but giving general advice is a First Amendment protected act. So anyway, and then anybody who says something mean about the Doggie Committee, he says, you're breaking the law, he should he should check. There are the federal the federal books are filled with laws around privacy and record protections that he and his DOJ boys seem to be breaking at a just absolutely relentless clip.
A lot of this is going to be tested in the courts and already is to some extent, but we'll see if some of it ends up getting rolled back. But he's i mean his status as a special government employee, which is what the White House says he's taken on. If you go read the Justice Departments outlined restrictions for somebody who's a special government employee. Unless Elon Musk takes very quick and significant steps to deal with his financial conflicts he's in flagor violation or gets some type of special waiver for them, which as yet he doesn't have. He may be able to get that quick order now that Pambondi has been confirmed, but it's impossible to see how what he's doing sort of fits within those boundaries.
Oh yeah, it doesn't.
I mean, which he you know, he called it a revolution. And so if the revolution fails, like if you come at the king and you miss, yeah, you actually in this country, you get a second shot, as we showed after January sixth, let's if you don't get.
A third shot.
Four people who are curious, buddy mine collected some of these eighteen USC. Fifteen oh five, fifteen nineteen, twenty seventy one, Federal Records Act, you get five USC. Five point fifty two, the e Government Act of two thousand and two, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act, eighteen USC.
Two eight eighteen USC. Two five. There's there's a.
Ton of them, and each of them have, you know, the various penalties with them, and each record could be an offense. And we're talking about hundreds of millions of records. Said, this is not a time of home monitors. It's a time of revolutions. So if it moves back towards the time of home monitors, those are the crimes that we know you're committing, and they're probably a bunch of others. So I guess the advice would be your revolution better work.
I wish we had your Lenin book behind us.
I actually not have it back.
We'll have to put it back up. But anyways, I.
Feel like I feel like Kerensky being like the provisional government authority here is dually constituted by.
The Duma, and you're not able to just take power. Proff is reading the book.
It's an incredible book, that that biography of Lenin that was up there.
So let's move on to Republicans actually embracing with some hesitation, fully embracing Tulsei Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Junior, and the Senate yesterday Robert F. Kennedy Junior and Tulsi Gabbard made it out of committees active committees that they're being considered before the Senate yesterday. And this is significant because there was a point about a week ago Ryan where it was seeming like because of Bill Cassidy in particular, who is a doctor and likes to have everyone know that he's a doctor, and Susan Collins, fairly hawkish Republican, it seems as though they might be so pressured out of voting for Robert Kennaji or actually they wouldn't have needed too much pressure in either direction. But because Susan Collins obviously represents a state that is not super friendly to Republicans always, she's up. So that looked like it pretty Jared Golden, But you know what I mean, Tulsea Gabbard I think probably plays well in Maine. This is a type of Democrat that probably plays well former Democrats. I should say that probably.
Oh absolutely, this is a voting no.
For Susan Collins would have cost her more with Trump's people, I think so. Yeah, yeah, I think that's Colin's obvious political choice was voting for Tulsi here.
Yeah, no, I agree with that. But even Todd Young, who's somebody that was a fairly like red state Republican, he's from Indiana, had his famous back and forth we'll get into this in a minute with Musk right right, he was.
Called like a deep state call him a deep state stooge.
Yeah, stooge or something like that, and then flipped me. Musk flipped right away and said, my apologies. I talked to Todd Young on the phone, and he's a stalwart MAGA defender.
Well, who flipped there? Sounds like Todd Young is the one who flipped.
Well, he seemed to be planning the seeds of like possibly voting against gab.
Right and then he was like no, no, no, never mind.
And so I think the question here is similar to the question between Trump and the oligarchs that were sitting behind him on his inaugural dais is who conquered who? Right? Like, who is the conqueror in this situation? Was Tulsi and RFK Junior? Were they the ones who are now captured and in the pocket of the quote unquote deep State? And Bill Cassidy did RFK Junior Absolutely no favors in that direction. We can put D two up on the screen. Cassidy said he was able to get a significant number of concessions out of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In exchange for his vote. He said that they're going to have monthly meetings. It was sort of like a babysitting arrangement, kind of said CDC will not remove statements on their website pointing out the vaccines do not cause autism. He'll maintained that he'll maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations without changes, and said he would not create a parallel structure for vaccine approval. There's a lot more, but these are already just sort of I've run through here fairly significant concessions. It's also worth noting that Tulca Gabbard basically flipped on Section seven oh two in order to and Snowden. In order to kind of Snowden. She refused to call him a trader, right, which I thought was I mean whatever. I actually thought that was a fairly principled mood. If it would have been pretty easy to say yes, you know, and say like, yes he was a trader for the reasons X.
Y and Z, she didn't do that because she knows he's not.
She does not believe in section seven or two or believe that Edward Snowden is a trader.
So we will see how she asks to be clear on Snowden.
The knock against him is that he's in Russia. Pardon the guy, and he'll come home like he's in Russia because the US stopped his plane on the ground in Moscow and basically forced him off the plane.
Yes, so the US pushed him into into Russia.
So and Telsea Gabbert I think also said she would do a very important thing if she's confirmed, which is have a direct hotline. This could go many different ways, but she said she would have a direct hotline to her for whistleblowers. And that is exactly how you prevent a snowden because he tried to blow the whistle, as many whistleblowers did, without success on what the government was doing. And that's actually a significant component of how that entire story unfolded. That gets completely right right.
And also, like telling the government what they're doing when it is like top down, secret government policy and they're doing it on purpose is kind of pointless. It's like, hey, do you guys know that you are, you know, tapping everybody's phone here through these like underground cables and reading everybody saying well, yes, we know we're doing that.
We're because we do it on purpose. It wasn't.
Whistleblowing is effective internally against a rogue project, but not against a project that is in line with the actual top down policy.
And so on.
On doctor Cassidy, So he's a doctor. Uh, I'm curious for your take on the politics of what moved him. He committed the unforgivable sin. If I recall correctly, of voting for Trump's impeachment.
He did, and so.
He has a target on his back primary. Do you think that Trump and Musk promised to help him out if he would get on side for the next for the foreseeable future, Well.
They definitely promised to make his life impossible if he didn't. So there were threats from Nicole Shanahan even like Megan McCain. Oh, that was a tulsy gabbard one. Actually never mind, so scratch that on Cassidy. But Nicole Shanahan and Elon Musk were Cassidy, by the way, already has a primary challenger who announced.
The backlashes December. He gets ten million dollars Elon Musk and Trump's endorsement.
Right, So did Cassidy not only manage to stave off potentially that scenario where there's a ton of cash going be infused into his opponent's coffers, but did he also secure significant funding from Trump and Musk and potentially stave off a mega challenge just in terms of like endorsements and resources. I don't know, it's entirely. He sort of likes to march to the beat of his own drum. He's from obviously a politically fascinating state, sort of thought of as a deep red southern state, but definitely more interesting than that.
The Democrats governor's mansion, right.
And it's a fairly recent like flip to we don't have to get into the history. But anyway, he feels more comfortable marching in the beat of his own drum. But that's what's interesting. I think about somebody like Robert F. Kennedy Junior, or Tulsa Gabbard and Susan Collins case. If you go out and talk to average people, some of them really hate Robert F. Kennedy Junior. A whole lot of them really love ROBERTIF. Kennedy Junr. And it's easy to rage against that from Washington, but it's harder when you're on the ground in your own state like Louisiana, to talk to especially Republican voters. He said, you know, you heard a lot from pediatricians that opposed Robert F. Kennedy Junior's nomination, and so as a doctor that was weighing on him, I may continue to weigh on him.
But key concession, then, keeping the vaccine protocol as it is is a key concession to the pediatricians there.
I would think that's enormously significant from their perspective. So, yeah, this is the question for Tulca, Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Junior, and the entire the.
Anti Measles coalition coming together here.
Well, the entire MAHA agenda hinges on Robert F. Kennedy Junior being doing sort of what Musk has been doing at other agencies to his own agency, significant radical reform. You know, when Brooke Rollins was confirmed as Secretary Department of Agriculture, a lot of people Matthew Stoller pointed this out, were wondering in the MAHA movement why she moved immediately to you know, force California to sell the meat of created pigs. Change in regulatory interpretation there. So yeah, I don't.
And they backed off their promise to ban forever chemicals. Yeah yeah, it was.
A Biden regulation the band forever chemicals that was rolled back. Yeah. So, and that's obviously not Kennedy's department. But how serious is Trump world about Maha? The voters, if you talk to voters, they're extremely serious about Maha. The ideological conservative movement is very serious now about Maha, partially because they know they have to be. But how serious will the administration be?
I don't know when they come up in conflict with plastics, which is the oil industry.
And whoever funds Bill Cassidy and pharma, which I should be more precise about. I don't have it in front of me. I assume that he gets significant money from them. So I think your theory is probably sound.
Good place for a rubber meets the road metaphor robber meeting the road. It spits those forever chemicals right into your bloodstream.
Yeah, the pfest rubbers meeting the road is meeting the pothole riddled road. Then Bernie, yes, Bernie did not just reluctantly say he was voting against Robert F. Kennedy Junior, somebody who you may know more about this than I do. I think Bernie probably for a long time. So Robert F. Kny Junior is sort of a coup in the Kennedy family from a leftist perspective, somebody who was an ally in the fight against like big corporations because of his environmental work. But Bernie Sanders put out a scathing statement, let's put D three on the screen, said, you know, we don't disagree on everything, but he said, I cannot in good conscious support someone who denies and will dilute our public health protections so distress in science and overseeing massive cuts to healthcare programs for vulnerable Americans. Vaccines were obviously friend of mine for Bernie Sanders, Ryan, do you have any other context you think is useful in the Sanders RFK jor war that's bloomed?
And I feel like culturally Sanders has become a fairly normy Democrat, interesting and like culturally when it comes to the pandemic and the way that Democrats approached the pandemic, like you would have imagined a world in which he went either way on that, and he went the way that he went, And I think that and you know, also, I don't know how much of a role it played, but RFK Junior is like obnoxious and willfully dishonest attack on him as being in the pocket of pharmac CEOs and then seeing like so many morons like circulate that video as like evidence that, oh we discovered that Bernie Sanders is actually corrupt. And for people that didn't watch this, RFK Junior did this thing where he's like you said, you don't take money from you know, the pharma CEOs, but actually it says you took.
A million plus dollars.
It's like, bro, those are like pharmacists, those pharmaceutical reps. Those are people who work for in manufacturing of pharmaceuticals. Like the pharmaceutical industry is a multi billion dollar industry which contains workers.
If you go and look go to like uh, go to go to Open Secrets.
And look at Bernie's, like top industries and supporthim, it'll be like Amazon, Walmart, you know, the pharmaceutical industry, the plenty from the oil industry. Like that's because that's where people in our economy work.
They are workers.
It'd be like something and Bernie Centers is in the pocket of Amazon or Walmart, like because people at Walmart are giving him twenty five dollars. It's it's so dumb that it's like it crosses the threshold into being offensive. And so I could imagine that at Bernie's, like you know what f this guy, Which that's not how you should do politics.
And you got to put the path go past those lights.
But it's also so dumb that you're like, so either this guy is this deeply dishonest that he's going to make this a which is does not speak to qualifications for a secretary, or he's so dumb that he doesn't know what it means to get twenty five thirty dollars.
Contributions from workers. Yeah, he knows, he.
Would hope so because he himself ran for president, well he can go to open secrets and see his own top industry.
He's a significant student, Like here's a long time student of money in politics, and he's serious about it.
So then it'ses.
He definitely knows. And I think in his case, he feels like a lot of the attacks on him have been dishonest, and there's just a lot of attacks on him, so of course some of them have been dishonest. But that seemed like an odd way to talk to Bernie Sanders, somebody who does have a lot of common cause.
Was exactly.
And by the way, if you're watching this clock in your mind, anybody that treated that as a serious attack, and do not listen to them about anything ever again because they think you're an idiot. If you are an idiot, then continue to listen to them.
It is sort of a funny litmus test for people who don't like look at the FEC data a lot, right whenever someone does that.
So I'm speaking to the not idiots who like and people who are casually following this and like like, oh wow, I didn't know that.
That's really interesting to me.
They are playing on you because they're playing you because they think that you're not going to look one layer deeper.
So don't listen to them ever again, or some of them.
Just don't know and are like new to this, speaking of which, by the way, can confirm that Bill Cassidy is a major recipient of donations, not merely from people who work in pharma, but from packs.
So yes, there you go, right, there's packs, there's CEOs, there's executives. Those are the people that give you the max donations or the five thousand, six thousand dollars checks. Yeah, that's completely different than somebody cutting you thirty dollars and then it says employer you ever given money, It asks you your employer, and then that puts you into an industry.
Right, Yeah, So if we gave money, we would put down journalists or media and then it would clock as if you're reading the FEC or for it's as hepathetically, Bernie Sanders just took money from the media media, and so it would look similar to if like funny enough, like the head of NBC News or the head of NBC Universal as a media company, it would look the same. Yeah, right, So anyway, you can find all kinds of strange stuff in there if you go into the FEC reports. But Ryan, you picked up on this really interesting report in the New York Times on housing that we want to get to.
New article with Pro public in the New York Times, So you can put this E one up on the screen here. It's a deep look at the fluctuations in home values relative to regions in the country that are being hit or not hit by climate implications. So what this is doing, I think kind of for the first time, it's relying on a lot of data from the the Financial Street, which tries to figure out, you know, which direction how real estate prices are heading for their own kind of internal commercial reasons.
They teamed up with ProPublica New York.
Times to unload a bunch of their datas they could so they could try to clock it by climate and so what what they find. What they found shouldn't be surprising to anybody, but has deeply profound implications, and we can actually put up E.
Two. They have a couple of these maps that that.
May make clear what's going on. You can see the red there is basically a heat map of where you are screwed if you own if you own property, and the clearer it is, the better off you are in terms of climate implications. And so what they're what they're finding here is that over the next thirty years they expect home prices to not rise very you know, substantially on average. But when you break it out by climate implications, if you are in a place impacted by severe weather and flooding, you're looking at over the next thirty or something like a six percent decline, whereas if you're not, you're looking at something like a ten percent increase. The American dream has been built around the idea that home prices are going to continue to rise. That that's how you build your wealth, and that's the wealth that you're eventually able to pass down to your family. Something like two thirds of adults own homes, and more as you get as you get older, and they First Street is estimating that five million people will move this next year significantly as a result of these climate implications, and they're saying that along with kind of location, seafront view of that kind of stuff, and public schools, like the quality of the school in the area, climate is becoming for home buyers something that they are now actively considering.
Anything in this surprise you.
And more importantly, do you think the implications are going to be as profound as their forecasting?
Yes, but probably from a different perspective here if we put the two back up on the screen. One of the interesting things here, we were just talking about Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana look at the dark red in southern Louisiana. Well, we were talking about what industries he takes money from. One of them actually is construction. And what's funny about that is almost a decade ago, is working on a story about flood insurance reform. That really opened up my eyes. So a lot of the ways that we subsidize rebuilding in areas like that, and Cassidy was sort of opposed to this very conservative, ideologically conservative idea about flood insurance reform. And you know in states like Louisiana, states like Florida. I remember when we talked about in Miami each when the condo complex collapsed several years ago. This is why I think the implications of it are going to be profound, because we've had these technological advances in the last one hundred years that have allowed us to feel like we conquered nature and to build in these areas that are vulnerable when the climate change is naturally or otherwise. And whether you believe in man made anthropogenic climate change, whether you believe that or not, the climate changes, like you don't even have to buy into the ideology of climate change to recognize that some of these developments, you know what's been built up in California. I talked to James Pogue and Leighton Woodhust about this on Undercurrents recently. This is new developments over the course of one hundred years that sprang up really quickly because we were able to build quickly. We were able to build clothes, we were able to build these areas that required conquering nature. And so that if you're somebody who doesn't believe in anthropogenic climate change, the climate is going to change no matter what. So you have to have a plan for people's properties because that's important to them. It's what the American dream is, the cornerstone of the American dream, literally, the cornerstone of the American dream. So I totally agree that this is a significant, massively significant issue.
And the phenomenon that this article zeros in on is the way that climate denialism, fueled by governments has blocked, interestingly, the market from producing the signals that it otherwise would have produced that would have driven home construction and population dispersal that would have been more in line with climate developments.
In other words, in Florida is a good example.
The insurance industry has been at the forefront of the climate science. They're like, have fun over here with your documentaries pretending that climate's not real. Like we have actual skin in the game, we have money on the line. We're going to study the actual implications of the changing climate. And they looked at these studies and they came back and they're like, Oh, this used to be one hundred year floodplane. This is a fifty year floodplane. This was a ten year flood this is now a two year floodplane. You're gonna get flood every two years. Therefore, here's what you're going to pay for your insurance. So insurance hazard insurance used to be they estimate about six percent of your overall kind of monthly mortgage payment, and so it was relatively trivial. It wasn't something that people really factored in. Now it's pushing closer to twenty and it is growing faster than inflation, which is which is the reason then that you have to factor it in as you're thinking about where you're going to buy.
Well, people don't like to do that.
People then complain to their county commissioners, to their state lawmakers, to their members of Congress, and those lawmakers say, that is really unfair of those insurance companies to be charging that. So we're going to subsidize it, and we're going to make a law that they have to do it, et cetera. Yeah, and so here I am on the left talking about the free market and its value in setting signals, and so then yeah, people are like, okay, great, thank you for that.
We will build here.
But it's not just about signals. It's about people's physical safety. And I remember that I was actually talking to Sean Duffy about this at the time. This was when I was doing a flod insurance reform story, the NFIP, the National Flundaform, right, yeah, yeah, Well, the NFIP subsidizes rebuilding homes and genuinely dangerous floodplains over and over again. So in Houston, for example, people who are like low income, middle income who own these homes keep rebuilding because it's subsidized in these very dangerous places. And it's a not ideal situation at all. And so there's serious problems with the programs that you get incentivized because of crony capitalism to keep redoing and redoing. And Duffy was trying to lead the charge against it at the time. Now he's Transportation Secretary. But it does create these really perverse systems of incentives, and so the insurance system, I mean, I think this Times report is interesting from the perspective of like where insurance companies are coming down on this and how they're looking to influence government policies amidst all of this. Like, there's serious problems with both people have genuine interests here in doing the wrong thing and genuine interested in doing the right thing. So how do you marry them.
Well, ultimately, things that can't go on don't go on.
And so the numbers that they're adding up in this article two hundred and fifty billion for the LA fires, you can call it climbing and call it, you know, poor fire management. Complain about Gavin Newsom nuts open up this biggots where it doesn't matter. It's going to cost two hundred and fifty billion with a B. On top of that, you've got tens, maybe hundreds of billions. If you combine western North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, these other storms that we saw very recently, you're very quickly getting towards half a trillion dollars.
And damage is there.
That threatens the entire stability of and solubility of insurance companies and reinsurance companies. And you know they say that when the floodwaters received, it's when you really start to see who you know, who's who's naked. And that is that is that we may find out that there are some budgetary gimmicks going on at the insurance and reinsurance companies such that when homeowners with valid policies, I don't know if it's going to be this time or next time or down the road, but at some point they're going to go to this insurance company and be like.
Look, here's here's my valid policy.
Here my claim I need I need to be paid out, and they can be like, yeah, sorry, we're bankrupt. We don't actually have that amount of money because the actuary actuaries weren't allowed to do the math accurately, and so we charged everybody less than we understood it would cost. Yeah, if we hit these worst case scenarios, and now we've hit them, and then you're then you kick it up to what's called the reinsurers, who are kind of the backstop for the insurance companies. And once you're in that world, who knows what kind of counterparty risk they have and whether or not they're completely solvent either, and then you're back to the federal government needing a bailout.
Yeah, and so this is again the the I guess consequence of institutional trust, like having record low levels of institutional trust, is that you can't agree on the science, the capitalist science, whereas we call it the fauci because it's sort of interchangeable. He is the science and vice versa. But in all seriousness, when you can't agree on some basic well, you can't agree in some like basic research and it's been polarized and politicized. Then there are all kinds of things they get affected by that, including like insurance rates and people's decisions about where to build and invest, like individual homeowners' decisions about these things. So we sort of think about institutional trust as a very abstract conversation, like this is just something that the you know, professors talk about in with their tweed elbow patches, But it's really like consequential people's everyday lives. And this is a good example, by.
The way, I understand why you would need elbow patches like I need them already.
Get a little faith.
We're going to come in next week with their elbow patches.
Up next, Jasmine Crockett, congress when from Texas, has thoughts on mediocre white men. If you are a mediocre white man or you who are friends with mediocre white men, stick around for this one.
Congresswoman. Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Krockett had some thoughts about quote, mediocre white boys on CNN. Let's take a listen to what she said the other name.
I am tired of the white tears. Listen, if you are competent, you are not concerned when I walk into Congress every single day. You know why I don't feel away and why you can't make me doubt who I am is because I know that I had to work ten times as hard as they did just to get into the seat. When you look and you compare me to Marjorie Taylor Green or me to Lauren Bobert, there is no comparison. And that is the life that we have always lived. So the only people that are crying are the mediocre white boys that have been beaten out by people that historically have had to work so much harder. This is why they don't want us to have education. This is why they are trying to literally say we won't fund the HBCUs because they know that if they've already gone after affirmative action and they're saying, you know what, don't allow them to come into say these pwis as we call them, don't allow them to come into these institutions. We know why they created the HBCUs in the first place. It was because they wouldn't allow us into the white institutions. And so now they're not allowing us in, and now they're saying, you know what, we're also going to defund the HBCUs. You know why, because they don't want any more Kamala Harris's. They don't want any more Jasmine Crocketts. But I got news for them. I don't care what they do. We will fight to the end to make sure that we get our due. Because again, if you want to talk about the people that shouldn't be in this country, you probably need to look in the mirror, because the last time I checked, the Native Americans who summer Ice have been rounding up, or the Puerto Ricans who are absolutely Americans. Listen, the only people that came and colonized this place are your ancestors.
Trump, I don't know Ryan well.
By the way, for people just tuning in, PWI BPS of PWI stands for predominantly White institution.
So so people can keep up there. Now.
Not only did this spark controversy, there was a sub controversy that we can get into in a minute where the DNC's rapid response yes, shared this, which I think is and and then was attacked pretty viciously by the left saying like DNC, what are you trying to do?
Like who are you? Who are you winning over by pushing this content out? Like who who? Is who is this for?
And you can be you can even be smug about it if you want, like and the smug the way to be smug about it would be the quote that at at least that famous, at least Stevenson line, the guy who the Democrat of an egghead who ran for Congress I mean, I mean for ran for president a whole bunch of times in the mid twentieth century lost every time. He famously, perhaps apocryphally, said on somebody yelled at him and said, you have the votes of every thinking man in this country, and Stevenson yelled back, yeah, but I need a majority, which is funny and everybody laughs at it.
But it also.
There's a through line from that all the way through to this today's party, which runs through Barack Obama's guns and religion and the whole which you know, you kind of talk about this in this good, new, great new essay that you wrote. What's it called the point of the point about the kind of cultural elitism that that kind of seeps out. It used to come from white eggheads, like at least Stevenson, you're gonna say, like Obama, now it comes well half white egg and now it's now it's from somebody like Jasmine Crockett. But to take it on his own terms, we all we actually should all care about all mediocre people like this. There was this joke where they nominated a moron to the Supreme Court. I forget the moron's name, people can remember the comments section. And the defense of him was, well, you know, idiots need representation too, and the counter argument was, okay, but not necessarily on the Supreme Court.
Is this maybe the one place representation doesn't matter.
Let's get the smart cats on there. But mediocre is another word for average. Average is a word for in the middle. Like people who are in the middle, their grievances are or entirely legitimate, period, so to say. And so I think there are a lot of obvious things you can say about what Crockett said. I'm trying to say the non obvious thing, and the non obvious thing would be, if you are an average person in this country and you feel like you're being screwed over, then that's probably a legitimate grievance.
Well, also if you are because.
The country should be fair for everybody, including the Yog people.
But that was the sort of victory of the Civil Rights movement is why there are a lot of people who were involved. I mean, the civil Rights movement veterans are sort of split on these questions, but there are a lot of people who are involved are deeply uncomfortable with where DEI has gone. And actually this was in your great story a couple of years ago on the Elephant in the Zoom that people have sort of seen unintended consequences as the experiment has played out in ways that create more rancor and are not as fair. And it's not just mediocre white boys. It's also Asian Americans who get short the short straw and a lot of these situations, it's not it's it's it's not it. This is not it. This is not the right Democratic answer to Dee. And I get the Jasmin Crockett is a representative of a blue area around Dallas, like I understand that there are a lot of people in blue enclaves that are offended by the walk away from DEI. As an increasingly prominent spokeswoman for the Democratic Party, mocking people who are upset about Dei is probably not the way to go now.
To try to defend the impulse that Crockett is coming from. There is something I think interesting and insightful that she's trying to get at, which is basically that So what she's arguing, if you shared of a lot of the.
Rhetoric, is that there are a lot of people.
Who are much more talented over the last one hundred and fifty two hundred years who have been kept out of positions of prestige and authority because of their race and gender. That is true, and we should absolutely acknowledge, like that is a fact, and that racial engender, SegReg segregation, and exclusion did in fact allow mediocre white men to get into positions that if they had, if they had to compete with the entire population of men and women, black and white and brown.
Would have been harder for them.
That's like that, that is a that is a fact, and we and we should all acknowledge that. And so because that is because that is a fact, it is the case that some people who feel like they deserve positions are not getting those positions, and now they're angry at the women and the black people who.
Are getting those positions.
So I actually think like on one level she's making she's making a point that is that is accurate, and it is getting it something, and it's getting it something real. But to kind of blanket just go after like all mediocre white men or white boys, it is not very effective weighted it well.
And to assume those are the only people who are concerned about de I, or maybe not to assume, but to argue those are the only people who are concerned about DEI is just not correct. And I think Democrats choosing to fight bitterly back in the culture war over DEI is in normal like it actually bums me out as somebody who's more on the right, because I think one of the reasons that there's going to be overreached from Donald Trump is that there's just not a potent opposition party. And part of that is because what we saw from the DNC election over the last couple of days, where you have Jonathan k peart asking you, you know what actually happened, dear, Oh, there's just a bunch of racist and bigots that made sure Kamala Harris didn't get elected. And I'm paraphrasing kind of you know that was age. Yeah, it wasn't the most charitable interpretation, but it wasn't entirely disaccurate, inaccurate. So anyway, all that is to say, I think Jasmine Crockett's message is not the one Democrats should for moral reasons or political reasons be landing on here.
Right.
In politics, you're supposed to pander to people, not insult them. Yeah, like less than one Yeah, And another word for like I was saying earlier, mediocre would be like regular. Like we're just talking about regular people, okay, And you want to reach out to regular people, like you don't you don't want to just like aggressively assault them. I think that Obama's guns and religion argument, he like he was saying and he was making a cultural connection to as you talk about in your peace, a cultural connection to economics. He was saying, as as people saw the economic rug being pulled out from under them because of NAFTA and offshoring and collapse of manufacturing and the collapse of the American dream, that one thing they retreated to was guns and religion. That's where the clean guns and religion, bitterly it comes from, bitterly clinging to guns and religion because we're upset about the direction of the world. Like there is an analysis that's it's vulgar, but like you can see it and it's directionally, there's there's some insight into it. But even Obama as a politician is like, it's not good to talk about people.
In those bitter terms.
It's much better to talk to them as part of a collection of us who's going to like work together to overcome this in the way that like a Bernie Sanders would talk about it, like, yes, we are bitter, but we're bitter at the one percent who has done this to us. And work, work, and together, mediocre and excellent people together, black, white, brown men and women. We're going to come together and make the world better for all of us. And there's no all of us in the way that Crockett is talking there.
Right, And I don't know that she buys into the I guess ideological leftist argument about capitalism being the real enemy, but this is really to the extent that she does, or to the extent that she did, you would recognize from that vantage point that mediocre white boys, this is the argument you're saying, are a victim of that system, in the same way that people you're trying to help with DEI are a victim of that system. So it doesn't it's not coherent, it's not helpful, and you know, maybe Democrats should take a step back from the Jasmine Crockett train if that's where if this is an intentional strategy, promise she rates. I believe she probably gets fun. She probably brings money into and we saw that throughout the resistance, the same thing with the Lawfair people. Everyone who was engaging in the Lawfair was raising money for Democrats. Yeah, see how that worked out anyway.
And she had that, like what would Democrats really right want right now is somebody who's willing to just punch Republicans right in the face, like they're hungry for rhetorically, hungry for somebody rhetorically to just scream like and just take them down.
And she's and she's and she's delivering that in that sense.
If you will go find that she had that was it, Marjorie Taylor Green, Lauren Bulberg, She had some like poetry slam esque griff.
Just like yeah, it was Margine Tayler Green.
Just and she delivered in blonde.
Beach built Butch Buddy.
Just delivered it impeccably.
And you're like, I don't know politics aside, just the performance was just utterly impeccable.
Yeah there was something else. Oh yeah, yeah, I un ironically loved that exchange. So great place to land on at the end of today's edition of Counterpoints.
Yeah, just let it.
Sometimes you just have to let them yell at each other.
We would, we would play that out at a moment.
Of such a thing. Does he still do that?
I don't know. I don't think so. It's probably Comedy Central's back on Comedy.
Yeah, maybe he does. We'll have to check it out. We will report back. We will figure that one out. Thank you so much everyone for tuning in. Breaking Points dot com is where you can go to get a premium subscription and you get the show right in your inbox. Early no breaks, full, full show, listen to the whole thing, all gas, no breaks. As they say on TikTok, where Ryan is now a.
Celebrity, get over there, follow me there.
On Friday, we were so Thursday, It'll come on Thursday afternoon for premium subscribers. We're going to have Natalie Winters, who is I told my wife this this morning, I said, Steve Bannon's White House correspondent.
She's like, I'm sorry, what like I said, it's Steve. She's Steve Bannon's white House course.
And she's like, yes, I heard you. What on earth are you talking? How does Steve Bannon have a white house course?
Well?
I was like, so, Steve Bannon has a podcast called war Room. The podcast has a white house court. She's like, oh, okay, interesting times we're living in. I was talking to Crystal. Yes, yes, we were talking about how Friday Morning should we also do like an a block because there's just so much news that's going from like Thursday to Monday, so we'll put out the Friday Show. If Emily is around, we'll and I'm from around wallso we'll also do like a you know, wrap up some news for you too, because like, good lord, there's a lot going on
So much going on, but looking forward to that for sure, So make sure you stay tuned and if you want it early, Breaking points dot com