hey everybody welcome back to the Allin

podcast with us again today yawning from

Milan your favorite the chairman

dictator chamath poopaa you look a

little tired my friend how you doing

over there buddy I left Monday I flew to

Singapore I was on the ground for two

days and I flew here I'm here for two

days and then I go to London for five

days

I'm you are on a worldwind tour I mean

I'm Bas I'm flying around the world

literally flying around the world moving

West man right I'm tired and this is all

service I mean at our age you feel it it

hits differently when you when you pass

40 and I'm assuming this is 8090

business we out there selling you're

selling you're selling grock you're

selling 8090 you're out there doing BD

little selling little closing and then

I'm speaking at the Oxford Union on

Wednesday okay okay well that sounds

fancy check in The Bucket List oh okay

there you have it and in his camo hat

and in his election Afterglow look at

the glow he is in that Afterglow he is

post quitus here post election anybody

got a cigarette I need to I need to

light up a cigarette

that was a close one I didn't think I

was going to make it but you did do you

like my C hat Jal this is this is a hat

well it says Trump F you look like we

fud what does it say you're hunting

lives no remember remember when uh Tim

Waltz rolled out the camo hat yes and

you said it was going to win the

election for Harris it might it might I

thought that he might have a shot yes

yeah I was wrong about that one be belly

belly quiet we got all the camo guys

they voted for us hunting Wibble

nobody's going to get this uh but it's

very good it looks good on is that Elmer

fud that's Elmer fud be belly belly

quiet we're hunting wibbles that sounds

like Mike Tyson well I'm gonna mess up

that Jake Paul how about I wear a

different Trump hat every week for the

next four years absolutely fantastic I

mean the ratings on this show good ones

I mean all I care about at this point

I'm getting Savage in any way possible

all I care about is ratings now let's go

you're fine Maga

get in the comments let's get these

ratings up and with us of course the CEO

of ohalo

ohalo David freeberg how you doing there

little buddy thanks for having me again

J thank you all right

well it's good to be here yeah how you

doing I'm chilling man you know just

nice to the executive producer to have

you on the show yes I've been producing

you here well it's uh you know always

I'm always thinking about your best

interest I was hearing a little I I

heard you on a phone call before you

said you had a perfect body what was

that in reference to makes me go yeah

she makes me go to the dermatologist

where they she examines your whole nude

body to look for moles so this morning I

went in early to the dermatologist she

examined it she said perfect I said does

she have to wear sunglasses because

you're just so white like it just like

it's blindingly white she or woman did

she get Hazard pay the poor that poor

dermatologist my God she's like she's

like thank you for the experience this

is why we need to uh in all seriousness

this is why Sachs we have to legalize

psychedelics this poor woman has PTSD

after that we need to get get out of

here get out of here it was a wonderful

examination she was thrilled I mean

right okay and uh of course I'm Jason

kakanis and uh you know there's been a

lot of scuttlebutt sacks I don't know if

you know this but uh comedy might still

be legal here on the all in podcast but

there's been a lot of scuttlebut a lot

of debate lot of energy dare I say

around are we gonna break the rules

today finally I don't know we'll see

anything's possible people get a little

sensitive sometimes with the com do I

have to put my pronouns back in my zoom

chat put your pronouns back in shabath

paapa douche back uh here we

go you you you might not know this but a

lot of appointments are being made sax

did you know this are you aware that the

appointments are being made I'm aware

yeah it's happening you have SE you've

seen the flow of them well I got a dump

I'm not going to say who sent these to

me but I actually got the next five or

six announcement that Trump's going to

make I'm not gonna say who gave it this

is gonna this bit has the potential to

be so good I'm so tired but you've got

me awake I'm I'm awake too ready well

here's our first one here's our first

one this is a very interesting one yeah

here it is this is a statement from

Donald J trump it is my great honor to

announce that Hunter Biden of Delaware

will head a new the Bureau of founder

mode procurement founder mode

procurement you notice saak dropped off

he doesn't want to uh have a reaction

shot here uh next one up this is

interesting Tony henchcliffe I don't

know if you know him he has been

appointed into a new role he's the

ambassador to Puerto Rico Cham

he's that's a good one chamath actually

uh your wish has come true you are now

your sole duty is to ensure all

executive branch knitwear is on point

the sweater inspector General

everybody's going to have perfect Nar

knitwear absolutely knitwear and uh I by

the way just so you know that's a that's

a lurana Kashmir sweater in that picture

apparently apparently I'm actually

decided I would flip I've gone full Maga

here I am I have been appointed as Chief

virtue signaler that I like that I like

every time podcast you're GNA be uh

you're gonna have stiff competition from

Mark cuan for that for that post I know

I beat him out I beat him

out yeah yeah I went down to he deleted

he deleted all of his proa tweets have

you done the same uh no no I haven't yet

you're going have to work on that you

get look at the Lusty eyes in this

picture yeah I know it's pretty great

that's it really you you have there you

have not found a virtue you didn't want

to just burrow yourself absolutely not

absolutely not hey freeberg you've been

appointed here we go uh as Bobby

Kennedy's Whipping Boy and you will be

officially his little uh anything

any Innovation you come up with is

officially blocked and here he is my

great honor to announce David Sachs is

now the chief retribution officer

congratulations well

done retribution must be had J Cal

payback is a there were a lot of

people who are out of line just a little

bit a little bit they deserve to get

smacked around a little bit just On's

goingon to get his shoe shine box just

on a little bit just a little

bit let your winners ride

Rainman

David and in said we open source it to

the fans and they've just gone crazy

[Music]

with there's been a lot of talk about a

holiday party free BR you want to give

us an update on the holiday party quick

plug on the party so the party is coming

up in three weeks the all-in Holiday

Spectacular Steve Aoki Andrea bz Gary

Richards AKA Destructo are gonna be

DJing several I'm doing a secret DJ

set I may it's actually good idea beat

we will have chess challenges with Alex

botes several sections are sold out VIP

is sold out uh draymond's joining us

Draymond Green from the Warriors he's

gonna come and do a little bit with us

on stage it'd be great he's great so

should be great get your tickets at

allin.com events all right let's get

into it everybody I just want to start

with a a little bit of Finance here

Bitcoin and Finance stocks way up since

the Trump win which was now 10 days ago

uh Bitcoin peaked at

92,000 unbelievable it's dropped down to

89 but obviously that's an alltime high

and as we all know we talked about it on

the show Trump heavily heavily coed the

crypto industry during his campaign in

addition to the bitcoin news since early

August AFF firm Robin Hood PayPal

coinbase all up double or 50% it's an

extraordinary run in July Trump

headlined a Bitcoin conference he laid

out his plans number one he was going to

fire SEC chairman Gary Gensler here's

the clip on day one I will fire Gary

Gensler and appoint a new SEC chairman

this

who I didn't know he was that

unpopular

fire a

fire too bad for

G I didn't know he was that unpopular

let me say it

again on day one I will fire Gary

G whoa there it is okay enough with that

technically president can't fire the SEC

chair but he can appoint a new one when

Gary's term ends in 2026 or Gary could

resign when Trump takes office that

happens uh sometimes and uh folks are

speculating gansler has already made

that decision to step down he uh put out

a press release with a quote in it that

a number of people took note of where he

said it's been a great honor to serve

with them the people who work at the SEC

doing the people's work and ensuring our

Capital markets Remain the best in the

world Trump also said the federal

government will never sell never ever

sell its Bitcoin Holdings uh which they

own through criminal assets as you know

and number three he said he would create

a Bitcoin and crypto presidential

advisory Council where Trump said quote

the rules will be written by people who

love your industry not hate your

industry and he also advocated that all

future Bitcoins would be minted in

America I don't know that he gets to

make that choice but they have it

freeberg any thoughts here

on the crypto market and this incredible

bull run here we've seen in the last you

know 10 days and then before that couple

month I mean I think like you said it's

not limited to crypto crypto is One

Market of several that have been

significantly affected by the Outlook

based on Trump's election uh I think

that Trump's election has a couple of

key features that are changing market

dynamics one is folks kind of view some

of his policies to be obviously

stimulatory with lower tax rates and

more deregulation this is you know

theoretically going to drive up

investment and economic growth the

deregulatory nature on its own benefits

markets that have been encumbered by

regulatory oversight and Regulatory

challenges like crypto finance and

fintech so those types of businesses are

are clearly going to benefit or expected

to benefit significantly by being able

to launch products more quickly and have

Fe and ways that they can generate

Revenue that they might be challenged to

do Under the current Regulatory schemas

and then uh there's also this element of

kind of things being inflationary the

the feature of tariffs if we don't get

spending cut fast enough there's an

effect on markets so you know we're

still seeing 10year treasury sit at

about 4 and a half% up from 3 and a half

perc which is where we were right around

the rate cut beginning in September and

remember since those rate Cuts began in

September we've cut 75 basis

points and uh and and we're still seeing

the kind of tenure treasury hold High

which in kind of implies that there's

expected to be persistent inflation in

fact the October inflation number

accelerated again so it's back up not

going down it's I think it went up to

2.6% up from 2.3% the month prior these

General kind of effects that are

predicted from the Trump policy plans is

having an effect in different markets

obviously in equities we're seeing more

kind of risk-seeking risk-taking and

then in the bond markets because of the

4 and a half% treasury yield there's a

really in Dynamic and and I I kind of

sent this this link out yesterday but if

you look at the spread on yields between

us treasuries which have historically

been kind of considered and talked about

and are deemed the the risk-free rate

and the yield that corporates have to

pay to borrow money we haven't seen a

spread this low in 26 years so it's a

17-year low for the spread between the

yield that companies that issue junk

bonds have to pay from treasuries and

it's a

26-year low for credit grade bonds so

this means the market is either more

risk-seeking meaning they're looking for

more yield and they're going into

corporates because they feel like there

is a higher probability that these

companies are going to be successful in

the future they're not going to have

higher default rates Etc so the market

is becoming much more risk-seeking

or the alternative is that parts of the

market are reassessing the risk-free

nature of treasuries M themselves if

spending doesn't get under control the

treasury market appetite is decreasing

so there's this kind of spread that's

shrunk in the last couple of months so

we're seeing Capital flooding into the

markets for risk-seeking assets and this

is obviously affecting crypto equities

and and bond markets all across the

board and we'll talk a little bit about

IPO and m&a later great shath your

thoughts aside from yum

yum I mean yum yum you could say it it's

a it's a yum it's gonna be a just say it

no I mean look what did I say at the

beginning of the year was G to be the

biggest risk

asset winning

trade yeah it's great bitcoin's great oh

my Lord I haven't seen you this

[Music]

Happ what made you more H happy getting

to Milan and spending time with your

white truffle dealer or watching Bitcoin

break 90k which one was more exciting

for you you know honestly you know what

I think about I actually think about all

the Bitcoin I

sold yeah you I had Bitcoin I had a

bunch of Bitcoin in my funds when I

managed outside

Capital you know that's a I don't know a

three or four billion dollar mistake in

growing now because my partners at the

time capitulated and I wanted to be a

good team member and we distributed and

it was profitable but obviously I

shouldn't have sold it would have made

them a lot more money and then I think

about like I bought some

land I remember Taho it was in the Wall

Street Journal I'm sure you can find it

but yeah how much is that worth now

probably couple hundred million dollars

maybe more rough TR R but you you do

have Bitcoin holding can can I ask you a

question why do you say sold Bitcoin as

opposed to converted Bitcoin into

Dollars like when you think about

Bitcoin just as as a participant do you

think about Bitcoin as a dollar

denominated asset that you go and buy

Bitcoin and then you're eventually going

to sell it turn it back into dollars and

use the dollars or are you like what do

you think about the purest kind of idea

that Bitcoin should be the deao currency

and store of value in the future and the

dollar doesn't matter and we shouldn't

necessarily be talking about the the

value of Bitcoin in dollar denominated

terms as something I'm going to

eventually turn it back into it hasn't

happened yet and so until it happens I

think you have to view it as like a very

good gold proxy

but it's a

largely dollar denominated asset now why

do you see it going the other way like

so a lot of folks thought that as a safe

haven it should do well when there's a

negative economic Outlook but it has

traded the last couple of years kind of

totally correlated no it's tot it's a

totally correlated asset I mean yeah

there will be a

point and it's probably an hour lifetime

where it is an

independent asset and a non-speculative

store of value there will be that day

but that day is not now and I think it's

very important to see the conditions on

the field as they are versus what you

wish it to be and and the reason is that

it allows you to risk manage more

appropriately because if you don't see

it then when something happens to the

dollar complex good or bad or when

something happens to rates good or bad

or when something stimulative happens

good or bad you're not going to react

properly if you're in the business of

managing it as a risk asset so if you're

in the set it and forget it bucket and

there are some

people I think it's great none of these

conversations matter but like most

people you're probably going to be

motivated to do

something and I think if you're

motivated to do something or you have

filo that stimulates you to do something

whatever the psychology is that leads

you to action it's probably important to

just view things as they really are

versus how you wish them to be and so I

think the purists may eventually be

right I think they will be right at some

point in my lifetime but they're not

right now and that's why these things

are correlated and youly the other the

other thing I'll say just broadly about

the market is I think that there's a

tremendous amount of optimism about the

economy I think that's why you see risk

spreads get crushed definitely yeah yeah

and I think that as long as we see the

kind of prognostications that the Trump

Administration is putting

out I think people are going to be

mostly bullish I think the way that this

trade turns around is when something

actually breaks in terms of the

inflation picture or in terms of the

deficit picture and if those things look

like going into 2025

that President Trump's actions are not

going to be able to course correct it

then I think you're going to see people

go massively risk off which I think will

not be great for markets obviously but

right now we're not in that point and

you don't think the tenure reflects that

already at 4 and a half% I mean that's

showing some degree of inflation and

concern about the

deficit right it's like I think I think

the tenure could be at

7% yeah

what does 4 and a half% mean I mean if

you're if you're going to run

8% of GDP level deficits for the next

four or five or six years

yeah you're going to have the tenure at

seven to %. that's just mathematical

right sax your thoughts on uh crypto

before we get into IPOs and m&a if any

yeah just on crypto the House

Republicans already passed a framework

for crypto regulation earlier this year

it actually got 71 Democrats to to join

it it was called the financial

Innovation and technology for the 21st

century act or fit

21 and it would classify digital assets

like crypto as Commodities regulated by

the cftc if the blockchain they run on

is is quote functional and decentralized

that's the key requirement if their

blockchain is functional but not

decentralized then they would be

considered Securities and fall under the

purview of the SEC I think the the

crypto industry basically wants a really

clear line for knowing when they're a

commodity and they want Commodities to

be governed governed like all other

Commodities by the cftc so that's what

the Republican bill would do I think

with the Republicans now winning the

Senate the prospects for that bill to

get enacted are now greatly improved

especially because shered Brown who used

to run the Banking Committee just lost

to Bernie Moreno this was a a seat in

Ohio Elizabeth is still going to object

to this legislation but she's just going

to have way less influence and like you

said it's not clear that Gary gendler is

going to be sticking around very long at

the SEC so look the bottom line here is

that I think that we are close to having

clear rules of the road codified by

Congress which is what the crypto

industry's been asking for and the days

of gendler terrorizing crypto companies

by issuing Wells notices without

clarifying what the rules are that he's

in Prosecuting those days are about to

be over over so I think this is why the

crypto markets are

rallying and so to your point if it's

centralized or partially centralized

you're going to be a security if you're

decentralized anybody can join the

network no one person controls the

network and I guess most people would

consider that Bitcoin versus say Ripple

which is partially decentralized but

largely centralized and that's going to

be I guess the new rules of the road in

addition to that there are new rules

that are being fored that hopefully

Trump fit 21 passes right this bill is

called fit 21 but I think much much

higher likelihood that it or something

like it now can get through the Congress

Mak sense yeah and then there's also

legislation that's already been enacted

that's there's multiple ways multiple

paths but accredited investors there's

going to be a path to becoming an

accredited investor with a test so that

is something that is also on the docket

we'll see if it happens let's talk about

IPOs and m&a yum yumo

is just a level set here with the

audience here's the number of IPOs per

year and as you can see the last three

years have been some of the

lowest since 2008 and 2009 the Great

Recession for those of you who are old

enough to remember it and if you look at

VC the number of

distributions have been absolutely on

the floor for the past three years in

fact if you look at the distributions

from 2022 through 2024 those three years

combined it's been around 200 billion

Which is less than 2019 in total and uh

with this year projected to be about a

100 billion in distributions that's

about 14% of the peak Zer era when in

2021 we had

710 billion do in

distribution here so the back room Buzz

is that Donnie from Queens is going to

make m&a great again couple of reasons

there Sachs the wrath of Lena KH coming

to an end Max Heaven sitting on massive

amounts of cash and that cash is growing

as people have laid people off and

they're focused on getting fit obviously

we all know the FED did another quarter

point cut last week although some people

maybe don't know that because it seems

to have gotten lost in the election news

and psychologically I think everybody's

feeling very optimistic so maybe these

IPOs are back on the menu chath I don't

know if you saw it but clar just filed

for their IPO that's a Swedish fintech

company they were kind of the Pioneers

in buy now pay later what are the other

IPOs we could see file in 2025 data

brick stripe whiz canva plaid Rippling

and air table there's a long shot that

people have been buzzing about I don't

have any inside information but people

have been speculating SpaceX could IPO

starlink their starlink unit and if you

want to get really crazy jth maybe

there's a long shot that Sam Alman jumps

the fence and decides he's going to take

open AI public during this window that

people expect to be opening what do you

think choth what's going to happen here

in terms of m&a and IPOs in

2025 I think it's going to still be

pretty

subdued subed okay I don't I don't think

that you're going to see

these crazy m&a deals that I think

everybody is expecting

I also don't

anticipate a lot of these big companies

going

public at least in the first half of the

year and the only reason I say that is I

just think

that like this year and the first half

of next

year what's the difference the IPO

Market is what the IPO Market is and if

the 10e is back to you know four and a

half 5% that's not a compelling strategy

for some SAS

company or some internet business

that didn't take an opportunity to go

public when rates were at zero so if you

just look mathematically at what the

actual fair value of these companies

should be I don't know it's not like

such a great IPO market then on the m&a

side if all you're doing is waiting for

Lena Khan to not be there to me I think

that that betrays what m&a is supposed

to be which is you're supposed to

underwrite some industrial logic from

first principles where things are very

accretive and very accretive

things should not hang by a thread on

the

emotional regulation or disregulation of

the FTC commissioner so I kind of think

that you would have seen some of this

stuff already as well if if the

industrial logic was so high and again

when rates are non-trivially high I just

think that it's not the easiest thing in

the world to pull off like a really big

m&a event nor is it a really easy thing

to off to pull off a huge IPO when again

there's a reason why Warren Buffett has

$325 billion sitting in t- bills making

4 and a half% a year he owns more t-

bills than the United States government

he's making about $15 billion dollar a

year in interest when you can do that

with absolutely no

risk again relative to stocks at least

yeah what is this IPO going to give you

Jamal's right like the 10 years at 4 and

a half% you're basically paying 20 times

cash flow

to own a risk-free bond the US treasury

bond or you can pay 23 times to own a

totally risky asset yeah it's 30 times

to own the S&P 500 right now it's yeah

it's but but there is a lot of

risk-seeking Shifting happening chth

right so I mean we talked about like

some of the crypto stuff some of the

fintech stuff deregulation that the PE

might seem high today but if you forast

out 10 years for some of these

businesses in a

deregulated deted environment enironment

or reduced tax reduced regulation

environment that the earnings should

accelerate in a way that outpaces the

the multiple you're getting today right

so I mean this is part of why some of

the fintech companies are ripping right

now why some of the finance companies

are ripping right now if under Trump and

the Republican control of the House and

Senate laws don't pass and regulations

get reduced theoretically earnings are

going to rip and you should pay a higher

multiple today because you're actually

buying these things at 8 to 10 times

earnings 5 Years From now so there seems

to be some risk appetite there but I do

agree with chamat on the m&a point if

you think about what's gone on over the

last couple years hold on a second can I

ask you a question do you think that

regulation is the reason why these SAS

companies have never made a dollar of

profit no no I'm not talking about SAS

I'm not talking about SAS I'm talking I

guess we then you're talking about

industrial companies no the fintech

market right so we were talking about

ftech and some of these assets

earlier some of these equities that have

been RI it's a very narrow part of the

economy right like if you look at Broad

like on a broad-based basis the tens and

tens of trillions of dollars of market

cap that

exist I do agree with you that

deregulation benefits a bunch of those

companies but it benefits sort of the

non-te businesses more than the tech

businesses the tech businesses right now

are relatively lightly regulated yeah I

would think that it benefits Pharma

businesses it benefits a businesses it

benefits real estate companies it

benefits a whole a whole whole swath of

the economy but we've started to see

that

reating and maybe we'll see a lot more

so maybe Jason the more Nuance answer to

your question is the kind of m&a that I

think you want to see that I mean let's

face it that we all want to see here

because we all have the vested interest

which is really specifically Tech m&a I

don't think that any of this

deregulation particularly accelerates

that but maybe a more Nuance take on

this would be that these other more

regulated parts of the economy could do

well and catch up to some of the

earnings potential or the forward

pricing of the tech businesses but again

now you get into this weird trade where

you can buy steady cash flowing

businesses that can grow in valuation as

fast as a as a fast growing but money

losing Tech business but then you trade

both of those two things off and it has

effectively the same yield as a

tenure what do you do yeah yeah I you

know I think there's a lot of back

up inventory where venture capitalist

boards and Founders people who control

and make these decisions on m&a if they

would sell the company to a larger

company I think there's a lot of

exhaustion in the market and that will

drive the capitulation on valuation

talking think the valuations will be

yeah

exactly I'm watching it right now I mean

you think Warren Buffett's going to take

325 billion of cash and but he won even

buy his own stock so going to pay in

terms of a multiple I think it'll be

more like Salesforce or Microsoft or

Google or Amazon getting off the

sidelines because they've looked at and

said you know the juice ain't worth the

squeeze we might as well put our efforts

and our Capital into buying big hardware

and building new products and services

but if they think hey I got a chance of

pulling this through I'm sitting on all

this cash what if I hit another YouTube

an Instagram you know really great

Acquisitions that were transformative

for those two companies meta would not

be where it is right now Facebook you

know that well Jam if they hadn't gotten

Instagram and certainly you know

freedberg as in alumni of Google if they

didn't get YouTube it would be a

completely different picture for that

company right now I think there's a lot

of those type of Acquisitions I think

there's a lot of those Acquisitions that

have been sitting there waiting and I'm

watching the secondary markets to your

question what's the discount going to be

the discount was last year I kid you not

780 90% off the last round for SAS

companies and this year it's 20 or 30

I'm seeing this when I'm getting offers

to buy our shares in some private SAS

companies some private fintech companies

and then I also think if you're a CEO

and you watch Robin Hood Uber Reddit

door Dash and instacart those five have

actually after getting a a little bit of

a ass kicking when they first went out

they have all rebounded massively and

for the people who held on to their

Reddit shares Robin Hood shares Uber

shares they have been rewarded massively

massively for having faith in you know

through this storm so I think those two

things the capitulation of all these

boards and Founders are going to say you

know what let's take the haircut let's

go public and let's tell our story and

and see if we can make it work as a

public company and then the people who

feel one step weaker than that I think

they want to cash their chips in they've

been in some of these Investments Jam

it's year 11 12 13 14 for some of these

private companies there is capitulation

on those boards people are exhausted so

that that I just I'm going to I'm going

to take the side of the argument on this

one I'll kind of play along so I think

and and I'll disagree a little bit for

couple different reasons these big tech

companies the ones that have had you

know media businesses or because

remember there's Tech that's Tech right

Nvidia does not have a media business

but there's been a conversation over the

last couple of years where we need to

break up big Tech has been kind of part

of the conversation with the Dems and

now the Republicans are coming in and

they're saying the same thing we got to

break up big Tech so there I think are a

few of these companies Google being one

of them that are very much handicapped

right now with respect to what kind of

m&a they can do without dealing with the

regulatory Sledgehammer coming down on

them so I don't think that those guys

are buyers JL I don't think that

Google's in a place right now where they

can go out and make a bunch of

Acquisitions they're going to do

everything they can to avoid the

regulatory Sledgehammer that's coming

their way first it was coming from the

Dems now it's coming from the new

Administration there's a bunch of other

companies you know that don't really fit

that bill like Microsoft probably

doesn't fit that bill Nvidia Adobe maybe

they'll make some Acquisitions but I

don't think it's as simple as well we'll

sell at a low price we'll buy at a low

price I'm just not sure they really need

to do that agree with you I completely

agree I I

think that these big tech companies will

need to pay a pound of Flesh for the

deplatforming and the censorship that

they did and this is a perfect time if

we're going to go to the political angle

to bring you in Sachs what are The Vibes

my per

is Trump likes to win and Trump wants to

see the economy soar that is his

platform he's a business guy I think he

wants to see fluidity I know JD has been

not a fan of like the Googles Etc so

maybe you could help us navigate this

who's right here what's the possibility

of m&a becoming more vibrant in a trump

uh

Administration well there's no question

that in general president Trump wants to

have the most vibrant economy we can

have and I think to that and you're

going to see the end of this era of

deceleration of regulatory capture and

lawfare I think all those things are are

over I think that equities that have

been straining or or tamped down under

the weight of these abuses you see them

ripping now for example Tesla it's gone

from roughly 250 to 320 a share just

since the election and you could call

that the lawfare discount I mean that

basically is the discount Tesla stock

because the market was pricing in the

risk of retaliation if the Republicans

lost there's a widespread belief that

the Democrats would go after Elon and

his company so you can actually measure

the lawfare discount based on regulation

right because there's a lot of

regulations around self-driving rocket

ship launches all those things he's

involved in there's a lot of Regulation

there yeah there was this crazy thing

where they they made some regulator made

them put a headset on a seal did you see

this to test the effect on seals of loud

noises the sonic boom sonic booms yeah

this poor seal do you see this poor seal

had like a head I don't don't do that to

freeberg put the no don't put it on the

screen put it in

post don't put it on the screen that's

freeberg is gonna anyway so they

subjected this poor seal to exactly the

thing that they were worried would harm

seals in any event the seal seemed

totally fine it didn't they torture

seals to make a point I got it yeah

anyway it's really crazy so yeah look

this crazy what about this JD help us

navigate I know JD is the VP and then

you have Trump is the CEO chamok pointed

out maybe there's a little on the

GOP anger resentment

residual because of the you know Banning

of trump from YouTube and and some of

these other platforms do you think that

makes its way into m&a or not I guess

sax like let me be specific to jal's

question not all tech companies are the

same in that point of view right Tech

m&a generally is a thing but

specifically the companies that have had

social media platforms may be kind of in

a different lens from a regulatory

perspective is that

fair yeah I mean look I think that not

everything Lena Khan did was bad in fact

she definitely has some fans among the

populist Republicans and yeah you know

some of them who've spoken out on her

behalf in various areas have been JD

Vance Matt Gates as well she did do some

good things specifically she was willing

to take on the big tech companies I mean

companies like Amazon Apple Google

frankly they just had a free ride for

the last couple of decades where they

were allowed to do anything and she came

in and said there's a new sheriff in

town and she was actually willing to

apply pressure on them to not engage in

anti-competitive tactics so I think she

deserves credit for that I think she did

change the conversation I think that

we've talked about on previous pods that

perhaps

there was not as targeted and surgical

an approach was used and as a result of

that it did have a chilling effect on

m&a and so it hurt the you know the

small Tech environment and so I think

that we need to fix that part of it but

I hope that whoever repl as Lina con

will continue to apply pressure to Big

Tech because they are monopolies and

they will abuse their power if they're

allowed to and they need to be

controlled sax if you had to handicap

the

probability of

of a lawsuit or some kind

of attempt to

dismantle Google and

Facebook would those be the two

companies at the top of your list and

how would you handicap that so my view

is that Google should be broken up

there's abundant reasons for that

there's at least three monopolies in

that company there's the search business

the advertising business and YouTube I

think they should be busted up what are

the that that happens it's hard to say

but what are the odds that that is

pursued in the next Administration in

some capacity or at least investigated

I'd say hi I'd say Facebook or meta

lesso I don't see the compelling need to

to bust them up but quite frankly I

think the issue that meta is going to

face is just there were a lot of abuses

in terms of censoring the Free Speech

rights of Americans now I don't think

that was all the company's idea I think

a lot of pressure was put on the company

by the Biden Administration I think they

wanted to do the right thing and just

didn't show enough backbone I think El

Zuckerberg's been clear that he regrets

and the knee now he's like listen I I'm

not a letter yeah he published a letter

and maybe it was done to some degree to

inoculate himself against the result of

this election but I'd say to his credit

it wasn't clear at all who's going to

win the election when he put out that

letter and he basically Ally said that

he regretted the fact that meta had gone

along with the censorship requests by

the Biden Administration and he

specifically referred to that whole

Hunter Biden story that got censored in

2020 that was election interference it

was a completely True Story by the New

York Post it got censored by big Tech at

the request of these 51 former

intelligence officials who were lying

through their teeth claiming was Russian

disinformation so he clearly regrets

going along with that in any event I

think there are better ways of handling

the speech issue on social networks than

busting up Facebook but I I I do think

though

that Congress should investigate or

continue investigating what went wrong

there and what exactly is the

involvement of the intelligence

community and the Deep state in the

censorship request that we saw exposed

by the Twitter files remember can I

bring up something maybe tangential and

you can react to this just speaking of

of like censorship and then just the the

media complex that we have I saw today

that Trump filed like a 10 or 15 billion

dollar lawsuit against the broadcast

networks maybe this is old news but I

and maybe I just saw the news I saw a

headline go by on X I don't I don't saw

as well yeah didn't make and then

separately with Bobby Kennedy's

nomination to HHS one of the things that

he has said that he wants to put an end

to is the advertising

that Pharma does on these broadcast

stations if you put these two things

together where you deprive these folks

of their largest revenue source and at

the same time they have to sort of like

answer for censorship or manipulating

content it does do you think that that

changes the landscape of how all these

companies behave in the future or how do

you think that that plays up yeah I mean

absolutely so all right let's take each

one of those so on the the broadcast

and we've talked about this before the

big broadcast networks and their

Affiliates receive free Spectrum

licenses from the FCC and they get some

of the most valuable Spectrum there is

through those licenses in exchange for

certain requirements that their

broadcasts are in the public interest

namely they have to follow a fairness

Doctrine which is supposed to mean that

you give equal time to both candidates

well in the final weeks of this campaign

we saw some really egregious abuses NBC

brought on KLA Harris but not Donald

Trump for a very favorable segment on

Saturday Night Live the week before the

election separately you saw 60 Minutes

deceptively edit in an interview with

KLA Harris where they actually took one

of her answers from one question and put

it as the answer to another question I

mean really deceptive so you have a

couple of examples with both CBS and NBC

which were violating the equal time

requirement were're were clearly working

on half the KLA Harris campaign and when

you look at the coverage itself this

election was the most unequal in terms

of favorable coverage it was something

like a 60 point difference something

like KLA KLA Harris received 80

something per favorable coverage and

Trump received something like 85%

negative coverage so it there's no way

who's that according to do you know yeah

there's um it's a report by Brent

bazel's uh media Watchdog group it's

been around for has been recording this

stuff in every election for the last 30

years in any event I think that there's

a very strong argument that the

broadcasters have not been Fair that's a

violation of their licensed requirements

and we should be re-evaluating their

Spectrum especially because it's not the

highest best use the great irony of this

though saxs is that they have already

been demolished I don't know if you saw

but a bunch of the anchors at CNN are

not renewing because their advertising

is so far off that like Chris Wallace I

think was making 8 million a year 9

million a year and he just said I'm

going to go do podcast because they I

think they low balled his offer and if

they lose well there's a bunch all that

advertising from Pharma which I think in

some of these networks is a third or

half and that's all networks that's from

Fox to CNN every MSNBC everybody

combined if they lose advertising from

Pharma it's over like these those news

networks are going to lose half their

revenue overnight that would be a that

would be a death blow jamath to your

question yeah well let me me let me get

back to that so so just on CNN and MSNBC

you're absolutely right that they're

announcing a bunch of layoffs their

ratings are destroyed I think they're

down MSNBC ratings are down like 50%

since the election what that tells me is

that their own audience wait sorry since

the election % yeah and what that what

that tells me is that their captive

viewer base who's been tuning in for

years to all of this TDS have has now

realized that they were deceived by

MSNBC and they've lost credibility even

with their most fervent support ERS so

there's no question that CNN MSNBC

they're hurting now jcal dis toate one

small modification they do not receive

they do not have Spectrum licenses from

the FCC right because they're cable

network so they're in kind of a

different bucket they don't have to

abide by the fairness doctrine that CBS

and NBC do right but they have different

problems and to your point about Pharma

there's absolutely no reason to be

allowing Pharma advertisements on these

uh TV networks the fact of the matter is

the people who are viewing those

networks can't buy you can't

buy Pharmaceuticals without a

prescription right it's up to doctors to

write you the prescription and this is

why most countries most Western

countries prohibit Pharma advertising on

the networks and I think Bobby Kennedy

has a very strong argument that it would

serve the public interest not to allow

this we don't

allow advertisements for tobacco right

so I guess the thing that doesn't make

sense to me sax is you're so such a

First Amendment absolutist in free

speech absolutist isn't it and I'm not

saying this my opinion but you know my

my challenge to you would be is tell me

about freedom of speech and expression

in relation to being able to do

advertising for these products well I

mean aren't aren't consumers smart

enough to figure it out the point of the

advertising is I think is not at the end

of the day to influence consumers

because consumers can't buy

Pharmaceuticals they have to go to

doctor they saying it ask your doctor

about the purpose of the advertising is

to buy favorable coverage that's the

point and there are many examples okay

explain that expl well there are many

examples of people who've worked in

these networks saying that they had a

story that was negative about Pharma

companies and that story got spiked

because the Pharma companies are the

biggest advertisers in fact I think it

was there was a story about Fox News and

who who um who's the guy Roger ALS well

there's been a number of stories I know

what you're talking about there's been

stories about Anderson

Cooper who's the the the guy who does

international coverage on the weekends

GPS is the name of his show I'm drawing

I can't remember right nowed Zakaria

thank you fared Zakaria yes um I think a

bunch of those shows were like literally

brought to you by fizer brought to you

by these things and so those shows

potentially would just go away and then

there were there was reporting on the

number times they would report on those

companies and it showed they didn't so

what what do you think freeberg of

should Pharma companies be allowed to

advertise to Consumers to ask their

doctors to ask them about

viagra what's your

take he's thinking for those of you at

home listening he's giving a deep

thought while he's thinking JK let me

just say that I think I think there is

there is a free speech issue that that

has to be weighed okay so I don't want

to be totally dismissive of that however

I think that the Viagra example is a is

on the like far end of the spectrum of a

drug that by you know by advertising it

you could actually get consumers to

request it from their doctor I don't

think most drugs are like that and I

think my contention would be that the

real reason they're paying all this

massive advertising is not to influence

consumers but to influence the coverage

that they get and there is something

very corrupt about that and I think

Bobby Kennedy has a really strong point

that if you were to remove that

incentive that many people inside the

industry have admitted exist then You'

get much fairer coverage of these Pharma

companies and we would actually get to

be a healthier country because you

wouldn't allow them to basically

manipulate the public debate so I that

that's the

argument freeberg you want to chime in

on it or no I I I mean I feel like

there's some Market correction that

takes place here which we're already

seeing which is the consumers are moving

away we just talked about moving away

from cable news moving away from Legacy

Media they don't trust it the trust is

at an all-time low I don't know if it's

necessarily the government's job to

determine who advertises what where how

and why I don't like the government

having that sort of degree of authority

generally speaking because it can then

lead into the government having

overreach and oversight to control

entities that maybe are competitive with

the government in different ways I do

believe that the the beef with big Tech

is a result of big Tech's influence over

the population where big government

wants to have that degree of influence

over the population so it's actually a

battle between government and private

entities over who can influence the

population and who has the ability to

control the narrative and I think that

the general concept that the government

should be determining who advertises

where what how and why is not a great

one and I don't think that consumers are

dumb I think that consumers are showing

their proclivity for Independent Media

and independent news sources because

they don't trust the influence that's

been kind of imparted upon these other

channels and these other sources and

they're moving away from it so I don't

know if it's as much kind of a

regulatory question and big Pharma needs

to be affected I I think that the market

to to some degree does its job I don't

think the consumers are dumb I will also

just kind of counter one of Sax's points

I I think that there are drugs like

multiple sclerosis is a good example

there was a drug introduced a couple

years ago called acus and it was a new

therapy for for multiple sclerosis that

is extremely effective it's a it's a

really a big step change in in

biological

therapies and a lot of people that were

on Ms and have had Ms for decades take

kind of old school old school drugs that

maybe aren't that effective so to create

awareness and they're not regularly

seeing their doctors they may not go in

and see their doctor every year like

they're supposed to

so the the Pharma companies are creating

awareness that there's this new modality

and this new product that could help

them to get them to go into the doctor's

office you know so I I don't want to say

that these are all like evil you know

trying to control and influence like

there are good drugs that come to Market

they are beneficial to people and people

don't know about them how else are they

supposed to get that word out if they're

not able to advertise so I don't think

that it's all like negative and all

malicious you know kind of behavior and

manipulation of media people we all have

the resources we all have the capacity

and we are all likely very frequently

going to doctors most people don't and

so most people that have chronic disease

or have health issues there there has to

be a mechanism for you know making them

aware of new options New Alternatives

new products that are coming to Market

so I'm not super like putting my foot

down saying Pharma company shouldn't be

able to advertise shouldn't be able to

buy media out there and put ads up and

tell people about stuff that they've

discovered or that they've invented

that's been regulated that's been tested

that's been approved and that works and

can help save lives I think they should

have the freedom ability to do that so I

think there's a there's a bit of a

Nuance here to how this gets handled is

my point yeah I mean look I I I'm not

saying that there's no benefit at all to

letting Pharma companies advertise some

products I think the question you have

to ask is why is so much money going

from Pharma to these news outlets

because most of the products you know

that you generally can't buy them I'll

tell you the reason the reason is that

the Pharma companies make so much money

off of government funded Insurance

programs let me just state that again if

we only had private insurance or if

consumers had to pay for their drugs and

their therapies themselves the cost of

drugs would go way down the reason the

cost of drugs has gone way up is because

so much of the government insurance

programs don't negotiate drug prices and

there are all these middlemen and all

these people that sit in between that

have been regulated through regulatory

capture into the system that has allowed

an incredible inflation in the of drug

prices therefore there is a lot of money

to kind of continue the capture of the

system I don't think that it is right

and I think that the free market

generally or having a less regulatory

captured Market will allow an

appropriate kind of pricing of therapies

an appropriate kind of adjustment in the

market which doesn't exist today so so

much money to kind of keep the market

the way it is needs to kind of keep

flowing that's my sense of this it's I

don't think it's about bad drugs need to

kind of stay in play as much as it is

this Market's been allowed to inflate

and the cost of healthcare and the cost

of drugs has inflated in a way that's

simply untenable and it doesn't make

sense and I think that it's because of

regulatory capture and I think that that

needs to change and I'm hopeful that

that it does that's the second reason

then to get the this farma money out of

advertising because you're basically

explaining it as like a self- looking

ice cream cone but again there's another

reason as well I think that explains the

sheer magnitude which is its influence

buying it's influence ping to your point

sax it's that was what I was about to

bring up you know

there it's very subtle you're not going

to have somebody at NBC or CNN or fox

come down and tell Tucker Carlson or

Rachel mat or Anderson Cooper hey you

can't cover the story but there is a

bunch of self-censorship that occurs I

believe where people just don't select

certain stories to be on the docket and

they just shape the coverage so they

might not say something positive or

negative about fizer or or Johnson and

Johnson whoever it is they they'll just

avoid that story H because these anchors

are getting paid or have been previously

paid 10 10 million 25 million a year do

you think they're going to like really

go hard at fizer or somebody like that

no they're just not going to I've been

inside the machine they just avoid those

stories okay let's keep going through

the docket here I think it was pretty

good conversation I and by the way I

just wanted to say to the Trump

Administration if you want the economy

to rip let m&a Rip but my one caveat is

is a really simple way to do this if

you're under a trillion dollar valuation

let those companies buy and sell each

other because then we could go from a

MAG 7even to a MAG 70 that's where I

think actually it makes the most sense

if you actually are concerned about the

consolidation of power in the top seven

let them sit out acquiring more

companies and let the people under that

who are the mid-market cap companies let

them do the buying and selling because

then you might have a 8 N9 and 10 show

up that's not talking my book it would

be better for me freedberg to let the

mag 7 participate because they can pay

higher prices they're not price

sensitive but I do think the mid-market

companies buying and selling would make

a healthier environment for competition

so you think sorry you think it creates

more competition which will that'll

benefit consumers and grow the economy

well look at it this way if somebody

wants to buy let's say wayo gets spun

out somebody wants to buy it if Amazon

can't buy it and Tesla can't buy it

and Amazon can't buy it but they could

merge with Uber Lyft door Dash you know

all those mid Airbnb if those companies

could consolidate can you imagine what

would happen if a Amazon couldn't buy

those companies but you could see weo

spin out and then partner with door Dash

and partner with Airbnb and you had that

as one company now you got a $400

billion doll company that is nipping on

the heels that is aggressively competing

with Amazon that's what you want in the

market is more competition for the MA 7

you don't want the Magnificent 7 to run

away with it and we could create the

eighth nth and 10th so just imagine that

freeberg if there was a another trillion

dollar company like I actually I think

Tesla just became a trillion dollar

company again so now that they're up in

those ranks

great don't let Tesla don't let Amazon

Etc Nvidia buy more companies let those

that mergers and Acquisitions and that

strength happen under the trillion

dollar Mark what do you think of that

General concept freeberg yeah I

generally think competition is good I

generally think free markets should be

allowed to operate and I've shared my

point of view I think bigger is going to

drive more Innovation than lots of

little so okay again wayo wouldn't exist

if not for Google plowing billions and

billions and I don't know about you guys

I took weo around the city yesterday

pretty sick like it is legit I don't go

to the city yeah it's pretty legit and

um I I think toxic cess pool and by the

way I will say my other comment is I

think San Francisco has gotten 10x

better now that I've been working

downtown the last week or two 10x better

from a toxic pool just means success

pool I think part of the fact part of

the reason is all of Walgreens is gone

there's no no Walgreens left you can't

buy deodorant problem solved there's

nowhere to do crime anymore how toil

drug that doesn't ex San Francisco how

do you do that you got to ask Jason

Jason get an Amazon package delivered

yeah I don't man I'm in Texas you can do

whatever you want here Jason gets his

supplies aird dropped in once a month

what are you talking about I'm bullish

on the San Francisco turnaround because

I think Dan Daniel lurry getting elected

mayor was huge and this doesn't get

really as much attention but it's very

important the board shifted the radicals

got voted off The Board of Supervisors

so the Board of Supervisors are less

Progressive Daniel's in the mayoral

office it and I think I think the city's

already like turning around I've been

super blown away the last couple weeks

I've been downtown I'm like why am I not

working downtown every day it's actually

really nice it feels like San Francisco

20 years ago let's see I'm pretty

bullish I mean safety is the number one

thing if they can and this budget need

to get put under control San Francisco

spends one and a half x per capita of

what New York City spends and that's

something that Daniel and his team have

kind of said they're GNA address sort of

like their own Doge and there's a team

going in there to address this so I'm

really bullish on what's going to happen

with the city it's just such a great

place it seems like power resides in the

supervisors and they seem to have

flipped two or three of the really

lunatic ones right saaks they got rid of

Dopey de Preston who was the other guy

peskin peskin he was an idiot and they

those guys are done so that's progress

do you want to talk about the Trump uh

candidates JL yeah let's get to that in

a second but before we get to that FBI

raid the home of poly Market CEO Shane

copelan he was on the election night

stream he was raided on Wednesday

November 13th 8 days after the election

they say poly Market is Bloomberg says

poly Market is being investigated for

allegedly accepting trades from us-based

users here's the backstory in 2022 po

Market paid 1.4 million to settle a case

with the cftc for offering option

contracts without proper

designation the commodity Futures

Trading commission also ordered the

company to prevent us Traders from

making bets they recently said poly

Market that is that they had taken

additional to block Americans from

trading at the same time Ki and Robin

Hood were able to offer presidential

prediction markets because Ki it seems

like they won their lawsuit against the

cftc last month so that allowed some

betting markets to happen but poly

Market is still banned from the US

because of that settlement in 2022

here's the poly Market claim they

claimed the raid was obviously political

retribution by the outgoing

Administration against poly market for

providing a market that correctly called

the 2024 presidential election and Shane

posted on X discouraging that the

current Administration would seek a

lasti effort to go after companies they

deem to be associated with political

opponents bunch of conspiracy theories

flying around Peter Tel and founder fund

have made an investment into the company

and Nate silver is an

advisor I

guess I'll just point out accurate they

were much more accurate than they toally

accurate yeah so how manipulated can it

be if they got everything right yeah I

mean that's literally the point I was

about to make and um I'll just end with

this and then give it to USX for red

meat Americans are not allowed to

participate in a lot of different

markets and these kind of actions have

been taken many many many times as we

all know poker crypto real estate and

prediction markets have all had actions

like this taken against them and they

typically are a the offices too or just

his house just his house according to

the information we have right now they

bust into his house at 6: am and they

took his phone by the way shout out to

no but like like if you were breaking

the law why wouldn't

they all that off yeah it's a great

great speculation and important to note

this action came after the election is

resolved so it's obvious the FBI knew

that doing this beforehand would be seen

as political and doing it after I guess

the decision no no I know what you're

saying I'm adding something else which

is they obviously knew this would be

political sacks and so they did it after

they knew if they did it before that

would be looked like you know really bad

that the prediction Market that's

predicting Trump a trump win was rated

so they did it after what do you think

sax what's going on okay I think it's

political or not I guess question we

don't know what was driving this it's

certainly an extreme action to bust into

someone's home at 6:00 a.m. with the FBI

and take take your phone so it's very

curious I think there's three theories

that I've heard that I think could

explain this and I want to just be very

clear that there's no proof on any of

this it's just speculation yeah it's a

speculation going onul yeah but by the

way just before I get into it I think

Shane Copeland had one of the funniest

tweets I've ever seen new phone who yeah

new phone who this Nick you should show

that I mean that was like ballsy the FBI

bus in your house takes your phone and

that's the person means this is a that

means that this is probably not a

serious situation but anyway go ahead

well who who knows but yeah or he's

confident is I what I would say yeah

yeah okay so Theory number one is that

what the feds are looking for is whether

any domestic whales were illegally

wagering on the election outcome because

theoretically the money is all supposed

to be offshore because domestic wagering

on the election was illegal however a

Court rule just days before the election

that domestic wagering was legal so that

so Theory number one doesn't really make

a lot of sense because the FBI would be

enforcing a a rule or a law that the

courts had just overruled just days

before the election so but that's Theory

number one Theory number two and this

theory was raised by Fortune Magazine is

that this that poly Market was rif with

what's called wash trading which is a

form of Market manipulation where Shares

are bought and sold often simultaneously

and repeatedly by the same people to

create a false impression of volume and

activity liquid this is illegal the us

and it does occur in crypto markets so

they could have been going after that

but again it does seem like a very

extreme thing to bust into his house why

don't you just ask Shane what Authority

would the US government have if it's all

offshore in that context I don't know

I'm justay out I'm laying out possible

theories but Fortune Magazine did did

raise that theory but again if that's

what your claim is just subpoena poly

market during business hours I don't

know why you need to raid the the guy's

home or Raid the office that's where the

files are right now let me let me lay

out Theory number three okay which is

going to be a little bit more

controversial here we go but uh get the

chin foil if if somebody was

manipulating these sites okay then on

whose behalf were they doing it and what

you'd have to say is that they were

doing it on behalf of the comma campaign

because in the last few days of the

election there was a weird blip where

poly market and and Kia especially Kia

even more than poly Market all of a

sudden flipped to Kamala and you could

see this particularly in Pennsylvania

where all of a sudden there was a big

flip at the end away from Trump towards

kamla that turned out to be totally fake

and Trump won Pennsylvania pretty pretty

handily and so you got to wonder wait a

second was a Comm supporter maybe trying

to push the narrative that there was a

last minute surge to Kamala because

that's what the action seemed to

imply and remember that at the same time

this was happening there was a big there

was like a media push to create a

narrative by her supporters in the media

that there was a late break for Harris

yes by Independence and so you have to

kind of Wonder was somebody trying to

push the prediction markets at the last

minute to feed a media narrative that

they were trying to create look I have

no evidence for this whatsoever but the

the action in the betting markets and

the narrative they were trying to create

in the media do line up so if somebody

was going to investigate election

manipulation this is what they should

look into Jam you have any thoughts

here no zero thoughts I mean yeah you

know my thoughts on it are I I don't see

him ever doing anything risky or illegal

so it makes no sense to me I'm guessing

that somebody made him aware pure

speculation of something in the system

and that probably was on his phone and

they probably wanted to get that and

it's probably like a speeding ticket

ticky tacky

thing and you just have the law still

working its way through the system

because they Sachs were under an order

to not take us but Ki had gotten the

mark the law changed with their

successful lawsuit or they had defended

their their case so I would say it's all

allegedly folks and so wait for more

information is always a good idea all

right Trump is building his team and uh

it's a long list we've got I guess

dozens of names right now so let's start

with the four who's your favorite

job well my opinion probably doesn't

matter all that much but let me go with

the four that uh are creating the most

Buzz let's let's create the let's go

with the four that are having the most

buzz and then I'll let you each tell me

what you think J one you you love the

one I yeah there is one actually I love

but let's I'll sa that don't know who's

that I'm curious actually genuinely

curious vake and Elon doing doge is my

absolute favorite yes anything else that

I

am fascinated by Bobby Kennedy going in

and trying to make the country healthier

and the country is the most sick country

I think of uh all of the Western

countries and I think our food system

has massive problems so I'm very excited

to see what he does inside of the health

and human services department I think

it's a little little bit controversial

obviously but I don't see how it could

be any worse than what we currently

have how do you feel about that who's

your favorite I guess we can just go

with people's favorites if you want to

go that way the way I interpret his

cabinet picks is that he's creating a

coalition so I view it more as like a

package deal jcal I'm not going to pick

out one or two although I do have my

favorites the person who I think very

astutely understands what Trump is

trying to do is Charlie Kirk who's a

major influencer on the Republican side

and he says that that what Maha which is

make America healthy again they get RFK

Bobby Kennedy HHS obviously the

Libertarians get Tulsi at dni I would

add to that that they also get Elon vake

at Doge the base the populous base gets

Matt Gates they get Heth at DOD they get

homman and then the peace through

projecting strength crowd which is kind

of a nice name for neocon gets Rubio as

Secretary of State and stefanic get the

UN so I think that Trump is basically

trying to have his cabinet reflect the

diversity of views within the Republican

Party he's not decisively choosing one

side over another what this means is

that during his presidency he's going to

get all the views and all the options

within the that's the collective view

that's an interesting way let's go Point

by Point through the most controversial

ones Matt Gates is obviously the most

controversial

that's what's all young that's another

Trend yeah and he has uh been put up as

attorney general he has to be confirmed

by the Senate obviously he's the house

rep from Florida saaks how qualified is

he for this job on a scale of 1 to 10 I

think that Matt Gates would be a breath

of fresh air at at doj I mean look

here's why is that the doj has been

involved for the last eight or nine

years in a completely fabricated effort

to portray Donald Trump as an agent of

the Russians it started with the steel

dossier they then opened an

investigation based on that phony piece

of opposition research funded by the

Hillary campaign they lied to the fisa

court to spy on Donald Trump's campaign

they then worked with the various

intelligence services and with uh the

media to create this like hoax that went

on for years and years there's been no

accountability for that furthermore in

the 2020 election you also had that

effort to essentially cover up the

hunter Biden hard drive that the FBI and

doj were sitting on that for roughly a

year they created a a phony story that

it was Russian disinformation when it

turned out to be completely authentic so

you believe there's a lot to clean up

there how qualified to 10 what the

president what the president ran on was

that the doj needed to be de weaponized

that it had been turned into a partisan

political apparatus for the Democrats I

don't think anyone can argue with that

at this point I think the American

people clearly bought into that argument

now in order to clean it up you're going

to have to bring in a total Outsider

who's willing to break some eggs and

shake things up is Matt Gates the only

person who could do that no there are

other people who could do it but Matt

Gates is definitely qualified for that

role he was one of the most outspoken

critics in Congress of this

weaponization of the FBI he was never

fooled by the Russia gate hoax most The

Establishment was con anybody anybody

who bought into the Russia gate hoax is

not qualified to run the doj at this

point okay any

concerns well there's a bunch of

unproven smears and accusations have

been made against him put that any other

concerns about him excuse me aside from

the the the investigations and whatever

and the smears there's a bunch of

unproven yeah smears and accusations

been made against him and my own view on

that is that if there was really

something there I think Merck Garland's

doj would have acted on it two or three

years ago so I personally discount all

these smears without there being any

evidence whatsoever and I think it's

very predictable that what we're seeing

with both Matt Gates and with Tulsi is

that the worst accusations get made

without any evidence in the media when

the blob or the establishment wants to

stop a true populist reformer from

cleaning up their backyard free your

thoughts on M Gates I that seems to be

the most controversial one any concerns

you think he's the most suited guy for

the

job I I don't want to comment on mat

Gates but I'd like to talk

about why

not because I'd like to talk about a

broader point of view on it

okay so I

think there's this kind of thing that

happens in biology called Evolution and

a lot of people think evolution is this

continuous process but it's not

evolution is this process by which there

is some significant growth for a period

of time and then there is an an

Extinction event or an external force

that causes what ultimately becomes

what's called punctuated equilibrium so

the whole kind of system resets and then

the healthier stronger species survive

and they grow and they

persist and if you look at the first

chart Nick that I pulled up this will

just show you guys past Extinction

events large amounts of biomass over the

past half billion years get wiped out

when these Extinction events occur and

then Evolution occurs because the

species that concern survive the

extinction event persists in the

environment and they grow and that's how

Evolution kind of actually takes place

is there's an external force that

changes what survives and what doesn't

it's kind of a testing Force if you look

at federal spending and this is a crazy

link but here's federal spending over

the last couple of decades

and I would argue that many of the

agencies much of the bureaucracy many of

the jobs created many of the spending

programs many of the operating models

many of the behaviors can kind of be

viewed as a specie or species within

this ecosystem that have kind of grown a

lot over the last few decades and I

think what Trump's mandate was by the

people and people don't want to hear

this and they don't like it but his

mandate was to be kind of the extinction

event and whatever agencies whatever

operating processes whatever individuals

whatever bureaucratic systems exist

within the federal government that can

withstand the scrutiny of the the

individuals that Trump is going to put

in charge of each of these agencies that

they can survive and they can come out

the other end there is certainly some

degree of strength and resilience and

hardiness this is not about right or

wrong this they deserve to exist if they

can this is going to bring in this is

going to bring in the most disruptive

force that federal agencies have ever

seen and the intention with Trump isn't

to find some person to keep running

things the way they have been run in the

past his mandate from the people who

elected him based on the message put out

there is to do the opposite which is to

go in and be as disruptive and damaging

and destructive as possible and whatever

comes out the other side will be

stronger will be harder and

theoretically will'll be you know more

resilient and I think that that's the

event that's underway now the people who

are getting exactly what they want in

Trump's candidacies are the Democrats

they were saying Trump is going to put a

bunch of crazy lunatics in office and

he's going to make them the cabinet and

they're G and they're and now they're

able to kind of clap their hands and

saywe told you so we told you so and I'm

not sure that if they're really getting

the message which is that the intention

here isn't to keep things running the

way they have been running but to really

fundamentally test the systems and test

the systems with the most challenging

oppositional forces the systems have

ever been tested by which is the

candidates or the individuals that he's

putting in charge of each of these

agencies so I I'm not saying it's right

or wrong one way or the other but I'm

making an observation that this is going

to be kind of an extinction level event

that Trump's decisions on who he's

putting in place I think are going to

drive an outcome on the other end that's

going to make the government look very

different and I you know I'm not going

to sit around and say this person's good

this person's bad because I don't think

the point is to find someone that's

quote qualified to do the job the

intention is actually quite different

and the outcome may actually be positive

for America if you fast forward a couple

of years in some cases and there's some

cases where things could get really

messed up and people could suffer and

jobs will be lost and all sorts of bad

things will happen but we can continue

the way we have been with respect to

federal spending with respect to federal

spending bureaucracy and inefficiency in

the federal government and so something

has to happen and if this is the path by

which this gets resolved in The Limited

window that's in front of this this