The AI Cold War, Signalgate, CoreWeave IPO, Tariff Endgames, El Salvador Deportations

28:54They just need to have jobs and break even. What should our tear policy be or what is it? I mean, we know what it is for autos. It's 25 % Do you know what it is? I mean, it seems like it's in flux. So maybe we start there. What should the policy be? What do you perceive the policy is? Because it does seem to be a moving target. We'll see what happens on April 2nd because Trump keeps tweaking, let's say, testing in public. Yeah, I mean, this is so So, traditional economics would say, hey, tariffs are not a good idea. We should have free trade. Everybody understands the principle of comparative advantage.

29:33I do think the Trump administration is pretty convicted that that approach has not worked well for America over the last 20 years. And maybe it's worked well for knowledge workers, but it hasn't worked well for kind of ordinary Americans. And I think they're very convicted in changing that and trying to bring back kind of good high quality manufacturing jobs to America. I think they see tariffs as an effective way to do that. Are they right? Is it going to be because a lot of what we're seeing in factories is automation. So what they may have been right about tariffs bringing back high paying middle class jobs for the past 20 years, we cannot go into time machine and change that policy.

30:13And isn't where the The puck's going that we're going to have optimist robots, figure robots, pick a robot company. But we're going to work. Here's what tariffs do. Tariffs are a level setting mechanism that fixes a historical imbalance. Look, the reality is that we have had meaningfully lower tariffs for products coming in, then those reciprocal tariffs exist for our products going into these other countries. That's true. And the one thing I'll say about Donald Trump is you may not agree with the tariffs, but he's been incredibly consistent. I was on YouTube yesterday and I stumbled into an interview he did.

30:57Nick, maybe you can find this with Larry King in 1987. And he ran a full page ad in the New York Times talking about this exact issue. And then went on Larry King and he walked through the entire trade imbalance 40 years ago. Yeah, he's been on this soon. So this is not a fly -by -night thing. So what do they want? What they want is to create the economic incentives to reassure as much industry as possible into the United States. The Delecate Balancing Act though is that after 20 years of globalism and a perverted version of free trade because it's not what it is today. It's been perverted. it.

31:38It is incredibly difficult to do that without these whack -a -mole problems emerging in other areas, right? Whether it's inflation or whether it's retaliatory tariffs or consumption taxes, all of these complexities, I think, are what has to get figured out. But the structural reason of why tariffs make sense is not necessarily to overly penalize one country over another. But it's simply to say, if you charge 5%, we charge 5%. If you charge 10%, we charge 10%. So Nick has a clip. He's just just listen to this from 40 years ago. We don't have free trade right now because if you want to go to Japan or if you want to go to Saudi Arabia, various other countries, it's virtually impossible for an American to do business in those countries, virtually impossible.

32:19So the fact is that you don't have free trade. We think of it as free trade, but you right now don't have free trade. So Gavin, let's get back to this original question with Shamaat's important context. Trump has been on this for a while. But is this where the Pucks going? We have the lowest unemployment of our lifetime. Wages are obviously not where we want them to be. So is the right solution to put in a bunch of tariffs, create trade wars, and then hope that people are gonna build factories that employ humans when in fact, it probably will be robots. So is there another solution like maybe raising the minimum wage?

32:57I don't know, what are your thoughts? Well, one, I think it's Jamaat, then that clip illustrated. He is convicted in this. It's 40 years old. It's happening. Yeah, it's happening. And so I would say two things. Like one, I think it's something I'm always conscious of. At my wife Becky, one of her college or high school reunions, there's a guy there who has been in our class and who's been in the Navy SEALs and he deployed to any countries. He's been in the Navy SEALs for like a decade. And I said, what's the one thing that you learned? And he said, the one thing I learned is everybody in America is always focused on making America better.

33:35Have you been to 80 different places all around the world? Our only goal should be to not screw it up in America. Just don't make it worse because America is so much better than everywhere else. So the first thing is, like, you know, Chema said the word delicate and I think that's right. And if I had one thought for the administration, it would be every time they say the word tear. Whatever they think, Wall Street in the markets, and I would say, you know, I think a lot of business leaders are convinced that tariffs are about. Now maybe Wall Street is wrong and the administration is right. One thing everyone agrees on is deregulation is good.

34:11So every time they say the word tear, they need to say the word deregulation two or three times. because the best way to maximize the odds of this policy succeeding, despite the headwinds from automation, I think it's going to be a long time before we have hundreds of millions of robots. Even between China and Tesla, I think it's going to take a long time to make vast numbers of humanoid robots. The best way to encourage this reshoring is just making it easier to do business in America. Okay. 100%. Can I just add one thing? And that's really, really important. What Gavin said, there's a third thing I would add, Gavin, to your list, which is we need to figure out the difference between manufacturing and IP.

34:54And I think what we want to do is make sure that we trap the real value back in America. As well, look, I've told you guys a story before, but when I was helping to run Facebook, I was a signatory. When we were setting up Facebook abroad, we exported all of our IP to Ireland and low and behold who do they sue, Zuck, Metta, and me? Pink. And we've been in this 10 year lawsuit, 15 year lawsuit with the IRS because they're trying to come back and say, hey, Facebook, you owe all of this money. Why? Because we exported all of our critical IP to Ireland and we trapped it there. That should not have been able to happen.

35:33We can fix it. Separately, there's many companies who are abroad who live inside the American market, who have given a mechanism would import their IP into the United States if there was a mechanism to do so. So not only can you have manufacturing, you can also have the critical knowledge, not just of that manufacturing but of that product or that supply chain. Those are the incentives that these nuances, if we get right, it's really a renaissance for the United States. Let's talk a little bit about maybe other solutions, Friedberg, obviously, perhaps raising the minimum wage or increasing corporate taxes in order to do that, would that not not also help us maybe build back the middle class.

36:15That is the criticism, I think some other people have. We, you know, Trump when he did his TCGA, as people remember the tax cut and jobs act, corporate tax rate was 35%. We put it down to 21. And now repatriation of cash from what we see is this Tomats pointing out, I think it's only 15%. It's like everybody can kind of afford that. So would that not be another way to solve this problem of the bottom half, the bottom third, not making them enough or maybe even lowering their tax rate, which is already pretty low. Well, I think the proposal that I've heard from this administration that we heard from Howard Lutnik when we met with him was they're going to cut all taxes for people making less than $150 ,000 a year, so get the tax rate to zero.

37:02Do you believe that? Do you think it's realistic now that it's a week after you do that? You actually think that could happen. I 100 % do and what timeline and why? Well, that's the key question. This is where this becomes like a first and second derivative problem Let's just talk about it this way when you take money out of the economy You want to make sure you're also putting money back into the economy in another way to keep the economy stable or growing So if you're taking money out of the economy in the case of tariffs You're putting money into the government's coffers you're reducing people spending because everything costs more now so consumers will spend less.

37:40So what you want to do is you want to make sure that the money that you're repatriating is going back to the consumers so they can now have more money to spend. So that's why you want to cut taxes at the same time they are increasing the tariff rates. So if you increase the tariff rates things cost more. The government is now making things more expensive. That's not good. But at the same time, if I cut your taxes and you got more money now than you did before, so you can now buy the things that you were buying, even though they're a little more expensive, the economy should be able to remain stable or grow.

38:10At the same time, if you're cutting government spending, that means that the government can afford to take less taxes in. And so they can make that assessment. So these are all, we've said it many times, these are all very related.

38:27And but the incremental dollars flow into things like automation, onshore productions that the cost of things come down. And so, again, not a simple equation, I would call it a grand economic experiment. The analogy for me feels a little bit like there's four freight trains passing by each other at very high speed, and you're trying to pass all the ingredients to make a sandwich between the windows of the freight trains. You're trying to get them all over, so you can make this delicious sandwich and get to the scolding age. That's the configuration that it feels like They need to kind of assess as they're and they're they're iteratively they're not that's the red the needle is I think your point And it's really hard to do and you use the phrase experiment Gavin you said before hey don't screw up this amazing Country and what we've got here.

39:12This sounds like a very High -risk, you know high -dexterity maneuver. It's feels like a fighter plane like trying to land on You know a very small all aircraft carrier, can they pull this off? Can they get to the tariffs working at the same time, inflation not spiking, not impacting employment, getting rid of people's taxes? Does this sound too complex to you and too much too fast? What is your honest thought, Gavin, as you watch this as a capital allocator? Are they going too hard too fast or is it worth pursuing this experiment as Friedberg framed it? Look, Scott Decent is probably the single most respected or was the single most respected macro investor in the world.

39:54Like he really understands the markets, how they flow through to policy, how policy flows back. He's an extremely smart talented guy. They have a coherent theory, you know, I thought Howard and Scott did a great job in the last two episodes. Absolutely, yeah. Kind of explaining the theory. And the one thing I would just say having, you know, we all watched the first Trump administration, he is adaptable. He adapts to circumstances. And the midterms now are whatever they are, you know, and political terms, they're 15 months away from, you know, around the corner. Yeah, around the corner. So I think they're trying to do a lot as quickly as they can.

40:36But I also think that if after a few months, it's, you know, six months, nine months, it's not working, they will adapt. And I think that's one reason there's such an emphasis on reciprocity. You know, and Vietnam came out and they lowered their tariffs on American goods. And that's good. And so I think the out is, oh, you know, maybe it's not going quite the way we hoped. We're going to declare kind of, hey, we have a series of grand bargains with these countries. Declare victory, maybe tariffs on American goods are slightly lower, tariffs here are slightly higher, feels more fair. And move on to kind of firm ground of deregulation, balancing the budget, cutting government spending, and cutting government taxes, commensurate with the spending cuts.

41:28So I think they're trying the risky stuff first and if it doesn't work, they will attack quickly. Yeah, that was my perception, especially after hearing percent on the oil and pod great job guys on getting those long form. And I think this is where the administration is strong. It's when they do a long form discussion and you hear their thoughts about it, it doesn't sound as crazy as when, you know, all due respect to the president, when the president is like, I'm going to go easy on him. I'm going to go hard on them. You know, and it's like a reality TV show and who's going to get fired this week.

41:57He actually have two incredibly thoughtful. I won't point out Democrats, lifelong Democrats around Trump. And I think that's like a really, I had this crazy observation, Gavin. I don't know if you noticed it as well. Trump lost his reelection campaign and he filled his whole cabinet with a bunch of Republicans. This time he filled this whole cabinet and everybody around him is a Democrat and he's gone to a really unique concept here of how to solve the USS problems, which is get the working man and woman, a higher salary, and lower their taxes. This could be like an incredible grand bargain that the cent, I think, is the architect of and let Nick is, you know, the communicator and executor of.

42:39You think they have a chance of pulling this off? What do you, if you had to handicap it? I hope they do. As an American, I hope they do. I think they for sure have a chance of doing it. They have a solid theory of the case. They need to execute well. I would say doge's efforts are important. You know, if you can really cut a trillion dollars of kind of waste fraud and abuse out of the government spending, that's good. You know, we should all agree as Americans. You know, maybe Democrats they want more government spending, maybe Republicans won't last. But for whatever given level of government spending, we want it to be as efficient as possible.

43:12Because if you're a Democrat, that means more services, if you're a Republican, maybe that means a smaller government. So I think they have a solid theory of the case. I think there's a reasonable chance it will succeed, but if it doesn't, I think they will attack quickly. And the one thing they can't afford is a recession. If they're focused on the deficit, a recession blows out the deficit. So they will be ultimately sensitive to these market -based forces, rates, stock markets, the foreign currency markets. Tremoff, you want to maybe wrap this up for us here on Ardolvon to some of the other topics of the week.

43:48John Arnold had a post this morning on X. He was saying the deficit this year is going to be 1 .9 trillion. His best guess for 2026 was 1 .9 trillion and he was just kind of asking his followers what they thought. If you listen to Howard last week, what he said is, I'm going to raise a trillion dollars and Elon's going to cut a trillion. Now, if that comes to pass, then we have a balance budget. If you ask the sharp money on Wall Street, their numbers range from 170 billion to 300 billion on the revenue side. So let's take the midpoint of around 200 to 250 billion. Okay, 250. If the sharp money is right, that means that tariffs and all of that stuff will only really raise a quarter of a trillion, which means that there's going to be even more pressure on Elon, he's going to have to find not one trillion but 1 .75 trillion.

44:45Again, assuming that that 1 .9 trillion dollar deficit exists next year. So that's the math. It is a two trillion dollar bogey and they have to fill it somehow. My intuition is that the waste fraud and abuse is probably meaningfully more significant than we think. When we were there, we heard about one consulting firm, 95 plus of all of their revenue, multi -billion dollar revenue comes from time and materials contracts with the United States government. We heard throughout the week, I've reposted it on X, $65 billion is paid out to consulting organizations beyond just that one in these time materials cost plus contracts.

45:27If you start to add all of these up today, we just heard that the $2 billion Gryft to Stacey Abrams was canceled and they're now starting a DOJ Investigation to how those dollars got given to her all of these things start to add up It may be the case that if there's an upper bound on tariffs That there will be more than a trillion and Elon kind of fills in the gap But I think that's possible. They are looking, Gavin, also at military spending, and maybe cutting that eight percent a year every year for a couple of years. That's where big dollars are sitting. And obviously nobody wants to touch social security.

46:06Despite, I do have to point this out for my besties. You guys did a great job with that interview. And I just want to say F -T -M -Z for like trying to spin it as, let Nick was trying to take away people's social security. They've literally took an hour plus interview. They clipped it to try to make it seem like he was saying the opposite of what he said. He was saying the fraudsters will be the first to respond, not my mom. My mom would just call eventually and say, hey, can I - She would assume that there was good intentions. Yes. Whereas the fraudsters would be like, oh man, I gotta get here.

46:45I think it's great. And you know what? You can use this. same thing. No, let me finish my little thing here because I don't want you guys to have to defend yourself. Listen, I couldn't make it. You guys did these last minute interviews, Mausletoff. We missed you. Thank you for saying that. I would have loved to be there. I will be at the next ones for people who are saying, like, oh, there's some conspiracy. There's no conspiracy. I had skew week. These guys went to do business or whatever they were doing and see their friends in DC. And, you know, these things happened very rapidly. And I wasn't able to get bottom line.

47:14These were great, substantive, long interviews from Democrats, one of them a gay Democrat, by the way, the highest ranking gay Democrat who's ever been an administration. The left and the media should be giving praise to these interviews. They should be studying them and they're doing the exact opposite. They're trying to spin them into something they weren't. It's a gift what the all -in -pon case did to the American people by showing them a long -form interview with the administration explaining these details don't spin it. I think it's great. I think it's great. I'm sorry, I'm pissed off about it.

47:47It pissed me off. I don't think you should be pissed off. I think it's wonderful that these people lie. I think it's incredible that they just put it out there. And it just further erodes what's happening. I think if once Bobby puts a nail on the coffin of pharma ads on TV, buy by Anderson Cooper, buy by all these guys. Yeah, I think it's great. I'm so pissed off. I'm sorry. When I see people, I think it's great. I think it's great. They should be lying. It's great because they will not exist again. You're neutral. They're going to go ahead. I just say three really quick points. First, what Howard Lutnik literally said was if we can find a lot of waste fraud and abuse, we don't have to raise or time age.

48:26Everybody is talking about raising or time age to 70. Yes. If we administer these programs more efficiently, we can keep it at 65. And that's good for everyone. The second thing is, it's just interesting to be there so much doubt about this when the inspector generals of both Biden and Obama said there were hundreds of billions of dollars of waste for our reviews. And I would just say someone in my immediate family has had their social security, their identity stolen, and someone is using their social security number to collect unemployment benefits in Alabama. And this has been going on for two years, and they've been unable to stop it.

49:04And so you don't want to rely too much on anecdote, but I think this is really happening And then just the third thing I would just say is I do think no one has ever raised no president has ever raised my taxes more than Trump did. And I think they are pretty convicted and they're focused on normal working class Americans and making their lives better is actually genuinely their North Star. You can disagree with the theory of the case. You can disagree with the way they're communicating it. But I think their intentions are good. Absolutely. And you know what? He even said in the interview, if you really listen to it, he said he was disgusted by the idea that you would even raise the social security age.

49:49I think we should, by the way, any rational person. I think the majority people say, hey, maybe it should go up a year or two. Maybe we should have a little austerity here on the margins. But no, of course not, we can't talk about that. And the thing this administration could do better is communication. Those two long -form interviews was a great step in the right direction. They should do more of those and those should do a better job of explaining this waste and fraud. They're doing a good job. I give them a B plus, but there's more work to be done here. And there's waste, there's overspending, there's fraud, and there's abuse.

50:24These are different categories. to get to the fraud, that takes building legal cases. All that stuff's gonna have to be referred to people. We have a justice system here. It's gonna take years to figure out if somebody actually stole, but waste and overspending, we're gonna find that pretty quickly. So it's a process people. And I, for one, trust the process because we're overspending massively. Let's get to some other conversations here. I think maybe we start with... Jake, I just think it is, whether it's a semi -annual or quarterly something that is like the Doge report and everything's just audited and triple checked.

51:02These are the three categories. This is what we found. I think something like that would be very helpful. I think they need investigative journalists. I'm happy to help with this. I'll do a Doge pod. Listen, I'm not part of the administration. Everybody knows I was never Trump or I'm independent blah, blah, blah. Just plainly, just plainly, plainly. I would totally go in there. Are you still in a hard time? for our J .K .L. Why do you keep saying independent and then you destroy yourself a label that says you're not independent, you're dependent. No, I'm telling people I was a never -trumper. But if Trump is going to surround himself with the modern democratic, I like to think so.

51:36I try to be independent called balls and strikes here on the program. I'm not going to bend the knee to the administration. I'm going to be critical of Trump coin. I'm going to be critical of these deportations, which we're going to get to. And I will say critical things. But I would go in there and I would do the doge pod with Elon or wherever in the group is and go point by point through these things to explain it to the American public Let's keep moving here. We got such a full -docket. I want to talk about signaled it. Text our bestie and top -toe mode. I think that's a good one. Yeah, I mean, maybe I should go in there because listen, I don't even consider this like a Trump administration.

52:05Now I can say that as a democratic moderate administration. Everybody around Trump now, here's a Democrat. I think that might be in. I might be in. You guys have had a good time. I'm like, you guys look like you had a good time last week. I kind of want to be put in. It looked like fun. Did you vote for Trump? I don't want to bring in my vote. I did not vote for Kamala. Let's keep moving here. I'm going to keep dropping kids. Wow, my gosh. I did not vote for Kamala. I couldn't vote for her. She said, I don't want to say it, but... Anyway, let's keep going. I don't want to vote for somebody who was selected.

52:38I wanted to vote for somebody who had a primary. And the Democrats, the Scraziad, for not having a proceed one primary. right. Signal gate. It's the biggest story in America right now. On Monday, you're like turning this is incredible. What a day. No, I'm going to call balls and strikes right now 70 % of what they're doing. I agree with 30 % I don't. I'm going to get to the 30 % on a human rights basis. I think you just admitted you voted for Trump. It's really incredible. Anyway, let's keep moving here. I'm from the great state of Texas. I'll leave it out. Signal gate, signal gate, signal gate.

53:06On Monday, the Atlantic published a story titled the Trump administration accidentally texted me. There were plans somehow. Atlantic, Eddoran Sheep, Jeffrey Goldberg was added to a super high profile signal group with our Secretary of State, our Vice President Tulsi Bessent, the CIA Director, the Secretary of Defense. How is this possible, folks? They added a journalist, the Eddoran Sheep of the Atlantic to their war planning signal group. They shouldn't be using signal obviously to do this stuff. And inside this group, they discuss the plans to strike who the targets across Yemen. Nobody noticed.

53:47Nobody checked that the energy for the Atlantic was in the group chat. They included the exact targets, the actions, the timing of all of this. It was apparently cut and pasted from some other system by Hegsson, Our Secretary of Defense Informer Fox commentator. That's not a dig, it's just a fact. I'm not saying it isn't dig. Chimath, people are losing their mind over this. I could get into all the details. I think most people know it because it's taking up the whole, all the oxygen in the room and the media in the group chats. Number one, what's your general take on what happened here? How stupid is this?

54:27How ridiculous is it? Does it matter? Go ahead, Chimath. It's start us off here. I think that what folks have stopped talking about entirely, which I think is just worth touching upon, is what is actually going on that necessitated this group chat to be created in the first place in such haste. So I have a couple of images that I pull just to explain what this issue is. So the problem that we have is that somewhere after the war with Gaza, Iran continues to fund these Houthi rebels in Yemen and what do they start to do? They start to invade and flood into the Red Sea and they start to block up the Suez Canal in different points, making it very perilous for freight traffic to get there.

55:18So what do folks do? They're either forced to go all the around the Cape of Good Hope or risk attack through the Suez Canal. So what do you think happens? Well, the traffic through the Red Sea in the Suez Canal falls off a cliff and then you would ask, well why is that important? Well the problem is that because of that other chart in this chart, prices start to skyrocket. So if you're trying to ship things, even going into the United States, prices start to rise 30, 40%, going to Europe prices are rising 300 and 400%. If you add that all together, as Gavin said earlier, we're in this very delicate moment where we're fixing all these parts of the economy.

55:58The thing we can't have is productivity go down. You can't have a recession. And so if you have a bunch of input prices that go up or trade, slow down, now you're bringing the likelihood of a recession to the forefront. So that's one thing. The second thing, which was included in the group chat, is it turns out that nobody was in a position to fight off these hoodies except the United States. The British, the French, all of their naval capacity wasn't strong enough or adaptable enough to fight these folks off. So the United States had no choice but to attack these guys and reset. And so what happened?

56:38Now all of a sudden traffic is reset. Right. Volumes are back up by the third week of March, which is where we are now, we're back to where they were even a year ago. The price of shipping is now contained. The inflation risk is contained. The productivity hit is contained. It's just okay. That's all great. So this is the context. So this is why they did the attack. Great. I find it crazy that we still actually for 95 articles though, Jason, on signal, we have only less than one article on this. So I just wanted to smart people to listen to our pod to actually understand it. The second thing, the second thing I'll say is, send the bill to Europe because this is really a European problem because, okay, so we have the whole Pacific Ocean we can accept things through.

57:23So ports and taxes or the point is, so the point is we're on a shot. Now, yeah, so the point is we're on a shot clock. People have to act quickly. Here's my big problem with signal. I think it was a. Okay. And I think I think it was an important set of decisions that had to be made. but I think the using signal was a mistake, but there's very one narrow reason why. And we've said this in our group chat. The signal desktop app is total and complete garbage. Okay. And when you build apps, somewhere along the way, we were all told, all of us as app developers, oh, you need to have an app on every endpoint.

58:01It needs to be available for Android. It needs to be available for the iPad. It needs to be available for your phone. It needs to be available for the desktop. And the problem is now you'll have a computer at home. You'll have a computer in your den. You'll have a computer at the office Some IT person comes and helps you install this stuff and now will the sudden is that having one Attack vector you have seven right so this is insanity So you it's a mistake. It's a stupid mistake But I think it's a mistake and so I think like you know, let's give it to scare moochies. I think we'll forget about it Give it a star mooch here to should somebody resign should somebody be fired.

58:38No, no, I think these are mistakes And I think I think by the way, sorry the other thing is John Racklef is very clear There are very clear procedures that they inherited which is no administration's fault But there's some security IT person that writes these things it's approved and so rewrite those things to be more nor free Barg your thoughts here. Do you have a take? So I think this issue will become one of whether or not government officials can use signal and apps like it for communication. This is a controversy that's been around for some time, but it's actually being pried in the courts right now.

59:19There's I think four active cases. So the Federal Records Act was originally passed in 1950 and then there was this amendment related to electronic communications that was passed in 2014. And the Federal Records Act says all government officials and employees have to create, maintain and preserve adequate and proper documentation of activities, transactions, decisions, policies, and other business. That's the law. That's the law. And it says adequate and proper documentation is defined as records that clearly document the government's decisions and actions. And that can be preserved and retrieved for accountability, transparency, and historical purposes.

59:57And then we have the FOIA laws, which allow you as a citizen or as a journalist, we'll make a request. Freedom of Information Act, this is to have a functioning democracy, what you're talking about here, for your biggest people who work for us should not be able to end run their communication. And that's the law. Yeah, the FOIA provides access to government records because our taxpayer dollars pay for the government to do its work, and therefore access. So the question is, is the particulars of the communication that's taking place amongst these individuals, in this case and in the daily work done by government officials that's like this, where people are updating one another, talking with one another about things, does that have restrictions around preservation of records under the Federal Records Act and the amendment that came out in 2014?

1:00:43And so there were a bunch of lawsuits. One is the Competitive Enterprise Institute against the OSDP, the Office of Science and Technology Policy in 2016, where using email accounts and communications that weren't properly archived or preserved, was challenged by this institute and the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the officials who use private email for official business must copy or forward email communications the government accounts to comply. The citizens for responsibility and ethics in Washington Act sued the Trump administration in 2017 and this is ongoing in multiple forms right now in the courts where there's a lot of procedural complexity but the courts have generally said that they emphasize that these officials are obligated to preserve official communications, and that failure is violating the law.

1:01:28Then there's judicial watch versus Department of Homeland Security, and then there's national security archivers, Mike Pompeo, the State Department in 2019, which is also still in the courts. And I think from these cases, and this particular incident, there's gonna be, Palm, much greater kind of call it clarity, and also a better understanding of the consequences of what communication do you need to preserve records of, and what communication are you allowed to have off the record that you can have in? What do you think, Freemark? I mean, we get it. There's a great question. What do you personally think?

1:02:00Yes, David Freemark. So the Sultan of Science think? I think it is counterproductive to have every piece of communication, foiable, and kept in the public record. I think that's a mistake. And I'll tell you why. When you're making a business decision, let's say you're making an HR decision. The management team sitting around, they're talking about a particular candidate or person at the company, should we give this person a raise, should we terminate someone? You don't want to have a record of that that employees can then go pull up and see and understand because it will have a really euding effect and a dampening effect on the types of conversation, on the authenticity of the conversation, on the productivity of the conversation that you will be able to have if you're forced to say, this is always going to be in the public domain.

1:02:41And so I do think that this idea on like, how did you make a decision? And what was the action that you took? Those to me feel like they should be recorded and they should be foiable. But all of the background material, all of the noise, all of the dialogue that leads up to that. So the opinion of this would be, I do not think that should be foiable. And I think that you need to justify the actions and the decisions that you're making as a government official. But I don't think that you need to have a record personally of everything that led up to that action or that decision. Because I think that that will be really deeply unproductive.

1:03:13Let me give it take here. This is a serious issue. They shouldn't be doing it for obvious reasons. It's very easy to hack personal phones and they do have a way to do this, which is called the SKIFT. And there's other places for them to have secure communication. And as you point out, they work for the American people. They should be a record of this. They're breaking the law by doing this. So the administration should not be breaking the law. Obviously, we don't want them to do that. But also, Hegsa clearly took a report of the attack plan, cut and pasted it from some server somewhere, and then pasted it over.

1:03:49This is a known vector. Your clipboard is what it's called, and this is an attack vector that anybody who's in IT or has basic security training knows that you can get your clipboard hacked very easily. They need to take ownership of it. This is one of the things that this administration and this group does very poorly. Instead of taking ownership like Jamal said here, just take just on it. No big deal. This is a, you know, a chance for us to learn and iterate on the security protocols. Yada Yada, we apologize. Let's move on. They attack. And this is Trump's slight playbook. We have to attack the journalists.

1:04:24So what did they do? They attacked the journalist. They take no ownership. And the second thing, which is administration really hasn't a killy seal floor is on top of just taking, not taking ownership and attacking the hypocrisy. Because this was the entirety of the anti -hillary movement was oh my god She did this exact same thing with her email and republicans had a long list of totally different hears I'll finish you'll get your chance Shema to defend your boys The point is it's complete utter hypocrisy and it's distasteful to attack the journalists which you added this is in Competence it's a mistake own it hold on and then every single person's phone has to get dumped now And so they're not doing a good job communicating what they're going to do to make sure that somebody hasn't gotten onto Everybody's personal phone.

1:05:12Why are they doing this on their personal phones at Shema you very much pointed out These are attack vectors. They should be using the phones issued to them for these communications

1:05:24The first thing is I think you're wrong about the fact that they don't have an adequate claim with this journalist I think it's fair to ask what is the ethical standard that that journalist should have had. If you're added to something, you know it's inappropriate. The guy just sat there lurking. You don't know how it was added, Jason. You're speculating. It could have been, hold on, it could have been injected. Okay, it could have been injected into a laptop. Nobody knows yet. This is why I think just admit what happened was a mistake. I think they did that. They're looking into it. Let them look into it.

1:06:03I don't think you need to have scalples and heads and all this other stuff. But I do think it's important to say, why was this guy lurking about, okay? What ethical standard should he have at? Clearly he had none. And by the way, this guy... No, that's ridiculous. You're so wrong in this. He's my... He's my attorney. He's my attorney. Okay, your opinion is wrong in this case for so many years. He tried to figure out what was going on here. And then when he did figure out it, he contacted them and removed himself. He didn't stay on there indefinitely. If he did that, that would be wrong. But for him to be added to something, he may have been being attacked himself.

1:06:37And the other reason you're wrong is they went on the attack immediately and they denied that there was anything wrong. They did not take ownership of it and that's why we're having this debate right now is they don't take ownership of these things. Marco Rubio did say someone made a big mistake. There were no consequences. We learned we're going to do better. And he is a secretary of state. So someone in the administration did say that this was a mistake. Yeah, and the other guy is attacked, generally. So that's what I find distaste. No, no, but hold on a second. Trump said it was a mistake, too.

1:07:07I don't think these guys, it is. It's a mistake. So fix it and move on. But the point should be what is the mistake? The mistake is the security protocols that these guys rely on. I don't, I'm going to just go out on a limb. As expert as they are in policy, I think they're inexperts in technology. So there is probably somebody that is responsible for how all of these folks communicate, how all of these folks get software installed on their multiple devices, okay, how they get new devices. I'm guessing that it's not them. So I think that that's using their personal devices. I think that's the problem.

1:07:47Why is anybody in government using a personal device to share plans? How do you know that? for a time because they said it was their personal devices. They've said it. This has been established that they did this on their personal devices. That's totally established now. Okay. So and they have skips for this. So I just don't understand why they don't just use it there. But again, I'm saying the bigger issue is that they had to operationalize quickly. They weren't in a position to be together. The importance of the issue is getting lost. It was an important issue that has global consequences. No, they have skips.

1:08:19Shema. They're all within 10 feet of skip it all times. They're SUVs or skiffs, they're offices or skiffs. Gavin, you have any final thoughts about before we move on to the last part? Yeah, I would just say that the contents were interesting and that there are a couple of things. There's all this, oh, the Trump administration is, you know, cozying up to Russia, I mean, you know, trying to blow up these, you know, this post -World War II alliance with Europe. There are two things. One, they said, we are the only people on our side of the ledger who can deal with the Houthis. And our side of ledger, meaning like recognizing kind of Europe, you know, traditional alliances.

1:08:56The good team. The good team. So that was interesting that just brought the rhetoric. They're conscious of who's the home team. And second, they made, it was very clear to everyone in that chat and JD Vance raised it. Three percent of America's trade goes through the Suez Canal, 40 percent of Europe's trade. So we are really doing this. It will help us a little bit, but it will help Europe a vast amount. And we're doing something that helps them that they cannot do. Now, hey, they're asking that they want to be paid, but I just think it made me think that behind the scenes, a lot of this rhetoric about, you know, the US and the European's chism is overblown, and we're still helping them.

1:09:38That was interesting. Yeah, I think it's important note. Okay, let's move on to our final two stories of Trump administration is deported 238 alleged gang members to a pretty severe prison called C -C -E -C -O -T prison in El Salvador. Here's a clip of them being dragged out of the United States and put into this extremely notorious prison. This was all done under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. This allows the president to detain and deport individuals without due process from quote an enemy nation during an invasion or quote predatory incursion. It's been used before, but only during actual wars.

1:10:20FDR use it to deport thousands of Germans, Italians, Japanese during World War II. The Trump administration is claiming that the gang members were sent to the US intentionally calling them a hybrid criminal state. Not surprisingly, most of them were not all of them had criminal records in the US. This was confirmed by ICE and obviously some number of them appear to have been misidentified as gang members or terrorists. I can tell you you know coming from a law enforcement family and Just looking at the statistics out of 238. You're not gonna buy the thousand So maybe you get a couple of these wrong former pro soccer player Jersey Reyes Barrios he fled then as well after being tortured by the government for protesting.

1:11:02He's a refugee He has been stated for a gang member according to his people because he's got an arm tattoo supporting his favorite club real Madrid. And there is a social media post that ice officials believe featured him making gang signs, but it was actually the language for I love you according to his attorney. second example, a shoe salesman in social media influencer, Noberto Rodriguez. He fled Venezuela for Columbia out of desperation because he and his family were starving. He's a father of three. He was also suspected because of a tattoo, which features playing cards and dice. His family says he got to, he got it to cover a scar on his forearm and third and final example, stylist and makeup artist Andre Hernandez.

1:11:51He is being represented by the Immigration Defender's Law Center, he claims he has no criminal history. He saw a asylum after fleeing Venezuela where he was persecuted for being gay. Again, his arrest was based on tattoos that his attorneys claim are not gang affiliated. This has caused the US District Judge to pause these deportations, the administration has apparently continued these deportations and they're even videos threatening people with the prison in El Salvador, again, the sea -cott. Your thoughts, Chimaf, on this extradition process, if any? I mean, as long as there's a mechanism for these mistakes to get rectified, seems like the overwhelming majority of these folks should not have been in the United States and were part of illegal criminal organizations.

1:12:53Okay, so there should be a mechanism, Gavin, your thoughts? If innocent people were sent to a prison, like that's a terrible mistake, and that happens, and it shouldn't happen, and hopefully it's rectified, but I guess my bigger thought is a little bit, this administration, as we discussed, they have a really ambitious agenda. They want to fundamentally change American ways that they think will be better for kind of blue collar normal working Americans. And things like this, you know, signal gate, if you, if they made a mistake and sent innocent people to this prison, there's only so many of those mistakes they can afford before they lose kind of the mandate necessary to accomplish their goals.

1:13:39And, you know, hopefully it's, you know, we're in whatever, we're not even into the, you know, third full month. 66 days. 66 days. We're into the third month, but we're 4 .5 % of the way through the second term. It feels like six caramotuses in. Yes, six with brutal hit and easier. This is such a good point, though, Gavin continue. They just execution matters. Like if they they to accomplish their goals, they need to execute at a high level and communicate thoroughly and effectively. And just if innocent people were sent to this prison, mistake, signal gate, look, hey, maybe it's a big mistake, it's a small mistake, depending on where you sit, I thought Marco Rubio's response was good, but just like I think execution is important for them to accomplish their goals.

1:14:33Great. Freeberg any thoughts here? I do not agree with sending people to prison or detention center of that due process. I felt similarly that Guantanamo Bay, because I don't think it matches the rights and the values that the United States should stand for. I think it's different if you believe that they're here legally, they're part of a criminal enterprise and we don't want to try them in courts here, then we should ship them back to a port of departure somewhere else in another country. maybe it's back to Venezuela and let their courts try them, but I will talk a little bit about this El Salvador motivation.

1:15:08As you guys know, the El Salvador prison that they set up for putting the gang members in had a radical impact on living standards in the country. In 2015, the homicide rate per capita in El Salvador was 103 people per 100 ,000. So one out of every thousand people were murdered every year. They introduced this aggressive policy of rounding people up without do process and putting them in this prison. And through that action they were able to reduce the homicide rate per capita below two per hundred thousand, which is what it was last year 1 .9. So it had a radically positive effect on society, but obviously at the cost of a value that we in the United States hold dear, which is the value of due process and the importance of due process, because all it takes is one in this and life being locked up.

1:15:56What's our year seeing? El Salvador, there was no due process? There was no due process. And so there are plenty of stories. If you watch the documentaries on this prison, there are plenty of stories of people that later were released when they were found to be completely innocent and randomly rounded up or caught up in a sweep or something that they shouldn't have been at. And there was actually one fascinating interview I saw of one of the guys who spent over a year in the prison was completely innocent. But he said, you know what? It was worth it because the government has been able to clean up the streets.

1:16:24I got to find this clip, but I was really like shocked. I couldn't believe that a guy that's spent a year in this prison actually had something positive to say because it was such a profoundly... Let me be able to say that to get out. Who knows? Well, it was such a profoundly difficult place to live in El Salvador and we've all heard these stories. But I do think that there is an acute being taken by this administration that there's a way to kind of very quickly resolve to a positive outcome with respect to immigration and crime. But I do think Gavin's point is right that we do have to have some boundary conditions particularly as it relates to human rights that we do value here in this country.

1:16:59And as long as there's a court trial, as long as there's a judge, as long as there's some sort of, it doesn't need to be a jury of peers, but as long as there's some evidentiary hearing to make the determination that someone is likely this criminal, it makes sense. But again, I'm much more in favor if there's going to be force movement of people. I don't think that they should necessarily be moved into a prison as much as moved to a port of departure and have them tried in another country if there's a crime or we try them here and put them in. I agree so much with what you just said. Do process is important.

1:17:31Like America, like human rights, our core American value, that was great. You acknowledged that like the outcome in El Salvador was good. Homicides down 99 .9 % lots of lives save. And just, you know, there needs to be a balance between these. Yes. Then let me ask you guys a question. Very point of question, if you guys could implement an El Salvadorian style incarceration system tomorrow, and it would have the exact same effect on American crime. So yeah, absolutely. And I'll give you there's a 4 % error rate. Would you do it? Would the benefit of the safer society be outweighed in your minds by the error rate or not?

1:18:19Absolutely not. Most people would say yes because they wouldn't affect them. And then the 2 to 5 % of people who have family members who are innocent get locked up. I get that. I'm saying what do you think? Yeah, I wouldn't compromise that value. Yeah, we don't want to compromise that value. It's incredibly dangerous. Incredibly dangerous. We've been riding on a bit of a high. And I think there's a couple of things here. This administration could do better. And communicating when they make a mistake. and then human rights is such a core part, I believe. Me, Jason Cali -Gannis, believes that there is a sadistic nature to this administration.

1:18:54It is an Achilles heel for them. And when you see them doing videos from these prisons and saying, this is going to happen to you. And this prison is known for torture. And this prison is known for just absolutely the most abhorrent issues in the world. This is the sadistic nature of this administration that I think they need to drop, because it is going to derail them. and people care in this country deeply about human rights and process. And there is a constitutional issue right now because Trump and this administration is disobeying the court when they say, hey, let's slow down here. There is no cost, zero cost, to Americans sending these people to a way station and investigating each of these cases to make sure we don't send a gay hairdresser to El Salvador, another country to be tortured in prison, And if that is in fact the case, and it is against all American principles to not have due process and to have innocent people potentially go to jail.

1:19:52And what all Republicans should do is here is say this is going to derail the administration. These are the things that will build up over time. And people just pragmatically speaking, people in America who are rooting for this administration to do some good things like I am, when they do stuff like this. And I represent a large swathe of people. It loses them votes. And this is why they, I predict. This is why they will lose the midterms. If they continue to do this type of stuff, that's my position. It's not virtual signaling. I've cared about human rights long before the All -In podcast existed.

1:20:24I have my first job was working at Amnesty International. And this is a giant mistake by this administration. Gavin, you had some thoughts. This whole debate is a question of ins versus means. And it's like, we all agree that the homicide rate down 99 .9 % and Al Salvador is a good outcome. It's a good end. And this is one of the great philosophical questions. And it's, you know, we can debate it endlessly. And there has to be a balance between the two. Human rights are a core American value. And I agree, I think with a lot of what David said, but I also think if you are, you know, going back to that homicide rate, The Trump campaign, you know, they spoke to the mothers and the families of people who were brutally murdered or raped and murdered by people who were illegal immigrants and were convicted criminals in their home country and were known convicted criminals and somehow still were not apprehended and then committed terrible crimes that were very similar to the crimes they committed there.

1:21:30You have a lot of compassion for the victims too, but all they have to do, like one of I thought Elon's best moments, and I, you know, it's what Doge is doing is great. These are brilliant people working hard for free to do things that have never been done before in the government in terms of efficiency and kind of modernizing IT. But you know, Elon said at one of the first press conferences, listen, we're going to make mistakes and then we're going to quickly correct them. So, to me, I think all the administration needs to say, and I do think more Duke process to David's point is good, is like, listen, if we made a mistake, it's terrible, and we're going to fix it immediately.

1:22:09And it just, it gives you so much credibility when you say that. Agreed. But isn't Duke process happening? How else would you guys know that three out of the 238 were miscasts? The fact that you know that means the process is working. I think the question is, what about the other 235 people? Their families talk to the press. This wasn't from the administration. But the point is it's there. So whether it's the freedom project or whether it's the Southern property law center, my point is there are resources. Is it bad when this happens? Absolutely. My question is, do you just blow the whole process up and then what do you do with the other 235 people?

1:22:46You'd hold all 238 at Gitmo if you wanted to in humane prisons and process them. and then have their attorneys get to look at their case. You could give their cases to, you could be public with their cases and say here are the cases, these are the people who are deporting and why. So your specific issue is where they're being sent. Yes, you, Chvap, they're being sent to the most sadistic prison in the world. If you wanna answer your question about like the 5 % trade -off, like if you sweep up 5 % of the people being innocent, whether it's worth that trade -off or crime, did I get an answer? Well, you asked the question, but I wanted to hear your answer.

1:23:25Like what's your point of view on that? I think that that's probably what happens today in America's prisons. In fact, it's probably more than 5 % but I guess the question is, Jamal, what is an acceptable, you know, it's a little bit like the trolley problem, you know, the many variations of this. I think the important thing is I think that that's a bit above our pay grade, but I don't think it's above the presidents. And I think that that was part of what he was elected to do is make that call Because I don't think he hid behind any rhetoric. He was very clear about what his intentions were and to your point He did bring the you know, Lake and Miley act.

1:24:00I mean they were very explicit about what their intentions were Yes Man, it just feels like a little more due process Being a little more careful with the signal, but also just going back to what we're 4 .5 % into the administration I'm not saying but hey mistakes were made and it's okay Hey, innocent people are sent to this prison. That's terrible. And I hope it gets rectified quickly. If there was some concession here, hey, if we made a mistake, we're going to fix it. That would be a lot better than putting out promotional videos, lauding how brutal this prison is. That would go a long way with me.

1:24:36But we're seeing the opposite. They're releasing videos that they're producing. We'll play one here for you to see. By the way, I think an important point about this.

1:24:48And perhaps like the key part of the strategy of the administration is that this isn't the beginning of a continuous process, but they're sending a signal which they expect will cause people to naturally emigrate out of the country that are committing crime or at risk of being caught for being associated with gangs and while being in the United States as a way to kind of chase folks out. So I think that there's some calculus and what's going on here with respect to the risk and the actions being, hey, look, if we do this to the first 240 people and even if three or four innocent people get caught up, there is a net benefit ultimately because it will reduce the immigration immigrants kind of coming to this country that are parts of gangs and perhaps some of them will choose to go home.

1:25:36You know, they clearly believe that this is going to save innocent lives in America. That is their clear belief system. Well, yeah, and everybody wants that. Here's Secretary Christie, known from the prison itself. Here at SeaCut today, and visiting this facility. And first of all, I want to thank El Salvador and their president for their partnership with the United States of America to bring our terrorists here and to incarcerate them and have consequences for the violence that they have perpetuated in our communities. I also want everybody to know if you come to our country illegally, this is one of the consequences you could face.

1:26:15First of all, do not come to our country illegally. You will be removed and you will be prosecuted. But know that this facility is one of the tools in our toolkit that we will use if you commit crimes against the American people. Harsh words, she's trying to make it a deterrent, clearly. Alright, another amazing episode of all in is in the can for Kevin Baker David Freiberg and from off Paul you're hot, but here I'm Jay Cal Jason Calcana and we will see you all great next time virtue signal

1:26:47I mean I can't even take it there. I'm sorry. I'm passionate about something I'm passionate about something look at this. I can't tell how much of the tension is real over a slide I love I love Jason. I'm in a little bit We'll let your winners ride. Rainman David Sack I'm going on the beach. And it said we open source it to the fans and they've just got crazy with it. I'm the queen of kilowatt. I'm going on the beach.

1:27:21Besties are gone, go for it! That's my dog taking a wish to drive away. Oh man, my ham is the actual meat. We should all just get a room and just have one big hug or two because they're all just like this sexual tension that we just need to release that house. What, your feet? What, your feet? Here are Fee. Fee, what? Good, good. Where did you get my cheese? I'm doing all it.

1:27:54I'm doing all it.