Trump verdict, COVID Cover-up, Crypto Corner, Salesforce drops 20%, AI correction?

24:40Fauci regarding eco -health. On October 25th, 2021, you wrote, quote, Peter from Tony's numerous recent comments to me, they're trying to protect you, unquote, you meaning eco -health and Dr. Dastic. Dr. Rins, did you ever have any conversations with Dr. Fauci regarding eco -health? Well, the ones you just mentioned, I don't have any recollection of that. No recollection. No recollection, no. All right, so we're on the no recollection train and then I'll give this final clip here. This is unbelievable, SACs. Currently there's a FOIA lady, Freedom of Information Act Lady, working at NIH to train and help and mentor people on how to avoid having their communications.

25:28These are people who we work for us. She's the FOIA lady at NIH. Play the clip, Nick. And as you've said, you previously testified that you did not delete any federal records. But on February 24th, 2021, you wrote, quote, I learned from our FOIA lady here how to make emails disappear after I'm FOIAed, but before the search starts. So I think we are all safe. Plus, I deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to Gmail, end quote. And the next day on February 25th, 2021, you wrote quote, but I learned the tricks last year from an old friend, Marge Moore, who heads our FOIA office and also hates FOIAs.

26:07In quote, yes or no, is March more the FOIA lady you were referring to? Yes, she was at the time. I believe she's retired since then. Did the NIH FOIA office instruct you on how to delete emails or avoid FOIA? No. All right, thanks. There's a red meat, smoking guns everywhere. What do you think? Please give me a couple of minutes to kind of lay out what happened here. Okay, so Fouchy knew very early as early as February 1st of 2020 that COVID came from a lab leak. The scientist said so all they had to do was look on our microscope and see the fear on cleavage site, which is not naturally occurring.

26:43It's something that was added, basically bioengineered to the virus in order to make it more transmissible in humans. So they knew right away that this somehow came from a lab leak. And Fauci and Collins said in emails that they were going to begin a brutal take down in order to conceal this fundamental truth of the lab leak from the public. Now why would Fauci need to conceal this? Because he had funded Gaina function research programs via Peter Dazek and the EcoHealth Alliance to conduct again Gaina function research at the Wuhan Institute of moreover, Fauci was personally responsible for reversing an Obama era decision to prohibit gain a function research because it was so risky.

27:29Fauci wrote op -eds, justifying gain a function research. He wrote a paper in 2012 which was actually quite candid about the risk of gain a function. He describes the kind of lab leak that could occur in the type of virus that could escape from a lab because of gain a function. but then he says that's a risk worth taking. So this is somebody who funded the Wuhan lab, he funded gain of function research. He was person responsible for lifting the ban on gain of function research. He had a lot of reasons to wanna hide the fact that COVID was engineered in a lab and was lab leak. And so we know that even before this conspiracy to basically defraud the FOIA request that Fauci had done things like organize that letter to the Lancet, which speared and demonized scientists who were trying to tell the truth, saying that the so -called zoological theory was nonsense.

28:25This had to be for the lab. He was doing things like this. And now we have this added piece, which is this longtime colleague of Fauci and Collins at NIH, Dr. David Morens, developed a strategy for evading FOIA requests that would expose the truth. He did this by deleting government emails, which is a crime by using private email to conduct government business, which is also a crime, and then strategically misspelling names and titles to frustrate the FOIA searches. And then the craziest part is that Marenz foolishly detailed his schemes in emails that Fauci would have seen, that Fauci was on the distributional stuff.

29:02So he has no possible deniability. It's literally like they're like, here's how we can avoid getting caught in an email. You have to see the FOIA piece within the overall picture here, which is Fauci from the Gecko was lying about the origins of COVID in order to cover up his role in funding this type of research. Yes. And there was a comprehensive effort by people at NIH, likely at Fauci's direction to, again, not just cover this up, but to smear scientists were going to support it. in addition to trying to cover their essence. Yeah, people like Jay Bada Chorriet, who then got banned on Twitter and banned on social media.

29:46By the way, who is a Stanford professor? Who's banned for speaking up to Mothlet's zoom out here and start thinking strategy and theories of what's going on here. I have my own, but I'm curious to hear yours first as we go around the horn here. What would you take on this? I would like to make four points, I think, that kind of summarized my view of this. I think what happened here needs a really clear accounting because the implications are far greater than I think people realize. And I think why maybe the four of us have always been tugging on this little thread is because each of us instinctively understood that.

30:25So the first is, if you just look at the macroeconomic consequences of what COVID did and our reaction, we broke the seal of having absolutely no accountability on massive spending, right? So there are subsidies, there are kickbacks, there are government programs that now number in the trillions of dollars a year, incremental to what we were going to spend if things were the status quo. And the problem is that in Freeberg has talked about this really eloquently in the past, it's creating a massive debt issue that us and our children and our grandchildren are gonna have to deal with. If we had responded to this pandemic differently, those issues would not have occurred.

31:07If we had just kept the economy open because we understood what was going on, we would not have reacted the way that we did and we would not have nearly as much debt as we had and we would not have made it okay for politicians to spend trillions of dollars. That is a direct consequence of our reaction to COVID, not COVID itself. The second is we caused billions of people all around the world to take immaturally tested drugs. They were called vaccines. We found out that they were modestly effective at best. And then some of them were designed in some ways to manipulate our DNA and we just don't know what the long -term impacts will be.

31:47We see some small issues of myocarditis, we see other issues of all cause mortality, but the point is we just don't know. And that would not have happened. Had we not rushed to force people to stand in the line and get a jab in order to get back to their normal life. That was a direct consequence, not of COVID, but of a reaction. The third is what we're realizing right now, is that we had this power drunk aparachic. And this is similar to the quote that Mike Pompeo made, When he took over the CIA, what he found, and he said this after, when he laughed, was, there were people on the top floor of the CIA building, the seventh floor of the Pentagon, that fundamentally believed that it wasn't the Democrats nor the Republicans that ran the country, but it was them.

32:38And I see a similar level of arrogance here, which is this belief that they know better. And so what they did was they committed the greatest sin, which is where the cover -up is way greater than the crime. And they created a setup where all of these things were amplified by their prestige, their perceived scientific knowledge. But what they were really doing was keeping critical information to themselves and then trying to cover it up, Jason. That is so unacceptable when you think of the broad consequences of what happened. And that's what needs to get documented. And I do think there needs to be some form of accountability for that.

33:18I think as well said, and just looking at it, I think we are now at the point of this conversation and investigation where you can say this is not a bipartisan, this is a new issue. And everybody knew, like we had these conversations on this very podcast, the public knew, something didn't seem right about this. And if you just think about this from first principles of what occurred here, just what occurred here? Traybird, we funded gain of research to create these super viruses that what I think other people could just as equally call a bio weapon with the Chinese. Now, we're supposed to be arch rivals here.

33:56We're like these competitors. And then when it came out and it leaked and of course, I don't think it was released on purpose, When it came out, the people who work for us and we trust with our family safety, who funded this in order to save their own reputations, to cover their asses, then lied about it, and then, like as you said, Sachs, perfectly, they were on the offensive. These people were not elected by anybody. That's right. These people work for us, and they failed us. This is a crime against humanity of the greatest cause. Because people committed suicide, people died because they had depression.

34:39Our kids lost two years of school. This generation has lost their education. And now we have burdened them with billions, hundreds of billions of dollars in debt from this. No trillions, trillions, trillions, trillions. This is a failure of leadership. It is a crime. And when people said prosecute Fauci, they were like, you're being hysterical. This is ridiculous. these people need to be prosecuted. If you hit this stuff from a FOIA request, you need to go to jail. This needs to be accountability here. I think what they did to society are children and the future. I am infuriated by this. Imagine what happened in the situation room or the equivalent wherever the president of the United States, all these world leaders were coalescing to try to make decisions in that period, they all looked at this quote -unquote expert.

35:32They pointed at Fauci and said, lead us out. And so, do we not think that at any point he was thinking, how do I do this in a way where I have no fingerprints? Clearly, the answer is, in fact, he was leading from a position of, how will I not have any fingerprints on this? And so, did we get the best advice on the margin? I think it's pretty fair to say we could not have gotten it because he was too conflicted. He was figuring out how to cover up what happened as opposed to just own it and then help the world get out of it. Yeah, I mean talk about like incinerating your entire career and legacy, but putting that aside the morality of Covering this up and you know, so then you have to think Trimoff This is why I was like what is this strategy?

36:15What goes through somebody's Mind when they decide to do a cover up this level. Is it just fear of getting caught and their lives being in their mind ruined and they're going to do this incredible cover -up, I actually think that they thought this would become a globally destabilizing moment between the United States and China and that there could be revolutions. Now I know that this is now sounding really conspiracy theory, but if you're sitting there and you're like, what if the public finds out we created this and their grandparents died from it? And their kids didn't go to school because they'd be riots in the street, but if enough time passes, maybe there's not riots in the street.

36:54Well, you know what? This is something that is just so abhorrent that, I mean, people need to really be held accountable, freeberg your thoughts. What would you guys do if you're sitting in a policy -makers seat today and you're being offered by scientists this ability to go and figure out what the next big virus will be and start to make plans for getting in front of it by understanding the biology of these viruses by seeing where they're going to evolve to and by trying to get in front of the next pandemic so that we can protect the population. Do you guys support that sort of research and what are the questions you ask?

37:28So let's rewind 15 years. Pretend Fauci doesn't get to make those decisions. You guys are the policymakers and folks say SARS just happened. We want to do this research. We want to figure out what do you do and how do you answer that? There's a really simple question. of anybody who's watched any kind of science fiction or knows the history of this kind of research, which is don't do this in a population center and how will you prevent it from breaking out? Like literally that's job one. If you're going to, even if you're not going to, like literally every science fiction film, it's so, it has this.

38:02It's like put it on an island and there's an island off long island where they keep these things. I forgot the name of it. It's a plum island or something? Well, look it up. Yeah. And by the way, there are internal NIH emails that suggest that COVID leaked from a level two facility. They call it BSL -2, which does not operate with the top level biohazard safeguards. So they knew the Wuhan lab was not at the level of safeguards that it should have been. But look, I would go deeper and say that why would you do this kind of research at all? I mean, you are deliberately manipulating viruses in order to make them transmissible in humans.

38:38This was a bat virus that was not transmissible to humans. It was bioengineer they had the fear and cleavage site to allow it to gain access to human cells. Yeah, so SACS, I am going to push back because that is not conclusively true. What you're saying is something that some people have claimed, but there are other scientists, including papers published recently in the Lancet and other like pretty reputable like medical journals and research journals that indicate that the evolution scene in the fear and cleavage site can be traced back to an evolutionary origin, not necessarily to a human engineer to origin.

39:11So I want to just make that clear that that is a possibility. I'm not dismissing it, but I'm not supporting the other side. I'm saying we have work to do to figure this out just to be clear. It's a possibility that's so remote. I mean, look, I heard Professor Jeffrey Sachs talking about this in a recent interview and he went through the whole history. He said there's like 200 of these coronavirus in this class or category, and there's not one fear, and you've decided among any of them. So can you say that there's not a one, what's going back to my, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And I don't know, but so back to your question, there's very, very, very low probability of that.

39:44But let me punch up your question, Freiburg, because if you know if your question is, what should you do? I want to ask you guys, what do you do? So like forget about, oh, there's bad guys, Fauci's a bad guy, like what do you do to protect the world against the next pandemic? Number one, you don't do this type of gain of function research. Number two, if you are going to do it, you don't do it at a level two facility like the Wuhan lab. Number three, when the virus leaks from the lab, you don't basically lie about it, conduct a cover at campaign that smears reputation of honest scientists. Number four, when you're hauled into the Oval Office in response to this once in a century pandemic, you don't pretend like your America's doctor and you have all the answers.

40:26And in fact, you're the guy who created this problem. You own it. There's an idea, you own it. And you know what? Like the question really embedded in your question, FreeBurg I think is, is there any argument to doing gain a function if so how? And then is there any reason to research, you know, the backdung or whatever material they get it from, you know, from those caves and take it out of the caves? I could see the ladder, Chimoff of like, hey, this existed nature, you studied on an island somewhere far away from everybody with massive controls. The gain of function seems like it literally feels like the speech from Jurassic Park like I think it's not I would you but you listen to these people took place on an island for a reason there were many scientists who are opposed to Again, function research.

41:11They thought it was unduly risky and didn't have Offsetting benefits and that is exactly why Obama banned it very good decision To me this whole idea That we need to to amplify these viruses in order to find out what would happen if this happened naturally is insane. You didn't have this to run until you created it. Yes. This is not a nutty. This is nuts. Great. There are examples we know. I'll just point to two. Let's just say the attempted overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014. You can go back to Iran, Contra has yet another example. And you can add gain a function research now, which is again, I'll just go back to when there are these lifelong bureaucrats that believe they're above the law, that there's this sensation that they can pull the levers of power silently behind the scenes because they know better.

42:07And then what they're doing, as you guys said, is they are contraverting the desires of the people. So whether you like President Obama or not, he's duly elected by the people. And when he says this isn't allowed, it shouldn't be allowed. And when you instantiate chaos and wars and all of this other stuff over throws in all of these other places that then create all these long tail effects, they're not done with really America support. They're done by a small group of people who think they know better. And I think that we've created that kind of a problem that needs to get fixed. And so I think that there, this has to be an example where you can make them an example, because otherwise it will keep happening and there are other parts of the American bureaucracy where people are in charge of very critical and important decisions and I suspect 99 % of them are good -earnest honest people doing the right thing for America But it's just a lot of large numbers.

43:07There will be one or two and all it takes is one or two Who get drunk with that power and so unless that there's a check -in balance on that dynamic? that will have more issues of this. And as the world gets more sophisticated and we rely more on experts, I hate to say this guys, but you have to be more skeptical of experts. As much as you think an expert is an expert, you have to fight the tendency of saying, I'm gonna abdicate all of my intellect onto you and you decide. I think you have to find a way of just gut checking and sacs at this critical thing. If I was the president of the United States in a pandemic, I didn't need the COVID to teach me this example, but if I'm trying to solve a very technical and hard engineering problem, what I always do is I bring a cross section of people in a room, typically some of them have to have disagreeing opinions and I make them intellectually fight it out.

44:04And my job is to observe. And in that, I apply my judgment. I'm not nearly as smart as them. I'm not nearly technically as trained as them. but that is a process that works. And I'm just questioning, it couldn't have happened here because as SAC said, if you basically bury the reputations of the folks that are pushing back, you could never bring them inside the room in the oval and have a conversation with them and say, hey, Jay, but to charia, give us the red team version of what you think is happening. Yeah. And that is real. And we are giving. Steal man the opposite side. Let me build on a point, Jamal Thmaid, which is, I think we have to ask the question, or what type of government do we really have?

44:42You know, we call ourselves a democracy, but are you a democracy when the elected leaders come and go and the really powerful bureaucrats running the government, running these agencies stay for decades and decades, and if the president disagrees with their policy, they can just wait them out. Fauci wanted to do gain a function research. Maybe by the way, at the behest of DOD, we don't know, it could have been a bio -weapon or bio -defense program. There's a lot more to this than we don't even know about yet. In any event, it's clear he was passionately committed to funding gain of function research.

45:15He just waited for his opportunity and implemented his wealth. Victoria Newland in the State Department passionately committed to basically bringing Ukraine into NATO and using that to essentially provoke a regime change operation in Russia. Again, she just had to wait for her opportunity to basically keep pushing these policies for decades. These are the people who are really running the American government. How would you change it? We have to turn these things over. These organizations are getting rid of them. We talk about term limits for politicians. Maybe we actually need term limits for the administrative apparatus that runs all these critical organizations.

45:52Right. It's called the deep state, right? You're ever here, the expression deep state. It sounds conspiratorial. It's not. It's just the permanent bureaucracy. We elect a president, but how many people does the president actually appoint a couple hundred? You're 99 .9 % of the people running the government are there permanently. Well, and then I'll just say here, I want to give a shout out to the journalist, Catherine Abon and Catherine Abon and Emily Cump. I know that people also have no faith in journalists. These are two journalists. I think you could have tremendous faith in them who are going to win pollisters because they've been doggedly pursuing this.

46:24And you have to wonder why this is not the top story on the news networks and why this isn't the head of the New York Times or the Washington Post. They need to be much more coverage of what's going on here. I don't understand why this isn't what we're going to do. Yeah, because the New York Times take every headline. I don't think it was any to do with Trump. I think it's got everything to do with the fact that the New York Times was covering for Fauci. Fauci's been there for decades. He is a major source of the New York Times, just like he was a major funder of grant programs, right? So there's a lot of people who have developed a dependency on Fauci.

47:00I mean, every information you think access journalism is what's going on here. He gave them access. There's no question that they were in your time was covering for this. The New York Times definitely promoted the idea that anyone pushing the lab leak theory was some out conspiracy theorist or a nut. And you have to lay on top of all this acts in the political environment. They were pushing that whole crazy wet market theory and the... Well, the wet market theory. I'm a penguin. The penguin, remember the penguin? We need a John Stewart to dismantle the penguin theory. In relation to that, these wet markets have spread massive viruses and all kinds of things.

47:38And they do need to be, there was like a UN report on the K, we have to upgrade these people after we lost our markets. That's why I don't know if that was a great cover story. I think it was a logical theory to pursue to the end point of eliminating it because they around Wuhan, there are a lot of these wet markets. It is completely conceivable that a person who was in that lab went to a wet market and it spread via the wet market. This is why we need a full investigation, folks, because all these theories could come together and there are more cards to turn over, which one of you alluded to, like, who knows what the turn and the river are gonna be here?

48:11Like, what did China know? What did our government and China know? Maybe they are making bio -weapons. Maybe they're doing even worse stuff that we don't know about. Maybe there's all kinds of global programs that are occurring here. That's why we need to keep digging and digging the American public must hold these people accountable and they need to tell us who else was involved. Because if Fauci's involved and this guy's involved, there's other people. I want to hear from everybody. There's many crazy parts of this, but I think maybe the craziest part of the whole thing is that when the pandemic happens and the elected government of the United States, the president needs to pull in the resources to manage a policy response.

48:51Who do they pull in? Fauci, the guy created the problem. It's kind of like when they have Newland BR Chief Diplomat in the State Department and she's fermented the coup in Kiev in 2014. It's again, these bureaucrats are doing the exact opposite of what they're supposed to be doing. They're not for the dictatorship of the House. They have to take ownership of this and being honest, yes. But I think to answer your question, what do we do about it? I think we just got to clean out the Stables here. Yeah, I think we just got to despair and some of these government departments. Why do we have so many this whole alphabet soup of three letter agencies?

49:21I think the vague grandma swami at the right idea. Let's just get rid of a bunch of these things Zero based budget zero based budget the whole government start over Yeah, and just go right through each one like if and you know what it should be a bipartisan issue But there's so much money involved. This is one of the challenges in the capitalist system is there so much money There's so much grief to go around that when something like this happens and there's an opportunity to I don't know make a vaccine and put a couple of billion dollars into this light speed thing, which was a great idea. Seemingly, everybody lines up, okay, yeah, sure, we'll get involved.

49:53We'll take some of that money, yeah, buy a billion shots from us. President Trump was really onto this because he's the one that really coined the term, the deep state and went after it. And if you think about the other side, right, the people that are there, it must be very discomforting to hear because a lot of those people are folks that worked hard, tried to go to good schools, get educated, and join an infrastructure to move a country forward, because they believe in the country and the value of somewhere. Sounds like a noble mission, right? But over long periods of time, most people come and go, and then there's a small cohort of folks that sort of end up ossifying and running the top parts of this permanent bureaucracy.

50:34And I think SACS is right. They start to observe just the simple principle that But all these folks come and go, yet arms still around. President comes, President goes. Under Secretary comes, under Secretary goes. The Secretary of this comes and then they go. And so they start to believe that they're really in charge. And that's where the deep state idea comes from. At least we're in a democracy where these hearings are occurring. I just want to give who does to, in addition to those two journalists, to the people on subcommittee who are doing it in a bipartisan way and they will be and they're being relentless.

51:10I think that's the honorable thing to do. I encourage them and those investigative journalists to be relentless. And for example, too, remember when he was in the fall, falling courage, people like this guy's a loon. No, Rand Paul had a right. To your point about what does this mean for our democracy, I want to just bring up the summer for article where they pulled young people and young voters, they despair over U .S. politics, they describe the United States as a dying empire led by bad people. After what we've learned about COVID, and I would argue also the whole background of the whole war, is this right?

51:47Their intuition is right. From the mouths of babes. I mean, if bad is, I mean, if they covered this up in the way it's looking like, I would call this behavior not bad. I'd call it evil because it was premeditated. And then look, the point is we're supposed to have this check in balance from the media, but when the media is complicit because they like to be in those halls of power, that's where these feelings come from. I think the latest stat that I saw is, I think, more than 52 % of Americans now believe that the mainstream media is untrustworthy. And that's a really terrible place to be, which means you're basically, where do you get true?

52:21You're consuming something that's just fundamentally not true. I mean, burn it down. I mean, that's the conclusion. any logical person would come to is just burn it down. This makes no sense that they would try and cover this up. The right thing for Fauci to do is say, hey, listen, we didn't do gain a function under Obama. We did do it here. It's obviously been a mistake. We need to never do it again. And here's the roadmap to make sure that we protect people from the next one. Thank God this one didn't kill children the way it's killing all people. And by the way, this is going to crack open.

52:51I encourage you all to be vocal about this and to watch on Monday. because Dr. Fauci is scheduled to appear in a hearing for the same subcommittee. And that is going to be explosive. Life's streamed on YouTube. We'll put the link in the show notes. Since we're in the don't trust anybody and have your own sovereignty and we're in the libertarian moment, let's go to our crypto correspondent. It's crypto corner with Shema. It's part of my production company. I'm not doing crypto corner with Shema. That would be next week. I thought it would be good to talk about crypto for a couple of reasons. One is because we just had the having at the end of April.

53:32What did that happen? The having is where just for folks that don't know the way that bitcoins are created is by solving these complex mathematical algorithms that take a lot of time and energy and money. When you solve it, you get rewarded with some number of Bitcoin. Roughly every four years, that reward gets cut in half. It's called a having and This week I saw somebody who reminded me all of this and I just want to give this guy a proper shout out So his name is Wences Casaris and Wences in Silicon Valley, I would say really was agent zero of Bitcoin He was the one in 2010 that Introduced it to me.

54:11I remember he reminded me of the story actually we were at Orin's hummus and he's like He's Argentinian great. He's a great. So I'm gonna try to copy. He's like that. Jamat. You not the buy the Bitcoin So I heard the story, I fell in love with it. I remember I called my family office and I'm like, buy me a million of these things and he was like, or a million dollars worth. And he was like, are you crazy? And I was like, no, there's just a little appetizer. We'll get to the main course. Anyways, he has done a phenomenal job of understanding and prostitizing Bitcoin. And I wanna thank him because he really put me onto this.

54:43But he mentioned something to me when I saw him a couple of days ago, which is you should really look at the pattern of Bitcoin after a having. And so I was really curious. And so I had a guy on my team Quentin put this together. So Nick, let me just, let's go to the first page. So why is this interesting? So here's a little Bitcoin price analysis for you guys. So there's been a couple of having cycles that have happened. And I asked him to go back and look at the price performance. One month after a having, three months, six months, nine months, 12 months, and 18 months after a having. And what you notice is that there are these moments, initially, where essentially when you go through a Bitcoin having, people are sort of reassessing what's happening.

55:31And they're trying to figure it out. That's sort of what I would say is happens in the first month. And roughly what also happens in the first three months. But then within six months to a year and 18 months of these things, there are these crazy price appreciation cycles that happen. So that's what this page shows, which is, you know, 18 months after the first having, the Bitcoin price returned 45X after the second having. It returned almost 28X. And after this third having, it returned almost in 8X, which is really incredible returns in such a short period of time. If you go to the next page.

56:11And so if you graph that, this is what it starts to show, which is what is this price performance after each of these having cycles. Now, why is that interesting? Well, it's interesting because on top of this having, which theoretically, if history is a guide, we should see some price appreciation. Obviously, the other thing that's happened is we've commercialized Bitcoin, and we talked about this sort of as my big prediction for 2024, which is these ETFs are really going to allow Bitcoin to cross the chasm and have its sort of central key moment, right? And so if you apply the averages, and again, these are just averages there by no means predictions, okay?

56:51So I just want to qualify that. This is not financial advice. It's not financial advice. These are just data. We took these and we applied it to the price of Bitcoin. And if you go to the next page, you start to see what could happen if you just take the average of the last few cycles, so because the first cycle was so extreme. And you start to just doing cycle two and three here to be clear. Just the averages of cycle two and three and what you start to see is some really meaningful appreciation. And when I talked to Wentz is about this, how he explained it, which makes a lot of sense to me is there are a lot of countries that will never look at Bitcoin credibly, even if they support it, the US maybe one of those, but there is an increasing body of countries that will become dual currency.

57:40And they will look at their local currency and then they will look at Bitcoin. And they will say, both of these two things are needed. One, when you're transacting on a daily basis for random goods and services. And two, when you need to buy a permanent asset that needs to have residual value, you'll use something like BTC. And I think that's a very powerful concept. And if you look at what this price chart could indicate is that if this thing starts to get to these levels of appreciation, it is going to completely replace gold and start to become something that has transactional utility for hardassence.

58:19And I think if you marry that with this worry that some folks have about dollar debasement, you start to see some really interesting opportunities. So I just thought that this was is an interesting thing that he hears our disclaimer. Interesting thing that he put me on. I thought I'd share that with you. I'll publish this on Twitter, but that's your crypto corner for the year folks. I think it's really interesting how the crypto community is getting organized into basically a lobby to advocate for its interests because they've been so. It's the biggest lobby in America. Did you know that? Yeah, they've been so targeted over the last few years because Gensler and Warren have been on a crusade to basically make crypto illegal or drive it offshore.

58:58Well, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Now that crypto people have basically had a political awakening and realized they have to get involved in the political system, this is a matter of defense, self -defense. Shout out to SPF. So they're getting... It was a pioneer. Well, not like that. I mean, that guy's a pro. No, I mean, he was dropping money on everybody. Yeah, but he was... Did you guys hear this rumor that he was doing that to basically push for regulatory capture? Remember? I think it's that's the first point. Did you guys hear the new one? Did you guys hear this rumor that SPF was gonna put a billion dollars into the election and convinced Tom Brady to run as a Republican?

59:36And give the billion to Trump. Oh, sorry, give the billion to Trump. He was gonna give Trump a billion to not run. Okay. And then get Tom Brady to run. I mean, this person had delusions or grounded. He thought he was a Jedi knight and he's like literally in job as follows right now. I don't know what this, I mean, what a lunatic he was. I mean, talk about delusions of grander sex. It's got to thought he would just drop a billion dollars and convince somebody not to run for government. I think we're going to get a regulatory, you know, back to the young people we talked about in the previous story.

1:00:07I think the reason they're attracted to crypto is because it doesn't have government control. And since if you don't trust the government and you see the government over and over and over again, cover things up or the grift or make decisions that are not in your generation's best interest, why wouldn't you opt out of their financial system? And you know what, there's a lot of them. And they have, and they're getting organized to your point, SACs. I think we're going to have a crypto framework. And it's worth probably five points in this election. What do you think, SACs? How many points is being the pro crypto candidate worth in this election?

1:00:40One, two, three points of votes, four points. It's got to be some young people. It could be 500 basis points. I mean, young people do not show up to vote because there isn't an issue that they care about. Correct. But there's 50 million Americans that don't crypto. 50, five zero. Okay. So if 10 % of them are like, let's say that's their same way. No, that's five million votes. No, no, no. There's a plausible case where 40 million of those folks show up because you're talking about a structural part of their wealth creation. Right. So for example, like Biden, And President Biden talked about giving people a head start by eliminating their debt.

1:01:17That's a narrow issue. And the reason it's a narrow issue, there's just as many people that don't have debt and just as many people that paid off their debt. And it creates a lot of haves and have -nots, right? And there's all these rules around who will get the debt relief, et cetera. You end up touching four or five million people maximum. But if there are 50 million people who have now decided to have at least the hedge against the establishment and the traditional financial system, and you are threatening to take that wealth away. Yeah. I could see how 80 % of those folks show up to the ballot box and say, all right, which one of you will just leave me alone.

1:01:56And if the answer is President Trump, then they're all going to vote for President Trump. I think this is like such a great issue for political candidates to embrace. And it's such a simple framework or set it a dozen times. create a sophisticated investor test, let a thousand flowers bloom, people can make whatever crypto projects they want, but to buy it, you just have to take a simple test, like a driver's license, so that you don't risk your entire network or whatever. If you do, you're an informed buyer of crypto. Just make a sophisticated investor test and let's move on. Chimoff, just since we're in crypto corner, before we leave crypto corner, when is my ape going to be worth money again?

1:02:32When will my ape go back up? Never. Okay. So my ape's not coming back. Okay, so I guess I shouldn't have done that. All right, no way how's the sax coin doing we had sax coin and we had I coin went crazy, but that was a pump and dub scheme that we had nothing to do with I will never sell you a coin Until I do I just want to let everybody know that if you get a tm for me I am not selling jcoin until you hear it first. I would literally do an angel investing coin I mean, immediately, if there was a framework for it, it would be the greatest idea ever to have like a J coin and I could just like put it into startups and then people could buy and sell it and be like this ongoing evergreen venture.

1:03:12Where's my J Dow? I loved owls and I love the idea of an angel investing coin, but man, startup coin would be brilliant. Yeah, the Jason coin is basically at zero. It man, it was worth. The sax coin is down to eight cringes. Yeah, to be honest, I don't know anything to a sax coin either, but I was more amused by it than anything else. Yeah. Well, my friend decided to tell everybody he was gonna buy some and that straight to the moon. Yeah. That's pretty funny. It's hilarious. I have some, I've only, we've only bought crypto twice. We have some doge, which I bought during like the, our doge phase a couple of years ago.

1:03:55And then my wife, presently bought Bitcoin, I mean, at a very low price when everybody was talking around around Thanksgiving. And my hard Bitcoin went phenomenal. Am I doges at break even now? So I've spent two years just on the pendulum. But who knows? Maybe those should become a thing again. I love doge. All right, we have a bellweather of sorts here. Salesforce dropped more than 20 % after reporting earnings. We should talk about the state of SaaS software as a service if you're not in the industry. Salesforce had its worst day in the markets in nearly 20 years on Thursday. And that's when we take this.

1:04:32It lost about $40 billion in market cap or as we say in the industry, two figments. On Wednesday, Salesforce missed Q1 revenue estimates for the first time since 2006. Revenue was up, $9 .1 billion, 11 % year over year, but about $40 million below Wall Street expectations. So they're doing great, but Wall Street is concerned for a reason we'll get into what that is. net income was 1 .5 billion, 7x year over year because they've been doing a lot of cuts over there. Free cash flow, it's billion, up 43%. Profits are up huge because if you remember those activists, investors came in and had been off really re -banked the structure of the business and the footprint of the business.

1:05:10But guidance for Q2 down. Salesforce projecting 7 % growth, relatively low for them. And, Freiberg, you and I were talking about this. Like, what are your thoughts here on what's happening in the markets? And then we had the side discussion, which we didn't dock it, but I think it's worth bringing up here in dovetailing, which is it does seem like the consumer, which is not to price, or even the economy is cooling off consumers. I think our running out of money, the yellow economy is finally, I think, at its end. What does this say to you, Freiberg? Well, I think the key question to your point is there a macroeconomic reason for a slowdown in their business.

1:05:53They're forecasting for this next fiscal year revenue growth of only 8 -9%. And for this next quarter, it's basically a flat revenue quarter relative to the past quarter. So for this fiscal year, 38 billion of top line revenue, 9 billion of operating cash flow. And with the market cap coming down by 20%, the stock said a $200 billion valuation. So it's trading it, you know, call it roughly 20 times. They're operating cash flow forecast with sub 10 % revenue growth. And that's basically where treasuries trade, right? Because treasury yields for 30 year treasury, you can get 4 .7 % today. Yeah, it's about say almost five.

1:06:33You know, that's about 20X, right? So that's about where the multiple is on the sales force stock. So I think it really begs the question on, you know, is there a macroeconomic force where the enterprise is spending less? Because of you know a revenue slowdown in the economy, which we saw on the latest GDP report That's number one that could be driving this and will affect ultimately the multiple for all these enterprise SaaS companies Or number two is there a shifting underway in the SaaS business model that the premium that SaaS companies were able to charge in the pricing model on a per -seat basis and the dollars that they're able to charge per employee or per user is so significant relative to what that enterprise can build themselves now with the commoditization available to them under this new era of AI and the ability to build tools internally or the ability for competitors to emerge with significantly underpriced alternatives because they can use generative AI to make software that can compete.

1:07:29And then there's this other question because Salesforce has been leaning and heavily on the generative AI capabilities that they're offering their customers. And it seems like the question is, are enterprises waiting to see the value of that generative AI service capability? Is it worth paying for today? Should I wait and see? Or is it actually indicating that there's a big commoditization in generative AI underway? Okay. Meaning, why do we have to pay Salesforce a bunch of money when I can use some open source, third party tool or some more freely available tool? So, Chamoth, Freiberg presented two options here.

1:08:01One of them, macroeconomic slowdown, the other one, hey software, you know, belt tightening is happening inside the enterprise and it's cheaper to make. So maybe we have a deflationary kind of situation inside companies. I guess this is adjacent, that last part of his theory is adjacent to the 80, 90 mission you're on with your new startup. And maybe this is isn't or or an end in your mind. Chamoth, is it both these things? But sorry, before you answer the third point I made was that generative AI. Generative? Yes. And the third point may not be a product line. It may not be enough to charge for given all government source tools.

1:08:34Yes. And there's a big question mark about the AI new software. Will people pay for it? So, Chimap, take those three. What are your thoughts? I think that if you look at what happened before, we had a cycle where very large monolithic software was replaced by these SaaS vendors and Salesforce led that charge and they led the many ways the definition of the cloud. So that was amazing. That was this one big cycle. And before that, that model of those model of the software vendors were replacing like mainframes and very archaic stuff. This is sort of this third disruptive cycle. We're going to go through a process of ripping and replacing these legacy products.

1:09:20And so Genai is just an enablement layer that allows you to deliver functionality to people. And I think what you're going to find is that it allows you to deliver that functionality at much, much cheaper to your point. That's the whole point of 80, 90. We always joke with Salesforce going to get 80, 90. Yeah, because you can deliver 80 % of the features at a 90 % discount pretty easily today. And what you can't deliver today will get much, much easier in a year and two years and three years for sure in ten years So I think what the market is voting with their dollars is that these large lumpy monolithic software companies that need big 50 100 million dollar customers They're not going to find them soon because those customers will realize that you could get you know look what freeberg said, what you need for 10 million or 5 million or 1 million or 500 thousand and in some cases free.

1:10:19And so the cost structure of your organization makes no sense. And so you're going to have to go through this very complicated cycle of recycling, you know, the business model, which unfortunately will mean tons of layoffs. And that's not a today thing, but over these next five and ten years, that's probably what's going to happen. And it doesn't mean Salesforce is a bad company. It's just that it is on the wrong side of the life cycle. And the odds are overwhelmingly such that a bunch of small companies will flood this opportunity and provides cheaper, smaller, more flexible capabilities. SACs, obviously, you made your bones in the SaaS business over the last two decades at least.

1:10:58What are your thoughts here on the challenges I just interviewed Owen McCabe from Intercom and he says he thinks the seat model is going to change. And obviously, if there's less people at companies, there's less seats, and that may be a headwind that you just can't win again. So maybe a consumption model has to happen or a different pricing model. But what are your thoughts on what's happening at Salesforce and then open the aperture there and tell us what you think's going to happen in terms of how corporations either decide to make that build or buy decision? Well, I think it's pretty amazing that Salesforce forced loss something like 40 billion of market cap because of a revenue mis of 40 million.

1:11:39It's amazing how these relatively small, in percentage terms, misses in revenue earnings drive such huge changes in market cap. It's quite a ripple, isn't it? Yeah. I mean, look, my view is that I don't have a strong view about the stock, but my sense is probably a buying opportunity. I mean, I think Salesforce is still a great company. Mark Bering -Auf's a great CEO. So he's always positioned the company to chase after whatever the current thing is. So obviously he was one of the first to realize that software was headed to the cloud, evangelize for the cloud. Then when the social networking revolution happened, he launched Chad, which was a competitor to my product Yammer back then.

1:12:24But he was ahead of the curve on social and the enterprise. then it was big data and they launched Einstein. Now they've got AI and they're gonna be doing a bunch of different things there. So my guess is he's gonna figure out how to take advantage of this AI trend for the company. They're not gonna miss it. They're not gonna get caught totally flat -footed. So, you look, I don't have a super strong point of view on it as an investment, but I still think it's a good company. Open the aperture there. With the SaaS or an pricing. and how many people work at these companies, and then if the Perseid model is the model, and then people are gonna have less humans working at companies and do more with less, what does that mean for SaaS, writ, large?

1:13:07I'm honestly not worried about the Perseid model. I mean, the point of a pricing plan should be to align revenue expansion with ROI, meaning the more value that a customer gets from your product, the more they're willing to pay. And you just need some proxy for measuring that. Seats are a good proxy. It's a good way to measure how much value the customer is getting out of your product because the more seats they're buying, the more value they must be getting. Yes, you could do it some other way. You could basically meter data usage. You couldn't meter API usage. Sure, those models will work for other kinds of companies, but I don't think there's gonna be a huge disruption to the C model, as my sense.

1:13:49Look, I think the bigger issue here is that that their forecast was saw, right? They are forecasting what, sub 10 % revenue growth. And this is why the stock got punished. And I'm seeing that a bunch of SaaS companies are kind of hurting today now in the wake of this. They're down like 5%, not 20. But so I wonder if what the market is wondering is whether there's a more general slowdown that we're on the precipice of. I don't think that that explains 40 to 20 % drop in a day. I think typically these public market investors internalize a bunch of fears and they don't execute on those fears. And then when given an opportunity, they just barf it all out because it's like now it's acceptable.

1:14:37And so to your point, David, like it was such like an insignificant revenue miss so as to not even be important, quite honestly. But the reason it's down 20 % is I think folks have internalized a different set of risks and then they've found an escape hatch where they have plausible Deniability for selling that's just what a lot of public market investors do I don't think it's a coincidence that we just had the GDP forecast revised down For the latest quarter. What was it? It's down to like 1 .4 % Along something yeah, we talked about this last week because it's this numbers fake that company is looking pretty soft right now which is, I guess, a good jumping off point, which is, what do we think is happening here with the economy and then interest rates because the whole goal here was to get us under, you know, get us close to 2%, get rid of the free handle at least in terms of interest going up and maybe get the consumers to not be spending so much money, which is crazy to think about or maybe get more people laid off and have the unemployment not so low.

1:15:36Remember when everyone was talking about soft landing? The reason why they were having that conversation is because the Fed jacked up interest rates really suddenly from roughly zero to five, five and a half percent. And it worked. That has an impact on people's consumption because debt is much more expensive. So again, it's worth it. Part of my house, harder to buy a car, anything you need to finance gets much harder. It took a long time for this to work its way through the economy, but I think we're fine seeing it now. I think we're, I think that's exactly right. I think we're here. When you see that three -handle, like, does it go down?

1:16:08You know, it's very interesting about the 2 % target. I went down the rabbit hole to try to figure out that 2 % target. Like I was like, who came up with 2 % as a number? Like why is it a 3 or 2 .5 or 1 .5 or 1? So guy in New Zealand who has, you know, came up with what he thought was a good target, 2 % the world adopted it. So going back to our conversation about experts. Yeah. But he just freely admits it. He's just like, yeah, I just thought 3 % seemed like the right number. It wasn't too high. Wasn't too low and it's kind of healthy to have things go up in price because that means the economy's growing.

1:16:38It's just a random target, 2%, who is his gut. Incredible, right? Yeah, I mean, if you look at this, we are at, what is it, 3 .6 % annualized CPI inflation, and 1 .3 % annualized GDP growth, and a 4 .7 % 30 -year treasury yield. This is, I don't know what else is more definitional of stagnation. The economy is not growing, prices are going up and the cost of borrow has gone through the roof. Yeah, so I've got to give. And then also if they keep raising taxes, like their plans are, then affluent people are going to be trying to protect their assets. And who's they? I'm just thinking like a politician, like if a politician were to raise taxes dramatically, but which I don't want you to have Biden to range from syndrome here, sacks.

1:17:31Okay. I don't think Trump's going to raise taxes, but I'm buying and what is the cost that trifecta? Absolutely, absolutely. That's why I'll see you Thursday night with my $50 ,000 check, I can't wait to be there. It's gonna easily be paid for by my tax cut. Just to jump back for a second on the Salesforce point. So, you know, Salesforce faces these challenges, but it's still led by Mark Benioff. Absolutely, that dude's tremendous. And if you look at the performance of the average public company, regardless of the sector that that business operates in, that is run by a hired CEO versus run by a founder CEO.

1:18:06The founder, public companies that have gone public, achieved a $10 billion market cap and are still founder run as the CEO from there, outperform nearly any index you look at. And this is, I think, like a really key point. You could probably put together, I think some people have done this, put together a founder portfolio, but I wouldn't count out Benny off just because of some of the stuff that we talked about. I have founders. I have founders. Founders can and will maneuver their way to success. That is the hunger of the entrepreneur. Let's do our draft. The one, founders you should not bet against.

1:18:45Which founder would you least want to short, Chimoff your first in the draft? Who do you got? Who would you not want to bet against? Worst person to bet against. Sorry, what do you mean? Like founders? Any entrepreneur in history? You know what happened if you'll try to short Elon they got incinerated barbecues also, okay? You got you picked Elon on the draft then that's number one. You got yeah, that's easy. I would pick it to Okay, but we got picked somebody out. That's why it's a draft. You're a Tucky one. I think the next person It could be anybody doesn't have to be alive doesn't have to be in position right now Who would I so sorry?

1:19:21What's that? What's that? What you least likely to short? And entrepreneurs you at least want to short Well, you have your own Listen, okay, Larsen, George Holdon now free break you get to go on the draft We do yeah, I don't know the I mean all these founders. I don't know how to pick one I mean what do you know with yeah, I'm gonna go with I'm gonna go with Bill Gates What he's not always talking over No, I said it could be any time period of time. Yeah, now that you know the stock performance What are you talking about I just think even in the next come

1:19:56You're going to go out in a limb. I'm going to go out in a limb and say that was all kids was doing his legendary run. I wouldn't have sorted that. Absolutely. I also wouldn't short Michael Jordan or the broad James step curry. Definitely wouldn't get better against them. All right, everybody breaking news today in the law being fair. I'm sorry. Today in law fair, depending on your view, Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony charges. you can choose your own framing here. Some say it's election interference. Some people are referring to this as the hush money points, our case. Other people are calling it the deep state law fair case.

1:20:30The jury deliberated for about a day and a half. Trial S at six weeks, including testimony from pointy witnesses. Key moment seems to have been Trump's CFO, Weiselberg, who's I think in jail right now for other charges, outlining the terms of the payments to Michael Cohen, the disgraced lying attorney who recorded Trump's conversations. And that's I think all I can tell you about this, except for maybe the sentencing is coming up. It's gonna be July 11th, which is but four days before the art and see clearly a sad day for America. I'm not sure if anybody on the panel has any opinions on the Trump verdict, but let's just randomly start with you, David.

1:21:16but any thoughts on Trump being convicted of 34 felons in this case? Well, first of all, in terms of understanding this case, I think it's important to understand that both Merrick Arlen's DOJ and former Manhattan DA, Cyrus Vance, they looked at this case, they looked at these charges and they passed on bringing this case. Alvin Bragg, who was a source -funded DA, he won a hotly contested race to succeed advance by pledging to get Trump. And that's why he brought this case. And in order to bring these charges, he had to use a creative legal formula that turned a misdemeanor charge of falsifying business records, a charge that would have been passed the statute of limitations, into a felony by claiming it was in the service of a second crime, but he never named exactly what that crime was or proved that it happened.

1:22:08And I think it's safe to say that a case like this, which is novel and creative and torturous would never have been brought against anybody, but Trump. Now, there's about five different grounds for appeal on this. Number one, the judge is a Biden donor with a daughter who works for Biden. Number two, prejudicial and irrelevant evidence was admitted that should have been excluded, including Stormy Daniels testimony. Number three, Trump was not able to call his expert in election law from our head of FEC Bradley Smith. Number four, The prosecution never named the second prime. And then number five, the judge let the jury pick from a range of options for what the second crime might be, including tax crimes which no evidence was presented and federal election crimes which the court had no jurisdiction.

1:22:54So my guess is that at the end of the day, this case is going to get tossed on appeal. But that's probably going to happen after the election, after November 5th, and Democrats now have what they wanted. They wanted to get out of this case four words. Donald Trump convicted felon and you're going to be hearing that phrase, convicted felon repeated ad nauseam from now until November 5th And I think that's the whole point of this case. Freeberg, you're taking. No, I mean, it felt like this was always a win -win trial for Trump if he gets convicted then you know the conversation that we're hearing now, you know, this was an unfair conviction.

1:23:31How could they do this? This is law fair and And if he doesn't get convicted, they tried to burn him at the stake. How could they try and do that? Clearly he's innocent and he was made innocent. So you know, it never really struck me as being a smart, I'm not a political guy, but the political calculus just seemed off on this entirely. It certainly wasn't clear what they were trying to accomplish. Either way, Trump looks good. And I think we saw tonight reports that his website for making donations crashed. A lot of people started making public statements on Twitter that are not typically Republican donors that they're donating a lot of money to Donald Trump coming out of this.

1:24:12And so it is clearly infuriating a lot of people that as SACS points out, you know, something that some people are considering to be, you know, a bookkeeping or accounting crime has turned into 34 felony convictions. It feels unfair. It feels like the wrong decision. And it's going to infuriate people because people worry about the quality of the justice system. anyone who's sitting in the middle as an independent or an undecided, I think it is much more likely that they are going to have sympathy for Donald Trump coming out of this not admonishment. Shema, for your check. I think that if you went into this looking to confirm your hatred of President Trump, you were the one that was given red meat.

1:24:53And I think that if you were undecided for pro -President Trump, you probably found more reason to support him for all the reasons that Friedberg said. The thing that's unique about this specific trial that I found rather interesting was the diversity of people who just couldn't understand what this trial was about. Whether it was Bill Barr who worked for him but was not a huge fan of his, nor was Trump or vice versa, right? To an Alan Dershwitz to Asair's fans, you had Democrats and Republicans and independents, legal scholars, legal experts, some who liked President Trump, some who did not, some who got along with him, some who did not, some who fought with him, some who did not, some who got fired by him, some who did not.

1:25:45And they were all categorically confused about about what this whole thing was about. I'm not legally well versed enough to understand what it was. So as a layman, you then tend to go to this next obvious thing, which is you have to bucket this decision as here are some experts and what they know is better than what I know. And we talked about this earlier on the pod today when it came to Fauci and it turned out to not be so true. Or you go to this other place where are there systems of government that can be convoluted and turned in the favor of the majority who's in power, again, someone that they feel is a threat.

1:26:26And we've talked about that as well with respect to how some of these governmental institutions have targeted some of our friends. So I think that we're in a very precarious moment where the systems of governments in the United States are a little bit more fragile than they were the moment. Okay. If people are wondering what the case is actually about falsifying business records, this is a pretty serious crime in New York City. Basically, when people don't keep correct records, when they're committing crimes, this is taken seriously in New York because it is the financial capital of the world.

1:27:02They've got a long history, whether it's Bernie made off, Enron, etc. of pursuing these. I don't know why this didn't get communicated well to the public, but there were obviously tons of business records falsified here. And they basically admitted to it. Michael Cohen had pleaded guilty to it already. And so it really feels like a misdemeanor. And then to understand what happened after that, there is a law in New York as SACs correctly pointed out on top of the falsifying of business records, which New York takes deadly seriously, and they put this in every indictment when people do it because they want the accountants, lawyers, CFOs to behave themselves and not cheat the public.

1:27:48The election interference also taken very seriously in New York. There's been tons of cases. Again, typically minor things, but people who do things like try to stuff ballots, etc. And so you put those two together. if you do falsifying, if you falsify business records and you do it as part of a second crime, which he did, which he was convicted of, then you get these penalties. So that is the explanation of the case. That was why he was found guilty. It's pretty easy to figure this all out. If you don't know all this, it's because you didn't take the time to read anything about the case in terms of the basic heuristics of it, which I think is because people are burned out on this.

1:28:29Trump has committed so many Mr. Meaners and crimes over time that were kind of used to it. And you know, my personal take on it, and I'll just leave it at this is I think it's going to be a speeding ticket. I do think it's going to get overturned. I think Trump has done this his whole career. I lived in New York. All these real estate guys were doing all these kind of like little tiki tacky cheating things. And I do think that this was politically motivated. What was the second crime, Jacob, if you understand this? Election interference. Election. You're not allowed to interfere in the election.

1:29:02So the theory here, which the jury unanimously I'm voting in front of over these six or seven weeks, election interference was because Trump was in dire straits. He after the access Hollywood tape came out that weekend when he admitted to assaulting women, the grab them by the blank came out. His team, in this case, admitted, including his assistant Michael Cohen, Alan Weisselberg, and of course the guy from the National Enquirer Packer, all of them agreed, testified, and just were completely honest, that this payment and the reason they bought these people off was because they were scared that it would reduce his chances of being elected.

1:29:56They were in panic mode. They all testified to that. The jury found that they committed these crimes, the falsifying of business records, in order to save his election chances. So that is the legal concept. This legal concept was available to everybody for the last, you know, since it's been filed in the New York Times. any body who doesn't read these basic things and comments on this case is just a partisan who doesn't want to accept the reality that these are actual legal concepts that are completely valid. Now, I do think, despite all of that and making it abundantly clear to anybody that you don't want people falsifying business records, and you also don't want anybody interfering in elections, I do think it was politically motivated.

1:30:39So you got to keep two things in your mind at the same time. It's politically motivated. Trump commits crimes regularly often, but they It's a guy reverse you just said it was going to be a reverse on appeal So if you're so confident to crime then why do you also say it's going to reverse? Yeah, because I think oh well I'll let me restate that I think he's gonna get a speeding ticket I don't think the case is gonna reverse. I think there's gonna be some sort of a pardon now that this is a state Kind of situation so it wouldn't be Biden who would pardon it. It would be the the governor and I think what's going to happen is somebody like Trump, Teflon Don, he's called that for a reason, he gets away with it every time, he's rich, he's powerful, like all rich and powerful people, you have to really do something heinous to wind up in jail.

1:31:20So I think it's going to be a speeding ticket. I do think the documents cases, that one is a pretty legitimate one with an obstruction and I do think the election interference, those are the two he should be really worried about because if he is found guilty on those, those are legit, but I do think this country is going to need to come together. I hate to be the bigger person here, but I do think the company, the country needs to get together and to get us to new candidates. And we can't be having this law fair and politically motivated lawsuits every time somebody loses or they're afraid of losing an election.

1:31:53But let me ask you a question Jason. You're a, you're a famous successful person. And over the next 10 or 20 years, the odds are pretty good. you'll be more successful. Same more, Chema. Do you feel the less the same or more? Okay, you have to say less same or more. Okay. Somebody in government doesn't like what you're up to. After today, are you less the same or more in terms of the risk that the laws could be used to fight you? I think we're kind of in the same area. I think there's always been politically motivated prosecutions that have occurred. That's part of you know the flaw in our legal system and I do think appeals Partens exist as the the relief valve for those things and I think for rich and powerful people with great representation They always get off unless they've done something incredibly incredibly heinous and I don't think this is incredibly heinous And so when it's framed as simply oh, it's a porn star He banged a porn star who cares?

1:32:55It was consensual and she got to pay off or maybe she was was extorting him even. I don't know if those details were ever determined, if you could frame it as extortion or not. I think none of that matters. Like this falsifying business records thing is just something they did. They should just own it. They should have just platted out. And it should have probably never been escalated to the next level with the election interference so that that was a little bit of a stretch. But not that much of a stretch. I got escalated because Alvin Brad got elected to pursue this case. And that's the only way you could get a permanent estimator to a phone.

1:33:33Yeah, exactly. So I think that is part of the reason you sound. I know you're really giddy about this jaycock and getting a voice. No, I'm not. Honestly, I will. No, no, no, no, I'm going to stop you right there. No, sorry, sax. You don't get to say I'm giddy. I'm not going to tell you how you feel. You don't get to tell me how I feel. I actually am sad for America. I'm sad for America that Trump and Biden are our choices. Okay, great. So speak for yourself. Not for me. Okay, great. Well, maybe I'm just detecting enthusiasm in your voice. I'm not quite sure what it is. No, enthusiasm. Not at all.

1:34:01You're presenting these documents on the screen that are basically from Alvin Bragg's case. That's all you're doing is repeating his theory of the case, which I must say is extremely tortured. And it's novel. I don't think a case like this ever been brought. And if you are going to bring a case against a former president, it should be for something more than tiki -taki type stuff. Stuff that you yourself admit is politely motivated. It's obvious. Bragg was out to get Trump. This is a campaign strategy. You have to bend the law into a pretzel to create the case that you're describing. Listen, I think Trump will continue to do these.

1:34:39He's had these long before he was in public office. He got tons of speeding tickets like this. He'll get them after he's out of office. He's always committed crimes. He's always done this. What this reminds me of is, you remember Ken Star and what they went after Bill Clinton for with the home monochewinsky thing. Sure. And when that star report dropped, you know, and then hundreds of pages of localities and they described all the perient behavior and, you know, amazing amounts of detail. At the end of the day, the American people looked at it and decided that maybe there's a taught the element to this, but it's personal behavior.

1:35:12And after some period of time, Clinton's popularity rebounded, and he actually gains seats in the midterms because the Republicans overplayed their hand. Yeah, totally. And I think in a similar way, it's very clear to me, and in fact, you've already said this is politically motivated. And they basically have taken some sort of bookkeeping error that was a misdemeanor that was passed the statute of limitations, and they've combined it again with this very novel legal theory about somehow committing fraud in the election, which by the way was not actually proven in the case. And as part of the jury instructions, again, the judge allowed the jury to have a multiple choice on what the second crime was, which is what a lot of legal experts think will become the basis for appeal.

1:35:56So again, this case was tortured, it was politely motivated. I would go so far to say it's a sham. It's an outrage. And I think people are reacting as though it's an outrage. And again, if you're going to bring a case, not just against a former president, but the current front runner to be the next president, it better be something important. Not this tiki tacky thing that the way you describe it as being tiki tacky. Why even waste the public's time with this? Why even spend all the money pursuing this? I told you why. Yeah, no, that's not all Trump convicted felon. That's the reason why the media wants that talking point.

1:36:32And by the way, if you want to make a switcheroo and get a different candidate than Joe Biden does not going to happen now because Democrats in the media think that this is their salvation. They know they're running a candidate. It's not going to be. The obstruction case and the January 6 case, that is those are legit cases. They shouldn't have just gone after that, because those are the ones that are completely legit. But here we are. The dog right already knows the running candidate who can't debate, who can't put two sentences together, who can barely find his way off a stage, whose policies are coming home to ruse the economy, like we talked about in the show is slowing down very rapidly.

1:37:08His foreign policy is a disaster, but they think that somehow this is going to be his salvation is, is being able to say that Donald Trump is a felon. That's their plan. Yep. And I think at the end of the day, this is probably not going to work. All right. There you have it folks. There's your quick hot tape around the horn with your bestie on Trump being convicted by a jury in New York today. It'll be sentenced on July 11th. And we'll see what happens there. The market also after we talked about Salesforce, a bunch of the SaaS companies took a dive in the after hours, Freeberg, any thoughts there as we quickly were.

1:37:45Not just SaaS, but also Dell. And in particular, Dell reported, their stock is down 20 % after hours. So I do wonder if there is a slow reckoning underway right now in technology that's, as we talked about in the show, a function of both kind of an economic slowdown, so enterprises making fewer investments, but they clearly called out the increased cost associated with AI. So they are spending quite a lot and their their cogs on AI systems is much higher. And so they're showing a lot more cash per. And I think this is to Jamass point. Jamass been talking for a while since unsustainable guys. I've been saying this now for a month.

1:38:22So let's just be precise again. You cannot spend this kind of money and show no incremental revenue you potential. So while this is incredible or in video, the chicken is coming home to roofs because if you do not start seeing revenue flow to the bottom line of these companies that are spending $26 billion a quarter, the market cap of Nvidia is not what the market cap of Nvidia should be. And all of these other companies are going to get punished for spending this kind of money. Now Dell is a unique example in the sense that I actually think it's a beneficiary of spend. And I think that it will build data centers and it will actually do well in the move to AI because it's a very smart, the position, pick and shovels provider.

1:39:05But the threshold question is where are all these newfangled things that we're supposed to see that justifies a hundred billion dollars of chip spending year, two hundred billion dollars of energy spend, a hundred billion dollars of all this other stuff guys. This is, we're not spending $750 billion dollars. This is on the order of a national transfer payment. And we've seen nothing to show for it except that you can mimic somebody's voice. And you can make like a cat jump on another cat. Yeah. I mean, making a developer 30 or 40 % more efficient, that's actually legit. But I will say I did it.

1:39:41It hasn't happened yet either. No, that's total. No, no, that's happening in startups right now. I'm seeing startups with four developers do what just a couple years ago they would need A to do there and that's the premise of your EG90 company. I think that developers can go faster with these tools. Yes, but these are aspirational things. When you take, for example, a 30 ,000 person company, it is not true that those engineers now are now all of a sudden as productive as 130 ,000 employees. It's not even true that a thousand employee company is as productive as a 4 ,000 person company. The reason is for one very specific thing.

1:40:14Even as all of these next generation models get released, the practical threshold problem is when you introduce a completely new way of doing things into an existing workforce, what happens is people push back. And even in the companies that I own where I could theoretically mandate, you must use these tools because I am the owner of this company. It doesn't happen. And so to explain, I think what you're really seeing Jason is a few people embrace it. Those people may be 50 to 100 % more productive, but when you blend that into the entire workforce It's still a single digit percentage which means the old world activity gains are nominal Yeah, I think it's a fair point because I am forced to spend yeah again 750 billion dollars a year.

1:40:58It doesn't all hang together yet Yeah, I agree there's gonna be a bit of a gap there and and I am biased because I see startups Which are always looking for the most resourceful way to do things and you're talking about large enterprises This is which are slow to adopt, right? And to your point to be right here. You get around the innovators, though, I'm out by saying, guys, you need to be AI first from the outset, which a startup can do because they can recruit people that, for example, with 8090, same thing. You must use these tools. For example, we are not allowed to have any administrative staff.

1:41:30Everything is done by an agent or workflow. But that's because we're a new company and we can make those decisions. But somebody who is an established company, I suspect that these are the ones that are that these gains are nominal at best, yet the spend is outrageous. And it gets, and when it catches up with you, when you report, I think the market is sort of like saying. Well, I think the first, you know, the general statement might be made that perhaps the first AI mini bubble is bursting a bit. And particularly with respect to the accelerated expectations that public market investors had for public market technology stocks, that perhaps now is the time for a bit of a reckoning, that perhaps this isn't going to happen at the same margin level or the pace that folks had modeled.

1:42:14And this is going to cause a bit of a setback. I think pace is a very good point you're making. I also think that with the GDP slowdown that we've seen report that just came out this week with a sub 2 % US GDP growth, we are seeing an economic slowdown underway. There is going to be reduced spending. There is going to be reduced conversion of enterprise customers to buy anything. And so that is going to dramatically affect the market. We're looking at 5 % 30 -year treasury rates, which means that you are going to see multiple compression that's going to happen across the market for tech stocks.

1:42:44So this could be the beginning of what I think might be a slow contraction. One thing I just want to make sure I'm not a market start. I do have some information on the Dell stuff. One thing to keep in mind is they had like a 30 % run -up or 20 % run -up at least since Nvidia CEO praised them and like I guess all these meme stock people has just jumped in. So I think it's just like a little tiki tacky correction back to the tiki tacky sacks any final thoughts here on AI before We all leave to go to our You know trump celebrations and or Yeah Maybe the market doesn't like the US becoming a banana republic.

1:43:26There it is folks I get so be friends with you guys alright everybody for Who's you guys? Oh, you guys. I was so into those guys. All right, four schmoths, two missing buttons. We'd like to encourage everybody to enjoy their summer. Three buttons are coming. I got over 100. I got my short short. Oh, God, that's so pasty white. I got my sunglasses. The over under on when schmoth goes through the third button is June 25th. So June 25th and the batting markets right now for the third button. Love you guys. We'll see you all next time on the World's Greatest Podcast. Bye -bye

1:44:33That's my dog. Take it away. I wish you drive away. Sit down. Sit down. Oh man. My ham is the actual meat. We should all just get a room and just have one big hug. Or because they're all just like this like sexual tension that they just need to release them out. What? That beat. What? You're a beer or beef? Beef or beef? We need to get mercy. I'm going all in.

1:45:06Okay, last year at the All in Summit we had a wonderful talk by Jenny Just and they have a very cool program called PowerPoker. They're holding a 2024 summer bootcap and tournament for women only. So for the ladies out there, if you want to learn how to play poker just like the best and Jenny just. You can join this for week training class, get unlimited playing time, you play in a tournament, I'm going to come and play in one of the sessions. But here's the great part, we donated a ticket because we think it's worth encouraging women to join the poker community. And so there's a $7 ,500 all in Summit 2024 ticket at stake.

1:45:41There's only 80 spots. Go ahead and join at hokerpower .com slash summer dash bootcamp. Pokerpower .com slash summer dash Bootcamp. It's going to fill up quick. A number of the women who work at my venture from launch have joined and they're looking forward to learning poker again 80 spots. I think they charge a hundred bucks just to make sure you show up and there's an all -in summit ticket there for you. You can actually see the video of this podcast on YouTube. YouTube .com slash at call in or just search all -in podcast and hit the alert bell and you'll get updates when we post and we're going to do a party in Vegas.

1:46:14My understanding when we hit a million subscribers and look for that as well, you can follow us on xx .com slash the all in pod. TikTok is all underscore in underscore talk, Instagram, the all in pod and on LinkedIn just search for the all in podcast. You can follow Chamath at x .com slash. Chamath and you can sign up for a sub stack at chamath .subsack .com. I do free bird can be followed at x .com slash free bird and oh, hello is hiring click on the careers page at oh, hello genetics .com. Calm. Three, two. Okay, everybody, follow SACs at x .com slash David SACs and check out SACs. Slack Killer, blue at blue .ai.

1:46:54I'm Jason Keller, canis. I am x .com slash Jason. And if you want to see pictures of my bulldogs and the food I'm eating, go to Instagram .com slash Jason in the first name club. You can listen to my other podcasts this week and start ups to search for them on YouTube where you're favorite podcast player. Here we are hiring a researcher, apply to be a researcher doing primary research and working with me and producer Nick, working in data and science and being able to do great research, finance, etc. All in podcast .co slash researcher. It's a full time job working with us the best ease. And really excited about my investment in Athena, go to Athena.

1:47:30Wow. See you in a wow. Doc Fahm and get yourself a bit of a discount from your boy, Jake Owl. Athena Wow. Doc Fahm. We'll see you all next time on the All -In Park.