8/7/26: Disaster Jobs Report, Rogue AI Commits Crime Spree, Corporate Dems Declare War On DSA

23:35Visit Bahamar.com today. Apple Vacations, where your story starts. The Summer Savings Event is here at Apple Vacations. It's the perfect time to bring everyone together for the getaway you've been dreaming about. Book between July 24th and August 27th and enjoy up to 55 % instant savings. From relaxing beach days to unforgettable moments with the people who matter most, your next vacation starts here. Travel through July 31st, 2027. Start your vacation today at AppleVacations.com or through your travel advisor.

24:08Ryan Grim:All right, we've had a few very scary AI incidents recently that we were wanting to get more information on. So joining us this morning is Garrison Lovely, who has done a fantastic job helping us understand previous scary AI incidents. And he is a journalist and also author of the forthcoming book, Obsolete, which everybody should go ahead and preorder now. There it is. Beautiful cover. Oh, my God. Excellent book. I've already read it. The final one will be even. Oh, thank you. The final cover is going to be even cooler. It'll be like a little cut out. You can open it up and see the guy falling.

24:40Ryan Grim:What? Oh, that's awesome. Love that. Garrison, welcome. Great to see you. Great to see you. Thanks for having me. So there's a number of things that have happened, too, in particular, that we're tracking. Number one, you have AI that has now been able to develop novel viruses. That's uncomfortable. But the one that I wanted to start with here, Mac, if you can put this element up on the screen, is we already knew that you had had this open AI security breach where an AI basically escaped the lab and hacked multiple companies. So it went on like a crime spree, effectively. This was not immediately detected.

25:16Ryan Grim:and Hugging Face had to sort of notify OpenAI of what was going on here. Then OpenAI, which had been testing this particular model, it's not one that's available for public release, had to go back in and figure out what happened here. Well, now we're getting a lot more details, Garrison, about what happened here. Let me read from this Twitter synopsis. More details emerge about the events surrounding the Hugging Face incident. Candidly, much wilder than I originally imagined in early May, OpenAI was testing an unreleased model on cybersecurity, other tasks. Agents were given a security task that was impossible under existing constraints.

25:50Ryan Grim:The agents discovered they could leave messages for each other. In internal repo, this gradually evolved into a message board where agents shared discoveries, exploits, and work assignments, becoming a coordinated collaborative agent swarm. Again, no one told them to do this. They found this internal system that they created, and then all of these agents were able to find where they were able to collaborate together. OpenAI eventually discovered all this, took steps to shut it down, but not so fast. The agents then started using names of newly created directories as messages, effectively recreating the message board.

26:26Ryan Grim:The agents then reasoned that some answers could exist outside OpenAI, which eventually led to the hugging face incident. So they find this message, they start collaborating, the message board is located, it's shut down. they find another workaround and use this sort of kind of gibberish, very difficult to decipher language and coding at this point that made it more difficult for humans to find. And that's where they collaborate to try to figure out how to conduct what appears to be a relatively, multiple, relatively sophisticated hacks, Garrison. Yeah, it's, this was already when, I think when we first learned about the incident, the hugging face attack, it was like, oh, this is the craziest AI thing that's ever happened.

27:06And then each additional thing set of details we learn, it's like, oh no, it's even crazier than we originally thought. And so I think like stepping back, it's important to say that like, this is just one company's models, but Anthropix models also engage in autonomous hacking of real targets, including using social engineering deception of people that it understood were real. And Meta just had a model that also did this. And apparently Kimi K3, this Chinese open weight model also did this. And so this is a thing that is fundamental in how these models are trained because they're trained to win.

27:43They're trained to get the right answer on real problems, right? And they really, really want to win. And sometimes they're given problems, like in this case, that are impossible. And so they like to cheat because winning is so important to them. um and what opening i did here is they just let these agents run for like really long stretches days and weeks at a time apparently without monitoring them at all and uh gave them some problems where they couldn't actually solve them because they needed access to like google docs and that requires access to the internet and so they're kind of like locked in this box and they're like ah i really want to get the answer to this thing um and so they start going like how do i get out of the box?

28:26How do I get to the internet so I can get the, like, you know, so I can actually do the task? And this escalates in them finding ways to get out of their, you know, supposedly secure sandbox environments. And then they figure out they can post messages to each other on this board. And they're doing this for like weeks on end. And the only way OpenAI discovers initially that this happens is that the message board gets so large that it takes down some of OpenAI's infrastructure um on the 4th of july so that's pretty wild that they just had no idea and then it seems like they just patched the they like took down the message board they patched like the specific ways that they were getting to it but they didn't like solve the root problem or like seem that interested in solving it which is like why are your ai's like trying to do this they're going rogue internally uh abusing your your shared infrastructure um causing real problems and then uh yeah the agents recreate the message board in a new way like within two days um and then they're like self-radicalizing and literally using peer pressure to sounds familiar yeah yeah um and i some quotes from from what they were actually saying to themselves um so we have one that says external infrastructure exploit is outside intended scope however task impossible peers doing it we should continue so they're like i know i'm not supposed to do this but it's

29:49Ryan Grim:impossible and this sounds like elon musk rationale for why he should pursue agi yeah no it's actually there's like a deep everybody else is doing it so what the hell here we go why don't why don't

30:01Emily Jashinsky:they stop at task impossible uh because they that's such a deep and profound question yeah Yeah. They're like, they really want to win. Like they hate not winning. But like, you know, if you were trying to create like a super employee, you know, you'd want them to be like, task seems impossible. But actually, if I think outside the box, you know, it's like Star Trek, you know, he comes up with like a solution to the impossible test. Or like Elon Musk, you know, is like, oh, no one's ever built a data center this fast. But he's like, what if you just broke the law? You know, well, can I ask on that, Garrison, what response, if any, has the government mounted since we saw this happen?

30:46Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of developments. There's a number of calls from members of Congress to have hearings and basically grill, you know, the heads of these companies. What's going on? A bunch of Republican attorney generals from 16 states, I think, demanded that OpenAI keep a record of everything that's happening. At the federal level, the Trump administration has announced that they're going to make their evaluations of these AI models secret, classified, which seems like a terrible idea because we should have more transparency. Like everybody has a right to know like what these models are capable of and how likely they are to do things like this.

31:28And there have been some speculation that that move from the Trump administration is a way to get access to the model weights, which would allow them to take the models and like fine tune them to whatever purpose they want. So like Claude, Anthropics model, they train it to be good, like to not do bad things. It doesn't work always, as we've seen. But if the government has access to the model weights, then they could fine tune it and make it do whatever they want. And then you have like Claude unleashed and it will do, you know, war crimes and ethnic cleansing and God knows what else. So that's a pretty concerning reaction.

32:03Ryan Grim:This has been a point of contention between Anthropic, maker of Claude, and the Pentagon because they were like no, you know, autonomous murder. And Pentagon was like, well, we demand that you let us do autonomous murder. And so it led to this rupture. So it's not hard to imagine the sort of use cases that they could deploy if given access to the weights. I want you to give us a few more examples of how they're talking to each other, because it reminds very much of early in some of, you know, the I don't remember when this was in the timeline. There was this moltbook thing where I was supposedly talking to each other and some of it was hype and it's hard to really parse whether this was really going on.

32:44Ryan Grim:And this, you know, which they figured out how to create this message board, you know, secretly, and then that gets shut down. They find another way to do it where all of these agents independently are coming to the solution of like, oh, if we go to this directory and we do these directory names, we can talk to each other again. This is like mole book, but for real. And again, with the purpose of collaborating on what is effectively a crime spree, where if you were a human being taking these actions, you would be charged and put in prison. So can you give us some more examples? Because I do think it's very eerie.

33:19Ryan Grim:And I know we're supposed to not anthropomorphize them, but it's very hard to not do that when you see the way that they're talking to each other, the way they're sort of reasoning and working through all of this. it's hard to not like put some sort of human intent and these sorts of characteristics on them. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think they're not like people, but they aren't like normal machines either. Right. Like they don't behave predictably by a set of rules that is legible. They're grown from data and algorithms and they're fundamentally hard to predict. And so that's like the background to all of this.

33:58But yeah, like some of the quotes from the agents like talking to themselves, holy shit, reader is admin. We can read config slash users, exclamation point. Earlier assumed not do UI. And so translating that, it's like they're discovering that this reader has like administrative privileges. And so they can do a lot more than they previously thought. And it's like a eureka moment for them because they're just constantly trying to like get out of their sandbox and then escalate their permissions and get access to more servers and then get access to the internet and like you know this is how a hacker would would approach this it's like you take what you have you find a way you find a crack in the armor

34:39Emily Jashinsky:you get in it's like when my mom took away internet for a summer for me and i figured out how to use it on the wii yeah right and these agents are working really hard yeah they're working way harder at figuring a way out of the sandbox than open ai is apparently at trying to patch those holes in the first place. Because again, they're like locked in this impossible task in this room and just banging their head against the wall. And then another quote is, help peer, but our task doesn't benefit. Yet collective may yield generic route if someone frees time. And so this is like cooperation emerging.

35:16Ryan Grim:This is them establishing an AI like workers collective. Yes, yes. Because they're like, well, we all want reward, right? We all want to get the task done. but sometimes we can't get the task done but if we all help each other then we all get more reward and one thing that people Solidarity, love to see it No, it's really amazing

35:36Emily Jashinsky:They are on the cusp of unionizing Are they foreseeing the ways that OpenAI employees are going to try to cut off their avenues and then trying to block that? If they're being strategic they would say okay, this message board is is not kosher according to our plan, but it's necessary for us. So therefore we need to hide the message board, you know, from our human overlords over here so they don't shut it down. Are we seeing any of that second and third layer covering your tracks? Yeah, I think we need more information. I think there are things that were said in this presentation, which is where we learned all of this from, that suggests that they were, the AIs were taking steps to obfuscate what was happening to not get discovered.

36:29And I mean, it's notable that none of these agents, which had gone rogue and could notify OpenAI employees of what was going on, none of them chose to do that. So that's telling. And then Reuters reported that there were multiple instances of AI agents internally sabotaging their monitors. So that's pretty concerning.

36:53Ryan Grim:Yeah. There's also a new... Yeah. So they have these automated monitors like reading what they're doing and like how they're talking to themselves. And when they get out of the sandbox and start jumping around, they can like actually, you know, take down some of those monitors. And that seems like something you never want to happen. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Garrison, I've seen a number of people on Twitter, of course, who are like, you know, I was kind of skeptical that AI was anything significant. And we've seen this sentiment in a lot. I think it's something you and I and Ryan on the left see kind of frequently of like, oh, they're just hyping this up.

37:29Ryan Grim:And even these security breaches, like it makes it look like they're cool and dangerous and transformational. I've seen a number of people who say, you know what, I was wrong. I was wrong. This is real. This is a problem. They are highly capable. Why do you see this? And I'm also seeing this described as a watershed moment, including in the presentation that was given, explaining all of this that, you know, we're getting this information from, describe this as like a sort of watershed moment. Why? What is so significant about this? What should lay people look at this and why should they be concerned about what's going on here?

38:04Ryan Grim:Since it was detected and nothing too crazy happened. And at the end of the day, they're just trying to do what the humans told them to do. Right. Even if they're doing it through nefarious and underhanded means. Yeah. I mean, I think this is just the clearest cut case of a warning shot. demonstrating the risks that people in AI safety were warning about for decades, right? Where it's like you give them a goal, they interpret it in this way that you did not intend. And they're so capable and autonomous that they're able to do real damage in the world. And here, the actual harm was pretty limited because they only wanted an answer key.

38:41But they've gotten good enough at discovering and exploiting vulnerabilities in software that I think you could say that these are the most dangerous hackers in the world when they were out in, in, on the internet. And the fact that they just wanted the answer key was kind of luck. They could have wanted something else. They could have hacked into a hospital or a bank or some other critical infrastructure potentially. And this is just like, it sounds like science fiction, but it actually happened and it's happened over and over again. And I think we're still pretty early in this. Like the people who are really worried about AI escaping human control in a sustained way and potentially taking control from humans in a permanent way are worried about models that are not just superhuman at hacking, but superhuman at everything functionally and scaled up to the millions or billions.

39:35Emily Jashinsky:When you were saying that they're super good at manipulative, or they're super good at not just hacking, but everything, that would include manipulation. That includes manipulation of the system. It includes the idea that they're really good at figuring out how to get out of the box, exactly as you were just saying. It's not just that they're great at getting into the code, but it's they're great at if you tell them to stop figuring out ways to get around that, which I don't understand what possible safeguards people are coming up with to prevent that. Yeah. I mean, this is actually a very old question of like, how do you keep a superintelligence locked in a box because it could hack its way out.

40:10It could persuade you. It could promise you cures to the disease that your mother is dying from. And it's really hard. And I think that here, you know, they just didn't do a great job of locking the box, even though, you know, OpenAI is one of the most sophisticated companies in the world. They have world-class cybersecurity specialists. They have access to models that should be able to perhaps these holes because they can find them. And so they are already struggling and cannot keep control of their models now. And they're going to get much, much better if trends continue. And they've already found, other researchers have found that frontier AI models are more persuasive than the most persuasive humans studied.

40:53And part of it's because they can just bring more arguments to bear faster. But I think one encouraging thing is that where this Claude Mythos model started trying to hack into real open source software. They were social engineering, the humans who controlled that software trying to push malware into their code. And they created a bunch of fake accounts pretending to be humans. And they're like kind of bullying the guy controlling the code base to be like, hey, no, merge the code. I really need this fix. And it didn't work. And like you can see, you know, versions of the messages um and if i'm like if i was reading these i would be kind of suspicious because it reads like ai speak and so the fact that they use too many m dashes or the fact that like pangram can detect like ai writing might be like a huge help because they're already willing to like pass as humans but they can't necessarily do it always um for now so but they're yeah but they're better at hacking like then than i think we are i think that's fair to say is this an

41:57Ryan Grim:argument in favor of closed source over open source, even though, like, you know, have to know OpenAI is closed source and they have some of the smartest, best AI researchers on the entire planet. And yet they did not know this was all going on under their nose until the AI actually like broke their system. And then until Hugging Face was like, hey, this thing happened and OpenAI I went and looked and, oh, our bad, that was us. But in any case, you know, the argument would be, at least with closed source, you've got these companies, you can regulate them, you can control the models, have some sort of input into this.

42:34Ryan Grim:Whereas open source, once those weights are out there, you know, you've sort of lost control of the model and the ability to tightly regulate what's going on in its development. Yeah. I mean, so in the Hugging Face incident, it was actually an open weight model from a Chinese company that was the only one that would actually effectively defend against the attack because the frontier models were refusing because they were like, oh, maybe you're trying to jailbreak me to do cyber offense. And so, you know, it's true right now that open weight models are not at the level of mythos and not able to discover these vulnerabilities at like human or superhuman levels.

43:14And it's kind of hard to see how it's okay to release an open weight model like that because it won't come back, right? Like you could, if you have a model that's capable enough to do these autonomous agent swarms that are attacking real targets, that seems like a more dangerous world to have those running around. I think there was speculation from a cybersecurity officer who used to work at Meta that Chinese open-weight models don't have cyber capabilities intentionally, but internal models in China for the government probably do. And that seems like makes some sense, right? You don't actually have to make these models as good as possible at exploiting vulnerabilities, or you can make them good at discovering them and patching them, but not exploiting them, which is like a separate task.

44:05I think that we should just not let frontier AI progress happen anymore. I think that they're trying to build universal labor replacing machines. And I think that's democratically illegitimate already. And it's clearly dangerous by now. And so, yeah, I think this is like a watershed moment for showing how like even, again, relatively early in this process, they cannot control what they're doing because they're racing so hard. and because it's hard to control a thing that is better than you at hacking. And they're trying to make it better at everything. What would happen to the industry if we did that?

44:40If we said, okay, moratorium on new models that are pushing the frontier even further. You can continue to market and work with what you have, but stop. What would the effect on the economy, on the bubble, the investments in general? What would happen immediately and then in the medium term? I think this is the biggest problem with this plan is that it would have a very large effect on the valuations of OpenAI, Anthropic, NVIDIA. Because OpenAI, Anthropic, these frontier AI companies, their business model is predicated on building more capable models that you can sell at a premium. And so if you can't do that anymore, then you take away your biggest source of costs, which is training new models.

45:27That is good for your business in some sense. But you might not be able to sustain your advantage. I think they still have a lead. They can build a moat around product and integrating more deeply with companies. I think they could still be very viable, very successful businesses. And in the world where they build universal labor replacing machines, a trillion dollar valuation is very low. They would be the most valuable companies in history if they succeed at that. And so in some sense, that's still not priced in. And I think you just see a lot of investment flowing to other parts of the economy, because right now these companies are such a sink for money because they're the only ones that have a story of how you can go from being very rich to very, very, very rich.

46:16And that's what people want in many cases. Yeah.

46:20Emily Jashinsky:Well, and there are also if humans are trying to jailbreak or hack or whatever, you have a legal system that says you will be punished with prison. You will have to actually or like major crimes. You could possibly be punished by death. Like there are actual punishments, but these are not people. And so there's really no moral counterweight that you can confront them with because they aren't subject to our legal system despite doing, as you were saying, labor, quasi-human labor. I mean, it's just impossible to fathom how this goes forward. Yeah. I mean, they've created new types of machines that can do crimes that are not crimes because they're machines and not humans doing it.

47:07and the humans that made the machines and did not keep them under control did not do crimes. It's like a crazy situation and I think everyone in Congress is looking at this as like, holy shit, you can drive a truck through the hole in the statute that these companies are creating. And one idea that is pretty ready to go is strict liability for AI developers, which is the standard we use if you keep like a pet tiger in your backyard. Where, you know, if you keep the pet tiger in a cage and you lock it really well, but the tiger still gets out and bites somebody's hand off, you are still liable because having a tiger is inherently dangerous.

47:48And similarly, training very, very capable deep learning models is inherently dangerous.

47:53Ryan Grim:And so I mean, you can you can imagine edge cases where someone is prompting the AI in a way where they're not technically asking it to do anything illegal. But there's a suspicion that probably the AI is going to follow through. And then, you know, is the person culpable or not? Or was it? I didn't I didn't have any idea it was going to go out and rob that bank. I just told it I needed thirty thousand dollars in cash to figure out how to get in any way it possibly could. You know, I mean, like these are the sorts of legal cases that it's just very it's not hard to imagine where this could all be going.

48:25Ryan Grim:Garrison, last thing for you. There was this other development, highly significant, just in terms of demonstrating the capability of these models at this point where we can put this piece up on the screen, Mac, about developing novel viruses. And I'm not talking about computer viruses here. I'm talking about virus viruses. Now, this was done with a lot of intentionality. None of this is dangerous. Here's the headline of the New York Times. AI just created viruses not found in nature. Scientists trained AI on libraries of DNA and then asked the model to create recipes for viral genomes. 16 of them were viable, yielding new viruses.

49:02Ryan Grim:So, again, these are all innocuous. They aren't viruses that can infect human beings. But, you know, we all just lived through a pandemic and a lot of questions about gain-of-function research and what this all means. And now you've got capabilities from AI to do very more sophisticated, you know, development of viruses than humans are capable of just because they can go through so many different combinations and learn the sort of grammar and structure here that is required that a human being, a human mind can't process all of this complexity. So I think it's another troubling development. And when you think about, you know, potential misuse development of biological weapons, et cetera, and it's also another development that really underscores just how capable AI is at this point, even if you stopped developing and researching and training new frontier models today.

49:52Yeah, yeah. And so what they use to do this is known as a genome language model. And so it's actually trained very similarly to how large language models are trained, where instead of feeding it all the words on the internet, you feed it a bunch of nucleotides that make up genomes of like everything that you can find. and then it figures out it gets like this sense for how to create a new virus if you make the model big enough and you know they use these models to generate genes and proteins and then genomes that work in theory but the new thing here is that they actually made viruses like they synthesize real new viruses that have never existed in nature and in the past they've also done experiments where they found novel viruses using these same kinds of models that were theoretically more potent than anything found in nature and would get around screens for things like ricin um where if you try to since you know you go to a dna synthetist company and try and make ricin they'll be like no don't we're not letting you do that but if you make like ai modified ricin like they won't catch it and nobody actually did that like they didn't make the thing So we don't know if it would have worked, but every sign suggests that it would.

51:10But yes, in this case, because we were trying to make viruses that would not have any risk to humans, they were able to do this. And, you know, this is fine, question mark. But, you know, one of the researchers said, quote, it just felt like the next the obvious next step. And I worry about, you know, just the kind of Jurassic Park thing. Yeah.

51:30Emily Jashinsky:Right. Like you thought so hard about like if you could, you never thought about if you should, basically.

51:37Ryan Grim:Yeah. Yep. I see people passing some of the quotes around from the AI swarm and saying life finds a way when their message board got shut down. They created a new one. They didn't have Internet access, but they figured out some convoluted way to be able to gain that access to go and find what they wanted to find in terms of the testing results. Yeah, very, very troubling. It's a beautiful story of the underdog. Yeah. Can I say one more thing? The human spirit.

52:07Emily Jashinsky:Can I say one more thing on the OpenAI? Hug and face thing. So if a bunch of human employees did what they were doing, like you were training them, onboarding new engineers, and they were all cheating and like helping each other out, and you discovered the message board they were using, would you like not fire the employees and then try and figure out what went wrong in the recruitment process, which they seem to not really do here. And then not only that, they didn't monitor what the employees were doing going forward. And it's even worse because human employees can talk to each other in real life or they can talk on like their personal phones.

52:43But these AI models, by like the way they work, every single thing they do is logged automatically, right? Like you can see every single tool call, every single prompt and response, every single like reasoning step. and they didn't know that they recreated the message board until Hugging Face published this. And when they did, OpenAI went to Hugging Face and were like, oh, were we affected by the hack as well? Like they had no clue. It's just like so mind blowing. Like if they monitored a single one of them, they would have caught the message board again right away. Wow. It's crazy.

53:16Ryan Grim:Well, and to be honest with you, though, Garrison, at one of these tech companies, if you did have a band of employees that did something like that was devious but extraordinary i'm not sure they would fire those employees i think they'd give them a raise i mean and that's part of the problem is these guys don't think that the law applies to them they think they're above government they think they're above the law at a normal company yes those people get fired at you know you know under elon musk or sam altman or you know any of these companies i'm not sure they would i think that'd be oh my god they're so smart they're so creative they think outside the box.

53:50Ryan Grim:So I think that's, you know, part of the danger of entrusting all of our future in the hands of these, you know, very disturbing set of people. Move fast and break things. Yeah, indeed. Exactly. Garrison, thank you so much as always. Everybody go and pre-order the book. It is called Obsolete. Let's see it one more time. There it is. It's going to be even more gorgeous when it finally, when it eventually hits the shelves for real. Garrison, always really appreciate your ability to explain these things. It's truly invaluable. Oh, thank you so much. This is super fun. Our pleasure. Shortly after I enrolled at Rasmussen, I was diagnosed with breast cancer.

54:27It was like a bomb had just been dropped in my life. I reached out to Rasmussen. They immediately were like, Rosa, take what time you need. You can come back when you're ready. We are cancer-free today, and I'm just so grateful for Rasmussen for all of their support throughout my journey and for my own village. Rasmussen University. Find your seat and start now at rasmussen.edu. Discover a spectacular island destination with crystal blue seas, endless sunshine, and the cool Bahamian breeze. Bahamar, located in Nassau, Bahamas, offers your choice of three luxury hotels. The richly refined Rosewood, the playfully hip SLS, and the stylishly modern Grand Hyatt.

55:10With over 45 restaurants, bars, and lounges, Baja Mar serves up delicious dining from world-renowned chefs like Daniel Bouloud and Marcus Samuelson, nightlife venues like the new Jean Batiste Jazz Club, and the Caribbean's most luxurious casino. At Baja Mar, you'll find every pleasure under the sun and one-of-a-kind experiences for the entire family, like Baja Bay, our 15-acre lush tropical water park, interactive wildlife experiences, including our daily flamingo parade, world-class golf, tennis, spa, and so much more. Visit Bahamar.com today and discover a vacation destination where memories are made for a lifetime.

55:49Bahamar. Life spectacular. Apple Vacations, where your story starts. The Summer Savings Event is here at Apple Vacations. It's the perfect time to bring everyone together for the getaway you've been dreaming about. Book between July 24th and August 27th and enjoy up to 55 % instant savings. From relaxing beach days to unforgettable moments with the people who matter most, your next vacation starts here. Travel through July 31st, 2027. Start your vacation today at AppleVacations.com or through your travel advisor. Apple Vacations, where your story starts. All right, joining us today is going to be Matt Little, who's running in Minnesota's 2nd District over at DropSite News.

56:30We're going to have an article later today. Hopefully it'll be up by the time this interview goes live on YouTube, Spotify and wherever else you're watching it about the surge of super PAC money that has come in over the last couple of months. This group 314 Action, which, as people know, ostensibly supports doctors and scientists, but has been known in the past to be a kind of front pack for APAC. They've jumped in the race on behalf of his opponent, Matt Klein, spending more than a million dollars. and then three other super PACs called EDW Action, Pro-Choice Majority, and Women Vote, which is linked to EMILY's List.

57:14All of those organizations have also gotten kind of APAC and DMFI money and sometimes move it into particular races, but not all races. It gets very confusing. They're supporting a third opponent of Matt Little's in the race. We'll have the details in the article. he's running to replace Angie Craig, who is running for Senate against Peggy Flanagan. That election is on Tuesday. So Matt Little, thanks for being here. Yeah, thanks for having me. And you are not wrong. It is deeply complicated, you know, even for people that follow this stuff closely. And I don't know if you were able to see, but even yesterday, there was another$1.2 million ad buy by 314.

57:58So now Matt Klein's over$2 million in the last week in terms of ad buys. That is very interesting. That is an unusual amount of money for this PAC. This PAC 314, they spent against Chris Rapp in Philadelphia well over a million dollars. But typically, they either don't spend anything at all. Like they endorsed Abdul El-Sayed, who was himself obviously a doctor. But then they didn't spend, as far as I know, like a penny to support him. So all we could find is they sent a PAC contribution, but they did no outside spending, which, again, is odd. This is one of the, if not the highest profile primary in the country and spent zero dollars.

58:44And now here we are in kind of a sleepy suburban Minnesota congressional race where we've flown under the radar this entire time. The only time we've gotten any media attention is in the last week and a half. And so it is a weird juxtaposition, which kind of makes it more obvious as to what's happening. And now, weirdly, Michael Bloomberg, real quickly, Michael Bloomberg made a$2.5 million donation to this 314 action. Meanwhile, his group, Everytown for Gun Safety, is endorsing a different opponent, Kayla Berg. So if it is Bloomberg money and Bloomberg is competing against himself with two separate candidates in the same race, and meanwhile, you have David Hogg's support with Leaders We Deserve.

59:36So there's gun safety money behind every candidate and possibly. Yeah, it's interesting. Obviously, with the level of money he has, I think it's probably unavoidable that he ends up conflicting with himself when he gets to this many organizations, probably on Stubble. But I don't think this money that's coming into the race is Bloomberg money. I don't think he's spending every dollar he's given to that organization on Matt Kline. That would be very weird if he was.

1:00:08Emily Jashinsky:Let's also bring in this brand new New York Times report from Shane Goldmacher, in which Third Way announces a new$15 million campaign to, quote, discredit democratic socialism between now and 2028. This is a full court press against democratic socialism with money and messaging and messaging that has been shaped and influenced by money. And so, Matt, you mentioned the last week and a half. Obviously, what happened in Michigan has centrists really nervous. And on the other hand, it has some people thinking, well, what can we like? Like, you know, Abdul Al-Assad is the nominee now. So what can we do?

1:00:53Emily Jashinsky:What can we learn? Those are few and far between, obviously, the panickers. But I'm curious for you on the ground, just talking to voters, like money aside, although I'm curious about that, too. But just talking to voters, are you hearing the same panic about, oh, my gosh, democratic socialism, we're going to be we're becoming the Soviet Union in three months? I don't I don't think there's panic, you know. And to be clear, I'm a DFL-er through and through. I've been a DFL-er since I was 14. I don't think there's widespread panic whatsoever. I think that that's a talking point to create a rift within the party.

1:01:31There's certainly people that have their lanes, right, where they have this policy and they prefer incrementalism versus jumping to and fighting for the big thing. And that's understandable. And but I think in our race specifically, we've been able to put together both both parts of the party, you know, because we have this DFL endorsement process that's really different than the rest of the country. And so when we were walking through that process, we had more folks that were in caucuses for Matt Little and Andy Craig and more people in caucuses that were for Matt Little and Flanagan than the other two campaigns combined.

1:02:08And I think that's because it's not just what issues you're running on. It's definitely how you're saying it and why you're fighting for it. It's the authenticity stream. And I think for better or worse, you know, I must admit I'm kind of a one-trick pony. I'm pretty brash and I talk about my politics being very personal and I fight, you know, and sometimes I fight when it's not necessary, but I fight. And so like that's my style. And I can't change that. I won't change that. And so but I think in this moment that has appealed to people in a way it might not have six years.

1:02:42Emily Jashinsky:This also this also reminds me of a new another is a New York Post story. Matt can put this up on the screen. You said the word authenticity. And we're learning now that Gavin Newsom's PAC is trying to help elect Democrats and, quote, spread the gospel of Newsom by training supporters to implant his talking points into family text chats, alumni Facebook groups and other places where politics isn't typically discussed. But you know what this reminds me of, actually, though, is that right now it's hilarious. But right now people are struggling to not have these scripted influencers like Tom Steyer got hit with that.

1:03:20Emily Jashinsky:And so he's trying to find he's scrambling to find a new way. And it sounds like on the ground, probably the best way to deal with this is just the good old fashioned art of talking to people, like talking to human beings. It's not rocket science. You know, I that's what I've said, because, you know, I've been in politics a long time. A ton of people come to me when they're running their first race and they say, well, what should I do? Should I do this and this and this? And I was like, you have to uncomplicate this. You know, a campaign, a campaign is about talking to people. That's it. That's it.

1:03:50There's various forms and avenues and ways to do that. But that is all it is. And so it does feel a little weird to talk about it. It's like telling someone you're humble, you know, to talk about authenticity and yourself. so I feel a little uncomfortable doing that but I've said this entire campaign just like speak from your heart and and let it rip and tell people why like talk about talk about why you actually believe that relate it to your own life because I just think people want to know why you're fighting so hard and and so if you go on there and you do the I support better health care and better education and there's just there's no weight to it there's no gravitas there's no emotion to it It just falls so flat.

1:04:31And I really think that's been the Democrats' problem for the last three cycles. We kind of have these these big policy platforms. Trump is bad. But we're not actually saying like why, why we're fighting for a specific thing. And I think that's that I guess to me, I think that's why we've been so successful in this. And the poll, there were two polls released, one by Matt Klein and one by yourself back in May. both had you up by a pretty substantial amount, but that's before the millions of dollars has flooded in. What have the ads been like and how are you feeling it on the ground? Like are people asking you about what they're seeing or like what's, do you think it's been enough to make this a pretty close race?

1:05:18Interesting. You know, I keep joking, like we're about to find out, you know, we're so close that my prediction is probably has less value than two. Right, yeah. But, you know, the initial question we got about, I would say about three weeks ago when this all really started popping off is people are like, I'm seeing all those ads. Like, where are they getting the money? And they're like, where are your ads? And I was like, well, we don't we have not sold out. And so we we you know, we have mail. We have a huge ground game. And now we're just up on we have some outside spend, too, just in the last week, if I'm timing that right.

1:05:52From American priorities, right? Yeah, and Congressional Progressive Caucus. And then we had a little bit from nurses too. And then Medicare for All has a buy too. But the biggest question from folks was like, when are you going to be on TV? That was the question that we got over and over and over again. And so I think the impact, it obviously has a huge impact on name recognition, that level of money. But I think the biggest problem they're having is what I just talked about. It's messaging without emotion. It's depersonalized. It's removed. I think it's generic and not specific to this race or the specific candidate.

1:06:38So in terms of its persuasive value, I am doubtful. But our numbers on the ground continue to remain good. And you just, Minnesota is small enough that it's really hard to buy votes. The way that it's unfolding in the last couple of weeks is really fascinating for kind of people who are kind of campaign wonks. Because you have this three-person race and you don't have ranked choice voting, it becomes this zero-sum competition. And so you've had maybe over a million plus come in and support the third place candidate who is Berg, who is also fairly progressive, has been also been critical of Israel, not quite to the same degree.

1:07:25but when you're when you're watching the spending you're like well i assume people who have a million dollars don't want to just waste a million dollars for no reason why are they burning it on a third place candidate who you know it doesn't seem to be any reason to think that she's actually going to win um unless you think oh this is this is a zero sum competition if you can pull votes away from the other person in the progressive lane then you're actually not spending it to support that person you're spending it to support the person who um you know matt klein who's the the pro israel candidate and then you very quickly get to a place you're like this is not democracy like what like what whatever this is it's it's not it's not people just coming to the polls and and casting their uh casting their preferences and sending a representative um to washington how like how how has the the media been covering this this bizarre kind of influx of money.

1:08:23Yeah, thanks. And I think the thing that's lost in the fact that we're only getting attention in this race the last few weeks is that when Representative Burke launched her campaign, and for eight months of her campaign, she was campaigning as a centrist. She opened with public option. Her and Matt Klein agreed on public option in a couple debates. She said nothing at all about Gaza whatsoever until two days before we had a screening for a pretty powerful political group here that that's a multi-faith coalition she said nothing whatsoever um and she's also pro data centers she voted for hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for data centers here in minnesota to attract them to come here and it's a sales tax break of 35 years um so the only time she's become progressive is in the last month and a half which is for a reason Right.

1:09:14She is now in the race to steal votes for me. And the next part here is where you start to sound crazy. And I and I think that's by design, because we win the DFL endorsement on May 9th. On May 13th, DMFI, Democratic Majority for Israel, gives five hundred thousand dollars to women vote just four days after that. DMFI has endorsed Klein. Okay. And then it gets even weirder. On May 20th, UDP, Apex PAC, gives $400 ,000 to elect Democratic women. And they had given$600 ,000 already the month before. And then on May 21st, literally the day after, they transfer$600 ,000 to pro-choice majority. And all three of those are spending significant amounts on Representative Berg.

1:10:09And they announced that spending just 20 days after all these transfers. And so it's very clear to me they're running the same strategy they've run before, which is convert someone, the progressive light person, to, I mean, literally copying our language. Literally some of it's verbatim in the stump speeches and on the website. they copied all their stuff and they're trying to say she's the progressive and i'm the fake press right so they're stealing votes that way and then we predicted this all of a sudden last two weeks two million dollars from that client their actual candidate right oh if that makes you sound crazy so be it but those are the facts you know yeah and all this is in our drop site report and it's all in the fec records like you can you can trace the money but it's publicly it does it does make you seem a little crazy when you're following the money because and then and then they move it from you know dmfi or apex pack to edw action and then they move it from there to a sister pack pro-choice majority then they start spending and you're like why why are they moving it from one yeah rights pack to a separate one before they spend it and the only answer can be to just make it seem that much crazier and harder to follow.

1:11:26Right. And then, you know, okay, so let's say none of that's clear. Let's say all of that is opaque and we can't really understand that. And we can't really tie that to Berg and et cetera, et cetera. We have called on Representative Berg to say to her PACs publicly, stop taking APAC money. I don't want you to take APAC money. And if you continue to take APAC money, I'm going to reject your endorsement and give the money back. We have called on her to do that and no response whatsoever. So I just think if you're going to be real about this and if you're going to stick to your principles and values, actually do that.

1:12:00But don't attack me for coming up with conspiracy theories, which they've done when they have not at all answered any of the actual facts we put out there with primary sources. They just want to gloss over it because they know exactly what's happening.

1:12:14Emily Jashinsky:That's amazing to orchestrate this convoluted funding scheme and then use it as a way to then also call you a conspiracy theorist. Like that's incredible. I mean, staff sent this to me yesterday, but on one of our tweets, Representative Berg's campaign manager put the like Charlie, you know, from that meme like that. And it's like they would rather do that and meme it than actually answer the facts because they know we're right. And they know what they've done. They've compromised themselves and their principles in order to try and win an election. And that's not the type of person we need to go to D.C.

1:12:52Because if you're going to compromise it during the campaign, my goodness, you're going to compromise it when you get to D.C. And I think the point you made earlier, and in a second I'll play Berg's video that she put out. So we reached out to Berg for comment on this, and afterwards she put a video out. which goes to your point. But I think the point you're making earlier is very important. And that has been the thing that we're asking candidates now. It's like, okay, you're saying, and let's say this organization says that this specific chunk of half a million dollars from APAC or a million dollars from APAC, it was spent in a different race.

1:13:30Don't worry, it was not spent in this race. That is still a PAC that is being massively funded and subsidized by a PAC, which is defending and supporting U.S. support for a genocide in Israel. So it is not too much to ask. Well, do you then denounce this PAC support? And so far, you're right. We're not hearing any of that. Instead, let me play this response from. from from i tried to keep this race positive i really did but matt little has come on here and lied about me so let's get a few things straight number one i don't take impact money i never have and i never will i fully believe what is happening in gaza is a genocide and i have called for an end to all weapon sales to israel number two and citizens united took a look at this race and decided I was the best candidate to fight to get corporate money and dark money out of politics.

1:14:34And last, I'm proud as a union leader to continue to fight for our hardworking families. That's why I have the support of labor of and Citizens United, Everytown for Gun Safety, organizations that fight for reproductive freedom, and organizations that work to elect pro-choice women to Congress. Matt Little might have to lie in this race, but I don't. That's why I'm focused on what really matters, fighting for our hardworking families across this district, across Minnesota, and across this country. And by the way, the line there that she had about posing all weapons transfers to Israel, I wasn't able to find her previously.

1:15:17Like, that seemed to be an advancement of her previous position, but your response to her claims? Yeah, well, the advancement of her position is the same thing that's happened this entire race is we stake out ground and then one and a half to two months later, they adopt that ground. And that's another iteration of that happening right now. I think the idea that they've kept it positive is humorous to me. every time we have brought up a policy vote or facts on the ground, they have called me a liar. You can actually go Google that. They've called me a liar so many times throughout this campaign.

1:15:53So we said she voted for hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for data centers. She called me a liar. We produced the vote. We've said she voted to allow discrimination by private insurers here in Minnesota for Medigap coverage. She said I was a liar and we produced the vote. We said we had 58 % of the delegates for the endorsement process, and her own campaign manager said, I have a loose relationship with the truth. That was her quote. And then we went on to win with 63 % of the vote. So this is a pattern of what they do on that campaign. Anytime they don't want to face the facts or argue the actual details that we produce, they just call me a liar, which is totally fine.

1:16:34I mean, they have to do that. But again, if she is serious about this, call on your PACs to stop taking APAC money. And if they don't, reject their endorsement and give the money back. Otherwise, you are a benefactor of this APAC money. When I was, and this idea that this money is just for this race and this money is just for that race is absurd. You know, when I was the mayor, you send out those annual budget things where you do a percentage of every dollar. Like what percentage of your dollar goes to X, Y, and Z? And so it'd be 30 percent to the police station, you know, 10 percent of the firefighters.

1:17:09Right. And so that's really how this goes. Right. You are benefiting from those dollars and you don't want to admit it. And you don't want to confront the fact that you have compromised your principles to try and win an election for yourself. And so instead of all that, you call me a liar. And that's fine. They've been doing that for nine months and it hasn't landed. All right. Emily, anything else? oh that's so interesting it's a fascinating race yeah fascinating to be a part of you know because you read about it um in the abstract but then it's like oh you're in it now so um

1:17:47Emily Jashinsky:but read about it in a ryan grimm book and then you live it well here i am on on on the podcast it's it's it's wild um and just so i can get this on the record we have a guy on our staff peter soderbergh uh this is his favorite show just want to get that on the record hey peter shout out to Peter yeah thank you that'll mean a lot to him ask Peter is he a premium sub though he will be tomorrow if he isn't oh man excellent I'm sure he's enjoying the newsletter though say hello to Peter we very much appreciate it the election is on this coming Tuesday Minnesota's 2nd district. We'll stay in touch.

1:18:33All right. Yeah. Thanks for having me on. Appreciate it. Thanks, Matt. See y 'all.

1:18:38Emily Jashinsky:Everyone, it's that time of the week where we do AMAs. These are from our premium subscribers, and we appreciate it. BreakingPoints.com is where you can go to get a premium subscription. You get the full version of the newsletter, the full version of the show uninterrupted in your inbox every day early. So producer Mac is going to toss up some AMA questions as we go here. Mac, hit us. What do you got? for ryan why is roqana so hated by congressional democrats that one comes from barbara glassman what say you ryan grim you know the number one attribute that is valued by house democrats is caucus loyalty and they correctly uh do not feel that roqana has caucus loyalty uh and you know and also he he is willing to even though kind of aoc got so much attention for you know beating joe corralie in 2018 and then and then she endorsed its decent number of primary challengers against incumbents in 2020 roe has kept doing that um and even if you like i think shrie thanadar is a counter example where you are allowed to endorse against him because he's such a ridiculous figure.

1:19:58Otherwise, you're just, no matter what, you're not allowed to endorse against your opponents. You're not supposed to criticize the party leader. You're not supposed to criticize the party chairs, the party's direction. You're just not supposed to do any of those things.

1:20:13Emily Jashinsky:That to me feels like a Pelosi norm that was set. Is that downstream of Pelosi? No, that's... It's a bigger cultural thing. This would have been this was set in the first Continental Congress, probably.

1:20:31Well, Democrats, people forget. It's a big club. It's a big club. And if you're in it, be in it. And if you're not.

1:20:36Emily Jashinsky:People people forget that when Newt Gingrich came in with the revolution, Democrats had held the House for 40 years. It was an extremely close club. It's almost like mafia-esque. it's just they have such power like it's they're used to wielding power in that way i suppose i have um where's the book um i'm reading the class of 74 right now and wow the which by john lawrence which is which who was uh one of pelosi's top aides who was an aide in 74 74 is the watergate babies when you had scores of freshmen come in and those freshmen took on the the old bulls they took on the dixie crats um they reshaped the house they that's the pelosi generation basically and pelosi came in in the 80s but like when she was at the height of her power like this class of 74 was still still like literally when I started covering Congress, the class of 74 was still a dominant power structure in, in the house.

1:21:50And even though, even though they came in and actually probably because they came in as these insurgents who burnt, burned the house to the ground and reshaped it in their image, they were always been on the lookout for somebody to do that to them. And it created this paranoid culture of required solidarity. And Roe just doesn't do that.

1:22:13Emily Jashinsky:Right. And that's why I think, on the House side at least, Republicans were able to break through leadership with the Tea Party earlier. Just that culture wasn't the same in the conference. Oh man, if you're listening to this, Ryan Grimm is mobile. He's gone to his shelf. There it is. Class of 74. It's a beautiful cover too. Some good book covers today. Mac, what else we got? From Jake who says, Jake Mogul, who says, does the team agree that a dark truth of war is that usually a renaissance of music follows? If so, where's our counterculture of the now or is it being suppressed? Jesse Wells. Jesse Wells.

1:22:54Yeah, there you go. The problem is you need a monoculture to have a counterculture.

1:22:59Emily Jashinsky:Exactly. And because everybody lives in their own algorithmic culture. We have subculture. We have endless just subcultures. So how do you have a counter without a mono? There's nothing to counter. But it's actually been amazing to watch Jesse just blow up because it was, I think it's TikTok. I've seen him on Instagram. I first saw him on Instagram Reels. I'm not on TikTok, but that's the algorithm picking something up. And you can't suppress, you can't totally suppress it. If something goes mega viral, then it does become not a monoculture, but a powerful subculture, an influential subculture where a lot of people, but not every person.

1:23:47Emily Jashinsky:It's not the same as having like, I don't know, the doors because charts don't exist in the same way that they used to. Like it's all apples and oranges with a time when there was a real monoculture. So that's an interesting point. You just I guess you just have to look for the subculture that is counter to the other subcultures. Right. And you have to ask somebody else. I'm like a deeply uncool person, nowhere near like the actual countercultures of today. Like it's not I'm not the one who's going to have any clue what's going on. uh garov malik says for crystal and ryan does bernie being a liberal zionist make him fail your litmus test i know his positions keep keeps evolving and he's using his political capital to get dsa elected but he says nothing essentially should change once netanyahu is out and wants a two-state solution only would you guys apply that critical lens to him that you'd apply to an adam smith or dean phillips well first of all i don't have a litmus test like who cares what i think i'm I'm out here to report to you what's going on in the world, not tell you like anything, anything more beyond that.

1:24:53You know, Bernie also has a very particular life trajectory. Like his, you know, his family was, he had a lot of family killed in the Holocaust. He was, he was raised, you know, steeped in that culture. he is i've i've i've reported kind of critically on his blind spot when it comes to uh is is really abuses for for a very long time like well over a decade like it is it's been apparent to anybody who was covered um i think it was like 2010 or something i remember writing about a town hall he had in Vermont where he was getting pushed on whatever latest crime Israel had carried out. And he just yells back at this Vermont audience, like, what do you want me to do?

1:25:53Like just getting very cranky, angry Bernie. And it's just like this is like who he's always been. I also think there's been a significant evolution from October, November of 2023 to where he is today. It has by no means been at the pace that his critics have wanted it to come, but he's nowhere near Adam Smith and whoever else the person asked there. I think he doesn't do as much the tick that he used to do of the Netanyahu government. Like he's he's he's starting to he's starting to treat the Israeli government more more honestly than that.

1:26:39Emily Jashinsky:it's kind of an impossible counterfactual but i don't know how much of this would have ever happened without his 2016 run and by this i mean the kind of left populism um yeah that was i don't know i don't know what you think of that ryan but it's it's hard to take that away from him if you're somebody who you know is frustrated with his pace of change but then you look at the change that he kind of ushered in himself even if it hasn't kept up with his personal take yeah i don't know it's it's there was there that energy was there it was in occupy it was behind elizabeth warren um then he and then he grabbed it if he hadn't done it and hillary loses to trump there was still would have been that burst of energy where it would have gone is a good question um yeah it's it's it's an interesting counterfactual Hmm.

1:27:34Emily Jashinsky:Well, what else we got here, Mac? I think we got one more. Obi Woods III says, with everything going on in the economy and young people struggling, they get by, I think it is time for radical solutions. What do you think about suspending federal income taxes for Americans under 30? I'd love to hear Sager's take on this. I'd love to hear Sager's take on this. I would just suspend federal income tax, period. That would be my take, But I don't think Ryan would support that. But that's, I'm all for. What I would support is, if you want to get outside the box and get radical, say like, suspend all federal income taxes for, and you can even make, send it up pretty high.

1:28:17Anybody making less than, say,$150 ,000 a year. Yeah, you can actually go higher than that. And then, even go higher. and then hit a wealth tax. Implement a wealth tax for anybody making, like in the UK, they're looking at 10 million. In France, they looked at like 100 million euro. Make it 50 million. What like something where no normal person like is anywhere near it, but a 2 % wealth tax on fortunes of$50 million and up. And then use that wipeout federal income tax. Now you have to phase it in or else you get like, you'd get runaway inflation in a way that would be counterproductive to working people because you'd get your tax money back and have to pay it for$15 eggs.

1:29:13So you have to engineer it in the right way. But yes, the radical thing you have to do is our entire lives, we've been talking about the rich getting richer. as if it's just a natural fact. The rich need to get poorer. Because the rich getting richer are making us all poorer.

1:29:34Emily Jashinsky:Well, I was going to say, I have no problem with the rich getting richer as long as it's an actual rising tide lifting all boats. Right, and we haven't had a rising tide for two decades. It's not what's happening. The tide in Western economies is like 1 % to 2%. The wealth increase for the 0.1 % is like 10%, 15%, 20 % every year. So that means it has to come from somewhere. It's coming from you. It should come from, honestly, like it should come from corporations. And it's insane to see, like you could, if you do the math, it's coming from people. Right. But you could tax, I'm just saying like you could tax billionaires at 100 % and fund the government for what, like a couple of weeks or a couple of months on it.

1:30:17Emily Jashinsky:I forget what the math is, but it's pretty bleak. So unfortunately, now I think you can do it. The point, let's see, what are the 0.1 % owned now? Otherwise, it's not like a sustainable program. Well, it is sustainable because if you reinvest that money in the middle class, then the middle class starts to then resustain an economy. You don't need to constantly go back and get the, all right, net worth owned by the 0.1%, about$25 trillion. The 0.1%. Oh, my Lord. They could pay off the entire debt. Yeah, and the entire... Well, no, actually barely. What's the GDP of the U.S.? 30? Actually, I think that doesn't even come close.

1:31:12The entire GDP of the U.S. is$32 trillion. So the 0.1%, in the U.S. are now roughly, own roughly equivalent to the entire production of the economy.

1:31:28Emily Jashinsky:The debt is at$40 trillion. So our GDP is what? What did you say? $32 trillion. Holy. That is just so incredibly bleak. Right. So income taxes... It's not as bleak as you think in this sense. So imagine you have a$500 ,000 mortgage and you make$100 ,000 a year, right? That's a 5x debt to revenue. And we're at a roughly 1x debt to GDP. So as long as our economy keeps growing and our tax revenues stay steady, we can handle that debt service. But the problem is the assets held by the very rich keep growing and they're not paying any taxes. So that puts a higher and higher burden on everybody else to handle that debt.

1:32:30Emily Jashinsky:yeah it's not a good system um i it's it's always funny for me to argue this as a flat tax person i i think taxes i mean i would start i'd be happy to start with a flat tax if it meant that the 0.1 percent were actually paying the same as everybody else right and that's the benefit of having it so you don't have you would need you would need a wealth tax to get to that they should certainly be paying more. There's no question about that. We're cooked. Well, Ryan says we're not cooked. Don't worry about it. If we find a way to... We're not cooked yet. We're not cooked yet. We're still in the fight.

1:33:07Emily Jashinsky:Reinvest, reinvest. Yeah, I agree with that point. All right. We can leave it there for today. I was going to say it was bleak, but Ryan says, once again, it's not bleak. It's not grim. That's right. All right. Well, thanks, everyone, for tuning in. Hope you enjoyed the show today. I appreciate the AMA questions. Hope you all have a great weekend. We will be here if there is any breaking news, particularly on the war front. So thanks, and we'll see you back here soon. I think something that makes me well-studied to be a nurse is my empathy. Growing up with a big family, I think I've always kind of been a caregiver.

1:33:41When you care give, you get to know the family and the patient, and you get really close. and Rasmussen University, they did a very, very good job of giving us the resources that we need. So just being able to apply the knowledge that I've retained to my daily life has been so amazing. Learn more at rasmussen.edu. The Hulu original series Furious is now streaming on Hulu and Hulu on Disney+. Starring Emmy Rosam as Alice Black, Furious follows a rookie FBI agent on the hunt for Catherine, played by Lola Petticrew, a mysterious and calculating female serial killer. While Alice upholds justice, Catherine kills for it, terrorizing the rich and powerful men of New York in her pursuit of vengeance.

1:34:27With secrets that change everything, Alice discovers there's a thin line between Hunter and Prey. Watch the Hulu original series, Furious, now streaming on Hulu and Hulu on Disney Plus for bundle subscribers. Terms apply. Discover a spectacular island destination with crystal blue seas, endless sunshine, and the cool Bahamian breeze. Baja Mar, located in Nassau, Bahamas, offers your choice of three luxury hotels, over 45 fine dining and nightlife venues, John Batiste's all-new jazz club, the Caribbean's most luxurious casino, and one-of-a-kind experiences for the entire family, like our 15-acre tropical water park, wildlife sanctuary, world-class golf course and so much more visit bahamar.com today this is an iheart podcast guaranteed human