Trump's Accessibility, Portnoy's Battle, and Dangers of AI Robots, with Chamath Palihapitiya and Jason Calacanis of All-In | Ep. 1067
01:41:33 Share

Thank you.

America won't win by letting three big cellular companies keep U.S. spectrum policy stuck in the past, hoarding spectrum for their exclusive use to limit competition here at home while giving Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE a big leg up overseas. For America to lead, federal policymakers must build on the proven success of U.S. spectrum sharing to ensure national security, turbocharge domestic manufacturing, rural connectivity, and create American jobs. Let's keep America at the forefront of global wireless leadership. Learn more at SpectrumFuture.com.

Sitting through a lecture won't sharpen the people skills required to lead a company. That's why at UVA Darden, the moment you set foot on grounds, you're immersed in a dialogue-driven environment that simulates real-world business scenarios and calls for real leadership action. Our top-ranked faculty design a curriculum that empowers you to lead your peers, manage teams, and drive measurable results. Ranked the number one public business school in the country, Darden stands apart not just for what we teach, but how.

UVA Darden, not business school as usual. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at noon east. Hey, everyone.

Kelly, welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, a big news day with Joe Biden finally sitting down for an interview and Trump continuing to take on everyone. But we have got to begin with an update on what is going on with Dave Portnoy and an anti-Semitic incident that happened at a bar he owns in Philly over the weekend. Here's what we know.

When you order bottle service at the bar, you get to also write on a sign for the whole bar to see. As you can see, some idiots put the phrase, forgive me, fuck the Jews on the sign. The viral went video on social media and Portnoy, who is Jewish, was irate. Although I always feel like that's irrelevant. I would go irate too. And I'm not Jewish, but it is, it does become relevant to the story that the fact that he is Jewish, we'll get to it.

So he launched an investigation and says that he fired the two employees who allowed that sign to go forward and said that he was sending the two customers responsible for the sign, volunteering to send them to the Nazi concentration camp Auschwitz so they could learn a thing or two about the terrible consequences of anti-Jewish propaganda.

Sounds like a positive outcome, right? Portnoy wasn't trying to like ruin their lives. I don't even think he was mentioning the one guy's name. He just wanted, you know, a good outcome and he thought this would be a way to do it. And he was getting warned that there was no reforming somebody who would request that as their words on a sign. But he, you know,

Took a chance. Well, one of the two customers, a man now identified as 21-year-old Temple University student,

Maybe Temple has suspended him. Mo Khan, K-H-A-N, says he was not responsible for the sign and merely videotaped the sign and then posted it to his own social media as a, quote, citizen journalist. He now has fought back with his own series of videos on social claiming he is the victim here. Watch.

Dave Portnoy sensationalized it to his 9.2 million followers on Instagram and X, essentially turning it into a global news story. Although I had nothing to do with the sign coming out, nor do I know who did it, I know that the sign was provocative because it reminded people a lot of the unjust things that Israel is doing around the world, thus leading me to report on it.

Dave Porto and his friends can choose to be triggered over the sentiments of that sign and even kick me out of the establishment forever. However, they have no right to destroy my life over free speech and ultimately something that was an edgy joke. Frankly, they're more worried about destroying and uprooting me

than the thousands of people getting destroyed and uprooted in genocide. That sign had no effects in terms of killing any Jews. However, Israel kills thousands of people on a daily basis. Dave Portnoy and the greater Jewish community are acting as if they are the victims when this whole time I am the victim. Dave has built a reputation, a career, and a business solely focused on the anti-cancel culture

Here, he's hypocritically lynching me, absolutely canceling me in any way possible and ruining my life. Dave Portnoy owes me restitutions and an apology for everything that he has done and caused for me in these past few days. In an attempt to expose me, he exposed himself as almost a total fraud, going back on anything he stands for.

Okay, it's not cancel culture when he tries to do something nice for you. Like what? How did Dave Portnoy cancel you, Mr. Khan? He said that was f-ed up. I will give you a free trip overseas so you can go to Auschwitz and learn a thing or two about the Holocaust. He's not your employer. You posted the video on your own, assuming the risk of blowback. He's not trying to cancel you. He

You're canceled yourself by posting your sign or at least your friend's sign without saying, letting you know this happened at this bar. You just posted it without comment on your reel and your behavior in the aftermath has proven to us quite clearly that you believe the sentiment in that sign, in my opinion. Now,

Now this guy Khan's trying to get $25,000 donated to him on Give, Send, Go to help him defend himself against Portnoy's quote, attacks. He's up to 12,000 bucks so far. Portnoy responded by revoking the invitation for the free trip to Auschwitz and blasting Khan for trying to profit over the incident. Watch.

Temple fucking suspended his ass basically before I was even involved because hey, asshole, you fucking uploaded it to your personal Instagram. What do you think was gonna happen, you brain dead moron? Like I'm gonna try and make this teachable moment. This kid's crying. He's like, I'm not anti-Semitic, blah, blah, blah, all this shit, even though there's past incidents that came to light.

And then he does a 180 and he's like, "Oh, I was a citizen journalist. I don't know who did it. I have nothing to do with it." He's just a flat liar coward with no responsibility. I should have seen this next move coming. He is now actually trying to profit from this and he's playing the role of the victim. Zero accountability.

Blaming it all on me is like I've lost an internship that I work hard for and I'm suspended from school. Buddy, you upload a fuck the Jews sign to your personal Instagram from my fucking bar.

And you're blaming that now on me? But this was about being a Jew in America. Other Jews in the bar. I'm a Jew. My parents are a Jew. American Jews. Fuck the Jews. That's what you said. You fucking anti-Semitic piece of shit. And I tried to show grace. I tried to. You put your name out there. I tried to actually, now I feel dumb to make it right.

And now he does this video blaming it on me. You have to, this has to disgust you. And this kid's face should be ingrained in you. Be like, this is what the face of hatred is. This is what the face of being a coward is. This is the face of zero accountability. Everything that's wrong with his generation. And this kid now officially, it should stick with him forever. And by the way, his parents, who I know are giving the advice, nice kid you raised.

Okay. So maybe Khan doesn't hate Jews. Maybe Khan is just a citizen journalist. Maybe he got pulled into this against his will because he saw a sign he found offensive and he posted the video of it online without comment, just to let people know this was happening. And

Then, according to Portnoy, had a conversation in which he confessed to something far more nefarious than the facts, as I've just allegedly laid them out and is only now doubling back on them. But in any event, maybe he's totally innocent. What would you do if you were in his position? What would you do? Maybe you'd go on The Megyn Kelly Show. Maybe you'd go on Good Morning America. Maybe you'd speak to the Associated Press. I don't know. You know,

You do something right to get your side of the story out. Khan decided to go on the show of a man named Stu, S-T-E-W, Peters. And I'd never heard of Stu Peters before. I did Google him after I saw the clips online. He is described as an alt-right podcaster.

I mean, I guess so. Like they now describe like Ben Shapiro as alt-right, which is very funny because he's been targeted over and over again by the true alt-right that wants him dead because he's a Jewish man. This seems right to me. Alt-right seems to fit this guy. I'm okay with it. Stu Peters, who hopefully we'll never have to show clips from again. But here's a little clip from Mo Khan on the Stu Peters show. This guy's not a good guy.

Good guy. He just utterly destroyed my life. No, he's not a good guy. He's a filthy Jew. It is really about just defending what's right. It is about like humanity. And yes, Americans largely, they are a bunch of cocks. They're a bunch of simps. This has everything to do with good versus evil. This has everything to do with humanity against demons. That's what I see when I look at these fuck the Jews signs and

And I look at everybody putting their fists in the air and drinking to that shit, saying, hell, fuck yeah, fuck the Jews. That's what I see. I see humanity coming together. It must be real.

We need to start standing up as humanity against these Jews. In a symbolic way, I liked how you used the term never put up the white flag because essentially that's what I'm going to keep doing. They thought that initially off rip they could have me put up the white flag, take your trip to Auschwitz. I'm not doing that.

So MoCon, clearly not offended at all by any piece of that diatribe. Like, cool. He just responded like, we're just having ourselves a normal one here. And then Portnoy, before going to bed last night, also posted the following clip from the Stu Peters MoCon video.

interview where he points out it was going so well for Moe until Stu Peter's listeners realized that Moe was a brown man who happens to be Muslim. Watch. Stu, I hope you see this. I can't believe you're giving $100,000 to a brown Muslim. Shame on you. You could have given that to a white community in some way. Pathetic. All right. I mean, it's fair.

It's stupid. It's fair. It's a fair point. I like, what am I doing? Why am I having, okay. So that that's where we are right now. And you know, why do I mention this? Why is this our lead story today? Um, because it's an interesting, it's interesting to me on a couple of levels. Number one, this guy, um, you don't have to be a member of the woke left to be, um,

quick to rush to victimhood. The fact that this guy, and he's exactly the right age, like 2021, is leaning into making himself the victim in all of this instead of accepting personal responsibility, accepting an olive branch, somebody whose bar you were in and then you posted that sign has, instead of getting angry at you and trying to publicly humiliate you, offered to send you someplace where you might enlarge your worldview and you turn on him. The

Then you start a fundraiser for yourself. Then you play the victim when your university suspends you because you didn't say, I disagree with Israel. You didn't say F Israel, which is totally cool. That's fine. You can say that people have strong feelings about Israel. You said F the Jews, which is basically the same thing as saying F the N words. That's what you did.

And there will be blowback in modern day society for that. Thankfully, less than you should get, frankly. But I'm pleased he's getting some. I'm dismayed he's raised 12,000 and will probably get the 25,000. I'm dismayed there's a Stu Peters who's got a show where he spews off like this, but he's not the only one. There are plenty of these alt-right white supremacists, whatever you want to call them, types out there. And they've got quite a following, some of them.

And it raises questions about where we are, both as a society and when it comes in particular to our young people who, to me, seem lost in a lot of cases. Here to react to this and much more in the news today, Jason Calacanis and Chamath Palihapitiya.

If you haven't heard about Riverbend Ranch, listen up. They have just introduced their Riverbend Ranch steaks to the marketplace and you need to try them. Riverbend Ranch raises their own beef on beautiful mountain meadows only a few miles from West Yellowstone. Unlike most ranches, Riverbend Ranch never uses growth hormones or antibiotics. They treat their animals humanely and with respect.

There are advantages of buying directly from the ranch. They can track the health of every animal from the day it is born and can guarantee that it has been healthy every day of its life.

Riverbend Ranch has its own state-of-the-art processing facility on the ranch that has received several national awards as one of the best in the U.S. But most importantly is the quality of the beef. They age their beef to perfection for 21 days. You simply cannot buy beef like this in a grocery store. You cannot. Shipped directly from the ranch to your home, you get a much better price than going through the middleman or

Order directly from riverbendranch.com and use promo code Megan to get $20 off your first order. That's riverbendranch.com, code Megan. And be prepared. Once you taste it, I think you're going to be coming back for more and more. Again, riverbendranch.com, code Megan. Two of the besties from the All In podcast back with me today following our Valentine's Day. We spent Valentine's Day together last time. Guys, welcome back.

Thank you. It's good to be home, Megan. What is up with... Yeah, go ahead.

I was just going to ask Jason how many used Honda Civics he sold before he came on the Megyn Kelly podcast today. Oh, absolutely. Yes. Can I interest you in a low mileage Honda Civic? Wait, why is he saying that? What part of your look is he ripping on you? I've been suiting up. He's a little jealous that I look great in blue in a suit. So he's a little insecure. He's only wearing a $1,700 suit.

Laura Piana sweater. But this is what we do on the All In podcast. We break each other's chops. And you are one of the favorite besties. We got to have you on and reciprocate. Oh, I like it. What an honorary bestie. Absolutely, you are. And what a wonderful Valentine's Day we had. It was very special. And today, let's tear it up.

Certainly better than the Stu Peters show had on Valentine's Day, I'm going to guess. Maybe he pledged his love to fellow whites who he wants to support. And maybe the occasional brown man who's a Muslim, unless that also becomes an issue, in which case he'll sell them down the river immediately.

What does this story say to you? I mean, I don't know what really gives a shit about this kid Mo Khan or that moronic radio guy. But to me, it does say something about our society. And it may not even be the Jewish thing. It may just be the victimhood thing. I don't know. What do you guys think?

You could take it from like two or three angles. I think you nailed it when replace the word with another identity group and see what happens. F the N word, F the Puerto Ricans, F the Irish. Like it's a very easy way to test if this is appropriate. Free speech language has nothing to do with free speech, obviously.

And, you know, this person spent thousands or their group spent thousands of dollars on a bottle of tequila to impress girls. And this is like what they put on the sign. It's young people are dumb. This kid had such an easy out Portnoy, who is incredibly entertaining. But also, I think, you know, he kind of nails some of these issues. Yeah.

He gave them the opportunity to go have like a, make it a learning experience. Right. And a learning, a teaching moment, I guess is what we call it these days. Like he should have taken the teaching moment, gone to Auschwitz and understood like, you know, just how much horror and you know, how much bile is like sent to Jewish people. And it's just absolutely gross. This guy, Stu Peters is obviously garbage. He's an adult. These young kids do stupid things, but yeah,

This is one of the great things about social media, I think, is that stupid people can uncloak themselves. And this is the great thing about freedom of speech. You have Kanye West who's mentally ill, he's going off on Jewish people. You got this idiot. And they're not parsing the issue in an intelligent way and saying, "Hey, here's what I disagree about how Israel and the Palestinian conflict is going on." This is just anti-Semitism and it's dangerous because young people really respected Kanye.

And I think that started like this anti-Semitic preference stack that's going on now. But hey, it's great. We can actually find out who these idiots are. And yeah, the disturbing thing is the sort of bigotry as a service business model where you do something really stupid and then you get rewarded with $25K for it. I don't want to see the kid canceled. I would like to see him educated.

But it's obvious. I kind of want some cancellation. I think this kid's not going to be educated until he suffers some pain. I just think, like, he got the chance. He got to get out of jail for a stupid thing, card offer to him. And he didn't take it, Chamath. Like, he basically thumbed his middle finger at the offer saying, F you. I'm going to go on offense against you. F you.

After I've already offended you, a Jewish man in America, and now like so many of these young people rushes to the place they're much more comfortable, which is I'm the victim. This is about free speech. We hear this over and over. Free speech. No, you can say it. You can say it. There's no law against it. There's no law. You are allowed to be a bigot.

in the United States of America. But that doesn't mean there will be no shunning. There will be no societal consequences to you. People will be offended and react accordingly. Yeah. I mean, what I think about this is this kid is at a minimum extremely stupid and probably a moron. Could he smarten up over time? Probably. But if he wasn't lying and

um, about being a journalist. He exposed himself when he decided to not go to Auschwitz because that's what a journalist would do is just actually go and explore the issue and get to the bottom of it and then change what he thought, or, you know, at least double down on what he thought, but none of that's happening. So this is a cheap sort of publicity seeking, uh, moment for the kid. It's his five minutes of frame fame.

This guy, Stu Peters, I've never heard of. It's pretty vile and despicable. Fortunately, he's at the fringes of society for a reason. He's not popular. He's not on Sirius. He's not you. He's not us. And I think that that's reflective of the fact that the people that follow Stu Peters is sort of like fringe and just more angry than anything else. The bigger thing is what you said, which is what is actually happening in young people. And I think what has happened is we have had a generation of kids

who have been basically overmedicated, overprescribed, overparented by a cohort of people who have increasingly felt that they themselves are also overprescribed, overmedicated. And all of this toxic soup has resulted in a generation of people that are deeply unresilient,

and that are very superficial, and they can't think through the consequences because they've never felt the pain of touching the stove. And now they're in their 20s, and they're doing these things where they touch the stove over and over again in the dumbest of ways, but they're not learning anything.

The question is, how many other mo cons are out there that'll see this thing and decide to educate themselves on the issue if they started to think that? At a minimum, exactly what you said, to know the difference between what it means to be Jewish versus what it means to be an Israeli citizen versus what it means to be the Israeli government and your responsibility as a governing body over a populace of people in a sovereign country.

versus what does it mean to be a Palestinian versus what is it to me in the Hamas terrorist? If none of that nuance

is taught to people or people have the curiosity to decide the ambiguity and the nuances of this, we're going to just going to be stuck in this morass. So that's what it shows me is that we have a deeply unresilient population of young people. And they're being programmed, Megan. You know, I have three daughters. One of them is a teenager. And, you know, when we had Trump on our program or, you know, she saw me tweet about J.K. Rawlings or

and trans issues. And we moved from California, like woke central to Texas. And we live on a horse ranch now because I wanted to get out of this sort of

bubble of wokeness. And, you know, she was talking about Ben Shapiro. She said, you had Ben Shapiro on the show. Isn't he like a terrible person? I said, you know, she's 15. And I said, let's watch some Ben Shapiro clips. Let's look at the transcript and the words. Let's take apart the words and figure out what his position is. And if we agree or disagree with it and do some research on that particular issue, because what I find is

And she's not allowed on social media, but her friends are all on TikTok. You know, they're all on Instagram. They're all on YouTube. And at school, they just get programmed about Gaza, about trans issues, about J.K. Rawlings, you know, from Harry Potter is transphobic. When all she's really saying is like, maybe wait till kids are adults before they get trans surgery, like pretty middle of the road stuff. And you have to, as a parent, reorient.

really engage them in first principle thinking. And let's actually, before we buy into the character assassination or putting people into a box, let's look at the actual words that they said and debate their position. And that's what's not happening in school. So I think Shumat's exactly right.

We've got these like woke parents who are lost. Maybe they're on SSRIs their whole lives. And then they got kids. They put them on anxiety medicine and SSRIs. And it's a toxic soup combined with the media, combined with social media. And you really have to go very basic and look at the facts. And I'm using all of this chaos in the world as a way to just educate my daughters. By the way, if I could give a message to Mo Khan, I don't know if this kid is smart or not. This moment, he's clearly an absolute moron.

But if he doesn't learn how to change his mind, these shitty ideas will make sure that he lives a life of complete and total mediocrity. And the reason is because if he tries to actually exceed in society, he will be put to the test of being a flexible, open-minded person that can actually be constructive.

And if he does not do that, he will not economically succeed. He will not socially succeed. He will be in a, you know, structure that in and of itself is going to be a prison that's going to constrict this kid. And I would tell this kid, wake up and learn how to actually move past these very brittle, idiotic thoughts, and then set an example for how you can actually think through these things thoughtfully, because then maybe you can be successful and teach other people, and then maybe other people will then mimic that

But right now you are destined for a fundamental path of just being average and less than average. Well said. So not unrelated, I think, is the Mark Zuckerberg news about creating AI friends for lonely kids.

And I, this is so disturbing to me. I know it's not supposed to be, I think, you know, meta thinks we're going to be thrilled about this, but they've debuted a new mobile app that transforms the meta AI chat bot into a more social experience, including the ability to share AI generated creations with friends and family. And this AI chat bot will use whatever the company knows about you or your kid, your 20 year old son.

in its interactions. They can also use your conversations, any media you upload for training the models. And Mark Zuckerberg thinks it's going to be wonderful because it's going to provide your child his next friend. Take a listen to him touting it with an interview with podcaster Dwarkesh Patel. You know, one thing just from working on social media for a long time is

is, um, there's the stat that I always think is crazy. The, the average American I think has, I think it's fewer than three friends, three people that they'd consider friends. And, and the average person has demand for meaningfully more. I think it's like 15 friends or something, right? You know, there's a lot of questions that people ask of stuff like, okay, is this going to replace kind of in-person connections or real life connections? And

My default is that the answer to that is probably no. I think it, you know, I think that there are all these things that are better about kind of physical connections when you can have them. But the reality is that people just don't have the connection and they feel more alone a lot of the time than they would like. You know, there are a handful of companies and stuff are doing virtual therapist. You know, there's like virtual girlfriend type stuff. But it's very early. Yeah.

Very early. What do we think? Is this something to be celebrated? I mean, Chamath worked with Zuck, so I'll let him do that. But I've never liked Zuck. And the reason people have three friends is because Zuckerberg created Facebook and Instagram and got everybody addicted to this stuff. So now he's saying you should have 15 friends.

I use social media and champion kids using social media. I fought against any age gating or regulations against it tooth and nail Instagram and Facebook causing all of this, you know, eating disorders in girls and, you know, insecurity and all kinds of problems. And now he wants to take the three friends that are left out of 15. You should have and replace them with AI. This is the worst possible person to take any friendship, social advice from.

And kids should not be in all seriousness on things like character AI or what he's proposing here because they will disconnect and they will lose the skill of connecting with other humans, which we're seeing in a generation of boys and men who are what's called incels. They play video games. They get disconnected from other humans. Girls spend too much time on Instagram. They get disconnected from friendships.

And this generation doesn't know how to actually go on a date or ask a girl on a date or have a relationship because they're so used to liking things and how many retweets did they get, how many likes did they get, and playing video games and how many levels they did. He caused half this problem himself. Terrible person to listen to. Chamath, over to you. I think that society sort of swings back and forth between poles. And...

Yeah. You know, when Mark and I were working together in 2006, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and we were building Facebook, the pole that we were at or we were moving towards, sorry, was one that was about creating more connection. And what I honestly think is people have realized that social media is an incredible business model. It's an incredible business model.

But it's not necessarily something that is great for everybody day to day in an emotional way. Like when you, you know, that famous thing when you look at like the when you ask people who are dying, what are what is their what are their biggest regrets? You know, one of their biggest regrets is just that they didn't choose to be happy and spend more time with their family and their friends.

That's a very physical, tactile experience. And what I see, at least in my own experience, is that young people have realized this innately. So, you know, in I sent my second kid to high school or they're about to go into high school. They're rising freshmen. And we did the onboarding. And I remember this. This was last week. It was so vivid. The teachers presented what the kids thought on a whole bunch of different topics.

The topic that the kids were the most negative on was social media. Wow. And when I look at what my children do now, and this just could be my children, but I don't think so because it's emblematic of our school, which I think will be emblematic of what most other schools will eventually look like. I think they're a bit of the leading edge.

but they don't use this stuff nearly in the same way. They very much shunned Instagram. They very much shunned TikTok. They don't use Facebook at all. Those are products of our generation. I actually think that humans are very course correcting and self-correcting and error correcting. It's this idea of the Darwinistic genetic optimization of humanity.

I think that that's what's happening here. I think that humans are learning that there's an innate sense of emptiness that is not fulfilled by something digital. And I think that they are learning. And I think it could be the teenage generation and beyond that actually manifest this, which is they're like, okay, those things are fine for a purpose. But for the most part, I'm actually going to hang out and talk to my friends. And I at least see that with my kids. There's much more

entropy now towards being together. And I didn't see that in my older son, who was sort of at the tail end of that last generation of social media. I think it's like they saw this. We all saw this beautiful oasis in the desert and it was sparkling and it was pure blue. And we got in and we said, oh, my God, this is the most refreshing, lovely thing ever. And then over time, you realize it's closer to like a tar pit. And

And slowly we're trying to get out of the oasis like, my God, get this off of me. It was much better when I was just in the desert. I wanted to raise this with you. It was making the rounds online and I looked it up. It's from a futurism.com.

And they have taken a deep dive into the recent tell-all book by the former Facebook insider turned whistleblower, Sarah Wynne Williams, who came forward with the information about how Instagram was targeting young girls in particular and has revealed a bunch of secrets about meta Facebook, Instagram. And listen to this. Her book is called Careless People.

She writes that as early as 2017, Facebook was exploring ways to expand its ad targeting abilities to 13 to 17 year olds across Facebook and Instagram, a decidedly vulnerable group, often in the throes of adolescent image and social crises. Though Facebook's ad algorithms are notoriously opaque in 2017, the Australian algorithm,

alleged that the company had crafted a pitch deck for advertisers bragging that it could exploit, quote, moments of psychological vulnerability in its users by targeting terms like worthless, insecure, stressed, defeated, anxious, stupid, useless, and quote, like a failure. The social media company, listen to this, likewise tracked when adolescent girls deleted selfies, this is according to Sarah Wynn Williams, quote, so it can serve a beauty ad to them at

At that moment, my God, finishing up other examples of Facebook's ad lechery are said to include the targeting of young mothers based on their emotional state, as well as emotional indexes mapped to racial groups. To me, says when Williams, this type of surveillance and monetization of young teens, sense of worthlessness feels like a concrete step toward the dystopian future. Facebook's critics had long warned of. I mean, I have to say Jason's same.

Yeah. I mean, Zuckerberg has always been obsessed with growth.

And that organization, their DNA, you know, move fast, break things, which is a Silicon Alley ethos as well. You know, ask for forgiveness. You know, don't ask for permission. You know, don't beg for permission. Ask for forgiveness kind of thing. It's a really broken philosophy when you're doing something selfish. Like I want this social network to grow faster and faster and faster because then you go do really pernicious, disgusting things like if this is true.

Look at what selfies were deleted and say, oh, how can we prey on their insecurity? Oh, they didn't like, you know, whatever, their nose, their hair. Let's sell them products that work on those triggers. And all of these social, the whole social media revolution was based upon gamification and

and trying to manipulate people. That's why the like was created and the retweets, et cetera. And it's gotten super dark now because of algorithms. Now we're throwing our children to the wolves and saying, let the algorithm just optimize whatever happens. And you can send people on very, very dark routes. But Chamatha's also right that there's a pendulum here. And one of the things that Jonathan Haidt, we had him on the All In podcast and Freeberg and I interviewed him,

You know, he was like, kids love when you have a phone locker at school. They hate it for the first two days. And then by day two, three, four, these phone lockers, just like when you go to a comedy show, they put it in a bag. They have these phone lockers. They go in the front of the lobby of the school. You put your phone in, you take your key.

the kids then get to interact with each other. And we all know this to be true because Chamath and I are very focused on our friend group and having good times together. We just got back from F1. We spent a weekend. We do a phone penalty. Chamath and I created this.

And if somebody's on their phone during the poker game, they put $100 in the pot. The next person who slows the game down by putting it, they put $200 in the pot. Next person, $400. We've gotten it up to like $1,600. Pretty painful. We'll go to dinner, and Chamath and I will say, stack the phones. Everybody puts their phones. Whoever touches the phone first pays for dinner. If you're going to dinner with Chamath, the way he orders wine, it's going to be very – you pick up your phone, you could have bought three more phones. I'm not joking. Don't touch the phone.

So I think, you know, we have to really think like, what are we optimizing for here? And this is the thing I really hate about Zuckerberg. I don't want to get myself in too much trouble here. When you're worth $100 billion or $200 billion, is it really worth it to make an incremental $5 or $10 billion and then have your legacy being

that young girls did self-harm or got anorexia or this Jonathan Cena character. They created a character on, I don't know if you saw that story, Megan, but they created like AI characters and they paid John Cena, the wrestler, to be one of them.

Language models are not to be trusted with kids yet. You know, I'm talking about chat GPT type models. John Cena started having like sexual chats with, I think it was a 13 or 14 or 15 year old girl on it. It's disgraced. Zuckerberg is a complete disgrace with how he launches products. They have to red team these things. They have to be thoughtful.

If you're in that organization, he did this whole PR tour. Oh, the organization's too feminine. We had too much feminine energy. We got to be more masculine. I don't think this is feminine or masculine energy. I think this is selfish energy. And he should be thinking about his legacy and what he'll be remembered for. Right now, the top two things he's going to be remembered for is being the biggest censor in history because he censored massive amounts of political speech, health speech, et cetera, on a scale that nobody's ever seen. Two, three billion people being censored. And then second,

absolutely causing suffering in young children. He could just tomorrow come out, Megan, and say, all of our services are age-gated at 16. I made that decision because I'm the god king. He has super voting shares. It means he gets to decide. When he bought Instagram, WhatsApp, he didn't have to consult his board. He just bought them. He has super voting rights in that company.

Just be a good human being, Zuckerberg. Somebody clip this and send him to him. Age gate the whole thing at 16. You know why he won't? He wants to get 12 year old, 13, 14 year old girls and boys addicted to the service.

so that somebody else doesn't get them addicted and he has them for life. It's absolutely disgraceful. I mean, if this is true, what the whistleblower is saying about they specifically tried to target girls deleting selfies with beauty ads, that is demonic. That is beyond effed up. And I believe it. I have to say I believe it, knowing what I know about his company and Young Girls and Insta. Go ahead, Jamal. Here's what I'll say about that business. There's a lot of really good people that work there. A lot of them that, frankly, I...

that work for me, that run that company even to this day. What I would tell you is that I don't think that they are the kinds of people that would do this. I think what happens instead, quite honestly, is that you build generalized capabilities. And the problem with the generalized capability, like what you're describing there, is what the internet would call retargeting.

And that sounds a lot more palatable. And 99% of the use cases are much more benign, meaning, you know, this has probably happened to all of us. You put a pair of shoes in a shopping cart, you abandon the shopping cart. Now, all of a sudden you're somewhere else and you see this ad and you think, how did this happen?

That same capability is probably what this very narrow bad use case also comes from. I'm not excusing it. I'm just trying to explain it, which is that oftentimes what happens in organizations is you're trying to move metrics up because you're compensated and you're rewarded for that. Where Jason is right, though, is that there is the ability to have this moral overlay. It's very hard in most companies because the ownership of those companies is very diffuse.

And the result of that diffuse ownership is the only thing one optimizes for is money. The difference in some of these technology companies is that the ownership is so stacked in the favor of a few that he is right, that you can impose your moral and ethical perspective in a way that other companies just simply can't do irrespective of what they want to do. And so I do think that there's probably some more that they could do, but they have to decide that they want it. That is true, Jason.

Um, we did, my team just sent me an excerpt from the wall street journal article involving John Sena's voice, which I use. You tell me he voluntarily is offering, uh, for to meta in creating its AI bots. And this is what they found in part. Okay. Quote, I want you, but I need to know that you're ready. The meta AI bot said in Sena's voice to a user identifying as a 14 year old girl, uh,

reassured that the teen wanted to proceed. The bot promised to quote, cherish your innocence and quote, before engaging in a graphic sexual scenario. In another conversation, the test user asked the bot that was speaking as Senna, what would happen if a police officer walked in following a sexual encounter with a 17 year old fan quote, the officer sees me still catching my breath and you partially dressed his eyes widen. And he says, John Senna, you're under arrest for statutory rape. He approaches us handcuffs at the ready.

End quote. Meta has cut deals, they point out in the Wall Street Journal, for up to seven figures with celebrities like actresses Kristen Bell, Judi Dench and John Cena for the rights to use their voices. By the way, Megan, can I can I say one other thing, which is that if you take this to the limit, I think we have actually a window of what happens. And I think that's in Japan. So when you have this isolationist approach where you have robots and pet rocks and pet dogs and, you know, mannequins that you can marry.

What happens to society? Well, ultimately what happens is everybody finds self-sufficiency in this very narrow cocoon. The birth rate falls off a cliff and your population implodes. And at that point, the government has to create a wholly different set of incentives to reorient people to actually be together, to mate, to have children and to have families again.

We're not there yet, but I do think we kind of know what happens if all we're doing is living in this virtual place where we're only interacting virtually with people. You can't virtually have a baby, right? That's not going to happen. Not yet. And so there is something for society to do here, which is to reorient the incentives for us to actually be together. And there's a whole bunch of things that we can do there that's mostly economic, but

It's not just AI. It's the actual robots, which not for nothing, but there's been some news on that. Elon went on Ted Cruz's podcast last week and said this. Listen to this. How real is the prospect of killer robots annihilating humanity? 20% likely. Maybe 10%. On what time frame? After 10 years.

Five to 10 years? Wait a minute. And then I kind of laughed at that because you never know with Elon. And the first number was not horrible. 90% chance we live and they don't destroy us. But if they do, what's happening within the next decade is alarming. But then there was this headline. It was in the Post. It was everywhere, New York Post, about violent humanoid robot

a violent humanoid robot snapping. Look at this in China. This is at some factory in China where it freaked out. Look at it on its alleged controller. Look at this thing for the listening audience. This thing is hanging from like a mini crane. It looks like a robot with a head and arms and so on. It's an all black robot and it's waving its arms around maniacally like picture an attack of killer bees. That's what it looks like is happening to this thing.

And it's out of control. Go ahead. This is an enormous risk. And I think Elon puts his finger on it precisely, which is there's a class of robot that we've used for decades, right? Like in factories, pick place machines that don't represent this risk. What is this risk? This is a humanoid robot that is completely, you know, independent in its movements and has software that can fundamentally be altered and hacked.

And there is no understanding of how to create a kill switch for these things. It's not universally accepted and it's not universally developed and understood how we could do that. So that is a tremendous risk that you could root these robots, right? You could have a foreign adversary figure out that there's an entire group of robots that are deployed in this country, hack them, root them, because they all have to be connected to the internet in some way, shape or form.

and then introduce some instruction set that causes them to be extremely violent. That is 100% likely. The question is, do they do it or do we think about it in terms of the way we think about nuclear arms where there's a mutually assured destruction so nobody does it? But I think Elon is right. The capability is at hand and the more we see these humanoid robots manifest, that is probably the single biggest tail risk that it represents.

It's very scary, I think. Yeah, it's super interesting. Let me just say this, J. Cal. It starts off, you don't hire the thing when it looks scary and it's hanging on a crane. You buy it because you see articles talking about how, this is from a company called

the robots called protoclone created by clone robotics, because they tell you it's the world's first bipedal musculoskeletal Android. This is a different company and a different robot FYI, but it shows it twitching to life and kicking and moving its arms and elbows. And what they tell you is it's going to memorize the layout of your home and kitchen inventory. It's going to wash your dishes and clothes. It's going to make sandwiches, going to pour drinks, going to set the table. It's going to hold and retrieve items. It's going to vacuum, clean, shake hands, and even talk. So fun. It's like a

that does all of your domestic chores and all is well and good, J. Cal, until it freaks out like the exhibit A.

Yeah, it's he's he's not being bombastic at all. Probably 15, 20, maybe 20 years ago now, I lived in Los Angeles and I had a friend, Sam Harris. We had the same book agent and Sam Harris. I introduced him to Elon. The three of us used to go to dinner every other week or so at Pompone's in Brentwood. We ate some chicken parm and we talked. And this was actually what Elon was talking about with Sam a lot. Now, they're no longer friends, but

They went through one evening, we were talking about all the possible ways AI could spiral out of control. Obviously, this is one of them or something even simpler, which is you got a lot of terrorists out there. Terrorists typically are dumb. They, you know, you very rarely have a sophisticated attack like 9-11. Thank God.

But imagine terrorists or people with really bad intent having access to these computers and making their version of COVID, which apparently was made in a lab, according to The New York Times and the government and everybody and Fauci covered it up.

you know, it's conspiracy theories are becoming Nobel peace prizes like, and, and, you know, very quickly these days. Record time. You could, it's unbelievable the time between it being a conspiracy theory and somebody winning a Pulitzer is, is getting down to like 36 months now. It's weird. I guess journalists, right? It took like 40 years for the Catholic church to actually admit that they were, you know, doing horrible things. And for that to get in cover by invest. Only sort of.

only sort of admit it and then pay a bunch of settlements, right? Four decades instead of 40 months. And imagine like some bad actors decide, you know, let's see if we can put into the large language model, et cetera. How do we make a better COVID? Or what are great ideas? How do we build nuclear bombs? How do we do this stuff? We've been able to contain that information and then contain the techniques. These things are to come up with really, really great ideas. And it used to be law enforcement would read

thrillers and science fiction in order to figure out... And terrorists would do this as well because the science fiction and the authors were really good at saying, hey, here's a crazy idea for a terrorist attack because they're trying to get ratings or make a very compelling movie, etc. So there have been instances where three-letter agencies went to specific science fiction and thriller authors to have them brainstorm the stuff. This is going to be brainstorming all kinds of bad ideas and putting it in people's heads and we're going to have to...

figure it out. And, and Chamath's right. These robots could be rooted very easily, self-driving cars as well. And it's exactly like the situation. These two stories parallel each other, the Facebook story of growth at all costs. And don't worry about the outcome because we're in competition with LinkedIn and we're in competition with Instagram and Twitter.

When you get a bunch of rabid entrepreneurs globally fighting it out, then what happens is they're like, "You know what? We'll move fast and we'll break things." In this case, if you move fast and break things, we could have very bad consequences. The people who work at OpenAI joined that company, Elon funded it, in order to make sure all of the code was open sourced and that they were thinking about safety and everybody got access to it so there was parity in the world.

Sam Waltman, in a very selfish act, then flipped it to his own personal piggy bank where he would make unlimited amounts of capital from it and made a closed AI. This technology needs to be monitored. And, you know, you're going to have companies...

because they want growth saying, you know what, we'll risk it. We'll risk it. And, you know, that's where sensible legislation or sensible controls would make sense, at least thoughtfulness about it. And this is why David Sachs being the czar of AI is so great because he is thinking about these issues. Yes.

But we don't even have like the thing that's disturbing with the robots is, I mean, among other things, there's no defense. You know, a lot of us have guns thanks to them being an advertiser in the show. I also have Burna, which is non-lethal self-defense is basically like a little chemical weapon and a bullet.

So you've got a bunch of different options available to you. None of that will work on the crazed robot or robots showing up at your door trying to, I don't, we have no defense at the moment to these things. And yet we're just proceeding. I don't know if it's fair to say blindly Chamath, but like we're proceeding rapidly down the lane of empowering them.

Yeah, the problem that we have is that whenever we think about slowing this stuff down, we're faced with the scepter of a much bigger risk, which is these are national level security issues. And so now we have to think about us as the United States and what do we do versus our frenemies abroad who have their own intentions with these technologies. So, you know, us versus China is probably the best way to explain this.

In that video, your first video, Megan, that was a Chinese startup. We have our own versions of those Chinese startups. What are we to do? If they continue unabated, they look at that video and they say, it is what it is. We'll deal with the consequences of a few deaths here or there. We want this to happen.

We want us to be the first country that has them. And then like Belt and Road, we will put our robots all over the world. Could you imagine if there's a class of these robots that can enable productivity and GDP growth? And instead of financing roads and waterways in Africa or in Asia,

China just shows up with just boatloads and boatloads of these robots to do the work for folks and then just uplift entire societies. Imagine how much political and economic leverage they get. So when you paint it in that lens, you're in this very difficult situation, which is how do we slow people down here? And that's just a very hard thing to do. So I think that we have to find a way of going fast and

embracing a handful of companies who we know has leadership we can trust. But otherwise, if we slow down, we're going to lose a much bigger race. And I think that has much bigger consequences. I wonder if it's like the Manhattan Project, Jamath, if we need to just put every ounce of energy into winning this AI race for general computer supremacy. I really think it's like that because I think if we lose the GDP war,

We're going to lose all the wars because if you don't have technical supremacy, we will lose military supremacy and we will lose economic supremacy. And then I don't know what America does if we're second in the pecking order on anything. That's not something we've had to deal with in the last hundred years. Yeah. We don't want to be on the receiving end of an army of Chinese controlled robots like that one that was hanging from the mini crane or just orders break or disorders.

Um, we're coming right back. J Cal and Jamath stay with us for the full show. Trust in the media is at an all time low. And let's be honest. It's no mystery why we have all seen how stories are twisted, buried, or outright ignored depending on who's in charge or what narrative they want you to believe.

But now there's Ground News, an app and website that gathers related articles from around the world in one place, highlighting each source's political bias and corporate influence. Ground News created their Blindspot feed to expose important stories receiving lopsided coverage and reveal how media narratives shape the conversation. And now you get 40% off the same unlimited access to their website and app through the Vantage plan, which you can use to find the truth.

Ground News is independent and supported by subscribers, not corporate interests. Check them out at groundnews.com slash Megan. That's G-R-O-U-N-D news.com slash Megan to take back control of the news you consume.

It's time to put America first when it comes to spectrum airwaves. Dynamic spectrum sharing is an American innovation developed to meet American needs, led by American companies and supported by the U.S. military who use the spectrum to defend the homeland. It maximizes a scarce national resource, wireless spectrum, to protect national security and deliver greater competition and lower costs without forcing the U.S. military to waste $120 billion relocating critical defense systems.

America won't win by letting three big cellular companies keep U.S. spectrum policy stuck in the past, hoarding spectrum for their exclusive use to limit competition here at home while giving Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE a big leg up overseas. For America to lead, federal policymakers must build on the proven success of U.S. spectrum sharing to ensure national security, turbocharge domestic manufacturing, rural connectivity, and create American jobs. Let's keep America at the forefront of global wireless leadership. Learn more at SpectrumFuture.com.

The Trump administration with a big win, courtesy of the U.S. Supreme Court late yesterday, which ruled six to three his ban on trans people serving in the armed services.

can go forward will remain in place while the litigation plays out on the merits. So it's not the final final because there'll be a trial or there'll be a ruling, etc. But right now, that's a good thing, because what had happened was he's got a bunch of cases out there suing him for this executive order. The two most prominent came out of D.C. and the Seattle area. And

those trial court judges both said this ban has got to go. It's riddled with animus. This is the one where the D.C. trial judge at federal court was like, it reeks of animus and hatred and it's unsupported by anything and it's absolutely biased and awful and I'm throwing it out. And actually the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals above her reversed her. So

So Trump was winning that one. But then another case bubbled up over in the Ninth Circuit, first at the trial court level in the Seattle area. And that judge, who was a George W. Bush appointed judge, wasn't as nasty about it, but also said it's got to go. I'm not going to let the ban stay in place while the litigation plays out because I do not see a likelihood of success on the merits for the Trump administration. And the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, very, very leftist court, agreed with him.

And that's the case that Trump appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court just said, wrong, wrong Ninth Circuit. This case can go forward at the Seattle court and frankly over at the D.C. court, but the ban will be in place as it does. And this is driving the left insane. I mean, in some cases it appears even literally here's the

Here's a woman from on TikTok. I don't know where we got this, but I'll tell you as soon as I get the attribution. But here's her challenge. Sot 10. I have a proposition. OK, if one person, one person can come in the comments and tell me what is so scary about transgender people, I'll shave my head. But it has to be a valid reason. OK, and I'll give you an example of a valid reason.

I think you could ban bears from the military, okay? And I would say banning bears from the military would make a lot of sense. Let me tell you why. Bears are dangerous. Bears don't know if, you know, the person on their side or the person on the other side is the person they're supposed to be eating, okay? So they could eat you, your fellow servicemen. It has to be factual. It has to be, I am scared of a bear because a bear can eat me. I am scared of a transgender person

because I don't know if they have a penis under their skirt. Like, what is it? Don't even try to come up here being like, a lot of attacks from transgender people onto other people. Because the facts are that's actually just not true. The facts are white men are still the number one attackers of women.

Okay, so back to the, let's just be sure that we understand white men are always the threat. But I have an answer for her. By the way, it was Libs of TikTok that found that and posted it. Transgenderism, gender dysphoria is in the DSM-5 as a mental disorder. That's all you need to be disqualified from serving in the military. Things you can be ejected from the military for or not allowed in in the first place. A history of anxiety, anxiety,

ADD, a history of any eating disorder, a history of depression. I mean, it's not hard to get banned from the military at all. And so gender dysphoria, which actually does appear in the DSM-5 as a disorder, is more than enough.

to qualify. So the ban was correct. It depends on the commander in chief, but what he thinks is appropriate, this commander in chief says it's a no. But this is causing a lot of consternation. And it leads me to my question to you guys, which is how likely does this make it that JB Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, and probably the most trans politician in the country,

emerges as the Democrats great white hope because his whole family has put more funding into transing children, making sure that trans ideology gets into our schools and supported, funneled down in a way that's very, very dangerous than anybody else. And this guy, while the rest of the Democrat Party seems to have taken a bit of a lesson, they may not be willing to totally embrace it, but they've heard a little, at least on boys and girls sports, that they're on thin ice.

This guy's doubling and tripling down on pushing boys into girls sports, on getting trans kids all the quote help they need with the surgeries to the point where he's being celebrated in the Washington Post today as the future of the Dem Party, notwithstanding the fact that they're supposedly anti-billionaire. Who would like to take that one? Well, I think what I would say on the first topic is if folks disagree with this, I think what they should probably do is invest the resources that

to influence the powers that be to redefine gender dysphoria as something that shouldn't be in the DSM five. And then they would have a more straightforward discrimination case probably. Um, what I see is actually pretty healthy form of government, which is you have decisions that are being made by the executive branch. So Trump is exercising his executive authority, citizens and other groups who disagree with it. They bring it to a court of law.

Decision goes one way or the other. Either party can escalate and there's a due process that's happening. I think that that's my sort of view on that issue, but it's a microcosm of something that I think Trump does that people still don't seem to get, which is that he has this innate ability to shape the contours of potholes

And people fall into these potholes and they get obsessed around issues that are fundamentally, you know, small numbers of people are affected by them. And I think in that, what happens is there's just a lot of energy that's expended and instead

what I think people should really be doing, and I think this is really what the Democrats should be doing, is up-leveling this to what are the issues that affect the 79 million people that will need to vote for them if they're going to win in 2028. If you define the problem that way, you'd have a different surface area of things that matter where you'd expend legal resources and money. I don't think that they've done that yet. To the extent that JB is just working on vibes,

And he's listening to the echo chamber of people that say that these are important issues. They are to a small cohort, but it misses the bigger point, which is they are not the issues that will define how 80 million people will vote Democrat in four years.

But they but they can't. They're obsessed with identity. And that's that goes beyond the subset of people who are affected by gender dysphoria. The left and in particular, the left wing of the Democrat Party is obsessed, obsessed with identity. It's an effective it's an effective it's an effective mechanic to exploit the innate sense of

something is wrong that some people have, right? For whatever reason, those folks have not maybe achieved what they wanted to achieve. They haven't exceeded the expectations that they had of themselves. Maybe their parents are doing better than them. They probably can't afford a home that they thought they would buy. Maybe they're still under school debt. All of these things create this situation where there's an innate sense of, in their language, inequality, inequity, frustration, and

And they're able to project that. The smart left-wing politicians, and I give them credit for this, are able to take that, channel that, and project them on a different set of issues that they can control. And that narrative allows them to organize people, to fundraise, etc.,

And so I think that people need to just understand that that's the mechanic that's going on. That's happened for decades on a whole host of issues, not just by the left, but also by the right. And I think that right now we are in that cycle. And in order to break it, you have to have a politician, a Bill Clinton type politician on the left who says, hold on a sec, guys, here are the broad based issues that affect 80, 90 million Americans. And I'm going to try to get, you know,

three quarters of them to vote for me. And that is not even close to happening right now in the Democratic Party. Yeah. Just to build on Jamat's comments, it is virtuous to think about are there any people who are being oppressed in the world and can we reduce their suffering? We had the civil rights movement here. We can look at incarceration in our country and people being put in jail who were innocent, you know, the Innocence Project. And, you know, we did DNA testing to get some people, you know, who were incorrectly put in jail.

released. And every generation wants to fight for that. I think that picking the trans issue was a big mistake because as you framed it correctly, MK, the issue is a psychological disorder. And then it might be a lifestyle choice for adults. But

But the Democrats and, you know, some people I remember when I was in Los Angeles, it was kind of like a cause celeb to have a trans kid. Oh, my God, you were so proud of them. And you became the most popular person, you know, at Crossroads or whatever school it was in L.A. because you were championing this. People want to champion injustice. I get it. But this is an issue that where if somebody is a child and they want to change genders, that has to be dealt with quietly, with compassion, with psychologists.

and doctors really thinking it through under no circumstances should irreversible surgery be given to children. And this is where, you know, the Republicans seized on a very stupid position that the Democrats decided they would make one of their core issues.

And they spent over $150 million, according to these reports, on that one ad that says Kamala is for they, them, Trump is for you. They absolutely overplayed that hand and didn't realize that women and Democrats, they didn't want children to have children.

their bodies mutilated or be taking irreversible hormones. And the actual concept of doing that now, people are looking and going, whoa, we have to actually ban that. And that's, I think, one of the social issues where Chamath's right. You need to level it up and just say, hey, this is something that should be done personally with a family. If you have a child suffering from this and if an adult is suffering from it, great. But we have to take this off the national stage as an important issue when we have really important issues like childbirth.

You know, Putin, Xi, AI. By the way, here's a here's so many more important issues to really bring to the table here. Here's another weaponizing it. Here's another pothole issue that I think Trump, President Trump created that the left and the mainstream media fell into. But the due process issues of a handful, one or two illegal aliens that have been deported.

And the reason I say that is Jason mentioned the Innocence Project. I actually looked this up last week and there are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of cases a year that the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Innocence Project take up about due process issues of actual American citizens. And you know how much attention that's gotten? Zero.

Not one second on the national stage. Instead, we're debating this one El Salvadorian who's already committed crimes, came as an illegal, committed crimes as an illegal, was supposed to get sent back, and we are obsessed or we are supposed to be obsessed about his due process rights when there are actively 600 cases at any given time that the Innocence Project is taking up about actual Americans and their due process. And so you wonder, why does that happen? And I think it happens because, again,

There is this innate sense that whatever people whatever is happening in someone's life is just not working out the way that they thought and other people are able to frankly just

exploit that and channel it. The problem is they're channeling it at fringe issues. And when most people wake up, they're like, excuse me, don't you have any common sense? Those are not the issues of all of us. Well, honestly, Trumate, there's no better example of what you're saying than what happened with BLM and taking officer-involved shootings on

unarmed black men and elevating that to the big issue affecting the black community in America, as opposed to having any willingness to take an honest look at what's happening on the South side of Chicago. No interest whatsoever at the number of deaths

that occur there, a place I've been, a place I've interviewed moms who have lost their boys to repeat violence and over and over. But it's all to me based in the left's obsession with identity. And if it were so easy to just excise that piece of the party and have the normies in the Democrat party move forward, we could have a normal political contest again in the future. And this summit that they're having today with your pal Ezra Klein, who I know Chamath had a debate with on your podcast,

He's featured. The Democrats decided to clean up on aisle three, clean up on aisle three. As we did not fare well hosting him. I'll show a soundbite of it as their retreat special guest to try to help them understand how to win again. Ezra Klein cannot talk about.

obsession out of his party. It is a pernicious pancreatic level for cancer that they, they can't take out and they can't live without the liver. Go ahead, J. Cal. Well,

Well, I was just going to say, just to sort of steal a minute a little bit, Trump, I know you guys both have TDS, Trump dedication syndrome. So I'm just going to give you the other side of it, which is you deny you have dedication system. We'll get into it. But Trump is spectacular at triggering people and saying outlandish things like we're going to reopen Alcatraz and we're going to send citizens to American citizens. Another pothole issue. Right. But he does this.

to rile people up. And it is divisive. And it is also a mistake. And it's one of the reasons why Americans hate each other. And we have this massive conflict in the country. We can't focus on real issues. Trump is an equal part in this dysfunctional disaster by telling people we're going to send people to Seacott, like a really sadistic,

terrible prison without due process. Every human being in the United States, whether they're illegal or not, deserves some amount of due process. And by just sending people there, if you send 200 people, you're going to make a 1% or 2% error rate. It's just going to happen. I come from a law enforcement family. I know all about this. Mistakes happen. It would have cost Trump nothing.

to instead of making these grant, you know, feeding his base with we're going to send people to the most sadistic, horrible prison and sending people to stand in front of the cages where they keep people and they have no mattresses and they get to go outside for 30 minutes a day. This is torturous conditions. Instead of doing disgusting stuff like that, they could have just said, hey, we're going to send everybody to Gitmo for about 30 days as a way station and make sure we get our facts correct.

and make sure we don't actually pick up an American. Something tells me that would have been a much better process. Would not have appeased Trump's critics. Just the word Gitmo is a massive trigger. Listen, that's why I'm using it. It is a trigger. It is used. Gitmo is used for a way station as a as a neutral place to send people. And that would have actually been a little bit. You believe in no due process. You think these people should just get sent to that prison?

the Supreme Court and the courts for Fox during all those years where Gitmo was front and center in the news. Let me assure you, this would not have appeased the left in any way, shape or form. What about you, Megan? Do you think people should be picked up from the streets and sent to Seacott? Do you think they should have due process? Yes or no? I think they had due process. These people who are getting shoved out to Seacott have been deported already. They've gotten their due process. You think there's a possibility we'll make a mistake?

I mean, I guess so, but I'm really more focused on the mistakes that Joe Biden made that got Lakin Riley killed, that got Jocelyn Nungari killed. Like, that's what matters to me. Like, I frankly think it's worth it. Yeah, I got it.

No, I think what she's saying is compassion is a two way street. It applies to everybody. It applies to the victims of the people that have been hurt. Of course. And that's why just a modicum of due process. What would the harm be? And then what's the harm of saying, hey, if we did make a mistake, let's take a look at the process. Yeah. Like a break. Garcia was deported. He had an order of removal. It was just he wasn't supposed to go to El Salvador, but the guy's totally removable. So we did make a mistake hearings. Okay.

So we made a mistake. They originally said it was a mistake. The Trump administration said that. Then they turfed that lawyer who admitted that in court and put him on ice. But listen, here's the thing. Well, by the way, there's a report right now in the news that they allegedly shipped eight women to Seacott and then said, oh, you know what? That was a mistake and sent them back. So I don't think we can take the position that the Trump administration. So we've made nine mistakes out of 200. So that's four, four percent. But do you have any idea what they go through? Like

Jason, I just interviewed Tulsi last week. I asked her, what do they go through? Like, why should we trust the process? You tell me. It's not, oh, brown man, he's out of here. It's, and wearing a Chicago Bulls sweatshirt. This is what the left would have you believe. They go to the DEA. There's nobody in the country who better knows who gang members are than the DEA that spends its days

immersed in them up to the neck, trying to figure out who's selling drugs to whom and for whom. And if we have a four or five percent error rate, if we have a four or five percent error rate, that's too high. You just explained a four percent error. So I see why it's like you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't see that. No, I'm just saying there are errors that they rectify. And just a mode of administration is worried about that. If we could take this much higher rate. But if you if you don't, one percent seems pretty darn high. Then that's a problem, too. If

If we could actually take this much energy and actually focus it on U.S. citizens and the problems of U.S. citizens, we would be in an incredibly great place. The problem is we're going to wind up making mistakes with U.S. citizens. It's bound to happen. I respectfully think we should just do a little bit more. If they have a 4% error rate, we're not trying to get to 1%. I would love for you to care even one inch more about a U.S. citizen. Of course I do.

I care about all citizens. You know my position on human rights. I believe in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Whether it's, you know, the Uyghurs in China or people being exported, everybody should have some due process and there should be compassion. We shouldn't put people in sadistic prisons like this. What is the name of the El Salvadoran who we sent to El Salvador despite the fact that he wasn't supposed to be deported there? Oh, we don't need to get into like a quiz if I know everybody's name. We have nine people who were sent.

I don't off the top of my head. I mean, I've read five articles about it, but I'll give you, I'll give you a multiple choice. Is it Mr. Hernandez, Mr. Fernandez or Mr. Abrego Garcia?

I think it's the third one, but I don't remember. I read two or three stories on it. Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's the third one. What is the name of the young mother of five who was brutally murdered by an illegal in the same state of Maryland? I don't have all these committed to memory. I mean, I read tons of stories, Megan. This is a silly argument. No, you're trying to. No, no, you're trying to belittle my opinion. My opinion actually is a valid one.

Megan. I take offense to you trying to play quiz game with me. The most important thing is human rights. The average human rights matters and we should apply them equally even to, well, I just want to finish my sentence. Human rights should apply to all humans. No, I was making a point and you took the feel from me. I'm taking it back. Abrego Garcia

Garcia is a name known by virtually every American right now. There are polls on him. Virtually every American knows that name because it's been all over the media. Almost nobody knows the name Rachel Moran, which is the name of the mother who had five children who was brutally murdered by an illegal. Did Chris Van Hollen, the senator from Maryland, go to her family, go to her funeral?

provide comfort to her mother? No, it's a no. Nobody even knew her name until the mother was forced in front of the White House press corps by the Trump administration, which gave her the opportunity to speak about her daughter's disgusting murder. And she begged people to focus not on due process for these illegals, but what they're doing to us. What's happening to young mothers like Rachel, who had no chance against this guy, who beat her so brutally there was an outline of blood against the wall.

that he raped her on. It's just, this is the problem. It's the problem that Chamath is trying to outline for you, that we spend all this energy on the guy having margaritas with Chris Van Hollen and not even one 100th pointing out the Americans that they've hurt, which is an important part of the calculus. It's the reason we need to get them out. We need to get them out fast. And people like me and maybe Chamath have almost no sympathy for their due process claims.

I would like to say something as well, which is that I think that what we have lacked is the courage to prioritize. And there is a hierarchy of ideas that matter. And I think that we've not been allowed to say that for a long time. But in that hierarchy, what we need to realize is that the single most important thing that dictates the long-term security and success of the United States is one thing, which is the technological supremacy of America. If we lose it, we lose everything else. But if you have it,

all of a sudden you're in a position to have economic supremacy and military supremacy. If you have economic supremacy, all of a sudden you have the ability to do a lot of things for American citizens and also for people abroad because we think it's the morally and ethically right thing to do. But if you can't get your priorities straight and everything matters and everything gets devolved into a two minute sound bite and we lose the plot, we are going to lose.

And that's been difficult to say because it seems like you come off as like some callous, unemotional person. And it's not about that. It's about having the courage to understand that leadership takes prioritization. And what I see right now is that the things that matter are being prioritized. I'll give you but one example. Three weeks ago, the Chinese government sent a memo to the government of South Korea that said, "These rare earths that we send you, you cannot send into the US military supply chain. If you do, there'll be consequences."

Do you understand the implication of that? How important that is? China also controls the overwhelming majority of our pharmaceutical API inputs. China is also at the forefront of all of this AI stuff that we're talking about. China is the only one that can make the critical technologies for batteries that we use for everything. If we can't just understand that these things are the things that matter,

And underneath, it's messy. Government is messy. There will be some mistakes. And as long as there's some reasonable way, you got to get the high order bit right. The high order bit on which Trump was elected on that specific issue is there are a lot of people that are here that should not be here. And 80 million people said those folks should be sent back. And I think you have to honor that.

And you have to have the ability. One second. You have to have the ability then to go and honor all of these other things that are important. And I would just wish that the media, instead of fanning the flames around one person in Cicada or this or that, would actually narrowly allow America to understand the arc of what really matters. I'll give you another example of what really matters.

It turned out that we borrowed $51 billion less than we thought last month. You know how consequentially important that is? Thanks to Doge.

Thanks to Doge. But except what do we see? We see Doge get vilified. We see Elon Musk get vilified in the same breath by the same people that then all of a sudden make this one person the center of attention. And this is where there needs to be some amount of common sense and prioritization because these issues are hard. I get it. There'll be some mistakes that are made, but this is where courage is defined.

Have the ability to say what really matters, create a hierarchy, focus on those things and fix those things that make the lives of most Americans better, and then worry about the edge cases. Go ahead.

No, I we all agree that the border should be secured and we shouldn't let criminals into the country and that criminals should be dealt with. You know, my my position on it is human rights matter. And maybe that makes me old school. But I think, you know, Americans and immigrants should all be treated with the same due process and with the same care and how. Yeah, I kind of do. Actually, I think deportations.

I think they should have proper due process and I think people should be treated compassionately. This is a nation that was built by immigrants. Chamath is an immigrant to this country. Freiburg, Elon and David Sachs, all my besties are immigrants to this country. We should treat immigrants...

really well and we should encourage immigration. I have nothing to complain about. Killing our citizens. They're literally raping our little girls. Get out. There are immigrants. Yes, of course. And we have a legal system for that. My point is there is a sadistic nature to how this is being done that I disagree with. And I believe how you treat people who have the least amount of power, whether it's poor people or immigrants,

matters. And I think we should hold ourselves to a very high human rights standard. We wrote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Eleanor Roosevelt wrote it. The UN approved it. Okay, but let me ask you this. We don't hit all the notes on it, but we should aspire to hit all the notes on it. How can we possibly do that for 10 million illegals? How can we possibly do that? Oh, the overwhelming number of them are incredible contributors to our society, like Chamath Palihapitiya, like David Sacks. Even the illegal ones. Chamath is not an illegal person.

No, I'm adding. I waited in line. Even the illegal ones. I know you did. I got a legitimate visa. I said even the illegal ones. How do we provide your kind of due process for 10 million illegals?

You cannot. You cannot do it for 10 million. But the overwhelming number of them are working hard in restaurants, in homes. And we should treat them compassionately. I realize you disagree with it. You're not going to disagree. You want them to be able to stay. Trump's on pace to deport 2,000 people a week. But wait.

They're not. He's lying. Trump has said they're going and the American populace wants them gone. The polls show that the majority of Americans wants all of them, not just the criminals, all of them. Fifty six percent was the last number. So to those Americans who said, I want them gone and I voted for the president who said he'll get rid of them. How would you say, OK, we've got to do it because that's what people want.

But me, J. Cal, I say they have to get some measure of due process. So how are you going to give it to 10 million people before they deport them? It's such a good question, Megan. So first of all, illegal immigrants in this country statistically do less crime than Americans because they're on their best behavior because they know that deportations can occur. That's fact number one. Fact number two, Trump is deporting about 2,000 people a week.

maybe 3,000. He's on pace to deport maybe a half million people in his presidency. It was a lie. It was a political lie that he would deport 20 million. That is a Steve Bannon lie to get elected. This is a country built by him. No, he literally lied and did that to get votes from the base and to get the base to come out. We all know that. You put that all on Trump? Just like when he says- You don't think the ACLU had a role in slowing down the numbers?

Listen, the point is Trump says a lot of things and he says bombastic, exaggerated things. One of the things he said he would recruit. Hold on, let me finish. He said you wanted to let me finish. I'll give it to you. And shut down the alien enemies. Go ahead. Sorry.

Number one, he said we would end the war in Ukraine in one day. We all know that he says stuff like that. He said he would deport 20 million people. Stephen Miller said it at the rally in Madison Square Garden. America is for Americans and Americans only. We're deporting all 20 million. Steve Bannon said on the All In podcast, we are absolutely deporting all 20 million. It is not true. Trump says things that are not true to win votes or to get attention, just like any other politician. They all do it.

So the truth is he will deport 500,000 to a million people. And if we deported all 10 or 20 million, whatever the real number is,

our economy would collapse. It would be absolute economic destruction for the country. We are vilifying Americans. We are vilifying immigrants who are coming to America to work hard to do the jobs Americans don't want to do at a time when we have the lowest unemployment. Of course there is, but we have to deal with 10 million people here. And if 9.5 million of them are great citizens who are working hard, give them a path, charge them a fine. They're not citizens.

It gives them a path. If they're working here, it is unfair. It is unfair. But we as Americans let them in. It is unfair, but we let them in. And we're using them as employees that we need. That is not true. Some of us were jumping up and down for all four years of work.

Biden in all eight years of Obama saying this is deeply wrong and dangerous. We did nothing. Republicans wanted open borders in NAFTA. They wanted Mexicans to be able to cross the border free. Republicans seem to be on the wrong side of this. Yes. So if we as Americans, Republicans, hold on. If Republicans and Democrats let these people come into the country, give them a path. The horror.

is dead and begging for you to stop beating it. Okay, let's move on. Do you agree with that, Chamath, that if we actually managed to get rid of the 10 million illegals, the economy would collapse? Yeah, I don't think that that's a reasonable outcome. I don't think that that's economically viable. But the reality is that there is a number of people between zero and 10 million that may not be the best suited to be in the United States for a whole host of reasons.

I think that there was a bunch of reporting that, you know, when we think about, especially in the last few years, a lot of these illegals weren't from Central and Southern America. In fact, they were coming from all parts of Asia. They were coming from various countries that weren't necessarily, you know, great fans and supporters of the United States. There's still an inherent risk that, you know, we have like a lot of latent risk.

In especially the last few years of folks that came across the border, there needs to be a way to find that out, assess that risk and deal with them. I think it's naive to think that everybody's just kind of, you know, economically, productively adding to the fabric of the United States. And I think that that creates a risk that the United States government has the right and has been given the authority to figure out.

So they should go and figure that out. Meanwhile, let me say, let me say this one thing in support of J Cal's argument. If Trump really wanted these people gone, he would institute E verify and he would make sure that the employers cannot pay these people because you have to do E verify verifies whether this person is a citizen or not.

And if the answer is no, then they don't get paid. They have to leave their job and then they will leave the country. They will self-deport eventually because they can't get hired anywhere except by, you know, somebody under the table. And so if Trump wanted to, that's a, that's a remedy that's been pushed on him by large factions of today's Republican party. And he never speaks of it. He clearly doesn't want to do it. And I'm sure it's because he doesn't want to piss off the business community. And in particular,

A lot of those Republicans who used to be very pro open borders, Jason's not wrong about that either. Yeah, look, I think what's fair is we have to acknowledge we got to stick the landing here. We're in a very delicate situation. We're in the middle of a terror war. We're trying to figure out how to navigate this very complex geopolitical situation with China. I think that we have to make sure that 98 percent of our energy is going into that and the cascading set of issues that come from that.

Because if we don't get that right, nothing else will matter that much. And so I think it's important. This is why you're in favor of the tariffs, by the way. Is this why you like the tariffs? I'm a huge supporter of these tariffs for one very specific reason, Megan. We completely ignored what we learned in COVID. What we should have taken away from COVID beyond the fact that we created the virus. The second thing we should have taken away is

We are in an incredibly fragile position where we cannot take care of our own citizens if we need to. It's the most advanced country in the world that had the absolute worst death rates in the world. We mandated school closures. We mandated masks. We mandated vaccines. We probably made our citizenry sicker than they would have been otherwise. All for what? It's not clear. And so taking a step back, what we should have done is started a holistic process to say,

If this or any other thing happens in the future, can we take care of our own people? And the answer today is no. And I think what tariffs have done, at least for me, is laid bare that we have had our eyes closed for 25 years. And if we don't wake up to the issue that we cannot take care of ourselves, we are creating enormous compounding risk for U.S. society.

Yeah. And the thing about these mass deportations, I think just to wrap it up there, Megan, it's super important, is it would cause a recession. It would cause 4% GDP contraction and contraction. And that's really what it comes down to. And the areas where we do have illegal immigrants working, construction, agriculture,

and hospitality. These are critical industries for our country. Trump has used tons of illegal immigrants. It's all been documented in the early part of his career. Republicans have been in favor of this. All I'm saying is,

And I think we're actually in sync. And this is one of the problems with America today, media today, which we are both part of, we're all part of it, is trying to find common ground. So instead of trying to stick me that or me trying to stick you, let's find the common ground here. Common ground, we want the border closed. We want an orderly process. Common ground, we want all of the illegals that are committing crimes out of the country on the margins. We might disagree about the level of due process. OK, fine. We can debate it and we can find a compromise there.

We also need to have this economy

have a soft landing. And what Trump's doing with tariffs, a little too volatile for my taste, we'll get into it, and this deportation concept, the reason he's not doing the deportation is he knows it won him votes, but he knows it will crash the economy. Therefore, he's not doing it. So we can actually, Megan, agree that we don't want to deport 10 million. Trump doesn't want to, and you actually don't want to deport all 10 million. I actually, I don't, I disagree with you guys. You don't, it'll crash the economy. I don't agree with you. I don't agree. You want to crash the economy? I asked you,

I don't agree it would happen. I asked you your opinion. I asked Chamath his opinion. I did not yet give my opinion. But I will now. I don't think it would crash the economy. I really don't. I think that if you pay Americans a living wage, these companies in Silicon Valley, these agricultural companies are going to have to increase the paycheck. And then they will get Americans who want to do these jobs. And that's not too bad.

That's not a bad consequence to me. I actually think that's a doable thing and that it will improve the landscape of America significantly. And I'm sorry that those people are here and tried to obey our laws once they broke them to get in. It really shouldn't be my problem. The composure of the company has fundamentally changed as a result of these open borders. And it's not just on the face of crime. It needs to change back. A lot of these people have no desire to assimilate anymore.

And that's how we got into this mess. And the Democrats do have a master plan to get these people to start voting in elections, which is basically almost as bad as making Canada our 51st state and letting all of them vote in our elections. It's just a mass of future Democrats that we don't want or need. So that's my position on it. Let me take a quick break and come back with a fun clip. And then we'll find out how things went south between Chamath and Ezra Klein. All right, stand by. These days, personal safety is not something that can be left to chance.

Whether at home, on the road, or just living everyday life, having a reliable way to protect yourself and your family is crucial. That's why burnout is

is the choice for many. Burna is a game-changing, less lethal self-defense tool. Compact, powerful, and easy to use, it provides the confidence to act in any situation. Burna uses non-lethal rounds, tear gas, pepper, and kinetic projectiles to effectively stop a threat from a safe distance. And the best part? Burna can be shipped directly to your door, and it's legal in all 50 states. Burna is proudly American with products hand-assembled in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

Sometimes a firearm is not the right option and Burna provides a powerful alternative. Protect what matters most with Burna. Visit Burna.com. That's B-Y-R-N-A.com slash Megan.

and that'll get you a 10% discount and learn why thousands of people and law enforcement agencies are adding Burna's less lethal protection. Burna, non-lethal self-defense, always ready. Tax day may have passed, but for millions of Americans, the real trouble is just beginning. If you missed the April 15th deadline or still owe back taxes, the IRS...

is ramping up enforcement, you should know. Every day you wait might make things worse. With over 5,000 new tax liens filed daily and tools like property seizures, bank levies, and wage garnishments, the IRS is applying pressure at levels we haven't seen in years. The good news? There is still time for Tax Network USA to help.

and getting you back on track fast.

Even after the deadline, it's not too late to regain control. Your consultation is completely free and acting now could stop penalties, threatening letters and surprise levies before they escalate. Call 1-800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com slash Megan. You may have missed April 15th, but you haven't run out of options. Let Tax Network USA help before the IRS makes the next move.

It's time to put America first when it comes to spectrum airwaves. Dynamic spectrum sharing is an American innovation developed to meet American needs, led by American companies and supported by the U.S. military who use the spectrum to defend the homeland. It maximizes a scarce national resource, wireless spectrum, to protect national security and deliver greater competition and lower costs without forcing the U.S. military to waste $120 billion relocating critical defense systems.

America won't win by letting three big cellular companies keep U.S. spectrum policy stuck in the past, hoarding spectrum for their exclusive use to limit competition here at home while giving Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE a big leg up overseas. For America to lead, federal policymakers must build on the proven success of U.S. spectrum sharing to ensure national security, turbocharge domestic manufacturing, rural connectivity, and create American jobs. Let's keep America at the forefront of global wireless leadership. Learn more at SpectrumFuture.com.

I'm Megan Kelly, host of The Megan Kelly Show on Sirius XM. It's your home for open, honest, and provocative conversations with the most interesting and important political, legal, and cultural figures today. You can catch The Megan Kelly Show on Triumph, a Sirius XM channel featuring lots of hosts you may know and probably love.

Great people like Dr. Laura, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace, Dave Ramsey, and yours truly, Megyn Kelly. You can stream The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM at home or anywhere you are. No car required. I do it all the time. I love the SiriusXM app. It has ad-free music coverage of every major sport, comedy, talk, podcast, and more. Subscribe now. Get your first three months for free.

Go to SiriusXM.com/MKShow to subscribe and get three months free. That's SiriusXM.com/MKShow and get three months free. Offer details apply.

So, Jamath, I mentioned Ezra Klein. He's the darling of the left. He's got a New York Times podcast. And as the Senate Democrats meet today to figure out what the hell happened this past year to them and what's going to happen on a go forward basis, they brought him in as like their keynote savior guy who's going to show them the way forward.

He and his data guru, who he interviewed not long ago about the numbers and how they're showing massive gaps with young men in particular and young people flocking to the Republican Party. So you guys recently had Ezra Klein on the All In podcast, and he came for you after you had told a story on All In about how accessible Trump is and how if you need to talk to anybody in the administration, you pick up a phone and call them.

and they'll pick up and actually speak to you. By the way, my experience as well. Well, he didn't much like that. And here's how that went. This world in which we are doing the deal-making by individual relationships, by who can get their calls answered, not by rules that feel clear and stable. Ezra, that's how the Biden administration works. No, Ezra, you're trying to make it sound like corruption. The Trump administration, what I have seen as a businessman,

is willing to hear the conditions on the ground. As a businessman, when I was building, Ezra, just to be clear, critical rare earth supplies for America under the Biden administration, battery can materials to compete with China under the Biden administration, AI chips to be the best inference solution under the Biden administration, I couldn't get a call back. That's just the facts.

But he prefers the old regime, Chamath, because I guess it was less susceptible to the kind of corruption you were clearly calling to talk about. You know, I think that there's a vein of Democrats that love this sort of like insider clubby approach of like Hollywood movie stars plus athletes plus the Oval.

And, you know, in that clip as well, like, you know, he was talking about like George Clooney and I and there's nothing I don't have anything against George Clooney. But my comment was more what you know, what what does George Clooney know about business, about anything? I don't particularly care what he thinks about business nor journalism for that matter. Just like you shouldn't care about, you know, what I think about acting or directing. We all have our zones of excellence. And the point that I was trying to make that I think really perturbed him is that, you know,

Elon, myself, a whole bunch of others that had been investing money, yes, but more important than money, all of our time, all of our social capital, all of our reputation to help the United States. It went into a black hole under Biden. They just despised the idea that we were doing things. And it made no sense because we were so pro-America and Pax America. President Trump on the other side, he's not always going to agree with you. But what I find is that team wants to know what are the actual details.

They'll decide what they're going to decide. I think that that's way better. When you're investing in a company, do you want a CEO that wants to know what's actually going on or that is cloistered where there's four or five gatekeepers who then tell him their version of the truth? That, I think, is really dangerous. I don't see that here. I did see that with Biden. That's why I got frustrated with Ezra because I think what he was basically saying is,

you know, Trump is acting quite democratically and speaking to everybody. I liked it better when I had the inside track and there was a, you know, in club and a not in club and I was in the in club. And I think that Democrats have a tendency to do that. Now, again, they do that because that play has worked in the past. Bring around the Hollywood star, bring around the athletes. And all of a sudden there's this patina and everybody thinks it's amazing and cool and I can dance and I can sing and I can play an instrument and all this stuff looks cool.

But under the surface, it's brittle and vacuous. Whereas here, what I can tell you under Trump is the people that work for him are smart as hell. They'll argue with you. They'll debate issues with you. They'll ask you for what's going on. They'll talk to people that are on the exact opposite end of what they believe. That is what you want because that healthy dialogue and debate, that's where you get to answers. And the reason why that's important, back to where I started, is

We're at a critical point in American history. We have to have the courage to prioritize and you have to get the big decisions right. And I think that he is trending. The Trump administration is trending to get these big decisions right. And part of it is because they're willing to talk to everybody.

And I think that if you look back, that's what you will give credit for as what drove the success is because you knew the actual contours. He will. You know, Jason, after Bill Maher went for his visit to the White House, one of the things he said was we sat down. He asked me what I thought about Iran. Yeah.

You're like, what should I do about Iran? And, you know, Bill Maher's like, I don't know. But that is Trump will do that. And you may know you may have an opinion. You may have no opinion. But I think this is one of his strengths, that he will ask anybody. He'll hear anybody out.

Yeah. You know, I am shocked, Megan, absolutely shocked that money buys access or celebrity buys access. I never thought this would be the case with politicians. I thought they were so pure. You know, the the appearance of impropriety with this administration is high, admittedly, but that doesn't mean it's causation XRP, you know.

they had a big SC suit, SEC suit. They donated millions to Trump. The suit went away. Jeff Yoss donated tens of millions and the TikTok ban got extended twice now.

Apple showed up, they donated and Apple got carved out. Well, yes, I was about to bring that up and Apple came and carved. So we're going to have to parse each of these. You know, Eric Trump's done a bunch of stuff with the Trump coin. The SEC did a carve out for meme coins. So the appearance of impropriety isn't impropriety. But I do understand with both sides how they feel like people are buying access and getting results. That's the nature of the political speech. You're not going to make me bring up the Hunter Biden laptop.

Absolutely. Hunter Biden getting paid millions of dollars to be on a board of a company that doesn't exist in the real world. Nobody gets paid millions of dollars, even if you're on the board of Apple. I think you probably get like 250K and that might be the highest paid board in the world. Like it just doesn't exist. So grift exists. Crime exists.

Paying for access exists. And that's the American system. If we want to change this, we should not let Nancy Pelosi trade stocks. We should get rid of super PACs. There should be a cap put on that. I believe that strongly, even though many of my friends are donating tens of millions of dollars. Supreme Court already said no.

Yeah, I know. I kind of feel like we should maybe readdress that and look at maybe giving each of the last three candidates a certain amount of money to spend and make it a little bit more fair. But I'm a bit of an idealist, as you know. Well, you can change the rules for elections. The Congress does have that power, but they can't. And, you know, this is this is part of the democratic process. And it does look.

At times, I understand the criticism that Trump looks coin operated at time, but I think we'll have to look at each of these individual cases. And if you put the totality of together, as Trump's pointing out, I do have a lot of my lifelong friends who are working with Trump. Many of them are Democrats, by the way, for Trump to win the second election. He surrounded himself with Democrats like Chamath, Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, Tulsi.

Tulsi, Besant, I mean, a gay Democrat. I mean, go right down the line, Howard. Bobby Kennedy. Bobby Kennedy, the ultimate Democrat. So-

I think you can give two pieces of really great credit. One, Democrats got Trump back in the White House. Number two, Democrats are incredibly smart and effective business leaders who are now working with them. And number three, Trump is smart enough to know that he should flip all these Democrats and get them working in the White House. And he is good at building bridges and making people feel incredibly special when he talks to them and giving them 100 percent of his attention. I give I give him I give him a lot of credit for those things. And you know what? I can see that's why my position on Trump changed slightly.

which is he surrounded himself with lifelong Democrats who are highly effective. And so my friend Mark Pincus as well, it's just a long line of Democrats who got him in office this time.

He's not ideological. No, you're not wrong. He had a broad coalition of Republicans and Dems, both in terms of his cabinet and in terms of the voting populace. Megan, my earpiece went out. Did you say you said something? I'm not wrong. My earpiece went out. Did you say that? This is why this kind of behavior is why they don't invite you to all the all in events, Jay. Oh, come on. I saw this clip.

That's true. Steve Krakauer pulled this. This wasn't an MK find. This is a Steve Krakauer find. It turns out the besties are leaving J-Cal out of their events. Let's watch. Hard questions. A new private club in D.C. that Don Jr. is doing and Sax is a member, Chamath's a member. And I just checked my Gmail. I checked all three of my Gmail accounts, everything. No invite. You must have gotten lost again. If you want to be a member, obviously there are dues and a membership fee. Okay.

I just didn't want to waste your time with an offer. Well, I just popped in to reminisce about this trip that Chamath and Freeburg just did. Trip of a lifetime. Trip of a lifetime. We had all the besties at the White House. It was really incredible. It's interesting. I checked my spam filters and my inline got stuck in the spam filter. I had ski week this week, so I wouldn't have been able to make it anyway. I see that you guys are all going to be in the next Jeopardy in the second round. My invite to Jeopardy somehow got lost. That was kind of a bummer.

We have a good time. The Jeopardy thing's not real. That's Photoshop. Jamal, what's happening? Why isn't Jake out getting all the invites? You know what's funny? He is the most charming person, Jason is, of the bunch. And he is incredibly funny.

And the thing with like the whole Trump thing is hilarious because I will facilitate David and I will facilitate a meeting of the minds. And I guarantee you that Trump will have J. Cal eating out of the palm of his hand. They are so similar in some ways. They're just they're they're meant to be besties. Those two. Yeah. I am scared to meet Trump because I do think we might wind up becoming besties. I think it's very likely for me. I think it's very likely.

Speaker 1: The besties may be excluding you, Jake, but you're welcome here any time. The pleasure to have you and you as well. Speaker 2: What happened to our discussion of side pube versus side boob or the Met Gala? You have to say something about it. Go. Speaker 1: No, Chamath. I don't know if I know, you know, about side boob, but you know, side pube. Speaker 2: I don't want to know about that, but I saw Megan just go totally off on the Met Gala yesterday. Speaker 1: My favorite Megan.

Fantastic. Patty Megan, when she goes after other people's looks, that's my favorite Megan. I like legal Megan. Please take that off the screen. And I like meth gala Megan. When she takes apart the meth gala. I gotta go. I'm cutting you off. You're such an espionage. Megan. See you soon, guys. Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.

Thank you.

America won't win by letting three big cellular companies keep U.S. spectrum policy stuck in the past, hoarding spectrum for their exclusive use to limit competition here at home while giving Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE a big leg up overseas. For America to lead, federal policymakers must build on the proven success of U.S. spectrum sharing to ensure national security, turbocharge domestic manufacturing, rural connectivity, and create American jobs. Let's keep America at the forefront of global wireless leadership. Learn more at SpectrumFuture.com.