0:01

Support for the show comes from

0:03

Schwab. With Schwab Investing Themes, it's

0:05

easy to invest in ideas you

0:07

believe in, like online music and

0:09

videos, artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, and

0:11

more. Schwab's research process

0:13

uncovers emerging trends, then their

0:15

technology creates relevant stocks into

0:17

themes. Choose from over 40 themes,

0:20

buy all the stocks in a theme as is,

0:23

or customize to better fit your investing goals,

0:25

all in a few clicks. Schwab

0:27

Investing Themes is not intended to be

0:29

investment advice or a recommendation of any

0:32

stock or investment strategy. or a recommendation of any stock

0:34

or investment strategy. Learn more at schwab.com/thematic

0:36

investing. Learn more at schwab.com/thematicinvesting.

0:39

I'm Scott Galloway, and this is

0:42

No Mercy, No Malice. The

0:45

IPO market is frozen, and

0:47

everyone is waiting for a

0:49

breakthrough IPO to generate confidence.

0:53

Icebreaker, as read by George

0:55

Hahn. Icebreaker,

0:59

as read by George Hahn. slash

1:12

gen AI to see why

1:14

the world works with ServiceNow. Hi

1:22

everyone, this is Pivot from New York Magazine

1:24

and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Cara

1:26

Swisher. And I'm Scott Galloway. Hello

1:28

Scott, how you doing? Good

1:30

Cara, back in London. Oh, I'm finally

1:32

back in DC for a very short period of time.

1:34

Oh good. And where are you headed

1:37

next? Boston to do one

1:39

with the governor and

1:41

Princeton, New Jersey to do one at

1:43

my old high school and also Princeton

1:45

University. And then I'm going to see

1:47

Louis and Buenos Aires. Oh

1:50

yeah, that's where you're going to be. Nice, I'm so

1:52

excited. Yeah, yeah. Did you

1:54

like me on Bill Maher? I'm serious

1:56

Cara, I thought you were outstanding. I thought that was one of your

1:58

better. I thought you

2:00

just nailed it. I sent you a

2:02

text message that you should take pause and reflect on

2:04

Obama. I thought you were really really smart. I don't

2:07

like that. I thought he was great. I

2:09

thought the way he interviewed you, the

2:13

banter was good. He

2:15

made a couple really, I thought, really interesting

2:17

points. Yeah, yeah. But more

2:19

to the point, do you like my new best friend Justin

2:21

Theroux, who also knows you? Just

2:24

FYI, I was friends with

2:26

Justin first. Well, not anymore. Just so

2:28

you know. I gave him the Bill

2:30

Maher vest. Just so you know. So

2:32

you know. I gave him the

2:34

soft lovely vest. He looks really good. You're

2:36

literally, you're like the girl in high school

2:38

that when I like a guy, you start

2:40

fucking him. I mean, you're

2:43

Justin King man. To be

2:45

clear, I am not fucking him, but go ahead. Well, you

2:47

know what I mean. Anyways, Justin Theroux

2:49

reached out to me and said, let's get together

2:51

and we're both. And then

2:53

all of a sudden you're taking him to Bill Maher. Yeah.

2:56

Well, he had lunch before the Chateau Marmont.

2:59

He's very substantive. He's very soulful. He

3:01

is. He's a beautiful, he's a writer. He's

3:04

really interesting. Very good. He has

3:06

a pitbull too. Oh really? Oh, I

3:08

didn't know that. We don't know each other that

3:10

well yet. So we will in time, of course.

3:12

You're not good, good friends like me and Justin.

3:14

I'll dial you on. We'll go out. We'll all

3:17

go out. We'll all go out. He's a lovely guy. By

3:19

the way, just in case you didn't know, he's circumcised. Okay.

3:23

Good to know. I did. Okay.

3:26

And... Anyway,

3:28

thank you about Bill Maher. It was fun

3:30

actually. It was really well done. He did great.

3:32

You were really good. It was very

3:34

helpful. Of course, the freaking out because

3:37

of the Ilan. I got attacked by

3:39

Ilan over the beginning. Also, I

3:41

was on Jen Psaki's show and she was noting

3:43

that he's for Trump but pretending he's not. And

3:46

then they, you know, I said hello, he lied. And they

3:48

saying, I said he was a liar. I just was making a

3:50

joke in any case. Well, let

3:52

me just clarify. He is a liar. He

3:54

lies all the lying fuck

3:56

of lying. Lying liars. And there you have

3:59

it. is so high

4:01

on some disassociative drug you can't

4:03

disassociate with the truth any longer.

4:05

Yeah, that could be possible too. All

4:07

right, anything else? I'm sorry, go ahead. I thought you

4:09

were great on Bill Maher. Dustin Doreau has great hair. Great

4:12

hair. Anyhow, we have a lot to get to today,

4:15

including what's in the DOJ antitrust case against

4:17

Apple and how TrueSocial is factoring into Donald

4:19

Trump's money issues. Plus, our friend of Piven

4:22

is Jim Shuto, S.E.N.N.'s national security analyst. There's

4:24

a lot going on, including what's just happened

4:26

in Russia. And he's the author of The

4:28

Return of Great Powers, Russia, China, and the

4:31

Next World War. It's a good

4:33

week to have him on, given this attack in

4:35

Russia and, of course, everything that's continues to happen

4:37

in Ukraine and Israel and

4:39

Gaza. But first, employees at

4:41

NBC News and MSNBC are not happy

4:44

after the announcement that former RNC chair

4:46

Ron McDaniel would be hired

4:48

as a political analyst. The move has been

4:50

met with disappointment internally, I would say more

4:53

than that, including Chuck Todd, who said McDaniel

4:55

has credibility issues. Chuck went to town on

4:58

Meet the Press. Christian Welker had

5:00

to interview McDaniel, who

5:02

had been booked before she was hired. So she

5:04

continued with it and gave her a pretty tough

5:07

interview. But Chuck Todd sort of unloaded in a

5:09

relatively polite style, but pretty tough about what people

5:11

inside NBC feel. She doesn't have an election

5:13

denier, and then she suddenly isn't. She's obviously

5:15

going back on everything she said, because it's

5:17

just her talking now, not as the head

5:19

of the RNC. In an effort to address

5:21

the backlash, MSNBC's president, Rashida Jones, told Anchors

5:24

they would not be forced to have McDaniel

5:26

on their shows. I mean, just the stink

5:28

of her is a problem, though. So what

5:30

do you think? Okay. I'll go, but

5:32

I feel as if you have more domain

5:34

expertise here. No, no. I want to hear what you

5:36

have to say first. I'm really curious, because you're the regular

5:39

Joe, so to speak. I'm just

5:41

a Joe. It

5:43

strikes me that in this era, being

5:45

a spokesperson for the DNC or the

5:47

RNC, or being ... There are quite

5:49

a few spokespeople from the Trump White

5:51

House who have recovered and gone on

5:53

to get decent jobs, and they

5:55

acknowledge that what they said a lot of times ...

5:57

It's like ... Republicans

6:00

seem to grow testicles about the time they're

6:02

out the door, right? Bill Barr can't stop

6:04

talking about what a bad president he was

6:06

serving in. I mean, so

6:10

the question I would have if I were in the

6:12

MSNBC war room trying to deal with this is

6:15

how much of this is

6:17

the duplicitous, hypocritical, disingenuous previous

6:20

behavior of someone and

6:22

do we apply the same standards to people

6:24

who come from democratic organizations who have taken

6:26

license with the truth? So

6:29

it's a tough one because generally speaking in media, they

6:31

kind of give you a little bit of a hall

6:33

pass when you're in a political position before that. I

6:35

agree with you. They're all over the place. Look,

6:37

George Stephanopoulos worked for a news now, quite a

6:40

good host of the Sunday show. Same thing with

6:42

Jen Psaki, excellent. I was on her show. She's

6:44

quite good. She does disclose

6:46

it and she's not... The issue is

6:48

she's not across purposes to what she said

6:50

then, right? This was an astonishing

6:52

interview with Kristen Welker. Like this woman is

6:56

a full scale election denier, not just a

6:58

little bit, not like questions we need to

7:00

ask questions. She was an election denier and

7:03

now she isn't. So which one of... I

7:05

mean, so she's a liar at one

7:07

point, whichever one. And even now, why did

7:09

she change her mind? I'd like a long

7:11

explanation from her as to why she did.

7:14

Because she's no longer being paid to lie and

7:16

that's the same as other people. That's right,

7:18

but I'd like her to say it out of

7:20

her meat flaps. That's what I'd like. For

7:23

her, there's certain people, I get it, they come in,

7:25

you know, whether you've got... I'm trying to think. I

7:27

mean, they do it over on Fox. They do it

7:29

on all of them. They bring in these generals, etc.,

7:31

etc. I think holding their

7:33

feet to the fire when you're talking to them,

7:35

this woman seems... You know,

7:37

there was a controversy at CNN over Sarah

7:39

Isker, who was actually on Marr this week.

7:43

I think there's a smell test with some

7:45

people more than others. And I think you're

7:47

not going to prevent this from happening because,

7:49

you know, their experts are often people who

7:51

worked, you know, like David Axelrod or... But

7:53

you don't have an issue with David Axelrod

7:55

because, you know, he says what he thinks

7:57

and he... This

8:00

woman went really far. Like picking

8:02

this lady is, I

8:04

don't know, it's sort of like if you took in, you

8:06

made Pence one, that would be a problem for

8:08

me. I don't know. Just there's a

8:10

couple people where they just don't get to come back in

8:13

that regard. And you know, they'll say they're not allowed to

8:15

speak, but they should go on Fox News if they want

8:17

to do that. She could do that. They

8:21

have no standards over there. So I think

8:23

this is a real black eye to NBC, like

8:25

a real black eye. And I'm surprised that

8:28

they did it with her because she's so

8:30

egregious. She's like beyond egregious. So we'll

8:32

see. I think it's going to have a backlash

8:34

forever. And I think the right will say, oh,

8:37

you know, they're trying to cancel her, but she

8:39

deserves to be canceled in that regard, especially because

8:42

she said one, she said things with Trump

8:44

and now she's trying to backtrack because this is me.

8:46

And I'm just like, you have no

8:48

credibility. What's the credibility issue? She has

8:51

none. So anyway, we'll move on. Speaking

8:53

of credibility issues. Boeing's

8:55

chief executive, David Calhoun, will step down at

8:57

the end of the year following several plane

8:59

safety failures. In addition, the company's

9:02

CEO of Boeing commercial airplanes will resign immediately

9:04

and its chairman, Larry Kellner, will not seek

9:06

it. It's a clean out. Other

9:08

people pay the price, Scott. This is interesting.

9:11

The announcement comes less than three months after

9:13

the door plug blew off a Boeing MAX-9

9:15

during the Alaska Airlines flight. The

9:17

FAA audit of production found dozens of issues

9:19

and gave the company 90 days for fixes. I

9:22

mean, it looks so sloppy.

9:24

Will this help the Boeing brand bounce back or

9:26

did they take time? I think they move quickly

9:28

because look, as you say, there's never been a

9:30

perp walk for tech. There's never

9:33

been someone arrested for girl's self-esteem, but

9:35

one door blow is off and everyone

9:37

goes to jail essentially or gets fired

9:39

or investigated or lawsuits, et cetera. What

9:41

do you think? So

9:44

first off, you could argue

9:46

it's a bit unfair because he's been the CEO

9:49

since 2019 and there's very

9:52

little he could do when

9:55

there's literally thousands of these very

9:57

complicated machines in the air. There's

10:01

little he could institute in four

10:04

years that would turn this thing around.

10:09

Having said that, this was absolutely the right thing to

10:11

do because here's the thing. We

10:13

always make excuses for CEOs when they make

10:15

300 or 400 times the average worker that

10:17

that's okay, it's the market, they benefit. He

10:20

got a bit of a raw deal, but the bottom

10:22

line is when your planes start having malfunctions mid-air,

10:26

head's got to roll. Is it a little

10:28

bit unfair? Was he the wrong place at the wrong time?

10:31

Yeah, but guess what? The majority of CEOs

10:33

in Fortune 500 companies tend to be constantly

10:35

in the right place at the right time.

10:38

There's only three things you have to remember

10:40

about crisis management and then I'll get to

10:43

a broader viewpoint

10:45

on aviation. That is, in

10:49

crisis management, you just got to remember three things.

10:51

Everyone always gets it wrong because they sound easy,

10:53

but they're not. The first is you

10:55

have to acknowledge the problem. This

10:57

is unacceptable. This is what happened. Two,

11:00

the top guy or gal has to take responsibility.

11:02

They need to be out in front. Then

11:04

third, you need to overcorrect. This is

11:06

what the board is doing. The board is saying, look, it's

11:09

probably not fair. They could probably make

11:11

all sorts of excuses for why he's actually trying to

11:13

address these problems and turn around a tanker of a

11:15

culture that resulted in these things, but they're like, you

11:17

know what? We have to

11:19

overcorrect. We're sorry, but we

11:21

have to show we're really serious about this. The

11:25

larger point around aviation is people don't

11:27

appreciate global aviation,

11:29

which is really only several decades

11:32

old. People

11:35

really didn't start using the lubricant

11:37

of global commerce in terms of

11:39

face-to-face meetings and diplomacy via commercial

11:41

jet transportation literally until the 60s

11:43

or 70s. It's a fairly new thing. It

11:46

is also fucking frightening and unbelievable that

11:49

you can skirt along the surface of

11:51

the atmosphere at a tense speed of

11:53

sound and get to your destination safely.

11:57

It is literally a wondrous feat.

11:59

And it is so important to the global

12:01

economy that the FAA decided, we're

12:04

going to make this so ridiculously safe. We're

12:06

going to impose a set of standards that

12:09

are so over-engineered. Imagine your car, a

12:11

mechanic showed up, and this isn't an

12:13

exaggeration. Every third day is and said,

12:15

I'm going to change the spark plugs,

12:17

the tires, I'm going to test everything.

12:20

I'm going to deploy and redeploy the airbags.

12:22

I'm just going to make sure this thing

12:24

is absolutely bulletproof. That

12:27

is what they do in the FAA. And the

12:29

success of that approach is that

12:31

people have absolutely no issue saying,

12:34

I have to go pick up my kids at

12:36

camp, I'm going to get on a plane. I

12:38

have an opportunity to sell software into a company

12:41

in Toronto, the most neurotic. You

12:43

don't even have to be that neurotic to get on a plane

12:45

and be scared. Oh, my brother doesn't fly. My little brother

12:47

doesn't fly. But that's unusual.

12:49

The majority of people... Yeah, it is.

12:52

Pain in the ass, too. The majority of people take

12:54

the risk and get on planes because it is by

12:56

far the safest form of transportation in the world. And

13:00

it's lubricated the global economy. So

13:03

their attention, neurotic, obsessive

13:06

compulsive, anal retentive focus

13:08

on safety has paid huge

13:10

dividends globally. Listen,

13:13

he may not have deserved it, it doesn't really matter. He took

13:16

the big job. The buck stopped there.

13:18

The buck always stopped there. And it's happening in

13:20

tech more often. Okay,

13:22

last one. The Kate Middleton mystery has

13:24

been solved and it has us remembering

13:26

that the Internet is bad. By now,

13:28

we know she has cancer, is going

13:30

through preventative chemotherapy for weeks, conspiracy theories

13:32

and jokes have been floating around online

13:34

about Middleton's whereabouts, even reaching the late

13:36

night shows. There

13:39

was a big piece that we should all feel

13:41

bad. I don't know about that. I think

13:43

it's a combination of really bad PR on

13:45

the point of them. I mean, she's a

13:47

global figure. And as

13:49

much as she might expect some privacy, they made

13:51

it worse. And at the same time, you

13:54

know, now you look like idiots for making fun of

13:56

a cancer victim. So it's sort

13:58

of the Internet is bad. this way and I

14:01

don't really know if we have to blame

14:03

the internet at this point because it does

14:06

it on every story. I don't know.

14:08

I don't know. What do you think? I

14:10

think you get an old two thoughts in your mind

14:13

at the same time. The first thought is the 42-year-old

14:15

woman who is battling cancer, who has three children, it's

14:18

very sad. Yeah, 100%. You

14:21

want to feel empathy for her. You want her...

14:23

The last thing you'd want to do is have

14:25

anything added to that pain. I

14:27

mean you can absolutely have empathy for her and respect

14:29

it and understand why she may have

14:31

made the decisions she made. At the same time,

14:35

with all due respect, when you pick a

14:38

life that includes wearing the crown's

14:40

jewels and going to every cool event and being

14:42

called the Duchess of whatever, sorry,

14:45

there's incredible downsides. One of those downsides

14:47

is if you get sick, the

14:50

public's going to find out or they're going to go fucking ape

14:52

shit trying to figure it out. So bottom

14:55

line, whoever's handling comms for the palace fucked

14:57

up here because they should have said, we're

14:59

very sorry, Kate. This is awful. We feel

15:01

for you. This is going to come

15:03

out. And until we're straight

15:05

with the public about what's going on here, it is

15:08

going to be a shit show and

15:11

it's going to make things worse. So this...

15:13

I'm not talking about what should be. I'm talking

15:15

about what is. Right. Agree.

15:19

I don't even think what should be. They're the most famous family in

15:21

Britain and they're going to look at... They get

15:23

covered on everything. Let me just tell you,

15:25

her video was classy. It was lovely. It

15:27

was appropriate. I don't think she needed to

15:29

say anything else about her cancer. Everyone's now

15:31

wondering about that. I'm sick. I

15:34

have cancer and I'm not going to tell you what it

15:36

is, but I'm going to tell you I'm trying to deal

15:38

with my family. It's a combination of bad things. We wish

15:40

her well. And she's young

15:42

and healthy and so from what I understand,

15:44

should be hopefully will

15:47

be... This will be one

15:49

of those like my own strokes.

15:51

It will be your footnote hopefully. You're

15:53

right. Kate

15:55

is young. We've made remarkable progress

15:58

against cancer. More people actually... survive cancer

16:00

now than die from it? Yeah, four

16:02

of my friends. They're doing good. I

16:04

have four friends who have cancer young. But the

16:06

analogy I thought of with Kate, and

16:11

I realize it's a different situation, but if

16:14

Biden goes out of public

16:16

eye shot for 24 hours, everyone's

16:19

going to start freaking out. I mean, everyone

16:22

will start turning into Sherlock Holmes.

16:26

Wouldn't it be nice if Trump was out of eye shot

16:28

for 24 hours, but he won't be? So

16:31

he's sort of eating breakfast at

16:34

Mar-a-Lago. Anyway, we feel badly for

16:36

her and King Charles. Let's get

16:38

to our first big story. We're

16:44

learning more about the Justice Department's lawsuit

16:46

against Apple, which accuses the company of

16:48

maintaining a monopoly over the smartphone market.

16:50

The suit, which the DOJ filed with

16:52

16 states, argues Apple violated antitrust laws

16:54

when it get difficult for competitors to

16:56

integrate with the iPhone, ultimately driving up

16:58

prices for consumers. The DOJ

17:00

cites the App Store Smartwatch is

17:02

called based gaming and messaging apps.

17:04

That green dot has some examples

17:06

of Apple's monopoly. You

17:09

know, interestingly, Mr. Walt

17:11

Mossberg made a case that this is a

17:13

ridiculous thing. Apple said in a

17:15

statement that the lawsuit is wrong on the facts and law

17:17

and the company will vigorously defend against it. Decide

17:20

that what was on is that it's not

17:23

unusual. He said on threads, that's

17:25

like calling the best-selling expensive wine a monopoly when

17:27

it actually has a modest overall market share. He

17:29

is correct about that. The

17:31

iPhone US market share is 62% in

17:33

Q4 of 2023 in terms

17:35

of shipments according to counterpoint research. The

17:38

DOJ argues that Apple is more than

17:40

70% market share in the US measuring

17:42

by revenue and other metrics show Apple's dominance,

17:44

particularly in terms of young users. Let

17:47

me just get to this and I just love your

17:49

thoughts. A comment made by Tim Cook at Code 2022

17:53

also mentions the DOJ suit. Cook

17:55

was responding to an audience question

17:57

about improving communication with non-Apple devices.

18:00

Let's listen to what he said exactly since we've

18:02

been mentioning it. I

18:04

don't hear our

18:07

users asking

18:10

that we put a lot of energy in on that at this

18:12

point. And

18:15

so, now

18:18

I would love to... No more continue. I would

18:20

love to convert you to iPhone.

18:27

It's tough not

18:30

to make it personal, but I can't send my

18:32

mom certain videos or she can't send me certain

18:34

videos. And so we... Buy your mom an iPhone.

18:38

The DOJ is making the case

18:40

that Apple's messaging interface with those

18:42

green text bubbles for non-iPhone users

18:44

created a social stigma. So,

18:47

let's go through it. First

18:50

off, if you're a guy and

18:52

you send an attempt for a late night hookup

18:54

or a booty call and it comes from an

18:56

Android bubble, I think the

18:59

likelihood you end up having sex that night

19:01

is literally diminished dramatically. Oh, it's usually... You go

19:03

right to the heart of it. Go ahead.

19:06

Well, look, this is all... Look, Apple's

19:08

all about sex. It's a subtle way

19:10

of saying, I'm creative and I'm wealthy.

19:12

And by the way, this is also

19:14

clearly... This is Walt saying, listen,

19:16

kid, move out the way. Daddy's back. I

19:18

think he's a little bit jealous of your

19:21

attention. No, he isn't. No, he's right. I'm

19:23

so gay. He covered him.

19:25

I know, I know. But he covered them a lot, but go

19:27

ahead. Sorry. But he's caused a bit of a stir on the

19:29

internet. Yeah, he has. It's like, well, here's Walt.

19:31

Yeah. Five different

19:33

people sent me Walt's tweet storm.

19:36

I think Walt has a point. If

19:40

I were the DOJ, and I don't know the chestnuts here, I would

19:43

have stayed focused. I think the case they

19:45

have against the App Store is

19:48

really rock solid. Their

19:50

investment in going vertical here, I

19:52

think, gives them the right to

19:55

inhibit or diminish or

19:57

whatever the term is. Gmail

20:00

from Google, if you have

20:02

the Gmail app, it's better. So

20:06

is that anti-competitive? So I think they're focusing

20:08

on the wrong thing here. I agree. I

20:11

think they overdid. I think the App Store is a

20:13

slam dunk and that they went overboard on the other

20:15

things. And, you know, I think

20:17

Apple has a very good argument that, you know,

20:19

we're just a good product that people like. I

20:22

think the App Store, that 30%, the

20:24

inability to do payments, these are things

20:26

that they won and lost on. It's

20:30

not fully clear what's happening here, but that's the

20:32

fight to fight. Now I haven't talked to John

20:34

Kanter or anybody else yet. Maybe I will. But

20:37

I do think they over –

20:39

they gelled to the lily here. It's

20:42

a very good case because the DOJ

20:44

is making a case, what you were

20:46

just talking about, that the screen bubbles

20:48

is in there. It's

20:51

the beginning of a legal fight that could go on for years.

20:54

And I think they're going to have

20:57

a hard time with a lot of the things that

20:59

they – I think they're going to lose on a lot of the things. And

21:02

I think the App Store – just drilling down on

21:04

the App Store seems to be like – because they

21:06

had all those amicus priests and I do agree that

21:08

they don't – you don't have a choice. That

21:11

said, you don't have a choice in Google either. So they kind

21:13

of go hand in glove. There's only two systems. So

21:15

what can you do to make – since this is

21:17

the situation we have with phones, it's oligopoly

21:20

essentially, what is the way

21:22

we make it better for everyone to be

21:24

able to be surfaced? I think looking at

21:26

their competition with Spotify, just like in Europe,

21:28

I think that's the way to look very

21:30

strongly at it when they create products. It's

21:33

very much like when Microsoft did MSN and

21:35

was going after AOL. I

21:37

think that has a much more of

21:39

an opening. So it's just a little – I

21:41

think Walt really did sort of take it apart

21:44

in terms of the stuff they were doing on

21:46

it, but not the App Store. I think that

21:48

is, as you said, is really

21:50

the important part. The

21:53

most powerful part of the complaint

21:57

was the following. It says,

21:59

Apple apps itself and a cloak

22:01

of privacy security and consumer preferences

22:03

to justify its anti-competitive conduct. Indeed,

22:06

it spends billions on marketing and branding

22:08

to promote the self-serving premise that only

22:10

Apple can safeguard consumers' privacy and security

22:13

interests. Apple selectively compromises privacy and security

22:15

interest went in. So, as

22:17

in Apple's own financial interest, such as

22:19

degrading the security of text messages, offering

22:21

governments and certain companies the chance to

22:23

access more private and secure versions of

22:25

app stores, or accepting billions

22:27

of dollars each year for choosing Google

22:29

as its default search engine when more

22:31

private options are available. In the

22:33

end, Apple deploys

22:35

privacy and security testifications as

22:38

an elastic shield that

22:40

can stretch or contract

22:42

to serve Apple's financial and business interests.

22:44

Jesus Christ, everyone go to law school

22:46

and learn how to write like this.

22:49

But anyways, whoever wrote this, whatever, I

22:51

just... If anyone thinks the

22:54

government is incompetent, someone at the DOJ,

22:56

some junior, junior lawyer wrote this. I

22:59

know who wrote it, but go ahead. Yeah, who's really

23:01

talented. This is a deputy. Good. Anyway,

23:04

so... We are. And then

23:06

we're going to have a cuddle puddle, but go ahead. I knew him first.

23:09

You know, he likes me better. I knew him

23:11

first. He actually loves me desperately. Anyway,

23:13

go ahead. I couldn't believe. I

23:16

saw you. You are so invading the few

23:18

things I have in my life. You're at

23:20

Bill Maher with Justin Thoreau. Literally, you're like,

23:22

what are you going to start going to premiere

23:24

league games with Emily Ratajkowski now? I mean, come

23:27

on. You haven't met her yet. I

23:29

know, because you've sequestered her from me. We were meant

23:31

to be together. I have not sequestered her. Who

23:33

else do you really like? Who else do I really like? I'm

23:38

like, how did I end up here again? Is it Elon? No,

23:40

it wasn't Elon. I'll give you that. It wasn't

23:42

Elon. Anyway, you're not going to say it. I'm

23:44

sorry. Where are we? I'm back to Apple.

23:47

It wasn't people. Okay. All right. So

23:50

look, this is the case. case

24:00

that they have drawn, I think, probably too broadly

24:02

because people do have an affection for Apple and

24:04

the uses of it. And if you're in the

24:06

system, you like the system. And so that's what's

24:08

there. I don't think people don't feel like they

24:10

have to raise any stuff about the both. If

24:12

you want to buy that iPhone, they don't have

24:14

to make it easy for it to interoperate. They

24:16

just don't. They just absolutely, in that case, I

24:18

find that to be kind of a ridiculous argument.

24:21

But that said, the App Store is certainly, I

24:24

think both the Google App Store and the Apple

24:26

App Store have to go over and above to

24:28

make it easier for competitors and not to charge

24:30

things because they're the only toll keeper. And they're

24:32

going to have to do

24:34

it whether they like it or not. So

24:36

in that way, that to me seems very

24:38

easy to remedy. And we'll

24:41

see where it goes. It's going to go on

24:43

for years and years and years. But I think

24:45

they overstep. And that's the privacy thing. Look, you

24:47

can both use it as a marketing tool and

24:50

also actually be quite committed to it. So I

24:52

think they're both, right? That's why they're talking to

24:54

Google about AI because they

24:56

don't collect a lot of data. So

24:59

I don't know. I think they are committed

25:01

to privacy. But I think they use it as

25:03

both a marketing thing and a cudgel for

25:06

people. So it all bubbles up. And I

25:08

like to go meta on this stuff. The thing

25:10

that ails our country is that

25:12

for the first time, a younger generation is

25:15

not doing as well as their parents.

25:17

That's never happened before. And Jonathan Hyde

25:19

just wrote this amazing book called The

25:21

Anxious Generation. So they're not

25:24

only not doing as well, but every

25:26

day they're reminded of how they're not

25:28

doing as well with constant benchmarking from

25:30

algorithms that convince them that everyone's making a shit

25:32

ton of money vacationing at the almond and dating

25:35

someone much hotter. And so

25:37

the question is, how do we solve this? There

25:39

are a lot of things, tax policy,

25:41

vocational priority, but also we

25:43

break these motherfuckers up. And

25:46

it all rolls up to the same

25:48

thing. Our country is angry. People don't

25:50

believe in America. They're not mating because

25:52

they don't have economic opportunity because we

25:54

are totally weaponized by big corporations and

25:56

the wealthy and the incumbents. And I'm

25:58

all of those things. see how terrible

26:00

it is. All right Teddy Roosevelt, thank you

26:02

for that lovely speech. I agree with you.

26:04

I agree. Anyway

26:07

we'll see where it goes but we'll see I think this

26:09

case is going to be a long time. I don't

26:11

think this one's going to work. Yeah I'm not

26:13

so sure. All right Scott let's go on a

26:15

quick break and when we come back we'll talk

26:18

about true social going public and we'll speak to

26:20

our friend at Pivot, CNN's Jim Sciutto. Support

26:26

for Pivot comes from Mint Mobile. It's that

26:28

time of year, spring cleaning and maybe you're

26:30

thinking about dusting off your budget and cutting

26:33

down on some of your expenses. Well you

26:35

can start by reducing your phone bill with

26:37

Mint Mobile. By switching to Mint Mobile you

26:39

can say goodbye to an overpriced monthly plan

26:41

or unexpected fees. You can get three months

26:44

of premium wireless service for 15 bucks a

26:46

month. That includes unlimited talk and text plus

26:48

high-speed 5G data and Mint Mobile has great

26:50

rates whether you're buying for one or for

26:52

a family and their family plan starts at

26:55

just two lines. Signing up is

26:57

super easy and painless and you also don't

26:59

need to get a new device. When you

27:01

buy a Mint Mobile plan you can use

27:03

your own phone and keep your phone number

27:05

and contacts. To get this new customer offer

27:07

and your new three month unlimited wireless plan

27:09

for just 15 bucks a month go to

27:11

mintmobile.com pivot that's mintmobile.com

27:14

pivot. Cut your wireless bill

27:16

to 15 bucks a month

27:18

at mintmobile.com pivot. $45 upfront payment required equivalent to $15

27:20

a month. New customers

27:26

on first three month plans only.

27:28

Speed slower above 40 gigabytes on

27:31

unlimited plan. Additional taxes fees

27:33

and restrictions apply. See Mint

27:36

Mobile for details. Support

27:41

for pivot comes from Atlassian. Atlassian

27:43

software including Jira, Confluence and Trello

27:45

help power the collaboration for teams

27:47

to accomplish what would otherwise be

27:49

impossible alone. Because individually we're great

27:51

but together we're so much better.

27:53

That's why millions of teams around

27:55

the world including 75% of the

27:57

fortune 500 Trust

28:00

Atlassian software for everything from space exploration

28:02

and green energy to delivering pizzas and

28:04

podcasts. Whether you're a team of two,

28:06

200 or 2 million, or whether your

28:09

team is around the corner or on

28:11

another continent altogether, Atlassian software is built

28:13

to help keep you all on the

28:15

same page from start to finish. That

28:17

way, every one of your teams from

28:19

engineering and IT to marketing, HR and

28:22

legal can stay connected and moving together

28:24

as one towards shared, company-wide goals. Learn

28:27

how to unleash the potential of your

28:29

team at atlassian.com. That's

28:33

a-t-l-a-s-s-i-a-n.com. Atlassian.

28:43

Support for the show comes from Fiverr,

28:45

the world's largest marketplace for freelance services.

28:48

In the fast-paced world of business, every

28:50

decision counts. And when it comes to

28:52

hiring, there's no room for guesswork. That's

28:54

why Fiverr has developed solutions for business

28:57

to make outsourcing projects simple, quick and

28:59

compliant. You can gain access to curated

29:01

talent through Fiverr Pro's catalog of top

29:04

freelancers organized by skills and experience plus.

29:06

You can streamline your projects with a

29:08

user-friendly dashboard where you can track progress

29:10

and collaborate with your team. Fiverr

29:13

Pro is perfect for businesses that want

29:15

to work with top talent for immediate

29:17

or long-term needs. And for

29:19

anyone needing the highest level of

29:21

Y-Glove service, Fiverr Pro's project partners

29:23

can manage multiple freelancer engagements for

29:25

you. Project partners will

29:27

outline requirements, assemble a roster of

29:30

freelancers, and manage a schedule to

29:32

ensure your deliverables are completed on

29:34

time, allowing you to flex your

29:36

budget without any headcount constraints. Ready

29:38

to scale smarter? Visit pro.fiverr.com to

29:41

sign up and use code KIVIT

29:43

for 15% off any service. That's

29:47

pro.fiverr, f-i-v-e-r-r.com,

29:49

and use code

29:52

KIVIT. Scott,

29:57

we're back. being

30:00

called Don Forleone on social media, but Donald

30:02

Trump's finances are about to get a big

30:04

boost. Trump Media and Technology Group, the parent

30:06

company of True Social, will likely become a

30:08

publicly traded company this week following Digital World

30:11

Acquisition Corps approval of a merger last Friday.

30:13

As we record this, Trump just got a

30:15

lifeline for that judgment in his civil fraud

30:17

case. The bond was reduced from $454 million

30:19

to $175

30:23

million by the New York appeals court. Trump now has

30:25

10 days to post that bond. I don't

30:28

know why he gets a break, but what

30:30

do you think about this deal? Trump Media and

30:32

Technology Group has a market value of around $5 billion

30:34

based on a $37 share price at

30:37

Digital World Acquisition Corp. Trump

30:40

owns 60% of his overall

30:42

net worth will increase by about $3 billion.

30:44

That said, this is a meme

30:46

stack no matter how you slice it. There's also a

30:49

lockup provision in the merger agreement that would in theory

30:51

prevent Trump from selling his shares for at least six

30:53

months. A lockup agreement

30:55

could be waived by the board, which

30:57

includes his son, Don Jr., Devin Nunes,

30:59

the CEO, and Linda McMahon,

31:02

who used to run WWE or

31:04

whatever she did over there. They're all

31:06

friends of. But if he sells, the

31:08

price will go

31:11

down. If he sells, there's going to

31:13

be lawsuits aplenty. I'll say the last

31:15

thing, two last things. D-WACK, the SPAC

31:18

that merged with Trump's company was already

31:20

a meme stock to start with. As

31:22

SaaS Company put it, Donald Trump's true

31:25

social could be the memiest meme stock

31:27

that ever memed. Once again, Republican mega

31:29

donor Jeff Yass was the biggest institutional

31:31

shareholder of D-WACK, according to a report

31:33

in the New York Times. He's also

31:35

a major investor in TikTok's parent company,

31:37

ByteDance, as we discussed last week. I

31:40

don't know. This is just a ... Feels like

31:42

a lawsuit, like a securities lawsuit waiting

31:45

to happen. But your thoughts, Scott, this is

31:47

your area of expertise. So

31:51

say you were running for president

31:53

and you needed a bond of half a

31:56

billion dollars and you knew someone who was

31:58

the largest shareholder in TikTok. And

32:00

you said, if I become president, I'll make sure it isn't

32:02

banned or whatever it is. You

32:05

could get someone by virtue of the White House. You

32:07

could get them billions of dollars in shareholder value. And

32:09

you met with them on a golf course and you

32:11

said, oh, and by the way, there's

32:13

a very small float in this SPAC that I

32:15

have a large interest in. If

32:18

you were just to throw, say, 10, 20, 30

32:20

million, maybe 50 million at this thing and keep

32:22

the stock price elevated, that would make

32:24

me very happy. Because when you

32:26

look at digital digital world acquisition

32:28

company, the SPAC, I think it's

32:31

de-SPAC-ing to take over Trump's true

32:33

social. True social, the

32:35

numbers I've seen were the year to

32:37

date, it's done three and a half

32:39

million in revenue. The hottest AI companies'

32:42

stocks in the world are trading at 60

32:45

or 70 times revenue. But

32:47

Donald Trump's truth social, which has

32:50

five million active users, which is literally

32:53

nothing, made three and

32:55

a half million dollars. That's worth 600 times

32:57

revenue. So, something. Yeah, it

33:00

is. And maybe it's just a

33:02

meme stock, but... Does it feel

33:04

like a way to give money? It just totally

33:06

does. It's like, this is going to be so

33:08

investigated, I can't even... Well, okay, let me

33:11

be clear. There's corruption all over Washington. Nancy

33:13

Pelosi, it ends up... Corrupting, I get it.

33:16

Speaker Pelosi or farmer Speaker

33:18

Pelosi has godlike

33:20

stock picking capability. As

33:22

do a bunch of other members of Congress. There

33:24

is corruption on both sides of the aisle here. This

33:27

seems... This one really thinks he

33:29

has the right to start a company as a

33:31

private citizen. He has the right to merge

33:33

it with a SPAC. He has

33:35

the right to sell it after six months. I'm

33:38

just speaking purely, I have never

33:40

seen a company that feels like

33:43

a better short. And this isn't financial advice

33:45

because you have non-economic interest in this thing

33:47

and it could go to 100 if he's

33:50

elected president. But this is

33:52

a company with three and a half million in revenue that's

33:54

trading for billions of dollars in value. He has the right

33:56

to start it. He has the right to sell that stock.

33:58

It's not going to... happen in

34:01

time, unless maybe he can borrow against

34:03

it. I don't know. The whole

34:05

thing stinks. Who's going to take ... I mean,

34:07

it's got to be donors that take ... This is so legal. I

34:13

want to file a lawsuit right now. The

34:15

president should be paid $10 million a year.

34:18

Every senator should be paid $1 million a

34:21

year, if not $2

34:23

million a year. Every representative

34:25

should be paid $1 million a year for the following. All

34:28

of your stocks go into a blind

34:30

trust and they're held there for five

34:32

years after you leave office, and you

34:35

cannot go to work for anyone, anyone

34:37

that's going to benefit for a government

34:39

contract. Pay these people a shit ton

34:42

of money so they don't have to

34:44

paint their fence while they're in office

34:46

for when they get out of office.

34:48

The corruption here is just too tempting.

34:50

Yeah, I don't know if they ... I think

34:52

I just ... Again, when he sells, it'll drop

34:54

the stock. I think it's a way of

34:56

giving him money. This is what it feels like. It's like a back way

34:58

to do it. The fact that

35:00

you're mixing social media,

35:03

Donald Trump, TikTok, and

35:06

stock, mean stocks is just like literally, it's the

35:08

peak 2024. It's peak 2024. This guy, as always,

35:13

has found a way out. He's got to be

35:15

the luckiest fuck in America. He really is. That

35:18

said, I think this is just aching for

35:21

litigators to come at this

35:23

and investigators. It's our next

35:26

thing, whatever happens here, whatever the emails are

35:28

trading. By the way, this company

35:31

is also embroiled in all kinds of

35:33

legal action with the

35:35

people who started it and the

35:38

D-WAC guy. There's all kinds of ...

35:40

He's now suing. He's now anti-Trump, and

35:42

they're kind of anti-Trump also, the ones

35:44

that love Trump. Within this,

35:47

there's also more lawsuits. There was a good

35:49

piece in the Washington Post about it, and

35:51

they've been following it. There's lawsuits

35:53

inside of lawsuits, which is sort of

35:56

the brand of Donald Trump. We'll see

35:58

what happens here, think you

36:00

should necessarily rely on this but it's a damn

36:02

good way to get him money you

36:04

know and of course it totally explains his flip-flop

36:07

on TikTok give me a break you just have

36:09

to follow the money with this guy because he's

36:11

for sale and he loves money and so

36:14

he'll do whatever it takes to hold on to it he'll do

36:16

it he'll sell a stake

36:18

or water or a piece of

36:20

shit university to do so so it's

36:23

kind of gross grotesque in my feeling. I

36:25

don't have anything to add except I want to know what Walt

36:27

thinks. Ha ha ha ha probably I

36:30

don't see it as though. And Justin, and Justin Thoreau. Yeah together.

36:32

Maybe Walt, Justin and I will have

36:34

dinner together. You're so like I just

36:36

look at a guy and the next thing I know

36:38

you're sending me photos of you in

36:40

a hot tub with them. Well you chose to live in London we'd

36:42

like to invite you but you're not around. I

36:45

didn't choose I'm an influencer not a decision maker I

36:47

didn't choose to live here. Anyway

36:49

let's bring in our friend, David.

36:58

Jeff Shao is CNN's chief national security

37:00

analyst and the author of The Return

37:03

of Great Powers, Russia, China and the

37:05

Next World War which is really a

37:07

happy title there Jim. Welcome.

37:10

But before we go we're going to talk about the book in

37:12

a second but we have to talk

37:14

about this attack of the concert hall in Moscow

37:16

late last week that killed at least 137 people

37:20

a branch of ISIS called ISIS-K, the

37:22

main responsibility for the attack and US

37:24

officials have confirmed that claim. The

37:27

US officials did warn about this, warned

37:30

Russia both publicly and privately about intelligence pointing

37:33

to an impending attack. There's no

37:35

indication that Ukraine was involved anyway despite

37:37

Putin trying to make that link in

37:39

an address this weekend. It underscored vulnerabilities

37:42

in Russia and Putin himself and

37:45

at the time the US warned him

37:47

he called the warning blackmail. Can

37:49

you just talk about this because obviously

37:52

you're talking Russia's a big character

37:54

in your book. Well, first

37:56

of all, let's think Ukraine off the table. This

37:58

is not a Ukraine-style attack. They have no incentive

38:01

to carry out an attack like this. So

38:03

let's set that, and that's the US intelligence assessment.

38:05

Ukraine had nothing to do with this. This

38:08

group, ISIS, Khorasan as it's known,

38:10

or ISIS-K as it's shortened, is

38:13

a highly capable group. And

38:15

we think of ISIS having disappeared

38:17

as a threat, and it was

38:19

greatly reduced following this US-led campaign

38:21

in Syria going back several years.

38:24

But ISIS-K is an offshoot of it

38:26

based in Central Asia, so it's kind

38:29

of away from Syria. And they're still

38:31

able to generate plots,

38:33

including plots overseas. It's

38:35

ISIS-K that the US believes is behind this

38:37

terror attack that took place in Iran a

38:40

number of months ago, which interestingly,

38:42

the US warned Iran about

38:44

that attack prior, much

38:46

like it did with this attack, which shows you

38:49

a couple of things. One, the US intel

38:51

has a pretty decent handle on the activities

38:53

of this group. But two also,

38:55

it shows you that even in the

38:57

midst of this worsening standoff between

38:59

the US and Russia-China, but also

39:01

these kind of middle powers that

39:03

are situating themselves. The proxies. The

39:05

proxies. Well, and the friends, like

39:07

the sort of middle power kappos

39:10

in the larger kind of

39:12

organization in

39:15

Iran or North Korea, that

39:18

even as that's happening, there is communication

39:21

between those sides. And here

39:23

you have an example of the US reaching out, making

39:25

a positive step, say, hey, guys, Russia,

39:28

watch out for your Southern flank here.

39:30

This is planning. Iran, watch out. These

39:33

guys are planning something. And in each case, it kind of looks like

39:35

Russian Iran were like, I don't want to listen to you. And

39:38

it didn't end up well for them. So what's

39:40

the implications right now? I want to use it

39:42

to get into your book. What are

39:44

the implications for Putin? Because he's had a lot

39:46

of these, had the guy he ended

39:49

up killing in the airplane accident, but got pretty

39:51

close to Moscow. He's got, you know, he's got

39:53

all kinds of issues. He's obviously just won the

39:55

election, so to speak. So where is

39:57

he now? Because this makes being safe in Russia.

40:00

as I recall when I was there,

40:02

the prime directive of keeping people safe

40:04

by instilling fear in them and

40:06

protecting them. This is his whole

40:09

basis of legitimacy, right? Is I'm the strong

40:11

man, I'm gonna keep you safe from the

40:14

various boogeymen, you know terrorists certainly, but the

40:16

US, NATO, the Ukrainians, you know, the Nazis

40:18

in Ukraine, all this kind of stuff that

40:20

he creates as his enemies. I

40:23

mean some, oddly enough, the

40:25

real one is this terrorist group, the other

40:27

ones are exaggerated to his own benefit. And

40:30

I think it's also important to add

40:32

this to our larger picture of Putin

40:34

because there's this impression of him as

40:36

being 10 feet tall, right? That he's,

40:38

and you remember this leading up to the

40:40

invasion of Ukraine, you had a lot of

40:42

folks including in this country who said he's

40:44

too smart, he's too wise to invade Ukraine,

40:46

he would never do that. He's playing three-dimensional

40:48

chess, lo and behold he made a dumb

40:50

move, right? And here you have him again

40:53

making what appears to be a dumb move.

40:55

He had a warning from the US, he

40:57

didn't heed that warning, and we

40:59

should not invest him with any more brilliance or,

41:01

you know, wisdom than he actually

41:03

has or is demonstrated. And so it

41:05

is, as you say, you had

41:07

a guy that drove halfway to Moscow in Progogen,

41:09

you know, Putin later took him out, but it's

41:12

not like everybody was standing in the way

41:14

of Progogen when he was, you know, when

41:17

he was doing that. So he's got weaknesses,

41:19

he is not bulletproof. So speaking of

41:21

that in your book, you write that the current world structure

41:23

you say for US and its allies, this is a 1939

41:27

moment. What do you mean by that? I do

41:29

truly believe that, and I'll tell you the idea for this

41:31

book came to me while I was in

41:33

Ukraine in February 2022 as the invasion

41:36

was underway, as the tanks were coming across the

41:38

border and the cruise missiles

41:40

were falling on Ukrainian cities. It

41:43

just struck me that while relations

41:45

between the US and Russia and the US

41:47

and China had been deteriorating for a number

41:50

of years, and while we had had warning

41:52

signs, you know, major shots across the

41:54

bow like Russia's partial invasion of Georgia

41:57

in 2008, its Partial invasion

41:59

of Ukraine in 2020. Fourteen other steps the

42:01

China's taken for instance, in the

42:03

South China Sea That. And.

42:05

A full scale invasion of the

42:07

largest country in Europe. An

42:10

attempt to redraw the borders of your

42:13

by force of arms presents many the

42:15

ingredients that we saw. Nineteen Thirty Nine

42:17

you know you you have up there

42:19

at aggressive leader who views himself as

42:21

an historic leader, writing the the wrongs

42:24

of the past by force of arms

42:26

and really is insatiable. He takes a

42:28

piece and then if he is is

42:30

the resistance isn't so great it takes

42:33

another piece and of it of or

42:35

is at keeps going and I speak

42:37

tire collapsed. The Estonian Prime minister. For

42:40

speak to a great deal in this book.

42:42

she likes to quote church or on proven

42:44

that that quote know I'm paraphrasing but the

42:46

it it an appeaser is is someone who

42:48

feeds the crocodile expecting that he or she

42:50

will be it's last meal and I think

42:52

there's wisdom in that when you look at

42:54

boot and a particular today when you have

42:57

the accommodation less who say. Litter.

42:59

Skim, Ukraine marathon are war. it's

43:01

gonna be fine. Actually,

43:03

based on recent history, that's not the way

43:05

he operates. He takes something like are i'm

43:08

gonna take the next piece and see what

43:10

you do about. A

43:12

gym it's it's nice the meantime

43:14

really pursued and and and enjoy

43:17

your work of so. With

43:19

respect to Ukraine and then I have a broader

43:21

question. Even. If it were to

43:23

be a stalemate and and up and sort of

43:25

and North and South Korea situation room and force.

43:27

I had to redraw the the map and in

43:30

been. Weird. Greed or are you have

43:32

this? We have this. Hasn't

43:35

this been an enormous victory for the

43:37

last unified year of the union? For

43:39

the first time, Nato's out of a

43:41

brain coma. Coon looks terrible. I can't

43:43

think this this has been good for

43:45

his economy. Isn't. Isn't this a

43:47

a rallying point in something that boot? You

43:49

know that at the end of the day

43:51

as Burnished. The. Brand and the Power

43:54

The West. i think it's a

43:56

great points got as he gets it to to

43:58

what i was saying earlier we should not imagine

44:00

that they Russian, China are 10 feet tall or

44:02

invested with this special wisdom, or that

44:04

we are falling to pieces, right? To

44:08

just a straight up military point, from

44:10

say the US perspective, 5% of the US defense budget

44:15

in supporting Ukraine without any boots on the

44:17

ground, well, at least acknowledged boots on the

44:20

ground, but no US soldiers who've been killed

44:22

in this conflict has

44:25

effectively neutered Russia's

44:27

entire ground force capability. They

44:29

can keep churning up, sending

44:33

cannon fodder to the Eastern front, but

44:35

it has brought that paper

44:38

tiger down, right? In

44:40

effect for a very small investment, at

44:43

least from the outside, of course, the Ukrainians have

44:45

made an enormous investment in blood and treasure and

44:47

losses, but

44:49

from a purely military perspective, enormous victory,

44:51

but also a diplomatic one and an

44:54

economic one. The

44:56

thinking going in, and this was Putin's miscalculation,

44:59

but even folks here in the West was

45:01

like, oh, NATO is going to break under

45:03

this pressure. It didn't break. It's been unified.

45:05

Yes, you have Viktor Orban. It's expanded, right?

45:08

And it's expanded by two countries that resisted

45:10

NATO membership for decades. They had said, we're

45:12

going to be the ones in the middle,

45:14

particularly Finland, right? It sort of said, with

45:17

our history, yes, we've been invaded before, but we're going

45:19

to find a way to kind of balance out. They've

45:22

now added 800 miles to the frontier between

45:24

NATO and Russia, which Russia has to defend.

45:27

And economically too, Russia

45:30

lost its entire energy market in Europe.

45:32

China and India are happy to buy

45:34

cheap Russian gas at a discount, but

45:36

Germany just said it went cold Turkey

45:38

off of Russian energy. I mean, from

45:41

that perspective, I think we have to step back and say,

45:43

we're not doing bad. So what is

45:45

the biggest danger though out there for the US? And

45:47

talk about specifically the relationship between Russia and China, which

45:49

you read about in this book. Us

45:52

Officials told you about the, quote, nightmare

45:54

scenario with Russia and China both deciding

45:57

to make moves at the same time

45:59

to regain territory. But Talk about that.

46:01

their relationship. and because I I think

46:03

China. Probably looked down upon Russia

46:05

in that regard. Just as useful

46:07

idiot in that regard. But maybe maybe

46:10

I'm wrong. About that What? you're not

46:12

wrong. Bill Burns agrees with you as

46:14

interviewed him to Cia Director for this

46:16

book A said it's been a Russia

46:18

has to be careful over time that

46:20

it is not the junior partners in

46:22

this No Limits partnership that Russia and

46:24

China have unveiled. Notably just weeks before

46:26

the Ukraine and Bay in Base indices

46:28

see and put in hand in hand

46:30

is is think of. That relationship has

46:32

developed and cut become closer over a

46:34

number years. I wrote a book few

46:36

years ago called the Shadow War which

46:38

is talking about. This. Conflict between the

46:40

great powers taking place below the surface. and

46:43

now I would argue it's very much above

46:45

the surface, but it. But at the time

46:47

that relationship was largely of relationship of convenience.

46:49

You know, Cc would be up by scratch

46:52

my be, Scratch my back. I'll scratch yours

46:54

here and there, but it's They're definitely tighter

46:56

now. It. It's not a love

46:58

with the love match, right? because they

47:00

have their own disagreements, but they see

47:02

benefit being together in terms of. Undermining.

47:05

The Us and the international system that they

47:07

see is aligned against them to some degree

47:10

and it's pretty tight. You're the one step

47:12

the China has not taken at that the

47:14

Us was very worried about still is is

47:16

that providing direct weapons to to Russia for

47:19

it's war in Ukraine but it's done a

47:21

lot as providing a lot of to use

47:23

technology. A lot of things that that the

47:25

war wouldn't be allowed to continue. It

47:28

would be able to it without that shiny support

47:30

as well as by a lot of Russian you

47:32

know, oil and so on. so it's getting closer

47:34

but over time in a look at that. Russia.

47:37

Needs China more than China needs Russia.

47:40

And and you know couldn't probably aware

47:42

that but he can a needs of

47:44

now and at china's looking to take

47:46

advantage were a camp. So.

47:49

that the title of your bucks the return

47:51

of prey parents russia china and the next

47:53

room more for some at i do want

47:56

to know how you see the next world

47:58

where unfolding and know noses for your scenario

48:00

is there. And two, in the

48:03

last 10 years, I mean, we're now

48:05

spending a lower percentage of our GDP on the

48:07

military than we have typically historically,

48:09

and yet we spend more than the top

48:12

10 powers combined.

48:14

AI is all encapsulated or

48:16

being captured here. We're

48:18

now the largest energy producer in the world,

48:21

food independent. I mean, isn't

48:23

it really,

48:25

isn't the last decade, if you look at

48:27

the data, GDP growth inflation, isn't the data

48:30

kind of reflected the return of the great

48:32

power singular and that great power is the

48:34

US? We have a lot

48:36

of advantages, no question, economic among

48:38

them, military, technological advance. We're still, you

48:41

guys both know this much better than

48:43

me, but we

48:45

develop technology enormously well across

48:47

the board, although China is competitive in a lot

48:49

of spaces. The

48:52

weaknesses, right, are that China,

48:55

first of all, Russia, while it is

48:57

that, to quote John McCain, the gas

48:59

station masquerading as

49:01

a nation, it's got more

49:03

nuclear weapons than anybody. And it's

49:05

proven a willingness to disrupt to

49:09

a degree we just haven't seen

49:11

for decades, including invading the

49:13

largest country in Europe and including, as

49:15

I talk about in one of the chapters

49:17

of the book, becoming very close to using

49:19

a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, to breaking that

49:21

seal on nuclear conflict for the first time

49:23

in 80 years. So while their

49:26

economy is decrepit and their population

49:28

is shrinking and all the wealth

49:30

for what it is is concentrated in Moscow, and

49:32

if you go to the hinterlands, it's a

49:35

mess, they still have enormous

49:37

capability to disrupt. And China,

49:39

China, of course, has become

49:41

an internationally formidable economy. Again,

49:44

about 10 feet tall and that economic growth, as

49:46

you know, is flattening out

49:49

and their population is getting older,

49:51

etc. But its nuclear arsenal has

49:53

been doubling, tripling over time. It

49:56

has created a blue water navy to project

49:58

power around the world. the world. You know,

50:01

we may have, and we certainly do have,

50:03

advantages over them, but

50:05

individually and together they have enormous

50:07

both capability and willingness to disrupt

50:09

what we hold dear to a

50:11

degree that we haven't seen. Yeah,

50:14

disrupts the only, and speaking of disruption, looking at

50:16

the election, you described Donald Trump as a geopolitical

50:18

wild card. I think that's a kind way of

50:20

putting in it. But what

50:22

could you see him doing if he's

50:25

reelected besides his

50:27

ranting on through social? Concrete

50:30

moves, right? And in that chapter,

50:32

I speak to the folks who served him at the

50:34

most senior level in the last administration. Who will not

50:36

be there? Who will not be there? They will not

50:38

be there because they've said that he would be a

50:40

disastrous president. John Kelly, his

50:42

former chief of staff, quote unquote, in the

50:45

book, it would be fundamentally a catastrophe for

50:47

the country. John Bolton, former

50:49

national security advisor, says in the

50:51

book that Trump doesn't have a brain

50:54

to contemplate national

50:57

security policy around the world. So

51:00

they say a few things they

51:02

expect in another term. One, they

51:04

say Ukraine aid ends. I think

51:06

that's kind of to be expected

51:08

based on what we've heard the president say, the

51:10

former president. They

51:12

believe he would take the US out

51:14

of NATO. And if congressional legislation, which

51:17

we know was passed recently that would

51:19

require congressional approval to do so, he

51:22

would neuter it effectively if he can't do it formally.

51:24

And all the commander in chief would have to do

51:26

to neuter NATO is say, I'm not going to defend.

51:29

I'm not going to go to war for the Baltics. Not

51:32

my problem, too far away. Talk about it the

51:34

way that he talks about Ukraine. And a similar

51:36

view of US defense partnerships

51:39

with South Korea. Trump, you'll remember

51:41

in his last administration already talked

51:43

about reducing the US military presence

51:46

there. Stop joint military exercises. Same

51:49

with Japan. And with Taiwan,

51:52

across the board, his former advisors say, I

51:54

would be very nervous if I were Taiwan.

51:57

Because John Bolton tells a story in the

51:59

book where Trump when he was president

52:01

would sit in the oval, hold

52:03

a sharpie in his hand and point to the tip of

52:05

the sharpie and say, see that, that's Taiwan. Then

52:07

he'd point to the resolute desk and say,

52:10

that's China to make the point that Taiwan

52:12

has no chance against China

52:14

and therefore we have no business defending them.

52:16

So that's a big deal. It's

52:19

a big deal. So

52:21

disastrous, in other words disastrous. And Israel?

52:24

Israel. So he's... It's

52:27

interesting. He was in Israel in post

52:29

October 7th and October, November. And

52:32

my manuscript was largely done, but I

52:34

started reaching out to context to see

52:36

how is this war another

52:39

battlefield if they were seeing it for, you

52:41

know, in the larger conflict. And

52:44

they were absolutely seeing it. One sort of

52:46

hard example of that was that Russia took

52:49

it upon itself to send a SAM missile

52:51

system to Hezbollah in the midst of it,

52:53

calculating it seemed that, hey, if

52:55

there's an open... If there's a Northern front in this war,

52:57

I want to make it more difficult for Israel, America's

53:00

ally. You know, just to make it, you know,

53:02

to some degree, they just

53:04

like to throw fuel on the fire, the

53:06

conflict, right? That kind of thing,

53:08

because it occupies the US. It weakens a US

53:11

ally. And by

53:13

the way, it's not just secret stuff. He

53:15

invited the leaders of Hamas to Moscow, you

53:17

know, repeatedly, Putin did.

53:20

So, you know, these are not... They're not

53:22

good actors. They're not nice. He looks like

53:24

to get his filthy fingers into everything. He

53:26

really does. What a thug. Scott,

53:28

last question. Yeah, if there was a

53:30

threat that you didn't think we were paying enough attention

53:33

to, what would it be? Is it

53:35

AI or anything else like that? Well, on

53:37

the AI point, I do... I talked, for instance, to Richard

53:39

Moore, the head of MI6 on this in

53:41

the book. And I think he describes it in

53:43

a good way. The AI is a force multiplier,

53:45

right? For every weapons system you're talking about, you

53:47

talk about drone warfare, which we're seeing play

53:50

out before our eyes in Ukraine. When

53:53

those drones can be controlled by AI

53:55

more so than you're talking about swarms

53:57

as opposed to individuals that can overwhelm...

54:00

the defenses of the US aircraft carrier can

54:03

turbocharge cyber attacks, which are

54:05

already consequential and already show

54:07

weaknesses in our system. So

54:10

AI is certainly one of them, but I suppose

54:12

it's... What strikes me

54:14

is that this is a multi-front conflict

54:17

technologically in a way we've never

54:19

seen before. Nuclear

54:22

weapons, three nuclear armed powers. And

54:24

by the way, no treaties with

54:26

China that govern nuclear weapons and

54:28

fewer treaties with Russia. Everybody

54:31

has tremendous cyber capabilities that could

54:33

impact not just our military, but

54:35

our civilian technologies that we depend

54:37

on every day. GPS and train

54:42

signals, et cetera. Space

54:45

weapons, because we depend on space

54:47

technology, our military certainly does. Smart

54:50

bombs aren't smart without GPS,

54:52

but you and I do. We just

54:54

know our communications and so on, which

54:57

is deliberate, right? These space weapons can impact

54:59

both the military and the civilian population. So

55:02

that as we were reporting a few

55:04

weeks ago, when Russia talks about putting a nuke in

55:06

space to zap

55:08

our satellites, we

55:11

take that seriously. We better take that seriously. So

55:13

I suppose to answer your question, Scott, is that

55:16

we've never faced a

55:18

multi-front war like this before with

55:21

so many different technologies, both

55:24

old school technologies, just the

55:27

largest land war in Europe in 80 years, but

55:31

super powered technologies like nucleus, cyber,

55:33

and space weapons that would all

55:35

be used together and create a

55:37

whole spectrum conflict that would inflict

55:39

pain, not just on our

55:41

military, but you and me. So this impression

55:43

that we could retreat behind the ramparts and

55:45

say, Taiwan's not my problem. Ukraine's not my problem.

55:48

The Baltics, yeah, they're nice, but I'm not going

55:50

to go to war to defend them. We

55:52

can't really think in those terms because very quickly any

55:55

conflict like this would impact you and me. I would

55:57

say that's the threat that we need to be aware

55:59

of. thing to do. You have

56:01

anything happy to say? Anything? Well

56:03

to Scott's point, we writ large

56:05

have done a pretty good job in the

56:08

last couple of years, right? And I spend

56:10

the whole last chapter of the book talking

56:12

to folks involved every

56:14

day in responding

56:16

to this conflict for ways

56:18

forward. And communications are important,

56:21

redline communications, sharing information about

56:24

say, pending terror attacks,

56:26

you know, this kind of thing,

56:28

deconflicting, that stuff

56:31

matters, treaties matter, negotiations,

56:33

but also standing up

56:35

and defending what we think is important, you

56:37

know, and clear red lines and defending

56:39

those red lines. And just to be clear, I'm

56:41

not a warmonger. I got a 15 year old

56:43

and a 13 year old, right? They're not many

56:46

years away from draft age if we go to

56:48

war. So from a personal

56:50

standpoint, I want to communicate as

56:52

best I can what smart people are saying about avoiding

56:54

conflict. In any case, thank

56:56

you Jim Shudo. And again, the book is

56:58

the return of great powers, Russia, China and

57:00

the next world war. I'm going to put

57:02

a parentheses that we all hope to avoid.

57:05

Anyway, thank you so much. Truly enjoyed

57:07

it. Thank you, Carrot Scott. Nice meeting you Jim.

57:10

All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be

57:12

back for wins and fails. Support

57:18

for pivot comes from CODA. It's already

57:20

hard to get your team on the

57:22

same page when you're all in the

57:24

same place, let alone when you're spread

57:26

across time zones. If you're looking to

57:28

create a more centralized organized digital workspace

57:31

for your team, you might be interested

57:33

in CODA. CODA is an all in

57:35

one collaborative workspace designed to bring teams

57:37

and tools together for a more organized

57:39

workday. CODA blends flexibility of docs, the

57:41

structure of spreadsheets, the power of applications

57:43

and the intelligence of AI to make

57:45

work well, a little less work. With

57:47

CODA's extensive planning capabilities, you can

57:49

stay aligned by managing your planning

57:51

cycles in one location while setting

57:53

and measuring objectives and key results

57:55

with full visibility across teams. You

57:57

can communicate and collaborate on documents. and

58:00

roadmaps instantly. If you want a platform

58:02

that empowers your startup to strategize, plan

58:04

and track goals effectively, you can get

58:07

started with CODA today for free and

58:09

get a thousand dollar credit at coda.io.pivot

58:13

That's a special limited time offer

58:15

for startups that means you can

58:17

begin planning right now at no

58:19

cost. That's coda.io.pivot to get started

58:22

for free and get a thousand

58:24

dollar credit. Support

58:28

for this show comes from Indeed. Imagine

58:30

the perfect employee. Let's call

58:33

her Jackie. Jackie

58:35

is professional yet relaxed, punctual,

58:37

friendly, meets deadlines, and just

58:39

makes your job easier overall. But the

58:42

search for Jackie can be long and

58:44

tedious, especially when you have so many

58:46

other things on your plate. Indeed wants

58:48

to help you find your next Jackie. Indeed

58:51

is your matching and hiring platform

58:53

with over 350 million global

58:55

monthly visitors according to Indeed data

58:57

and a matching engine that helps

58:59

you find quality candidates fast. They

59:02

leverage over 140 million qualifications

59:04

and preferences every day, so their

59:06

matching engine is constantly learning

59:08

from your preferences. That means they

59:11

can better connect to you

59:13

with your Jackie. And the

59:15

listeners of this show can get a $75 sponsor

59:18

job credit to get your job's

59:20

more visibility at indeed.com/ just

59:23

go to indeed.com/podcast right now

59:25

and say you heard about Indeed in

59:27

this podcast. indeed.com/podcast.

59:30

Terms and conditions of planning. Need to

59:33

hire? You need Indeed. Support

59:37

for this show comes from Fiverr, the

59:39

world's largest marketplace for freelance services. In

59:42

the fast-paced world of business, every

59:44

decision counts. And when it comes

59:46

to hiring, there's no room for

59:49

guesswork. That's why Fiverr has developed

59:51

solutions for businesses to make outsourcing

59:53

projects simple, quick, and compliant. You

59:55

can gain access to curated talent

59:57

through Fiverr Pro's catalog of top

59:59

freelancers. organized by skill

1:00:01

and experience. Streamline your projects with

1:00:04

a user-friendly dashboard where you can

1:00:06

track progress and collaborate with your

1:00:08

team. And for anyone needing the

1:00:11

highest level of white glove service,

1:00:13

Fiverr Pro's project partners can manage

1:00:15

multiple freelancer engagements for you. Project

1:00:18

partners will outline requirements, assemble a

1:00:20

roster of freelancers, and manage a

1:00:22

schedule to ensure your deliverables are

1:00:25

completed on time. Ready to scale

1:00:27

smarter? Visit pro.fiverr.com to sign up

1:00:30

and use code VOX for 15% off any service.

1:00:33

That's pro.fiverr, F-I-V-E-R-R,

1:00:35

dot com, and

1:00:37

use code VOX.

1:00:44

Okay, Scott, why don't you do your win and fail?

1:00:47

Well, I mean this sincerely. I thought you were fantastic

1:00:49

on Mars. So that's my quick win. I thought it

1:00:51

was a great show. And also the show was good.

1:00:53

I thought Beto was good. I thought, I forget her

1:00:55

name. I thought she was quite good. Sarah Isker. I

1:00:57

thought she was quite good and I thought he was

1:00:59

on point. Anyway, I thought it was a great show.

1:01:03

And I thought you were especially strong. My

1:01:06

win is my colleague Jonathan

1:01:08

Hyde. I think right now Jonathan is arguably

1:01:11

one of the most influential scholars in the

1:01:13

world. In his new book, The

1:01:15

Anxious Generation, the thing

1:01:18

I just love about it is, he

1:01:20

went after cancel culture and now he's going after phones.

1:01:24

And it's really actionable. He's basically saying

1:01:26

that for reforms or new norms to

1:01:28

build a healthier childhood in the digital

1:01:30

age, and he has

1:01:32

four things, no smartphones before high school,

1:01:35

no social media before 16, phone-free

1:01:38

schools, and

1:01:40

more independence, free play, and

1:01:42

responsibility in the real world.

1:01:45

And these sound like simple things, but

1:01:48

they're things that are actionable. They're things schools can do.

1:01:51

I've been getting more involved in my kids' school to

1:01:53

just say, how do we promote

1:01:55

these four things? But we've talked a lot

1:01:57

about this, age-gating. There's no reason anyone should

1:01:59

be. be on social media before the age of 16. Schools,

1:02:02

there's a big problem and anyone

1:02:05

with kids knows this, people without kids say,

1:02:07

well, it's your fault, just don't give them

1:02:09

the phone. There's the...

1:02:12

Kids are ostracized if they don't have these devices

1:02:15

and are on their platforms because everybody's on them.

1:02:17

So the only way to solve this problem is

1:02:19

to get everyone universally off of them. And

1:02:22

you do that through age-gating and taking their phones away.

1:02:24

I don't... I've really...

1:02:27

My son going to boarding school has been... It's

1:02:31

quite frankly, it's been awful for me and I really

1:02:33

don't... And it's not about me,

1:02:35

but of course, I'm thinking about me. But

1:02:37

it's wonderful for him because they're too busy

1:02:39

and they're too programmed and they have too many

1:02:41

sports and too much studying and too

1:02:44

much socialization to be on their phones. And they hand

1:02:46

their phones in and he doesn't miss it. Anyways,

1:02:50

his book is... I think it's going to have

1:02:52

a real impact on the way we approach or

1:02:56

think about new ways of

1:02:58

approaching this incredible uptick in

1:03:00

teen depression and anxiety at

1:03:03

the hands of not only just social media,

1:03:05

but handhelds. Apple plays a role here. The

1:03:08

platforms play a role. Parents play a role. Schools

1:03:10

play a role. But anyways, my

1:03:13

win is Jonathan Pite's

1:03:16

new book and his action, his

1:03:18

very actionable strategies here.

1:03:22

My fail is I don't think that people

1:03:24

are taking seriously enough or just

1:03:26

along the lines of Jim Trudeau. I think the biggest threat

1:03:29

to our national security is not... And

1:03:32

I've talked about this before, is

1:03:34

not Russia, it's not ISIS, it's

1:03:37

not an invasion of

1:03:39

Taiwan by China. I think our biggest threat

1:03:41

is a series of factors that have come

1:03:43

together to create the loneliest generation of young

1:03:45

people in history. And I

1:03:48

think lonely people, specifically young men,

1:03:50

specifically lonely young men who serve in

1:03:52

our military and at our soft tissue

1:03:54

of our ports and our infrastructure, I

1:03:57

think they're going to become especially prone and vulnerable

1:03:59

to bad actors. And

1:04:01

I think there's not only a moral

1:04:03

obligation to get more involved in their lives, but

1:04:05

I think it's a defense threat. I think these

1:04:08

young men can be weaponized very

1:04:10

easily with AI bots and

1:04:13

disinformation when they don't have the guardrails of relationships,

1:04:15

friends, family. You've spoken of this many times. You've

1:04:17

spoken of this. I think it's

1:04:19

a huge threat. There are a lot of things

1:04:21

we can do to fix that, whether it's economic

1:04:23

opportunity, after school programs, national service. I

1:04:26

think if we're not going to do it for moral

1:04:29

reasons, I think we should do it just

1:04:31

out of what Jim was talking about as

1:04:34

a defense threat. All right. Well,

1:04:36

okay. My fail,

1:04:38

I think, is pretty

1:04:40

clear as Rona McDaniel. I mean, this is

1:04:42

just... We

1:04:44

talked about this earlier. I just am like, come on.

1:04:46

Like, stop it. Like, there's... You

1:04:50

know, you could go on about cancel culture. This woman

1:04:52

deserved to be canceled in some fashion. She...

1:04:55

And actually, you know what? I even blame her. She wants

1:04:58

to make money. She got, like, zeroed out by Trump. She

1:05:00

served him loyally. And, of course,

1:05:02

he screwed her, which is what he does. Rona,

1:05:04

Rona, whatever Harvard says. I don't care. You

1:05:07

should change your name back to Romney,

1:05:09

by the way, which it was. She

1:05:11

was the niece of Mitt Romney. You should spend more

1:05:13

time with your uncle, who has a lot

1:05:15

more backbone than you do, and ask

1:05:18

for forgiveness from him. I

1:05:20

just... Literally, but I blame the executives

1:05:22

at NBC for this. I'm so glad I got

1:05:24

rid of my contract with them. Now,

1:05:26

look, CNN's made a lot of dumb choices, too,

1:05:28

in its history. But I

1:05:31

would be embarrassed to be there, and I would have to

1:05:33

quit, I guess. I don't know. It

1:05:35

just... Do you think they should pull her offer? Do

1:05:37

you think they should say we screwed up? I don't

1:05:39

know. I don't know if they can. Like, the

1:05:42

damage is already done. I don't think

1:05:44

they should have her on, and I think no host should have to have

1:05:46

her on. This woman has no credibility.

1:05:48

She is literally changing her tune every

1:05:50

five seconds, like, drastically changing her tune.

1:05:52

That's not even subtle. And

1:05:54

then... So anyway, just... In

1:05:56

this case, it's at some point, like,

1:05:59

with Donald Trump. I mean, blaming him

1:06:01

anymore. We know who he is, right? It's

1:06:04

the people who support him that know

1:06:06

better and they're repulsive. And she is

1:06:08

repulsive to me in that regard. Not

1:06:11

physically, just repulsive as a character and

1:06:13

a liar. She's a liar and she's

1:06:15

a mendacious fuck. She wins the Mendacious

1:06:18

Fuck Award of the Week. And

1:06:20

then my win is all the fantastic stuff around

1:06:22

the movies that made me cry, which you still

1:06:25

haven't gotten me on Hoosiers. No, I'm sorry, people.

1:06:27

I didn't cry at Hoosiers. Speaking

1:06:30

of which, I'm doing this thing in Washington and

1:06:32

I wish Scott would do it sometimes where you

1:06:34

pick a movie and then discuss it at this

1:06:36

event. It's a movie night kind of thing. And

1:06:38

I was trying to decide what to do and they're like, oh, broadcast

1:06:40

news, which I also love, or the net, something to

1:06:43

do with net. But I am

1:06:45

going to stick with the ones I want

1:06:47

to, which is Roadhouse, which made me

1:06:49

cry because Patrick Swayze is a genius,

1:06:51

or Gladiator. And now I

1:06:53

may have to do Omen, the original Omen

1:06:55

movie, which I love because of course

1:06:57

the nanny hanging herself. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

1:07:00

yeah. I love the Omen. That didn't make me cry. I

1:07:02

loved it. I love all the Omen's as bad as they

1:07:04

are, but there's a new one coming out called The First

1:07:06

Omen where we find out how it

1:07:08

got to the Omen. It

1:07:10

looks terrible and I'm going to see it. So

1:07:12

there you have it. Anyway, I thank you for

1:07:15

all your things. Keep them coming. I'll try to

1:07:17

cry at something. And before we go, I just

1:07:19

want to flag a new piece in New York

1:07:21

Magazine called Andrew Huberman's Mechanisms of Control, the private

1:07:23

and public seduction of the world's biggest pop neuroscientist,

1:07:26

very popular podcast. I find it to be a

1:07:28

smart Joe Rogan kind of thing. It

1:07:30

looks fascinating. We can't wait to read it. If you do,

1:07:32

let us know what you think. We will read it this

1:07:34

week and perhaps discuss it next week. We

1:07:37

do want to hear from you. Send us

1:07:39

your questions about business tech or whatever is

1:07:41

on your mind. Go to nymag.com/pivot to submit a

1:07:43

question for the show or call 85551 Pivot. Okay,

1:07:46

Scott, that's the show. We'll be back

1:07:48

on Friday with more. Please read us

1:07:50

out. Today's show is produced by Larry

1:07:52

Naaman, Billy Marcus, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie and Todd

1:07:55

engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Bros and

1:07:57

Neil Savario. Nishakkura is Vox

1:07:59

Mee. as executive producer of audio. Make sure

1:08:01

you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to

1:08:03

podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot, from New York

1:08:06

Magazine of Vox Media. You can

1:08:08

subscribe to the magazine at nymag.com/pod. We'll

1:08:10

be back later this week for

1:08:12

another breakdown of all things tech. And this

1:08:15

is Kara, have a great rest of the

1:08:17

week. Support

1:08:27

for Pivot comes from Fundrise. You know the

1:08:29

adage, buy low, sell high. It's easy to

1:08:31

say and hard to do. For example, high

1:08:33

interest rates are crushing the real estate market

1:08:36

right now. Demand is dropping and prices are

1:08:38

falling, even for many of the best assets.

1:08:41

It's no wonder the Fundrise flagship fund plans

1:08:43

to go on a buying spree, expanding its

1:08:45

billion dollar real estate portfolio over the next

1:08:47

few months. You can add

1:08:49

the Fundrise flagship fund to your

1:08:51

portfolio in just minutes with as

1:08:53

little as $10 by visiting fundrise.com/Pivot.

1:08:56

Carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges,

1:08:58

and expenses of the Fundrise flagship fund

1:09:00

before investing. This and other

1:09:03

information can be found in the

1:09:05

fund's prospectus at fundrise.com/flagship. This

1:09:07

is a paid advertisement.