Billionaire Les Wexner Testifies About Epstein Ties

Hi, it's Sierra Miller. I can't wait for you to check out my new collection of shoes and accessories at Designer Shoe Warehouse. If you love shoes as much as I do, then trust me, I got you. From cute sneakerinas to the perfect flip-flops to stunning heels. These shoes are all style, no drama. It's a girls' girl's summer, and DSW has just the shoes. Shop the Sierra Miller collection right now at your DSW store or DSW.com. And now, the next chapter of the Serta counting sheep. Hey, Uncle Number One, why aren't we counted anymore? Let me tell you a story. Long ago, Serta invented the perfect sleeper mattress. Oh, no. Oh, yes. It says the all-new Serta Perfect Sleaper with the Q4 support system has four and one perfectly interlinked coils that help relieve aches and back pain for perfect sleep night after night. We'll never get counted again. Uh, nope. Serta, we make the world's best mattress. Welcome to the beat. We are reporting right now on new testimony coming out of this House Epstein probe. The recent Epstein files showed the DOJ had leads on these people in Epstein's orbit and others redacted. As you see, this was a big, important document that we only got from the new files. And the DOJ only ultimately prosecuted one, Maxwell. We only know that because Congress overruled Trump and forced out those files. Now some of the same members of Congress say they are doing basically some of the investigative work that the DOJ failed to do. And that would stretch back from the recent Trump administration and the Biden administration because these leads, if they mean anything, weren't deeply followed by the DOJ under successive administrations. That's the background. Here's what's happening today that's new. The House compelling, a powerful billionaire who's usually behind the scenes, Les Wexner, to go under oath. to provide answers about his long business history with Epstein. He was interviewed where he lives in Ohio. Democratic lawmakers led this questioning today. Some Republican staff members were told also attended. Now, Wexter's a key figure because we already knew Epstein made so much money off of him. This is one example of a photograph from the Oversight Committee with an individual redacted, again under the reasons we've been told, but the two men having a drink, hanging out, whatever you see there. Now, Epstein made money off this man, and we know big sums were also returned. Now, lawmakers say their evidence shows over a billion dollars cumulatively went from Wexner to Epstein, and that he's in the files over 1,000 times. You're looking at... one file, one photograph. There are many, many other references and contacts with him. Now, that billion dollars is part of the fortune that ultimately propped up Epstein's crime spree. And it's been documented that Wexner back in the day cut ties with Epstein around his first legal problems in Florida. If you think about some of the people who've gotten in trouble recently, you remember a lot of them are being basically held to account because after Epstein's conviction, for a sex crime involving a minor, what they call soliciting prostitution for someone under 18, and people years later were in contact with him, and they got in trouble for that. This one is a little different. Wexner can show and point to evidence financially and otherwise there's documents that they cut ties around that time. In fact, Wexner also says Epstein stole from him, and they got some of that money back, as I mentioned. Today, the new Wexner testimony includes a public statement.

where he describes how despite his own business skills and, you know, purported to acumen and intelligence, he says he was duped by a world-class con man and that he regrets ever having met him. Wexner also suggested today that Epstein was a skilled manipulator living a type of, quote, double life, and that he would compartmentalize different sets of people in crimes. If you do an investigation, you follow these kind of pieces of testimony or allegation. And there's some support for that because the emails do show Epstein kind of operating in a different way, even with very different language and different sort of references depending on who he's dealing with. The key question that I'm going to get to here is whether Wexner knew that or not. Wexner suggests that he was only and essentially one of Epstein's financial victims. And others were Epstein sex trafficking victims. And that basically Epstein had a lot of people fooled. Now, we should note Wexner has not faced any legal allegations from the DOJ, and that is his view. And that's part of why investigators gather testimony. But was it the full truth? And was it credible? That's also what we're reporting on today. Some of the Democratic lawmakers basically will let you see what they said, but I would kind of summarize it, is that they basically doubt. Wexner's claimed confusion or ignorance about the totality of the years of other Epstein activities. Mr. Wexner appears to be unaware of much of the money, as he claims, that was given over to Mr. Epstein, trying to downplay how close Jeffrey Epstein and Mr. Wexer actually were. The more this deposition goes on, the less Wexner knows. We are running into dead ends. She most likely will be left with more questions than answers. He has basically alleged that he saw no evil, heard no evil. So you can see the lawmakers there reacting to that. The question isn't whether that's unsatisfying or it doesn't fit a story or a narrative. The question, of course, is whether it's true. Now, they did, of course, probe certain issues. When you take the island, the infamous Epstein Island, Wexner says, you went once with his wife and children. Trump Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently made a similar admission, and Trump is not sanctioning or removing him unlike the people you see on your screen. Howard Lutnick lied about that for years. The only reason he copped to his lies was that the files outed him. We continue to track others, though, who are facing investigations, ousted from top positions, and other forms of consequences. While it must be noted that Donald Trump, who claimed he would get to the bottom of this, won't even throw someone overboard. who was caught on the island. Lower right, by the way, you see a new addition, Kathy Rumler, who was a Democratic lawyer, ousted from Goldman Sachs just in this past week. Now, as Congress investigates, convicted Epstein Associate Maxwell, continues to dodge any attempt to level with the House. She has invoked her Fifth Amendment rights, which are, of course, irrevocable constitutional rights. The only way to get around that would be if Congress wanted to immunize her and then compel her because she wouldn't have.

to worry about any future prosecution. They haven't taken that step. So when you take this together tonight, what you have is a type of investigative progress. And there is a big gap here between what Congress says it's trying to do and what the DOJ... has done and isn't further doing. And while much of this has been in the heat of this MAGA era, this second Trump term, any reliable serious allegations that the DOJ didn't chase down obviously goes back more than two years, given that Epstein died in 2019 and includes Ameri Garland DOJ as well. if there are avenues that have not been fully pursued, whatever the reason, that is an indictment of not only the current DOJ, but the last one as well. As we go down this road, I want to bring in one of our legal analysts, Emily Bazelon, legal writer with New Times Magazine, thoughtful, fair, measured in these wild times. Welcome back. Thanks so much, Ari. Emily, this isn't your first rodeo, and I'll be honest with you. It's not mine either. So when we have politicians sometimes going in the right direction, if that might be called truth or justice, and yet the heat is so high as I've mentioned about, oh, this DOJ didn't go into any of this. I've got Garcia, I'll play in a second, saying, FBI and DOJ haven't done enough to try to get to the bottom of the Wexner investigation, which is, I think, appears to be the case. But that, of course, involves multiple DOJs. What do you see as important or substantive out of what's happening today? Well, so there are obviously the questions of the sex crimes and the sex trafficking, which is why we're all here, right? That's the central harm and evil that Epstein committed. And then there is this big question about all the money, right? How did he get control of so much money from men like Wexner who gave him power of attorney? really trusted him with these vast sums. I think what today was about is whether there's a connection between those two kinds of activities. And Wexner is saying there wasn't any. And as you laid out, the timeline at least suggests that that could be true, right? Because he cut off contact with Epstein before Epstein was convicted of crimes. He is very emphatic. And now the question is going to be, is there evidence that he's lying about that. And I think it's important. This is the timeline. I want to let you finish. But I have a simple question. And we're looking at that's back around when he was indicted that they did to have a breakup in their relationship. But Emily.

If somebody steals what he describes as vast sums, and that's a billionaire saying vast sums, wouldn't you do more than just ask for it back nicely? You might, sure, and I can see why you would expect that. But I think also people are very embarrassed, and it can be hard to, if you've given someone power of attorney, how do you show that they stole from you as opposed to just... They were trying to make a deal and it didn't work out or they paid themselves a really hefty fee along the way. I think sometimes really wealthy people care more about their reputations, not being exposed if having fallen for a con, then they would necessarily about, you know, going to the police or prosecutors with this kind of allegation. And what we need to look for next is evidence about whether there is a connection that Wexner's not admitting here. So far, I see members of Congress sort of assuming, well, there must be. He was so involved, he must have known. But that's really different from we can show here that he's lying. We can show here that he knew where his money was going. And especially because of the way this timeline works, it just seems like they have some real proof they need to offer before they make these kinds of allegations. And that's part of the challenge with something like this, where it just starts to swirl, right, all of these accusations. Yeah, and here's what Garcia said there about the DOJ side. He's someone that's been named by survivors, someone that's in the files more than most people, someone that's clearly the financial benefactor to Jeffrey Epstein and has not been contacted or interviewed by the FBI or the DOJ. What the hell is going on? That is shameful. How about that? Well, I think this question of whether they should have interviewed Wexner, should they have done a lot of work along the way many years ago and sure, in the last DOJ as well as this one, to try to probe all these potential connections. Yeah, I mean, given the vast conspiracy that we're talking about, I can completely understand the distress over not interviewing Wexner and not pursuing this lead. But that's really different from proving a connection that would, right, prove that Wexner knew about the sex trafficking ring, did something criminal, etc. We sometimes tend to look at these things very locally, parochially. Epstein, of course, was in America. But here's a headline about the new probes in France and the UK, the Paris Public Prosecutor opening two lines of inquiry on human trafficking, the other into financial wrongdoing related to Epstein and Britain, police confirming their looking revelations from the files about flights that were there to remind everyone. There is no real global police. The jurisdiction is generally geographic. I'm simplifying. There are international types of crimes, but they're looking at the nexus of whether things went down there and involved their community. What do you think as a legal expert about how long it's taken in many places to look at this?

Well, I think the French and the British are looking at the people whose names are coming up in the files, and they're justifiably asking whether there's any criminal wrongdoing that they can prove in their court systems. I was struck by the fact that the French prosecutors were asking for new victims to come forward, suggesting that what they know so far may not be something that they can indict people about, and they're hoping for more proof of actual crimes to move forward. Yeah, and that's a good point as well, that although you can't assume too much, the kind of questions we hear, especially when there's public calls for cooperation, also speak sometimes to lack of direct evidence, at least in that jurisdiction. Emily, really important stuff. Thanks for walking through it with us. Thanks for having me. Absolutely. When we look at the unaccountable tech billionaires, one of them went under oath today. I'll explain. That's coming up and will be joined by novelist Jay McInerney. And the White House ballroom? A lot of problems. And the immigration crackdown is backfiring on Donald Trump as advertised. We have a very special guest, Ty Cobb, in 90 seconds.

Donald Trump's problem with trying to be an autocrat continues. And polling shows he's having trouble here. He's sagging at 39%. The immigration outrage is part of that. The LA Times reports all of this taking a toll with crashing trust in our elections, concerns about misuse of ICE and other federal agents. 30% of the voters think the immigration officials might be at polling locations, including a larger share. of minority Americans, and that matters because the belief, by 46% say of perfectly lawful Hispanic American or Latino American voters that ICE could be there, could be a reason to skip, which goes to the propaganda war that's also being waged. What is sometimes called, depending on the situation, voter suppression. Here is also what Trump is saying. Why would you want mail-in ballots if you know it's corrupt? It's a corrupt. It says, we're the only country in the world that has this system of mail-in ballots. Think of it. The only country in the world that has this system of mail-in ballots, because they cheat. Fact check, false. This, along with the fear that Steve Bannon and others are putting out about ICE agents roaming voter, polling locations may be this effort to distort everything or to undermine trust in mail voting. There are entire states that do only vote by mail. The president's claim that it is, quote, corrupt, is not backed up by the experience in states, and Donald Trump himself has netted many, many votes for him through the mail. Meanwhile, we have the pictures of the East Wing Ballroom. You can see that going up. Turns out allies on the board are approving the project, rejecting concerns about the size of this building. There's also an appointment of an assistant to the panel in charge of reviewing the plans, which is coming out of Trump's team. And if you look past the White House, Trump has directed his Air Force to repaint a VIP fleet in his preferred palette while putting up pictures and posters and renamings all over the place in the federal government, something the New York Times recently said was more akin to what you see in dictatorships than democracies. We're joined now by former White House attorney in the first Trump administration, Ty Cobb. Welcome back. Thank you. All right. Good to be with you. What do you see here as important in the signal the noise? And this attack on the midterms is, in your view, propaganda, trying to distort who turns out or also getting ready to do something. So I think if we go to 30,000 feet and look at all the pieces, keep in mind, Trump recently said that it was time to nationalize elections. He articulated publicly that he thought the federal government should interfere in 15 jurisdictions or more. Steve Bannon promised that ICE would be out in...

Groves at key precincts and in key states, and that Trump even went so far as to suggest at one point that we should forget about elections in 2026. Now, the White House with regard to the latter statement said that was a joke, but it's not a joke. I mean, this is all intended to desensitize America and to discredit voting, and it's had a big effect. I mean, the polls show that voters don't really anticipate that the elections in 2026. will go smoothly or in a trustworthy manner, not because of, you know, mail and ballots, but because of Republican interference and fascism suspected that will be at the polls. You've seen the judges, courts on the immigration front have responded to the, you know, atrocities you have well mentioned and described on your show previously. by revoking the presumption of regularity from the Department of Justice, that basically saying that after 250 years, what the Justice Department says is no longer entitled to the presumption of truth. We're seeing a real decline. And now, you talk about the ballroom, which I think is probably, you know, less of concern than, you know, the fascist efforts that are, you know, being undertaken with regard to elections. elsewhere immigration. But with regard to the ballroom, what would you see? You know, Frederick Law Olmsted, who, you know, designed DC and, you know, renowned figure in American history was one of the first people on the commission that you just mentioned. And now we have... You know, a very, very young woman who looks like she recently escaped from home room to have her braces removed, has no experience at all. And she's now a Trump appointee. Why? Because she's one of Trump's secretaries. So it's a kakasakashi, as the word that gets tossed around. I know it's a word I didn't know well, but it means governance by the inept. And that's what we're suffering through. Yeah, as you say, inept and nepotism and patronage carrying more weight than anything else, which, as you know, is also the opposite of what Trump had famously claimed in his campaigns. He said that because he was wealthy, he would have less corruption incentive. And it was really the public officials that you have to worry about. It's the opposite. I want to show you Kristi Noem, who at one point might have been fighting for her job over all the ice outrage. And she at DHS getting involved in the voting discussion, take a listen. When it gets to Election Day that we've been proactive to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country. Is that the proper approach of a security official and related? What is your legal view of the limits on ICE under current law to be out in a way that might be voter intimidation in any voting period when we get to the midterms? So that's an excellent question. I think we're going to see the courts gradually parse through that. You know, ICE actually has no local law enforcement authority in any of the states. They're only supposed to manage the limited number of federal crimes entrusted to them.

and they shouldn't be there, but it's going to take a series of court battles, I think, to prevent them from being there. And it may come down to a conflict between, you know, state national guards and ICE, absent an implication of the Insurrection Act, which I think we will see in advance of the elections. So I think people to be very, very concerned and very, very animated about what's coming. Carrie Kasparov, of course. has, you know, the noted Russian dissident and former World Trust champion has been very outspoken about, you know, the gulags that are being built around the country and the fact that they're intended not only to house, you know, illegally detained immigrants, of which we have thousands now, but also likely dissidents and people of color on a going forward basis. You know, what is happening in this country? You don't think, you don't think that's. You don't think that's just an international parallel gone too far. You believe that's something that Trump would try to do and get away with. So put it this way. You know, Trump is deporting people on a... trajectory and at a pace that's not very different from the number of deportations that happened under Obama. However, the number of illegally detained people is extraordinarily high. And he's building, you know, dozens of prisons to house up to 8,000 people. We've never needed that before. That's, that's, you know, well over 150,000 beds. Who are they for? And who are they going to be for when the detainees are gone? This is, this is, this is, as Derek Kasparov says, this is not a drill. Yeah, that's powerful coming from from his knowledge of the world and your concern about a man you once served in the White House. Tie, stay with me. That brings us to another question here about how people are trying to fight back and thwart this. I want to ask you when we come back. Sure. You know that thing where you get an amazing pair of shoes at a really great price and want to tell everyone about it? Yeah, so do we. Here at Designer Shoe Warehouse, we'll give you something to brag about. Like the latest styles from brands you love, or the trends everyone's obsessing over. Or shoes that make you feel like, well, you. So go ahead, show off a little. Buying shoes that get you have prices that get your budget. Head to your DSW store or DSW.com today. DSW. Let us surprise you. And now, the next chapter of the Serta counting sheep. Hey, Uncle Number One, why aren't we counted anymore? Let me tell you a story. Long ago, Sertan invented the perfect sleeper mattress. Oh, no. Oh, yes. It says the all-new Serta Perfect Sleaper with the Q4 support system has four and one perfectly interlinked coils that help relieve aches and back pain for perfect sleep night after night. We'll never get counted again. Uh, nope. Serta, we make the world's best mattress. Home to the Rachel Maddo Show. Morning Joe, the briefing with Jen Saki, and more voices you know and trust. MS Now is your source for news, opinion, and the world. Learn more at MS. Now.

We're back with Ty Cobb, a former federal prosecutor, a White House veteran lawyer under Donald Trump in the first term. We were discussing why you say to take Russian dissident Gary Castro's warning about illegal detentions in this country seriously, your concerns about your former boss and client Trump pursuing martial law. Some of the pushback we've seen on the election front, Virginia redistricting, goes forward, but the Supreme Court's considering an appeal. Florida voters suing to block. Republicans trying the mid-decade redistricting, something that may violate the tradition and different courts are figuring out whether to allow that kind of constitutional hardball. Supreme Court is letting California use what is a Democratic-friendly congressional map, which in that state, they won famously only pushing back on what MAGA had tried. How do you view that as a kind of a signal? to what courts will do with what could be the more emergency problems on a faster basis going into the midterms that you were outlining. So I think that the California decision by the Supreme Court is basically part and parcel of their decision in Texas, which they'd made earlier allowing the Republicans to move forward with redistricting. And there's really no distinction between the two decisions and the reasoning, even though Trump, of course, championed Texas redistricting, but, you know, criticized the California because it's, you know, Democrats and Republicans. That's not the way the country's supposed to be governed. It's supposed to be governed as a unified system of people for all the people. With regard to the other patchwork quilt of states, you have maybe five states, maybe six, actually, with things in play. I think the reality there, though, is It's coming a little late in the game, and there will be appeals and delays, and that gets right up against the Supreme Court's precedent about, you know, they're not going to make changes late in the game. So I'm not sure how consequential any of these current efforts will be. And then you look at Trump's lies about, you know, the perils of mail-in voting. I mean, Florida probably has the most mail-in votes of any state in the country. It's a Republican bastion. I don't think there's any basis for that. And but the level of election interference isn't just in terms of the SAVE Act, which is, of course, just another fascist brick and the prison that's being built around us. But it's in what's going on, the Fulton County case, the Fulton County case where the feds went in and, you know, nowwithstanding legal proceedings in the state involving the same ballots, disrupted all that, submitted an affidavit, which I don't know a single legal person who's reviewed the affidavit who believes that there's actual probable cause in there. In fact, the case agent who filed the affidavit noted that, you know.

At DSW, we ask the important questions. Like, what shoes are you going to wear? Whether you're prepping for wedding season, festival season, or just planning the ultimate vacay, the right shoes can make or break an RSVP. So own the moment. You've got big plans and we've got just the shoes at the perfect price, of course. Get ready to get ready with designer shoe warehouse. Head to your DSW store or DSW.com today. And let us surprise you. Let's check in on the Serta counting sheep. Why aren't we counted anymore? Well, the all-new Serta Perfect Sleeper has the Q4 support system that helps relieve aches and back pain. We'll never get counted again. Uh, nope. Serta, we make the world's best mattress. Home to the Rachel Maddo Show. Morning Joe, the briefing with Jen Saki, and more voices you know and trust. MS Now is your source for news, opinion, and the world. Learn more at MS. Now. Today, billionaire tech mogul Mark Zuckerberg faced questions under oaths. And this was in a venue that is money. could not evade. In court, he took the stand in a major, some say landmark case, depending on what happens, that tries to hold some big tech accountable for peddling addictive products sometimes to children. The company denies these allegations, but Facebook, Instagram, meta, are but one of several companies that reap profits from all kinds of stuff online. Maybe not all of it is questionable or even harmful, but some of it. According to the evidence in this trial is, and they are reaping a lot of money. Tech facing criticism that it is essentially now, especially in certain contexts or with children, more like tobacco than just something that you Google to get some information, that they profit off harm. And they profit handsomely. Because that's one piece, what they're doing and whether it's good, even if it's good business, and then how it's affecting our society inequality. Now, let me tell you up top, America has had many evolving debates over capitalism over the years, over wealth, over the difference between greed or the 80s idea that greed is good, said some, and excess, or the bubbles that burst and seem to hurt everyone. Today's Gilded Age, though, is clearly dominated by one industry. Nine of the ten richest people in the U.S. are all in tech, and they have been vastly growing their multi-billion dollar fortunes in just the last decade. So what started as huge is now just bananas. If you just take these people on your screen, some of them famous, maybe some of them less so, they have a combined $2 trillion in wealth. But they're not just sitting on that money to run their tech empires. As you may have noticed, they're increasingly using the money to buy up everything else that they think has power from major media, MAGA allies buying TV and newspapers, Stephen Colbert is in a clash about that this week, to the social media, which is on trial in that courtroom today. Elon Musk famously put his fortune from other tech companies to buy Twitter. And that made him even more relevant as he sought influence over U.S. politics, where he's an immigrant, and with Donald Trump.

Remember, Elon Musk is his biggest political donor. Trump might want you to forget that and they had their odd relationship, but Elon Musk spent a quarter of a billion dollars on Trump alone, plus wielding the efforts and influence of X, which got him at least a temporary job atop the administration last year. Or Amazon's Jeff Bezos. who has done many things that many people in business say are positive, creating jobs, changing the way commerce works online. Cool. But lately, as a tech billionaire, he's doing a lot of other stuff, cozying up to Trump, taking the Washington Post, which once said democracy dies in darkness, and now in this new Trump era, absolutely gutting what is one of the last American print institutions laying off close to half of the team there. or Trump's adult sons who are getting in on tech just from the other direction of government. Today, they did a joint interview about a very controversial walking conflict of interest, $500 million investment that they got in their crypto company. Take a look. I want to ask you about, you know, the World Liberty Corporation, which has been in the news. And there was this big Wall Street Journal report about the 49% stake that was sold to an Emirati royal family member after your father was elected president, raising questions about whether they were doing that so they could get access to AI chips. A, my father has nothing to do with. B, it has nothing to do with AI chips. We've been dealing with the conflict of energy stuff for years. I mean, they tried all this nonsense the first time around. Frankly, it's gotten old. They were the ones that put us into this position by creating legislation to try to put us out of business. We just fought back. The answer doesn't even fully make sense. Obviously, the United States has laws that govern business like everyone else. And if laws are passed in our bipartisan process to constrain or regulate business, and remember, after the housing crash and the earlier tech bubble, people wanted more of those kind of regulations so that you, the taxpayer, don't end up having to bail out people like that. Whether or not this was an actual illegal bribe or quid pro quo would have to be investigated and nobody's waiting on this Trump, DOJ. Paul Krugman, Nobel economist, says wealth in America is now more concentrated in a few hands than it was during the Gilded Age, and this increase in concentrated wealth at the top translates into increased power. Remember, it's not enough to just be the richest person in the world. Apparently the appetite is stoked to then control media and television and other tech. These individuals are flourishing under an American capitalism that we all share, that we all put into. Whether or not they are paying their fair taxes or should have control over all our media and our politics are open questions. Buying up media companies, plowing money into campaigns, which make your $50 monthly Bernie Sanders donation look a little quaint. We have been through parts of this before. Sometimes...

Pre-crash, sometimes in our culture, 1980s New York, where decadence and excess became not only accepted but kind of celebrated. What you might see in today's Instagram stunting of people trying to show they are as wealthy as possible or more wealthy than they are has echoes in these other periods in our history. Some of them didn't end that well. Take Bright Lights Big City. One of my favorites, if you happen to watch this show, the novel and movie, which looked at all kinds of excesses. Have you ever noticed how the good word start with D? D and L. You know, drugs, delight, decadent, debauchery, dexedrine, delectable, debilitated. deranged delinquent delirium and lest and lusessus rangerous librium librenous when does a little fun become debauchery when does a habit become an addiction whether it was the drinks and other stuff in that novel or today's phones that we're told are just making us smarter, but they might be making us more addicted than we even realize. And who's going to pay the tab? I'm going to put that question to the great author, Jay McInerney, who of course wrote that novel and has insights for us when we come back. The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that gree, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. And if you thought that was a bad guy in business, well... Look where we are today. That was a famous creed from Wall Street of the 80s. We are joined now by another 80s classic Jay McInery, who's written 11 books, including the iconic Bright Lights, Big City. Welcome back. Thank you, thank you. Was that Elon Musk with Charlie Sheen? Exactly. What are you seeing out here among the Jeff Bezos and the Zuckerbergs? Well, you know, I'm an early Jeff Bezos hater because I made my living from books and selling them mostly. And Jeff Bezos was an early disruptor and a very bad player in our industry and publishing in a book selling industry. And he really... He cut into a lot of people's livelihoods. So I wasn't as surprised as some people might be when I saw what he did. I've seen what he's been doing to the Washington Post. I mean, it's just disgraceful. He wrote in as a savior, and he's now presiding over the destruction of an incredible media legacy.

And you had determined from his business actions that you knew something about his values or his priorities. Yeah. I mean, he posed as a liberal for a while, but and a friend of, I don't know if he ever poses a friend of the common man, but he's now like so many tech bros converted to a Trump. to a Trump collaborator, an enabler. And I mean, it's kind of shocking to see how quickly the tech community has sort of migrated to that side. And billionaires in the 80s and 90s, they... They were, first of all, not as numerous, and secondly, I think they were better behaved. You know, they mostly picked on CEOs, with the one exception of the Koch brothers. They were always playing this game that these guys are now playing. It would seem that the culture of a society matters. I think we agree on that. Yeah? Yes, absolutely. The culture of tech feels now that it's absorbed. different than the finance of the 80s or the old barons who hurt a lot of people in their labor practices, but we're actually building things? Does it matter that so many of these companies in the culture around them are very top heavy and a few people benefit? The things they build, though, aren't really out here for us. They're just all a lot of virtual stuff that's feeding people into these algorithms. Does it matter for our culture that were ruled by these techies instead of the former elites? Well, I think, you know, I mean, I hate to be nostalgic for... a time that I wasn't really even conscious. But the captains of industry used to be the millionaires, if not the billionaires, and they were building brick and mortar institutions and systems of distribution. And that just feels a lot different than the sources of wealth today. I don't think none of those people that you put on the screen were. We're running a company that provides goods. I guess the internet. Yeah, most of them are virtual. Jeff Bezos would say he's an intermediary for goods. And Elon Musk, of course, famously has a car company among his empire. But yes, most of this is virtual. And a lot of it benefits off just people's use. So everybody Googles and everybody will rides the algorithm one way or another. but they're sort of in control, but not sated. I mean, they're much more political now we see than prior robber barons and such. They sort of have decided they got to be in it or they're going to get eaten is how they look at it. Yeah, well, you know, I am.

I'm always amused, Wendy. Even in the segment you mentioned, you know, the greed in the excess of the 80s. And frankly, it just seems incredibly quaint, given the greed and excess that we're talking about now. And the numbers are multiples of what we were talking about in the 80s. And the Dow, you know, the Dow hit like 3,000 when I was... A young man in New York, and that was considered a really big deal. Yeah, I want to get your view on the power of public free speech. Stephen Colbert is in this fight with his parent company, which is owned by MAGA people. So the fix is in on them saying, okay, we'll do what they want. Here was more of his response. Without ever talking to me, the corporation put out... this press release, this statement. Now, this is a surprisingly small piece of paper considering how many butts it's trying to cover. I'm just so surprised that this giant global corporation would not stand up to these bullies. I don't even know what to do with this crap. Well, hold on.

What is the role of the artist in this MAGA corporate moment? And does it matter when people stand up like he does? Well, I think it matters greatly that Stephen Colbert stands up. On the other hand, he can because he's Stephen Colbert. And, you know, there are people like him who were created. long before Donald Trump thought of running for office, who have a kind of residual power. But, you know, younger broadcasters, younger comics, you know, what are they going to do in the current environment? It looks like we're about to have three or four Trump propaganda arms instead of just Fox News now. You know, you've got CBS is on the way owned by... by Skydance and, you know, and the Allisons, who are Trump apologists and Trump enablers. And if they have their way, they will soon own Warner Brothers making CNN another arm of... of right-wing media. Right. What you're telling people, reminding people, is that deal's not done. Netflix wanted Warner. It's the same folks that Stephen Colbert says are acting like this who want to get their hands on CNN. Let's end on a high note, Jay. Who are you wearing? Chiffonnelli, Taylor and Taylor base in Paris. I think it looks good on you. Oh, thank you. You know, we don't like to perpetuate. I'm a fan of blue. You're a fan of blue. We don't like to perpetuate stereotypes around here. Uh-oh. But you clean up pretty well for a novelist. I, you know, I slouch around a t-shirt away. Jay McInerney, I'm a fan, which is why it's sometimes fun in this job, even though we talk about serious things to get to talk to novelists. I've been reading my whole life. We'll be right back.

Thanks for watching The Beat with Ari Melburgh. You can always connect with me online at ari melbaer.com. That's my name.com. Keep it locked right here. Real talent is defined by what people can do, not where they learn to do it. So by stopping at the education section of a resume, you might throw away the perfect hire. Skills first hiring helps you see talent others miss, like more than 70 million stars, skilled through alternative routes. Let their story unfold and gain a competitive advantage. Because hiring managers who start with skills are 60% more likely to find a successful hire. Higher skills first. Learn why at tear the paper ceiling.org. Brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council.