3707 - Primary Preview; Crypto's Diminished Power, For Now w/ Daniel Nichanian, Eleanor Davis-Diver

Hey, folks. Got a new sponsor today. I don't know if it's totally new, but we've done a couple. My stepdogs have gone absolutely wild for this. I want to make it clear. They're not my dogs. Have you ever looked at the ingredients on your dog food? All right? You get the first thing on the top. And then after that, it just becomes all sorts of like. filler and all sorts of stuff. Kibble, the dry food, is made with extreme high heat, which keeps itself shelf stable and cheap. So brands have to add back synthetic vitamins and minerals in the form of strange chemicals whose names you don't understand and you definitely can't pronounce. Is that really what you want your dog or your stepdogs eating? Sundays for dogs is different. Founded by Dr. Torrey Waxman, Sundays was created to meet her high standards as a veterinarian and as a dog parent. You can also feel the same way even if you're a dog step-parent. Saturday starts with 80% plus all-natural meats and then add superfoods like kale and ginger and blueberries. No fillers, no nutritional blends, no chemicals. Just simple, complete nutrition. And here's the thing. Sundays is gently air dried. So instead of using high heat, it ends up like, sort of like jerky. Sundays requires no fridge, no freezer, no prep, no mess. You get the quality of a home-cooked meal with the scoop and serve ease of kibble. It's what dog food should have been all along. And Sundays just launched a brand new fish recipe made with 80% whole and minced fish. Did you know that, and I did not know this, and my stepdogs have not tried the fish version, many dogs naturally prefer fish flavors. So Sunday's fish receipt is especially great for picky eaters. And then, of course, it's fish. So it's got, like, omega-3 fatty acids, which help with skin and shiny coats and joints, et cetera. Make the switch to Sundays, I should say, my stepdogs loved it. And it is much easier to have, like, I don't, we don't like to give them kibbles because of all the junk in it. But this also has the ease of, like, of dry food. You don't have to have your fridge full of stuff. Make the switch to Sundays. Go right now to Sunday for dogs, Sundays for Dogs.com slash majority and get 50% off your first order or you can use the code majority at checkout. 50% off your first order at Sundays. for dogs.com slash majority. Sundays for dogs.com slash majority or use the code majority at checkout. We'll put the link in the podcast and YouTube descriptions. And now time for the show. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Tuesday.

August 11th, 2006, my name is Sam Cedar. This is the five-time award-winning majority report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, USA. On the program today, Daniel Nican, founder and editor-in-chief of Boltz magazine, to discuss tonight's primary elections across the country. Then Eleanor Davis Diver, writer, editorial intern at the American Prospect. The most recent piece, Crypto Democrats are ghosting the industry. Also on the program, again, it is primary day in Connecticut, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Vermont, Alabama, special elections, South Carolina, California. Meanwhile, the White House used a plane full of journalists and White House staffers as a decoy for a possible attack on Trump. Fake news, real meat shield. The American Academy of Pediatrics says Trump's executive order. Scheduled to be signed within days to undermine the childhood vaccine schedule is dangerous. New report, U.S. has revoked at least 175,000 visas. And the disgraced supposed anti-sex trafficking NGO Our Rescue, you remember the CEO had to resign in 2023 because of Trafficking gets $250 million to represent migrant children. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attacked by conservatives for freezing her eggs because they're weird. Trump media announces a massive loss. that I'm sure they will somehow figure out how to fill their coffers again. Republicans release all of Anthony Fauci's phone text showing that he was responsibly weighing safety concerns over vaccines. Got him. Cop who shot and killed Cory Ruiz in Madison, Wisconsin is named as the investigation continues. And in today's gastrointestinal old party Republican diarrhea project, Taylor Farms recalls, prep foods containing jalapinos for salmonella concerns. All this and more on today's majority report. Did I... Oh, I didn't. I thought for a moment that I had forgotten to say Minnesota. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. Thanks for joining us. Emma Vigland out today. Meanwhile, we've got the primary tonight. We're not going to be doing late night primary coverage. We're mostly still recovering from last weeks. Yes. It is brutal.

Five and a half hours. There was a time in my youth where I was like, let's just go through the next day. But I am no longer that age. And I think I said this last Wednesday. I look over in the way that I gauge most of my behavior, whether it's like, oh, I should be at this point in prep based upon like when Matt comes in. But I'm watching Emma and I'm like, oh, she's getting drunk. She's getting drunk. I can get drunk. And then I realized, oh, she's not coming in tomorrow. But I am. She also was the one who was like, we should do primary coverage. Exactly. Yeah, exactly. I mean, it's fun to do. I think tonight is going to be a little bit less dramatic. But still, pulling for Lindell, big time. We will get to the prospects, Mike Lindell running for governor in Minnesota. That. It's a selfish. It's a selfish wish. I'm not going to... That one's for us. That one's for us. We deserve at least one. Also, just some house cleaning. The majority of Sam Cedar apparently was named number, I think it's 14 out of the top 40 progressive politics podcasts on FeedSpot. So I thought I'd mention that. I think we were one of the few independent ones. And I would bet, to the extent that we're not, there are other independent ones, I think we're the only ones that are not getting institutional money or part of a big platform. So good for us. Don't want to close that door, though. What's it? No, no, no, no. It's wide open. Send the checks. 14 is around where I like to be. Top 15%. That's what I like to do. That's nice. I guess out of 40, that's not, that never mind. Math is also not my strong suit. Also, I should say, and we'll put a link to this in the podcast and YouTube descriptions, I did Zateo's We're not kidding with Medi Hassan. We recorded the other day, but it's live as of yesterday. And it's a great opportunity for people to see that I have legs. That's it. I mean, I think the conversation's also good. But whenever I meet somebody who watches the show, they're always surprised that I'm not like... A torso? Two feet tall. It is like the number one response I get from everybody. It's like, oh, you... You have legs. And so people can see the legs there. All right. Good stuff. Really on a roll today. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s fevered wet dreams have come to fruition. And we are watching the administration begin to, and we should say that on the CDC website,

There has been a statement that implies there is no evidence that, or it's maybe explicitly says, there's no evidence that vaccines don't cause autism. To the extent that one can have evidence of improving a negative, it is pretty clear that they do not. But Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has decided that there was never any autism before the 90s. And it is both contrary to what medical professionals tell us, contrary to what neurological professionals tell us, it was very much undiagnosed. I will say, I have at least two friends who were diagnosed at almost my age, being on the spectrum. I don't know what it says about me that I never noticed. That's my close friends. I can imagine. I've taken the test, and I stopped it right there. But I'm up on that listening. But by the time to get to our age, on some level, you've created workarounds to deal with this. And who knows what would have been helpful at a younger age on these spectrums. But here is Donald Trump. announcing that vaccinations for hepatitis B, COVID-19, and the flu, among others, are no longer recommended for children. So at year one, you should have five separate visits for vaccines rather than giving them all in the same day. Very importantly, vaccinations for hepatitis B, COVID-19, and influenza. I just want to stop right there for one second. There is... No evidence that having the vaccines simultaneously increases any type of medical risk. There is a medical risk with every medical intervention you could possibly have. Take aspirin, Tylenol, you know, allergy medication. There will be people in the population who will have adverse effects. But think about who can afford to take five days off of work, maybe to go in and get a vaccine. Or who have access to hospitals. We know all these rural hospitals are closing now. You will necessarily have children. going without these vaccines because of this policy. Go ahead. All in the same day. Very importantly, vaccinations for hepatitis B. COVID-19 and influenza, among others, are no longer recommended for all children. In addition, this executive order directs the Attorney General to advance legal challenges against states that violate children's rights to religious or medical vaccination exemptions for the exemptions.

In other words, we don't mind putting kids into schools who are unvaccinated in this situation. And so for students who might have immunological issues with taking a vaccine, they're now at higher risk. This is the antithesis of public health policy. This is survival of the fittest. A couple of steps away from some eugenics. And you can be sure that wealthy people will make sure that their kids are properly vaccinated and will have the means to do it. Be able to send the nanny down if they have to or whomever it is to get the five separate vaccinations. But once again, the first people who are going to suffer are low-income kids, kids living in poverty. Now, why is Trump doing this? Well, if you've seen what he's seen, you would probably react the same way. This is number two. At one year, you should have five separate visits for vaccines rather than getting them all in the same day. And I saw this early on, and I've seen proof of it, where they have a vaccination thing looks like the size of a bottle of soda poured into a little child's body. And bad things happen in many cases, because this is an explosion. This is an epidemic. There it is. We've heard from the doctor-in-chief. You got your kids vaccinated, I assume? Oh, no. No, no, no, of course not. No, of course, I did get my kids vaccinated. Did you see a bottle of soda? A 20 ounce? Yes, it's like, maybe he saw a picture of a baby getting, just drinking a bottle of soda. He saw AI something. Here is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has a, Been an anti-vaxxer for at least 20 some odd years. In 2003 and 4, he was convinced that the presence of thermosol, this was his argument then, that the presence of thermosol, which is mercury, a preservative that would maintain the shelf life, essentially, of vaccines, was causing autism. The Marisol was removed from the vast majority of vaccines, particularly childhood ones, around 2002 or three, I think it was. And the idea was within three or four years, we should see a drop in autism rates that did not happen. When I specifically asked Robert F. Kennedy Jr. somewhere around 2012, I don't know where that interview is. You claimed it was the marisol. At that time, it was a legitimate question or thesis. The thamarisol was taken out. How do you explain this? I did not, I don't know at that time if I was aware or even if he had moved on to other reasons why vaccines cause autism. And his claim to me was the thomerosol was actually never taken out.

which easily provable if that was the case, but apparently not a single doctor all across the country bothered to test any of them at any time. Here is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.. claiming that there has been an explosion of autism. that we weren't aware of at the time. That the industry likes to say one of the talking points, which the press loves to parrot is, oh, we're just noticing it more. But this is an absurdity, and this is an absurd. Pause it for a second. It's not just that we're noticing it more. It's being diagnosed. The range of diagnosis now is much larger. It is, like, this is not a subjective question. Objectively speaking, the range of behaviors and neuro atypical behavior or states of being is diagnosed now on a spectrum. There is no argument about that. The noticing part is what these guys do. They just happen to notice it more. You know why Robert F. Kennedy Jr. notices it more? Because he got fixated on the vaccine, vaccination harm, posited a theory that was born out of a study in the Lancet. by a guy named Wakefield in the early aughts or late 90s, I can't remember what was, which was found to be fatally flawed. In fact, fate. And the Lancet retracted it. But when you go out there and put yourself out there, all of a sudden, everybody who has a kid with autism comes to you and you start to notice it more. You know what I notice more? People are really into politics. It's weird. Good. But this is an absurdity, and this is an assertion that has been debunked again and again and again by peer-reviewed literature. It's also debunked by common sense. Because we were just noticing it more. We would notice it in older groups. We're not. We're only noticing it in kids. We're born... Pause it. Again, this is not true. We are noticing it more in adults. It is, by the time you're an adult, again, you have, but for the most severe cases, you have established workarounds. Right, but those adults got the COVID vaccine. Oh, right. Okay. That's why we notice it. Duh. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. doesn't notice it in adults. Because he never really listens to anybody else anyways. Right. It was in a giant gilded bubble. Exactly. Or we would notice it in older groups, but we're not. We're only noticing it in kids who were born around 1989 or after. The older generations, you're not seeing those increases. So something happened in the mid-90s.

That changed our children. And it has to be an environmental exposure because genes don't cause epidemics. It can provide a vulnerability. Now, again, the idea that there is like an increase in autism that might be a function of environmental things. Like we know for a fact, we don't know for a fact, but it's quite clear that. There is a strong, I don't know if that's been proven from a causal standpoint, but there is a very, very, very pronounced correlation internationally around the cutting back in lead and gasoline and drops in crime rates. Because lead is a neurotoxin. And so it's quite possible that there are environmental factors. But what we know, is it's not vaccines. And we can wait another three years after we see a rise in child mortality because of the flu. We see a rise in child mortality because of hepatitis. We see a rise in child mortality, long-term illness because of a whole host of vaccines that they don't get and may be exposed to. And then we can check in three years if autism rates have dropped. But it's an experiment that no one in that room will be paying for. It's an experiment that low-income kids and families will. He says genes don't cause epidemics, but a guy who only wears jeans seems to cause some epidemics. Yeah, it's the guy who wears jeans to work out. Exactly. All right. In a moment, we're going to be talking to Daniel Lacanian to get a preview of today's primaries. A couple of words from our sponsors. I want to thank Zoc Doc for sponsoring today's episode. Zoc Doc has not only helped me find a dentist when I was on the road and had a dental emergency help my kids. Way of college and he's a new doctor. Found it. Therapist. Found it.

Finding a doctor is difficult. Getting an appointment with a doctor is difficult. Finding one that's in network difficult. Zocdoc lets you search and compare local in-network doctors. Zoc Doc's website has a ton of reviews from real patients. You get detailed doctor profiles to help you choose the right one. You can search based upon your symptoms. You can search based upon different traits that you like in a doctor. And then you can see the actual appointments that are available for the doctor on the site, all in Zoc Doc. click you've made the appointment you don't have to go back and forth with the with the receptionist or you know and do all the scheduling super easy and again also you can find out if your doctor is in network or not super easy appointments generally happen fast 24 to 72 hours sometimes you can even score same day appointments Your health matters and taking care of yourself shouldn't be complicated. Find and book the right doctor with Zockdoc. Head to Zock.com slash majority to get started. Check that appointment off your to-do list. That's ZOC, doc.com slash majority. Also sponsoring the program today, Factor Meals. Uh, it is, uh, school's about to start. Well, not really. Actually, we've got about three weeks. Uh, but once my, uh, schedule settles down, set up the factor meals for Saul and I. And it's incredibly helpful. My routine has been completely up in the air. And once I settle back in, settle back in with a factor and i've been doing the uh trying to do you know not dieting but trying to be conscious of what i eat so i'm doing the uh mediterranean uh diet you they have a bunch of different options you could do keto you could do uh you know protein based you could do uh chefs selection uh family friendly i've been doing the uh Mediterranean So like a salmon and chickpeas or like a shrimp with cauliflower and leeks and I don't know, some other type of spice. I can never remember the names of them. But Saul is big into steak these days. And so a filet mignon. Or they got a mac and cheese with a shredded beef he loves. A factor makes chef crafted dietitian designed ready to eat meals. So you don't have to choose between real food and convenience. Oh, I got my dad some too. He's been not able to cook as much.

And he loves him. Want to thank Factor for supporting the Majority Report. Go to FactorMeals.com slash Majority 50 off. Use the code Majority 50 off to get 50% off and one free breakfast item per box for one year. Every Factor meals designed around what supports a healthier lifestyle and nothing that doesn't. Factor meals are ready in two minutes. It's why I understood why people had microwaves. They don't require any prep time, no cleanup. So even when your days are out of control, your schedule is broken. Eating well, still super easy. Every week you're going to find over 100 nutrient dense menu items to choose from new options like salmon burgers, shredded pork, and more plus add-ons you're going to crave like pumpkin-flavored cheesecakes and protein shakes. Let's eat real. Head to Factor Meals.com slash Majority 50 off and use the code Majority 50 off to get 50% off and one free breakfast item per box for one year while supplies last until October 31st, 2026. That's code Majority 50-0 off at factormeals.com. Majority 50 off at factor meals.com. See the website. For more details, we'll put the link in the podcast and YouTube descriptions. Quick break, Daniel Nicanian.

We are back. Sam Cedar on the Majority Report. Emma Viglin out today. Joining us now, founder and editor-in-chief of Boltz magazine to discuss tonight's primary elections in, let's see if I can remember this. Minnesota, Connecticut, Vermont, Alabama, Wisconsin, special election in South Carolina, and one in California. Did I remember all of them? It's all I have. Okay, that's good. Well, we should say that I always go to Bolt on the day before a primary and the day after a primary because you have the most comprehensive rundown, local races. The implications, you've been on this for years now, the implications of sheriffs because they will have deals with ICE, et cetera, et cetera. But let's talk about some of the top line ones. Obviously, Wisconsin and Minnesota. And there's a big race in Connecticut, too, from my perspective, not just in terms of the governorship, but in terms of Larson there. But walk us through some of those races and let me know what the situation is. Okay. Let's start. I mean, let's start with the... biggest race, the one that's going to probably get the most attention tonight with the result, maybe probably the one that people watching already know the most about, which is the Wisconsin governor's race. It's an open race that Democratic governor is not running for reelection. It's a state that Democrats are very interested in gaining full control of. They haven't had that for a very long time. And there's an open primary for governor. Today, it's been very chaotic. I'll get to that in a second. But the reason it's gotten all this attention is that the frontrunner in polling is Francesca Hong. She's a left-wing state lawmaker, and she has a very large lead in the polls. And the establishment, the more centrist establishment in Wisconsin has coalesced. just in the past couple of weeks around David Crowley, her main opponent. And that's the race that's testing the left versus center divide of the party tonight, first and foremost. It's been particularly chaotic because the two of the front runners, the current lieutenant governor and the previous lieutenant governor, both dropped out of the race over the summer, both, I think roughly over the last month, which is very unusual. And Crawley, who is now the main alternative to Hong, was out of the race as of mid-July. He came back in, got the governor's endorsement. You know, there's been a lot of interest among establishment Democrats to stop Hong, who they think is to force the left and cannot win the general election. And obviously Hong's allies disagree there. So that's number one tonight. And then maybe let's pair that with the second big Democratic primary. Again, sort of similar thought lines, though not as dramatic, which is the Senate race in Minnesota.

This is also an open race. It's to replace Tina Smith, who is re-retiring, who's not going to run for re-election. And again, there's two candidates there, Angie Craig, who's currently in the House, who's a more centrist candidate, and Peggy Flanagan, who is running as more of a progressive. What's interesting there is that Angie Craig has gotten a lot of pressure, a lot of flack from her left for some of her votes. early in the Trump presidency, particular to support some hardship immigration enforcement. And it's been interesting to watch her during the campaign have to walk that back, apologize for some of those votes. The politics of the Trump 2.0 era shifting from centrists taking those votes early on to... for partial immigration enforcement to apologizing for them in and of itself tells the tale of the last two years. No matter what happens in tonight's primary. So just going back to Wisconsin. Right. And I will admit that we have not paid that much attention to the governor's race. We don't do as much coverage of governor's races as we do federal offices. Mandela Barnes, who was the lieutenant governor who dropped out. Like what happened? He just wasn't catching fire. And was he opening a lane for Hong in this instance? So the first one who dropped out, the first lieutenant governor dropped out was Sarah Rodriguez. She dropped out first. And that was because her campaign manager was, she said her campaign manager had misused the funds. She had run out of money. There had been some. impropriety in the campaign, and she dropped out. That seemed to open a moment where the establishment could have Koleser on Barnes, because he was the only one left, because Rodriguez had dropped out, and Kralia had dropped that. And to the extent that the non-hung wing of the party was divided, there was one candidate left. Instead... The governor and other Democrats sort of brought back in Crawley. Barnes seemed, according to reporting I read in Wisconsin Press, faced some allegations himself of misconduct during the moment where he was dropping out. He wasn't catching fire anyway. And so he dropped out. And so as a result, Crawley is now the main alternative. But as a reminder, this happened in the past. Really weeks at most, and early voting had already started. A lot of people have voted at a time where either Barnes or Sarah Rodriguez were in the race. So the chaos is going to impact. We will see tonight a substantial number of votes going to Barnes and Rodriguez just by virtue of the fact that people had already voted.

What are Hong's prospects in the general? I mean, that's ostensibly why the establishment is concerned. I suspect also they don't like to see another DSA person win. This is another example, though. I mean, and I should say. I don't know. I think I'm going to be happy with the outcome, assuming Hong wins, and it feels like she's going to. But this is another example from the perspective of the establishment. They are the level of incompetence. that seems to be here from all of the establishment channels, whether it's the DNC falling apart, whether it's the, you know, Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer picking losers in Maine and in Michigan. I mean, I mean by that literally, and perhaps in Minnesota as well. What are Hong's prospects in the general? Right. First of all, it's interesting because there's been the argument a number of times, if only the center had coales around someone else. They could have been in the left candidate. We heard that in Michigan. I mean, this is a situation where there was the current lieutenant governor, the prime lieutenant governor, the county executive, Crawley of the states biggest county, Milwaukee, a lot of voters, and no matter who you're putting up, you know, that's not working in Wisconsin and elsewhere. I think you said another DSA candidate. I mean, what's interesting about Hong, if she wins tonight and goes up is that. It wouldn't just be another DSA candidate at this level for governor's race. It would be a first. She'd be in a league of her own running for a statewide office in a swing state or a non-swing state, as far as I can tell on the moment, for a governor's race. So it's, I mean, she's sort of going to, she's going to answer the, we're going to see the answer. to that question in the fall, it seems like the Democrats are already preparing to have to coalesce around her, I mean, assuming she wins or call us around whoever wins, tomorrow in coming days, which I think, you know, what we're seeing right now, some of what, some of the answer to your question depends on how much Democrats also coalesce around her or not in Michigan last week. As soon as Abdulah Saeed won, Haley Stevens, Greg Gretchen Whitmer, immediately endorsed. I think whether that happens in Wisconsin is... is the question. The fact that it's not a federal race and means that the party label could function less as an immediate proxy for people who want to oppose Trump. But, you know, the DSA, the left argument is that they can... bring voters to the polls who wouldn't otherwise vote or wouldn't otherwise be mobilized. So that this is all going to be a test of that, of that, of that theory. If, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, the Republican running against, uh, assuming it's Hong. Uh, what can you tell us about, uh, him? Because there, I mean, Wisconsin's a.

can be pretty polarized state. And it's, you know, when Trump by one vote, it has gone back and forth. It has a huge history of, we talk about sewage socialism. We're talking about Milwaukee and we're talking about, you know, Madison. And so there's a huge sort of like very strong progressive history in Wisconsin. But also over the past 15 years or so, it was almost like a laboratory for the Koch brothers. I mean, it is interesting that the potential first governor was a socialist would be in the state that's known for the sewer socialism tradition, which obviously is a very, very long time ago, but we are hearing about it. Again, so the Republican Hong or Crawley would face in November is Tom Tiffany. He's currently in the House. He's actually quite far to the right. And Wisconsin is interesting for a state that has... that has had a democratic wins in the past few years, as a state that has had a lot of election conspiracy theories, a lot of people who tried to overturn the 2020 election, investigate it, and so on, and Tiffany has been definitely on the side of people who've raised, who've echoed false claims about a 2020 election, who I believe voted against the 2020 election. I mean, having someone like that as governor of a swing state is a big deal, especially because Wisconsin Republicans have not had the governorship since 2018, and so have not been able to pass the sort of election laws that we have seen in other states. So the question of whether Republicans have controlled Wisconsin or Democrats is going to be a very important heading into 2028. Minnesota. I guess it's, you know, we're going to see. I mean, it's fairly straightforward at this point. The polling has had Flanagan up. And again, this is another instance of Chuck Schumer and Gillibrand seemingly out of touch or incapable of assessing what's going on with. with Democratic primary voters. And we should be clear. This is not what when we see these primaries, and you tell me if I'm wrong, that what we're not seeing is sort of like these surprise. moments where, you know, in a low turnout primary, people are winning. Like, you know, when I'm thinking like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's win against Crowley back in 2018, there was a sort of like, there was a surprise element to it. And Crowley was overconfident. And, you know, it's a low turnout election. And if you manage just to get a little bit more in there, you can, you can win. The turnouts that we've been seeing from Democrats.

state by state by state have been, I mean, extraordinary for an off-year election. Yeah, I mean, that's certainly not the story from Michigan last week. Wisconsin, I don't expect that to be particularly low turnout tomorrow. It's also very, very highly for as far as the midterm. primary go, these races are getting a lot of attention to that. It's not the situation. I would say Minnesota, you know, is very different than Wisconsin in the sense that Flanagan doesn't have the anti-establishment vibe or opposition of the sort we're seeing in Wisconsin or Michigan. But, but, yeah, Angie Craig has been the establishment favorite there. Another big difference is that there isn't the electability argument. you know, knowing them why whatever you think of it is not really on a table in Minnesota, not that it's like a reliably blue state, but Republicans have, well, we, you know, we could talk about Republicans in a second, but they're in Minnesota, you know, getting ready to probably nominate, you know, very far-right candidate and election deniers aligned with Michael Endel, which is also going to sort of make them not very competitive in the fall problem, no matter who wins the... primary there tomorrow. Please tell me that Doug Lindell has a, Mike Lindell has a very, very good chance of being the nominee. He has a very good chance of being the nominee. Thank you, Daniel. He's running for governor. He's endorsed that, you know, he has his own candidate, his wing of the candidate in the Senate. I mean, it would be, there are people running against him for the primary for governor, but that's not what's happening in GOP primaries right now. And anyone who's really aligned with Trump has a clear advantage. And Lendell is, you know, his Michael Little. It's interesting that, you know, what like Tom, what, what Tom Tiffany has done in Wisconsin and supported the overturning of 2020 election and raised questions about it. in a more respectable manner, quote-unquote, than Mike Lindell. But the result wouldn't be that different than what Mike Lindell, you know, for anyone who doesn't know him, really is one of the main funders of election deniers and election conspiracists all around the country. It's not that, it's not that different. Well, I mean, honestly, I mean, aside from the personal pleasure. that I know that my job will be more fun over the next, you know, four months or whatever it is, if Michael Lindell is the nominee. But I do think that in the event that he is, this helps Hong significantly because of the point you just made. Because if Tiffany ends up being...

Like literally, if I was, I mean, I would be running ads. He's Wisconsin's Mike Lindell. That is going to be something that he's going to have to deal with. And I think Democrats on the hill have gotten a lot more sort of like aggressive than saying, to nominees, who's won the 2020 election, what happened on January 6th. And this very well may be a, particularly in Wisconsin, a tough thing for a guy like Tiffany to get past. And so that's going to be, Mike Lindell could be doing a lot of work for a lot of people and bless his heart. Sam, also to, I just had another thing I wanted to share, to order your question about, you know, what, what is, how much is this like a one-off, a surprise that's happening with low turnout or obviously not because there's going to be high turnout. But, you know, there's also a bench now of people either aligned with DSA or with the broader idea of being a socialist like Hong that is being built at the state level, at the down ballot. We're talking about the governor's race, right? But in the state assembly where Hong is right now, there's actually a four. a team of Democrats who formed a socialist caucus, including Hong and three others. And Hong is not running for governor, so DSA is trying to, quote, unquote, keep her seat. So there's a DSA endorsed candidate running for her seat. And then there's another member of the caucus, of the socialist caucus who faces a primary opponent today, and then two others are running uncontested. So, you know, not the most important race to watch tonight, I suppose. But in terms of just not... isolating these won races on their own. But there's this bench forming. There's people trying to win re-election as part of that bench, people who are trying to outst them. And that, we're seeing that we saw that in New York. We saw that in Maryland, in Colorado, you know, state, the state, DSA candidates winning at the state level, trying to win federal races. And this is the kind of thing that's important to watch as well. Let's turn to Connecticut. There are two races there that I think are worthy of mentioning. One is there's a challenge to the sitting governor, Ned Lamont, who. I think has governed Connecticut, I haven't followed it too closely, but in a way that I wouldn't be terribly appreciative of if I was in Connecticut, which I have mixed feelings about, because Ned Lamont is the one who beat Joe Lieberman in the primary years ago. And, in fact, he announced this candidacy on air with me on Air America Radio. I was very excited about that. But he's become a lot more sort of like... standard bog issue, I would say. And also a race with Larson in, you'll tell me which seat that is. That's a good one, I believe. Yes. And he.

He's the only guy at age 78 that I think I'm rooting for. He has been an incredibly strong advocate for Social Security throughout his career. And his opponent is a little cryptoed up as far as I can tell. What else can you tell us about those races? Right. So, well, you already said a lot of what I would say. So the governor's race, that Ned Lamont. who's running for reelection, is facing a challenger from his left, Josh, Josh Elliott. He's currently in the state house or state senate. I think the state house. An example of what I was saying, let me check since I have it here. The state... He's state rep. The state, right. Yeah. An example of what I was saying earlier when he, the Josh Elliott, won against an incumbent for the state house a few years ago, and now, you know, Chad Chandler hasn't gotten as much attention. And Ned Lamont won a very easy victory at the convention, the party convention a few months ago. But that's one to what Josh Elliott is, is, you know, saying that the state should be governed more. progressive manner than what Ned Lamont has done. One example that comes to mind to sort of give an example of what we're talking about. We ran a piece in bolts a couple of years ago already where Republicans were very upset that the clemency or parole commission in Connecticut was being, was freeing too many people, was being too open to freeing people who served a long sentence there in Connecticut. And they stayed at a press conference, you know, accusing the parole or clemency commission of going too far. And Lamont decided to robicans. He froze the process, fired the head of the commission and replaced them. So, you know, that's that's one example that we covered, for instance, as to what we're talking about. And then, yes, at the house level, there's this primary that's really, you know, one of the many primaries this summer this year, where age is a very important factor. Larson, who's been in the house for... 28 years, I believe. Yes, 20 has been in the House since 1998, so that's 28 years. He faced his two opponents who are a lot younger. There's actually, as I'm another primary that I'm watching at the State House level in Connecticut, where a Democrat has been in the safe blue seat and has never faced a primary opponent's 84, 1984. Wow. So that's 21 terms. She faces a much younger opponent who's actually... DSA endorsed connecting to our earlier conversation, but it's her first primary opponent in a safe blue seat since 1984. So, you know, there's our...

parallel elections, just in the sense that there's a lot of pressure on the older generation of Democrats. That's insane. I got to say, I went to college in Connecticut, and I was a freshman in 1984. That was a long time ago. Well, I think a lot of, you know, we're going to see in a few weeks, Massachusetts primary, where the incumbent senator and Ed Markey faces a moderate incumbent who's much younger. I mean, that's... We've often seen the age argument or the general change argument be done by more progressive, more left-wing candidates, but there's primaries coming up where the generational change argument is being made by people who are running to the right of the incumbents. But those are the major question there in those races. Yeah. All right. So what else? I mean, we're going to find out in South Carolina who's going to win the primary. This is a special election. Lindsey Graham's sister has decided to run, which was a surprise, I think, to Republicans there. What else? Is there any other races that particularly you think would be of interest to people? I mean, you know, the one South Carolina is interesting, in part because there's a sitting house member. You know, if a sitting house member, Republican becomes the nominee, does that open, he's still running for his own seat, does that open up a seat later on, a vacancy at a crucial time if the House is close. The Alabama elections are also special elections because Republicans redistricted the state in a rush after. The Cali decision came in April and the U.S. Supreme Court, the conservatives allowed that so that sort of canceled election that we're already on the ballot in June in sort of, you know, in a number of states in a very rushed manner. And what's happening today is Republicans are basically deciding who is what, who's going to be the Republican who's going to be favored in November to win what is currently a majority black district because that was redrawn to be a Republican-leaning district. Republicans are heading to the polls today to choose their nominee to win over a majority black district. And then maybe I'll, to go even more down ballot, I will flag that there's a prosecutor race in Minneapolis, which is interesting, you know, this is where George Floyd was murdered and the BLM movement in 2020. to cough, really. This is where there's been law, obviously, a lot of ICE violence in 2025, 2026. The prosecutor there was a progressive prosecutor who was not going to run for re-election, and there's a lot of candidates running there, some of whom are saying they want to continue in the tradition of the current progressive in office. Some of them saying, as soon as they're elected, they're going to turn the page, and today is the primary. So we're going to see who advances to the general election. But that's an interesting one, both. because of the progressive prosecution movement and Minneapolis being symbolic, but also because the current incumbent has said she finds it very important to prosecute ICE. She's allied with other prosecutors around the country to talk about how to do that, whether that tradition of local prosecutors trying their best to go after ICE agents that's also at play today and also some of the issues that are being discussed. So, you know, if you're voting on your...

for county offices, prosecutors, sheriff, those are also very, very important. Right. All right. Well, people keep an eye on that. One last question about going back to South Carolina. Right. The Lindsey Graham had an opponent, Dr. Andy Andrews, I think her name is. And the polling was, I mean, Lindsey Graham usually pulls it out. Not in this instance, as it were. But. He was down by, I think he was up by five points in some of the polling I had seen. It's early polling. She seems like she has a real potential opportunity here in the general election. What's your sense of that? And who would be the weakest? I mean, Lindsey Graham's sister, I think there's Republicans there who are. a little bit annoyed that she's running, that they were sort of feeling like, hey, it's my turn if this guy goes. What's your sense? It would have to be a... Excellent years for Democrats, of the likes we, you and I haven't seen in quite a while for that state to flip. But, you know, in 2020, Democrats thought that they could go after Lindsey Graham. They had a lot of polling showing that there was a tie in that race that they thought that Lindsey Graham could be flipped as part of what a lot of Democrats for a lot of 2020 thought was going to be a blue wave year. The Democrats were very disappointed. I think Graham won by about 10 points in South Carolina. the polling was arguably a little better at this equivalent point. But that result wasn't the specific to South Carolina, right? 2020 was disappointing. Obviously, Trump lost. But other than that, Democrats were very disappointed at the result of a lot of elections down ballot. They didn't see the blue wave they were expecting. There was a lot of Senate seats that were reached seats that they were very excited about all year and didn't work out. South Carolina was one of them. So that was a function of the environment just didn't pan out to be a blue wave or the huge blue wave. So, you know, and the best case scenario for Democrats, that's quite the reach state, but Democrats have not had success statewide there. And I don't have the number of top of my head, but in a long time. You know, so certainly does not reach the level of Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Alaska, but certainly an open seat is one is, is, is one to watch. Daniel Nicanian, always a pleasure to talk to you. Nobody has a more comprehensive view of what's going on with these primaries and these elections. Like I say, down ballot folks, head to bolts. If you have any question about who's running anywhere, you will have the answer there. Daniel Nicanian, thanks so much for your time. Really appreciate it. Always love joining you. Thank you. Okay. We're going to put a link, incidentally, to Bolts in the podcast and YouTube descriptions. Until next time. Thanks so much. All right. Folks are going to take quick break. When we come back, Eleanor Davis Diver from the American prospect on crypto Democrats are ghosting the industry. And they're not doing it because they've decided there's a problem with crypto.

We'll be right back after this. We are back. Sam Cedar on the majority report. Emma Viglin is out today. I want to welcome to the program, Eleanor Davis Diver, who's written a couple pieces in the prospect over the past couple of weeks on the clarity bill and the... Gosh, I should have come up with like some type of pun here, how it is rather cloudy. Its prospects are a little bit cloudy these days. Yeah, clarity is definitely a misnomer. Yeah, sorry about that, folks. Before we get into this, okay, and the story is how the Democrats that Republicans and the crypto business was counting on to sort of like push this through seemed to have gotten like a little bit shaky need on this. But before we get to the Clarity Act, Tell us about the Genius Act. Let's go back. Explain to us what was in the Genius Act and how it passed. Yeah, so last year, the Genius Act and the Clarity Act was sort of introduced as a... a package deal. The Genius Act focuses on stable coins, which are crypto coins that are supposed to be pegged to a really stable asset, like a dollar. They aren't actually very stable. They are always losing their peg. But the Genius Act essentially opened the door for regulated stable coin issuance. So if you're a crypto firm, you can go to the government and say I want to issue stable coins and they'll give you a license to do that basically. They'll give you a charter to issue stable coin. The rules for that are being finalized right now, but it has opened the door for the crypto industry to sort of start weaseling their way into the regular financial system. It passed with over 100 Democratic votes in the House, 18 in the Senate. It was, you know, pretty easily. But the clarity act, which is sort of its brother in arms, is having a lot more trouble. Just so that people can understand the Genius Act and what the idea of stable coins, my understanding is, like, you can almost think of it as like, you know.

American Express rewards points or something like this, except for these are one to one in terms of dollars. And where you can use them is a function of the issuer and the relationships that they have. So, you know, I can take my Amex reward points and buy some jeans at Old Navy or something. And it would be one to one. And this is a way of... It's almost like selling gift cards and they'll entice people into it. Like Walmart may issue a stable coin and say you get a 15% discount if you use Walmart stable coins. But you're also sort of locked into buying their currency. And what can go sideways with that aside from the fact that like you get you get locked in? Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of concerns when it comes to stable coins. The biggest one is that there's sort of a bridge between crypto and the rest of the financial system. And as you know, crypto is always crashing. It's always having crises. There's fraud. There's what have you. And so when that happens, staple coin can freak out. And that's sort of what happened with Silicon Valley Bank is that Circle, a statement issuer, had millions of dollars in that bank. And then FTX collapsed and everyone wanted their money out from their stable coin. The stable coin issues were take your dollar and they'll give you one coin and then they'll take that dollar and they'll invest it in money market funds or treasuries. And then what they kind of want to do is give you a reward, as you mentioned. So there are different ways to do that. They want to give deposits like it would be a traditional bank. But the companies can issue stable coins. If it gets to that point, there's maybe META or somebody was issuing some stable coins to creators in Cambodia. There's whispers of that happening, but it could be sort of a company script situation where you get paid. with your employer's stable coin, and you can only use it at that store. You can get locked into this money, and then if you want to pull it out, if you want to say, give me my dollar back that I gave you for the stable coin, if everyone's doing it at the same time, it's not insured like a traditional bank account is. So there's no, the capital requirements behind the stable coin are deficient. Right. I mean, it's just not protected at all like traditional banks are. None of crypto is protected at all, and that is one of the reasons it's so dangerous. And these two bills, they don't really fix that at all. The Genius Act gives trust banks the ability to issue stable coin, and they give these trust banks, which are regulated not at the same level as typical banks, because typically they're not doing the same activities, but they give the same... the stable coin issuers, the ability to perform the same activities that typical banks would just with these coins, which, you know, the federal deposit insurance fund isn't backing. So there could be a run. People could lose their money. And that is exactly what happened with Silicon Valley Bank.

And yeah, no, it can be really dangerous. And if you're like a traditional bank and you start issuing stable coin and there's a run on that, then that will ripple out into the rest of the sort of non-crypto banking activities, that's regular people, regular people's deposits, regular people's investments. So even if you're not invested in crypto at all, it will still touch you. So let's move to the clarity bill, but we should say when we talk about the Genius Act, people are wondering, probably listening to this, why would anybody vote for this? And we can just use Bernie Moreno as an example. He's got 40 million reasons to vote for that. To be fair, he may have a couple of others that deal with inside knowledge as to the thing that Max Miller seems to be holding over his head. You know. But I don't want to grind this down to the bone, as it were. Or was it adult finder? I can't remember. But the point being, crypto put a tremendous amount of money into races in 2024. Talk about that for a moment. Yeah. So they put over $130 million into just congressional race of 2024. Sherrod Brown, who had Marino's seat. was pretty anti-crypto, pretty vocal about it, vocal about the concerns. And he was also on the banking committee, if I remember correctly. So they poured about $40 million into that race and helped take down Sherrod Brown. And that was a major victory for the industry. And that was sort of a signal to Democrats in... maybe swing states who were worried about losing their seat, that if you cross us, we will come for you and we will get you. And so 18 Democrats in the Senate ended up voting for the Genius Act, some of whom were getting a bunch of money from crypto in those races who were like very pro crypto advocating for it out loud, making speeches on the floor, but then some of who just... were scared. They didn't want to cross crypto. And so they maybe weren't on the campaign trail talking about it, but they did vote for the Genius Act. And there was an expectation that the same dynamic would be happening with the Clarity Act. What is the Clarity Act? The Clarity Act, it's sort of a market structure regulation. The crypto industry likes to call it like a Rules of the Road. bill that basically sorts crypto assets into different buckets and then assigns those to either the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. And what it really does is it pushes the crypto assets, which act basically as investment products, you know, like you trade them like investment products, you're trying to grow your wealth. It pushes them out of securities regulation that typically governs investment products. And so it takes away investor protections.

It introduces these, again, these really volatile assets into the traditional financial system because it gives blockchain-based investment products. That's what they are. A lot of exemptions from traditional regulations that are costing for the issuers. And the crypto industry really wants it. designed buying for the crypto industry they want it because it frees them from a lot of regulations, but it also gives them this sort of like patina of legitimacy because they, you know, are associated with a lot of fraud and crime, rightfully so. People don't trust crypto at all really, and so they're having trouble like reaching the mainstream customer base that they really want. And so they really want this, this legislation to... make it seem like they're regulated and they're safe and the government is backing them. And also, at the same time, it's freeing them from a lot of the laws that should be governing their products. Right. I mean, it reads as a regulation bill, but what it really does is preventing actual oversight and regulation of the tulips that they're selling. So what happened? Like, it looked like this thing was going to pass. I know there was, I mean, a big reason is because Donald Trump, I guess there's a billion and a half reasons when we come to Trump as to why this, some Democrats got a little bit weak need. Yeah, I mean, so, you know, Trump has sort of been doing this corruption thing for a while. This term, he's been pretty outwardly corrupt, if you may have noticed. And a lot of that has to do with crypto. And so a lot of Democrats who want to use this corruption messaging in the midterms against Republicans in general, they started to get a little antsy because the... Bill would pass, as it is right now, would kind of give Trump a lot of money. It would help his crypto businesses, his crypto assets. As I said, it would give the interest or the boost they need to, like, enter the traditional financial system. And it would, it would set up to really help out Trump's pro-liberty financial, all of his... crypto ventures. And so Democrats sort of started discussing putting in a conflict of interest provision to basically force Trump to put his crypto investments, his crypto ventures in a blind trust or something like that. So he couldn't make money off of it while he was in office. There was a lot of discussions. about this over the summer. There was also some hold up over the stable coin rewards that I mentioned earlier with the banking industry. They were pushing back on this. But yeah, there's a lot of hold up with Trump's sort of crypto corruption. And then he dropped his financial disclosure, revealing that he had made $1.4 billion so far in his second term off of crypto. It's important to note that...

Most of that money just comes straight from the pockets of his investors because he'll release a token and the price will go up and he'll sell it all, make a lot of money, and then the price will collapse and all those people who paid him. are left holding the bag. So. And we don't, and to be fair, we don't know how many of those people are, uh, rubs and dupes that are just fans of his or, uh, folks who are like, hey, I need a pardon for my father-in-law who, um, you know, whatever it was, uh, was trafficking in child pornography or, uh, committed large scale fraud. So I'm going to, uh, buy. $6 million of this crypto. And if I lose my money, I lose my money, you know, and I write it off as a business, a failed investment. And I get a break of my taxes. And that's how this guy made a billion and a half dollars in a year. Yeah, no, exactly, exactly. I mean, Justin Sun, who was the biggest investor in World Liberty Financial, just came out complaining about how it was all fraud. But he invested that money to get off the hook for the fraud he committed, which the SEC under Biden was after him for and then was not off the hook under Trump. But yeah, so he's made a lot of money. You've got to appreciate the fact that he's like, you know. I was defrauded in my endeavor to get out of my fraud charges. I mean, so I guess there is some honor amongst thieves, but he seems to be happy about it. We should just say yesterday, yesterday, a federal judge. dismissed the criminal charges against the Indian billionaire Guatom Adani and several of his co-defendants. The DOJ killed the case, and the judge was like, I don't understand why you killed this case. I would be curious to know how much of, you know, World Liberty Financial crypto coins this guy bought or whatever it is. Yeah, no, there are many, many examples of that throughout, you know, this past year and a half or however long of this happening of partnerships with World Liberty Financial or whatever. And then immediately the DOJ or the SEC dismisses a case or asks to drop a case. And the judge is like, what are you even talking about? Well, so the Clarity Act, there was a hope by the crypto guys who have all this cash, and they've been playing in the primaries, and they haven't been doing so well, at least when it gets called out. And the idea was they were going to ram this through before the Senate recessed a couple of days ago, because the idea being you can't be this close to the general election.

It's a little bit more toxic. They weren't able to do it. Do you have a sense? Well, first off, who are the Democrats they were relying on? A, and then B, do you have a sense of, are the Democrats feeling the heat because of Trump's corruption? Or are they feeling the heat because the crypto money has now become toxic? I would say it's a mix of both. I mean, in terms of the Democrats, there's sort of a cohort of vocally pro-Crypto-Democrats like Kirsten Gillibrand, Ruben Gallego, Mark Warner, Ron Wyden. And then there's like Jon Ossoff, who is running in Georgia. And that race, you know, I mean, he's favored, but it could go either way, who they were hoping they could scare off with their money. But, yeah, there's been, I mean, it was slowed down a lot because of the corruption. They wanted to have a pass by July 4th. But that didn't really happen. And now we're kind of in this midterm season where money in politics and outside campaign spending is a big issue on the trail. And there hasn't been a lot of like specifically pro crypto spending that's been an issue. But there's a race tonight in Minnesota, Peggy Flanagan, who's been talking about that. Crypto has been funding a lot of money into her opponent, Andy Craig, who was... very vocally in support of the Clarity Act. And then, you know, there's a lot of other races where AI data centers have been a big thing. AI spending has been a big deal. And crypto and AI. A lot of people, that kind of goes hand in hand. And so the threat of money, I think, is maybe not as potent anymore because there's also a threat from the left that if you do this, we will use it against you. And it can be really effective. So that's sort of what's happening. What we saw last week. in terms of $60 million worth of APEC and crypto money, right? I mean, a lot of that was sort of like it was crypto money that Haley Stevens was getting was used against her. And it is this story, the reason why I find this story so fascinating and it's, you did a great job reporting it out is it really does show. I mean, look, I think there are some people like Gillibrand who.

They just, they want the money. They want the money. Their kid, her kid just got, what, a $30 million. Yeah, progressives are coming after her for that now. Like that is now becoming a thing that people can be attacked for sort of more in the center. I want to know the 22 year old. I mean, as the father of a 21 year old, I want to know what it takes for a 22 year old to convince people. that he should manage 30 million of your dollars. I suspect what it is is you got to have a parent who's a senator who's going to usher in. And, you know, and frankly, Chuck Schumer has worked in the same way when it comes to Meta, his daughter works there. So there's that ilk. And then I think like Aosuf is another example of somebody who's afraid of the money. But. That fear of the money coming in against him is now tempered by the idea of like there's a risk in that part of my opponent taking the money because I can now weaponize that. It is a, this is a great. example and manifestation of how money works. In the two types of like people who can be swayed by money in those instances, really appreciate you're coming on talking about it. We will link to crypto Democrats are ghosting the industry. What is your sense from your reporting as to how, when will they, I mean, I know they're going to come back with this legislation. The question is when? If you had to bet. What would you say when it's going to show up? Well, they do have a vote scheduled right now for September 15th, I think, right after they get back from the recess. The question is, is it going to pass? And I think it would take a lot for that to happen because not only do we have these Democrats. who are kind of finally standing up. But some Republicans are worried about repercussions from their community banking lobbies, about the stable coin rewards. So there's a lot, a lot. And then there's other things with law enforcement groups. There's a lot of issues that really have to be hammered out that they have not hammered out. And maybe they will. We will see. But they will be voting on it. I will say, though, that the... SEC and the CFTC have been essentially implementing everything that is in this bill that is so dangerous just by themselves. And really the reason that the crypto industry wants this is to codify that into law and to say, like, we have this regulatory legislative package that makes us more secure. But it's all happening. That's he just announced an open meeting on Friday to talk more about crypto regulation, where I'm sure they're just going to push through more of the really dangerous deregulatory positions in the bill and without having to stop any of Trump's crypto corruption, profiteering, anything like that. Well, it should be interesting. And they're going to need every Democratic vote they can get because Mitch McConnell, I suspect.

What a scumbag that guy is. What a stupid country this is? God. God. I mean, that guy was, it's just the lowest of the low. I can't the, I, he would be in my top 30 of people who are responsible for what's going on in this country today. I, you know, I just say top 30, it could be lower. But this is the guy who worked in the Bush administration's office of legal counsel in the DOJ and basically wrote the memo saying that torture was okay. The memo regarding the torture and military interrogation of alien unlawful combatants held outside the United States. And then he was at Stanford? Yep. Uh, law. God. Now he's making fun of the WMBA and trans people. What a piece of garbage. And his cancer also did that bit. He declared himself. It's a field day. There's like literally more men doing that bit than there are like trans people. Honestly, I think there must be some project around this. Like the, like we're getting towards elections. Who are we going to scapegoat? It's going to be the Muslims and the trans folk. And the black women in the WMBA as well. Of course. Oh, they're also going after white liberal women now. Ted Cruz literally has a tweet saying, God save us from the white liberal women. So, yeah, it's just all hate objects. So funny how, like, they're... Do they condemn us on Hasan Piker, is my question. Well, that's the... I mean, you almost want to give it to him. At least they're going after a guy, but he's Muslim, and that's really the reason why. Folks, it's your support that makes this show possible. You can become a member of Join the Majority Report.com. When you do, you not only get the free show, free of commercials, you also get the fun half. And you can I AMA and I can ignore your IMs. I don't do that. I mean, I try and read as many as I can do. It does feel like we have too much news. And I just don't get a chance, but we will get there. At some point. Maybe one of these Fridays, like at the end of August maybe, or the first week in September, I'll do like an open lines Friday. Where all we do is take IMs and phone calls and we'll do one story which will metastasize into an hour and a half. And then I'll take two calls and that'll be it. Anyways, join the Majority Report.com. Join the Majority Report.com. Also, just coffee.coffey, fair trade coffee, hot chocolate. Use your coupon code majority. You get 10% off. It's a co-op. It's in Madison, Wisconsin. Check it out. Meanwhile, whoa, look at the graphics.

Do a little bit of graphic design last night. Episode, no, David Griscom, he's out on vacation out in the American West. Oh, that must be why the graphics are just been graphics maxed. I got Yostin Hauga, who's an economist, a developmental economist at Cambridge University. You ever heard of it. Talking about China and development. The extent we've already been passed, and we're here talking about trans people playing basketball and the Muslim threat as China basically outcompetes our key industries in a way that might be irrevocable. So I'm going to talk about that. Coming up in 75 minutes over on left reckoning. Well, good job, Matt. By promoting China, there goes the reputation of the show. We're going to take, because we've seen it with us on Hasan Piker. He said, you know, pro-China. Yeah. Right. Saying that they're better than us. I mean, I'm making stuff they are. We're still waiting on your cozy earth mousuit that you start broadcasting from. You know, honestly, I should wear a moussuit just to. We should... But we're the exact one Hillary wore? Yeah. Just wear a mous suit just to, like, show people how just absolutely stupid and moronic it is to complain about someone's wearing a mow suit. He knew what he's doing, and it worked perfectly. Oh, my God. Uh... See in the fun half.

Jamie and I may have a disagreement. Yeah, you can't just say whatever you want about people just because you're rich. I have an absolute right to mock them on YouTube. He's up their buggy whipping like he's the boss. I am not your employer. You know, I'm tired of the negativity. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to upset you. You're nervous. You're a little bit upset. You're riled up. Yeah. Maybe you should rethink your defense of that, you're fucking idiots. We're just going to get rid of you. All right. But dude. Dude. Dude. Dude. Dude. You want to smoke this joint? Yes. Do you feel like you are a dinosaur? See good shit. Exactly. I'm happy now. It's a win-win. It's a win, win, win. Uh, hell yeah. Now listen to me. Two, three, four, five times, eight, four, seven, nine six, five, five, seven, two, thirty-eight, 56, 27, one-half. Five-eighths. Three point nine billion. Wow. He's the ultimate math, nerd. Don't you see? Why don't you get a real job instead of stealing vitriol and hatred your left wing limb? Everybody's taking their dumb juice today. Come on, Sammy. Dance, dance, dance. Ooh. Rand Paul. I had my first post-coital scene with a woman. I'm hoping to add more moves to my repertoire. All I have is the dip and the swirl. Fine, we can double dip. Yes, this is a perfect moment. No. Wait, what? You make under a million dollars to give. You're scum. You're not paying me. Excuse me? Fuck you. You fucking liberal elite. I think you belong in jail. Thank you for saying that, Sam. You're a horrible, despicable person. All right, going to take a quick break. I want to take a moment to talk to some of the libertarians out there. Take whatever vehicle you want. To drive to the library. What you're talking about is jibber jab. Classic. I'm feeling more chill already. Donald Trump can kiss all of our asses. Hey, Sam. Hey, Andy. Are you guys ready to do some evil? Hitler was such an idiot. You think I meant to be a Nazi. Agreed. No. Death to America. Do. Yes. Wow. Wow, that's weird. No way. Unbelievable. This guy's got a really good hook. Throw our hands with.

But, Sam, I got to get off. No worries. I want to just flush this out a little bit. I mean, look, it's a free speech issue if you don't like me. Hey, hey, hey, hey, shut up. Thank you for calling into the majority report. Sam will be with you shortly.