The Shutdown, Travel, & “A House of Dynamite” 11/6/25

Summary

---

Squawk Pod Summary: “The Shutdown, Travel, & ‘A House of Dynamite’” (11/6/25)

Podcast: Squawk Pod
Date: November 6, 2025
Hosts: Joe Kernen, Andrew Ross Sorkin (Becky Quick out), with Senior Producer Katie Kramer
Key Guests: House Speaker Mike Johnson, Captain Dennis Tajer (Allied Pilots Association), Director Kathryn Bigelow & Writer Noah Oppenheim

---

Episode Overview

This episode examines the historic government shutdown's effects on travel and aviation, the Supreme Court's review of the President’s authority on tariffs, political wrangling over government funding, the AI race between the U.S. and China, and the chilling realism behind the Netflix movie A House of Dynamite, a fictional but plausible scenario of a nuclear attack on an American city.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Travel Chaos Amid Shutdown: Air Traffic Cuts & Worker Fatigue

• FAA Reduction: FAA to cut flight capacity by 10% at 40 major U.S. airports due to staffing shortages linked to the government shutdown.
• Impact on Passengers: (~20:11) Captain Dennis Tajer, spokesperson for the Allied Pilots Association, highlights how a “10% cut” could mean “100% disruption” for affected travelers.
• Safety Over Schedules: Tajer stresses the top concern is safety as overworked controllers and pilots face fatigue:
  “What we've seen are these rolling delays… air traffic controllers, they're doing hero's work, but we're just asking too much of them.” (20:11)
• Thanksgiving Woes: Airlines are already dipping into reserve pilots meant for Thanksgiving:
  “We're already nibbling on the Thanksgiving turkey… when it comes to operations, that's just a mess and it's got to stop.” (22:19)
• Human Toll: Tajer gives a vivid picture of the strain:
  “If I had a crew member that said, ‘I just got done with an Uber shift… had an argument with my spouse because we don't have the money... let's go fly,’ I would say, hang on a minute. Is your head in the game?” (23:47)

---

2. Government Shutdown: Political Gridlock and ‘A Shutdown About Nothing’

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson Weighs In

• On the Shutdown: Johnson calls it a “Seinfeld shutdown. It's a shutdown about nothing.” (01:18, 26:22)
• Blame Game: Attributes blame to Senate Democrats wanting to “show a fight” over President Trump, citing political pressures from a rising left wing:
  “Chuck Schumer decided to throw a big wrench... because he needs political cover against the rising radicals in his party.” (26:22)
• Anecdote:
  “If you polled 100 Democrats... you’d get 100 different answers about what this is about.” (28:40)
• False Narratives: Asserts:
  “There’s a lot of false narratives. It is a clean CR… It’s exactly what they had already voted for.” (31:55)
• Media and Narrative:
  “The entire mainstream media is out every day parroting the talking points of Chuck Schumer. I have to do a press conference every morning just to try to put the truth out there.” (32:45)
• Influence of NY Mayoral Race:
  “Mamdani is all the rage now and the young Communists are uprising and that scares the old guard Democrats in Congress.” (29:33)

---

3. Supreme Court: Tariff Powers on the Line

• Legal Debate: Discussion around the Supreme Court reviewing the extent of the President’s authority to impose tariffs without Congressional approval.
• Notable Exchange:
  Sorkin recaps justices’ skepticism:
  “How can you not levy a 1% tariff if you’re allowed to do a whole embargo? It doesn’t make any logical sense.” (04:48)
• Market Implications: Andrew highlights predictions:
  “3 to 6 months. Analysts in this case expect a ruling not before early 2026.” (05:25)
• Johnson’s Stance:
  “If I thought that the Executive was overstepping its bounds, I would have spoken up. Now, I do it in my way. I would do it behind the scenes with the President.” (01:02; 35:24)

---

4. Filibuster Fears: Political Stability at Stake

• Debate Over the Filibuster: Sorkin expresses concern about its demise:
  “If the Democrats have a majority... they will get rid of the filibuster. That would open up the floodgates for God knows what.” (36:05)
• Johnson on the Filibuster:
  “The filibuster has been a very important safeguard, a bulwark against the Democrats’ worst impulses.” (37:02) “Without filibuster, you're going to have massive whiplash after every election... a lot of instability.” (38:57)

---

5. U.S.-China Race in AI: Nvidia CEO’s Stark Warning

• Jensen Huang’s Remarks: Initially warned that “China is going to win the AI race,” citing Chinese energy subsidies and rapid progress.
• Clarification:
  “As I have long said, China is nanoseconds behind America in AI. It's vital that America wins by racing ahead and winning developers worldwide.” (15:20)
• Hosts’ Take:
  “Playing both sides, but also saying... If we don't get with it, we're going to fall behind.” (16:19)
• Johnson’s Perspective:
  “We cannot lose the race... We have to keep our edge in AI… China is an adversary not an ally.” (39:33)

---

6. “A House of Dynamite”: Nuclear Terror on Netflix

Interview with Kathryn Bigelow & Noah Oppenheim

What if a Nuclear Missile Were Incoming?

• Genesis:
  “It started as a kind of what if question: What would happen if there was a nuclear ICBM headed toward North America?” – Kathryn Bigelow (43:03)
• Journalistic Approach:
  “From that initial conversation, we began building the story like you might actually report out a story for a newspaper... We just called the folks who had actually worked in these rooms.” – Noah Oppenheim (43:45)
• Frightening Realism:
  “Terrified by how short a period of time decision makers would have. Terrified by the fact that the President has the sole authority to make the call and has probably never rehearsed for it before.” – Oppenheim (43:45)
• Debate About Missile Defense:
  “The statistic in the movie, which is 61%, is fairly accurate in terms of... our missile defense system.” – Oppenheim (45:15)
• Moral of the Story:
  “Do we need to be living in a house of dynamite? ... We’ve built this world that is ready to blow at any second.” – Kathryn Bigelow (46:02; 47:06)
• Arms Reduction Advocacy:
  “I think we reduce the nuclear stockpile. That's the moral of the story.” – Bigelow (45:58) “It’s not an impossible dream to try to, you know, reverse the trend here.” – Oppenheim (48:11)
• Film’s Impact:
  “The movie ends with a question... it's really up to the audience to answer it.” – Bigelow (49:08)
• Hosts’ Praise:
  “It forces you to think a lot and to feel something, which is one of the great signs of a great film.” – Joe Kernen (49:27)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Joe Kernen on the Shutdown:
  “This really was, as some people say, the Seinfeld shutdown.” (01:18, 26:22)

• Pilot Dennis Tajer, on overstressed crews:
  “Stop messing with my crew. Get this thing done so that we can get back to flying in clear skies.” (24:26)

• Mike Johnson on Congressional power:
  “If I thought that the Executive was overstepping its bounds, I would have spoken up. Now, I do it in my way. I would do it behind the scenes with the President.” (01:02, 35:24)

• Kathryn Bigelow on the film’s core question:
  “Do we need to be living in a house of dynamite? That’s what the phrase refers to toward the end of the movie. We've built this world that is ready to blow at any second.” (47:06)

• Joe Kernen on Bigelow’s latest film:
  “It’ll scare the bejesus out of you.” (40:38)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Timestamp | Topic/Guest | Key Point/Quote | | -------------- | ---------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------- | | 01:18 | Mike Johnson | "Shutdown about nothing." | | 20:11-25:02 | Capt. Dennis Tajer | Air travel meltdown, worker fatigue | | 25:25-38:57 | Speaker Mike Johnson Interview | Shutdown politics, Supreme Court tariffs, filibuster | | 39:33 | Mike Johnson | U.S.-China AI race, Nvidia CEO warning | | 43:03-49:08 | Kathryn Bigelow/Noah Oppenheim | Making A House of Dynamite, nuclear defense realism | | 49:27 | Joe Kernen | "Forces you to think a lot and to feel something..." |

---

Tone & Flow

• The episode crackles with urgency and political tension but is leavened by the hosts’ conversational, occasionally bantering style.
• The guest discussions—especially with Speaker Johnson and Captain Tajer—strike a balance between candor, advocacy, and explanation.
• The interview with Kathryn Bigelow and Noah Oppenheim is thoughtful, pulling back the curtain on the research-driven, chilling realism of high-concept disaster storytelling.

---

Summary Takeaway

This edition of Squawk Pod provides a vivid, multifaceted window into the intersection of politics, policy, and culture in late 2025: a divided government stuck in the longest shutdown ever, the cascading impacts on one of America’s most essential systems—air travel—and the cultural trace of nuclear anxiety in a new Hollywood thriller. The conversations are pointed, informative, occasionally partisan, but always rooted in the urgent realities that policymakers, industry insiders, and the American public must grapple with.

---

Transcript

[Joe Kernan]

At Janice Henderson Investors we believe working together is the way to work better. Like combining your portfolio plans and our in depth strategy, your valued assets and our valuable insights, your vision and our mission. Working in harmony to seek the right investment opportunities. Janice Henderson Investors Investing in a brighter future together.

[Capella University Announcer]

At Capella University. Learning the right skills could make a difference. That's why our business programs teach you relevant skills you can take from the course room to the workplace. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more at capella. Edu.

[Katie Kramer]

Bring in show music please.

[Joe Kernan]

Hi, I'm CNBC producer Katie Kramer. Today on Squawk Pod, the Supreme Court weighing the president's authority on tariff policy. We hear from the speaker of the House, Mike Johnson.

[Mike Johnson]

If I thought that the executive was overstepping its bounds, I would have spoken up. Now I do it in my way. I would do it behind the scenes with the President. We worked that out privately and how.

[Joe Kernan]

Johnson's Republican majority is weathering a government shutdown that goes on and on.

[Mike Johnson]

This really was, as some people say, the Seinfeld shutdown. It's a shutdown about nothing.

[Joe Kernan]

But the FAA announcing a shutdown related cut to air traffic as much as 10%. Dennis Tezier from the biggest union of airline pilots tells us the impact to aviation essentials working without pay.

[Dennis Taeger]

Air traffic controllers, the TSA officers, they're part of my crew. Stop messing with my crew. Get this thing done so that we can get back to flying in clear skies.

[Joe Kernan]

What do we do if there was a nuclear bomb aimed toward an American city? The Netflix film A House of Dynamite explores that scary scenario. Screenwriter Noah Oppenheim on the fact based premise.

[Katie Kramer]

We began building the story like you might actually report out a story for a newspaper or for a news outlet.

[Joe Kernan]

And director Kathryn Bigelow wants us to be thrilled, yes, but also think, do.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

We need to be living in a house of dynamite? That's what the phrase refers to toward the end of the movie. We've built this world that is ready to blow at any second.

[Joe Kernan]

Plus Nvidia CEOs warning about AI competition and travel headaches.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

One very important key employee was able to make it back. He's here and he's looking well rested.

[Joe Kernan]

As the shutdown hits home.

They had the ice cream, you know.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

The ice cream is New York. You gotta fly in the back of the plane. Guys like you.

[Joe Kernan]

It's Thursday, November 6, 2025. Squawk Pod begins right now.

Stand Andrew by in 3, 2, 1. Q. Andrew, good morning and welcome to Squawk box right here on cnbc. We are live at the NASDAQ market site in Times Square. I'm Andrew Oz Sorkin back from London. So it's no longer a transatlantic operation. Joe Kernan is here. Becky is off today. So it's just the boys and Joe. I know we were talking about trains, planes and automobiles. My plane made it in. But I know you've got some news here on.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Not a lot of.

[Joe Kernan]

The FAA is.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Well, not a lot of traffic. I mean, the Atlantic is pretty empty, isn't it? You sort of come up over the. I mean, it's very cold as you're flying over Greenland and Iceland.

[Joe Kernan]

Right.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And et cetera. But I guess it could have. What?

[Mike Johnson]

Air?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

What, LaGuardia or JFK?

[Joe Kernan]

LaGuardia internationally.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Okay. JFK.

[Joe Kernan]

JFK or Newark in JFK.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And where did. I'm asking you. JFK.

[Joe Kernan]

JFK.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You came into JFK.

[Joe Kernan]

JFK. So that virgin Atlantic code share on Delta. Just to give you the full details, in case you were wondering.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I need more to get a nice meal. Did you have one of those pods.

[Joe Kernan]

Where you, you know, they had.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Were you in the back of the plane? Don't divert.

[Joe Kernan]

No, no. They had the ice cream.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You know, the ice cream in Montami's New York. You got to fly in the back of the plane.

[Joe Kernan]

You know these little ice cream things that come in the cup.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I do.

[Joe Kernan]

And then you have to scoop it out. But it was so hard that I broke the spoon. That's how hard the ice cream was.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I'm searching when we're like, what are.

[Joe Kernan]

You looking up over there?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

When we're likely to hear on the tariffs go. Because you're right, it could be sooner, but normally it could be all the way. I read that this morning. It's like, I can't wait till May or June to hear. And I'm also.

[Joe Kernan]

Oh, there's some talk that it could be three or four weeks from now.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I'm also hearing that the consensus that it is going to go against him isn't as clear. I know you're hearing it, but what they kept asking was if he can cut off trade completely with a country. With another country. An embargo?

[Katie Kramer]

Why?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

How does it make sense?

[Joe Kernan]

That was the Gorsuch question.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And Kavanaugh and others, how can you not. And they used a 1% tariff. How can you not levy a 1% tariff if you're allowed to do a whole embargo? It doesn't make any logical sense.

[Joe Kernan]

I don't know. I was reading a Lot of the transcripts and things that people were writing about and it looked like some of the quotes from Amy Barratt was very negative. I don't know if you thought that in terms of the way she was asking some of those questions. She did not seem.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Sometimes they don't. Sometimes they play devil's advocate. We'll see. I think. And then the other thing is he probably just. The administration would just shift to something else.

[Joe Kernan]

Use 232.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Yeah. Whether it actually gets dispersed back to companies, that's highly likely. Here's what's a typical timeline. 3 to 6 months. Analysts in this case expect a ruling not before early 2026, given the complexity and stake involved.

[Joe Kernan]

The other thing that was interesting is Neelak Cattell, who you know is suing on behalf of the small, small businesses for this, made an interesting argument when they were talking about remedies about this idea of would you have to pay people back?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Right.

[Joe Kernan]

And is that too complicated? And he said you don't necessarily have to decide that.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You.

[Joe Kernan]

You could decide to do it only prospectively. So I think that they were trying to find ways to get there. And that's why I thought at least from the questioning again, unless you think it's all devil's advocate.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

No, it definitely was sharp. The question. Do you want to hear the. I don't know whether we've run this through NBC News standards. I just think it's in our DNA to run things a certain way. But you want to hear what we have to say about this, what the writers on this show have. I'm going to read it. Let me just.

[Joe Kernan]

You tell me what the writers are.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I want to say.

[Joe Kernan]

I want to know what Kalshee and Polymarket have to say.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

That's a good idea. Idea because they were down.

[Joe Kernan]

So while you.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

They're in the 30s.

[Joe Kernan]

While you read what the producers have to say, I will read what the Polymarket Kalshee folks because it was at.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

30, even before yesterday that it's upheld. So you're probably. You'll probably have that. And we like them now because they were. They were right about everything in the election. You thought they weren't. I thought.

[Mike Johnson]

No.

[Joe Kernan]

Bill Ackman said they weren't.

[Mike Johnson]

Right.

[Joe Kernan]

And so I thought all of a sudden that was interesting point.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

If Cittarelli was always 9010 against even though one of the polls the Atlas intel had 0.6 of a percent behind and he lost by 13, which is what was the betting markets were saying. Okay, here we go. Supreme Court. I haven't Read this. Supreme Court justices hearing arguments about the legality of aggressive tariffs imposed by President Trump. Both conservative and liberal judges sharply questioning the government's lawyer on the method used by the administration to enact the tariffs. Critics argued that the levies infringe on Congress on Congress's power to tax. The solicitor general arguing for the government called the president's tariffs regulatory said that they. I'm not going to say the fact that because it's unnecessary and that they raised revenue was only incidental. And that they raised was only incidental. The court planned 80 minutes of arguments. They went more than two and a half hours. It's unclear when the court will rule, but the Trump administration has asked for a decision to be expedited. Some key retail names impacted by tariffs rallying yesterday I just want to say.

[Joe Kernan]

That I thought you read that very nicely and in a fair and balanced way.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I got rid of the fact that because it's. If you read any Mervyn because you.

[Joe Kernan]

Are, you know, such a grammatical.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

No, it's not grammatical. It's just superfluous. It means absolutely nothing. And if you read Strunk and White or Mervyn Block or anyone like that, get rid of it. Get rid of it going forward, get rid of it because at the end of the day you'll be happy. Transportation SECRETARY those are two of my worst. Transportation Secretary Sean duffy announcing the FAA will reduce flight capacity by 10% at 40 major airports starting tomorrow morning. What does that really mean? 3,500 flights. Is it. Would it change things that much in a low travel time?

[Joe Kernan]

I don't know. But I want to go back because I told you that I was going to give you the Cauchy numbers and we're down at 25%. 25 that it's upheld, 25% that it's upheld, 75% that it is not. Obviously that's.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I trust that more than all the.

[Joe Kernan]

Okay.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Anything else? Air traffic control has been working without pay since the government shut down on October 1st. The FAA administrator saying increasing staffing pressures are forcing the agency to act. It's unclear which airports will be affected, but likely to learn today. Secretary Duffy and the FAA chief say that they're meeting with airline executives on implementing the reductions and experts predict hundreds or perhaps thousands of flights could be canceled. I guess cumulatively because I think it's 3,500 a day or so. You got more on.

[Joe Kernan]

No, just giving you the. Just giving you the numbers and what's the two.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

They can do it another way. It's just they just shift to.

[Joe Kernan]

There are ways that they can shift to, but they can't do it then permanently. And some of the rates and it's not clear they could do it to every country. I mean, it becomes much more complicated.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Yesterday, you know, fentanyl, I don't like fentanyl. I guess more people have died from that than in all the wars combined or some horrible number. So it is bad whether the trade imbalance suddenly became an emergency with every single country blanket France, you know, by.

[Joe Kernan]

The way, that was Amy's question.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

That's a tough one.

[Joe Kernan]

I said, how do you say we're having a problem with.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Because China and rare earth metals, that rises to the level of an emergency, I think where you could say, look, everything, those things, it goes into everything just about you could. It's almost like you could cause a. I don't know what it would hit, what the hit would be to GDP if we didn't get those metals for, let's say, three to six months.

[Joe Kernan]

Sure.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

But I think it's around the world there'd be a global problem.

[Joe Kernan]

I think it's very difficult to declare an emergency unless the rest of the world is also declaring the emergency with.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You they might have on the rare earth.

[Mike Johnson]

Right.

[Joe Kernan]

And then you would have done that collectively. And then, oh, don't ask for collective act.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And now we're going back to coalition of the willing. We lead the world, my friend. And if you go to the UN there's going to be two outlier countries that don't let you do anything. I mean, you can't say anything without Sudan.

[Joe Kernan]

How about just Congress? How about a coalition?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

They might be worse.

[Joe Kernan]

How about a coalition of Congress, the voting representatives to do fordo.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Would you have had. Would you have gone to the Congress to be able to take out the nuclear facilities in Iran? You would have done that? You think you can possibly tell AOC you're going to do that? And it's not going to.

[Joe Kernan]

Not necessarily. But that's a totally different story.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Well, you're just saying there are times when you can't go to Congress, Andrew. Right.

[Joe Kernan]

Well, no, but that's. This is now a wartime situation. We're not. The rare earths are not a wartime, could be scenario.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Economic war. Some people call it the economic equivalent of a nuclear war. You know, what we got to talk about later is the filibuster, because I'm very concerned.

[Joe Kernan]

Okay. We will put that on the list of presidents.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You know, when it came about 1917, it's not in the Constitution but can you believe it's lasted that long? Because all you need is a simple majority in the Senate to get rid of it. And Manchin and cinema. Heroic.

[Mike Johnson]

Heroic.

[Joe Kernan]

So if so, you should be holding steady.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I am. But do you know why Trump is not holding steady? Because he knows next time Democrats get.

[Joe Kernan]

A majority, because he knows he's got three years to do what he's got to do, he wants to do, and that's. He doesn't care.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You know what he said? He said, well, that's true. But also he said Democrats are going to do it anyway. They're going to stack the court. They're going to, you know, anything you want to do, you can do anything you want. Climate change, gun control with 51 votes. Can you imagine anything. You can get rid of old laws.

[Joe Kernan]

Sure. And then that's no bipartisan. So therefore you should be, you know, speaking.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I see what he's saying in that they're going to do it anyway.

[Joe Kernan]

Why do you say they're going to do it anyway?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Because they tried to do it last.

[Joe Kernan]

Time, but invariably, maybe there will be a cinema if you're so happy about what she was doing. Or a mansion.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Yeah. It looks like the party's moving that way towards the center. Welcome to New York. Doordash is lower today. Sharply lower. Earnings missed expectations down about 10%. Revenue is up 27% from a year ago. That was above expectations, and total orders were up 21%. However, guidance for the current quarter came in mostly below estimates, and the company said it plans to spend several hundred million dollars on new initiatives and development in 2026. Commenting on the higher spending plans, the company said, we wish there was a way to grow a baby into an adult without investment or to see the baby grow into an adult overnight. But we do not believe this is how life or how business works. Can I just ask you one thing?

[Joe Kernan]

Please, Please.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Is it possible that for the rest of the country and our viewers.

[Joe Kernan]

Yes.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

That we focus too much on what happened in New York with the mayoral race, or is it so sort of transformational in terms of the national discourse with, with where the Democratic Party is headed, that it's fair game for us to continue?

[Joe Kernan]

I'm going to quote one of your comrades, yours.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We don't have comrades on my side.

[Joe Kernan]

I'm just.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

That's saying now you're getting confused.

[Mike Johnson]

That's your side.

[Joe Kernan]

Ross Duluth. Yeah. A conservative who writes for the New York Times.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Yeah.

[Joe Kernan]

Did an amazing piece in the past, I think, 24, 48 hours now, about how Actually, the attention that's given to mayoral candidates historically in New York is completely outsized. Makes no sense. Is based strictly on the fact that we, all the media are in New York and we're all navel gazing and that every candidate, I mean he goes through it. Every candidate that we, that we described and talked about over the years as being sort of the next coming, people talked about, never went anywhere. Bloomberg, people thought was going to be the next president, Giuliani was going to be the next president. Even when Eric Adams has the job. This was going to be the change in the Democratic Party.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

This is different this time.

[Joe Kernan]

This is different this time. So he, he actually made the argument effectively that New York mayors, this is the peak. We'll see whether he's right or not.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Maybe we'll see the center of capitalism and this guy's a communist. So that's different this time. Navel gazing, I don't like that term. I don't want to look at my navel. I don't look at anyone's navel, to be honest. The fuzz, the little thing, it just go ahead.

[Joe Kernan]

I don't want to think about.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Why'd you say that?

[Joe Kernan]

I don't want to. Because that's the phrase, that is the phrase bad expression. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang sounding the alarm for the US on artificial intelligence. He's now telling the Financial Times that China is going to win the AI race. In that interview, he highlighted a potential patchwork of state based AI regulations in the US he compared that with China, where energy subsidies are helping companies use local alternatives to Nvidia's chips, even though they are less energy efficient. He also told the FT that the west is being held back by cynicism. But shortly after that report was published, the CEO appeared to soften his stance. In a statement on Video's X account, he said, quote, as I have long said, China is nanoseconds behind America in AI. It's vital that America wins by racing ahead and winning developers worldwide. Those developments coming after President Trump told 60 Minutes last weekend that Nvidia's most advanced AI chips should be kept out of China. So that debate continues.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

It's very clear what he's, what he's doing.

[Joe Kernan]

Yes, playing both sides is what he's.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Playing both sides, but also saying, look, we're ahead now, but if you don't loosen up some of these state regulations, if you don't make it, if you don't come on our side, which would help his business, but if you don't get. If we don't get with it, we're going to fall behind is what he's saying.

[Joe Kernan]

Sure. But I think the biggest issue right now is I think he's not actually wrong. Meaning there's stuff going even though we are ahead. Sort of. There's stuff going on there now because of actually how they're daisy chaining these chips together and how frankly inefficient the energy piece is and they don't care because they're just subsidizing anyway that they can basically replicate a lot of what.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We'Re already doing even without the black.

[Joe Kernan]

And that's his argument.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Is he arguing that we might as well sell him Blackwell anyway?

[Joe Kernan]

Pretty much. So that's, that's where he's going.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

So it's all about his own situation. What else? Because not everyone is like that, Andrew. Not everyone.

[Joe Kernan]

You're not. I know.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Look at how often I take risks for life limb and everything else. And employment.

[Joe Kernan]

Cheese will be next.

Coming up on Squawk Pod. It is day 37 of the longest government shutdown in history. How it's affecting our essential travel workers with pilot and pilot union spokesman Dennis Tazer.

[Dennis Taeger]

While the negotiations may be righteous, we don't have time for that in my cockpit.

[Joe Kernan]

Plus House Speaker Mike Johnson on the mounting pressure to get something, anything done.

[Mike Johnson]

Mamdami is all the rage now and the young communists are uprising and that scares the old guard Democrats in Congress.

[David Schwartz]

The heaviest metal credit card of all.

[Joe Kernan]

Time, rumored to be one of only 18 in existence, plated with the very same tungsten that forged the international space station and wielded at business dinners like a cell samurai sword.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

It's a classic corporate power move.

[Joe Kernan]

But the real power move, having end to end visibility on your most critical shipments.

[Mike Johnson]

FedEx.

[Joe Kernan]

The new power move.

[Capella University Announcer]

Is it time to reimagine your future. The right business skills may make a difference in your career. At Capella University we offer a relevant education that's designed to focus on what you need to know in the business world. We'll teach professional skills to help you pursue your goals like business management, strategic planning and effective communication. And you can apply these skills right away. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more at capella.

[Joe Kernan]

Edu cnbc Sport on the Record. Your front row seat to sports and business. From commissioners and owners to media executives and top athletes.

[Mike Johnson]

These are Rembrandts. I'm telling you.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

These franchise on the Record.

[Joe Kernan]

All new Saturdays, three Eastern.

We're back. This is Squawk Pod. Today With Joe Kernan and Andrew Ross Sorkin.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Stand by. Joe his mike Cue. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced that he's going to reduce U.S. flights by 10% at 40 major airports starting Friday, impacting nearly 4,000 flights. Our next guest will give us a window into the government shutdown's impact on air travel. Captain Dennis Taeger. We've had on a lot American Airlines pilot more than 30 years of flight experience. He's a spokesman for the Allied Pilots association union represents 16,000 professional pilots. Good to see you, Dennis. What is 10% to the average person that's flying? What does that actually mean? Equate to. Do you notice that immediately?

[Dennis Taeger]

Well, you know, 10% if it's your flight, it's 100% of your day and your plan. So it's just the numbers and the bottom line is Secretary Duffy is repeated. His sole role is to maintain the safety margin. So what we've seen are these rolling delays every day that has happened when they have staffing shortages. And the air traffic controllers, they're doing hero's work, but we're just asking too much of them.

[Mike Johnson]

So.

[Dennis Taeger]

So they've. Administrator Bedford, the FAA administrator has said that they're starting to see reports coming in even from pilots about fatigue for the air traffic controllers and this is the right thing to do. You're getting ahead of something before there's an incident or an accident. So Secretary Duffy is leading in this. We stand with him. Our president of our union stood with him and Vice President Vance demanding an end to this shutdown. When it comes to the airlines, it's not a political debate. When it comes to safety and security, we've actually endorsed along with 40,000 other pilots represented by other unions, the Teamster pilots, NetJets. To do the clean CR, vote for the clean CR, we need an immediate vector to clear skies and not a meandering path. While the negotiations may be righteous, we don't have time for that in my cockpit.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. There's nothing that mind boggling about a clean cr. This should have never gone this far, should have never happened in the first place and it should end. Take another vote and you know, people of good faith on the other side, on whatever side need. It's only five Democrats and you'd have it. And now we're really. This is where the rubber. Well, it's not meeting the road, but this is where the issues are in the sky. Are we talking Dennis, the airspace, is that around what we would think of are the most busy airports is that where we're really concerned? New York and Chicago and Los Angeles and Dallas. Is that where we need to be concerned?

[Dennis Taeger]

Well, we need to be concerned across every airspace. Like I said before, if it's on your airplane and there's a safety margin invasion, we're going to protect that. And that's going to happen. The airspace is going to remain safe and secure, but you need to adapt to it. And what Secretary Duffy is doing prior to this announcement is reducing the amount of traffic coming in. And that's just the right thing to do because above all else, we've got to keep the system safe and secure. And I want to add a little nuance into this. You know, right now, airlines, we plan. We model for mother Nature, but we don't model for government nature. And when we staff the airline for pilots, reserve pilots are there in case there's disruption or delays and a pilot times out, which is starting to happen. We fly full schedules. The FAA has limits on how long we can fly during the day for safety reasons. Pilots timeout, you bring in a reserve. They're already starting to use the reserve pilots that were planned to be available for that important Thanksgiving season. So we're already nibbling on the Thanksgiving turkey. Frankly, when it comes to operations, that's just a mess and it's got to stop.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

So the delays that we're talking about and just the whole notion of things gumming up the works because of what's happening, that puts strain on pilots that are waiting to perhaps have to step in because there's many more delays and they're waiting much longer. So it's not just the air traffic controller.

[Dennis Taeger]

Yeah, pilots, time out. You know, I was out. Our pilots fly 12 hour days. You got about an hour and a half to play with, maybe two hours. You get a delay in there, you time out. You're not legal to fly, so you know the areas. It's just like if you had two guests at the same time on your program talking about two different subjects, there's no way you could get it done. So our air traffic controls have stepped it up. They're coming to work, they're not getting paid. They're human beings. You know, if I had a crew member that said, hey, I just got done with an Uber shift and I was down at the food pantry getting things squared away, had an argument with my spouse because we don't have the money to pay for our family's needs. Hey, let's go fly. I would say, hang on a minute. Is your head in the game. You're trying, but you're a human being. And that's what Secretary Duffy is going to avoid. And we stand with him. We're not picking the political sides in this. You can't bring your fight into my cockpit. My airplane has nothing to do with this righteous and noble fight that you're having outside. But if this was happening outside the airplane, I wouldn't allow you to board my airplane because you'd be distracting my crew and the air traffic controllers, the TSA officers. They're part of my crew. Stop messing with my crew. Get this thing done so that we can get back to flying in clear skies.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We're talking to Speaker Johnson later. We'll pass along some of your comments maybe. Captain, thank you. Good to have you on this morning. We've mentioned it before. It's day 37 in case you weren't keeping up of the government shutdown. Join us now, House Speaker Mike Johnson. Mr. Speaker, it's good to have you on this morning.

[Mike Johnson]

Good morning. Not a great day in America because of the shutdown, but I'm always happy to be with you.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Happy to be with you as well. We had Senator Britt on a little bit earlier talking about some of the efforts from that chamber.

[Joe Kernan]

I realized you can't break a logjam without having conversation. And so sitting down with Senator Schumer.

And talking about that, we really need.

To get back to doing the work of the American people.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I know you're willing to talk and, you know, try to get this thing ended, but it's really up to the Senate. What do you think of these ideas of a couple of the appropriations bills that have already passed? You could put it on the clean cr. That was her idea. But I don't think there was an Obamacare subsidy extension being talked about. Would that induce any Democrats across the to cross over finally and vote for the cr, those other appropriations.

[Mike Johnson]

Well, my dear friends, Senator Britt and others doing a great job over there. The Republicans are working hard with a few handful of moderate centrist Democrats who are left who understand the pain that's being inflicted on the American people and they want a way out of this. The Democrats have painted themselves into a corner, Joe, as we've discussed before, because this really was, as some people say, the Seinfeld shutdown. It's a shutdown about nothing. There was no fight. There was no skirmish between the parties. When we passed back on September 19th the clean continuing resolution, it was nonpartisan. You know, it's 24 pages in length, bare bones, just to keep the lights on. And this is an important point. The whole reason for that is because the Republicans and the Democrats who were appropriators got together and said, we're running out of time to do the normal process, the regular order of funding the government. We need about seven more weeks, so let's just extend it to November 21, and we'll all get our work done. That was the agreement they made, bipartisan and bicameral. But then Chuck Schumer decided to throw a big wrench in the, in the middle of the machine because he wanted to show a fight against President Trump, because he needs political cover from the, against the rising radicals in his party. I mean, that's pure and simple what this is about. So it never really was about any particular issue. It was about the Democrats trying to show a fight. And now they've gotten themselves into the longest shutdown in U.S. history. And it's serious business for serious people.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Do you think, Mr. Baker? And let's take, let's take some Democrats at face value with what they say. They say that they're really concerned about the expiration of the Obamacare pandemic subsidies and that, you know, if they knew for sure that Republicans would negotiate in good faith after they reopen the government, that if they had assurances even from President Trump they would do it, that's only about $40 billion. Why do we keep hearing 1.5 trillion? And, you know, why would you use the leverage which Democrats have? Because you need a super majority. Why would you use it to put all that other stuff in there if all you really wanted was, was, you know, a way to get a year's worth of these subsidies that's only $40 billion. Would you have agreed, would Republicans have agreed to that or not? Not even that would have been okay with Republicans.

[Mike Johnson]

Well, what you're highlighting there is the entire point of this when we say it's a shutdown about nothing. If you polled 100 Democrats between the House and Senate, you get 100 different answers about what this is about. That's the thing. It never was about one particular policy or argument or discussion. We all knew that the, the COVID era Obamacare subsidy was going to lapse at the end of December. That is the, the expiration date that the Democrats themselves put on it when they created that big subsidy. Okay? We knew that we were going to have to debate and arm wrestle about that through October, November, December, that was always on the calendar. Everybody in the building knew that in both parties, they tried to glob onto that and make that the issue of the day because they think that sells with voters. Okay, yes, the appropriations process is going forward. Yes, we're going to have to talk about health care and sort all that out. But when we say the 1.5 trillion, that is the actual counteroffer that they put on paper and filed in the Senate, it is still sitting over there as their counter proposal. 1.5 trillion in new spending on a 7 week stopgap funding measure. I mean, it's just madness. And included in that. Yes, go read the bill. They want almost $200 billion to be returned to health care benefits for illegal aliens. They want to send all these billions of dollars back over foreign countries for social spending in other countries. They wanted to restore half a billion to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, all these things. And in that proposal, amazingly shockingly to us, they put it on paper. They want to repeal the $50 billion rural hospital fund that Republicans worked so hard to get signed into law July 4th. So it's just a mishmash of priorities and things that different Democrats are claiming that illustrates the very point. This was never about one particular issue. They just wanted to show a fight. They wanted to look tough to the Marxist rise in their party. And remember this, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are both New Yorkers. Right? We all just saw what happened in New York City. Mamdani is all the rage now and the young Communists are uprising and that scares the old guard Democrats in Congress. And so they couldn't. They were afraid they'd get a challenge from a Mamdani disciple in their next election cycle.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

The speaker that.

[Mike Johnson]

Joe, that is what all this is about.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

You explained it on this show.

[Mike Johnson]

You explain.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I've seen you everywhere and Senator Thune, everybody else to this day though, a lot of the stuff that I get pushed back on. Johnson, they're trying to cut Medicaid. People, most people in the country do not know it's about a clean resolution. They think that in this bill that Democrats will not vote for. They think that Republicans are cutting Medicaid and taking away Obamacare so that somehow that has not reached most people at this point. And you saw the results of the election the other night. Now, they were blue states, no doubt, but in New Jersey, it was a much bigger margin than people thought, that Ciattarelli lost by Virginia. Even the attorney general, even that guy was able to get in. So something about the shutdown is not getting out from Republicans because the narrative from the left is that your meanies they're going to take health care away.

[Joe Kernan]

Well, they're suggesting that's going to happen later. Not necessarily as part of this, but.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

They'Re trying to use a load. No, it's a clean cr.

[Mike Johnson]

There's a lot of. There's a lot of false narratives. It is a clean cr. It is exactly what they had already voted for. And literally, Chuck Schumer led the 10 Democrats in the Senate to vote for this same product back in March. But that's when he took all the abuse from the radical left and he made a decision back then. I don't care what. I'm never going to do the right thing again. I'm not going to keep the government open. I will. I'll go down on that hill. Because he knows his career is over if he doesn't. I mean, really, that's what this is about. The clean CR guys is Biden era policies and spending. It's not Republican priorities. We don't even like this stuff. But we were trying to operate in good faith to keep the lights on. There's so many false narratives about this. Yes. I'm not surprised that people are misled because the entire mainstream media is out every day parroting the talking points of Chuck Schumer. I have to go do a press conference every morning just to try to put the truth out there, the simple truth that is not changing. It sounds repetitive to us.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Not from six to nine here, but it's not exaggerated. Not from six to nine here. Mr. Speaker, we're not parrying.

[Mike Johnson]

I know, I know, I know.

[Joe Kernan]

Mr. Speaker, I know you're asking.

[Mike Johnson]

That's why I appreciate your show.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Come on.

[Joe Kernan]

I wanted to ask you something different, which is just a comment on what we heard yesterday. The Supreme Court, because a number of the justices, including conservative ones, Justice Gorsuch and others, raising questions to the Trump administration about the tariffs and specifically asked at one point whether there were any guardrails that would prevent Congress from, quote, just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign commerce, for that matter, declare war to the President, effectively asking whether the president has too much power and whether Congress is effectively abdicating its power. In this context, yes.

[Mike Johnson]

Look, I followed it as much as I could in a busy day yesterday. That was what I used to do. I was a constitutional law litigator. I had lots of those oral arguments. I would not read too much into the justice's questions. I mean, that's kind of part of the process is to be expected. You know, vigorous judicial review is what you expect. Expect at The Supreme Court. And so they ask probing questions, and it's almost never indicative of how they'll come out in the end. I'm cheering for the President that the executive will win on this. Now, I say that as a jealous guardian of the legislative branch of government. Article one, There's a reason we're listed first in the Constitution. This is supposed to be the place of greatest importance. We're the ones that are supposed to make the law and the policy. But we do give the executive traditionally a lot of leeway, a lot of discretion over international trade. And we had a serious problem in this country for decades, as you all know and you've discussed many times. We had a big trade disparity. The President stepped in. I think he's used that authority appropriately. He's obviously created a lot of leverage for our trade strategy internationally, and it's yielded great results. And so I'm watching that carefully because I'm the guardian of the Article 1 branch of government. But I think he. I think he's well within the lines. And I hope that a majority of the justices agree, because if they reverse all this, it would really be chaos in the markets and in the economy. It would be a real problem for the country.

[Joe Kernan]

And that's a point that Justice Amy Coney Barrett actually asked about yesterday during the case, about what kind of, quote, mess this could create. But let me ask you a question that she also asked of the Trump administration. She said this is about, effectively, the law they're using to do this currently that was put in place in 1977 by Congress. You're asking us to read, quote, regulate importation, which is the phrase in that law, as a blank check. If that's what Congress meant, why didn't it say so? What do you think?

[Mike Johnson]

Well, I think Amy's a brilliant jurist, and I've known her since high school back in Louisiana, and I'm not surprised she asked good questions. I think the response there was appropriate. I didn't hear all the oral argument, but I know what the analysis and the rationale of the White House is, and they believe they're using the appropriate authority under the law. I do as well. And I would tell you, I mean, Andrew, if I thought that the Executive was overstepping its bounds, I would have. I would have spoken up. Now, I do it in my way. I would do it behind the scenes with the President. We work that out privately, not in a public dispute. But I really do think they're within the bounds, and I'd love to talk to my old friend, friend Amy, about that and try to sell her on my view. I wish I could have argued that case. I would have enjoyed that one.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Mr. Speaker, this has got me thinking all kinds of different things and a lot of the scenarios are quite horrific. And I'm talking about the filibuster and the senators are pushing back on what the President wants to do there. But then I think about it and he is right about one thing. If the Democrats have a majority without Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema, they will get rid of the filibuster. And that would open up the floodgates for God knows what. Gun control with 51 votes for gun control, for climate change, for whatever. So it seems like an absolutely has nothing to do with tariffs right now, but it seems like an absolutely horrific outcome. If, if it were to happen, is it going to survive? It seems like its days are numbered. It's been around since 1917. Do you think it should survive or because the President's pushing for Republicans to end it?

[Mike Johnson]

Well, I'm delighted that of all the things I have to say my prayers about in the morning, it ain't the filibuster, because that's a Senate thing, not a House thing. But I'll tell you what our Senate Republican colleagues say, some of the most conservatives, some of the most thoughtful people, is that they jealously guard that as a speed bump. Right. Because you're right. If the Democrats were ever able to govern with unified government, White House, Senate and House, without the filibuster, you would get. The Supreme Court would be packed with 13 or 15 justices. They'd make, you know, Puerto Rico, D.C. states. You're right, Second Amendment would be infringed immediately. You'd have all sorts of chaos. They'd nationalize the elections. You know, abortion on demand, just go down the list. So the filibuster has been a very important safeguard, a bulwark against the Democrats worst impulses. The big question is, and you're right, the President's convinced the Democrats would do it next time if they ever had the opportunity. Opportunity. I'm a little more skeptical about that. I mean, this is my view. It doesn't matter. I don't get a vote on this. But when Manchin and Sinema held them back last time, I believe, I'm told, and I believe it's true, that there was a group of moderate Democrats who voted yes and prayed no. In other words, they let Cinema and Manchin take the arrows and be the sacrificial lambs because they wanted to look tough to the base, but they certainly prayed that it would not be the case because they're afraid what we would do without any speed bumps, you know, So, I mean, it's been an important part of the institution. That's what the Senate, I mean, the Republicans and the Democrat senators have argued in the past. And you know, the founders, when they set up the Constitution, remember they wanted the Senate to be the cooling saucer. That's how it was described. Right. The House would be hot and emotional and everything would fly over there and then it would rest and they would have deliberate debate, very thoughtful conversation. More time would go by and that would prevent our worst impulses. I'll just say this last thought. If the filibuster is gone and maybe its time has come, I mean, they have to decide that. But if it's gone, you're going to have massive whiplash after every election, every presidential election. Any time a new team comes in, I mean, it would be a lot of instability. And I don't think that's great for the markets or the economy or anything else.

[Joe Kernan]

Mr. Speaker, before we let you go, there's a story we've been talking about all morning. Wanted to get your thoughts on it. Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang was quoted in the Financial Times as morning saying that China will win the air race. He was effectively making the argument that some of Nvidia's most advanced chips, thankfully, should be sold in China, otherwise they're going to run away with it, given some of the things they're already doing. He since softened some of those comments online. But how do you, how do you think about whether, whether in video and some of the American companies making the most advanced chips should be exporting those chips to, to China?

[Mike Johnson]

Well, we think about this race with China every day, constantly. They're trying to become a peer to peer adversary to us. And they have been on that, that journey for a while now. We're still the world's great superpower for a lot of reasons, but we cannot lose the race. And it's very serious. I mean, it has massive implications, most importantly for national security. And so I hope he's wrong in that analysis. I mean, I know he's got a business angle and I respect his work and what he's doing. And I want them to be successful. Successful, obviously. But I think China is an adversary and not an ally. And I think they're playing a long game and we have to take that very seriously. We have to keep our edge in AI the last time I checked with my tech gurus and the Silicon Valley leaders out there, they think we're, we're still months ahead, maybe many months ahead of China on the advancement. But that can change, right? So we've got to do what is necessary to keep our edge because a lot is riding on that speaker Johnson wow.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We're exactly 825. I'm really, we got to hit the hard brake like you can't believe for you. And we're going to do it. We're going to make it before then. Thank you so much. Great to have you on.

[Joe Kernan]

Still to come on Squawk Pod.

It'll scare you. It'll scare the bejesus out of you.

The Netflix film A House of Dynamite offers a fictional take on a nuclear attack grounded in real life. Filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow joins us next.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

It started as a kind of what if question. What would happen if there was a nuclear ICBM headed toward North America? What happens in the halls of power? You know, what's the chain of command like? What's the protocol?

[David Schwartz]

Think of your commute, your train, your car, maybe your walk. Even if you don't realize it, crypto and blockchain innovations are all around you on your way into the office. So why not learn about them on the way? From institutional custody solutions to 247 cross border payments with nearly real time settlements, crypto and blockchain are shaping flexibility and innovation for institutions all over the globe and your city. Join Ripple and host David Schwartz for crypto and blockchain conversations on blockstars, the podcast. It's happening with Ripple at Capella University.

[Capella University Announcer]

Learning the right skills could make a difference. That's why our business programs teach you relevant skills you can take from the courseroom to the workplace. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more at capella. Edu.

[Joe Kernan]

You're listening to Squawk Pod from cnbc.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

These are the circumstances. In little more than seven minutes, we will lose the city of Chicago. I can't tell you why. Up and Andrew Q.

[Joe Kernan]

Welcome back. Squawk Box. We've been talking about this show on Netflix for quite some time. The past couple weeks, Joe and I. House of Dynamite paints a picture of what could happen if the US Faces a rogue nuclear missile. Joining us, the movie's director. This is big time. Kathryn Bigelow is with us and writer Noah Oppenheim. Good morning to both of you. You, it's nice to see you. Congratulations on the film. I've now watched it twice and it's. No, it keeps you on the edge of your seat. We've been. We've been talking about the show, the film, I should say, a whole bunch past couple weeks because it'll scare you. I'm going to scare the bejesus out of you.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And all of her stuff. And Hurt Locker, Jeremy Renner's back with another Zero Dark Thirty.

[Joe Kernan]

All of it.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Right.

[Joe Kernan]

So. But I wanted to just go back in time before we even get into the. Into it itself. How did you decide you were doing this? Where did the original idea come from? And what were you trying to say about where we are in our society and in the world at this point?

[Kathryn Bigelow]

Well, actually, it started as a kind of what if question. What would happen if there was a nuclear ICBM headed toward North America? What happens in the halls of power? What happens, you know, what's the chain of command like? What's the protocol? And so I was lucky enough to be able to have a conversation with this gentleman here, Noah Oppenheim, and he spun out this incredible scenario. And I said, wait, hold it. Let's write a script about that and let's make it. And that was very. It was very fast. From that conversation to finished script was very fast.

[Joe Kernan]

Noah did it. How much did you know before you started researching this? And how were you surprised? Were you more scared at the end?

[Katie Kramer]

I was definitely more scared. I knew some. But, you know, one of the many things that make Catherine such an extraordinary filmmaker is her commitment to realism and authenticity and an almost journalistic approach to filmmaking. So from that initial conversation, we began building the story like you might actually report out a story for a newspaper or for a news outlet. And we just called the folks who had actually worked in these rooms, people who had served at the highest levels of the Pentagon, the White House, and said to them, hey, if this ever were to happen, how does it work? What do you do? What are the steps that get followed? And at the end of every conversation, we'd say, who else should we talk to? And so we kind of built it from the ground up. And yes, we were both terrified, increasingly, as we had those conversations, terrified by how short a period of time decision makers would have. Terrified by the fact that the President has the sole authority to make the call and has probably never rehearsed for it before. So, yeah, it definitely kept. Kept us up at night, I think.

[Joe Kernan]

How much debate was there among folks you talked to in the. In the sort of defense complex? I know that there's some folks at the Pentagon who have Tried to suggest since the film came out that, you know, we'd be able to, you know, that the film would end much earlier than it does, if you will, because there wouldn't be the prospect that these nuclear, you know, missiles would be coming towards us and we'd be able to actually hit it. How much of a debate was there? As you were. As you were writing the script on that point?

[Katie Kramer]

There was very little debate. I mean, you know, the statistics are actually in the public domain in terms of the Pentagon's testing of our missile defense system. And the statistic in the movie, which is 61%, is fairly accurate in terms of the testing record. Over the last 25 years, they've gotten better. It's possible you could knock a missile out of the sky. It's just very hard. And the odds aren't terrific, but they're. They're working to improve it. And I think the debate we wanted to open was, you know, do we need to build better missile defense or do we need to reduce the number of weapons in the world? What's the best way to get us safer?

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Is that the moral of the story? Golden Dome, like the. Like an upgraded Iron Dome that Israel has? Is that what the moral of the story is?

[Mike Johnson]

I don't know.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

I think. I think we reduce the nuclear stockpile. That's the moral of the story.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Well, you only need one, though. I think there's thousands.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

I know, I know.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

I mean, I don't. It only needs one. Out of how many does Russia have? Russia has thousands. We have thousands.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

Yeah.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We're not going to zero. Yeah. We're not going to zero.

[Katie Kramer]

Well, there are a lot of levers you can pull, right? I mean, the last remaining arms control treaty we have with Russia, New start. Is set to expire at the end of the year. You know, that negotiation or renegotiation is starting. So, you know, reductionreducing the stockpile is one lever. You know, gold. You know, Iron Dome is a much easier problem. Those missiles are moving lower, slower, and Israel is a smaller area to defend. But, you know, it's worth discussing. And that's why I think it used.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

To be SALT talks actually meant something instead of state and local taxes. They stole that. They stole that.

[Katie Kramer]

They did.

[Joe Kernan]

So, Katherine, you know, there's a movie theater in the White House. I think you can also watch films on Air Force One. If the president were to watch this film, what would you want him to take away from it?

[Kathryn Bigelow]

Oh, well, again, reduction to denuclearize the world. But at the Very least a conversation about it. Do we still need to. Do we need to be living in a house of dynamite? That's what the phrase refers to toward the end of the movie, where we've built this world that is ready to blow at any second. So it's a very combustible environment. And the question. The movie ends really with a question. Do you want to live in this world with that degree of combustibility? I mean, I know how I feel.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Well, I know, but we wouldn't unilaterally.

[Joe Kernan]

This arm. Right.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And it looks like we're ramping up. It looks like we're ramping things up. We're not ramping things down. That's the discussion. Now, if we start testing. Putin just yesterday said, if you're going to start doing it, we're going to start doing it. But it's always been about that anachronistic idea of mad mutually assured destruction. And we couldn't do it unilaterally. Right.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

You'd have. I know, but you. Exactly, but, you know, obviously, you'd have to. You'd have to.

[Katie Kramer]

We have done it before, though, Joe. I mean, the thing to keep in mind is however many thousands of weapons we have now, we had a lot more during the Cold War, and we've seen the global powers get together and reduce those number of weapons. We've seen countries give up their arsenal. I mean, South Africa, apartheid. South Africa gave up their nuclear arsenal. So it's not an impossible dream to try to, you know, reverse the trend here.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

But in this case, it's not even Russia or China, from what I can tell. I haven't seen it yet. But if it's a. You don't know, you know, once again, you only need one. It doesn't even have to be.

[Joe Kernan]

So I have a creative question for. For Catherine Noah. Without trying to give away the ending. But I'm not going to give away the ending, I promise.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Does the world live?

[Joe Kernan]

Well, there's a question about that, and I want to know sort of how you were thinking about the ending of this film. If you can somehow describe how you thought about it without giving away the ending. I know this is like a needle to thread. That's very hard.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

It's a little bit difficult. But I think the way to talk about it is really that the movie ends with a question. And, you know, questions are kind of messy and ambiguous, but it's really up to the audience to answer it. So I give it to you, Andrew, to tell me how it ends.

[Joe Kernan]

Well, I will tell you this, it forces you to think a lot and to feel something, which is one of the great signs of a great film.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

It ended with Rosebud. That makes.

[Joe Kernan]

No, no, no, no, no.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

It did not end with Catherine.

[Joe Kernan]

Noah, we want to thank you. It is a great film.

[Kathryn Bigelow]

Thank you.

[Joe Kernan]

I encourage you to watch it. It does make you think a lot, Joe. And you're always looking for something good to watch on Netflix. This is. This is. This is it.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Looking for something good to watch. Not something that, you know. I never sleep again. No, I'm going to. I love Hurt Locker, Jeremy. I loved it. And Zero Dark. Zero Dark Thirty.

[Joe Kernan]

Yeah.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

Love them both.

[Mike Johnson]

It's riveting.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

And this is the same, I guess.

[Joe Kernan]

Yes, it is.

That's Squawk Pod for today. Thanks for listening. Squawk Box is hosted by Joe Kernan, Becky Quick and Andrew Ross Sorkin. Tune in weekday mornings on CNBC at 6 Eastern for all the news, economic and political headlines you can't miss.

I'm gonna quote one of your comrades.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We don't have comrades on my side of things.

[Joe Kernan]

Or follow Squawk Pod for the best of our show in an easy to listen to podcast. Take it with you on the go. We're on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, wherever you like to listen. That's it. We'll meet you right back here tomorrow.

[Andrew Ross Sorkin]

We are clear.

[Joe Kernan]

Thanks, guys.

[David Schwartz]

Think of your commute, your train, your car, maybe your walk. Even if you don't realize it, crypto and blockchain innovations are all around you on your way into the office. So why not learn about them on the way? From institutional custody solutions to 247 cross border payments with nearly real time settlements, crypto and blockchain are shaping flexibility and innovation for institutions all over the globe and your city. Join Ripple and host David Schwartz for crypto and blockchain conversations on Blockstars. The podcast it's happening with Ripple.