← The David Pakman Show
The David Pakman Show
5/2/25: They’re telling us recessions are good now
01:00:57
-- On the Show: -- A desperate Donald Trump proposes more crimes -- Trump tool Peter Navarro now tries to convince Americans that a shrinking economy is actually a good thing -- An agitated Fox News host Bill Hemmer is forced to admit that...
Loading summary
Transcript111 lines
- [00:08]
David Pakman
We start today with more crimes being proposed by the White House at this completely unhinged cabinet meeting that took place this week from which we're still trying to recover. And it's hard to even go over all of the concerning and disturbing aspects of it. The president point pointed to using the Insurrection act to send troops to the border. Now, as some of you I know are aware, because we've talked about it before, it is not kosher, for lack of a better term, to use the military for domestic law enforcement. There are exceptions to that, limited exceptions. And Trump has come to believe that. Just saying we've got to use the Insurrection act of people coming over the border is an insurrection, and therefore I'm legally justified in sending military to the border would be legally. Okay, legal experts certainly don't agree with that, but listen to this.
- [01:02]
Donald Trump
But we have a country that's under siege. We have a country that really is under. I think it's under attack. In many ways worse than under attack because there are no uniforms. You don't know who the attacker is. So you really don't. It's not like you're fighting an army. You're fighting people, you don't even know who they are. But 11,008, 188 murderers, many of them murdered, far more than one person are roaming now. Some of them have already been caught. A lot of them have already been caught, taken out. But we're being impeded by judges from doing our job. And hopefully that situation is going to be solved because I think nobody wants to have murderers and people from jail and I mean for serious, serious crime.
- [01:46]
David Pakman
So there's the idea. Use the military for domestic law enforcement. An extraordinarily authoritarian move, a wildly legally dubious thing to do. But we've sort of come to expect it from this administration. Now, in another terrifying moment, Trump casually says, as a result of the China tariffs, you know, a lot of the stuff we don't need and we'll have some open shelves. Someone said, but you know what, maybe you'll have two options for dolls instead of 30.
- [02:19]
Donald Trump
And I told you before, they're having tremendous difficulty because their factories are not doing business. They made a trillion dollars with Biden. A trillion dollars, even a trillion one with Biden selling us stuff. Much of it we don't need. You know, somebody said all the shelves are going to be open. Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of $30. You know, and maybe the $2 will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.
- [02:46]
David Pakman
But now, unfortunately, there Trump says, well, you know, maybe kids will only have two dolls to choose from rather than 30, and maybe they'll cost a couple of dollars more. And this shows such a fundamental lack of understanding of the percentages and ratios and proportions that are implicit here. If you really are talking about $2 instead of 30 with level demand, it's not going to be a couple of bucks more because all of a sudden all of the demand for dolls is going to be distributed over a fraction of the availability. Two dolls instead of 30, that's less than 10% of the dolls that were previously available. So I'm with you in the sense that a lot of this cheap Chinese crap, I'm sort of a minimalist at heart. I try not to buy anything. I don't genuinely need even stuff for the show where it's like, well, I don't know exactly. I don't know exactly which, you know, cable I need. Let me get like three or four different cables and just like, what if. No, no. I really try to be thoughtful and not have any extra stuff. But to the extent that this is going to be affordable for the American people, if we have $2 instead of 30, we're talking about hundreds of a percent increase in price, not a couple of dollars more. Now, at another moment during this thing, Howard Lutnick said that people are asking him about buying 10 of these gold cards, which will get you citizenship in the United States.
- [04:14]
Donald Trump
So much as I travel around, the attention on the Trump gold card, I mean, it makes me very popular.
- [04:19]
David Pakman
Last night I was out to dinner.
- [04:21]
Donald Trump
And someone came up and said, said, can I buy 10 and how do I buy 10?
- [04:26]
Anna Kelly
And I'm like, it's pretty good.
- [04:27]
David Pakman
It's $50 million for dinner. So, you know, it's paying for my dinner. Money is just flowing in, if you believe Howard Lutnick from people who are desperate to buy their way into the United States. What a scam. What a complete and total scam. And then finally, chillingly, Trump justifying ignoring judges when they are radical left, horrible judges. Whether a court order needs to be listened to, I guess, depends on whether Trump assesses the politics of the judge favorably.
- [05:02]
Donald Trump
These are radical left, generally radical left, horrible judges. And we didn't lose all of these people. You know, we've lost a lot of people to death and to rape. All sorts of crimes committed by the people that poured into our country. And they came in totally unimpeded. Just come on in and you see it every night. You'd see thousands and tens of thousands of people pouring into our country. We have no idea who they are. And to this day, we're looking for people. We have no idea. We hear that we have terrorists in our country, country that are so bad they couldn't stay in any other country. But we're getting them out. And the group between Pete and Christie and Tom Holman and everybody working together, people that you would least suspect are reporting of getting it, and the public is.
- [05:57]
David Pakman
We are all working together, regardless of what courts or judges say to do what we've determined a priori is the right thing to do. If that's not terrifying authoritarianism, I don't know what is. We have reached the shrinkage is actually good phase of the Trump economy with Peter Navarro. Peter Navarro is Donald Trump's former trade adviser and he's sort of like an economic Mad Libs generator. He went on CNBC to address the shrinkage of the gdp and he is telling us this is actually a good thing. Let, let me explain it to you. You might be saying, wait, I thought economic growth was good. No, no, no. Economic shrinkage is good.
- [06:41]
Donald Trump
I got to say just one thing about today's news.
- [06:44]
David Pakman
That's the best negative print I have ever seen in my life.
- [06:51]
Donald Trump
And the markets need to, like, look.
- [06:53]
David Pakman
Beneath the surface of that.
- [06:54]
Donald Trump
We had a 22% increase in domestic.
- [06:58]
David Pakman
Investment that is off the charts.
- [07:01]
Donald Trump
When you strip out inventories and the negative effects of the surge in imports.
- [07:06]
David Pakman
Because of the tariffs, you have 3% growth. Did you guys catch what he just did? He, he's been telling us the tariffs are phenomenal for months. And now he goes, if we remove the negative effects of the tariffs, which I have never previously acknowledged is a thing, if you remove all of the bad things that the tariffs are doing, then we actually had growth. As if that's supposed to be reassuring. This is like an Orwellian up is down, down is up, black is white sort of thing. Shrinkage is growth. If you remove all the calories. Calories, the cheeseburger is a very low calorie thing. And it's not just Peter Navarro, because over at the White House, they've been running the same play. Here's White House Deputy Secretary Anna Kelly who says, you know, Biden had a lot of, a lot of a role there. He was president 20 days after all the matters of the economy. It was reported this morning there was a slight shrinking in the gdp. What's the response of the White House to that?
- [08:08]
Anna Kelly
Well, look, if you break it down, there is an outsized influence of January in that report, remember this president wasn't elected until January 20th. The GDP is a backward looking indicator. But all the other indicators we do have from that report and others show that there is a really positive trend for this president's new golden age that he is unleashing. Investment is up 22%. That is a testament to all of these conversations he's having with 130 countries all around the world trying to make better trade deals with this president because companies know the way that you'll face no tariffs. 100% is by manufacturing here in America. So we are seeing those investments roll in. We are seeing price private sector job growth increase, we are seeing retail shopping increase. All the signs trend that the new golden age is underway to thanks to this president's economic leadership.
- [08:53]
David Pakman
That's a big fast word salad. But what she wants us to believe is that the reason the GDP dropped for Q1 has nothing to do with Trump's tariffs. It's because for the first 20 days of January, which included, by the way, I think two federal holidays on which there were not even, there was not even stock trading on those days, not the massive tariff tariffs Trump imposed after that. It is those first 20 days that are responsible for Q1 GDP being down. It's not the market anxiety, it's not the pullback in investment that businesses tell us they're making. It's those 20 days before Trump took office that ruined everything. Except Peter Navarro said it is the tariffs that caused the GDP to slip, but it's a good thing. So you have conflicting explanations here. Peter Navarro says, yes, GDP is down, but it's a good thing because it's a result of the tariffs. And if you take out the tariffs, we actually had 3% growth. The white House deputy press secretary gives a completely different explanation, which is the tariffs actually have nothing to do with it. It's that Biden was president for those first 20 days. Is this making sense to you yet? So here is what we know is going on. GDP contracted in Q1, that we know, number two, the tariffs are hurting the economy. And then number three, that Team Trump is doing Olympic level gymnastics to spin it as a win. Trump is saying it's Biden's fault. Peter Navarro saying if you remove the tariffs, we actually had growth. Anna Kelly is saying it's actually the 20 days of Biden. The bigger problem is that they're counting on the fact that a big chunk of the public either won't notice or will believe it anyway because it's coming from somebody in a Suit saying it on television. It's called gaslighting economics. It's not trickle down, it's not Austrian economics. It's not Chicago school economics. It's gaslighting economics. When the numbers don't match the narrative, you rewrite the numbers, you blame the calendar, and you say, we like where we're at. Everything is really good. And so where they landed at is gdp. Contraction is good. Recession is growth. Ignorance is strength. We've heard it before. And it's not just in the book 1984. You can almost hear the pain in their voices. Fox News is being dragged kicking and screaming into reality. The Trump economy is shrinking. Here is Bill Hemmer. You can hear the lack of comfort in his voice delivering the numbers on air. And, you know, it's really funny. He almost gets it. He almost figures it out.
- [11:27]
Anna Kelly
All right, so obviously this is just moments after we learned that this GDP number came out. It did show a drop in growth, a contraction in the economy. First that we have seen in years, in fact. And it's a sharp reversal from the 2.4% growth we saw in the fourth quarter. So obviously this is a White House that is stepping out to, you know, defend its policies on the economy. In a moment where we're waiting to see if the first deal comes through on tariffs.
- [11:52]
Donald Trump
Yeah, we were looking at this.
- [11:53]
David Pakman
Quarter four was 2.4% growth.
- [11:56]
Anna Kelly
Quarter three is 3.1, quarter two is 3.0.
- [11:59]
David Pakman
And now we're at negative point three percent. He almost puts it together. You can, like hear the rust grinding off of the gears. It's Almost like in 2021, we had growth. In 2022 we had growth. In 2023 we had growth. You see where this is going. In 2024, we had growth, and then 2025, suddenly the economy contracts. What changed in 2025? I'm just trying to think, what could it be that explains the change? And then there's Maria Bartiromo, who broke the news to her audience like she was announcing a national tragedy. The tone is a lot less economic update and more like the President has been shot. Sort of feel, feel. And here's what she had to say. Welcome back.
- [12:45]
Anna Kelly
We have breaking news right now. We're getting the GDP in for the first quarter and it is a contraction, negative 3. 10 of a percent. This is the first contraction since the first quarter of 2022. Markets this morning have reversed. The Dow Industrials right now down 115 points on this contraction of the GDP. First quarter GDP, first read. We've got More coming up, up in terms of advances. But the first read on the first quarter GDP is in fact a contraction down 3.10 of a percent versus an estimate of up 3.10 of a percent. First contraction since first quarter, 2022. Markets reversing down at the lows of the day, down 120, 139 right now on the Dow Industrials.
- [13:31]
David Pakman
You know, for years, Fox has been spoon feeding viewers the myth that Trump is an economic genius. But now with the GDP falling for the first time in years, they're kind of stuck. Do they admit that Trump's policies are hurting growth? Do they invent a story where the numbers are fake and they can't be trusted? Or do they say the numbers are real, but they are Biden's fault and they're sort of trying to do all of the above? The bottom line is this is not a blip. This isn't a weather event. We have Trump imposing sweeping tariffs, rattled markets, investment slowing. Everything is happening exactly the way economists warn. This is not some surprising thing nobody could have predicted. Fox can't spin it away. The numbers are public and even their hosts are admitting through like gritted teeth the growth is gone and the contraction is here. So it's not a win, it's a warning. And if Trump keeps going down this road, we're going to see more of this. Shocked Fox anchors whispering bad news to a base that was promised endless winning, even though every serious economist said, oh, right, yeah, you impose blanket tariffs, economic activity will reduce, it'll be bad for the economy. It's happening. And now they go, oh, well, I don't know how to explain this. And there's one guy who is sick of it, and his name is Dave Portnoy. Okay, something very interesting happened. Dave Portnoy of Barstool Sports, longtime Trump cheerleader, self proclaimed stock market guy. He has turned on Trump over the state of the economy. And he did it in plain language that Trump is definitely going to understand. He. He posted, including a screenshot of Trump's troth blaming Biden. He said, this is Portnoy. Now, what's that old expression? Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining? Well, that applies here. The stock market is a direct reflection of Trump's first hundred days in office. Doesn't mean it won't get better and that we don't need to be patient. But this is his market, not Biden's. And he includes here the screenshot of Trump's truth social meltdown, where he desperately tries to Blame the market dip on Biden. Even though Biden hasn't been president for a while now, Portnoy is not having it. Now. He is to a degree saying, stop insulting our intelligence. This is your economy. Now, of course, the reason he's worried about this is he, he said it publicly. He said, listen, I voted for Trump, but I can't log in and see my stock portfolio dropping 2 to 3% every day. That's not going to work for me. And so there's a couple of reasons that this matters. Number one, it's who it's coming from. This is not a liberal, he's not a never Trump Republican. This is the kind of wealthy, high visibility influencer who normalized Trump with the younger, apolitical male voter. And for him to say, this is on Trump, not on Biden, it does sort of break that loyalty script that's been written. Number two, this exposes the cracks in Trump's economic gaslighting campaign. Because Trump's strategy has mostly been roll out damaging tariffs, watch the markets flinch, blame Biden for the fallout. It's been 100 days. Investors aren't stupid. Many of them aren't. And even Trump's own fans are realizing this is not someone else's mess. This is very obviously Donald Trump's mess. Number three, the broader danger here for Trump is narrative control. If Portnoy starts saying out loud what a lot of people are thinking and seeing in the numbers, growth has stalled, markets are uneasy, the boom is certainly not happening. Trump loses the illusion of economic strength, which has always been a big part of his brand. So it's Dave Portnoy, who cares about barstool sports, whatever. This is not just a disgruntled tweet. This is a signal that Trump's cultural allies are realizing what's going on and they're willing to say it out loud. If the economy tanks, it's not going to be Biden's fault, it's going to be Trump's. And, and when someone has an audience that overlaps with Trump's base and they start calling out the BS this early in the game, 100 days in, it's not good for the President. Dave Portnoy is not some savior, he's not some progressive. He's worried about his own money. And I understand that when I log in and see my portfolio, it's concerning. Right? But he is willing to say something many other Trump supporters are not. We will have more coverage of this on our bonus show today, so make sure that you sign up@join pacman.com Become a member, support the show. We are primarily funded by folks like you and there is a whole rest of the show coming today. First your mom wants you to call her and this Mother's Day give her a call. But you can also consider giving her an Aura digital picture frame. Aura Frames was named the best digital photo frame by Wirecutter. I've gifted these to so many folks, including my mom. No matter where I am, if we're traveling, if my daughter does something absolutely brilliant on the playground, which happens all the time, I can take a picture or a video and upload it directly into my mom's aura frame or whoever's. I can also share access. I shared it with my brother so he can upload pictures directly as well. Aura has a great deal for Mother's Day. My audience can save for a limited time on the perfect gift by going to aura frames.com and getting $35 off plus free shipping on their best selling Carver Mat frame. Go to Aura frames.com use the code PACMAN. That's a U R A frames.com use code PACMAN to get $35 off their bestselling Carver Mat Frames frame. The David Pakman show is an independent media program. This means that on the one hand I don't have seven editors and a media conglomerate telling me what to do. On the other hand, this means that you, the audience, are our primary source of funding. And that happens primarily through membership, which you can read about@join pacman.com we do an extra show every day for our members. Alex Jones hates oh, the bonus show.
- [19:35]
Anna Kelly
Where you want to make money.
- [19:36]
Donald Trump
Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad.
- [19:38]
David Pakman
And of course he thinks it's predatory.
- [19:40]
Donald Trump
That is a fricking predator right there.
- [19:42]
David Pakman
He was talking about me in that clip. Believe it. In any case, if you disagree with Alex about the nature of the bonus show, check out membership@join pacman.com and consider becoming a member. The White House experienced total cult moment this week. Now you might say, well yeah, David, which one are you talking about? That's right. I am talking about one of the most unhinged moments yet from Donald Trump's second term. In a straight faced response to a reporter asking Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary, listen, Americans are out there, they're struggling. They're trying to navigate the messaging from the White House on the economy, but the GDP is down and stocks are all. It's, it's a mess. What, what's the message? And the message is without Irony. Trust in Trump. No plan, no policy, just faith. Like he's some kind of divine figure. Listen to this.
- [20:44]
Anna Kelly
We talk a lot about volatility and uncertainty in the marketplace and the President.
- [20:48]
David Pakman
Stated all along that he's more concerned about mainstream America.
- [20:52]
Anna Kelly
The American worker.
- [20:53]
David Pakman
You just talked about deregulation and this entire fair trade and reciprocals.
- [20:59]
Anna Kelly
What is your message to the American.
- [21:01]
David Pakman
People in terms of letting them get through this disturbance and the outcome being greater and a greater good for the.
- [21:09]
Anna Kelly
American worker, the American people, the American families? I would say trust in President Trump.
- [21:16]
David Pakman
There is a trust in President Trump. We are in cult territory here and we've been in it for a while. The message from the White House is not here's how we're fixing it. The message from the White House is not here is the timeline through which the policies implemented so far are going to come back and create great prosperity. It is trust Trump. That's the pitch. And it didn't stop there because during the same press briefing, this was another wacky exchange. A reporter pointed out this was before Trump called Bezos to strong arm him and get him to stop doing it. A reporter pointed out Amazon is going to start showing consumers how much Trump's tariffs are adding to prices. They're going to put a number next to the price tag saying of the 20 bucks, $4 is because of the tariffs. Seems like basic transparency. No, no, no. Caroline Levitt says it's a hostile tariff and political act by Amazon. So it was reported this morning that Amazon will soon display a little number next to the price of each product. That shows how much the Trump tariffs are adding to the cost of each product. So isn't that a perfect, crystal clear demonstration that it's the American consumer and not China who is going to have to pay for these policies.
- [22:36]
Anna Kelly
I will take, take this. Since I just got off the phone with the President about Amazon's announcement. This is a hostile and political act by Amazon. Why didn't Amazon do this when the Biden administration hiked inflation to the highest level in 40 years? And I would also add that it's not a surprise because as Reuters recently wrote, Amazon has partnered with a Chinese propaganda arm. So this is another reason, reason why Americans should buy American. It's another reason why we are on shoring critical supply chains here at home to shore up our own critical supply chain and boost our own manufacturing.
- [23:15]
David Pakman
Is Jeff Bezos still a Trump supporter?
- [23:17]
Anna Kelly
Look, I will not speak to the President's relationships with Jeff Bezos, but I will tell you that this is certainly a hostile and political action.
- [23:26]
David Pakman
A hostile and political action. Pricing transparency is now considered a political attack. Informing Americans about what they're paying because of Donald Trump's tariff policies is being framed as an act of sabotage. You really can't make this stuff up, but think about what it is they want from you. They don't want you to question rising costs and say, why is it happening? Give me information. No, no, no. You just need to trust Trump. And if a company has the testicular or ovarian fortitude to show you what Trump is doing to your wallet, saying, look, this is a product that would be $4 cheaper if it weren't for the tariffs, it's considered hostile. Transparency is considered hostile. This isn't governance. This is propaganda with a press badge. And now we have to see how it's filtering to other areas of the media and of government. And it's as dystopian and authoritarian as you might imagine. Let's go now to Fox and Friends. Ainsley Earhart, the girlfriend of Sean Hannity. Ainsley Earhart delivered what might be the most embarrassing segment of state media we've seen yet. Of course, it's not actually state media, it's Fox News, but it might as well be on live television praising Donald Trump like a flawless renaissance man. Here is Ainsley taken aback by just how gifted Donald Trump is. He's so good at everything. He's so good.
- [25:05]
Anna Kelly
I watched the press conference yesterday when the Phillies, when the Eagles were at the White House, and he is so good at communicating. It's, it's such a gift because if we had to do that, I don't know enough about football, I would be a nervous wreck. But he knows about every sport. He knows about trade, he knows about the border. He's so equipped for this job. And I think he's having more fun. Even said that in an interview with the Atlantic.
- [25:26]
David Pakman
He's having, he's funny and he's having fun.
- [25:29]
Anna Kelly
More fun this go round. But he talked to the, the coach, he brought the security guy up who loves Donald Trump and talk. He talked to the owner, he talked to all the players. He talked about the plays and how they beat the Chiefs this time. It was just, I, I watched that press conference and I thought, he is gifted.
- [25:47]
Donald Trump
Well, and to the.
- [25:49]
David Pakman
Let's poll the audience.
- [25:50]
Anna Kelly
In fact, we're going to go out in the. I watched.
- [25:51]
David Pakman
Yeah, the audience agrees Trump's gifted. This, this is how far gone they are. I mean, it's not just that he's competent and Smart. And all of. He is gifted. The guy who thinks stealth planes are literally invisible, not just invisible to radar, and that tariffs are paid by other countries. He's a master of sports, he's a master of economics, he's a master of immigration policy. Who knew? This is not journalism. This is a cult testimonial with hair and makeup. That's what we have here. And good lighting. Okay? And the saddest part is that you can almost hear the desperation underneath this. Imagine knowing your job requires you to praise without blinking an orange man who can't name a single foreign leader without fumbling and thinks windmills cause cancer and confuses tariffs with taxes and political asylum with insane asylums. But everybody's just got to keep smiling and nodding. I mean, listen, Doocy is looking a little uncomfortable with it. Kill Mead looks like he just had bad clams casino and it's starting to ferment. But they smile and they nod because he got to put food on the table. Right? So this is not analysis. This is fan fiction with a studio budget at the end of the day. And it is something that should horrify and terrify every single one of us. Okay, I want to give you. Now, this is the end of the nauseating part of the show. Unless you find my shirt nauseating, in which case, well, it's going to be a little bit longer, but I'm going to give you your daily dose of secondhand embarrassment. Tammy Bruce. Yes, the Tammy Bruce, formerly from Fox News now State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce. She went on TV and she delivered one of the most sycophantic performances of the Trump era. She doesn't just praise Trump. She doesn't say he's gifted the way Ainsley Earhart did earlier. She glazes him. This is a full on fawning over his supposed strength and genius and leadership. It's like she. Tammy, you got the job. You don't have to keep auditioning for it. No, no, no, you do with Trump. You do have to keep auditioning for it. I was expecting her to start crying tears of joy. Here, listen to this.
- [28:21]
Anna Kelly
I am standing here because of my faith in the President of the United States.
- [28:27]
David Pakman
Faith, right. This is the theme. Caroline Levitt says, you've got to just trust Trump. Don't question, just trust. Tammy Bruce says, I have faith in the President prior to him winning this.
- [28:38]
Anna Kelly
Particular election, knowing from his past what he's accomplished. We, of course, the American people, have felt the same way in returning him to this office after four years that were.
- [28:49]
David Pakman
Were not good for the people of.
- [28:51]
Anna Kelly
This country, economically or otherwise. There are an extraordinary number of accomplishments ranging from the closed border, inflation going down, people at tables to discuss peace and cease fires that never anyone had imagined or was able to accomplish pre Isley.
- [29:11]
David Pakman
What's especially humiliating about this is that this is not just a Fox News pundit, although she was that's the funny thing. It this is not a Fox News pundit anymore. This is a State Department official. This is someone who represents the United States abroad. And she's acting like she's doing PR for a celebrity cult leader, not the president of a democratic country, which she sort of is because that's what Trump has become. You know, it's one thing to support your boss, it's another to worship him in public like your job depends on it. But under Trump, her job does depend on it. That's the thing about it. So Caroline Levitt, Fox News, State Department. It's all fully gone cult. Where can we get real information? I hate to say it, but a lot of the places that the administration says are the fake news enemy of the people. That's kind of becoming a sign that that's who you might actually want to be listening to. You know, I'll often talk to my friends about what do we really think is private on our computers and on our phones. And many people believe that their emails are genuinely private. And it turns out that a lot of the email services are looking at your emails and can look at your emails even after you have deleted them. Which is why I recommend our sponsor Start Mail, a trusted name in secure email for more than a decade. Start Mail is based in the Netherlands. Netherlands is known for very strong data protection laws. Your emails won't be scanned, your emails won't be tracked. Start Mail will block those invasive tracking pixels so you won't be monitored by companies and by hackers. And when you delete an email in Start Mail, it is gone for good. Your data stays private. They are all in on this. With a ton of features including aliases to keep you anonymous, strong encryption with your emails, it is super easy to move. To Start Mail, it's a few clicks. Migrate your emails, migrate your contacts, you really can't go wrong. Try Start Mail for yourself completely free for seven days at start mail.com/pacman, which will also give you 50% off your first year. That's star t mail.com/pacman for a seven day free trial and 50% off your first year. The link is in the podcast notes. All right. As I'm sure many of you know there is this guy Charlie Kirk from Turning Point USA who goes around to college campuses and he debates mostly college kids. And he's built a huge following for being a great debater and just owning everybody and destroying liberals. And one of the things that I do think occasionally is useful to do is really to break down his arguments. And you will see that these debates are really referenda on who is better at debating. They're not really adjudications of the truth or reality. So I'm going to play one for you here and then we're going to talk about it. This is only a minute. The topic is sort of like affirmative action, DEI hiring type practices. And Charlie Kirk went viral with this video because he made such great points. But I'm going to apply just a little bit of critical thinking and you will see these are not really great points. Let's first look at the viral video, then we'll break it down.
- [32:49]
Anna Kelly
Right now, the NBA, 75% black.
- [32:51]
David Pakman
If all of a sudden the NBA.
- [32:53]
Anna Kelly
Said we want more diversity, it's too black.
- [32:55]
Donald Trump
Yeah.
- [32:55]
David Pakman
Right.
- [32:55]
Anna Kelly
Because we want to have more diversity.
- [32:57]
David Pakman
Right.
- [32:57]
Anna Kelly
And they would say we are not allowed to have any more than 30 of the NBA be black, would the quality of the NBA go down?
- [33:04]
Donald Trump
The quality of the NBA arguably right now? Yeah, I would.
- [33:08]
David Pakman
But.
- [33:09]
Anna Kelly
So half of the.
- [33:10]
David Pakman
I think you can see what I'm saying, right? Yeah. No. Half of the NFL is black.
- [33:13]
Donald Trump
Yeah.
- [33:13]
Anna Kelly
If all of a sudden, you know, Roger Goodell.
- [33:15]
David Pakman
Boo.
- [33:16]
Anna Kelly
We don't like Roger Goodell. If he came, he's like, hey, diversity is our strength.
- [33:19]
David Pakman
Right. We're only going to say 30% of the NFL is black. Black.
- [33:23]
Anna Kelly
That would. You would have other unqualified white people.
- [33:27]
David Pakman
That would then get positions in the.
- [33:29]
Anna Kelly
NFL and the quality of play would slip.
- [33:31]
David Pakman
Right.
- [33:31]
Anna Kelly
So you get the argument.
- [33:33]
Donald Trump
Yeah.
- [33:33]
Anna Kelly
You then extrapolate that to other walks of life.
- [33:35]
David Pakman
Right.
- [33:36]
Anna Kelly
You think to yourself, let's just hire the best.
- [33:37]
Donald Trump
Yeah.
- [33:38]
David Pakman
And the NFL does be the. It should be the best no matter what the thing is like.
- [33:42]
Donald Trump
But I don't think there should be restrictions to anybody. As long as you're good at what you do, it doesn't really matter.
- [33:47]
David Pakman
I. Okay, so the analogy here to hiring is to sports. Now, I know some of you have asked me, why is Charlie Kirk, like, eating and glitching and twitching and doing weird things the entire time? I have no idea. I don't. I have no clue. I noticed it. I'm not going to get into that. Let's Talk about the analogy to sports. Sports are a really narrow extreme case. Sports are not a model for all of society in any way. It's a terrible analogy. He talks about the NFL and the NBA. These are. These are complete and total outliers. They measure pure, specialized physical skills. How fast can you run the 40? How high can you jump? How agile? What's your level of endurance? In most jobs, that sort of easily measurable physical ability is not the metric. It's a terrible analogy because in most jobs, success is based on complex, varied skills. Leadership, communication, creativity, critical thinking. So when Charlie Kirk says, extrapolate my analogy from the NBA and NFL to everything, it's a terrible thing to extrapolate. You can't take a world where vertical leap and sprint speed dominate and apply it to hiring a doctor or an engineer or a teacher or a CEO. Sports leagues are the exception, not the rule. It's. And that's why Charlie Kirk is selecting it. The best is not some pure, obvious thing outside of the world of sports. The speaker acts like it's very easy to spot the best in regular jobs. It's not in sports. Stats like points, yards, tackles, these are completely quantitative. Hiring is completely subjective. And so that's why unconscious biases, whether they be about race or gender or increasingly about class, shape who we think is the best. And when you look historically, this is why we're even talking about this. You had entire groups, highly qualified women, highly qualified black people and others who were systematically excluded from opportunities not because they weren't the best, but because of bias. So this is not about seeking equality of outcome. It is about equality of opportunity. And so when we pretend that merit naturally rises without bias, just like in the NBA or the NFL, to complete in total fantasy, because hiring the best requires addressing the barriers that sometimes prevent the best from even being seen. You know, the concept of the fair competition that he talks about, it doesn't necessarily exist without some intervention. Charlie Kirk imagines a level playing field where everybody's already getting a fair shot. If that were true, that would be great, but it's not true. In the NBA, a poor black teenager can get noticed if he dunks over some seven footer at a high school game. In law, in technology, in business and academia, you might not even get into the room without elite schooling or networking opportunities or the right mentors. And that is shaped. Shaped by wealth. It's shaped to some degree, at least historically it was by race. And so talent might be universal, but access is not. Diversity initiatives don't lower the bar, they try to expand the pool and fix a pipeline that might be broken so that then, yes, ability can decide who actually wins rather than privilege. So if you want a real meritocracy, you have to fight the advantages that exist. You can't pretend that they aren't there. Nobody is proposing hard racial quotas like Charlie Kirk describes. Saying only 30% black players in the NBA is a ridiculous straw man, because in real life, diversity policies don't cap groups, they widen participation, and that's really the goal. The other thing is we don't need perfect representation. What I mean by that is the following. There's no doubt that even if unconscious bias plays a role, historical discrimination plays a role, etcetera, There can still be perfectly benign reasons why one group might be over or underrepresented in certain areas. So if you look at the population and you say, OK, 50.3% of the population is women, but as was the case, at a certain point, 0% of the Senate has ever been women. Right? There was a point at which there had been no female senator. A sensible person would look and look at that and go, okay, that, that doesn't make sense. There has to be something going on there that is a barrier, either ideologically or legally, or something that would explain why despite being 50.3% of the population, there has never been a woman senator. On the other hand, you might have 38 or 42% of the Senate be women. Hypothetically. We don't. But imagine that you did, and then you would say, well, 42% of the Senate is women and 50.3% of the population is women. We must fix this immediately. No, not necessarily. That. That. That may not be the case. You may actually have an explanation that is not this zero percent, very obvious fiasco in some areas. And that's ok. So. So it's a strawman to suggest that we need exact representation in every industry that mirrors population demographics. So Charlie Kirk, as usual, sounds very good, he's very well prepared, but it's bogus, it's nonsense, and a lot of college kids are falling for this stuff. We are seeing a growing trend that when Donald Trump is asked about things, he hasn't heard of it. And we've got a bunch more examples of that. Here is a reporter asking Trump, there was a car bomb in Moscow. It killed the Russian general. Any reaction? Trump's like, huh? Who killed what.
- [39:57]
Donald Trump
Killed the Russian general? Do you have any reaction to that? Russian general killed? Well, no, I'm just certain. You tell me that for the first time. Where did this take place? In hospital. Washington. That's really close to home, right? That's, that's a big one. I'll look at it. If I hear anything, I'll let you know.
- [40:21]
David Pakman
Yep. The. What, what, what happened? Trump then asked, any update on Pete Hegseth? You know, multiple signal chats where he's sharing information with people, people he shouldn't be sharing it with. Remember this major national security scandal? Trump's like, why? What would it mean? I don't have any updates yet.
- [40:42]
Donald Trump
I hear pretty good, Mr. President. Any update on Secretary Hicksev, your confidence in him about what? With Signal having signaled on his. I don't view signal as unimportant. Peter, what do you think? I don't view Signal as important. I think it's fake news kind of. Viewing is important.
- [41:00]
David Pakman
It's fake news. Guys, follow up on the, on the signal thing. Of course, I don't have any follow up on that. What do you. Why would I have follow up on that? Nothing's going on. This is the way the administration is being run. This is, this is every day in the White House. Trump asked, you taking Melania to dinner for her birthday. Did you get her a present? Trump's like, no, but people are understanding how great tariffs are.
- [41:24]
Donald Trump
What's on tab for Melania's birthday? Oh, she's going to have a great birthday. She's got, she's got a working birthday. She's up front. I should send her back. You want to have somebody answer question? I'll send, I'll send her back into the lion's pit. Susie, let's send Melania back to the lion's pit.
- [41:45]
Anna Kelly
Are you taking her to dinner, by the way?
- [41:47]
Donald Trump
They would love that one. Can we see your, your office up there? Sometimes we can now. Yeah, we'll let them come up a little bit later. Okay.
- [42:01]
David Pakman
All right. And then Trump shuffle, shuffling away. And then just. You can. I'm sure that Melania is completely fine playing second fiddle to tariffs. And then finally, Trump asked a very good question, which is, can you commit that nobody on your team was leaking trading tips to Wall street executives so that they could monetize the timing of the tariffs being on and off, which led to huge stock market swings, essentially providing insider trading information. Can you tell us nobody did that? Trump's answer, all I can tell you is I didn't do it.
- [42:41]
Donald Trump
Can you commit that nobody on your financial team was giving any type of tips to Wall street executives about deals with India? There was some reporting yesterday that People had heads up on Wall street possibly to make money. Can you commit that? That I can commit to myself. That's all I can commit. You know, thousands of people that work for me, but I can't imagine anybody doing that. I have very honorable people that I.
- [43:04]
David Pakman
Can say that sounds like Trump absolutely cannot tell us that there was not insider information being leaked as tips to people who could have traded and profited from it. Trump is telling us why would anyone on my team do that? We're all very honorable. If we've learned anything, it's that the people working for Trump are not honorable. And Trump being very cagey, very careful about that one. What a day. Fox News is continuing to melt down over the Trump polling disaster. You turn on Fox News these days sort of looks like a funeral. Fox host Sandra Smith acknowledging the polling disaster that is afflicting Donald Trump. And you can see that this is not a particular, this is not the golden age for Fox News, I think is fair to say. Listen to this.
- [43:57]
Anna Kelly
This is President Trump's job. Approval rating on taxes, 38% approved. 53% disapproved. This Fox News polling, 38% on the economy approved, 56% disapproved, 33% percent on inflation. We know this was hugely election, 59% disapprove. But Scott Bassett had a very important message as the 100 day mark approaches on all of that. Listen, from this morning we've got a three legged stool here. It's trade, it's tax, it's deregulation. President Trump has come out of the.
- [44:30]
David Pakman
Box roaring and I think this is.
- [44:32]
Anna Kelly
Something new for the American people.
- [44:33]
David Pakman
We're going to continue, continue to make.
- [44:34]
Anna Kelly
The US the best destination for capital in the world and that something new might be, you know, the short term pain people are feeling reflected in the polls. But will they hang in there, Robert, to see what is promised?
- [44:49]
David Pakman
As you can see even Fox News having to acknowledge this short term pain thing. I don't know if they're going to.
- [44:55]
Anna Kelly
Hang in there for as long term gain. You know, let me be quick here. I mean one Steve knows a, a tariff is a tax on the consumer. Yes, it brings revenues, but it's not a tax cut to the consumer. That's just not true.
- [45:11]
David Pakman
And Steve's actually written about that, as.
- [45:14]
Anna Kelly
Has Kevin Hassett with respect to the three legged stool. I think with short term pain you're seeing it in the polls. People would don't know really what's going on. Things actually some of the prices are going up, some are going down. This is not actually the immediate, you.
- [45:28]
David Pakman
Know, great, you know, great economy that.
- [45:32]
Anna Kelly
The president spoke about. Actually, half the economist thinks we're going into a recession.
- [45:37]
David Pakman
It is not typical. It is not typical that you have Fox News acknowledging bad polling for a president that is a Republican and then bringing on commentators who instead of sanitizing it and saying no, it's actually fine and it's going to be fine, acknowledging that the policies that are resulting in the decline in polling are genuinely bad policies for the country, for the economy and for the American people. And this was two people. This was Robert Wolff, former Obama economic adviser, but also right wing Stephen Moore. And they all agree the tariffs are taxes on the American people. You might say that they are taxes that are warranted and correct or not, and maybe they would disagree as far as that goes. But this is not your typical Fox News segment. And Fox News is now in the unenviable but funny position of having to figure out how to bridge the gap between sucking up endlessly to a Republican president you want to continue being on good terms with on the one hand, and on the other hand communicating with an audience that isn't buying that this is all great for them as they see what happens to their 401ks and as they anticipate that their small businesses are going to suffer. And Fox News is, I guess, just figuring it out. How long is this tenable? If things don't turn around with the tariffs and the market instability and all of it, it feels like it's a matter of weeks, if not days. Don't forget that the best way to support the David Pakman show is by becoming a member, which gives you access to the daily bonus show, the regular show with no commercials. You also get access to our entire archive of every episode dating back a really long time and plenty of other awesome membership perks. Go to join pacman.com join pacman.com alright, let's get into Friday Feedback from the week. Friday Feedback will look at responses and comments across all of our platforms, but you can also email info@david pakman.com if you have a specific question, comment or whatever the case may be. Let's start with Isaac Hardy Ken Balls who says, hey David Pakman, let's clean this up before you run off with another half baked headline. Yes, the FSU shooter Phoenix Eichner was a disturbed individual with far right and pro Trump views. He was reportedly kicked out of a student group for white supremacist rhetoric and posted Nazi symbolism online. That's all Documented. But here's where your claim collapses. Law enforcement has not confirmed any political motive behind the shooting. This wasn't some MAGA operation. It was a tragic, complex case involving mental health, personal instability, and access to a gun owned by his deputy stepmom. So it's not accurate or ethical to say pro Trump MAGA lunatic shot up fsu, unless you're trying to spin trauma into content. Well, as is often the response to these emails, criticize me for things I've actually said. Not only did I not weigh in as to the motive for that shooting in the video, I said police are still searching for a motive. What I did was, as you say, stick to the facts. Facts that Isaac acknowledges. The FSU shooter had far right pro Trump views. The FSU shooter was kicked out of a student group for white supremacist rhetoric. The FSU shooter posted Nazi symbolism online. Isaac acknowledges that, and I acknowledge that in the video. The problem with the allegation from Isaac is, is that I don't claim to know the motive in the video, and I specifically say the police are looking for a motive. So Isaac's advice to me is to only say things that are backed up by the facts, which I did in that video. My suggestion to Isaac is when you write into shows to criticize a host for what they said, maybe first figure out if they actually said it. What about that chemical Top wrote on our subreddit? Where does the phrase with tears in my eyes, sir originate? I'm assuming this quote is from a deranged Trump rant. Yeah, so here's the whole tears in my eyes thing. One of Trump's tells that he's almost certainly lying about a story is that he will frame it by saying, you know, people come up to me with tears in their eyes and they say, sir, you've got to get rid of all these Mexicans, or, you know, he'll like, claim to have been told something in that framework. Very often the stories are completely unbelievable. And so it's sort of become a joke that the with tears in my eyes, sir is a verbal shorthand for when Trump is completely fabricating some claim whole cloth, and it has no relation to or connection with reality whatsoever. So those, those are the oranges of that phrase Brie guy wrote. Hey, David, what happened to those crypto projects you used to advertise on your show? So there's kind of like two answers here. First of all, I don't keep track of our sponsors when they're no longer sponsors. I would assume, like many sponsors over the years, some of the crypto projects we advertised have shut down. That, that would be my guess, similar to, you know, we had advertisers on the show five years ago selling a product that have also shut down. I think, you know, the implication here seems to be that there was some kind of, like, scam that I participated in by promoting certain projects as advertisers. You know, as I've said before, doing that would primarily harm me. Like the idea that I would think of making a quick buck by scamming my audience into something I have no incentive to destroy trust with my audience in that way. I try to be very clear with advertisers, especially when there's anything financial that I am giving no financial advice on the show, period. And everybody should be researching. No matter what product you're going to buy or if you're involved in a crypto thing or anything, you should really be doing all due diligence yourself and ensuring that whatever decision you're making is the right decision for you. But beyond that, you know, I've always operated in good faith. Not every sponsor industry is perfect. The idea that I would bring on scams to the audience, it's backwards from how we approach our work. So I don't know if this particular person's implying that, but it certainly, certainly seems to be the case. Okay. Stephie Bob Effie says, as a mother to an autistic child, this is absolutely terrifying. Autism is not destroying families, but a registry would. Stephie is of course referring to Robert F. Kennedy Jr's recent statements about how he's never seen an adult with, quote, full blown autism in public. And the idea that the Trump administration has of building an autism registry of autistic people. Yeah, you know, we heard from so many parents of autistic people, people and even also autistic people themselves. Everybody saying this sort of idea that either adult autism doesn't exist because RFK doesn't see it, or that it's an affliction with which no one could tolerate to live. The reality, of course, being that many autistic people pay taxes the way, you know, RFK said they don't and go to the bathroom by themselves, hold jobs. And again, not, not joking. Elon Musk has said he's autistic and although he pays very little in taxes, he does pay taxes and have a job. He has like 10 jobs. In fact, part of why everything's collapsing is he has too many jobs. So, yeah, I did get a lot of emails like that. And Also, Zoe Beth wrote in on Blue sky about the same issue and said, david, not to discount the amazing point you made, but I saw a guy in a wheelchair at the gym two weeks ago and also a deaf man who I was attempting to sign with. Rich assholes like RFK Jr don't care to interact with those he seems he deems as defective. He's an effing ghoul. Yeah, that's. It's also, as I was mentioning, it's also important to mention that RFK is sort of general, general view that folks with autism and other conditions that he mentioned in passing of, like, as an aside, they do participate in society. And I might have said, you know, RFK isn't seeing some of these folks at the gym, but Zoe Beth is seeing some of these folks at the gym. So the point is incredibly limited, unempathetic and completely unproductive perspective on this. Red Ash wrote on the subreddit, if it was proven, if it was proven that the Trump assassination was staged, would that tip the tide? And Red Ash goes on to elaborate. Imagine for a second a credible source came out that Trump staged the assassination attempt at the Pennsylvania rally. Indisputable facts come out that the MAGA is that was shot was dying anyway and it would give him honor if he martyred himself to help Trump. Similarly, the shooter being someone who is willing to be a martyr, he was a hardcore MAGA ist after all. Okay, if this revelation came out, this individual says what would happen is denial followed by de emphasis, where the narrative becomes it's not a big deal that Trump pulled this ruse because the ends justify the means that Trump needed to be elected to save the country or some noble purpose. Then it would disappear from the airwaves like nothing happened, similar to the scandal involving Hegseth and the signal fiasco. It saddens me to think that the MAGA base is so delusional they would buy that argument that it wouldn't shed much of his loyal base. I agree with Red Ash. If it came out that the Trump assassination was staged, you would see a few reactions. Some would just deny it. They would go, nope, we can't believe it wasn't really staged. No matter what reporting comes out, they would deny that it was staged. Second, one group would acknowledge it was staged, but they would say Democrats are the ones who either did it or are the bad guys. Trump had to stage it or it was Democrats who staged. What if they would try to spin staged into orchestrated? And then number three, some would say Trump was right to do it. Trump had no choice but to stage it because of something Democrats or Joe Biden or Kamala Harris did. That's my sense of the three reactions you'd get. Now, I do think that some MAGA people might turn on Trump if it was revealed that he staged the assassination, but a large swath would not. And I think you'd hear those three explanations. Bubba Zuckerberg asks, curious, did you cast such a critical eye on Biden's piece? I think they mean Biden's bs. Did you cast such a critical eye on Biden's bs? I mean, seriously, there's ample content available, yet somehow me thinks you didn't. Well, all you need to do is go look at my YouTube channel. All the videos I did when Biden was president are still up. And while I said Biden did many good things and I listed those, I was also critical of Biden for the things he did that I thought were not so good or things I thought he should have done and didn't. I was critical of Biden for not doing more when it came to cannabis, for example. Oh, ask the DEA to reschedule. Ok. I would have liked to have seen more done there. I would have liked to have seen a serious tax proposal. We just kept the same tax plan from Trump's 2017 tax cuts and Jobs Act. I was critical of Biden in other areas as well. I think he was a far better president than Trump. So of course I was less critical of Biden than Trump because I think Biden was a better president. But the idea that, you know, I'm not even it would be funny if people understood I've never been a Democrat and I don't do the whole like, yes sir, I'm here with the party talking points thing for Democrats. I'm not part of a lot of the Democratic little groups and clubs that the overtly Democratic media are. I think a lot of these right wingers don't seem to realize that. Stevie Steve says, can you actually have a politician who will speak against the talking points and speak truly? You, as just the host, only has so much responsibility. But if these politicians actually care, they should be more direct and less indignant that borders indifference. I don't totally know what Stevie is saying, but I still wanted to include this because I want to tell you what I believe my responsibility is when doing interviews with lawmakers, number one, it's are they saying things that are blatantly untrue? And if so, I want to be prepared to rebut that Number Two, are they speaking too generically about issues in a way that doesn't really connect with the salience of these issues for individual households? You know, when we hear generically from politicians, we've got to do something about health care. Okay, well, do you really even understand, Are you speaking to what this really means for the average person? I think Cory Booker during our interview did demonstrate that he knows exactly what it means for the average person. Okay. And then number three, I need to be prepared to address substantively any areas in which they may seek to shut down conversation. That's sort of what I see as my role in a lot of those conversations, and I will continue to try to do that. I don't 100% know exactly what was meant by, by the rejecting of the talking points, but my goal here in these interviews always is let's get beyond the talking points for sure. Info@david pakman.com Remember that you can get on our newsletter for free@david pakman.substack.com critically important as it is the only platform on which we own our data and they cannot shut us down because we own our data, unlike on every other platform. We'll see you on the bonus show and I will be back here Monday as well.