[0:00]Leon Black, the private equity billionaire who paid Jeffrey Epstein $170 million for tax and estate services, appeared before the House
[0:10]Committee, then abruptly left. Then the subpoenas came. President Trump said Iran launched four drones at vessels in the Strait of
[0:20]Hormuz. One did damage. Big problem or hiccup? Also, another framework is signed. This one between Israel and Lebanon.
[0:30]The US men's national team lost last night and at the very last second, but still advanced to the knockout stage. We engage its chances and spotlight other
[0:42]World Cup stars. >> [music] >> Hello everyone, I'm Major Garrett in
[0:53]Washington. Welcome to The Takeout. The US military is carrying out strikes against Iran right now in retaliation for those drones we mentioned that they called open. We'll get to that in a second, but first
[1:04]This is the world's richest country. It is also the most competitive. People who acquire vast wealth here typically are not stupid. To the contrary, they have
[1:15]many layers of intelligence, and this is especially true for those who make vast sums of money in finance. They leave little to chance. They devour
[1:24]data and trends. They obsess over their competitors. They keep track of a lot of things. Leon Black amassed a fortune of $13 billion.
[1:35]He got his start in junk bonds and moved to leverage buyouts, then to private equity. Endeavors where cold-blooded capitalism is rewarded
[1:44]and where economic victims can be found. Leon Black was a close friend of Jeffrey Epstein. How close? From 2012 to 2017, he paid Epstein
[1:55]$170 million for tax, estate planning, and other related services. That's the terminology. Quick check of the math, that's more
[2:07]than $30 million for tax and estate planning. No one who does this kind of work can understand that level of compensation. So, what about those
[2:18]other related services? What does that even mean? Well, Epstein also advised Black on how to deal with his extramarital affairs. That
[2:28]led Black to pay $20 million to a dozen women. Black also paid $62.5 million to the US Virgin Islands to
[2:37]resolve potential legal claims related to Epstein's infamous island there. And very deep allegations about sex trafficking through there.
[2:48]Black's name appears, according to congressional Democrats, 8,000 times in the Epstein files that have been released thus far. The phrase "Call Leon
[2:58]Black," they say, appears more than 300 times. One other thing. Black sent a 50th birthday poem to Epstein that read in part,
[3:08]"Blonde, red, brunette, spread out geographically. With this net of fish, Jeff's now the old man and the sea."
[3:20]Black testified before the House Oversight Committee today. Things broke down when Republicans and Democrats demanded answers about non-disclosure agreements with women in Epstein's
[3:30]orbit, some of whom now assert they were victims of Epstein's abuse. After Black ended the interview, the committee issued two subpoenas.
[3:41]>> I have just issued two subpoenas to Mr. Black. Uh one for all the NDAs that he is party
[3:50]to. And second for a deposition on July 16th. So, this is a result of refusing to
[3:59]answer specific questions about the NDA NDAs and the terms. We believe that information is vital to our investigation.
[4:11]Uh I will remind everyone that uh Mr. Black came in voluntarily, but they are uh refusing to disclose that, so I have
[4:22]issued the subpoena, and we are handing it to him as we speak. >> Now, this committee has clashed at sometimes over its investigatory actions and procedures. It did not clash today.
[4:33]>> I completely support uh Chairman Comer's decision here. I think that Mr. Black is not answering questions about the NDAs. Um the NDAs are central to us
[4:44]understanding what actually happened. There are real accusations, and there are survivors who have accused Mr. Black of horrific things. >> Black has denied all wrongdoing. He told
[4:56]the committee he had no knowledge of Epstein's nefarious activity, said he was unaware of anything exploitative or criminal, and was drawn to Epstein's
[5:06]unrivaled network of relationships. Black's attorney spoke to reporters after he left Capitol Hill. >> Mr. Black came here voluntarily to
[5:16]assist the committee. They made a premeditated political decision to serve him with subpoenas after less than an hour of questioning and before they even
[5:26]asked a single question about his legitimate payments to Epstein. I want to be clear, as Mr. Black said in his opening statement, he never abused a
[5:37]woman, he never was with an underage woman, he never engaged in sex trafficking, he never paid Epstein for access to women, he was never
[5:47]blackmailed by Epstein. >> Black said he never knew anything. He never did anything wrong, and he has no knowledge of any wrongdoing. He paid Epstein a lot of money. He paid
[5:58]a lot of money to others to conceal things and avoid further legal action. He never knew anything or did anything. Perhaps a subpoena and the threat of perjury before Congress will shed more
[6:10]light on all this. Joining me now, member of the House Oversight Committee, Virginia Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi. So, Congressman, let's get to Iran very very quickly because that's the breaking news. The United States, uh according to
[6:22]a release from Central Command, is in ongoing military strikes against what it describes as Iranian missile and drone storage locations and a coast and
[6:32]coastal radar sites. Your reaction? >> I I It's not surprising. Uh Iran is difficult to deal with in the first place, and then you have an administration that has shown itself to
[6:43]be incompetent when it comes to uh foreign affairs [snorts] and diplomacy. And so, that's why you have the breakdown of all these frameworks, and that's why you have continued tit-for-tat attacks. Uh I don't think
[6:54]this war is anywhere near over. I don't think this framework or this uh deal that they made, this 14-point deal, is going to hold up uh in the short term and and long term. So, they're going to have to figure out a way forward, but
[7:05]right now uh you know, if Iran's striking uh you know, vessels uh and not opening the Strait of Hormuz, and then there's a tit with a return strikes, then uh that to me doesn't sound like
[7:17]peace or a ceasefire. >> How does it read to you that this was announced by Central Command after markets closed? >> I I think it reads exactly the way we're implying here, which is that this
[7:28]administration looks closely at the stock market, they look closely, uh and they manipulate the markets often. Uh they come out with news on Fridays and Mondays based on uh how they think the
[7:39]markets will react. And then at this point, you know, releasing this news after markets. So, there's a reason for doing that. >> All right, let's get back to what happened today at the committee and Leon Black. What was it like in there? What
[7:51]was the atmosphere? >> It was interesting because I had 3 hours worth of questions and so did the committee and
[8:00]yet Leon Black is telling us that we had this premeditated strategy to corner him and to subpoena him fully. Remember, this was a transcribed interview.
[8:10]Republicans decided that they wanted to not have him sworn in and have him deposed under oath, but I think they changed their tune when they saw that Leon Black, like many other witnesses
[8:22]close to Epstein, was not answering questions. He was not being forthcoming with us. He said from the very beginning he would not talk about anything other than his financial ties to Jeffrey Epstein, but that he had nothing to do
[8:33]when it comes to when it comes to sexual assault or rape or or sex trafficking. So, if he has nothing to hide, why not talk about it? Why not answer our questions? And then when it comes to the
[8:44]NDAs, he flatly refused to even acknowledge the existence of NDAs. NDAs don't hold up in front of Congress. That's I don't think they understand that. Congress is not a court of law, we're different and when we're doing an
[8:55]investigation, they need to comply with our investigation. And so, you know, their lawyer was did not was not up to speed on the way things work in a congressional
[9:05]deposition. But, I'm glad that the chairman went forward with issuing him a subpoena and he's going to come back on July 16th, I hope. Otherwise, he'll be going to jail.
[9:16]>> Congressman, for those who don't follow this story closely, explain the importance of these non-disclosure agreements with women who were in Jeffrey Epstein's circle and that you suspect Leon Black has more knowledge
[9:27]than he's so far disclosed. >> Right. So, Leon Black bankrolled Jeffrey Epstein from after he was first arrested in 2008. You're talking about 2012 to
[9:37]2017. And so uh part of what Leon Black's strategy was was to make girls and women sign these NDAs when something with them happened, whether there was an
[9:48]extramarital affair. And uh a lot of survivors have said that he also engaged in the sex trafficking and and sexual assault at times. And he's very brutal and they were afraid of him. And so uh
[9:59]you know, he was intimately um working with Jeffrey Epstein on financial matters. And somehow Jeffrey Epstein was able to get paid uh enormous sums. We're talking about hundreds of millions of
[10:10]dollars uh for work that cost a fraction of that amount from a reputable firm. And so uh it doesn't add up. Uh the only way it adds up is if uh Leon Black is guilty of something. And so that's why
[10:22]we had questions for him. These NDAs that were central to understanding uh how Leon Black controlled the people around him, including the women who
[10:31]accused him of of sexual assault. >> For my audience's benefit, Congressman, explain the power of a congressional subpoena and what can happen if you ignore it or
[10:42]you lie under it. >> Yeah, absolutely. Uh when we subpoena someone and they do not respond, they do not show up, uh we can hold them in contempt of Congress. Uh that happened
[10:54]earlier this year. I think wrongfully happened earlier this year when uh Republicans on the committee wanted to uh have criminal sanctions against the Clintons, uh even though I think they made every effort to. In this case, uh
[11:04]Leon Black is now just being issued a subpoena. Uh and if he does not comply, meaning he does not give us the NDAs that he used to control these women, if he does not show up for his deposition
[11:15]on July 16th, uh then uh we can vote to hold him in criminal contempt of Congress, refer that to the Department of Justice, uh who will then prosecute
[11:24]him, and uh we'll see him go to jail. >> Virginia Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi, I appreciate the time, sir. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> CBS's Nicole Killian is at the White
[11:36]House with more on the ongoing retaliatory strikes against Iran. Nicole. >> Yeah, that's right. Well, we are still uh learning details about what exactly is going on at this hour, Major, but uh
[11:46]what we do know, according to a statement from CENTCOM, is that a US aircraft uh did target uh missile and drone storage locations in Iran, calling
[11:57]this a powerful response after a drone attack by Iranian forces on a ship in the Strait of Hormuz. Now, uh the president earlier today, and actually you can see that statement from CENTCOM,
[12:09]the unwarranted aggression against commercial shipping by Iranian forces clearly violated the ceasefire. So, uh it goes on to say that Iran's uh dangerous behavior undermined freedom of
[12:19]navigation as commerce increasingly flows through the vital international trade corridor. And of course, this is a key part of that recently signed memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran,
[12:30]reopening the Strait of Hormuz. In exchange, the US dropped its naval blockade there. Uh but of course, uh this is really the first uh kind of tit-for-tat response we have seen uh
[12:40]since that agreement was reached. The president warning earlier today about those drone strikes that it was a foolish violation of our ceasefire agreement. Uh and just a short time ago in the Oval Office, before these strikes
[12:52]uh by uh the United States took place, he was asked whether or not there would be any repercussions for uh this Iranian drone attack on that ship in the Strait of Hormuz, and he just said, "We'll
[13:02]see." And then minutes later, Major, is when we got word from CENTCOM about these attacks. Now, what this means for the future of the agreement uh remains to be seen, uh but there's certainly a
[13:12]lot of concern at this hour uh about uh the fragility of this agreement, if it even still holds, uh now that both sides have exchanged fire again. >> Nicole Killian with all the latest. I
[13:22]appreciate it very much. I'm going to walk over to the touch screen where I will find Aaron McLean, who's host of School of War podcast and my able advisor and educator on all matters. This is happening right before our eyes,
[13:34]Aaron, and clearly the memorandum of understanding now has a very big misunderstanding or intentional misreading. >> That's right. So, it's the middle of the >> It's back to kinetic stuff. >> It is. It's the middle of the night in
[13:44]Iran right now and the United States Central Command is striking targets. We don't know exactly where, but we know it's in the area of the Strait of Hormuz. We hear missile sites, drone sites, and radar sites. These Iranian
[13:55]islands here also have potential targets on them. In retaliation for a strike the Iranians did yesterday on a container ship, the Ever Lovely, that was transiting this southern Omani route
[14:07]through the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranians don't like the existence of this route. They want all ships to go through a northern route that they control. And that's the core issue. Iran says, "We control the Strait of Hormuz." The United States state says, "No, you
[14:18]don't." And we've never actually settled this question. >> Right. And now with this fire, first from them, now from US forces, we're back where we were several weeks ago when this was a
[14:29]contested piece of geography with global economic implications. >> And I think what you're seeing here in the Strait of Hormuz, but in other issues as well, for example, what's going on right now with Hezbollah in
[14:40]Lebanon, is the Iranians have a series of very clear for them strategic goals. They want revenue. They want to control the Strait of Hormuz. They want Israel out of Lebanon. And they are pursuing
[14:50]each of these goals in turn and provoking or or daring, I think is the better word, daring the United States into responding. Right now we see Central Command and President Trump responding. What the Iranian response to
[15:01]that is going to be, that's the big question for tonight into tomorrow into tomorrow. Will we see Iranian strikes in places like the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, other sorts of places like that? >> Aaron, would it be foolish of me to ask
[15:12]a question I think might be on the minds of my audience? Aaron, you just put a whole red line about things that were still there. Why were they still there? Why didn't we attack them earlier? Why
[15:23]didn't we take them out to make sure they couldn't do that once we knew we were going to pursue a negotiated agreement with the memorandum of understanding talking about an open Strait of Hormuz. Why didn't we deal with this before?
[15:34]>> One of the enduring mysteries of this entire campaign operation Epic Fury from the start has been why the United States failed to anticipate or plan for the
[15:45]obvious Iranian counter move to the killing of the Ayatollah, the leadership strikes, the very high intensity way that this war began. That move obviously being closing the Strait of Hormuz. It happened right at the start. The United
[15:56]States frankly never reopened the Strait. We were helping sneak a few ships out at night there towards the end. Um but at no point did we effectively establish conditions in the Strait for the free flow of traffic. Now
[16:07]we claim that Iran has agreed in the memorandum of understanding to allow traffic through. Well, as the events of yesterday show, the Iranians have a somewhat different interpretation of that than we do. It's a very very unstable situation.
[16:18]>> Aaron, before I let you go, do we have any sense of where our what the disposition is of our naval assets here? Because for the blockade, they were all down here. Are they still hanging around more or less? >> Um yeah, we we do have a a pretty
[16:28]substantial laydown of naval forces generally speaking out here in the Gulf of Oman and further on off the map in the Arabian Sea. We do not have a lot of naval assets in the Persian Gulf right
[16:39]now. Why? Because when we sail them back and forth through the Strait of Hormuz, they tend to get shot at by the Iranians which happened before the MOU got signed on several occasions. So right now, yes, assets in the region, Central Command,
[16:51]pretty well armed, but the Iranians not particularly deterred. >> Might be a dicey weekend ahead. We're going to watch that little stretch of geography and waterway very closely. Aaron McClean, great stuff as always.
[17:02]Still to come on The Takeout, California launches the nation's first statewide tool to track job losses inflicted by artificial intelligence. We're going to take a closer look at that.
[17:13]Also, the US men's national team, well, it lost its final group stage match in the World Cup. Now, it's on to the round of 32. Can it make a deep run? Plus, Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van
[17:24]Hollen broke with Democratic leadership to endorse progressive [music] Michigan Senate candidate Democrat Abdul El-Sayed. Related to that, he now says he wants to run for president. Our political panel will take these
[17:36]developments and a pint of Guinness for a spin >> [music] >> at the takeout tavern. Takeout returns in 90 seconds. >> [music] >> Welcome back. California now has the
[17:50]nation's first dashboard to publicly track artificial intelligence-related job trends. Jobs created, jobs lost. The dashboard, it's going to be updated monthly, uses unemployment data to look
[18:02]at which jobs could be more exposed to artificial intelligence. As of now, its early findings show no evidence of rising statewide unemployment related to artificial intelligence and its
[18:14]expansion throughout the economy. Joining now, Till Von Wachter. He is the faculty director of the California Policy Lab at UCLA and he is the co-author of the AI Unemployment
[18:25]Tracker. It's great to have you with us. Real simple question, how does this work and what do you hope people will learn from it? >> Thank you for having me, Major. It's a great pleasure to be here. So, typically
[18:36]in the United States, we look for new unemployment benefit claims if you want to get a sense of the real state of the labor market. And so, what's new here is that we combined unemployment claims
[18:47]with information on AI exposure of the occupations of these claimants. And so, what we can see now is whether new unemployment benefits claims in California are coming from occupations
[18:59]that have high exposure to AI. And that's unique because we can follow AI-exposed unemployment claims in real time. Um, we can see the statewide
[19:09]claims, but we can also see claims by different groups. And so, we can zoom in on some of the groups that we think may be most affected. And here you see a figure on the screen of workers with a
[19:21]high school degree or less and workers with a master's or PhD degree relative to earlier in in in a few years ago when ChatGPT really first took off. This is
[19:33]the for economists at the the start of the AI use in the among companies and um the population. And you can see here that those with a higher degree will
[19:43]have an increase in AI claims relative to those with a high school degree or less. This is exactly what we would expect. Those are the occupations maybe most affected by AI. However, the good
[19:54]news here is that there is no increase or or a rise in unemployment claims for these workers recently. >> Till, let my audience know how many of
[20:05]the nation's AI companies are in California? >> I would say most of them. >> Yes. >> And so, that's why California is of course ground zero for some of these
[20:17]effects and also for the adoption here. And so, we don't only look at highly educated workers, but also workers in the San Francisco Bay Area as where many of IT companies are in and the IT sector
[20:28]as well. >> And this is only data in California. So, AI adoption in other states may have unemployment ramifications. You're not tracking that. You're just
[20:40]tracking California. Is that correct? >> Yes. So, each state has an unemployment benefit system and they keep their own data. And we have an ongoing cooperation with the Employment Development Part
[20:51]Department here in California. And we have been study studying unemployment claims in California since the pandemic. And so, we saw a window here to really make a difference and bring new data to
[21:01]bear to this question. Other states could stand up their own tracker and California is really a leader here. So, I expect other states will follow suit. >> So, when I hear you say thus far no
[21:12]negative unemployment effect, some people go, "Oh, woo, oh, we're we're we're in the clear." This is going to be an ongoing issue, and the data is going to tell us
[21:23]things over time. So, no one should jump to any conclusions yet, I'm guessing. >> Absolutely. The real value here is that we can track these unemployment claims
[21:34]from AI-exposed occupations over time, and it's an early warning system. As soon as these claims pick up, or as soon as we see some workers more affected
[21:43]than others, right, we can jump in. But, really, this data allows us already to think about what policies the state could improve or use to support these workers, or maybe to prevent layoffs
[21:55]altogether. >> Have you gotten any word from other states saying, "Hey, what are you doing? Maybe we should do that. Can you help us?" >> Well, I think some of the other states
[22:07]have been actively using their unemployment benefits. So, California already took the lead during the pandemic to really use these UI claims to track their labor market, and other states have taken notice, and there are
[22:17]some very interesting dashboards out there. So, I expect that these states will again sort of take a page from California and look at the AI exposure of the occupations of the claimants and
[22:28]stand up similar dashboards. >> AI is a transformational technology with many, many aspects to that story. We are endlessly fascinated about it. Till von Wachter, UCLA, appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
[22:40]>> Thank you very much for having me. >> US men's national team rests many of its stars and gets ready for the knockout round. But, last [music] night, you probably heard, suffered its first loss
[22:51]right at the last second. We're going to check in on the state of the World Cup and related issues. It's going to be fun when we come back. You're watching [music] The Takeout. >> Welcome back to Ticker. Welcome to the
[23:06]conversation corner. Here's a look at what else we and now you are watching this evening. Search and rescue operations continue in Venezuela after two devastating
[23:15]earthquakes. At least 920 people have died. More than 3,000 have been injured. Thousands remain missing as crews from around the world are arriving in
[23:26]Venezuela to assist. Former Trump national security advisor John Bolton pleaded guilty to one count of retaining classified information today. Bolton agreed to pay a fine of more than
[23:37]$2 million. Prosecutors accused him of using a personal email account and messaging app to share sensitive government information with two
[23:46]relatives over a 7-year span. Bolton's legal team and the Justice Department agreed to a prison term of no more than 60 months. 60.
[23:57]Sentencing scheduled for October 28th. Washington, D.C. has settled a lawsuit with a man who said he was arrested for following National Guard troops deployed
[24:08]to the nation's capital while playing the Imperial March, which is more or less Darth Vader's walk-up song from Star Wars. The ACLU brought this First Amendment
[24:18]legal action on Sam O'Hara's behalf. His confrontation with troops happened in September. Financial terms were not disclosed. The ACLU, though, described
[24:28]it as a {quote} significant amount. US men's national team will play Bosnia and Herzegovina in the World Cup knockout round next Wednesday. Last night, you probably heard, Americans
[24:39]lost to Turkey in the final second. I mean, the final final seconds. But, it doesn't matter. First place in the group was already secured. And, importantly, most of the team's
[24:50]stars and starters did not play. Former midfielder for the US women's national team, Casey White, joins us now. She's also an analyst for MLS, that's Major League Soccer on Apple TV.
[25:02]Casey, so great to have you with us. Thank you. Let's just quickly go over what happened to the US men's team last night and how you evaluate the pros and cons. >> It's one of those moments where the team
[25:13]wants to get a win, but they were able to secure the first place. So, they were able to rotate the roster, get nine players in that did not start in the last game. That helps with culture, that helps with confidence, especially for
[25:25]players like a Sebastian Berhalter who had a good performance, one goal, one assist, and he's able to gain that confidence. He'll most likely be used in these knockout rounds. So, this was an
[25:36]opportunity to do that and be able to rest players that had put in a lot of minutes previously. >> Casey, those who watch the show may be complete soccer nerds as you are and as
[25:46]I'm trying to be, but some may not know some of the terminology. So, the backline of the men's national team has been described before the tournament began as a weakness, and it looked a
[25:57]little weaker than it ought to have been last night. Is that a point of concern? >> There were four complete changes to the backline, four players that had not started or played significant minutes in
[26:07]the first two wins. So, it was expected that there would be a few of those growing pains in that game versus Turkey A last night. Not a huge concern, but it is a focal point as the backline that
[26:18]will come in against Bosnia and Herzegovina will look to have a shutout. That's something that's been alluding them in the lead up to this tournament. >> Let's talk about the cup more broadly.
[26:29]The stars are everywhere and they are reigning in goals. It has been amazing to watch. >> It certainly has. Messi, first of all,
[26:41]five goals in two games. It's just unbelievable how unstoppable well he is at his age. We've seen it in Major League Soccer last season, this season, and now he's doing it again on the world
[26:52]stage. Kylian Mbappé is right on his heels forward for France as well and just one of those players that has been unbelievable so far in this tournament.
[27:02]>> And then you've got Haaland, you've got um Ronaldo. I mean, there's a those are four marquee stars and they're all kind of running circles around everybody else.
[27:12]>> Erling Haaland had his debut in the World Cup for Norway. He is a prolific goal scorer. He has a high work rate. So, he is a player to continue to watch. He got rest today against France. And
[27:24]again, Ronaldo has been in the media for in the first game not scoring goals, but in the second game he was able to get a brace, those two goals, and help Portugal start to get things back on track for them.
[27:36]>> And Casey, how have you absorbed the festival of it all? Yes, it's breaking attendance records because there's more matches, but still, the stadiums are full, the atmosphere around the stadiums
[27:46]appears to be completely festival happy. This looks to be off to a great start. >> It certainly is. In '94, when we hosted the World Cup, it definitely propelled the game to another level. That is
[27:58]happening 32 years later here as well. There has been such an an investment from US Soccer, from our domestic league with Major League Soccer to grow the game, and the fans are showing up and
[28:08]and supporting other countries as well, like the Tartan Army of Scotland. It's been a lot of fun to watch. The Netherlands, the Dutch fans have been incredible and also showing up, of course, for the United States who have
[28:20]put on a show so far. Just wonderful to see how much it's evolved so far in this World Cup. >> Casey, before I let you go, what's the ceiling for the men's national team?
[28:31]>> I believe they can at least get to the semi-finals. I would have said quarter-finals before this. It's the optimistic in person in me to think that they might be able to go just a little bit further, but you do need everything
[28:43]on your side. We'll see if they can bounce back in the round of 32 and then use that momentum to carry them as far as they can. >> Casey White, great stuff. Really, really great. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.
[28:53]>> Thank you. >> Next, what Vice President J.D. Vance said about former President Richard [music] Nixon and how Watergate would have been handled today. You really will be surprised [music]
[29:04]when you hear it or possibly not. Our political panel will join me to discuss that and a whole lot more from the Takeout Tavern when we [music] come back. Welcome back. Coming to you as you can
[29:20]see from the Takeout Tavern, it's political panel time. Democratic strategist, former Biden advisor John McCarthy, Republican strategist, former Republican Senatorial Committee Press Secretary T.W. Rigby. They're drinking
[29:31]beer. It's Guinness by request. There we go. And ladies and gentlemen, they have practiced this many times before. >> One, two, three, go. >> And the conversation about politics. [laughter] All right, want to play for you sound from J.D. Vance, the Vice
[29:42]President, at the Nixon Library, talking about if Watergate broke today, how would it be covered journalistically today? Please listen. >> As I joked with Robert backstage, if
[29:53]Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story. Like the idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy. And by the way, if you look at the story
[30:05]of how the deep state took down Richard Nixon, it's not all that different from what the same groups of people, the same
[30:15]institutions tried to do to Donald Trump in the first Trump administration. >> It would not be a 12-hour story, Mr. Vice President. It just wouldn't. And remember, it was the Nixon
[30:26]administration that used the tools of the state to surveil Americans as part of a deeper scheme around the Watergate break-in that led to the end of his presidency.
[30:37]And it was ended not by Democrats, but by Republicans in the Senate. Just to put that on the record. John, your reaction? >> I mean, we've heard those stories over the last few weeks of the Vice President down in the situation room talking about
[30:48]different cover-ups. So, he's clearly very comfortable in the era of coming coming up with political distractions, but the Vice President's political stock is going down week after week. And I think it's because of episodes like this
[30:59]that that's the reason why. >> T.W.? >> I am all for a re-examination of Richard Nixon's presidency as a whole. >> I'm I'm for that. I I agree with you.
[31:10]>> is is vastly underrated. >> It's it's it's hard to take away the resig- resignation part. >> Yeah, totally. >> You know, but in the over the 6 years, much was achieved. >> And I'm but I'm I'm sort of reminded by
[31:20]Bill Murray who said on on Joe Rogan that he now doubts the whole Nixon story because of some of what he's learned down the line about Bob Woodward's reporting, but I don't like to get into that. What I would like
[31:32]to say is this, J.D. Vance made a broader point during that whole thing which where she talked about the coalition that Nixon won with during his major landslide victory compared
[31:44]>> Starting in '68 and then expanding dramatically in '72. Yeah, and I think that is really what should be talked about the most because I do think Richard Nixon really did. Exactly. It was the first breakage of the Democratic control of the South.
[31:56]>> And we talk about Reagan's massive landslide victory where he lost one state, but Richard Nixon did that, too. >> So, I also want to play you some sound from Chris Van Hollen, Democratic Senator from Maryland, who's surprising some people saying he wants to kick the
[32:07]tires of a presidential campaign. We'll see how far that goes, but interestingly, in that general conversation, he said this about Abdul El-Sayed, who is the progressive Democratic candidate in the
[32:18]Michigan Democratic Senate primary. Listen. >> We need fighters in the Senate who want to dismantle a broken status quo that is not working for the American people.
[32:29]We need senators who are willing to rid our democracy of a corrupt system where big money special interests rig our economy and our politics in favor of the
[32:40]billionaires at the expense of everyone else. >> So, this is a part of a conversation that is rippling through the Democratic Party, rippled pretty loudly through the
[32:51]New New York primaries on Tuesday, and this Michigan Senate primary is going to be an interesting weather vane. >> Yeah, I mean the Michigan Senate primary is certainly going to be the test of, you know, are we really going to be
[33:02]moving further left as a party? I would argue that people are kind of over reading into the New York primary results. Um New York getting bluer is not really a big surprise. Michigan will be an interesting test, but I actually think that this story is more about 2028
[33:14]than it is about Michigan. There's going to be like 30 people who run for the Democratic nomination. >> Chris Van Hollen >> for the best, you know? Like that's a good >> not be on anyone's list in this city or in any other big city among Democratic
[33:25]donors of, "Hey, I didn't I should really Let's What What about Chris Van Hollen?" But he's inserting himself willingly into that conversation. >> why he's doing something like this. I think you're going to see some of these candidates who might not be the first
[33:36]top five names you think of start taking political risks like this to try and figure out if they can piece together some kind of a coalition. It's what they need to do. >> That a risk on the progressive left side is the place to be. >> It could be a lane. I mean every single
[33:47]candidate's going to have to define a lane for themselves, and I think the senator is going to try and see if this one's his. >> T.W., have have a sip and give me your sense. >> Okay, one. >> [laughter] >> Beautiful.
[33:57]>> it is a massive, massive risk. Not only because I don't know if the votes are there to actually build that coalition out, but secondly, it's a massive risk
[34:07]because you're aligning yourself with viewpoints that no American right, left, or center agrees with. So, Ziad said he's not really sure Israel
[34:18]has the right to exist. You say the candidates in New York don't matter. Well, taken collectively, they want to abolish prisons, abolish borders. They were waving Hamas flags the day after
[34:28]the October 7th attacks. I mean, how have we gotten to a place where candidates wanting to seek the presidency or higher office are comfortable aligning themselves with that? I remember in
[34:39]2010, we got in trouble because of social policy that was far to the right of where our base was. I would never take that back. >> Transitions are non-starters for any of the places Democrats actually need to win. If you're looking at swing
[34:51]districts, I mean, those are just political killers. >> You two, we're going to go to a commercial break. You keep drinking. There we go. Keep working those muscles. There we go. >> John McCarthy, T.W. Eriggy, we'll be right back. >> Back stay stay with us.
[35:02]>> [music] >> Welcome back to the takeout tavern. Our political panel still with me, John McCarthy, T.W. Eriggy, and importantly, the Guinness. And remember kids, it's always coffee for me. I keep my wits
[35:14]about me. All right, I want to play for you sound bite from Gavin Newsom, governor of California, because something has just qualified for the November ballot in California, a billionaire's tax in California. Newsom
[35:25]opposes it because he wants a national billionaire's tax. Listen. >> The system is fundamentally broken. The federal tax code, the corporate tax
[35:34]code, and the inheritance tax code seem to be written for a different set of Americans. It's time for an economic reset, a true minimum tax, a true minimum tax on billionaires that will
[35:46]ensure that people at the very top pay at least the tax rate their own workers pay. >> Now at first blush, you might say, "Well, that's hypocritical. You oppose it in California, but you want a nationwide." No, Newsom's point is if
[35:57]it's only in California, I may lose billionaires from California who will flee the tax, but if it's nationwide, it's not only progressive, it keys into this thing you were talking about in the
[36:07]earlier segment, John, but it shields California. >> Yeah. And I mean, I think that, you know, he's demonstrating some new ideas. One of the things that we keep hearing from voters over and over again is that Democrats are saying, "That's not a new idea to raise taxes." But it is it is
[36:18]the way he's doing it. There's some new substance to it. He's talking about this new AI equity fund. That's kind of a new idea, giving the American people ownership of some of the wealth created off AI. That's part of the proposal. And I do think that Democratic primary voters right now are just looking for
[36:30]something new. They want energy, they want ideas. And you know, the wealth inequality in this country is staggering. Like I think both sides should be able to agree on that, right? Like the top 10% of the, you know, wealth holders in this wealth holders in this country hold 2/3
[36:41]of the wealth. We just minted our first trillionaire. And people still can't buy groceries. So I think that people are feeling like, you know, they want something new, they want some new ideas. I think he's on to something here. >> And before I let you jump in, T.W., also
[36:52]Gavin Newsom has made it very clear he is going to embrace the Biden legacy. >> Yeah. >> The Biden presidency. He is not going to run for the hills on that. >> Yeah, I mean, there is a massive disconnect, I think, on this with the elites in our party versus everyday
[37:04]people. I think everyday people look at someone like Joe Biden and say he was a patriotic guy, he served his country, and those are qualities that they're looking for. The fringier, kind of weird actors in our party, non-starters. So if I could get a Joe Biden who was maybe 20
[37:16]years younger, he'd be my candidate any day of the week. >> T.W., you know who else is talking about AI equity? A mayor by the name of Donald Trump. He's also talking about different
[37:26]ways for the AI companies to pay for energy, to pay for their own development of technologies. >> And he's withholding some models back on the safety side, which is not where they were a year ago. >> Correct. Here's the problem with what
[37:37]Gavin Newsom's saying. This is a very sly way to get out of it, but still pander to the base. He knows states are laboratories of democracy. Even if you took it at a lower level, like a millionaires tax, they put that in
[37:48]Massachusetts about a few years back. What happened? We've seen a 20% decrease in the population of Massachusetts. There have been several >> That's why he wants to federalize >> have left. But here's the deal, we live
[38:00]in a global economy. Just like companies can register their businesses, you know, overseas, many many industries here do it, have their have their headquarters overseas, people can do that, too.
[38:11]>> Right. But T.W., an average American might say, "So what, we just throw our hands up at this wealth accumulation? We do nothing about it?" >> You do not First of all, there's so many different ways for
[38:21]What does a billionaires tax mean? Does that mean your net assets? Does that mean what what you're putting up to the IRS? Or does that mean what you have in cash? That all needs to be seen. Even Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney talked
[38:32]about recently as well. I talked about ways of closing loopholes to get more money from from richer folks without being punitive and saying just because you make X amount of dollars or you're worth X
[38:43]amount of dollars, you know, we're going to raise the upper rate. >> I do think that there's some kind of a disconnect here just in how Republicans and Democrats view the economy though. Republicans love to sit and say, "Well, if you tax them, the billionaires are going to leave." As if suddenly like,
[38:55]you know, economies only do well because there's a billionaire sitting around somewhere. The reason that these billionaires do well in these places is because of the work forces. These major cities, these population hubs with well-educated or well-equipped work forces, that's why these billionaires
[39:06]have made that money. So, they're not going to move out of these important population centers just because of tax rates. They can't go somewhere else. They make their money off the backs of other people. >> Totally Well, yes, yes and no. But but Yes, you are
[39:17]correct. They make it through the the people who work for them. I think every CEO would say, "My employees are my my draw." But The bigger problem is they hide their money. We need to close loopholes make
[39:28]sure they can't hide it, not push them elsewhere. >> Great. Let's tax them. >> Right, but the way that that's proposed is wrong. You don't do a millionaire addition. We do have a progressive tax rate. Let's keep it. What about a higher
[39:38]corporate tax rate? I would be open to that, but there's usually more layers to that. And I think that Mitt Romney talked about Mitt Romney talked about that before. It's not just a simple wave your wand and it happens.
[39:48]>> He just said didn't Mitt Romney just put out an op-ed saying that people like him should be taxed a higher rate. >> But he did not say a higher income tax. He said that's absolutely the wrong way to go. >> Accumulated assets over time, legacy
[39:59]assets, there's a way to find money. The federal government's usually pretty good at it. Some people think there should be >> have a revenue problem. >> Uh there we go. You get the last word. John McCarthy, Guinness, T.W. Rigby, Guinness
[40:10]by request. Thank you. Now, to our continuing tribute to this network's devoted celebration of America's 200th birthday, it's bicentennial. CBS produced bicentennial minutes that
[40:21]aired every night in the primetime hour of 8:00. For 912 nights, starting July 4th, 1974, and ending December 31st, 1976. Tonight, two female stars, one a
[40:32]Broadway legend, the other a Broadway nightclub and TV star. The first, Ethel Merman. For those of you too young to remember, Ethel owned this great Broadway tune.
[40:43]>> There's no business like show business like no business I know. Everything about it is appealing.
[40:55]>> Here now, Ethel Merman's bicentennial minute. >> I'm Ethel Merman. 200 years ago today,
[41:08]many frightened Long Islanders took oaths of loyalty to King George III. They were told to distinguish themselves by wearing red ribbons. There was an immediate rush on red cloth that soon
[41:20]exhausted what one observer called the visible supply. So, the invisible supply was put to use, women's red petticoats. The British sneered at men who wore
[41:31]those red badges of cowardice, and called these loyalists the petticoat gentry, a name that stuck long after the revolution was over. I'm Ethel Merman,
[41:41]and that's the way it was. >> The second comes to you from Eartha Kitt, a dancer, Broadway singer, and
[41:52]nightclub phenom. Kitt spoke four languages and sang in seven. She was also the Catwoman in the third and final
[42:01]season of the campy 1960s comic TV series Batman. This song, recurrent every holiday season, I bet you know.
[42:11]>> Santa baby, just slip a sable under the tree [music] for me. >> Come on, Santa baby. Doesn't get any
[42:21]better. Here's Eartha Kitt by Centennial Minute. >> I'm Eartha Kitt. 200 years ago today, the women of the
[42:31]Pennsylvania region known as the Forks of the Brandywine Creek took aim at the British with plows instead [music] of muskets. It was time to ready the fields for planting winter wheat and all the able-bodied men of the area were
[42:43]fighting in New York. The women didn't dare wait for their return. They meant to keep the mills grinding. So, they began preparing the land themselves. It
[42:53]was more than a patriotic gesture. By their actions, the women of the Brandywine region proved that they could be as determined at home as those in battle.
[43:04]I'm Eartha Kitt. And that's the way it was. >> Gidget, Eartha [snorts] Kitt, Ethel Merman. That's why I can say to you with
[43:16]confidence, happy Friday everyone. This is the Takeout. Relentlessly curious. Pick up that stein. There you go. Curious. >> America. >> Relentlessly curious, reliably civil, occasionally clever. The Daily Report coming your way next.
[43:28]Cheers, gentlemen. >> Cheers. >> Cheers.