Speaker 1: And welcome to the Big Podcast on this Wednesday, the
sixth day of August, year of Our Lover twenty twenty five.
My name is Tom Sullivan, and we just have a
breaking news and breaking news and breaking news.
Speaker 2: Kind of hard to do breaking news on a podcast
because I don't know when you're listening to this, so
I'm so used to doing live radio, but forgive me,
so I want to start with. First of all, we
just had some news out of the White House that
President Trump maybe looks very positive that he may be
meeting with Vladimir Putin next week. Steve Whitcowff had a
meeting with Putin earlier today. It was a three hour
meeting in Moscow. And after that meeting, apparently Witkoff communicated
with the President that Vladimir Putin is willing to meet
not only with Donald Trump but also with Zelenski next week.
We don't know where, we don't know the date. It's
still it looks like it's pretty certain. But President Trump
put a caveat on it and said I'll go to
that meeting absolutely if the meeting consummates into a ceasefire agreement.
So we're still waiting for a double triple confirmation. Dan Hoffman,
former CIA station chief in Moscow, this is his reaction.
Speaker 3: Well, first, I would tell you from my experience of
having tried to see the world through the twist of
kgbiyes of Vladimir Putin for decades when I was serving
at CIA. President Trump will be asking the intelligence community
for some reflections about what's going on in the Kremlin.
What's motivating Vladimir Putin? Is this an act of desperation
on Putin's part because he's concerned about those sanctions that
are supposed to hit in two days. Did Putin take
to heart President Trump's decision to deploy two submarines in
the region after Putin's deputy National security advisor Mitvedev made
such irresponsible comments about nuclear threats and nuclear rhetorical nuclear brinkmanship.
Those are questions yet to be answered. Peter's right, there's
lots of work to be done, preparatory work. It's a
time to mistrust and verify Vladimir Putin. Russia's demands have
been maximalists. They want regime change in Ukraine, they want
a puppet regime there. They want to control Kiev and
the central government. And they've never really offered up any
real peace proposals. So there's a lot of work yet
to be done.
Speaker 2: There is a lot of work to be done, especially
if they're going to meet next week. That's only a
matter of a few days. Again, the deadline for a
ceasefire was a ceasefire agreement is Friday, and so sometime
next week they're going to be meeting. And also today
the President said to India, because you are buying Russian oil,
the twenty five percent tariff that we had on all
goods from India, guess what, I'm changing it to fifty percent.
So here's more from Dan Hoffman. Yeah, I think that's right.
And look, China and India hold all the cards. They're
importing oil at reduced prices. Russia is very much a
junior partner in those relationships, commercial relationships, and certainly the
overall strategic relationship with China. Question of whether India and
China in particular have been reaching out to Vladimir Putin
and telling him that he needs to strike a deal here.
So we'll just have to wait and see how things
shake out in the coming days. So we'll give it
some time, but not a lot, because they're going to
have to make a decision about whether this meeting is
absolutely foreshore and if so, the fact that Putin is
willing to meet, and Trump saying only if the meeting
equals or ends in a ceasefire. So there's a lot
going on there. We also had a shooting today, another one,
this one at Fort Stewart in Georgia. Fort Stewart had
five soldiers that were shot. All of them are in
stable condition. Three of them have been brought to surgery,
but their five soldiers are all in stable condition. A
sergeant on the base was the shooter and they apparently
tackled him. Here's the base commander, General John Lubits, from
the third Infantry Division, talking about what happened at the
base today. Shortly before eleven o'clock, an active duty soldier
assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia, shot and wounded five of
his fellow soldiers here on Fort Stewart. Thankfully, all are
in stable condition and all are expected to recover it.
The alleged shooter is in custody. We re established security.
I have lifted all lockdown measures on Fort Stewart and
there is currently no threat to the local community. I'd
like to recognize and thank our Army law enforcement and
medical personnel, and our partners from local, state, and federal
law enforcement and emergency services for their quick response and support.
I would also like to thank the brave soldiers who
immediately intervened and subdued the shooter. If these soldiers, without
a doubt, prevented further casualties. Our wounded soldiers were initially
evacuated to Win Army Community Hospital right here on Fort Stewart.
All arrived in stable condition, and three of the five
required surgical intervention. Two have been transported to Memorial Hospital
in Savannah, Georgia for additional care. We have identified the
alleged shooter as Sergeant Cornelius Radford, an automated logistics sergeant
assigned to second Brigade Combat Team. Sergeant Radford has not
previously deployed to combat. Sergeant Radford has been interviewed by
the Army Criminal Investigation Division and is currently in pre
trial confinement awaiting a charging decision to by the Office
of the Special Trial Council. Right now, our primary focus
is first on caring for our injured soldiers and their
families and also supporting the soldiers of the Scartan Brigade.
All of the families of the victims have been notified
and we're wrapping our arms around them and ensuring we
provide them all the support that we can. Before I
take questions, I want to remind you that this is
an ongoing investigation and we're still gathering questions, and ladies
and gentlemen, I'll now take your questions.
Speaker 4: Center lewisvill Vegas Costs the Lewis, Can you give us
what unit he was assigned to at how long be
served in the army If you didn't.
Speaker 2: Mention it, he is assigned to one of our sustainment
units here in second Brigade Combat Team at Fort Stewart,
and I will have to confirm how long he served with.
Speaker 4: Us RUS fine him with the associated press as best
you can know, and so early can you block us
through here? This happened, what happened in the shooting and
words of victims on subordinates of the sergeants or were
they people over him and ray?
Speaker 2: Yeah, right now, it's premature and we're gathering a lot
of the information. What we know is this soldier, the
shooting occurred at the soldier's place of work. It did
involve his co workers. We're still not certain about the motivations,
but again he's been interviewed by Army investigators and we
believe will gain more information here shortly.
Speaker 4: Do you know if it's with any kind of training
exercise or were they meaning any weapon?
Speaker 2: No, man, we don't have any reason to believe it
had anything to do with with a training event. Other
than that, I can't I can't state the motivations for this. Sould.
Speaker 4: We've heard that the shooter may have been from Jacksonville, Gorder.
Are you burned that you also heard that you maybe
been arrested for a duy recently.
Speaker 2: Yeah, At this point, I can't confirm where he's from.
We can follow up on that. I do believe he
was arrested locally for a DUI that was unknown to
his shane of command until the event occurred and we
and we started looking into the law enforcement databases.
Speaker 5: Robert elf the currents.
Speaker 4: Can you tell us whether or not that was a
military weapon or what is personal weapon?
Speaker 2: Yes, ma'am, I can. I can confirm it was not
a military weapon, and we believe it was a personal handgun.
Speaker 4: What does this mean for ongoing security measures? Situations.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm very confident in the security of this installation.
We've got a great partnership with local law enforcement. As
you can see here at our gates, we have armed
guards in protective equipment. This one's a bit difficult, and
we're going to have to determine how he was able
to get a handgun to his place of place of duty.
Clay News for Jackson.
Speaker 4: Has the suspect had any friar, disciplinary or behavioral issues,
Hung Banker, No.
Speaker 2: Man, not that we're aware of. But again it's it's
early in the investigation, but not that I'm currently aware of.
Speaker 4: I know WJ.
Speaker 6: Scales paces you mentioned that some soldiers out siting him,
you know, gives as he surrendered peacefully or what is arrest?
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 2: I don't have the details on that, but I know
that his soldiers in the area that witnessed the shooting
immediately and without hesitation tackled. The soldiers subdued him. That
allowed law enforcement to then take him into custody and
wait that time for one more question.
Speaker 4: Uh. I know that he can't speak to the motivation,
but you know, this turns out to be some situation
where somebody added his your misbeliefs or maybe class privacy
terrorist attack. I mean, how does that change the basis
response or the basis investigation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, currently we have no reason to believe any of
that is the case. However, we continually continuously assess the
threat environment, both in the immediate area and across our
army and DUD installations, and we will address the threat
level accordingly.
Speaker 4: You have the branch of the shooter.
Speaker 2: Yes, sir, he was a sergeant. Badies and gentlemen, thank
you for your questions, and again thanks to the local
responders and the local community for their help. Thanks and
have a great afternoon.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 2: So there you go a lot of people asking questions
about how did he get this gun on a base?
The base. If you're assigned to the base, which this
sergeant was, he goes through the guard gate, has his ID,
has probably a sticker on his car, shows his ID,
and they wave them through. If you're visiting the base,
they're probably going to stop asking you to open your trunk,
look around a little bit to see what you're bringing in.
So it's not unusual and people stretch of the hey
going how could he possibly have a gun in there?
I gotta tell you. An army base is one of
the most gun free zones you'll ever be on because
there's armories and if you are if you have a rifle,
a gun, a pistol, all of that needs to be
checked in and locked into the armory, and they're very
particular about how you get a gun out of the armory,
usually only for some sort of mission that you're going on.
So it is kind of a gun free zone. But
that doesn't mean if you're living off base, or if
you're coming and going from the base to out into
the area of Fort Stewart, you go down to a
gun store, you buy a gun. It's not that difficult.
So it was a handgun and more details to come,
but the good news is five soldiers, all of them
are expected to live. They're all in stable condition. It
does remind me, though, of remember Fort Hood in two
thousand thand and nine. Major Hassan got a hold of
a rifle I believe it was it may have been
a handgun, and killed thirteen people and injured thirty two.
Major Hassan is parking himself somewhere in some break somewhere
ever since. But that was a he had a problem.
I believe he was a Muslim and he had a
problem with the war against a Muslim countries and all
of that that was going on back in two thousand
and nine. So this looks more like a workplace beef
than it does anything regarding politics or religion. The story
of the Texas legislators that are on the run, it's
I don't mean to snicker, but this seems so silly
to me. They did this. We've seen this movie. The
Texas legislator is left four years ago and they went
to Washington, DC, and they stayed for I think something
like thirty some days, a little more than a month,
until some of them finally cracked and went home. Living
in a motel room or hotel room gets real old,
real fast, and so they are parked mostly in Illinois.
The silly part about all this is everybody's giving high
mighty speeches about how they're protecting democracy and this is
unheard of and nobody has done things like this when
Illinois is If you haven't seen it by now, you
should look it up. The congressional maps talk about talk
about jerrymandering. The lines are squiggly all over the place
so that they carve out just the right number of
places to elect Democrats. They've done it. California has done it,
New York has done it. They have Jerry Mander to
get more of the people that are in power, more
of them, namely Democrats in those three states. So is
this right? I don't like it. I didn't like it
when California did it, or Illinois or New York. But
that's what's going on right now, and they're acting like
this is something that they just can't believe. Well, they've
done it themselves many many times. So guess who's leading
the fundraising to provide money for the legislators that are
on the run. None other than Beto or Rock. He
can't get elected, dogcatcher, but he's out there crying about
all of this. Here's a little of Beto and is
crying about the fact that the democracy is at stake.
Speaker 7: I was in Nebraska last night where we were talking
about winning the second congressional district currently held by Don
Bacon to advance the opportunity for Democrats to hold power
in the House of Representatives, because that matters more than
anything else right now. It matters more than being right.
It matters more than any other party we have to
stop their power grab. We have to win power, and
then we have to use it to provide a check
on Donald Trump and to deliver for those folks that
you're talking about right now. Only with that power are
we going to be able to help America. And those
fifty six Texas Democrats right now are giving us the
best chance that we have. We've got to have their back.
It ends with Democrats win in power. I think for
far too long, my party has been more concerned with
being right and coloring within alliance, and they've cared about
being in power, while the other side only cares about power,
regardless of what is right, what is ethical, what is legal.
Even so, we've got to take the gloves off and
we've got to fight them, and we've got to seize
the initiative and stop waiting for these would be fascists
to land the punch and throw ours first and throw
it harder. And that's what I'm starting to see from
some of these democratic governors across the country, and so
more of that, and I think these Texas Democrats have
inspired them, have set the example, and have shown the
way I think the election of twenty twenty six is
going to be decided in the summer of twenty twenty five,
so we have to fight now and every day going forward.
Speaker 2: So did I get that right that he's basically he's
pitching the idea that we have to have we the Democrats,
have to have the power because the Republicans now have
the power, and we can't let them have the power.
We want the power. That's what it is. It's a
power grab and it's all about them. Is not going
to help you one iota. Going back to Illinois, by
the way, the interesting thing about that state, if you
look at the crazy Jerrymander districts that they've drawn to
make sure that they have more Democrats than Republicans, they
have in the legislature in Illinois, they've got three Republicans
and they've got seven Team Democrats, So it's overwhelmingly a
Democrat run state. But Donald Trump won forty four percent
of Illinois, so it doesn't reflect the reality of the
people and their political positions.
Speaker 8: Seriously, you're talking about preserving democracy when the president wins
forty four percent of the state and the Republicans only
have three out of seventeen as less than twenty five
percent of the congressional districts have a majority, read a
seat out of a state where the president of forty
four percent. The numbers just don't add it the math.
It doesn't work. We're talking about the Jerry Mandarin capital
of the world. Illinois. Please stop talking.
Speaker 2: Well, they should stop talking. But you know how the
thing is is that because we've seen this movie, you
know it's not going to end the way they wanted to.
They're just going to burn through money. They're going to
sit in wherever they are, Chicago or somewhere in New York.
Thirty days will go by, and they'll go back to
Texas and this redistrict team will pass, and then there's
some democratic states that will try to do the same thing.
The thing about it is they don't have The Democrats
or the Republicans don't have any guarantee that redrawing the
lines is going to give them more votes. There may
be a backlash from the voters for redrawing the lines,
but usually it works. Listen to this lady. She's one
of the Texas legislators, and she's comparing the importance of this. Sadly,
she doesn't understand history. She compares this to the Holocaust courted.
Speaker 9: I mean, we will lose all of our rights. And
if you think it can't happen, it can. And I
will liken this to the Holocaust. People are like, well,
how did the Holocaust happen? How is somebody in a
position to kill all these people? Well, good people remain
silent or or good people didn't realize that what happens
to them can very soon happen to me or somebody
I love.
Speaker 2: That's just got to be insulting. There were millions of
Jews that were killed during the Holocaust, and this lay
thinks all of her rights are going to be Now,
my question for you is is she stupid or does
she think that you're stupid? It's one of the two,
because that's where I think she's stupid. She just thinks
all of her rights are going to be taken away.
Back to Tim Scott, Senator's God, it wraps it up.
Speaker 8: Bottom line is overing this making comparisons that have nothing
to do with one another doesn't make it better. It
makes it worse. Actually, people see through that it's a veil.
The truth of the matter is that they've lost their
minds and they're losing their voters. As a result, they're
looking for some way of holding on to the very
little power they have. Think about what the Democrats have
done to minority communities around the country. They have devastated
minority communities. Why they were more interested in the power
than the progress of the very people they represent. That's
why President Trump has this new working class coalition. The
forty eight percent of Hispanic men vote for President Trump,
thirty plus percent of African American men vote for President Trump,
or fifty percent of Native Americans vote if for President Trump,
that means redistricting. As you see these states fill full
of more people. They're going to redraw those maps so
as to maximize the opportunity of the new citizens who
say free at last, Free at last. They want to
experience it. And President Trump is delivered. The Democrats are
scared to death.
Speaker 2: One more point. On this last time they ran off
to Washington, d c. For thirty six days. The tariff
for all of that, the cost of the meals and
hotel rooms and airlines and all that stuff, five hundred
thousand dollars, So better or work was asked about, wouldn't
that money be better served by spending it on people
who need help. He didn't have an answer, and he
just keeps coming back to and he says it out
loud that this is more more important than being right.
This is everything to them. It's sadly hysterical at the
very least. All right, speaking of sadly hysterical, let's get
you updated on the Epstein story that won't go away,
because there's a big dinner tonight over at the Vice
President's house. Yep jd Vance is hosting the dinner and
at the dinner will be Pam Bondi, Cash Battel, Susie Weiss,
chief of staff, Todd Blanche, the number two at the
DOJ that went and interviewed Julane Maxwell, and of course
hosted by the Vice president. They're going to be debating
what to do. This isn't hard at all. David Urban,
who is a Republican spokesman, kind of lays it out
this way.
Speaker 10: Yeah, listen, I don't disagree with Karen that this is
that there are many, many, you know, thousand plus young
girls victimized here. I don't think that the Trump administration
is ignoring them at all. I think, if anything, they're
trying to be sensitive to not disclosing that. I do
agree with Karen that, you know, the subpoenas that came
from the House, everyone was saying, well, who's Trump. You know,
President Trump is conspiculously absent. I think the person who's
conspiculously absent from that subpoenaist is alex Acosta and the others,
and that US Attorney's office in Miami to cut this
plea deal. If you really want to get to the
numb of this issue, bring them before the committee, have
them testify, peel back the onion and find out why
the deal was cut that was cut originally with Epstein,
and we'll get to the bottom of it. That's the
quickest way to get an answer here, I think, much
more quickly than anything else. And so I do I
disagree with Karen that this administration is looking past these
young victims. I do agree with Karen that alex Acosta
probably has more answers than anybody else.
Speaker 2: Yeah, if you don't remember, alex Acosta was the former
US attorney in South Florida and was the one who
signed off on basely a little slap on the risk
for Jeffrey Epstein back when he first got caught back
in the early two thousands, and he wound up being
Secretary of Labor in Trump one point zero. So he
has just disappeared. But I think David's onto something. Get
him back. Let's find out where all of this first
started being buried, and you'll get some answers pretty darn quick.
Christ Nunu, former Governor of New Hampshire, this is his
take on it.
Speaker 11: Look, I think you have to rip the band aid
off and release everything. It's all going to come out.
We're all going to figure out at some point. The
Trump administration has the opportunity to live up to what
they said they were going to do and just rip
the band aid off and open it all out. And so,
I mean, I think that's what's happening. I think there's
probably some very interesting information given in those interviews. He
saw her now being transferred to another facility. So clearly
they were happy with the interview that took place, and
now they're going to have yet another discussion. And now
that this has been made so public, the discussion has
happened happening, they're setting a real expectation. I mean, how
do they have this discussion and then not release a
lot of information off of it? Right, because the expectation
is built up not just with the conservative base, but
really with all Americans. It's both sides. This isn't actually
a political issue at all. Every American wants to know
that there isn't a the haves and the have noth
The elitists get protected and everyone else has to play
by a different set of rules. This is the administration's
opportunity to open all that up and really clear the decks,
if you will, and set a precedent that this stuff
isn't going to be tolerated anymore.
Speaker 2: In some tariff slash business news, Tim Cook, CEO of Apple,
had a meeting in this afternoon with the President in
the Oval Office. He brought with him a message that
in addition to the five hundred billion dollars that Apple
has previously said they're going to invest here in the
United States, he added another one hundred billion to it today.
So Apple is going to invest six hundred billion dollars
to boost their US investment. So there's some sort of
announcement that was supposed to come out of the White House.
Haven't received it by the time we started with this.
This gets interesting too, because the President, like I told you,
earlier raised the tariff on India by fifty percent of
fifty percent tariff, not by fifty fifty percent tariff on everything.
Remember Tim Cook said, oh, we'll move a whole bunch
of our production of Apple iPhones over to India. Well
that won't work anymore. So here comes Tim Cook into
the White House saying, yeah, we'll spend another one hundred
and fifty billion dollars here. By the way, for those
of you that Apple, you know, people think a lot
of these big corporations they get away with whatever Apple
has paid in the last five years seventy five billion
dollars in taxes to the United States government. They're one
of the biggest tax payers in the country. So we'll
see what happens out of him bringing an extra hundred
billion to the table. Told you yesterday about the Aspen
Institute is having their big summer. Soare and a lot
of big, big people, important people are there. Neil Kashkari
is I think, very smart, smart, smart guy. He is
on the FED. He's part of the Federal Open Market Committee.
He's a voting member. He's a president of the Minneapolis
Federal Reserve Bank, and he's at the Aspen Institute, and
in the interview he had today, he made it clear
that he thinks things are slowing down, and he thinks
there's maybe two more rate cuts by the FED before
the end of this year.
Speaker 6: It's uncertain. I mean, there's a lot of the Feds
in the news for a lot of reasons outside of
just economics, and so that can be a distraction. And
so it's just a reminder, keep focusing on the data,
keep focusing on our jobs, and that's what we have
to do, and that's what we are doing. There's two
categories of data that I'm focused on. There's a bunch
of data that I know and then I've got confidence
in and there's data that i don't know and we're
not going to know for a while. The data that
I think we know is that the economy is slowing.
Housing services inflation is gently declining, non housing services inflation
is coming down, wage growth is coming down. We've seen
the jobs number, and consumer spending is cooling. All of
that suggests the real underlying economy is slowing. I've got
confidence that that is happening. The part that I don't
have confidence yet is what are the ultimate effects of
tariffs going to be on inflation, And what I'm realizing
is we may not know the answer to that for
quarters or a year or more. And that tells me
as one policy maker, I need to start leaning more
on the data that I've got confidence in the economy
is slowing, and that means in the near term it
may become appropriate to start adjusting the federal fundry. I mean,
I think the economy is held up remarkably well. I
think these tariff shocks are unlike anything that we've seen
in one hundred years virtually, and it's take in a
while for businesses to try to process it, for policymakers
to try to process it, and they've just been delayed.
And if you look at the average effective tariff that's
being paid at the border, it's around ten percent. It's
been climbing now month after month. It's well short of
the sixteen percent headline rate. And so should we react
as policymakers to the headlines or should we react to
what's actually affecting the economy. And that's what's making these
judgments difficult. I think tariffs are more complicated. Are your
competitors going to do it or not? You know, I
was in Montana recently a small business. She runs a
small restaurant company. I said, how did you protect yourself
against tariffs? She said, in late January she bought a
year's worth of bamboo shoots from abroad and stored them
to protect her and her customers from tariffs. It's remarkable
that that happened at such a little company and at
big companies. So that's also why we have not yet
seen the full effects. People are working down these inventory
right now. The economy is slowing, and I think that
we're going to have to respond to that as the
inflation data starts to come up. We're seeing it now
in core goods. But how high is that going to get?
Is it going to spill over into other categories, and
is it going to be persistent. We're not going to
know the answer to that for a long while. I'm
assuming the tariffs will be persistent. Whether the tariff effects
on inflation are persistent is the question that central bankers
care a lot about and that we're not going to
know for a long time. And does it bleed over
into inflation expectations. So the path that I think about,
you know, I put down two rate cuts in my
December last year December Summary of Economic Projections for twenty
five I maintained two. In March I maintained too. In June.
Two still seems reasonable to me for the end of
the year, so two more potentially, But now we've got
a lot of data to come in. But sitting here today,
I could see two rate cuts this year. But if
it turns out the tariffs are having a bigger effect
on inflation and it's more persistent, we could do one
or more rate cuts and then we could pause.
Speaker 2: So one or two rate cuts, one or two more
rate cuts and then pause, or maybe another rate cut
or raise interest rates if inflation is being driven higher
by tariffs. So that's Neil Cashkari. I think he's a
very straight shooter about what they're thinking about regarding the FED,
and they're trying to get their wrap their arms around
what might happen, but they don't want to they don't
want to take action until something does happen. So the
next meeting of the FED is mid September, and that's
when a lot of people in Cashkary just said it
think that they will probably drop interest rates in September.
He was also besides interestrate. She was also asked about
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and you, as a policymaker,
can you rely upon the numbers coming out of the BLS?
Because Janet Yellen, the former Treasury secretary, listen to what
she thinks, she thought that the numbers coming out of
BLS were gold.
Speaker 5: Well, I was appalled. You know, our statistical agencies have
set the gold standard globally for quality of our statistics.
They're universally trusted and have never, to the best of
my knowledge, been subject to political manipulation.
Speaker 2: That is just classic Jennet Yellen. Yes, of the Bureau
of Labor Statistics numbers, they are golden and have been
completely relied upon. Everybody thinks that they're reliable. No, they're not.
They've been way off, And she has her head in
the clouds and just ignore the fact that the numbers
have been way off and have to be revised by
huge numbers, hundreds of thousands of jobs. So anyway, cash
Car says they rely upon a lot of other data
besides the Blso he was being kind. He didn't say
he relied upon them, but he says, we have a
lot of data that we look at and doing a
little look back on this day in history. It was
eighty years yars ago that we dropped a B twenty
nine dropped atomic bomb on another country. It was on
this day, eighty years ago that we dropped what they
had a name for it called Little Boy. But the
B twenty nine dropped the first nuke ever on Hiroshima
or Hiroshima however you want to put the syllables. And
then three days later we dropped the second one on Nagasaki.
And the thing about this is it brought It was
exactly what the plan was was to bring World War
two to an end, and it did. The Japanese said,
that's it. We're thrown in the towel, and we don't
know how many lives, can't you can't determine what never happened.
But the numbers of lives that were that were saved
by ending the war right away or were huge numbers
by anybody's admission. So on this eightieth anniversary of the
first nuke to be used, the bomb was fifteen tilotons,
which compared to today's nuke bombs, we have one point
two megatons are bombs today. Nuke bombs are eighty times
more powerful than they were eighty years ago when we
dropped the two bombs in Japan. There's nine countries that
have nukes, supposedly US and Russia, China, France, United Kingdom,
India and Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. Israel never admits
that they have the nukes, but France is the one
back in the nineteen fifties who got the nuke information
right away, so they basically taught the Israelis how to
build a nuke bomb. So that's your nuclear history on
this August sixth, where it was, It changed the war,
put a war to the end. On Wall Street today,
market was up okay, wasn't anything to write home about.
Dow up eighty one points at forty four thousand and s,
and P up forty five, Nasdaq up two hundred and
fifty two. The price of gold fell three dollars to
thirty four to thirty one, and oil fell a buck
down to sixty four dollars for one barrel of oil.
Thank you for coming by today. I hope you have
a wonderful rest of your day, and we'll try this
again tomorrow. Hope to see you then,