Transcript of '60 Minutes' Meltdown, Trump's Intel Chief Pick, and Apple’s Next Big Bet New

Support for the show comes from Retool. Too many companies run critical operations on duct tape spreadsheets, Slack workflows, and whatever else they could cobble together. Not because they want to, because building internal tools means weeks of waiting on someone else's backlog. That's where Retool comes in. Build custom internal tools just by describing what you need. Prompt something like, build me a revenue dashboard for our Salesforce data, and Retool actually builds it on your company's data in your cloud with enterprise security built in. Go to retool.com/pivot. We all need We need to retool how we build software. Kaffee in seiner besten Form. Mit Qubo wird jeder Kaffee auf Knopfdruck zum Genussmoment. Denn mit der neuen Qubo One Kapselmaschine von Chibo genießt du feinsten Spitzenkaffee aus besonderen Anbaugebieten. Vollmundige Aromen dank innovativer PressBrew-Technologie und über 17 Sorten Kaffee für jeden Geschmack. Erlebe Premiumkaffee schon ab 29 €. Entdecke jetzt die Qubo Kapselmaschine in deiner Qubo Filiale und auf qubo.de. Cheating on your partner is a huge breach of trust. All of the pain and the guilt and the reality of what was happening hit me just like a tidal wave all at once. Why do people cheat?

And why does it make us so mad even when we are not the ones it's happening to? That's this week on Explain It to Me. New episodes Sundays wherever you get your podcasts. You know, it's like someone coming to me and saying, "I think you need to lead the New York Knicks to victory." It's like, "No!" Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher.

And I'm Scott Galloway.

Oh, Scott, you so owe me.

I do owe you. You kind of came through.

Explain for the people.

I came through. You delivered one of my heroes.

Yeah, I did. Right to you on a silver gold platter. So we're—

5th and last final city of our 5-city Pravjhi Markets tour. And in New York, obviously important, 'cause this is what I consider, I don't know.

The center of the universe, yeah.

Yeah, the center of the universe, important. And sold out. And we start talking about Iran, and the voice of God comes over, and it's Kara Swisher going, "You don't know what you're talking about." And then she comes out, and everyone goes crazy. People like, people like, do like Kara. And she goes, "You don't know what you're talking about." I'm like, "Well, that's not helpful. Who should we have?" And she goes, "Well, I brought a friend." And then Secretary Clinton comes walking by.

Hillary Clinton, yep.

And she got a stand, she got like a 2-minute standing ovation.

She did. People like her. Yeah, people like her.

And she was, you know what, I'm curious to get your thoughts, but I, A, I was very intimidated, but 2— You were.

You didn't interject, I noticed, but go ahead.

Yeah. But two, I got really sad. I just thought it took me back 10 years. How would the nation be different if we had elected—

Just someone this intelligent.

So intelligent. Secretary Clinton. And you don't know, right? Maybe America needed to just— Maybe America needed a weirdness to bounce back stronger, which is my silver lining here, hopefully. But it'd just be interesting to try and game theory out how the world would look different right now.

Yeah, you just never know. She might've gotten us somewhere. Who knows? I mean, what was really interesting was how she thinks in paragraphs. Like, her intelligence is so— The reason I thought she'd be good for this is because we don't know what we're talking about when we're talking about Iran, and she does. She's been in the room with these people. Whether it's Ukraine, she's been in that deal. She understands and can really game it out too, and really does understand. And one of the things that, you know, she doesn't get the credit for how prescient she was about Donald Trump too. She called all of it. Like, if you go back, the things she was saying about him, and it wasn't just campaign campaign frippery, she was like nearly perfect accuracy of what would happen because she's such a— And one of the things that's amazing about her is that, you know, she's gone through shit and she's done some things, you know, look, she's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. All manner of stuff. I don't think you can be in public office without stuff hanging off of you in some fashion.

And she shouldn't, you know, have to answer for her husband all the time, by the way, especially, you know, remember the Epstein stuff. She's like, "Why am I even here? I didn't—" I didn't sleep with underage young women or whatever. But I thought she was— what she displays is an incredible— she does her fucking homework. I guess that's what I'm trying to get at.

Yeah, there's definitely, again, I think hard work, character, and competence. I'm hoping it makes a comeback. She was known when she was a senator from New York, she had a reputation among colleagues on both sides of the aisle of just working really hard. She does. And I also said at the, when she left the stage and we're talking about her, I talk a lot about role models for young men and an absence of great role models at a kind of a federal level. And masculinity and femininity are social constructs and we get to fill them with whatever associations we want. And we talk about her being a great role model for young women. I think she's a great role model for young men. Service, strength. Intellect, working hard.

She's amazing. She just brings it and it's really, and she's actually, I hate to say softened up, but she's starting to get that at Hillary Clinton backstage is starting to be on stage now. Well, she's got zero fucks to give.

She gives zero fucks. And also just something you brought up, and that is I do think a lot of times, I think some calls for sexism or calling out sexism is sometimes overdone. In one instance where it's underdone or doesn't get enough reporting. If she had been on Epstein's Island, people wouldn't be harassing Bill, asking him to explain why she was on the island. That's right. Yeah, totally. It's just like, no one would, you know, if Graham Plattner's wife had been sexting, no one would be giving him a hard time. There is a, that double standards is on full display when she gave testimony. Oh, she was so good. Village idiot Representative Boebert started asking about her husband and Epstein, it's like, well, okay, ask him. Ask him. You have the power of subpoena or whatever the hell it is. Ask him.

Yeah, she was good. I love that Hillary. Anyway, I'm glad to do that. I'm glad it was great. I'm glad that you had a successful run. You know what I did today? What'd you do? I was on The View.

Oh, you were on The View? Yeah. You were a guest host. How was that? You were in a chair. Good.

I'm gonna do it again tomorrow. I was middle chair. It was so much fun. I love that Whoopi. I like the whole team of them, Sunny and Alyssa. And I didn't know Sarah. She was amazing. And it was great. I have Joy Behar's seat. Joy Behar's seat. She's doing some show in Paris or some writers festival or something. And I love that team there, as I've said. They're so professional. It was— You know what? You know I always complain about going on the cable shows where they yell at each other? I don't like it. These are good conversations, actually. They're really good conversations, and I really appreciate it. And people try to come, and I think it's because of— Whoopi Goldberg. They try to come to some sort of, not agreement, but just like, she doesn't tolerate shitty conversations. And I really appreciate that. I like it. And the whole, the entire show is so well produced, and I just enjoyed it quite a bit. And it was funny because this guy who's in, I'm gonna, Gal Zotine, he's in the new He-Man movie, and he was on a bunch of great movies. And he's very, very handsome.

And all the audience started screaming for him, and it was fantastically fun. They have live audience, which I like too. Yeah. Like I said, they give It's great TV.

They're very good at what they do.

Yeah. I would— I love the ladies of The View, and I love—

That's a good seat for you.

It is a good seat for me. Maybe I'll just stay there and never leave. Anyway. There you go. We'll see. And reminder, I'm taping a live interview, by the way, of On with Kara Swisher at the Tribeca Film Festival here in New York on Monday, June 8th. That's next week. I'll be talking to comedian, actor, and podcast pioneer Marc Maron, which I'm very excited about. He's the original gangster of podcasting. He's great. He's amazing. He's also an actor, comic, and everything else. Tickets are available now at tribecafilm.com/audio. Anyway, I like being in New York. I like it. Are you staying for a little bit? Are you?

Yeah, I think I'm gonna be here a week and then I go to Stockholm and then, yeah. So by the way, it's beautiful here. It's beautiful. You know, I don't, it's so funny. There's always predictions, you know, pandemics hit, a bunch of hedge funders leave, crime goes up and everyone talks about the death of New York. I walk around New York right now. No fucking way. There's a line to get in the Birkenstock store.

There was a line at the, soft ice cream store the other day. Like I was trying mixed cheeses.

Bankers' bonuses are at all-time highs. Crime, by the way, in New York is at historic lows. I mean, if this is what— The Knicks, the Knicks might win the finals. There you go. All right. But if this is what a decline looks like, I'd love to see what prosperity looks like. And I've said for a long time that you don't recognize you're in a golden age till 20 or 30 years later. I think people are gonna look back on New York in this era post-COVID new restaurants. And the ultimate luxury item, I said this last night at the podcast or on the tour, the ultimate luxury item isn't a home in Aspen or a Gulfstream. It's being 28 and having, figuring out a way to live in New York and knowing that every time you leave your house, your life could change. You could find someone to fund your business. You could find a co-founder. You could find just some incredible, inspiring piece of art or culture. You could find someone you end up marrying. It's the greatest city on earth.

It really is. And I love a lot of cities, but it is the greatest city on earth.

And it's not, people talk about ingenuity being a function of technology. It's not, it's a function of proximity. And people. And density. And the reality is in New York, there's 8 million people getting in each other's way. And I say that as a feature, not a bug. Yeah. You can't help but not bump off of people constantly. Constantly. And it's the opposite of what ails, I think, America, especially young people, is a lack of bumping off of other people.

I agree. Empty sidewalks. I get so annoyed by the fucking sidewalks here now, but I'm kind of liking them. I'm like, oh my God, can I get up the street without 900—

Everywhere. People. Everywhere. Tourists. There's two types of people.

I guess Mandomi didn't kill the city. Oh, well.

Well, still time. But anyways, there's two types of people in New York. Rich kids and people trying really hard that are really talented. I mean— And workers.

And anyway, we love New York and we're here. We're here. We're appearing in New York this week.

I think it's—

Anyway, we're not going to be hanging out, but we are appearing. I guess you don't want to come to my award tomorrow. I'm getting an award, a legal award, L'Homme de l'Or.

They already tried to hit me up for money. Oh, okay. You didn't— Can I tell you this story?

Yeah, sure. Very quick.

Hi, good news. "Kara's being honored by Lambda. We'd like you to donate $100,000 and we'll put a paddle up with a $100,000 number on it." I wrote back, I'm like, "You're clearly not in fundraising. You know, don't just shove your tongue down my throat.

I mean, tell me I'm pretty first." Also say, "I'll surround you with beautiful lesbians at a table who will fuck you." I'm like, I wrote back and I'm like, "Thanks, but I'm gonna pass." Yeah, yeah, good. That's okay.

I'm sorry, Kara. I like you, but I don't like you that much.

Anyway, it's a great award. Actually, Preet Bharara is gonna be giving it to me. Had they known you were in New York, they might've asked you, but Preet is gonna do it 'cause he's that good.

Yeah, that's an upgrade. He's much more credible.

Anyway, the big story in media this week is 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley is out at CBS. Pelley's firing came after he accused CBS News chief Barry Weiss of murdering 60 Minutes according to leaked audio from staff meeting. He also told the show's new EP Nick Bilton, a longtime tech journalist at Film America, someone I know, that his qualifications to run 60 Minutes were slender. That is accurate. Bilton sent Pelley a letter on Tuesday saying he'd been terminated for cause effective immediately. It was a terribly written letter, Nick. It really was embarrassment to you. Barry Weiss later sent an editorial call that Pelly was fired because the foundation of trust had been broken. After his firing though, Pelly wrote in a statement, "Incompetence and unprofessionalism in the new management have wreaked havoc." He also wrote a response to her letter and what she was saying to the staff, and then recounted word for word— he looks like he must have taken notes during the whole thing— exactly what happened and said, basically called them liars about that they didn't try to get together. I thought, Pelly, they should not mess with this guy. He's a really good reporter.

And they are, they're being disingenuous. I think mendacious, actually. This is the guy, Tom, whatever his name is. All of them, they're just, they're really, they're lathering themselves in dishonor. 60 Minutes has been on the air since 1968. I just, you know, you're not a media person. This is, of course, illuminating media people. One of my disappointments here is the journalism is getting lost in all of this drama. This is not— nobody's talking about the stories, which is what 60 Minutes has been astonishing about. And the fact that they could just— that he was asking normal questions. Why did you fire all these really good people, including Tonya Simon, who ran the show and took it to new heights? Why did you fire these other correspondents? Also Cecilia Vega and Sharon Alfonsi. Why did you fire them? And they wouldn't give an answer. And I think it's very appropriate that he asked, and they were trying to act like he was— that he was throwing a tantrum. He absolutely was not. I'm sorry, he wasn't. He was being a reporter. So your thoughts?

Yeah, I don't— So you know my view. I think media and journalists tend to think they're more precious than they are. And I don't buy the notion that journalism is— I understand the chill that the Trump administration is trying to put on different outlets. And I have heard from producers that it has created a chill. But I've said this before, I wish The Washington Post would just go away already. I'm sick of talking about it because I do think the most talented journalists, I think there's a huge ecosystem interesting companies doing great work. And 60 Minutes, I think the world would survive without it. Having said that, I just look at it through a business lens. When you're in an industry that's in structural decline and you have a product that's up 9% year on year, you don't fuck with it.

Right, and doing well digitally, that was just very disingenuous in their memos.

It's doing very well digitally actually, but go ahead. It's literally like, okay, Phil Jackson's job at the Chicago Bulls wasn't to be the boss and disrupt the Bulls. It was to get along with Michael Jordan. The job of CBS management right now is to get along with 60 Minutes.

I think it's a little more serious than that because I think you're leaving out the Trump thing. Each of these people have said that these particular managers are trying to fuck with the stories, to try to shade them. Peli is making this allegation. Sharon made this allegation publicly. Cecilia Vega made this. These are very professional people. These are the top of their game, right? It's not like whiny righteous. They're not being whiny righteous. They're like, "What are you doing?" Like, these are— they're doing great work, and then you fuck with them? Like, because— and then the excuses. And by the way, I'm sorry, I don't know Barry Weiss. I do know Nick Bilton. None— you are not qualified compared to these people. I wouldn't be qualified to run this, right? Like, the fact that they think they can give instructions to these people, I wouldn't have the— arrogance to think I was better than them. And the excuse they're using is that, the excuse they're using is that, well, we're gonna fix it before it goes downhill. That's their excuse. Well, it's inevitably gonna go downhill and therefore we're gonna fix it. Let me tell you, I have more digital experience than both of you.

And you are, you don't know what you're talking about. 'Cause first of all, you're being disingenuous about their digital stuff, which is doing okay. And secondly, This is not the way to do it by wrecking it. This— wreck it in order to save the village? We're going to bomb the village to save the village? This is nonsense on every level. And I am someone who knows more than both of them put together, and I still have room for more. And I'm an actual journalist. Nick is a journalist. I'm still higher on the food chain than he is. I'm sorry. And one of the things is that they're not talking about the journalism. And these 3 people that they fired and Tonya Seimann are amazing journalists, and they should thank them for their existence. And instead, because they need to shade things with the— and I do believe these reporters, they are trying to shade the news in, in, in service of Trump. And therefore, they are minions to the powerful owners who own them, which are the Ellisons. And that's where the real problem is, is these people are— these people are— have a whole nother game going on.

And it's, it's to take a product like this that is not broken and break it is At some point you have to wonder what it's all about.

They've decided to perform open heart surgery on the healthiest person in the franchise. Yeah. It's this—

Excellent way to put it.

And I don't know Nick well, but I've been on his podcast. I think he's a talented producer. Yes. A talented journalist. I don't, but in my view, I'm not sure a journalist should be running it. I think it should be a Jeff Zucker-like character who has tremendous respect for journalism, but quite frankly, he's just a really strong manager. I think the person that shows up to 60 Minutes says, How can I help? Well done. Call me when you, when, how, how can I help? But the, what the, the narrative they're putting out there is the following. You disrupt from a point of strength. Okay. As someone who teaches strategy, these people don't, they're using the wrong words. Disruptors are small companies that go after fat incumbents and start eating up from a small niche. And typically, That is absolutely true. To say that is to say that, well, CBS News, which is hemorrhaging people, should stay the course then. What I think the word he's looking for, there's some excuse if he said, it's an amazing place, we wanna continue what we're doing, but we're also just, we don't ever wanna be fat and happy, we wanna innovate.

He's using the wrong words. The last thing you do at the one place that's working is disrupt it. That's not, That's not what you do. But I wanna move on. I've got an idea, and I'm literally gonna text Ted Sarandos. I think there's an enormous opportunity. If I were Ted Sarandos— I'd hire all these people in. I would call Scott Pelley and Anderson Cooper and say, "I'm gonna pay each of you $10 million. You hire whoever the fuck you want, including executive producer, and Netflix is gonna put out something called The Hour, and it's gonna be every week." Yeah, that's our online.

Yeah, I think it's a great— We are gonna move on. This is the only thing I have to say is, This is not how you fix. This is not what you do. And by the way, here's what I would— the advice I would give is, let's see what you can do. So far, the results are bad at CBS. Everything's going down, down, down. Your shows are losing people. The other shows, by the way, ABC and NBC, are gaining. So you're doing something— your changes are not working. Secondly, and again, I like Nick Bilton. I do. I do. I know a lot of people. He's very controversial. He gets a lot of attacks. I like Nick Bilton. He needs to show results. If you're gonna do something, don't come in and tell everybody, like, give them lectures about digital disruption. Make changes, make them with respect, and have— just let's see the results. This feels so Chris Lichtian that he kept talking more than he was doing. And so I feel like results are all that matter. Get in there, do good journalism, and then come out the other side. And otherwise, And again, I'm sorry, I'm not qualified to run this place, and these people should not be running this place.

I don't know what else to say.

Yeah, but to be fair, and you know these people better than I do, I think Nick, I think they poured honey on Nick and sent him hunting for bears.

Correct. I think they sent him into—

That's why I feel sick for him. They sent him into an impossible situation. Right. And I would like to hear Nick's side of this story, quite frankly, and I think he's coming on the pod. But look, the only way this person is successful is to show up and say just a few things. I will quit the moment you come to me and say, protect me from outside political influences that are hurting my journalism. I will be your heat shield. I'm committing to that right now.

Right. That's not what's happening here.

Well, I agree. But I think he needs to say that. Yeah. And if he can't say that, he shouldn't take the job. And two, I recognize this institution is more storied and more credible than my resume right now. I am a talented, thoughtful person. I'm gonna do my best to provide you with the resources and the ideas, should you want them, to make this an even stronger institution. But you call me.

I get it. I still do. I think qualifications matter, and you need to hire someone who has more qualifications in this area, who's done television, who's managed big teams. That's— I'm sorry, you don't just give a job, like, you just don't. You just don't. And again, full of great, interesting ideas, I agree with you, but you don't give a job to someone who doesn't have the experience to run it. And I think—

Well, okay, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that there have probably been people with lesser qualifications who've also been asked to run important media properties. This isn't about, this isn't as much about his qualifications, it's about the context. And how they've gone about this. If this had been a different situation at a different time, and someone with those qualifications had come in and said, "Look, I promise to protect you from outside political influence that gets in the way of your journalism. I realize I'm in over my head. I hope you're patient with me. I'm gonna do my best to help you continue." I think that person could be successful, distinct of their lack of qualifications.

He was working for people who haven't been accused of meddling, you know? I mean, and the Ellison themselves.

But that's not him. That's a bigger issue.

Yes, but he took the job with them. So anyway, it's not Nick's fault. You're absolutely right.

But what you're saying is it's doomed, anyone's doomed. And that might be a fair point that there's no way for anyone to be successful in that role right now.

I think in this case it is. I think they have another, there's another game afoot here that is nothing to do with, they wanna wreck this thing. That's my, that's the—

You're saying it's being turned into, and this is the most damning thing several people have said who've exited the organization, it's being perverted, and queered from a great journalistic operation that is arguably one of the most successful— perhaps is the most successful TV show of its kind in history. It's being used basically to become propaganda for the Trump administration.

That's correct. That's correct. And I usually go away from those things, but it feels like Edward R. Murrow. Remember when he got screwed? You know what I mean? Like, this is— it has that feel to it. Anyway, we'll see where it goes. But let me just tell you, Scott and— I don't know Scott. I don't know Cecilia. Although I'm looking forward to meeting her. I think Sharon's, like, is terrific. They're all terrific journalists and I believe them. I'm sorry, I believe them over, they're just really good. And all the people there, and I've talked to lots of people at CNN.

Netflix presents The Hour. Yeah, I love it.

The Hour. The Hour. They're gonna be just fine.

How about 59 minutes? 3,600 seconds.

3,600 seconds. You know, this idea of lack of qualifications, I'm sorry, I'm sort of obsessed with it. President Trump named Bill Pulte, who runs the Federal Housing Finance Agency, as the new acting director of National Intelligence, replacing Tulsi Gabbard, who's stepping down. Pulte is best known for accusing several of Trump's enemies of mortgage fraud, none of which went anywhere, including New York AG Letitia James. He has no known experience in intelligence— I'm not sure he's intelligent— defense, or national security. He's called Little Trump. That's his qualifications. It's unclear whether Trump will ask the Senate to confirm Pulte. By law, anyone nominated for this role must have extensive national security expertise. Republicans are attacking him. Uh, you saw several Republicans saying he has no expertise. Democrats especially like our friend Mark Warner, is losing his mind over this. This, this, it's not the same. Nick is very competent, but this guy is incompetent. This guy is incompetent at this job. And all he does is like, you know, he's— he like steps on a rake every 5 minutes and hits his head. I mean, and the same thing with Todd Blanch who he— Trump caved on his slush fund.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch, Trump's personal attorney, says the DOJ is abandoning plans for that $1.8 billion fund to compensate people who claim they're fairly investigated. It was a rare instance of congressional Republicans pushing back and winning. Trump is still getting carte blanche on his tax issues through this deal. I can't believe that, why we're giving him free, a free pass there. Your thoughts?

So some context. The reason the position was created, the Director of National Intelligence, was after 9/11, policymakers concluded that there was a lack of coordination amongst our 18 intelligence agencies. So there was really great intelligence pre-9/11 that something like this might happen. But the lack of coordination meant the right information didn't bubble up to the right people in time. And I don't think it's fair to call him an incompetent. He's just not qualified, which is kind of the same thing. But I— Incompetent to this task. Agreed. Agreed. So let's just, let's just review. The past directors of national intelligence, their background. So let's start with Tulsi Gabbard, to be fair. Combat veteran, military officer, member of Congress, House Armed Services Committee. Avril Haines, deputy CIA director, deputy national security advisor. John Ratcliffe, congressman, House Intelligence Committee member, former federal prosecutor. Dan—

now head of the CIA, by the way.

Go ahead. Dan Coats, senator, ambassador to Germany, member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. James Clapper, former Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, decades of military intelligence. Dennis Blair, 4-star Admiral, former Commander of US Pacific Command overseeing Indo-Pacific military operations. Mike McConnell, former Director of the NSA, Vice Admiral, career intelligence professional. John Negroponte, 40-year diplomat, Ambassador to Iraq, UN Ambassador, Director of National Intelligence created after 9/11 reforms. And Bill Pulte, I'm gonna say this, he's a rich kid. He builds fucking homes in Fort Myers. Yeah, that's right. And he might be a nice man. He might be very competent. He might be a brilliant businessman. He's 38 and he picks out Sub-Zeroes for homes and retirement communities and skiers.

Yeah, that's a big job. That's a big job, Scott.

Well, okay.

No, I'm teasing. It's not a big job.

The notion that we're gonna put, look, this is going to put our, Are servicemen and servicewomen in— in harm's way, danger unnecessarily and recklessly? Two, do you think the Mossad or MI6 are going to continue to share information with our intelligence agencies?

They must be cheering in Russia and China right now.

They must be cheering. This is again one of the most dangerous things. And also, I think the American public is guilty of this. I don't think the American— I think the American public has taken for granted the depth experience and commitment of what is the best performing organization in the world, and that is the US government, and how deep the expertise is. Expertise, yes. Of people who decide to forego a lot of wealth and lifestyle to go to work for our intelligence community, our government, our diplomatic corps, our Defense Department. And we're putting in one of the most dangerous thing that is now starting to bubble up as we see in missteps in Iran and other places.

They're unprepared for their meetings. They're sending in Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. Are you kidding? This is what Hillary was saying. They're running circles around us. The Iranians send in very qualified people to these negotiations. And instead, we send in people that didn't have any idea they were going to close the Strait of Hormuz. Why would it occur to them since they're not— This lack of expertise, and it is a real thing. You know, it's like someone coming to me and saying, "I think you need to lead the New York Knicks to victory." It's like, "No." Like, I have no qualifications to do so. And this kind of thing, the reason he was hired, two reasons I think, is one, he's called "Little Trump." He's— Listen, I don't think he's a nice person. I've seen him interviewed. He seems like an idiot. But besides, he seems like a pompous ass. I think he was selected so Trump can control the whole thing. He has to put these unqualified minions into place It's always the case with anyone who puts someone who's not qualified in place, which is they want to control the situation. And Trump himself is unqualified to run this situation too, by the way.

And this is what happens. And it's very dangerous. Same thing with Todd Blanchard. He was his lawyer, and now he's doing his gut work for him, essentially. This slush fund, are you kidding? Like giving him carte blanche in taxes. Terrorist immunization fund? Correct. That's correct. Yeah, the private militia fund is what I call it.

Yeah, I never miss an opportunity to try and sound important. I've been on a bunch of public boards and a general unwritten rule. So think about it. The CEO answers to a board that's supposed to be a fiduciary for all shareholders. The president— everyone needs a boss. Everyone should and does answer to somebody. The president no longer answers to co-equal branches of government. Republican Congress has been neutered. You know, the Speaker of the House is basically just doing— he's just doing the dirty work for the president. He's not— he's not in any way giving his Republican colleagues a seat at the table here. He's trying to run roughshod over them based on what the president wants. The Supreme Court, I would argue, has been politicized. I think a series of appointments have created certain decisions that I would argue don't have a hell of a lot of fidelity to the Constitution, but to conservative values or what the president wants. Not always. I do think they do hold a line on some things, but I would argue that it is no longer oversight for the president. The only people that provide any sort of checks and balance for Trump right now are voters.

And the first thing you notice on a board, or one of the first things you notice with experienced board members in terms of how they evaluate a CEO is a lot of CEOs have had to be in a closet in a knife fight for so long to get to where they are that a lot of CEOs have a tendency to shoot talented people on their team who might be the next CEO. And you end up with a talented CEO who has a really weak infrastructure of senior managers. And one of the first tests on a board to see if a CEO is a good CEO is how often is he bringing in, highlighting, and praising other senior managers, and if he were or she were to get hit by a bus, if you're running a public company and there aren't 2 or 3 people that could potentially be the CEO, you are not a CEO. And you see it all the time. You see these CEOs who all of a sudden start shooting talented people who are recruited away to go be the CEO of another company because it was clear they were not— Your job as a CEO is to immediately say to the most talented people, I'm gonna be here 3, 4, 8 years, and if you stick around, there's a shot you're gonna be CEO, and I'm gonna help prepare you to be CEO of this company or somewhere else.

It always happens this way. They always sort of amass power. They don't wanna be replaced. They shoot their minions in the head just so they can stay.

I've worked with some CEOs who are very good at maturing managers and recognize it's a responsibility to— I think Apple has 5 potential CEOs in the management ranks.

Yes, but I'm saying more common is the CEO who, cannot be replaced.

But a good board, a good board makes that part of the compensation criteria. Right. Are you putting in place really strong succession planning here? The president, I mean, it's just insane. There is absolutely, I just love the fact that everyone's talking about Rubio or Vance. President Trump is fucking Chernobyl. If you stick around him long enough, you die of political leukemia. The notion that he gives a shit He doesn't.

He does not bring people along.

He would rather see the Republican Party burn to the ground. Die.

That's what I now believe, 'cause he doesn't care. He doesn't care about—

He doesn't give a shit about the Republican Party or ideas.

I'm like waiting for him to like invade, I don't know, Newark or something.

He wants everyone to go, oh, he wants everyone to say, oh, this Republican Party is nothing without Trump. He'd rather see them go down in flames. He'd rather see AOC president than J.D.

Vance. He wants it to go down in flames 'cause he wants it not to outlive him. Anyway, really interesting topic. But please, people who aren't qualified, don't do jobs. Don't, don't, don't, don't.

At least in national security. Yeah, national security. I say go for jobs you're not qualified for, unless it's the DNI.

Let me just tell you, guess what? You would do a better job as Director of National Security.

You keep saying that as an example of how terrible Trump administration— Is this after I run for mayor of Los Angeles?

That's the last job you put me up for. Yes, I think you could be a good job. I think you'd be good at that.

Anyway. The mayor of Los Angeles has no power. It's a terrible job. It's almost impossible to govern that city.

Exactly. That's why we need to put you there, 'cause you could swan around with the rich people and you love it.

I do like that. I do like swanning.

Can I just say, speaking of Oscar parties, so I was at this dinner for the Tribeca Film Festival, and Bette Midler was sitting two doors down, like two seats down. And she listens to Pivot. And she's lovely, by the way. She's great. She is lovely. And she leans over Bloomberg to me, and she goes, "Let me just tell you something," in her Bette Midler voice. And she goes, "I don't want you to get a big head. You went to the Oscar party, Kara." And I'm like, "Oh, I didn't go to the Oscar party." I said that. I said, "Bette Midler?" "Scott that went to the Oscar party." And she goes, "Oh!" You know, she does that voice of hers. She goes, "Oh, I still don't want you to get a big head." And I'm like, "I didn't go to the Oscar party. I stayed home. I watched the Oscars with my kids." Like, what are you— Totally, I got accused of Scott things by Bette Midler.

If it makes you feel any better, at about 11:30, I got anxious, and I went home and raided the minibar and drank myself to sleep.

Okay. All right. Anyway, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, California primary results.

Support for the show comes from Anthropic. Not every question has an easy answer, and when you're working through something complicated, it helps to have a thought partner to kick ideas around with and uncover what's really going on beneath the surface. That's where Claude comes in. Claude is the AI for minds that don't stop at good enough. It's the collaborator that actually understands your entire workflow and thinks with you, whether you're debugging code at midnight or strategizing your your next business move, Claude extends your thinking to tackle the problems that matter. Plus, Claude's research capabilities can have comprehensive, reliable analysis and citations, turning hours of research into minutes. And Cowork brings Claude's code-agentic power to your desktop, no terminal required. Just point it to a folder on your computer and add connectors including Google Drive and Gmail, describe what you need, and it handles the rest. You just queue up tasks and come back to find finish. Finished work. For problems we're solving, get started with Claude today at claude.ai/pivot. That's claude.ai/pivot. And check out Claude Pro, which includes access to all of the features mentioned in today's episode. claude.ai/pivot. Support for the show comes from CoreWeave.

AI isn't just a new tool, it encompasses so much more. It's spurring a revolution across all industries and reshaping itself to become a big part of our future together. CoreWeave is at the center, powering some of the biggest names in AI. As the essential cloud for AI, CoreWeave provides an AI platform that combines next-generation infrastructure, intelligent tools, and expert support. It's powering the world's most complex AI workloads faster and more efficiently. From medical research and diagnosis to education, from complex visual effects for movies to breakthroughs in science and technology. If it's AI, CoreWeave is uniquely ready to power it with purpose-built tech. The big ideas, the wild visions, and what-ifs and why-nots. CoreWeave is working to build what's never been built before. CoreWeave is the essential cloud for AI. Ready for anything. Ready for AI. To learn more about how CoreWeave powers the world's best AI, go to coreweave.com/readyforanything.

Golden Globe winners Ayo Adebreye and Don Cheadle make their acclaimed Broadway debuts in David Auburn's Tony and Pulitzer Prize-winning masterpiece, Proof. "One of the best American dramas of the 20th century brought thrillingly back to life," raves the Chicago Tribune. Deadline declares, "Iowa DeBrie is utterly captivating, leading one of the best casts on Broadway right now." And Entertainment Weekly says, "Don Cheadle's portrayal is filled with sparks of genius." The Wall Street Journal says, "Proof is a jolt of energizing surprise." The strictly limited engagement is on Broadway at the Booth Theater through July 19th only. Tickets from $99 are available now at proofbroadway.com.

Scott, we're back with more news. Let's get into the primary races in California. What a fucking mess this is. As we record on Wednesday, ballots for California's governor's race are still being counted with Republican Steve Hilton and Democratic Xavier Becerra in the lead. In Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass holds the lead in results, but it became the city's first sitting mayor since 2005 to fail to earn 50% of votes required to avoid a runoff. As we tape, the race for the second runoff spot is too close to call, with Spencer Pratt currently in the lead. Let's listen to a clip we got from co-founder of Run for Something, Amanda Littman, about the situation. Hi, Kara. Hi, Scott.

So I will say it's still a little early to have some hot takes on the California election results. We'll know more at the end of the day today on Wednesday. However, a few things I am noticing: how much money does or does not matter. You know, Thomas Dyer spent upwards of $200 million of his own dollars on this campaign, maybe more. Seems like unless the results come back differently and the ballots are counting now, he's not going to make it to November. Meanwhile, down in LA, Spencer Pratt, even if he doesn't make it all the way to the runoff, we'll see how these ballots come in for Nithya, really modeled a new way of doing this. Mega viral user-generated AI videos, um, breaking through with really authentic video capitalizing on the honestly candidate-agnostic media ecosystem the right has built. We have to be prepared for this. We cannot just spend our way into victory. We have to capture attention in order to win. That means interesting candidates. That means engaging messages. That means sometimes a little bit more risk tolerance. We've got to be willing to lean in and be a little bit more unscripted.

And that's something that is very, very hard for Democrats to do, but is the only way we're going to be able to capture the voters we need this fall.

Interesting. That's very smart. I agree with her. I gotta say, we talked a little sort of about Graham Platner, the same thing is that, you know, you can expect perfection or results essentially. Thoughts on this? Thoughts on this situation in California? My son voted for Tom Steyer. Interesting, I think. I shouldn't say that, but I think that's who he voted for.

Yeah, but I actually think people, the story will be about Tom Steyer couldn't spend a quarter of a billion dollars to get into a runoff. It reminds me a little bit of Meg Whitman's campaign for governor. Oh yeah. Do you remember that? And that is on paper, they're very attractive candidates, but for whatever reason, they just don't resonate with voters. And I actually think it's a good thing when the, the biggest funder, it doesn't win. I think that that's actually a, a, a positive. But the biggest loser in this wasn't Tom Steyer. It's the California Democratic establishment. California's the bluest large state in America, yet the dominant issues weren't about bodily autonomy, Trump, or democracy. It was affordability, housing, energy costs, insurance, homelessness, And when voters are talking about quality of life issues and cost of living, ideology takes a backseat to competence. And Democrats are not perceived as the party.

That is true. Of competence. That's very canny.

And national candidates need to take a page here and start, like J.B. Pritzker is really focused on shit like upgrading the bond rating of Illinois bonds. That shit's important. It's boring, but it's really important. So Steyer, the story will be Steyer just proved money is overrated right now. If you're not a compelling candidate. And Hilton's success is a symptom, not the story. He's not winning because California became conservative overnight. He's benefiting again from something much more dangerous for Democrats who think the current model just isn't working. So what does California have right now? The highest housing costs in America, some of the highest energy prices, persistent homelessness, despite enormous spending, net outmigration over much of the last decade. And, you know, these are governance problems, not ideological problems. And Hilton, and to a lesser extent Pratt, are vessels for that frustration.

I think that's a very canny way to put it. They aren't something fresh. They're not rushing towards them. They're reacting against something.

This is why mothers voted for Trump who have traditionally voted Democratic. If your son's in the basement playing video games and vaping, you don't give a flying fuck about territorial sovereignty in Ukraine or transgender rights. And at some point when there are homeless people everywhere, despite reports it's costing taxpayers $70,000 per homeless person, you don't care about how thoughtful. You don't want someone cosplaying Obama. You want someone who says, I'm going to come in, And I'm gonna be a lifestyle mayor and focus on competence and getting shit done. And by the way, anyone who does an ounce of due diligence around, which I've done a little, I've just started doing around what it means to govern in LA, all of the shitposting and criticism, a lot of it fair, the Mayor Baskets, a lot of it is unfair because some of it is about bureaucracy at the FEMA level. Mm-hmm. Yeah. And good, whoever wins out the mayor of LA, A lot of this, you know, it's actually the president of the LA County and the Board of Supervisors that have all the power. LA, similar to, you could argue about California has become ungovernable, but until Democrats at an executive level start showing they can improve the quality of people's life and offer them good value for the money, every state is a product.

You pay for it in taxes, you expect a product. And right now there's just no getting around it. Democratically run products aren't gaining share, they're losing share.

Some of these, let me be, to be fair, homelessness is an intractable problem. It's one of these most difficult problems. In California, it gets it because of the weather and because people want to go there. Los Angeles particularly, it's a great place to be homeless compared to like, I don't know, Montana or somewhere else.

It is really bad.

It is really bad. It is. But there's all these problems. Like where do you begin? Because it's such, and it's also an interrelated problem. So they have the war The worst problem of the worst of a terrible problem that's already hard to fix in an easy— even if you had minor homelessness. But it's, again, it's a complicated multifaceted issue that you have to do piece by piece. And I don't think any— I mean, I don't think if Spencer Pratt, he's just gonna arrest them. That's not gonna work. That's not gonna fix anything. It's not gonna— you're right.

It's not gonna work. And by the way, your house burning down isn't a qualification to be mayor.

No, not at all. Not at all. But he is canny. She's right. He's good. He's good at the—

The stuff. Oh, he's, by the way, he's run an outstanding campaign. Yeah. Outstanding. Yeah, we'll see where it goes. The silver lining here is Becerra. Yeah. And that is he might be exactly what Democrats need. He isn't exciting. And quite frankly, that's probably why he won. If you were to summarize, you know, Democrats have spent a decade searching for charisma. Right now it appears voters are searching for competence.

Daniel Lurie is that. He does videos every single day from a different restaurant in San Francisco. I know who he is. He goes somewhere, he makes some mistakes. He's not talking about Israel.

He's not talking about transgender rights. He's not talking about bodily autonomy. He's not talking about Trump. He's just like, "How do I get money to get people to work?" Right.

But then he's also doing happy ones too. Like, I just went to this great Korean restaurant. He's very good. I would go— I'd follow Daniel Lurie's lead in a lot of these things. You don't have to be a douche nozzle like Spencer Pratt. He's basically a douche nozzle. Daniel's getting stuff done and using social media in a really— I'd pay attention to what he's doing. 'Cause he's not a compelling, like, wow personality. I mean, and he is, he's lovely, by the way, but he's not like, like, show up, you know, hand waving at all. But I think he does use social media.

He feels like upper middle management.

Yeah. And he's also very— he seems competent. He gets things done. He's always on social media. I look at him. Anyway, maybe he'll be governor of California.

But just to come back to California, the race became a choice between celebrity, Hilton, money, Steyer, and experience, Becerra. And experience appears to be winning. And the national lesson that Democrats need to draw from this is the Democratic Party keeps assuming every election is a referendum on Trump. Increasingly, voters are treating elections as a referendum on whether they can afford groceries, insurance, electricity, and a mortgage.

And what your governor can do about that. Not governors can't, or mayor can do about it. Anyway, last story here, Apple's smart glasses are now expected to launch in late 2027 after the company hit some delays.

More glasses.

This is from Apple, Scott. Apple is reportedly following the playbook similar to Apple Watch, focusing on driving mainstream adoption of both glasses and sunglasses. These are things that look like glasses. First-generation glasses are expected to emphasize features like cameras, but Apple believes glasses could eventually evolve into a health device and incorporate augmented reality. Now I know you've been critical of the Oculus and Apple Vision Pro. These are big, heavy units. These would be more like what Meta has with their Ray-Bans or their other different things. I have a feeling Apple's going to come right up the back, up the middle, and take it all. Just like with the watch. I think they'll design the best glasses. They'll work the best. And this is a way it goes mainstream, if this thing is to go mainstream.

You're exactly right. They weren't the first in the iPod. There's my colleague at NYU Stern who's now at the Tuck School, Peter Golder. He has this— he taught me something that stuck with me that I thought was just a brilliant observation, and it's the focus of his research., and that is the innovator doesn't win from a shareholder perspective. The innovator gets mud on their face and arrows in their back. It's the second mouse. It's the person that learns from the innovator who wastes a lot of capital and energy and comes in, and it's the second mouse that gets the cheese. Apple has essentially built the most valuable company in the world, now number 2, on a second mouse strategy. And that is essentially Meta built this market, but Apple's gonna collect the rent. And this has— this is not a mixed reality headset. That shit was like a prophylactic, right? That was just stupid. Just stupid. Meta has done the hard work. Ray-Ban reportedly sold about 7 million units in 2025 and owns 85% of the category. And Apple is now entering after consumer behavior has already been validated. True, right? Yeah. People— Apple is the most— is the most aspirational brand globally.

It says, I'm, I'm one of the 1 billion people who are the most creative and wealthy people on the planet. And it is the ultimate luxury item is an iPhone in terms of ubiquity globally. It means, it means you can afford a $1,200 or $1,400 piece of equipment that does the exact same thing a $300 or a free phone does. Mm-hmm. Because you consider yourself part of the creative class and you have some, you know, riz, if you will, economically. So Palm built the smartphone market, BlackBerry validated it, Apple captured it. Fossil and Swatch built watches, Apple captured it.

Remember Onkyo, the first wireless earbuds? No, you don't. I don't. Yeah, they were, I had 'em. Oh, there were a whole bunch of early wireless earbuds and then Apple came in and stole it, but it was called Onkyo. I had them. There were a bunch before, before the AirPods that we showed a bunch of them at the, the, the, our conference.

This is, this is what I think is gonna happen. Meta spent tens of billions proving people will wear computers on their face. Apple will show up late, charge 40% more, and take 80% of the profits here. And people, the mistake people make is that people think the Valley's greatest business model is invention. It's not. It's letting someone else prove demand.

Yep. Yep. Same thing with the AirPod. They weren't the first of those music devices. They just were the best. They'll come in with beautiful glasses. They're not gonna need Ray-Ban. They'll design something gorgeous and you'll wanna wear them.

It'll look beautiful. And if it's distinctly Apple, you'll wear 'em.

I'll wear 'em. I'll buy it. And you will totally have like 90 sets of them in your house 'cause you'll lose them.

Oh, look what I have here. One of my 8 sets of AirPods that I consistently lose.

Yeah. And remember when AirPods were thought as ugly when they— anyway, they're gonna take this area, I think. And if they shun, it has to be more than cameras. It's gotta give you information and talk to you and record things and everything else. It's gotta have more. I have a pair of the Ray-Bans. I don't find them useful at all. I don't, I just don't. It doesn't do anything.

People like them. My kids think they're cool.

I do, but it doesn't work that well with my other, with my Apple stuff.

I will say it's like another one of the wearables that ends up in a drawer.

Yes, that's where it is. But I bet Apple could, if they could give me enough stuff to do with it, I'd rather, like, because I use my AirPods now for everything. Like, I don't ever look at my phone, you know. Anyway, um, all right, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll talk about Trump quietly signing his AI executive order.

Have we underestimated the damage Trump has done?

It's easy perhaps to chuckle at a Donald Trump. There are times when he's sort of campy. I think there are things that he does, you know, his, his little dance and some of the other kinds of things to come across as a rascal, but I think we have to look under those things at the real harm he has done to American institutions and the rule of law.

I'm Preet Bharara, and this week, former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuaid joins me to discuss this administration's mob-style governance and corruption. The episode is out now. Search and follow Stay Tuned with Preet wherever you get your podcasts. Who is actually winning the war between Russia and Ukraine? Right now it's clear that Ukraine is much more confident. Time now looks increasingly on Ukraine's side, and there's no obvious reasons for them to negotiate a ceasefire in the near term just because the United States or somebody else wants it. I'm Jon Feiner. And I'm Jake Sullivan. And we're the hosts of The Long Game, a weekly national security podcast.. This week we discuss the war in Ukraine with Michael Kofman, one of the leading analysts of the conflict who recently returned from the front lines. The episode's out now. Search for and follow The Long Game wherever you get your podcasts.

Scott, we're back. President Trump has finally signed his AI executive order, and it's a paler shade of white after scrapping a previous version at the last minute a few weeks The new order is a scaled-back version of the original. It asks AI companies to voluntarily submit their most powerful models to the government for review 30 days rather than, I think it's 90-day review window, it was in an earlier version. But Trump rejected that saying it would get in the way of competition with China. The revised order comes after a White House meeting on Monday with Trump, Scott Bess and Pete Hegseth and former AI czar David Sachs who gave his blessing to the new timeline. David Sachs had gotten in the way of the previous one. I'll note Sam Altman is in DC this week making the rounds. It's just dumb. It's just, it does nothing. And that's my thoughts on it. Your thoughts?

Well, the elites in the Trump administration think the regulation is controversial, but you know who's ahead of them is the American public. Voters don't think it's controversial. This is one of the few issues where Republicans, Democrats, parents, unions, and, you know, churchgoers all agree. I think this is the next great populist movement, for better or for worse. It won't be anti-immigration or anti-globalization. It'll be anti-AI, Kara. And this is, this is an enormous opportunity for a Democrat or a Republican that figures out that the first, the first person that really goes into a populist movement around regulating AI is gonna, is gonna the political equivalent of beachfront property here. This is the next big populist movement.

Yep, I agree with you. I think that's absolutely true. I think you're 100% true. Anyway, it's a really interesting, but this one did nothing. This one did nothing. It's a big whole lot of nothing. And David Sachs got his way. Congratulations, David. There were others much more concerned in that administration and as well they should be. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for predictions. Okay, Scott, let's hear a prediction. I shall go first. I just want to say Missouri is reducing state funding for Dolly Parton's Imagination Library, an early childhood reading program that mails free books to children. My children get them. They're wonderful. And Dolly went on to complain about this online very— in a very friendly way. But this is a great program. And so reducing funding for kids getting books is the most idiotic thing I've ever seen. And I predict Dolly Parton will prevail here and the money will get to this group. Your thoughts, Scott?

Well, first, just a comment on that. I was watching Bill Maher and they asked Neil deGrasse Tyson, who, if aliens landed, who would you want to speak to that person? Or who would be best selected to speak to aliens? And he said a great mathematician, which makes a lot of sense because he said any alien that gets to Earth would understand math. And that would be our common bridge in terms of vocabulary. Which made a lot of sense to me. But I immediately thought, no joke, Dolly Parton. Send Dolly Parton. Send Dolly fucking Parton. She's super likable on a lot of levels. Kind of represents Earth pretty well. The best of us. The first that went into my mind is that if aliens show up and we need a spokesperson, send Dolly Parton. I agree. She can sing. She's likable. She's smart. Smart, charitable, Tells a good story, boobs. Yeah, you know, I don't know. I won't get into other attributes that kind of represent America, but—

She talks about 'em. You can say boobs with her. She talks about boobs.

Anyways, but I thought, yeah, Dolly Parton, that's who should represent us when the aliens come.

Well, give her her book money, you fuckers in Missouri. Anyway, go ahead.

So my prediction is more boring. I think you're about to see the mother of all capital front running. What do I mean by that? As everyone obsesses over the valuation of OpenAI, SpaceX, and Anthropic, you're about to see— Alphabet's already announced it. The next will be Amazon. Then it might be NVIDIA. Then it might be Apple. They're gonna front run all these guys. They're gonna cut the line and say, you wanna give cheap capital to companies in AI? Our company is lower risk, not as much upside, but much lower risk. Google just did it. Alphabet just announced an $80 billion offering. They're like, if there's a quarter of a trillion dollars out there of dumb money or cheap money looking to get into AI, they're cutting the line and they're gonna suck the oxygen or some of the oxygen outta the room of the IPO market.

Yeah, 'cause you noted correctly, there's not enough money even for all of these things.

I saw that from Alphabet yesterday. I'm like, oh my God, that's such fucking genius.

Explain what they're doing. They're raising money by—

Well, usually these companies will do a debt offering at this point because they can use— Why did they? Typically access such cheap debt.. But I think Alphabet said, my God, these guys, there's, there's people out there willing to invest at 20, 30, 100 times revenues to buy, go buy Nvidia chips and build out AI infrastructure. They're like, I think we'll take that. And so Alphabet, whose CEO or CFO is incredibly smart, said, no, we'll, we'll go get $80 billion of that cheap capital. And it's so smart. It's so kind of, if you will, and quite frankly, if I'm Apple, if I'm Alphabet, if I'm Alphabet and I have Gemini and I think, you know, OpenAI and Anthropic are competitors, I'm just gonna kick 'em in the nuts. Yeah, yeah. And I'm gonna step on their oxygen line before we've even hooked them up. By the way, they deserve it.

They are as good, right?

It's not like, why should they get the money? No, Kara, they're better. They're better. There's less downside.

These companies have robust businesses. Well, why shouldn't they get the money? Why shouldn't they?

And they have great management teams. Yeah. So they've basically— Lower risk. They're front-running the IPOs here. I wish I'd thought of this. I think it's such genius. But my prediction is Alphabet's starting— I bet the CFOs of Apple, Microsoft, CoreWeave, NVIDIA have all got their pencils out and have said, let's get some of this— why don't we go get some of that? Yeah. Why don't we— if there's a quarter of a trillion dollars on the sidelines waiting to invest in AI, hey, come over here. Here, I got an idea for you. To my little store.

And by the way, we have other businesses to support it if you are worried.

Yeah, and there's less downside here. If things don't work out in AI, we still got YouTube and iPhones. Yeah, we do.

And we still got PowerPoint. Yeah, excellent. Okay, that's a great one. I love that. That's a great one. That's an excellent, that's a better prediction. Anyway, we wanna hear from you. Send us your questions about business tech or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com/pivot, submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVOT. Okay. That's the show. Thanks for listening to Pivot. Be sure to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel. Scott, congratulations on a tour with Ed Elson.

Thank you, Kara. Thank you so much.

It was really nice to— Of course. You're a great partner.

I really— You totally made the tour, so thank you.

Thank you. You deserve it. It was a great tour, and it was really nice to see all your fans. They love you. Anyway, we'll be back next week.

Today's show was produced by Laryn Emansoi, Marcus Taylor-Griffin, and Todd Wiseman. Brandon McFarland engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Broadhurst, That was me, Severo, and Dan Shillong. Nishat Kurwa is Vox Media's executive producer of podcasts. Make sure to follow Pivot on your favorite podcast platform. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Kara, have a great weekend.