Around 1:57 it shares:
Idk if this is a lot or not just cause while I can believe that Trump is more pro-corruption or whatever I would be surprised to believe that the other presidents/administrations were better considering the volume of stuff corporations have gotten away with in the years.
The pardon for the crypto exchange (~2:00) reminds of the stuff Coffeezilla covers. He’s sold merch before with the phrase “Crime is legal”. I wonder if he noticed an increase in crypto scams (among other bad stuff in the financial sector) when Trump took office.
Hmm. Ok so around ~2:20 he mentions that while with Trump the time has been “ripe” it wasn’t exactly much worse before. Its apparently always been a pretty good environment for corruption. Democrat or Republican.
A thought around when he starts mentioning deferred prosecution agreements (~3:35): I think its kinda odd that the government has choice and leniency in dealing with crimes and stuff. Idk. Like one purpose I can think of is that their may be a lot of crime and you choose to deal with important ones. Or if you hear about a crime done for “good” reasons like stealing when hungry (i havent heard stories of prosecutors doing this but i think they can do something like this) and you let them go. But idk it feels like an arbitrary power. Especially as he mentions that these DPAs are everywhere. It feels like a power that can be used more for harm than good. Like how Rand has mentioned certain government powers are just inherently corrupt. But idk.
(~5:00) So DPAs started off as something I think is ok, being intended for “first-time and juvenile non-violent offenders”.
(~7:00) About the Anderson Story: I don’t know if he covers it later but I do think it kinda sucks to hold everyone in the company guilty (Idk if they did do that exactly but it sounds like something they approximately did). I can believe certain people in a big company were just doing their jobs and didn’t know about any of the bad stuff. Like I can imagine working at a manager from my Starbucks and hearing my boss say something like “Shred X documents”. I’m like ok. Idk if the proper thing would be for a manager (or anyone) to start questioning it so they don’t get held liable for the company.
(~11:50) Thats really really sad and messed up that this lady ended up pleading guilty to negligent homicide even though GM messed up and knew it messed up.
(~17:10) I hear this a lot with fines. That the fine is manageable for a company so its meaningless. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing but I wonder what a good alternative would be. A higher fine? A fine close to bankruptcy but not there? But then goes back to some of the previous issue of it may hurt the whole business who has “innocent” employees.
(~24:00) He mentions that some things we can do in the future are make fines more harsh and actually prosecuting people. He acknowledged, earlier, that this is not just a Trump thing. I wish more attention was given to why these bad things are happening, instead of that they are happening.