'People need to understand the ENORMITY of what we are living through': Liesman on Nvidia fallout

We're throwing out the script and stayi. with the breaking news that NVIDIA CEO. Jensen Wong has officially resigned. Joining the conversation, Steve Leesman, CNBC senior economics reporter. Peter, Sam, David is still here. Steve, a week ago, the American people said. the corruption. is too much. One week later, here we are. Exhibit A here. This looks to me like a convergence of money, power, and. HE KNOWS HOW TO GET INVITED ON THIS SHOW. I DON'T KNOW WHERE I GOT THAT PHRASE FROM,

BUT HERE'S THE DEAL. I THINK PEOPLE OUGHT TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND. UNDERSTAND HISTORICALLY THE ENORMITY OF. WHAT WE'RE WE'RE LIVING THROUGH AT THIS MOMENT. JASON WONG, AS YOU KNOW, STOOD AFTER THE SECOND LARGEST COMPANY. IN THE WORLD. SO LET'S THINK BACK. THIS WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF. JACK WELSH FALLING FROM GE. IT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF BILL THE PINNACLE OF GE. IT WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF. BILL GATES FALLING FROM MICROSOFT AT. THE PINNACLE I DON'T WANT TO GET THERE.

YOU'RE RIGHT. THE PINNACLE OF TIM COOK FALLING FROM APPLE, EXCEPT THE TIME WE ARE LIVING THROUGH. RIGHT NOW IS A MOMENT OF CONVERGENCE OF. MONEY AND POWER AT THE WHITE HOUSE. SO THERE'S DIMENSIONS TO THIS. STORY THAT I DON'T BELIEVE HAVE. BEEN UNCOVERED TO THIS POINT. LET'S BEGIN WITH THE IDEA OF THE CONNECTION TO THE. WHITE HOUSE, THE $25 MILLION DONATION OF NVIDIA TO. THE BALLROOM ALONG WITH SEVERAL OTHER COMPANIES.

GETTING BACK TO WHERE YOU STARTED, STEPHANIE, IT SEEMED TO ME THE. WE NEED TO STEP BACK FROM THIS. INCESTUOUS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN. THESE LARGE COMPANIES AND THE WHITE HOUSE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEAR. OR I'M SEEING WITH Jensen. WONG'S RESIGNATION IS THERE WAS. PERHAPS A DECISION, I I SAY PERHAPS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW,

ON THE BOARD THAT WE. CANNOT DEAL WITH THIS PROBLEM KEEPING JENSEN. INSIDE THE COMPANY. BECAUSE THAT IS ALWAYS THE FIRST INSTINCT. OF A COMPANY. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM LIKE THIS, KEEP IT WE'VE GOT TO GET IT INSIDE AND. SEE IF WE CAN DEAL WITH IT. WHICH SUGGESTS TO ME, LET ME GO BACK, 1985, ALEXANDER COBURN, EDITORY WRITER FOR THE NATION, WROTE A THING DURING THE HE SAID THE REAL. DEFINITION OF A SCANDAL IS WHEN MORE THAN HALF. OF THE HAIRBRAIN RUMORS TURN OUT TO BE TRUE. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT DOES ADVANTAGE.

AND I THINK WE MIGHT BE AT A POINT WHERE. WE'VE ONLY HEARD HALF OF THE HAIRBRAIN. RUMORS AND MANY OF THEM TURN OUT TO BE. THE PRESIDENT IS TAKING A STATE VISIT. PETER, I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO WEIGH IN ON THIS. THE PRESIDENT WAS HEADED TO CHINA. HOWARD LUTNICK, THE COMMERCE SECRETARY IS. ON THE PLANE. IS ON THE PLANE. MARCO RUBIO IS ON THE PLANE. MARCO RUBIO IS WARNING THEM. IT HAS BEEN REPORTED, THERE'S A REPORT OUT THERE. THAT. THAT THIS WOMAN INVOLVED WITH. Jensen Wang COULD ABSOLUTELY BE A.

CHINESE SPY. AND THE PRESIDENT'S NEXT MOVE WAS. TO SAY, HEY, Jensen, HOW ABOUT A LAST-MINUTE. INVITE? MEET US IN ALASKA AND COME TO COME TO. CHINA WITH US, RIGHT? THE NEXT MOVE FROM HOWARD LUTNICK. IS TO THEN ALLOW 10 ADDITIONAL. CHINESE COMPANIES TO HAVE ACCESS. TO THESE MOST VOLUABLE CHIPS. YEAH, IT DOESN'T SUGGEST a great concern. for national security out of it, does it? And except for Marco Rubio obviously. thought it was important the president know this. He made a point of collecting. the intelligence so. that the president could be told. and warned of what was going on.

The president didn't raise it, as far as we can understand, with Xi Jinping. And then, of course, then has Xi Jinping to the White House. in September. He's going there next week, by the way. He's going to be in Beijing. on, I think, Tuesday for the annual APEX Summit, where he plans, he hopes, anyway, to have a three-way meeting with Xi Jinping. and Vladimir Putin at a very fraught moment. We're talking about the power. of individual corporate heads, by the way what this reminds me. of is what we learned just the other day.

about elon musk and the power. that an individual corporate owner has. in ukraine right these are not just. private businesses anymore. In some ways, they are stakeholders in. our national security. in a way I'm not sure that we ever fully have. seen before because they control, in the case of Starlink, you know, they control the. skies. They control, you know, the ability to wage war. literally. for Ukraine as it fights for survival. In NVIDIA's case, it controls the ability to. build.

the future technology that's. going to basically govern our society. and our economy. These are private companies, but they have such great public impact. I mean, they're private companies. in the sense of being non-governmental, obviously publicly traded in the case. of these companies, but so important. And that's why THIS IS NOT JUST. SIMPLY A SCANDAL FOR NVIDIA, BUT A SCANDAL FOR THE UNITED STATES. AS A WHOLE. THIS IS JUST ONE OTHER SYMBOL, I THINK, OF THE TOTAL LACK OF GOVERNMENT. REGULATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS SOCIAL MEDIA BEING.

A KIND OF UNGOVERNED MESS, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY EFFORT BY THE. CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT FROM BOTH. PARTIES TO SUCCESSFULLY SET JUST. GUARD RAILS. ALL THIS SHOULD BE DONE BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR. I'M NOT SAYING IT SHOULD NOT. WE HAVE NO REGULATION BECAUSE. THE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN FROM THE PRESIDENT, IF WE DON'T JUST GO, YOU KNOW, 100 %. IT'S THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL RACE.

OF OUR LIFETIME. EXCEPT WHEN IT CAME TO DONATIONS. TO THE WHITE HOUSE. THERE WAS A CERTAIN EXCEPTION THERE. I WANT TO MAKE A POINT WHICH IS POLLING. for CNBC, our national poll for like 24 years. My take is that America is pro-business. Absolutely. Half of them work at small. businesses. The rest of them work. So I think there's a leash that they give to business. AND WHAT HAPPENED THIS TIME AROUND, THERE WERE TWO THINGS. THAT WE FOUND IN OUR MOST RECENT POLL. THE FIRST WAS THAT CORRUPTION. HAD REALLY SOARED TO THE TOP. OF THE LIST OF CONCERNS.

AND PART OF THAT CORRUPTION WAS THE RELATIONSHIP. WHEN WE ASKED PEOPLE ABOUT WHETHER OR. NOT THEY THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE. FOR THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS TO BE. INVESTING IN PUBLIC COMPANIES, THEY THOUGHT IT WAS WRONG. WHEN THEY ASKED WHEN WE ASKED. THEM ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, WHEN WE ASKED THEM ABOUT WHETHER THEY THOUGHT IT WAS. RIGHT. FOR MEMBERS OF THE PRESIDENT'S. FAMILY TO BE GETTING CONTRACTS. FROM THE GOVERNMENT. THEY THOUGHT IT WAS WRONG ON A. BIPARTISAN BASIS AND ONE ONE OTHER THING, TO TEE UP YOUR DISCUSSION ABOUT MISSISSIPPI, WE ALSO FOUND THAT APPROVAL OF THE.

PRESIDENT IN THE SOUTH OF THE MOST HAD FALLEN FROM. PLUS 20 TO MINUS TWO. HERE'S THE THING, WHEN YOU SAY THE AMERICAN. PEOPLE ARE. PRO-BUSINESS, WE KEEP. IT'S NOT THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT FOR CAPITALISM. I'M HERE TO HELP. I'M HERE TO HELP. ARE YOU FOR CAPITALISM AGAINST IT? IT'S NOT THAT PEOPLE AREN'T FOR CAPITALISM. IT'S THAT THEY'RE AGAINST CORRUPTION. AND, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE COUNTRY INVEST A. STAKE IN A. SPECIFIC COMPANY, THEN THAT PERVERTS HOW THAT.

THAT COMPANY CAN OPERATE. NOT JUST THAT COMPANY, BUT ALL. THE OTHER COMPANIES IN THAT INDUSTRY ARE NOW AT. AN EXTREME DISADVANTAGE. AND NOW YOU HAVE AN ADMINISTRATION, RIGHT? YOU NOW HAVE A THERE'S A COMMERCE SECRETARY. WHOSE FAMILY RUNS AN INVESTMENT BANK THAT. LIKELY IS THE ARRANGER FOR MANY OF. THE COUNTRY IS PRO-BUSINESS. IT'S A FALSE QUESTION WHEN WE ARE SAYING, WELL, IS THE COUNTRY PRO-BUSINESS OR. DEMOCRATS PRO- BUSINESS? NO. THE COUNTRY IS OBVIOUSLY PRO IT'S A LACK OF.

TRANSPARENCY AND MASSIVE CORRUPTION. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THESE MOMENTS BEFORE. YOU CAN CLAP ON THAT IF YOU WANT. THERE YOU GO. THERE YOU GO. THERE YOU. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THESE MOMENTS BEFORE. THERE WAS A MOMENT WHEN WE HAD. THE TURN OF THE 19th CENTURY INTO THE 20th. WE HAD ANOTHER OLIGARCHY OUT THERE. AND AMERICA REJECTED THAT. AMERICA REBELLED FROM THAT. AND WE HAD A PRESIDENT WHO TOOK. THEM ON THROUGH ANTITRUST AND. JOURNALISTS WHO TOOK THEM I THINK THIS IS.

PERHAPS A MOMENT WHERE WHAT'S HAPPENING, IF IT CAN EVEN BE BELIEVED, WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH. Jensen-Juan. on an individual basis is much bigger. than that and it could be a moment of reckoning. for the United States where we say hey, there was a reason we had a separation. between these things and maybe there was a good. reason for it and it's time to rethink that. But the American voter, Jason Johnson, I want you to weigh in on NVIDIA, but the American voter told us last week this, this bro-ligar culture that was being created, right?

These tech CEOs. Did you make that up? I didn't. I wish I did. You should buy the website. But just a week ago, remember, Elon Musk who spent almost $500. and that is not how we operate. And now here we are with the Jensen Wong. situation, and to Steve's original point, we don't even know the half of it.

And we won't know the half of it. We won't know the full of it. because the FBI director, Kash Patel is grotesquely incompetent. Stephanie, politically, this should be a slam dunk. for the Democratic Party. Once they take over in January, there is a short list. of people who need to be impeached. and it starts with Pete Hegssef, and it ends with Kash Patel. His failure to not only inform Jensen Huang. the way he was supposed to, his failure to investigate this case, he is behind the eight ball on everything, and this is what the American people are asking. for.

They don't want revenge, they want accountability. They don't want to push Donald Trump out. I mean, I don't really think even. impeachment is the number one thing, but they want these incompetent officials. who are supposed to keep us protected. out of their positions of power, and I hope the failure to get rid. of headset this week is not indicative. of Democrats' inability to address something. like this in the future, because NVIDIA is just the. beginning. Once we see some real oversight. and investigations, there's going to be some serious consequences. for the people who haven't done their job. in protecting our economy, our security, and the president of the United States,

believe it or not, when he fails like this. But it goes one step further, right? In terms of putting country over party. We have another element with this, Peter, and it's self enrichment, Nvidia specifically, but many of these AI companies, Donald Trump is personally a massive. investor in their stock, which has been before a few. days ago, which has been one of the greatest. performers in the market over the last 10 years, 15 years. Yeah, I mean, the obvious conflicts here. are pretty, pretty blatant, right?

I mean, you know, the president is doing so. many stock trades. in any given time. He obviously has so much invested in the market. Now he will say, I don't control the trades. I have managers who do that. You know, but it's not a blind trust. in the traditional sense. His traders, people who are making the. trades. know what his policies are, know where he is going in. terms. of government actions that can. affect private businesses. and they can invest accordingly. And so I think that's one of the reasons.

why you saw the voters also last week. do what they did. The idea of self-enrichment, the idea of monetizing the presidency. has always been an issue in American politics but. never like this. The president of the United States made 2. $2 .2 billion himself last year, not even. counting the rest of his family, his friends, the family of his friends and so forth. And much of that through this crypto business. of his where he gets a lot of money. and not everybody knows where it's coming from. So I think that that, you know, to your point about the oligarchy,

the roligarchy, the tech, uh, I've lost track of the phrase, but the, uh, the tech bros, uh, you know, I have definitely, certainly, uh, raised concerns about who's running. the country and where the right lines are. or ought to be between private interests. and public interest. Sam Stein, do I have you? Yeah, you do.