Trump, Tariffs, and Tech: Gary Shapiro's Unfiltered Take

Welcome to the Daily Signal Podcast, where we provide intelligence for the intelligent. Now, without further ado, here's today's take.

Ready to soundtrack your summer? With Red Bull Summer All Day Play, you choose a playlist that fits your summer vibe the best. Are you a festival fanatic, a deep end DJ, a road dog, or a trail mixer? Just add a song to your chosen playlist and put your summer on track. Red Bull Summer All Day Play. Red Bull gives you wings. Visit redbull.com/brightsummerahead To learn more, see you this summer.

Certainly there's a great reason to cheer the fact that President Trump won with a Congress that's Republican and conservative because it's theoretically pro-business. For me, it was, I'd say, one of the highlight moments in my career to see the inauguration and to see 5 of my CEOs standing behind the president. That's true, right? After 4 years of frankly hell under President Biden, which was so anti-business, so anti-technology, so anti— almost everything. And knowing that, you know, even in the first term, President Trump really rolled back a lot of the burden of regulation that was choking innovation, choking our economy, choking our country. And that was part of, I think, the ingredients to his success.

We are joined at The Daily Signal today by Gary Shapiro. He's the CEO of the Consumer Technology Association and the author of this book, Pivot or Die. Gary, it's good to be with you.

Thank you for having me. I'm honored to be here.

You have, uh, you and I have spoken in the past about your previous book, Ninja Future. It's, uh, it's good to have always a return visitor. There's so much happening in the world of technology. I do want to get to the book, but I'd be remiss if I didn't ask you about some of the current events that we're seeing right before our eyes. You have not been one to shy away from your views on some of the president's policies, particularly as they impact technology companies, tariffs obviously being one of the big ones. What are your thoughts on the first couple of months of this Trump administration?

Well, you know, I certainly— there's a great reason to cheer the fact that President Trump won with a Congress that's that's Republican and conservative because it's theoretically pro-business. And for me, it was, I'd say, one of the highlight moments of my career to see the inauguration and to see 5 of my CEOs standing behind the president. That's true, right? After 4 years of frankly hell under President Biden, which was so anti-business, so anti-technology, so anti almost everything. It was, and knowing that, you know, even in the first term, President Trump really rolled back a lot of the burden of regulation that was choking innovation, choking our economy, choking our country. And that was part of, I think, the ingredients to his success with the economy as for President Trump. And it was a brutal 4 years under Biden. So I welcome that. I mean, I remember testified in Congress the first time when Trump was first elected about the value of cutting back 5 regulations for every new one. And I said, this is great. This is what we should be doing as a country. We should be looking at these old things and getting rid of them because we are in a competitive world. And I think And I still think we'll see that under President Trump. I mean, he's made some really great cabinet picks. There's a commitment to our relation. I wish he'd go a little further. I wish he would take on lawyers, for example, 'cause there's a litigation tax in our country, which is unseemly. And it's been my whole career, it's been difficult. We have more lawyers per capita than anybody. And around the rest of the world, when other countries' leaders complain to me, I say, "Well, at least you don't have the lawyers. We'd be happy to export some and we'll trade you for your goods. You could have our lawyers." Because I really think lawyers are in, in large part, part of the problem our economy faces. It's a bigger challenge in the US than anywhere else. But having said that, yeah, there are some things that I'm not thrilled about. How could we be thrilled about tariffs? I mean, especially we learned the lesson. I have an economics degree and say 99.9% of the economists in the country would agree that tariffs are taxes. They're not paid for by some other country or some other company. They're paid for by the people who buy the products. And especially for the poorer Americans, which the Republican Party's done a great job of going after, those people won't be able to buy a lot of the products at the lowest prices that they were used to buying them, and it'll affect them dramatically. And also, President Trump ran because Biden drove up inflation with a huge amount of government spending, but also the policies we're talking about. So to fight inflation, having tariffs is a countervailing force. It's absolutely huge. And there's no question about it. This is not really subject to debate. I mean, there are some scenarios where tariffs make a lot of sense. They make sense for defense equipment. They make sense for shipbuilding. They make sense for a lot of things that are important to our future strategy as a country. But I'll tell you something, inflation's really important to the American public. What's important to us as an organization is the health of the US economy. We, as a basic fundamental principle of our 1,200 companies, US technology companies that I represent, we do not ask the government for money for our industry. We think that the federal debt is a mortal threat to our economy. And we're paying like now 5% interest on $36 trillion in debt. I mean, the numbers add up to the trillions per year we're paying in interest that we, if we could drive inflation down, which we could do, and you know, Trump has all the tools to do it. He has the brains and he has the willpower to do it. You know, cut the government spending, that's a great way of doing it. And also, you know, keep barriers to business low and consumers will win. Our interest expense will go down and the debt will go down, hopefully after we get the deficit down at least a couple of times. But, and you know, with what Musk is doing with Doge, I mean, it's brutal and it's tough and it hurts and it may not be the scalpel, it might be, but it's the right intentions. And I think he has the support of even a lot of Democrats definitely independents and of course Republicans. So I think it's there. We have all the ingredients there, but we're messing it up with tariffs.

Well, and to your last point there on the support for reducing or making the government more efficient, I mean, poll after poll suggests that there's an appetite for that across parties. I mean, obviously Bill Clinton, Barack Obama all said the same types of things. You're right, now that somebody's actually doing it, it's a different scenario.

Doing its stuff. But it's important.

Let me ask you, you mentioned the CEOs who were at the inauguration. Are they in President Trump's ear telling him about the consequences of some of these policies that you're talking about, specifically tariffs, or are they more hands-off now that, uh, well, I'm not gonna be out of their control.

I'm not gonna pretend that I'm talking to those CEOs and asking them what they're doing, but I will say that the CEOs from the Business Roundtable to other major trade groups in Washington, CEOs have been across the board reluctant to say anything publicly criticizing the president. They have an obligation to their shareholders. Let's be honest, President Trump does not welcome public disagreements, and no one wants to be targeted. And that includes a lot of members of Congress of both parties. Well, obviously the Democrats, that's— they feel their job is to criticize Trump no matter what he does. But Republicans who know better are biting their tongues and rolling their eyes, and they're fearful. And we're also seeing it from business leaders across the board. But on the other hand, look, my job as a head of an industry association is to stand up for the industry. That's what we do. And there's no question that in my world, there's very little support for tariffs. But I talk to CEOs across other industries as well. No one thinks this is a good idea because the uncertainty it's caused in terms of business planning is so dramatic. Just take the fall-off in international travel that is occurring right now, today as we speak. The Forward-Looking OAG Guide Hundreds of thousands of seats are being canceled from flights into the US. The rest of the world is becoming angry with us. We rely on travel and tourism as a country. It's a great way to get revenue without providing a lot of service, frankly. Not a wise move for all the hotels, for all the airlines, for restaurants, for the hospitality world. Upsetting the rest of the world from a defense point of view, all our allies, going after Canada, for God's sake, going after Europe, going after democratic free countries share our views. Look, we are— putting aside my own selfish needs as an industry, as an American, we all share this common view, Democrats and Republicans and independents, that we, we like our liberty, we like our independence, we like our First Amendment, we like all these things that we just take for granted. But the future— we're up against China. That's where the action is. And China, they do social ranking of everyone. They control the media. They own the media. They, they, they You know, it's unbelievable whether it— the social rank determines whether you can fly, where you are ranked on a dating service, whether you can get in what hotels you can go to. Everyone is ranked. We do not want this. We're fighting for the future of our children and our grandchildren, and we have to win these battles. And the battles are over economic issues as much as there are military ones. Military, obviously we have to focus on our military, and I applaud President Trump, and I have confidence it'll do that. You know, I wanna see ships built here too. I wanna see all these things. But in terms of going after the technologies of the future, which I will also give Trump credit, who continued in a sense what Biden did, we continued what Trump One did, is there's a focus on important technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing and robotics and things like that. The vice president gave a phenomenal speech to the Europeans about it, 'cause the Europeans, you know what? They're pretty good at democracy, but all they care about is privacy. They don't care about innovation and they export their regulations. As much as I love going to Europe and their democracies and their food, we don't share the same view. We are like Goldilocks and the Three Bears. We're right in the middle. We want that porridge just the right way. You have to balance privacy and you have to balance innovation. Innovation is so important to our American future. That's where our focus should be. And we don't need from government money to do it. What we need is the best environment possible to attract the best and the brightest from around the world, which has been our strategy to encourage people to come here. As Trump has even said, we shouldn't be kicking people out when they get their PhDs in these necessary sciences. And we have to change our immigration policy, which I think Trump is willing to do. I love the fact that he's willing to sell a certain number of things for $5 million. What I suggest is we get rid of a lot of chain immigration. Say, if you're bringing someone here, you have to pay for them, all their healthcare, everything in Social Security, buying into the system. Then you could bring your relatives here from abroad. That would cut back on chain immigration. It would allow us to raise the money for those that do come. And pay their own way. And it would also free up and say, who do we want here? We need nurses, we need doctors, we need engineers, we need healthcare workers. Let's get them here. And that's what we should be doing.

Gary Shapiro Shapiro Shapiro, thank you for that, for that answer. And I want to zoom out and talk about the Consumer Technology Association. You've had a lot of experience witnessing change, leadership in the industry during your tenure there. You've written several books on various topics. What stands out in your mind kind of at this, at this age we are with AI on the horizon and changing so many jobs in the country? What is it that you're advocating for at the Consumer Technology Association, whether it be on policy or what are you hearing from some of the groups that are members?

Well, I think the most important thing that the United States can do in addition to protecting ourselves from a military point of view and protecting our human rights under the Constitution is really to focus on the fact that there's this battle for the future of that affects our economy and it affects these new technologies like quantum and AI and robotics and biologics and things like that where we have the artificial intelligence, we have the brains, we are the most creative country in the world by almost every definition and we have everything and we, but it's not a divine right for us to be that way. I mean, we'd like to think it is 'cause our whole lives we've lived it. We owe it to the next generation to continue it. We have to be conscious of that. And what I'm fighting for is the future of our children and our future of our democracy. Because I believe in this country deeply and I want policies which encourage American innovation. Now we run the largest innovation event in the world. 40% of the people that come to CES in Las Vegas every January are from outside the US, which is great for our economy, but it's also great 'cause we are one of the few events in the world that's based in the US. It's the global event, it's innovation. And we, and the American companies there, whether it's John Deere or Oshkosh or all these other great, Intel, the chip companies and others, they're there because, They're innovative, but there are other companies in other countries that see the value in what we're doing. President Macron of France was a regular there and he pushed entrepreneurship. But as I remind him, entrepreneur is a French word, but so is bureaucrat. And that's what I like about President Trump. He recognized that bureaucracy is a risk factor and a potential big danger for innovation. And that's where I think we're doing some of the right things. So we have to say, look, these are the technologies of the future. Don't throw money at us. We shouldn't be asking for money. We should be creating an environment here so it happens in the United States. So we get the people here with the degrees and the colleges and things like that. So future, we also have this tremendous, we're still the crawling in terms of this artificial intelligence thing. We're in, we could do so much. I mean, I was not a big supporter of President Obama or what he did with healthcare, but the fact is now that the doctors around the country have electronic medical records, which detail how every patient has been treated. And we can now capture that data and using generative of AI, and of course anonymizing, protecting the, the, the privacy rights, we can figure out what works and what doesn't and what could work in the future based on age and sex and race. And yes, these things matter, as I've even had to explain to Republicans. You should be able to discriminate on the basis of all these physical characteristics, because in the healthcare world, that is what makes a difference. It could be your diet, your genetics, your DNA, you know, what year you were born, where you live, the food you eat. All these things matter. And of course, the treatments you get matter. But when medicine has been horrible about about is figuring out actually what works. Doctors— and I'm married to a doctor's family, my wife's a doctor— they do what they've been taught, and that's what they keep doing. And moving them off the dime on that to new things like focused ultrasound, which is a, it's a great thing that I'm on a board of a foundation for, which allows basically outpatient cures rather than chemo or radiation or surgery. Um, and it, it's a great thing that we have in America and we're exporting around the world. These are important developments which are coming along, but moving doctors, you have to do through education, you have to do through proof. And, and the way you get the proof is not through these lengthy peer-reviewed things and things like that. You do it by proving, going backwards and looking and seeing what works and what doesn't work. And we could, we are in a position now to be able to do that. So the, this opportunity in healthcare to cut back on healthcare costs, which is a huge part of our budget now, uh, is something that's real and it's out there. And also I think AI's gonna solve a lot of these factories that are gonna be run. They're gonna be run and built in the right way. And you know, I encourage US factories to be built, but let's be honest, it's gonna take 20 or 30 years. To build them. It's not gonna happen in the next few years. We don't have the skills. As, as, uh, Tim Cook of Apple said, it'd be a very small room that filled the skilled people who know how to build the factories here. Uh, China has several convention centers full of those people. If we're gonna go on that, and it is a good long-term strategy, it doesn't require tariffs. We just have to say, this is what we're going to do and here's how we're gonna do it and make it happen. Cuz we could do that. But to think that we're gonna have all these new jobs for factories is even the Commerce Secretary has said it's not gonna happen. These are gonna be highly automated factories and we need people who can We need people who can build them. And most of the jobs are in the construction industry. At the same time though, I wanna recognize in the short term, we've had this disaster in California and disasters in the Carolinas with, you know, natural disasters. We have a housing shortage. We need people who could build things. And—

That's true.

Yeah. About 50% though of the construction world is, are people who are not here legally. And, but they have a lot of skills. We gotta figure out how we could work this out so we have enough people to build stuff here, which we don't have now. The still, the one of the biggest problems our members have is hiring Americans to do things. Because there's a shortage of workers out there now. You know, the way we measure unemployment is obviously antiquated. You have to have been looking for a job in the last 2 years. The unemployment rate may be a little higher and we're encouraging people not to work now. I don't think we should be doing that. I think we should be encouraging people to work. We need the workers, we need the skills training. We have to, I love what President Trump and with Ivanka did is encouraging community colleges and skills-based learning. We gotta make so that people with skills have the same status in our society as people with college degrees. And I think that President Trump can make that happen. Absolutely. We have all the opportunities, we have all the ingredients here. But yes, I am frustrated because instead of doing that, we're focusing on isolating the US from the rest of the world, which is not good for our defense. It's not good for national security. It's not good for our advances in technology. We want people to do what they've done before. As President Reagan said, the shining city on the hill for the rest of the world. That's who we are. We want people to want to come here. Other countries don't have the immigration problems we have. We have the problem because people want to come here. Well, we should say who we want here and go after those people.

Big nonprofit hospital systems are making billions on 340B medicine markups. Hospitals can spend on luxury perks while engaging in aggressive debt collection practices. They get rich while patients like you pay more. Tell Congress it's time to hold hospitals accountable. Washington should fix 340B. Visit pharma.org/340Bmarkup to learn more. Paid for by pharma.

Yeah.

Let me ask you, you have mentioned China a couple of times. Where is China making advancements in technology that the United States should be most concerned about?

In everything.

Everything.

So, you know, 5 years ago, 10 years ago, I'd go around and in my first book about 20 years ago, I talked about China's the threat and here's what we have to do. Certainly the threat has gotten worse. You know, I said we gotta cut our debt and deficit. We gotta invest in skilled education. We gotta—

They're not listening to you, Gary Shapiro.

They weren't listening to me at all. I feel like I should be fired from my job. Because our priorities have not been met under Democrats and Republicans. The debt has tripled or quadrupled since my first book. And some of the things, yeah, focusing on broadband deployment, things like that, and competition has been good. But generally, we are having a problem. But China now, if people say, "Oh, China's just a copier," which is what I've been saying for years, it's not true anymore. They are hungry, they're quick, they take the fastest road, they work They work 16, 18 hours a day. They work on weekends. They are hungry. And they have a culture, which although it's very suppressed people and a lot of them are dying to come here. We have probably millions of Chinese living in the US illegally at this point because they come here and they want to stay here because this is a better place to work, which is great. But we really, I think we have to focus on the fact that if you're here, we're the ones who have to want you here. So there's a whole separate Chinese economy going on in the US right now and we have to deal with it. Well, I'll be honest with you, my kids speak fluent Mandarin. I have a 16-year-old and a 12-year-old. My wife and I have been to China a whole bunch of times pre-COVID. I don't think I'll ever be welcome back there because of some of the things I say. I'm probably subject to arrest. But they have a very bright future in terms of the strategies they're employing. Because for example, the artificial intelligence, they have no privacy. All their healthcare information is in one government body, 1.4 billion people. They have datasets that are unbelievable. They don't have these hearings about DEI and privacy and all that. They just go and do it. And they're doing a good job and they're starting to innovate and they're educating and graduating about a million engineers a year. So yeah, they're out there and they're hungry. But on the other hand, we could still get some of their best people here if we tried. And you know, they've been stealing, they've been trying to get a lot of the Chinese back that have come to universities. They offer 'em a lot of money. They offer 'em big things. They have a whole program. They're very strategic. They, I remember, I went to their vice premier speaking at the Brookings Institution a dozen years ago, and she laid out everything they're going after. And that's what they've done. They've gone after robotics, they've gone after AI, they're going after quantum, they're going after all these things. And we have to be very, very careful. We have to be smart about it. And I think what Trump has laid out with his Office of Science and Technology Policy about we're going after these things too is a very wise decision.

We talked about Elon Musk earlier. I would be remiss if I didn't ask you about what he's trying to do in terms of bringing technology to update the way that government operates itself. I mean, he specifically talked about the Social Security Administration, how outdated it is in terms of how they're keeping paper records in a cave in Pennsylvania. Do you think that there is an opportunity to, to make some innovations at the federal government level or even the state and local government level that could create some of those, uh, success stories like you highlighted in the healthcare industry?

Absolutely. I mean, there's no question about it. I mean, it's whether Musk is the right person is a separate discussion. I mean, he's running 5 companies still, which is, the guy's an advanced form of human being is all I could say. I mean, he's brilliant and I would recommend Walter Isaacson's book about him.

Yes, it's an excellent book.

Because he's really, I mean, he's so personally involved, but he's only one person and I'm sure he means well in his own way, but it's, there's huge opportunities for technological advance. And then we have bright people in Congress who comes from the technology world like Darrell Issa, our former chairman of our board, who is very focused on technology and government. But it does require some financial investment. I mean, it is a reality. You have to spend money to upgrade your technology. And as I said, we don't do government procurement as an organization. So I, you know, as I said, we don't ask for money for it. So I'm not here arguing for that, but I'm saying obviously technology made a difference. I was part of the, my best friend and roommate was the first worldwide chief technology officer of a state in Virginia. And we did it on a bipartisan basis. We did the world's first internet laws and the whole world adopted those laws. And that allowed business on the internet, electronic signatures, everything. It propelled the US forward very quickly. I mean, why did we lead on the internet? 'Cause we had a government that has a history of not stopping new technology. Europe has a history of stopping new technology. And if they see something, they wanna tax it or regulate it. We have the right mindset, but we always have to be on guard because there are business interests that are out there always trying to stop technology. I mean, we have a crazy proposal we're fighting, which seems so unbelievable. It's to mandate AM radio in every car. I mean, could you imagine like, and one of the biggest opponents of that of course is Tesla because they have a car that you don't have an AM radio 'cause it's a hostile environment for AM. And of course cars will be sold with AM radios for years for people that want them. But just to take it out and to require a Chinese-made product in an American car by Congress, which is what they're considering now, it just makes my head wanna blow up. We started in 1924 as the Radio Manufacturers Association. I'm probably the first Washington person who says, "I don't want our product mandated." Why should consumers have to buy this antiquated product? But the problem is, you know, the broadcasters who are fighting the technology world, they're broadcast, they go out to big audiences and they're having a tough time a tough time competing with these narrowcast audiences that come from podcasts and programs like yours and others that are out there that reach the people that they want to reach. But what Washington has done a great job, and we've done it as a country, we don't listen to the old industries fighting for government to protect themselves. And that's what Heritage has done a good job at. Heritage has said, don't protect the old industries, let's welcome the new industries. And that's what we have to keep doing always as the United States is be out there, welcome the innovators, welcome the entrepreneurs, attract them, make sure we have good universities, frankly, that are unbiased, where people could give opinions and things like that. I mean, there's a lot to be said for what Trump's doing right now, but you don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. I mean, some of the, the brightest people, the brightest— we want to make sure we can attract the smartest people to teach at our universities. At the same time, we have to respect a whole variety of views there, which we're obviously has not been doing. I mean, this whole— the thing of the DEI statements, that for every university is hiring people that you have to fill it out, it— the pendulum, it was so far out of whack, it has to swing back. And that's what we're doing right And I think what, you know, Musk and the president and others are trying to do makes a lot of sense as long as we keep our eye on the long game, which is we want to be the innovator of the world. We want to make sure it happens and the US is number one in the world in almost every measure.

Well, that's a great opening to ask you about the book, Pivot or Die. It's about leadership and the different types of pivots that you write about. You write about four of them. What inspired you to write this and share the lessons that you've learned throughout your career?

Well, being head of the organization since 1991 and dealing with these CEOs around the world and government leaders, you see which businesses succeed and which don't. And it's as, you know, the great geneticist Darwin said, it's not the fastest, it's not the strongest, it's those that adapt the quickest. And in business, especially as we saw with COVID which was really a, I mean, it was horrible, but there was a silver lining, is that businesses, instead of copying their competitors, all of a sudden they went in different directions. They started innovating, they tried different things. I mean, Best Buy, within like 4 days of the pandemic, the US closing down, Cori Barry, their CEO, went out there and she was delivering products to cars. And there's so many examples of that with COVID which has really propelled our healthcare system with telemedicine, telemonitoring, all these different things, and gotten rid of some really crazy rules about you have to practice in this state and that state and do all— We really gotta approach this with a thing like, what will make us best as a country? And there's so many ways to pivot now, and you gotta move quickly. The challenge is, and you know, Like a lot of the Asian cultures, for example, is very consensus-oriented and it's groupthink. And even if it's bad, it's like you can't disagree. So what we're good in the US is we're good because of our First Amendment. We're good at disagreeing with each other actually. I mean, even with all the division that goes on, we could work in a workplace and come up with different points of view and come up with the best thing for the company. But ultimately there is a system where you have leadership and people decide things and it's not the government deciding, it's the beauty of private enterprise which decides. And we have this success formula, which is amazing. I just, first of all, don't— we don't want to mess it up. We want to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship in the US and small business. 80% of our companies are small companies, and we go out of our way at CES, for example, we have a whole area called Eureka Park, and we subsidize it for startups. And we also, we have this program where we, we, we recognize that we have an issue with society. Maybe it's not a cool place to say it, but that people give money to people that look like them. So we have a $15 million fund we created that gives money to organizations which invest in people that have not been funded. Veterans, disabled people, minorities, women, and if they have an idea, they can't get funding. So we say we want to support that because that's a, that's a breakage in our system right now that we want to make sure, because good ideas could come from anywhere. As I tell my own employees, it doesn't matter who you are, good ideas come from anywhere. And we are a nation of great ideas and doers, and we have to perpetuate that, and we have to look where the gaps are. For example, the Head Start program is a gap that I think has been one of the most successful government programs. My view, uh, there's other programs, the Boys and Girls Clubs, uh, they, they take minority kids and they encourage them to stay in school and do things. Some programs do work. They can be private funded, they can be government funded. We're choosing to give our money to help the gap in funding of, of startups.

That's great. And I, and I, I mean, obviously coming from a conservative perspective, I think that oftentimes the private sector can do a better job than government. It's something that, uh, that we've seen in, in particularly the welfare state where churches used to play a much bigger role than, than they do now, and government has tried to step in. But I appreciate your point about innovation. I mean, it's something that we've tried to do at The Daily Signal where we've seen gaps in the market and we can pivot in that direction. And it's one of the reasons why we thought that there needed to be alternative voices on Capitol Hill covering Congress and why we've invested so heavily in building up a reporting team for that. And so I do appreciate the advice. I love leadership books and this was excellent. Gary, I'd like to close. You have built a huge following on platforms like LinkedIn. What are some ways that our viewers, listeners can keep tabs on your work and what's on your mind?

Well, certainly LinkedIn, our website, cta.tech, T-E-C-H, our trade show CES, which attracts 140,000 people from around the world. It's not open to the public, but if you have a business interest or you're media, we of course welcome you. Or if you have an idea and you want to exhibit it, we want to make it so a startup could get there and be exposed to 6,000 media and tens of thousands of buyers.

It's really amazing. I mean, every January, what a way to start the year.

It's inspiring because you see the future and you see that some of these fundamental problems of mankind, whether it's food or healthcare or clean air, clean water, are gonna be solved. And, you know, we'll fight over other things like social issues, I'm sure, especially in the US. But the reality is this is the place we wanted to see it happen. And we can if we do it right. And government has to get it right. And that's why I think your coverage is so important to get the facts out there and provide a different perspective. Perspective.

Gary Shapiro, thank you for writing the book. Thank you for your leadership of the Consumer Technology Association. Appreciate you being with The Daily Signal.

Thank you very much for having me.

Subscribe to get the news the legacy media won't tell you and only The Daily Signal can bring to you.