eds to decide. This is a big problem.

I don't know if this judge quite realized what kind of implications this might have. And I also don't know if this counts as precedent. So if there's somebody here who actually has some legal knowledge that would be very helpful. And I don't know if precedent always means the same thing. You know, maybe there's weak precedent and strong precedent.

All right. Well I'll wait to see if there's an answer to that in the comments. All right. How about this? Lindsey Graham talking about Iran played the Hitler card. And here's what he says. He said on TV the other day or yesterday, the Iranians are playing President Biden like a fiddle. The ayatollah is a religious Nazi. Hitler wanted a master race. The ayatollah wants a master religion. And that he says they're trying to drive us out of Syria and Iraq so they can dominate, blah blah blah, the Shia crescent. And they're trying to build a nuclear weapon to hold the world hostage and one day destroy the state of Israel.

Now here's the thing. You either have to totally rebuke Lindsey Graham for saying that Iran is like a Hitler situation. So you either have to rebuke it or you have to get a lot tougher with Iran, don't you? And who can rebuke it? Like who can make the case that that analogy is just way outside the realm? You know I'm of course like many of you a big critic of Hitler analogies because rarely does a Hitler analogy work, right? It's usually just such a gross exaggeration that it's just crazy.

But in this particular case is a Hitler analogy too far off? Well I don't know that the Iranians have a history of executing people for their religion or ethnicity. So I don't know if that quite fits because there are not many of them but I believe there are Jews living in Iran who haven