it wants by a two-thirds majority, I'm not sure how concerned I should be.

Here's another scary thing. Homeland Security is looking into battling online misinformation and has considered that misinformation could rise to the level of terrorism. I mean in effect. Now do you believe that? Do you believe that misinformation, be it intentional or not — I guess the intention kind of would be the worst kind that Homeland Security would care about — but that the misinformation could be like as bad as terrorism? I would say yes. I would say yes. You can see the effect in Russia versus Ukraine, the public opinion and misinformation could actually cause a land war in Europe. This could be a misinformation war.

So on one hand I can totally see how Homeland Security thinks information and the control of it is necessary to avoid terrorism. On the other hand, there goes your free speech. Am I right? How in the world can you regulate speech as a tool of terror and expect anybody's going to give you a fair opinion that doesn't have somebody's self-interest in the government involved? They can't coexist. You just can't have, I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you can have government control over information without giving away free speech. They're just too connected.

All right. I thought Biden was kind of clever in saying that this was a start of an invasion instead of an invasion. You remember all yesterday there was the argument, is an invasion or is it not an invasion? And then Biden comes out and goes, it's the start of an invasion. And I thought, oh that's good. That's actually pretty good because that does, that does actually, I know it feels like he high-grounded it. Like once he says that you go, ah, oh yeah, that's true right now. Because if you thought it was an invasion, he said it's the start of an invasion. And if you thought it wasn't quite an invasion, you could say, well yeah, it's just the start.

I thought it was one of the most clever political twists, you know, linguistic tricks I've seen in a long time. No, I don't think he wrote it. I mean I think somebody came up with it. But if Trump had said this I'd think it was clever, so I'll give Biden this.

So we've got all these sanctions that are going on so far. Can anybody tell me that they know if these sanctions are powerful or not? Is it my imagination or every time we hear about sanctions, isn't there always more to the story? Like, oh our sanction is we're going to behead every baby that's born in Russia. And then you read, but the context is that no babies are actually born in Russia because it's called the Federation of Russia. Yeah, there's always some technicality where you think, oh we got them now. Oh look at those sanctions. We've got those sanctions now. And then you turn out that the Nord Stream pipeline is just a delay of certification. He's not going to be afraid of a delay of certification because, you know, it will stop the delay on the certification running out of fuel in the winter. Yeah, that will pretty much speed up your certifications. You're going to get real flexible with Russia as soon as it gets real cold and you're running out of energy. So that's like a nothing.

Every time you hear that there's something, somebody in five minutes later is going to say, yeah but you know it'd be pretty easy to get around that one. So I can't even tell as an observer if any of this makes any difference.

So two banks were targeted. Sanctions on Russian sovereign debt. I don't even know what that means honestly. I don't even know what that means. I mean obviously they'll have trouble refinancing and getting extra debt, but I don't know the larger ramifications. Does that mean they just get help somewhere else and it doesn't matter? You know, was China going to buy up all their debt anyway? Does it matter? I don't know. Do you?

A ban on purchases of Russian bonds. I don't know. Was that a big deal? Nobody else is going to buy them. How do I judge that? How do they judge it? Sanctions on Russian elites and their families. Oh now we got them. We got some sanctions on Russian elites. Of what kind? Like what is it that they can't do if you've got 10 billion dollars? Tell me what you can't do. Am I right? I mean travel. Is there travel restrictions? Are they not going to let these oligarchs be involved in businesses that we do business with? Is it even practical to stop? Would we be shooting ourselves in the foot harder than we're shooting them if we did?

Why is it that we have no idea if these sanctions even matter? We have no idea and the news doesn't know because I don't think there's anybody smart enough to analyze it and give you the story.

There's no region in Ukraine and no age group where a majority of respondents say the Russians and Ukrainians are one people. That's also from the CNN stuff.

All right, here's another interesting twist on CNN. Chris Cilizza, who's one of their main opinion people, he does a whole piece about how Mitt Romney was right when Romney said as he was running against Obama, he said that Russia was our biggest foe. And of course Obama just slaughtered him in the debate by saying that China was obviously the biggest foe and Russia, you know, that Romney's stuck in the past. Well now Cilizza is basically saying that Romney was right, that Russia is the bigger problem.

And when do you see CNN agreeing with a Republican? Doesn't tha