cure malaria? I don't think so. I think he would just buy politicians the way anybody else does, wouldn't he? You would just buy a politician. And have you ever heard that Bill Gates owns a particular politician? There are a lot of people who are owned by billionaires but I haven't heard him owning one. He's like the only name I haven't heard in that context. I don't think it could be more obvious that he's not in it for the money.

And look at the way he presents himself in public. Do you think his interest is in looking good to you? Is there anything about the way Bill Gates operates that tells you that his real interest is how you think of him? Everything suggests it's the opposite. He doesn't even dress or exercise or present himself in any way that suggests he's really interested in the narcissistic perceptions of himself.

Now what about philanthropy in general? Do you think he's doing philanthropy because it's rehabilitating him and that's the reason he's doing it? I don't know. I can't read his mind but I will tell you that he said way before he became a philanthropist he said that the second part of his life was going to be giving away his money and then he did it. And he would be probably one of the most effective philanthropists because he puts in the work to figure out where the money makes the most difference.

Now why is it that anybody hates him? And what do you think he would do if he bought up a bunch of farmland? There is no scenario in which he can make money from the things he's doing. Like one exception would be nuclear energy. I do believe that he could make money in Gen 4 nuclear energy if that's the thing that takes off but he's not really the guy who would make that kind of play. That would just be one of his investments. He's got to be doing that for social reasons, right? It wouldn't make sense to put that much money in one company I don't think. If he were betting on nuclear in general he'd probably spread his money around. Maybe he has, I don't know. But for power issues. So what if you think that if you think that Gates is going for power like his own personal power then you have to explain why he's doing it the wrong way and it would be obvious what the right way is which is just buy some politicians, fund some organizations, the usual way. Does Soros, you know you don't see George Soros inventing any toilets for Africa, right? He doesn't need to. He just buys organizations.

So if you told me that Bill Gates funded some organization and through it he wanted power I'd say well look at that. But if you look at the whole portfolio of what he's doing there isn't. Okay let's say ego. Let's say Bill Gates is doing it for ego. Do you have a problem with that? "Oh I cured malaria but I don't get any credit because I just did it to look good." No that's not how it works. You let him get that credit. You know I labeled myself a grandiose narcissist. There are a couple different kinds of narcissists. There's one that's just all bad. The grandiose kind is just trying to get credit for doing good stuff but they actually try to do good stuff. They're not just lying. They're trying to actually do some good stuff. So when you see me trying to take any credit for something it's because I'm trying to do some good stuff, right? That's not a crime.

All right so I will publicly debate anybody who wants to embarrass themselves by saying that they know so little about how business works that they think what Bill Gates is doing, the portfolio of what he's doing, is to make money. I challenge you to this. I challenge you to find anybody with an MBA who holds that opinion. Somebody who has a master's in business, somebody who understands business models, how to make money. Here's your challenge: find anybody with an MBA, so that would suggest a lot of business education at least if not experience. Find anybody with an MBA who agrees with you that he's in it for the money. And if you say the tax write-offs you really need to talk to somebody who knows what business is. No you can't make money on tax write-offs. You can only lose less. You can't make money with tax write-offs. That's not a thing.

All right so the Panda Tribune, a Twitter account you should probably follow, so just look for the Panda Tribune, did a cool analysis of Musk and his purchase of Twitter and what his best options are. And the bottom line is that Musk is playing this correctly. So his backing out of the deal and then going to court over it etc. is the right play no matter how it turns out. So he's played the odds correctly.

And here's the argument. Let's say that Musk has to pay the one billion dollar breakup fee. It's still better than buying a company that used to be worth, you know he was going to pay 54 billion but now it's worth only 44 billion the stock price. So it's better to lose a billion than to waste all that difference between what it's actually worth and what he was actually going to pay, you know 10 billion or so. So it definitely makes sense to walk away.

But here's the thing that the Panda Tribune adds and I've always believed this would be the obvious way things would go but I don't think I've ever said it so tell me if I've ever said this in public. The leaders of Twitter have a fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal for Twitter. They can't walk away from the best deal if there's only one. If there's only one offer for Twitter and it's Musk, nobody else is offering, that's important. If there's only one offer and he says he's going to walk away and pay the billion dollars, he hasn't said that but if he did, what should the Twitter leadership do to do their best job for the stockholders? They should renegotiate the purchase price and they should try to get something that's between the 54 that he offered that he's walking away from and the 44 that it's worth. So if Twitter is smart they'll make him an offer that's somewhere in the middle. He will have saved let's say five billion dollars by not paying the highest price. They will have done better than they could have done before.

Biden has COVID. Somebody's shouting that Biden has COVID. That's not a news event is it? That's just somebody shouting that. Oh it's a new, oh it's just announced. Oh okay. Huh. So Biden has COVID. I don't know if that means anything. I mean even at his age he'll probably be fine, right? He's all boosted and whatever. Interesting. All right well we'll find out more about that.

So anyway it looks at this point that the most likely, if you follow the money, the most likely outcome is that Twitter and Musk will walk away from the current deal but they will keep negotiating because there might be a price where they can make the deal. But I don't know that they'll ever be able to make the deal unless they reveal their bot traffic. So maybe a future deal would have more teeth than about proving the bots or something. But the bottom line is that Musk will come out ahead by walking out of the deal. Like under every scenario Musk comes out ahead by challenging the deal even if he loses a billion dollars it's better than the alternative.

So it looks like Trump is going to be hit with some January 6 videos today by the January 6 people and by that I mean outtakes that don't show the full context. And here's how CNN is trying to frame this in advance. So they're prepping you for this. So Adam Schiff and you know all the usual people that you don't trust are saying oh this is going to be really bad. Where do you see these outtakes? And what they're saying i