going after them. Likewise there are a number of other people you can say have definitely not been bought off, right? Trump has definitely not been bought off. You can criticize Crenshaw whatever you want. I'm not in that conversation. I'm just saying there are some people at least on the Republican side and at least one Democrat who have definitely not been bought off. Definitely not. But that's not going to last. You know I don't believe that Biden, I mean do you think Biden hasn't been bought off? Look at what Hunter's been doing collecting money from other countries. You don't think that Hunter found a way to make some cartel money? Man, I don't have any evidence to suggest he did, but wouldn't that be the most obvious place to get your money? And wouldn't it be the only thing to explain why Biden seems to be doing whatever the cartels want? Because he's not really taking the border seriously and he's not taking the cartel seriously. He's not taking them even a little bit seriously. The evidence would strongly suggest that Biden's been compromised via Hunter.

Now here's the world we live in. I just gave you this whole long list of all the hoaxes. If you've seen my list of over 20 hoaxes and we know the pattern and how things are done, shouldn't you assume with no evidence whatsoever, just based on what you can see, this is not in question. It's not in question that Biden is doing a poor job of border security. There's no question about that. Some people think it's a preference but there's no question that a lot of people are coming across the border. You have to assume at this point that the cartels have some kind of leverage on Biden. Is that fair or unfair?

Now again when you talk about a government, the government is guilty until they can prove through some kind of transparency that they're not guilty. They're not people. If it were people they're innocent until proven guilty. If it's a government and they have a multi-decade pattern of being corrupt, which is well demonstrated from Watergate all the way through Google and Twitter rigging the last election, so there's no question about whether this is a group of people who do corrupt things on a regular basis. Democrats. Now I'm not going to say that no Republicans have done anything corrupt, right? But I'm just looking at this particular pattern. The Democrats have been running hoaxes and plans and ops against the American public for decades and we know it. We're not guessing. We know it.

So you have to assume that the only reason that Mexico is not being handled is that it's got to be. And I'm open to being proven wrong, but my assumption is since it's obvious, assume the obvious. Assume the obvious. And by the way that would be an amazing thing for Trump to say. Imagine this. You know the cartels are trying to bribe American politicians. Would everybody say that's true? They would, right? You know they are at least at the local level. So here's something Trump could say. You know the cartels are trying to bribe people. You know that there's no explanation for why Biden is doing so poorly on the border and against fentanyl. Assume the obvious. Just imagine Trump saying that. Assume it's exactly what it looks like. That's all he has to say. Just say assume it's exactly what it looks like and he's done. And walk away. Just say here's the setup. Just assume it's exactly what you see and vote accordingly. You know I'll take on the cartels. He isn't. And there's only one reason. There's only one reason and his name is Hunter. Now I don't have proof of it but you don't need it. They've demonstrated that this is how they act. Just assume it's true. You don't even need evidence. This is so obviously the pattern that they follow. It's up to them to prove it's not true, right? You can't take on the cartel money.

All right, next story. British Columbia, they're going to change the law so that they're not arresting anybody for heroin, cocaine, meth, fentanyl or ecstasy. Now Elon Musk actually responded to that and he said all things considered this is the better approach in my opinion. Do you think it's a better approach to decriminalize all of those hard drugs and the possession? So I think dealing is probably still illegal but ordinary possession would not be. In fact they won't even take it off you. They won't even confiscate it.

So here's the problem with this issue. The problem with this issue is that we have a binary brain. We all have binary brains. And the things we understand are it's illegal or it's not illegal, and then our brain stops. So since you've seen examples where legalizing things totally didn't work and you only have two buckets, don't give me any nuance. There are only two buckets. So if you know that there definitely are examples where legalization totally failed, well that's all you need to know. Only two buckets.

But of course in the real world, how many different ways would there be to change the drug laws without screwing the pooch? Probably lots of ways. Who knows if this is a small part of something bigger or it's just one thing they're doing. Now I do agree that putting these people in jail doesn't make any difference. I don't think that they go to jail, clean up, and then go on to live good lives. But if that is true that'd be interesting. You know I could be convinced. I don't believe that's true. But I also don't believe any data on anything anymore. So if you had data I wouldn't believe it anyway.

But it seems to me that if you put somebody in jail who had not otherwise been in jail, now they have a jail record on top of they're addicts. Even if they stopped, they're still, you know that, right? Just because you stop using that doesn't make you not an addict. You always have that problem forever. So it seems like you're taking one problem and turning it into two problems. One is you're a drug addict and now you've got a criminal record. So good luck.

Do you know what I would do if I were a drug addict and I'd cleaned up and then I tried to get a job with my criminal record and I couldn't? You know what I'd do? I would deal drugs. That's what I'd do. No I'm not joking. Absolutely I would go to the criminal side. I would sell drugs because that would be my best career move. And I'm already living this risky life and I take drugs to make me feel good so now I've got money. I don't care about the ethics of it. I just go sell drugs. And to me that's what I would do. Literally that's what I would do. Literally. There's no hyperbole here. If I had a criminal record because of drugs I would become a drug dealer. I would. Wouldn't you? It's just the rational choice.

So I can see Elon Musk's point. They're taking somebody who's got one crushing problem in life and adding a second crushing problem. Logically that doesn't seem to be the right approach. Now suppose you legalized it so you'd at least remove the one crushing problem but you did more about helping people have treatment or even