about you know I mean maybe Congress has some immunity but there's still enough people as part of the operation who would, yeah that's a problem. RICO is just politics. State actors have immunity. Well what is a state actor? If you're an elected official you have immunity or probably an appointed official, right? But what if you're just working for a paycheck or you're a political pundit on TV or you're the news? Because I think you could find a web of RICO type connections with members of the media, employees of the Department of Justice, employees of the FBI. Are they all immune? Yeah I don't think they have immunity for illegal actions do they? They probably have only immunity for civil suits. Would that be true? Because yeah if you do a criminal thing it doesn't matter if you're elected. That's the whole point of the stuff against Trump. All right they're immune from, you know they're not immune from criminal law.

Okay well in my opinion it's going to the level where it looks like just a criminal organization. That's not hyperbole. I don't intend that to be hyperbole. I think the Democrats have actually reached the level collectively that it looks like a RICO case to me. Now I don't think there's any chance of that happening but I don't see them as just a political party anymore.

Think about all the things that Republicans have been blamed for. Mostly they're blamed for crimes that didn't happen. You know obviously there are lots of lower level officials of all types who get convicted for everything so I'm not talking about the state official you heard about that one time. But in national politics it seems to me the Republicans have not committed any major crimes. I guess you'd count people like Michael Cohen or something but are they political? I guess they are sort of. Yeah to me it looks like one is a criminal organization, the other's not.

All right AOC came out against banning TikTok. Would you like to know the reasons that she gave for wanting to not ban TikTok? All right here's AOC. She looked into it and the reason she gave, I'll just summarize them. I don't understand anything about the topic. That's my summarization of her reasons. Her reasons showed she didn't understand the topic at all. She actually ignored the influence part of it where China can just decide how to influence us by tweaking the algorithm like that didn't exist.

Now what if I told you about the people who act like the big risk, the influence part, is it doesn't exist and they act like the data security part is real and then they take it to the next level of obviously either lying or bought off which is they say well other American companies have data problems so why would we be racist against China? So imagine if you will that in public she's acting like an Ameri