d to talk about some of these stories. But there's another big one. Representative Jim Jordan's posting about it and I think Mike Benz is taking a victory lap for being the one who brought this to our attention. And this is what happened. Apparently the National Science Foundation, NSF, they had massive funding from the government to develop all these AI automated tools for censoring online speech at scale. So the US government was massively funding an organization to suppress political speech on the other side. Now they don't call it that. They call it suppressing misinformation. But the things that we know they were suppressing were at least half of it was true. You know they may have actually suppressed things that were not true as well, probably, but probably at least half of the important things were actually true when they suppressed them or tried to. So there is a total information war that our government has tried to do the very thing our Constitution says not to. And the way they did it was by funding entities that we couldn't tell were doing it or were inside the government. So they did everything they could to thwart the Constitution of the United States, not for a good reason either. It looks like it's completely political. It doesn't look like there was any even intended national benefit at all.

All right, let's talk about Kamala's gaslighting on the economy. So I'll give you a very brief economics lesson here, just how to understand when the government is talking about how the economy is doing. Now I've told you even before the pandemic, I think I told you, that if there's one thing you get right you'll be okay and that's employment. As long as the employment numbers are good it's really hard to fall into a recession, you know, get into a depression or anything like that. So you could have a lot of things going wrong but as long as the jobs are looking good you're going to be in better shape. However that rule just changed and the Biden administration is I think taking advantage of the fact that people don't know that rule changed. Every other time if you said employment is good it was 85% of the whole story. Everything else would also just be good. But in the face of massive unaffordability, which will be the keyword, unaffordability or affordability problem, people are taking two jobs. So if people are taking two jobs because they can't afford things that's not a win, but it would show up as jobs opening and jobs being filled and stuff like that.

The other thing you need to know is if your government does not tie what the government does to the outcome they're just bragging about somebody else's accomplishment. So yes there are lots of jobs. Jobs were created that will get revised down maybe, but lots of jobs were created. So what was the policy that Biden did to create those jobs? Go name the thing that Biden did that you can connect to creating a job. I'm not aware of anything. Infrastructure bill? The one thing that they talk about. What was it? I mean seriously what was it? I'm not aware of anything that they did that would have some direct effect on jobs. So why is he claiming victory on something he actually literally didn't even work on? Yeah, so if anything he's made it harder to get a job for white people for the DEI stuff anyway.

So when you hear that jobs are good, it's true. It would have also been true under Trump. It will always be true that if you're coming off a pandemic, you know there's going to be some depression from the pandemic that takes a few years to dig out of and you should expect better, you know sort of a little bump in employment and stuff like that just because you're coming out of a situation like the pandemic. So first of all the numbers are weird because of the pandemic. Number two it probably would have been exactly the same if you'd replaced them with any president and there's no particular policy, nor does she claim it. There's no claim being made that because we did this we got this outcome. They're trying to make you think that he did things and they call it Bidenomics. What was it? What was the thing? Just name it and then connect it to the things you say are going right and then tell me why that wouldn't have happened if any other president had been there.

All right, the other thing is the stock market and the GDP are up. Do you know why the stock market is up and the GDP is up? Probably because of inflation. Inflation, yeah. The stock market is just adjusting to inflation and the GDP is just adjusting to inflation. So if you have inflation those two things go up but it's not good news. But how much of the public knows that? If you were to do a survey of the public how many of them could tell you that they do understand that the stock market and the gross domestic product go up just because the price of stuff goes up? It's not because you're doing better. I mean we might be doing better but it would go up because of any price increases.

She also says we have the strongest economy of any nation. Now it might be true but is that telling you what you want to know? Wouldn't you want to know what direction it's moving? Suppose we started with the strongest economy which we had and suppose it got weaker but everybody else you know was not doing so well so that weakness didn't put us below anybody else. Would you brag about that? No. So literally this could be bad news but it would be expressed in the same words. We're doing better than other countries. We were doing better than other countries before. We've always been better than other countries economy wise. So it depends how you measure it. I'm sure there are probably some small countries that are doing better but that's a spin there.

She says we have historically low Black unemployment. Do we? Is the Black unemployment better now than it was under Trump? What do you think? I thought that Trump had the record. And then she also said that historically low unemployment. That's just untrue, isn't it? I thought Trump had, I thought Trump's numbers were better but to be fair it was before the pandemic so if I'm using the same fair rules I'm using for Biden I would say that Trump's numbers before the pandemic can't be compared to really anything else. But my understanding is that's the situation.

So let me summarize. So she's got here are reasons: strongest economy of any nation, she's leaving out what's important which is did the gap between how strong we were and how others were shrink or grow? So that's just misdirection. We have historically low unemployment and historically low Black unemployment rate. I believe those are just lies because I think Trump had better numbers there. Wages have outpaced inflation. I believe that's just not true. Am I wrong? This is not true. Consumer confidence is up. Is that true? Do you think consumer confidence is up? Yeah I think so. No I think it is. I think it is not everybody but you know why consumer confidence is up? The news and the politicians have been telling you for months that they think that the news has not done a good enough job saying how great the economy is. So the news that works for the Democrats decided to tell you how great the economy was over and over again until the public said, oh well I didn't realize that but it must be good for other people because it doesn't look good for me. But if the news says it's good for other people...

So she's got let's see one misdirection, three lies, and one consumer confidence claim that's based on brainwashing that they did. And that's her claim for the economy. Misdirection, three lies, and something that they gained through propaganda that's not based on reality. And inflation helped the GDP and the stock market and there's no connection to any policies.

So here's a question. Tell me if you've ever seen this asked as Steve Doocy or anybody else said, the economy does have some good points to it as you've mentioned. Which policies are the ones that cause those to happen? Is it the open borders that help the employment numbers do so well? Was that the open borders that caused Black unemployment to be low? I feel like his policies should be working against all of these things. It's just that they haven't worked against them long enough and hard enough.

So all right, so Matt Gaetz is doing something very clever that I approve of. He's introducing a resolution to get people on record saying that Trump did not engage in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States. So the idea is to get members of Congress, especially Republicans, to go on record officially to say do you think that was an insurrection? God I love that. I just love it. Because here's the thing. You're probably thinking to yourself you know it's some kind of Trump loyalty test. That's how the news will say it. It's a loyalty test because if you're not willing to say that your orange Cheeto Jesus is innocent of all charges then you can't be a Republican. Look in, right? That's the way it'll be spun.

Here's the other way to look at it. This is my way to look at it. This is an IQ test. It's an IQ test. If you think that January 6 was an insurrection today, today you're an idiot. That's the end of the story. And I would love to get a list of all the idiots. And this is really useful because if you can get this into practice, I don't know what it takes to make a resolution happen, but if he could get everybody to sign up, whether they are so dumb that today they actually think that was an insurrection or rebellion, I do want to know them. I want to know their names. Don't you want to know the names of somebody who would be this dumb? Because that's too dumb to be an elected official. That should be the end of your career if you believe it at this point. That should be the end of your career. And if you vote for the border bill that should be the end of your career but that's separate. We'll get to that.

So yeah I love Matt Gaetz giving it an IQ test to Republicans.

So Nikki Haley has applied to get Secret Service protection. CNN reports. Now you might say to yourself does she really need Secret Service protection? She might because you know there's a lot of political action that could turn physical and so I'd like to see her get Secret Service protection but not unless RFK does. If RFK Jr. doesn't get any Secret Service protection then I got to say no. I got to say no. You got to do them both, both or none. Because if you're going to be this obvious about who you want to live and who you want to get shot that's no good. Yeah you're going to have to at least hide it a little bit by giving them both protection or neither of them protection. But no way can you give her protection and not him. I mean that would be crazy. So we'll keep an eye on that. They'll probably just ignore it.

Here on the they-always-accuse-you-of-what-they-are-doing contest, the AP has a story about how Trump is super sexist about Nikki Haley. And here are the evidence that Trump is sexist against Nikki Haley. He called her birdbrain. He said that her dress was not so fancy. And that once, unrelated to an