ore attractive are more likely to win cases? I just told you that. This is exactly that. This is just more of that. We all know that tall presidents or tall candidates do better than short ones. Do you know why? Because people want to sleep with tall ones. Same as dating. Exactly the same. Taller is better.

So if you look at Joe Biden, who is literally a desiccated pile of twigs, and you compare him to RFK Jr., who's ripped, you can understand why young women are saying, you know, I think I politically agree with RFK Jr. They have no idea what any of their policies are. There's no policy decision. Yeah, do you think an 18-year-old looking at RFK Jr. and Biden knows the policy differences between those two? Not a chance. They just know which one they'd bang. That's it. And that's enough. That's enough. Should guarantee a Trump win unless it's rigged.

Anyway, let's talk about RFK Jr., who did the most amazing thing on Erin Burnett's show on CNN. So the Vigilant Fox is reporting about this, has a nice summary on X. The Vigilant Fox, another good follow on X. Just look for it. The Vigilant Fox. Anyway, RFK Jr. says that Erin Burnett's brain stopped working when he made the stunning argument about Biden on CNN.

All right, so let's see if you think this is as good as the Vigilant Fox does. Right, so here was the argument. Kennedy said there's no court that found that President Trump tried to steal the election or tried to derail the election or tried to start an insurrection. However, there are courts that have found that President Biden was censoring his opponents and not just me. And then Kennedy said, although he did censor me and I did win that suit, so it's not just me making it up.

Oh my God, how much do I love that man right now? RFK Jr. is the person who I could disagree with the most and love the most at the same time because what he's done is he's dismantled their strongest argument against the election being rigged. But he doesn't know he did it. Well, he might know. But the conversation is about whether the president is an insurrectionist. That happens to be Biden's strongest argument against Trump because Biden went from what he went from Bidenomics, which now everybody's reporting he got rid of because of inflation. So he had to give up on Bidenomics. He did the whole the Army is full of white supremacists, and when they tried to root them out, they didn't find any. And then it seems like they've been silent about all the white supremacists lately. Have you noticed that? Like Biden was all about the white supremacists, but there hasn't been really a problem, and nobody was buying it, and there weren't any in the military. So the white supremacist thing like Bidenomics was something they tried and doesn't look like it worked.

So they've settled on this whole threat to democracy, threat to democracy, and also specifically that he doubted the elections. And when they say he must be a dictator because he doubted the elections, do you know why they can say that? They can only say it because no court found that the election was rigged. And now RFK Jr. comes at him with the judo reframe of all time and says there's no court that found that President Trump tried to steal the election, derail it, or start an insurrection. And that's just a fact. So you can't have it both ways. If you're going to claim the election was good because no court found it wasn't, you're going to have to find that no court found he was an insurrectionist, and you're going to have to eat that. And RFK Jr. is going to shove it down your throat on live TV if you don't like it.

So to me, RFK Jr. just dismantled the entire gaslighting operation of the Democrats right in front of you. That's kind of amazing. Now, what I hope is that Vivek and Trump see this and pick up that argument because it's a killer. It's an absolute killer. And here's what I'd love to see. And maybe you don't want to start too soon. It looks like the Democrats want to ride this whole insurrectionist threat to democracy. I think Trump should allow them to keep that argument until they're so committed to it it's just the brand, and then he should mock it out of existence.

You could mock the dictator thing away just by acting like a normal person. Imagine Trump going into Chick-fil-A. Some of you saw the video. Everybody loved him. He was hugging and taking selfies with a lot of Black women who were there, which is a great look for a politician. Imagine him going into Chick-fil-A, and while the camera is running and somebody's taking a selfie with him, let's say just to make the picture good, it's a young Black woman who's just thrilled to be in his presence. And then he turns to her and says, the news says I'm going to be a dictator. Do I seem like a dictator to you? And then just laugh. And then the person will laugh, and you will learn that there are no people who think it. It's just a news thing. There are no people who think it. And by the way, if you did think it and you met him, you would stop thinking it within five seconds.

Let me give you a demonstration of Trump changing somebody who believes he's a dictator into someone who doesn't believe it. Pat on the back, shake of the hands. How are you doing today? Oh wow, looks like you're doing great. I'm glad you're supporting me. How are the sandwiches here? And you're done. And people would say, how did anybody think he was a dictator? That was the least Stalinish thing I've ever seen in my life. He asked me about my sandwich. He came into Chick-fil-A, you know, where anybody could hurt him because he's right in the middle of the crowd. By the way, did you notice the Secret Service did not keep the people away? How about that's the biggest story. How about that? How about you missed the biggest story? Trump walked into the middle of a crowd unannounced, a very largely Black crowd, unannounced, just walked in. Now, the Secret Service was there, but there's no way they could have protected him. People literally had their arms around him. You can't protect somebody if somebody's up to no good. Yeah, he basically trusted the crowd, and they immediately reciprocated immediately. All he has to do is trust the crowd.

Now, it's dangerous because you know there could be, it only takes one crazy person. But Trump trusting the public is such a good look, and I would love to see him engage the public and just ask the question, do I look like a dictator to you? And to imagine that he thinks that would be his best play. In what world would that be his best play to become a dictator at age whatever? It's not a good play. It would guarantee his entire family got slaughtered. What kind of a good play is that? It would guarantee his businesses were destroyed. It would guarantee like civil war. Now, compare that to the alternative. The alternative of just doing a good job and then leaving office after his four years. Which one is better for Trump and his family? Unambiguously better to restore America to its former greatness as best he can and to walk out with dignity, having proven everything he needed to prove, and then let his business thrive, let history think well of him, and become the most popular president in the history of the United States. You don't think he wants that? You think he'd rather be a dictator and hated by everyone? It's crazy.

Now, if there's one thing that Trump wants, he wants the public to like him. He doesn't want to be a dictator. That'd be crazy. But a lot of crazy people are convinced it's true.

All right. Speaker Johnson finally told the truth about why he changed his mind about FISA. Now he is pro-FISA where he used to be anti-FISA. And he says, and Mike Cernovich phrases this exactly correct, he got the talk. He got the talk. Now, who told you? Name anybody else who told you this, that I believe that the top people, the president and the leaders of the parties, that when they get power, but not until then, only after they have their power, that the intelligence groups call them in and they say, here's all the stuff you didn't know before. Here's all the stuff you didn't know before. And this is why nothing you knew is real, and you better do it this way. That was me. And he's saying it. He's saying it directly, that when he found out what the intelligence people told him, he can't tell you what they said, but he's pretty sure he's got to do what they said.

Now, here's something Tucker added that I think is a real good addition to that idea. How does Speaker Johnson know that what the intelligence people told him is true? No way. There's no way he knows what's true. So if he doesn't know what's true, who's running the country? Because probably Speaker Johnson thinks he's one of the people running the country or at least a big part of the government because he knows this new information. But what if it's not true? If it's not true, then the intelligence people are running the country. What if it is true but it's also what the intelligence people want to happen? Well, then the intelligence people are running the country. So there are two possibilities. What they told him is true, which means the intelligence people are determining how things go. They're in charge. Or it's not true, and they're still in charge because they're telling you something to make you act in the way they want based on false. But either way, this is confirmation that the government is not the government. And Johnson said it directly. He said they showed him things, and if you knew what he saw, you would change your mind.

Now, if he had to guess, do you think he saw real things? I honestly doubt it because again I'm going to put the Dilbert filter on this. If you put the Dilbert filter on it and you give somebody unlimited power, the unlimited power to lie to the government and make them act like they believe it, who doesn't use unlimited power in the history of everything? If you give somebody that kind of power, they're going to use it. Of course they are. They're going to use it every chance they get. Now, they might not use it for small stuff, you know, because they don't care about the small stuff. But if let's say it was a difference between funding Ukraine and not funding Ukraine, do you think anybody's going to tell them the truth? I don't think so. Not a chance.

Here's what I think probably happened. I think they called him and said, here's why we need FISA. We can't tell the public, but FISA is the only reason we thwarted three nuclear terrorist attacks. And he'd be like, what? I never heard there were any nuclear terrorist attacks. He goes, well, that's because we did such a good job. We kept it from the public so they wouldn't panic and also that people wouldn't know our sources and means. But we have thwarted three terrorist attacks. I'm just making this up. If you're joining me late, none of this is real. But we thwarted three nuclear terrorist attacks. And here's the thing, Speaker Johnson, you can't tell anybody. Do you promise? Oh, well, really, if you thwarted three nuclear attacks, I have to admit I didn't want this FISA stuff, but I mean, the responsible thing to do is to make sure we don't get nuked. I don't want that on my record. So I guess I'm going to trust you. Yeah, going to trust you.

So it seems to me that whether or not Speaker Johnson heard something true or false, he did confirm that he's not in charge and that the government's not in charge. Now, do you think this trick would work on the president? If you said, Joe Biden, you don't know this but we know this, and you better not tell anybody. Of course it would. It would literally work on everyone. You put me in that situation and I'm totally aware of all the risk, right? I know what tricks they might play. They could turn me so fast it would be one second and I'd be flipped because this situation is irresistible. Nobody's going to say, yeah, I do want to take a healthy 30% chance that you're lying to me and I'm going to ignore the nuclear risk you just told me we avoided with FISA. Nobody makes that decision. You say if they told you, you're going to rely on them even if it's because that's just the better play.

All right. Marjorie Taylor Greene is still against the FISA stuff, but she has not been read into the secret things. Here's what I like. Yeah, you want to compromise? I'll give you a compromise, Speaker Johnson. I will be on your team and I will agree with extending FISA under the following conditions. You put Marjorie Taylor Greene in the SCIF and you tell her what they told you. If her detector doesn't ring off the hook and she says, oh jeez, I didn't know that, okay, okay, now that I know that I'm going to change my mind, I would be a lot more comfortable if you put somebody with the world-sized balls of Marjorie Taylor Greene in that room and she tells me so.

Let me say it again. I don't trust Speaker Johnson. I don't know him. I'm not saying he's a liar. I just don't know him, so I don't trust him. But I've been watching Marjorie Taylor Greene for some time. And by the way, if you put Matt Gaetz in there, I wouldn't believe him, right? I don't have that level of trust with him. Not that there's some specific thing. It's just I don't know. So but Marjorie Taylor Greene, I've got a feeling is purely a patriot. I mean, every signal she sends is that she's in it for the right reason. You know, even if you don't like her style or whatever, she really seems like she's in this for the right reason. Having been in the military probably makes a difference. So that would be my take.

So in Marjorie Taylor Greene and let her come out and tell me that she saw the same thing Speaker Johnson did, and if they both are on the same team, I'm going to get a little flexible about FISA. Yeah, I'm going to get a little bit flexible.

All right. Coincidentally, FBI director says there are more threats than there have ever been. Well, doesn't that work perfectly? Doesn't it? Oh, isn't it great that that FBI director says there's more terrorist threats than we've ever seen at the same time they're talking about FISA, the best way to stop those terrorist threats? So that fits kind of snugly, doesn't it? Just a coincidence.

Well, there's a new COVID whistleblower. This says that, well, it's everything you knew was true. The United States or members of it, including Fauci, absolutely did plan and execute and were funded the gain-of-function research to make coronavirus more deadly. I'm going to say that's confirmed, as confirmed as anything could be. Now, you have to worry about fake news and fake whistleblowers, but you know, everything about this looks just so obvious. Do you all agree that we could now say it's just the fact that Fauci was crooked? Fauci lied. It was obviously some secret government program. But here are the two questions that we have not seen addressed. Why were they doing that? Why were they making a deadly virus?