st use the same word. So the problem is that narcissism can mean this good kind where people are just trying to do something great for the world and actually makes them better at doing those things. What's wrong with that one? So that's the kind that I see Trump as. He actually feels he has some role to fix the world and then he goes out and he kind of does it. So wasn't it good that he had that opinion of himself? Otherwise he wouldn't have even run for president. Who runs for president unless you think, I mean you have to be sort of a narcissist to run for president. But if you're the bad kind then you're just a troublemaker looking to destroy everything around you so you feel good. That's a whole different deal.

So I insist again that calling this one narcissism is just the wrong label because it's like calling somebody who's a doctor a murderer because you both deal with dead people. No one is trying to save the people, the doctor. The others try to kill the people. So calling them both killers because, you know, I suppose a doctor can lose a patient by the wrong process. It's sort of the same thing. It's just the wrong word for the thing. So confusing.

Well CNN continues to find the middle ground here. Jake Tapper was calling out somebody he was talking to. Dan Goldman was on the show and Tapper was pointing out that there's no reason for the DOJ to withhold the Hur tapes. Hur. Those are the tapes in which Biden is presumed to sound more demented than the transcripts would show. If you had the actual audio apparently it would sound bad, people imagine. But the two things I want to say about this. Number one, I do think CNN's move toward reasonableness, which is the middle, is real. It does look real. But I don't think it's affected every person. The good news is Tapper is definitely moving towards something like a sensible middle and Smerconish has always been the most reasonable person at the network. But I found out the other day, if ChatGPT told me the truth, it might have been hallucinating, but I think they have the two biggest shows. So the two shows with the biggest viewers are also the more reasonable people on the network. So that's good.

But Dan Goldman the guest, I'm going to put him in the category of the professional liars. The Democrats have a professional liar group which is the weirdest thing. And what I mean by that is in politics there are exaggerations and sort of normal lies but then there are the extraordinary lies. The ones that really no reasonable person should ever believe. You know like Russia collusion or the laptop is fake or in this case there's no reason you need to see those tapes from Hur. These are just crazy, crazy things. So they have this group of people who are apparently either so blackmailed or they know that they're the worst people in the world but they're the ones who will say anything. And if you don't know who they are you will confuse them with real people, right? Dan Goldman is just, he's an Adam Schiff, he's an Eric Swalwell, he's a Jamie Raskin, he's a James Clapper, he's a Brennan. Those are the names that when you see them they seem to only appear when there's something so hard to defend that you would need somebody completely shameless to look in the camera and say it's true or not true. The regular Democrats really don't show up for this stuff. There must be at least 70% of Democrats who wouldn't say any of this stuff out loud because they know everybody knows they're lying. But for some reason there are this five to seven Democrats who will always say the dumbest ridiculous lie and Goldman's one of them. He's an absurd character.

I remind you that in an election year all our data is fake. I guess Jerome Powell, the Fed chair, basically admitted the other day that the employment numbers are inaccurate, right? So I'll tell you every day probably until election day there's no data that you can rely on during an election year. Probably you couldn't rely on it ever but an election year is just crazy to imagine as true, right? Everything's going to be gamed. And I find that I've entered this category of humans where maybe 90% of all the people on earth I can't relate to anymore because I can't talk to anybody who thinks that government data, commercial data from companies, the news and history are real. How do you deal with somebody who thinks the news is still real? How do I deal with somebody who thinks that data from the government is accurate? How do I deal with somebody who thinks that they know an election is fair? I don't even know how to talk to them. What would you say to somebody who's operating in, it's sort of like I'm a base 10 number counter and I'm talking to somebody who, you know, base I don't know what, invisible numbers or something. It's like I don't even know how to talk to them. If you think that news, history and government data are real or that anything that Goldman, Schiff, Swalwell, Brennan or Clapper tell you, if you think any of that's real, how can I actually have a conversation with you about anything important? I don't know what to do about that. It so removes you from the regular world because the regular world is walking around hypnotized into thinking all this stuff is real anyway.

The Federalist is reporting that the State Department won't say definitively whether or not it's colluding with big tech to censor speech before the election. Now wouldn't you call that an easy question to answer if the answer is no? Hey, are you colluding with big tech to influence the election that we're about to have? Well we're doing things, blah. No, but you didn't really answer the question. Are you colluding with big tech to censor speech before the 2024 election? Well, so yes, yes of course they are. Yes of course there's massive censorship. They're just going to be a little more clever about it I guess. Of course there is.

I have a question for you. Having now used ChatGPT quite a bit I can't think of any reason I would ever use a Google search which seems like a really big problem for Google, doesn't it? Because my normal habit would be lots of Google searches during any given week. It's just the most common thing. Now probably I would only use it if I knew the URL or the name of the website because you know it will autofill the website so that's useful. But besides autofilling the thing I want, ChatGPT gives me all kinds of context. You know I can do follow-up questions. I can do it in audio now. What happens when I've got that on my phone? Apparently ChatGPT and Apple are not paying each other. There's enough of a strategic interest that ChatGPT is basically free to Apple, not just free to the users but even Apple isn't paying for it. Now I don't know what's beyond that but it looks like they may be trying to take Google down. That's what it looks like because how does Google survive if I can pick up my phone and ask any question and ChatGPT will just take it over to presumably Bing to get my answer? I don't know. I think Google has an existential threat that just popped up out of nowhere.

All right, Charlamagne tha God. He's being interesting again and he was saying that, I guess he was on The Daily Show, he said that in the age of hate Democrats need a message makeover and that they should learn from Republicans how to talk like real people. Now that part sounds really smart but he can't quite leave the illusion. Here's what else he said. There's nothing wrong with the policies of the Democrats, it's their messaging. Gosh, every time you think Charlamagne's going to make the leap. No, Charlamagne, the policies are goddamn garbage. It's not about Joe Biden's personality. There's nothing about his, I do