ght? You would know it with no doubt whatsoever. Oh he doesn't do those things. He's been in public a billion times. We would have seen it by now. That's not real. You would have known it. But why is it that a faked video making Kamala Harris look drunk as a skunk in public you couldn't tell if that was real? See that's the story. The story is not that it's fake. The story is that a video of her looking drunk in public looks so real that we can't tell the difference. Although to be fair I had some suspicion about that one.

So this is kind of a problem because I think it's important that people do see the videos where she does look legitimately like she's on something. Now I'm not sure I would post any because now that I know somebody finally did what you expected, somebody made a fake one, I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable reposting anything on that topic from now on. So it makes you even wonder if it was done by the Harris campaign to embarrass the people who repost them. If so it'd be clever. It would have worked.

All right. The rabbit hole account on X reposted a graph that showed that only 3.4% of journalists are Republicans as of 2022. I think that means based on donations. I'm not sure. Either donations or registered but somehow they know. And what do you think? 3.4% are Republicans.

Now here's my take on that. If you had a press organization that was say 50/50 Republicans and Democrats and then one of you put out something that's just propaganda for one side or the other how would that work out for you? Not well because half of your company would say what the hell is this? This isn't news this is propaganda. You should be fired. So if it were 50/50 you wouldn't be able to get away with pure propaganda as we see every day on what we call the press but isn't really the press.

But suppose it's not 50/50. Let's say it's 60/40. Can you get away with propaganda if it's 60/40, a real clear majority of people on one side? Probably not. Probably not because if 40% of the people are saying you know I can't even work here if you're going to just print, 40% would be way too much. You couldn't get away with just being a propaganda network if 40% of your employers are like hey what the hell I came here to do news you're just doing propaganda.

But what happens when you get above 85% are on the same team? Once you reach 85% are on the same team you're only propaganda and you don't have an option to do balanced news. If you try to do some balanced news in an organization where 85% of them thought Trump was Hitler you would be fired for being balanced. You wouldn't be able to get away with it.

So I suggest the following. That we could come up with a working definition of whether a press entity is news or propaganda based on the percentage that lean in one direction and that you could be pretty sure that you had gotten it right. So you show me an entity with 85% people clearly Democrat and I will tell you no doubt about it this is not a news organization. No doubt about it like 100% certain this is not a legitimate news organization. But you show me an entity with legitimately something closer to 50/50 even if it's 60/40 I mean that would be close enough for me then I'm going to say that's probably news. You know maybe not every single story is just where you want it but that's probably a news organization that's struggling with being unbiased but they're news.

Don't you think that definition would work perfectly? Why do they get to tell us they're news? Why don't we get to decide whether they're news? And I would say that we should just have a percentage and say that if you're above, let's pick a percentage, 80% would that sound fair? If you're above 80% it doesn't matter which direction so you could apply the same thing to conservative outlets. If you had a conservative publication that was 80% conservative same thing. Don't you think you could claim that well 80% I'm not sure I'd call that news because even if the 80% are really really dedicated to giving you unbiased news at the very least they're going to be leaving out context and stories that maybe just didn't hit them as exciting and somebody else might have.

So you think 65 to 70 would be enough to say that you're not news anymore? I think if 30% of your employees don't like what you're doing you've got a problem. I think around 80% you're guaranteed to be propaganda. Guaranteed. You just there's just no way around it. So that's what I'd say. I'd say I think I'd do something like 50/50 definitely news, 80/20 definitely not news but somewhere in between would be like a little gray area. You could rate you know like a maybe yes no and maybe.

Well here's something I didn't know was legal but Republican senator Rick Scott and he's being joined with I guess Marco Rubio also Republican from Florida they're offering $100 million reward for information that would lead to the arrest and conviction of the Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro.

Now if our federal government put out some kind of a reward for somebody that was an international criminal I'd say