sed it on mice and they had 100% survival rate. 100%.

Now that's just mice and only 5% of the time do animal studies work out for humans. But this one might be a little different because the chemical that they're putting in the mouse or in the human is something that they already know works in humans. The only problem is it wasn't good at locating the exact cancer place. But they already knew it would do the work in a human. So if the only thing they've changed is how accurately they can target it, that animal study might translate. Remember, 95% of the time it won't. But if the only thing they're doing is working on the accuracy of the ultrasound, they may have cured cancer. Maybe. Maybe. So this is down at USC, so maybe you'll hear more about that later. I feel like that story might have some legs.

Well, I'm going to give you a quiz to see if you're as smart as I think you are. Now if you're new to my live streams this is going to impress the hell out of you. I have the smartest viewers of all time and we're going to prove it. I haven't even asked the question yet. What is the answer? Go in the comments. That's correct. That is correct. See, I didn't even ask the question. Now on Locals I can see their responses faster. Then they all have the right answer. Every one of them. 100% right answer. Incredible.

Would you like to hear the question? The question is, according to Rasmussen poll, what percent of likely US voters think it would be a good idea for Democrats to run Harris in 2028? 24%. If you said 25 I will accept it. The rounding. Yeah. So most people said 25%. Now the background for this if you're new is I often joke that 25% of the public will get any question wrong. It's a different 25%. I hope it's not the same 25% on every question. But you could rely that no matter how easy the question is, 25% will get the wrong answer. You could bring an anvil over to people one at a time saying I was thinking about dropping this anvil on your foot. What do you think? 75% would say no way, no way. If you drop an anvil on my foot that's going to hurt and it will accomplish nothing. 25% will say you have my interest. It doesn't matter what the question is. 25% get everything wrong.

Well, let's talk about Daniel Penny. As you know he is a free man. Why? Well, maybe the jury was sending a message to the judge. Maybe there were some lawyers on the jury who figured out that this trial was a little sketchy and maybe they influenced the others. Don't know exactly what went on, but my speculation is at least a little bit the jury was not happy with the judge or the process that the judge was running. So Daniel Penny appears to be a free man. We still worry about the charge that was dismissed could technically be retried, meaning they could try him again and try to get a conviction on the higher charge, the one that was initially dismissed. But as Jonathan Turley points out, that he thinks it would be presumptively barred by double jeopardy, which is a perfect lawyer sentence. So what I think that means is that although it would not be actual double jeopardy because it wasn't a completed trial, I think that makes a difference, but it would be in effect double jeopardy because he had the jeopardy and then they put him in jeopardy again. So there's literally two jeopardies. Double jeopardy. So I think that Turley probably has the right legal interpretation. Some people might disagree, but I don't see any way that they're going to try him again on that higher charge. That would just make the courts look like idiots. I mean I think the jury would be extra mad if they knew that was happening.

Anyway, the funniest, the larger part of the story is the racial element now. Because Daniel Penny is white and the person who died is black, how does that make it interpreted by Republicans? So how do Republicans int