And if the only thing you know is that you're seeing both sides, you don't know if you're the person they're trying to influence. And maybe you're not. So maybe you're just seeing regular content. But there's no way that they're going to keep their finger off the button if it's so easy to move the persuasion needle.

So anyway, this is not peer-reviewed yet, but it will be. So maybe it's not valid. We'll see what the peer review says. But I think it's just so obvious. You could have just asked me. You didn't have to do the study. Do you think China will use this to influence the world? Duh. Duh. So China did make a weapon of mass persuasion. And Kevin O'Leary seems to be one of the people who's part of a group looking to buy it so that TikTok could stay in business but become an American thing with American data and American control. I don't know if that's going to happen, but we'll see.

All right. The Washington Post is reporting, according to the New York Post is reporting about the Washington Post, that Trump is talking about scaling back his tariff threats and making them more about specific industries instead of making them broad. Now, here's my question. Why is the Washington Post working against the interests of the United States? One hundred percent of the people watching the story know that Trump is using tariffs for negotiation. Everybody knows it. Do you think the Washington Post doesn't know that he's using it for negotiations? So the main thing that you do if you're negotiating is you come in with your hardest offer, the toughest one, so that you can negotiate from that should you need to. So Trump has been consistent. Oh yeah, we're going to tariff everything from Canada if we have to, or everything from China. I don't know if he says that, but he acts like the tariff is just going to be wonderful and great and good for the country. And then the smart people say, but it's like he doesn't understand tariffs. He doesn't know that the American company pays for it, not the foreign company shipping in. To which I say, settle down. It's for negotiating. He doesn't have to say your version in order for this to work. He has to pretend that he wants tariffs so badly and they're so good that the more tariffs he has, the happier he's going to be, and then go into the negotiation.

But the Washington Post is trying to kneecap him. They're broadcasting to the world that he doesn't mean his starting position. What are they trying to accomplish? Is that just trying to ruin the country? Are they just an anti-American entity, and they decide what to write about based on how bad it is for America? Now, I don't think that's the case, but it looks like it. Why does it look like it? I guess they want to attack Trump in any way they can. So there's still a resistance publication. They're nowhere near the middle. And they think this is somehow advancing the interests of who? And then of course you have to ask the question, what would tariffs do to Amazon.com? Probably not good for business. So this is the kind of reporting that even though I'm sure it's accurate, I don't think it's inaccurate, but this is the sort of thing you should brush over as in some people say that it's a negotiating position. That's not telling anybody anything. But if you say it's a negotiating position and he's already saying that he's not going to stick with it, well, that's not reporting. That's just ruining his negotiating position. That's like getting in the story. So very unhappy about that.

Well, yesterday the Democrats, who have been saying for eight years that Trump is Hitler, they were quite proud of their peaceful transfer of power to Hitler. Do you think that anybody in their base has noticed that they called him Hitler for eight years, said he's the biggest risk to America, and then they're acting proud that they rolled over and gave him the win to protect democracy? That's right. The Democrat message is Trump is Hitler, and we're going to protect democracy by peacefully putting him into power. Does anybody on their side see that? Is it just us? Are we the only ones who see that nothing they did makes sense unless the primary thing they've been telling you for eight years was known to be a lie when they said it, which