od. You know, maybe sometimes he's more tired or the lighting's bad or whatever, but he looked great. Like he looked healthy and like completely in charge. So that was great.

But the other thing that I noticed is that Musk is a talent stack guy, meaning that whatever talents he has, which are considerable of course, he is continually adding to them. And I believe that his close association with Trump is teaching him things about communication and things about persuasion that is taking him to the next level. Because very few people can master those domains as well as, let's say, a technical domain. But if you look at Musk today, his ability to come up with a sentence you'll remember forever is almost Trump-like. I mean, nobody can match Trump. He's category by himself. But you can see the transfer of skill. You can tell that he's impressed. This is just me reading minds. But you could tell that if he's normal, he's impressed by Trump's ability to communicate and to control a crowd and to control a narrative. And boy has he learned well.

So I watched a number of, mostly I saw the clips, I didn't see 100% of it, but I was impressed completely about how succinctly Musk can explain an idea and you'll remember it forever. I'll give you an example. He said that they're already finding, or their goal is to find, $4 billion per day in savings, and they're on track to be mostly done in 130 days, which is what he's authorized for. How clean and simple is that? And Bret Baier says, well, are you going to be doing reports? And Musk says we're doing the actual savings. So they're reporting the savings, but you don't need to report because every time they add another billion dollars or whatever the savings, they put it on the website. So you don't need a report because it's reported as it happens. So that's a perfect answer. The $4 billion per day, I'll remember that. If he had said something like, you can imagine somebody who was bad at it saying, well, we're finding anywhere from one to eight billion dollars per day and we're hoping that that's enough. No, he tells you $4 billion per day for roughly 130 days is going to get to, we think, a trillion dollars in savings, which is 50% of the deficit spending. The other trillion Trump is going to handle with growth, we hope. So that's perfect. Just communication-wise, absolutely perfect. You could not improve on that. It's so clean. $4 billion a day, 130 days to $1 trillion. I'll never forget that.

And then they add the anecdotes. Imagine all the complicated things that DOGE is looking into. And imagine if they tried to explain the complicated things. You'd be like, that sounds pretty complicated. But instead he gives the cleanest little anecdotal example to back up the numbers. And he says that at one point nearly a billion dollars was allocated, I think per year, for some company that would do a survey that apparently nobody needed or wanted. There didn't even seem to be any obvious customer for it. A billion dollars a year for one little survey that looked like it was done by a high school group. A complete ripoff as far as we can tell. Now, will you remember that? One billion, real easy to remember, for one survey that looks like it was done by high school kids. You'll remember that forever, right? That one's just perfect for communication.

So even having the other DOGE leaders sitting behind him, that was great. Then the other thing he said, and this is just perfect genius of communication. You know how the biggest problem with DOGE is, hey, you're using a chainsaw instead of a scalpel. Stop using the chainsaw when all of us smart people who are Democrats know you should be using a scalpel. Where's the scalpel? So the way he handled that was he said that they're measuring everything twice if not thrice before they cut. So the old saying is measure twice, cut once. So he's moving away from the scalpel-chainsaw thing, but he's letting you know that they're not making any cuts unless they've measured twice if not thrice. Do you notice that twice and thrice rhyme? Who's that remind you of? Johnny Cochran. If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit. If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit. We'll measure it twice if not thrice. It is a well-known persuasion fact that if something rhymes, it's more persuasive. When California tried to get people to wear seat belts and they told them they were going to get a ticket unless they did, the campaign was click it or ticket. Basically click your seat belt or you get a ticket. Click it or ticket. If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit. We're measuring it twice if not thrice. Perfect. Perfect.

Now if he had said, and I would have made this mistake I think, if he would have said you know but sometimes you need a chainsaw, that might be true. It might be smart. But it would not be the right answer for communicating to the public what the public wants to hear. And the only thing they want to hear is I'm going to measure it twice if not thrice. So what I saw was an absolute lesson on how to be perfect. That was from the producers of the show to Bret Baier's questions, which were excellent, he's always excellent in that domain, to Musk's specific answers, to the people who were the head of DOGE sitting behind him and backing him up with answers. Every part of that was the highest quality you'll ever see for something like this. It was really, really impressive.

Anyway, moving on. According to the Wall Street Journal, billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted on duplicate Medicaid payments, and Musk has already said that DOGE will fix that. Now how did that happen? The Daily Wire is talking about it, but I think Wall Street Journal did the original investigation. And what they found was there are a number of cases where people should have been reimbursed by their insurance company, or I guess Medicaid was going to pay the insurance company, but then they moved. And so the systems were not clever enough to pick up the fact that it was the same person but at a different address. So apparently these big insurance companies, the biggest ones in the country, health insurance, were receiving two payments for a whole bunch of people if they had moved during some certain time. And the dollar amounts were massive, totaling up to at least $4.3 billion. $4.3 billion that went to insurance companies from the government. It didn't go to the individuals, so it wasn't like the people involved were involved in fraud. So they didn't break any laws. They just moved.

So UnitedHealth, remember UnitedHealth? I'm not going to say it. I'm not going to say it. I'm just going to say UnitedHealth was one of them. Elevance Health and Centene, I don't know any of those. They received hundreds of millions of dollars each in duplicate payments. You know what this story doesn't include? It doesn't include that those insurance companies are going to pay back the taxpayers who are owed that money, are they? It's such massive amounts that it probably would eliminate their profit for a year or two. I don't know what their profits are. But don't they have to pay that back? Because nobody's arguing that they were owed the payment. It seems like it's easy to demonstrate that these were duplicate payments. So where's our check? It feels to me we should be clawing that all back if it's possible.

Well, here's an update on Katherine Maher, the CEO of NPR. I picked up on this yesterday, but Brit Hume had a take on it on X. He says when you read or hear about NPR chief Katherine Maher being grilled about her hard left views as expressed on Twitter in 2020, remember that's five years ago. Remember it was three years after those tweets that she was made head of NPR. So did NPR know what her views were? Because she claims now that they're different, that her views have evolved in five years. But do you know what Katherine Maher calls five years? She calls it half a decade. I was listening to her being grilled by the Congress, and when she said but you know that was half a decade ago. Half a decade. That's five years. How many people have a complete transformation of political opinion in five years? And it's not on one topic. Like I could see how somebody would say oh I used to believe in this hoax but I found out blah blah blah. But how do you have a total revamp of your political opinions from crazy far left to something more moderate in half a decade? Half a decade. You lying, whatever.

Here's something I didn't know. I had to look it up. One to three percent of their funding comes from the government. So I don't really care about this too much. One to three percent of their funding. It seems like we should just yank the funding because one to three percent is something that can certainly handle. And why am I paying for any of this?

Christopher Rufo on X reminds us, he says don't forget the NPR CEO Katherine Maher is also the board chairman of Signal. She's the board chairman of Signal. Come on. Are we living in a simulation? How's that even possible? The only thing that could be weirder is if she were like the daughter of Judge Boasberg. She's not, by the way, but it's the only thing that would make this weirder. And then Rufo goes on and says and she spent a decade working on regime change operations in the Middle East and North Africa. Now I don't think anybody has had a more obvious connection to the CIA than she has. Now it's not, I can't confirm that. I don't have proof of that. But all of this from being CEO of NPR to being chairman of the board of Signal to working on regime change operations in the Middle East and North Africa. What does that sound like to you? Does that sound like just a bunch of coincidences? Sometimes things are just what you think.

Well, one of the biggest Tesla domestic terrorists has been caught in Las Vegas. I guess police made an arrest. It was the guy who did the most elaborate domestic violence. He's the one who set on fire multiple cars at a Tesla facility for repair, I think collision repair, and used a gun. He fired some shots and used some Molotov cocktails. And of course he has a history of being, he's 36 years old, has a history of being associated with the Communist Party and anything, everything else is bad. Anyway, he was booked on 15 counts. He could get up to 20 years in prison. Also a woman seen keying a Tesla in Washington has been identified. She's in trouble also. That 450-pound guy who was on some kind of a scooter thing and ramming the side of a car, he's been easily identified. And that's not a complete list. How many of the domestic terrorists have now been completely identified? Because I feel like we'll get just about all of them, you know, the ones that showed their faces. So it looks like the world is starting to get back in balance, meaning that as long as there's a continual drip of the domestic terrorists getting serious jail sentences, maybe it'll decrease. You know, maybe the Democrats will get tired of it. I don't know. Maybe they'll run out of crazy people.

I saw a post by Insurrection Barbie, who is a great follow by the way. If you're not following on X, Insurrection Barbie, you're missing a lot of great content. But Insurrection Barbie says the entire resistance to Donald Trump is made up of like 300 super connected Democrats and a bunch of paid protesters. Easy to realize why they lost the election and why they're continuously bleeding voters. But this is your daily reminder that 300 powerful Democrats and their NGOs are trying to hold the country hostage. And I think Elon Musk agreed with that estimate, that there are about 300 highly connected Democrats who are pretending to be the Democrats. Basically they're the ones in charge. That number completely agrees with my understanding of the world. About 300. And of course within the 300 there would be 50 who are super important and maybe 10 who are head of the pyramid. But we do see the same names, don't we? It feels like if there's something terrible happening, you know, lawfare or something else, it feels like the same set of people just keep popping up over and over again. So yeah, it's about 300. They just act like they're more.

So Trump wants an investigation of how it is possible, according to the Washington Times, that he keeps getting bad judges by chance. So apparently these DC judges should be assigned randomly. They've got some kind of wheel. But yet this Judge Boasberg, who is, let's say the Trump supporters think he's been highly biased and has conflicts, they would say, was nominated by Barack Obama, etc. And that somehow amazingly he got this newest case about the Signal app and whether that has to do with possibility of any federal records being destroyed because the app automatically deletes things. So what are the odds that he would be chosen yet again for another Trump-related case?

Well, turns out, as the Washington Times reports, and this is good reporting by the way, I