Chip Roy is the sponsor for this and it would amend the National Voter Registration Act to require states to obtain proof of citizenship in person from people registering to vote. So you better bring your ID. But it even goes further and it requires states to establish programs to remove illegal immigrants from existing voter rolls and allows U.S. citizens to sue election officials who don't adhere to the proof of citizenship requirements.

That's interesting. So it allows individuals to do the suing.

Now, I saw somebody's comment that this will never fly, even if it gets passed. The Supreme Court will knock it down. Some say because the states have what was described as an ironclad control over how voting is done. But I'm not so sure. I'm no Supreme Court expert, but it does seem to me like the federal government in its role of protecting the country, I mean just as a national defense issue, could require that the only people who vote are American citizens. So other than that, I could see that the states would have most of the control, but we'll see. I don't know what the predicted fate of this is, whether it gets completely passed by the Senate and then whether it can survive a challenge. But anyway, it's got some Democrats on it. So that's not the worst thing.

Let's see what the View host Sunny Hostin says about this. She says that requiring voter ID is bad for many Blacks and women who will not be able to vote. I love how crazy she sounds. When I watch Sunny Hostin, I like looking at her eyes and her face as she says things that probably every person knows. We're still looking for that one person who doesn't know how to vote or doesn't know how to get an ID but still wants to vote.

Now, I do believe there are people who don't have IDs, but I don't think they're clamoring to vote. So we're still looking for just one, just one person who says, and you know what would happen if one person came forward and said, "I don't know how to get ID, but I'd really like to vote." What would happen? Whoever they were talking to would tell them how to get an ID and help them vote. So as soon as you find anybody who's in that category, the first person they talk to solves their problem. It's like, "Oh, well, just go down to the DMV." "Well, I don't know where the DMV is." "Oh, well, let me check. Okay, here's the address of the DMV. Just go down there and get an appointment and get your ID."

But now it's extended from if you require ID, it used to be that it was a way to suppress Black vote, but now it's extended to divorced women. Is there a big problem with divorced women who want to vote but they've got the wrong last name on some of their documents? Is that a big problem? Can we see one example of that, please?

I think Hillary Clinton weighed in on that, too. Still waiting for that one person.

I'm going to delegate this issue to the Department of Imaginary Concerns because if we can't find one person in the real world, what would that make that issue? Imaginary. That's right. But it is an imaginary concern to a lot of citizens. So we can't ignore it. We should delegate it to the Department of Imaginary Concerns.

Let's see what else we got going on here. Over on MSNBC, former Attorney General Eric Holder says that what's happening now with Trump and his administration is quote remarkably similar to kind of what happened in Europe in the 30s. And if you don't stand up and fight now, it's going to be too late.

It seems to me that the drama queens only wrote one play. I mean, if you're going to be a drama queen, you should have more material than this. But they only have one play, and it's called Everything is Hitler. And everything I see is Hitler, and all I want to talk about is Hitler. And by the way, have I mentioned Hitler?

Now it seems to me that if you're imagining Hitler, but there is no Hitler and there's nobody really acting like Hitler, what would be the department that that should be delegated to? I've got an idea. Let's delegate it also to the Department of Imaginary Concerns.

Let's see what else the Democrats are up to. Representative Hakeem Jeffries says that Donald Trump and the extreme MAGA people are doing everything they can to tank our economy. Are they doing everything they can to tank the economy by negotiating trade deals and lowering regulations and lowering taxes? Yeah, that's exactly what you do to tank an economy. Making energy more affordable, lowering inflation. Yeah, that's how you do it. And it's going to drive us, according to Jeffries, drive us toward recession and gut the health care of the American people. So it's going to gut the health care of the American people.

Now, I could imagine at least two ways that that could happen, gutting the health care of the American people. One would be to do nothing and just keep the way we're going because that would lead us to a bankrupt country that couldn't pay for health care or anything else. So the path we were on guaranteed the end of health care along with the end of the country and the end of everything really, your life probably.

But at the moment there's no suggestion that the Trump administration would do anything to your health care benefits. So what would be the right department to assign this imaginary future concern? Oh I've got an idea. How about the Department of Imaginary Concerns?

Does anybody see a pattern? The biggest most effective attacks from the Democrats, all imaginary. Everyone. It's not based on anything that's happening in the real world. That's their best take.

Here's some good news. Activist Robby Starbuck has another big win. He got IBM to end their DEI policies. Now, I would read you the list of all the things that IBM decided to stop doing. It was a whole bunch of woke stuff like requiring proper pronouns for people and stuff like that. But the list was so long it just wouldn't work in this kind of a podcast. So just take it from me. IBM was just massively entangled. It seems like they had wrapped this ball of string called DEI around everything and unwrapping it is a pretty major project. So a whole bunch of things had to be changed to unwoke IBM.

But the good news is, and I'm going to give IBM some credit for this, that when they were confronted with the argument and the activism and Robby Starbuck's apparently very effective approach, they decided to unwind it. And probably there was a lot of volunteering of what parts needed to be unwound. So I'm going to say my standard for judging people and my standard for judging companies in this case is not if they make a mistake or do something I don't like or something doesn't work out, but how do they deal with it? Once you know you've messed up, do you correct it? Do you ignore it? Do you say it never happened?

This looks like IBM fully embracing that it wasn't a good idea and then fully embracing the steps it would take to unwind it and being somewhat transparent about it. So I'm going to say IBM A+. You've reached my highest standard of ethical behavior. I would never judge you that you once made a mistake. I suppose if it were you were a slaver or something I would still judge you but under the normal behavior of companies I judge the prior behavior to be completely irrelevant. I judge the current approach working with Starbuck to do something productive. A+. Good job.

I saw a report. I don't know how confirmed this is, but somebody said the New York Times had a story that the White House is considering using government money, your tax dollars, to give $10,000 per year to every person in Greenland. Do you think that's going to happen? Somebody must have calculated how much Denmark is contributing and then figured out how much could it cost if we were to essentially outbid Denmark so that the people of Greenland said, "Oh, I wouldn't mind $10,000 a year. I wasn't getting that much from Denmark." But I don't know if Denmark is doing more than that. Maybe they are. But there's something like 60,000 people in all of Greenland. So $10,000 ti