of them won't, but some of them will. How do you know if they're going to save more money than they've saved already? Because not only have they taken a whack at a number of the expenses and corruption, but they've put in place a system, a system of sort of permanent DOGE, which in theory should prevent some of the worst excesses from coming back while they chop away at new things that they find all the time. How could you possibly know if DOGE worked? It's way too early.

Now if you said I don't know that it'll work, well, that's reasonable. If you said there's not confirmed evidence that DOGE worked, I'd say that's true. But to say that you know it didn't work and won't work, where's that coming from? You don't have any inside knowledge about what's happening in any of these government entities.

Here's another question for Democrats. If everything is broken and wrong and Trump has destroyed the economy, why is the stock market so strong and employment looks good? Those would be the two things that would always go bad if the economy were heading in the toilet. So why aren't they? The stock market's sort of the same as it was a year ago. No big deal. And employment looks pretty good. So how do you explain that?

So there should be some kind of like ten questions to ask Democrats to see how well they understand anything. Anyway, I think if Democrats understood the issues, they would have different opinions.

Here's another fake news, but sort of true, but fake. I guess the Trump administration deported some parent, I think a mother, maybe more than one, who had children and then the mother decided that she would take her children who were born in this country and therefore are citizens. Although she was not a citizen and she had a deportation order, she would take her children with her back to Honduras I think in one case. And that causes the Democrats to say you deported children, which Rubio has to explain. No, we deported an illegal alien and she decided to take her children because why wouldn't she? Why wouldn't she? Of course she's going to take her children. That's not our decision. We didn't make the children leave. We just made the mother leave.

So there's that. And also we should mention that's the same way we treat criminals in the United States. When you send a parent to jail, they don't get to take their kids. But if they could, some of them would, don't you think? If somebody had a baby and let's say they're a mother, if they had the option of taking their baby to jail with them, again, there was some facility that would allow that to be safe, they probably would. But we wouldn't be putting children in jail. That would be the mother's decision.

Anyway, Scott Bessent is agreeing with Trump that China actually is talking to us about trade, but they're a little bit shy about what that looks like or who they're actually talking to. But there's a significant disagreement about whether there's any actual progress. Do you think there's progress in the conversations with China? My guess is there might be a few things where we think, oh, that opened up a door or something, but I feel like we're probably pretty far away from any kind of