cret Service destroyed the evidence, meaning the bag of cocaine. But then separately I saw that that would be the normal process for the Secret Service because the Secret Service is not an investigative Department of Justice kind of an entity. And I saw somebody say that their ordinary process if they had found a bag of drugs that they knew belonged to the family they wouldn't take it and give it back to the family. But it's also not their job to get the family arrested. So they would just quietly destroy it and that would actually be their known process. I like that process because you can't really trust your own Secret Service if you think they're looking for crimes that you're doing and they're going to put you away. But if they find a bag of cocaine, what are they going to do with it? They can't store it forever. They can't give it to law enforcement if they're trying to protect you. So it makes perfect sense to me that the Secret Service would destroy it. I don't have any problem with that at all. So I don't know if that would make any difference in their investigation since they already got the DNA.

Meanwhile, the University of North Carolina, I saw this on a Corey D'Angelo post. There's an undercover video of the administrator at the University of North Carolina bragging about how they just are pretending that they're getting rid of DEI, but all they're doing is changing the names and continuing on and doing it cleverly undercover. And apparently the person on the video said they're just going to finesse the language and they're going to do quote "work that is covert." And then when they were confronted with the fact that they had just been recorded, the university provost tried to run away. But contrasting to that where it definitely looks like they were trying to break the law and continue to do DEI, MIT again in the news for a different thing has closed its diversity, equity, and inclusion office.

Now listen to the language that MIT uses and you tell me if you think they're just changing the language and doing it anyway or are they serious about getting rid of it because maybe they didn't like it and maybe it's illegal. So this is what MIT said as part of their getting rid of DEI. They said MIT is in the talent business. Our success depends on attracting exceptionally talented people of every background from across the country and around the world and making sure everyone at MIT feels welcome blah blah blah so they can do their best. When you start with "MIT is in the talent business" that's a pretty good signal that you're serious about looking at talent over DEI. Now they did say they want people from all over the world. So that's sort of waving their hand at diversity, but they say first we're in the talent business. That sounds a little more serious. So although you have to watch all the universities to see if they are serious, I'm going to say they sound legit. So I'm going to say MIT might be trying to do it right. We don't know, but they might be.

According to the Financial Times, if you lived in the UK, there's a one in three chance that your phone would be stolen. I guess phone thefts have nearly doubled. And now 29% of UK adults have had one of their phones stolen. I wouldn't even go into public. If one in three people had their phone stolen, I would never leave the house. So here's my advice to the citizens of the UK. Get out. Get out. Run. Run. I don't know where you're going to go, but you probably want to go somewhere where there's not a one in three chance of your phone getting stolen just 'cause you left the house.

Well, Trump's tariffs were of course stopped by a court, the Court of International Trade. It ruled I guess yesterday that Trump does not have the authority to do these tariffs. Now the most surprising part about this story, I'd never even heard of the Court of International Trade. How many courts are there? How many courts have some kind of jurisdiction over everything Trump does with an executive order? But I guess the Supreme Court will hear this next. But allegedly this Court of International Trade seems to have some kind of power over the process. So I guess we'll wait for that. Some say that's why the stock market is up. Maybe.

Well, according to News Nation, there's a company called Impossible Metals that has sort of a robot machine that can pick up rare earth minerals from the bottom of the ocean. So I guess there are these well-known places where these potato-sized rocks are just laying there on the bottom, and you don't want to use a like a bulldozer scoop 'cause you'd be ruining the environment. So they've got this cool piece of equipment that they've already built that just goes there and sort of picks up each rock. It can tell which rocks it wants to pick up and just sort of picks them up as it goes. And that's really cool. So we're getting closer and closer to being able to produce our own rare earth minerals in the United States and nearby.

Let's see what else is going on. So you know how people like me and Marjorie Taylor Greene and Ron Johnson and Rand Paul were all complaining that the budget process was not including the DOGE cuts. Well, people like me did not understand the complexity of the budgeting process, but Speaker Johnson says, "Whoa, whoa, whoa. Don't worry. That's coming up." Now, you remember what I asked? I was demanding, at least on X when I was responding to Stephen Miller, I wasn't demanding a specific outcome. I was demanding that our politicians tell us when we should see some kind of cuts that would be DOGE related or at least get rid of the deficit a little bit. And I guess Speaker Johnson heard that, not necessarily from me, but he saw a lot of pushback from Republicans and conservatives and according to the New York Post, he's giving us an answer. He says his plan is to enshrine into law the cuts from DOGE, but the process would be it's going to get codified in the normal appropriations process in the fal