the smaller part of it. The bigger part of it was in LA. According to Breitbart News, there will be some more specially trained border patrol agents deployed to Los Angeles. To which my curiosity says to me, specially trained, you say? Specially trained to do what? To reduce tensions and riots or what? So Randy Clark in Breitbart News is writing about that. So we don't know what that's all about, but Trump has ordered 2,000 National Guardmen to respond. And he said that they'll be everywhere and they'll take care of it.

According to a CBS News poll, 54% of those surveyed support President Trump's program for deportation. So not just the border security, but 54% approve of his deportation program. And 42% think the program has made America safer, while 30% said it's made the country less safe. How in the world is the country as a whole less safe because we deported 10,000 criminals? What is even the point of having surveys if the answers that come back are so obviously stupid or biased or political that they're just meaningless? There's nobody who thinks the country is in more danger because the criminals were deported. Now, I get that there's the risk during the ICE raid that someone might get hurt. I get that. But even if you include all of that, getting rid of 10,000, I'm just picking a number, but getting rid of 10,000 known repeat criminals, that's definitely going to make you safer. Getting rid of a known South American gang. Yeah, that's going to make you safer. Yeah. So everybody who had the wrong answer.

What is the most important thing to know about the LA riots? Well, other people will cover things like how many people were injured and what's the cost of it all and how many law enforcement people have been surged and did they do a good job. But I'm going to cover the word play because somehow this is a sort of artificial event that's designed to create a lot of Democrat-friendly word play. So the first part is are they riots or protests? Well, if you're the mainstream media, you get to call them protests. If they were talking about somebody they didn't like, would they call it a protest or would they call it a riot? I don't know if the mainstream has yet turned it into riot or they're still sticking with protest. So that's the first word play thing to watch out for, to see if they treat it like it's a protest.

The other thing that I don't know if anybody else picked up on this, but suppose you were somebody who planned, let's say you were Soros or something, and you planned to fund big riots in LA and San Francisco. So let's say your idea was that if you fund these riots, you'll get some kind of benefit. You know, it could be any kind of benefit, but you've decided to fund them. What would be the natural outcome to Karen Bass, the mayor of LA, and Governor Newsom? Is there any reasonable way that when this is done, people are going to say, "Wow, you two did a great job"? Actually none, because it's simply going to look like they're in charge when you can't get to where you want to get because the roads are closed and you're going to see endless loops of whatever violence the cameras can pick up. I don't know what it is as a percentage of activity, but doesn't it seem to you that maybe whoever's in charge of funding this is trying to take Karen Bass and Newsom off the table at the same time in an unrelated story? Or is it unrelated? Is this story related or unrelated?

Separately, there's a story that Kamala Harris has remained unusually silent during the protests. Now, if you wanted Kamala Harris to either run for president or governor of California and you didn't care too much about Karen Bass either because she wasn't helping you, it would be kind of clever to fund a bunch of riots that make Newsom and Bass look like they're completely unable to run anything while having Kamala Harris just go quiet, don't say anything about anything, and then she'll be fresh and unspoiled whenever the dust settles. So that's just my speculation. There's no evidence.

So 2,000 National Guard. Does it seem to you that this is another one of those 80/20 questions where Trump is very solidly on the 80? When is the last time you met anybody in the real world who thought it was a bad idea to send the National Guard to have a little bit more force than it might make sense because if you threaten with enough force then you get what you want without the force. How many of you have even talked to anybody who thinks that's a bad idea? It's got to be at least 80/20, right? In favor of it. So once again, the Democrats have figured out how to find the most unpopular thing you could imagine, which is, hey, suppose we make your traffic worse. We damage your downtowns so that you lose your retail business and we try to open up the border and keep as many criminals in the country as we can. That doesn't even really sound like it could be happening in the real world. It's so ridiculously stupid. But it fits everything Democrats have been doing for the last five years, right? Just unbelievably stupid. But somehow they think they can get some word play out of it.

Here's some more word play. Chaotic. Remember I told you that the Democrats were going to say that the riots and/or protests were sort of a natural free speech, but the chaos, the chaos would be coming from the people who are trying to stop the violence and the protests. I think they're trying to stop the violence, not the protests. And sure enough, sure enough, you wake up and everybody's like, "It's chaotic. Trump, Trump is making everything chaotic." So chaotic. All right, word play.

The other thing we have to agree on is I think we need to have a constitutional convention. That's the wrong thing, but it just sounded funny. To decide what the word "most" or "mostly" means. Do you know how important that is? "Hey Scott, how much violence is there at the protest?" "It's mostly peaceful." So what did you just learn from that? Nothing. Most protests, no matter how violent they get, I would bet you that even in the worst situation, no more than 20% of the participants would be breaking things and setting them on fire and hurting people in the worst situation. And we're not anywhere near that. We're more in the 2%, 5% situation. But no, we should decide. Does "mostly" mean more than 50%? Does "mostly" mean less than 10% of the people are being violent? We can't even talk about these things without knowing what that word means. So Democrats' word play. That's all they got.

We got some Waymo cars on fire. And here's another word that is sort of a Governor Newsom word play. He said this is a serious moment and it requires serious leadership. And where's your decency, Mr. President, blah blah blah blah blah. It's immoral. Those are all words, aren't they? Do you think that Trump was unaware that this was a serious situation? Do you think that Governor Newsom was actually under the belief that Trump didn't understand that a major riot in LA and other cities was a major serious thing? If Trump is not taking it seriously, what are those 2,000 National Guard people doing? Are they just having fun playing beer pong and waiting for things to settle down? No. I think he's taking it pretty seriously. But again, the Democrats don't have arguments. They just have word play. So it's a chaotic situation and it's mostly peaceful and Trump isn't taking it seriously. Which part of that told you anything? None of it. There's no information in any of that. It's completely content-free communication. There's no argument. There's no data. There's nothing to agree with. There's nothing to disagree with. It's literally just word play.

Anyway, where's your decency, Mr. President? I'll say it again. It's immoral. All right, maybe you should say it more than once. It's immoral. What part of it is immoral? Is it immoral to try to protect the innocent people whose storefronts might be destroyed by a mob? Is that immoral? Is it immoral to deport people who at this point are criminal? Is it immoral to have a border? I think even the pope is in favor of a little bit of law and order, isn't he? That would be a good question for the pope. Pope, is this immoral? Well, you know, six of one, half dozen the other. And by the way, how many of you thought that Governor Newsom was your moral compass? Because when I want to know what's moral, I say to myself, well, what did Governor Newsom say? I mean, I have my own opinions, but until I hear what the most moral person in the world says about it, I know it's up in the air.

It looks like another Trump 80/20 win and we'll see how that unfolds. Meanwhile, we've got a tough guy competition where Governor Newsom is saying that he's daring Tom Homan to arrest him. He says, "Come after me. Arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy." That's what Newsom said. And that's because Tom Homan said that if anybody interferes with the work of ICE that they might arrest him. And then Newsom is like, come after me, big boy. Yeah. Come after me. I feel like nothing would make Newsom happier than getting arrested because it would take him off the field when there's nothing he can do on the field that's helping whatsoever. But it would be this great visual. You saw him perp walked with the handcuffs on and you say to yourself, "My God, that Trump has overreached. He's gone to full authoritarianism." So I don't think Tom Homan needs any advice because he's been pretty awesome. But let me give you some advice, Tom Homan. Don't arrest that guy. Arrest anybody else you want, but don't arrest the guy who wants to be arrested. Yeah, you don't want