is. So far, Musk has only talked about getting senators and House of Representatives, a small group, you know, maybe just a handful of each, and having that be enough to be able to influence events. So he's not trying to flip the House or turn it into mostly an America Party thing. He's just trying to get a smallish group of like-minded people who are just more America first than they are wed to any political ideology and see if he can influence things in a positive way.

Now, so far he has not made mention of running a presidential candidate. If he did run a presidential candidate, then yes, that's a Ross Perot problem. So do we agree if he runs a presidential candidate, which he has not indicated he would, he's not indicated that, but if he did, that would be a problem. And I think I would immediately flip to, oh, this is no good. So which is also probably the reason he's not mentioning it, because probably he's fully aware that it's no good. It wouldn't work in his interests.

But does it make sense to have a smallish group of people who are just dedicated to doing what's good for the country and have them part of Congress? It might. And if you've got a Mark Cuban and maybe some other smart people will also go independent, you never know. It might be a little bit of a follow-the-leader kind of thing happening soon. So I'm going to stay open-minded. To me, it looks like something that could be helpful to whoever is president because it could maybe allow them to get things that even they think are good ideas but they know they couldn't sell to their own base.

So a lot of it depends on whether you think that Musk himself wants what's good for the country but he also has big corporate interests and some of them have government subsidies. And so you can't completely untangle him from self-interest and fiduciary responsibility to his companies. But it's all public. It's all transparent. So you would get to see what he promotes and why. Make up your own mind. So I'm going to be open-minded on this. We will see how it develops.

I saw an account called Tesla Owners SV who was speculating on what the America Party would focus on. Now, this is not coming from Elon Musk. It's coming from somebody who's just a watcher of all things Tesla, I think. But when I read the list, I said to myself, yeah, that's probably pretty close. So if we're going to speculate, and this is just speculation of what an America First or what America's Party would focus on, it would be reducing debt and responsible spending. Probably modernize the military with AI and robotics, probably. Pro-technology and make sure that we're in it to win it with AI. That's almost everybody really. Less regulation across the board, but especially in energy, probably. Free speech, yes. Pro-natalist, meaning more babies, probably. You know, because those would be things that in my opinion are unambiguously good for the country.

And if you said to me, but Scott, these are mostly Republican things, I would say, well, maybe it looks that way, but there's nothing really Republican or non-Republican about free speech. Most of these are just strong ideas. How about controlling our spending? Who's against that? And then centrist policies. So that's kind of generic. So remember, this is not Elon Musk. This is just somebody's opinion of what that party would look like. And it looks about right to me.

Tucker Carlson has announced he's already interviewed the president of Iran and he hasn't edited it yet so it's not available. But he's warning us because he knows it's going to be controversial and people are going to say, oh, are you talking to Iran because you hate Israel and you're anti-Semite. That's what they will say instead of what they should say, which is anybody in Tucker Carlson's position who interviews important people on important subjects would want to talk to the president of Iran. I would if I were him. So I'm 100 percent in favor of Tucker Carlson talking to the president, not the supreme leader. And this is important. Not the supreme leader, but the president. And that'll be very interesting. I'll be watching that.

All right. Here's some sort of fake news. So Trump in one of his rallies the other day, he referred to the bankers, some of the bankers, as shylocks. And that caused a controversy because people say, hey, that's anti-Semitic.

Now, how many of you, this will be a little survey, instant survey for the chatters, how many of you would have been aware before the news told you that the word shylock is something used as a negative for Jewish bankers in particular? I guess it comes from The Merchant of Venice, a Shakespeare play in which it was used to refer to a Jewish character or characters. How many of you knew that? I'm looking at your list. So lots of yeses, but also lots of nos.

I would have been vaguely aware that I shouldn't use the word myself. So I would have been aware of that, but I didn't know where it came from and I would not necessarily have known the connection to it. I would never use the word because part of my brain had a little flag on it. You know, there was like a little red flag. When I think of the word, I just see the little red flag waving and I don't know where it came from. So at some point in my life, I must have known that was a word you don't use.

Trump says he was not aware it had any anti-Semitic element to it. And I believe him because there's no way he would have used it in a public event if he knew what some people apparently did know, that it's associated with an anti-Semitic kind of a reputation-destroying kind of thing.

But did you think that the Democrats would leave that alone after he said, oh, I didn't know that? No. They took out the designated liars. Remember I tell you the designated liars are the Democrats they send out to talk when there's some lie they need to tell. But ordinary Democrats would say that's too far for me. I can't tell that lie in public. So they sent out the designated liars. So that would include, I guess, Eric Swalwell, Dan Goldman, and Jerry Nadler. They all came out immediately to condemn the remarks as blatant and vile anti-Semitism.

And then if you wanted to know how high the credibility is, the disgraced ADL also called it very troubling and irresponsible. Now if you don't know, the ADL is a disgraced organization that probably had a good purpose for existing at one point. I don't know the history of it, but at the moment it's more of a it's more the Eric Swalwell of organizations, if you know what I mean. It's more the Jerry Nadler of organizations. It's more of a Democrat hit piece organization. They came after me as well. The ADL blamed me of being a Holocaust denier. That was the head of the ADL. Said that in public. Actually said that about me by name. So that's how much credibility they have. So no for the NPCs. No, I'm not a Holocaust denier. That would be ridiculous.

Anyway, apparently the BRICS people are having a summit and I went to Grok and said, explain what BRICS is. I mean, I knew sort of what it is, but I wanted to see if there was something I didn't know about it. And so BRICS is a coalition of 10 emerging economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Indonesia, and UAE. And they're focused on economic cooperation as sort of a response to the fact that the US and Europe have too much economic clout. So they're trying to form their own power block for their self-interest, which makes sense, and maybe to try to get away from the dollar being the most important currency because that's good for the United States but maybe not as good for them.

So at the moment, I think Trump has threatened them to drop their idea of having their own currency and to continue using the dollar. So threats work. I think the threats were tariff threats, but they worked. But I guess Putin is not attending and President Xi is not attending and Iran of course can't send the top guy so they send a medium-level guy.

So one source I saw, I saw this in a Mario Nawfal post that Gazeta do Povo basically is saying it's a failed organization because if you can't get the superstars to go to it, you also can't make any decisions. So all they're going to do is have breakouts and talk about the weather and climate change and go home. There won't be anything that comes out of it. So don't worry about the BRICS, at least while Trump's president.

Here's a new suggestion for handling the Pa