could say is you can't get any worse.

Can you imagine in any world where Trump would use those words? We've hit rock bottom. There's only one direction to go. After he'd been in charge for months, maybe if he had just taken the job, Trump would say, "We're at rock bottom, but it will take me a week to sort this out and then it would be great." But the Democrats are so bad at messaging that they just beat themselves up and act like they couldn't be any worse.

If you were thinking of joining a political party, would you join the political party that says the golden age has begun and the best six months of any president has just happened and America's back and we're suddenly now again respected on the international stage. NATO is stepping up with us. Would you want to be on that team? Or the one that says like Droopy Dog, when you hit bottom, there's only one direction to go and that's up. And that's what we're doing. Well, how are you doing that, Ken Martin? Well, we'll probably have an off-site meeting to talk about our strategy, but it probably involves swearing more to appear to be more authentic. Oh my god.

Well, there's a Harvard study according to the brighter side of news. Joshua Shavit is that really his name? His last name is Shavit. I used to work with somebody whose last name was Beavers. So every time I see a name like this I think what if it were the 70s and Joshua Shavit married into the Beavers family? Would they name their kid Beaver Shavit or Shavit Beaver. I don't know. Could happen. But that's not why I brought it up.

There's a Harvard study that finds that a common virus is what triggers multiple sclerosis in 97% of cases. A common virus. And that the virus is, are you ready for the greatest simulation you've ever heard? Think about all the things that have been in the news recently. Okay. And now listen to what I'm going to tell you is the name of the common virus that may be the cause of almost all of multiple sclerosis. I'm not making this up. You've heard of this virus before. It's not the first time you've heard his name, but you haven't heard it in this context before. The virus is called the Epstein-Barr virus.

Now, most of you have heard of that. Epstein-Barr, B A R R. The Epstein story features Bob Barr and Bob Barr's father. The actual news is about Epstein and Barr. And then there's other news that Epstein-Barr is causing multiple sclerosis. Come on, how is this not a simulation? Is that just a weird coincidence?

Anyway, I would bet that the Epstein-Barr virus does not cause 97% of MS because it feels like that would be a much bigger story. But there's a study, so maybe it'll be reproduced. Maybe we'll find that out. Maybe that would suggest a cure. I don't know.

Apparently there's now indications that bread, eating bread is what makes people sad, anxious, or even hallucinate. And that the gluten triggers an immune response in up to 1 in 17 people that causes inflammation in the brain. I guess they would get brain fog, mood swings, anxiety, depression. Oh, I guess that's the problem with Hillary Clinton. I was blaming her for being a drunk, but I feel like that there's no evidence for that. But she's bread. Maybe she's one of the one in 17 where she's perfectly normal and then she eats some bread and then she's like you. So yeah, mood swings. Yeah, could be.

But apparently there's even indication that schizophrenia is caused by bread. That if you're a schizophrenic and you have some bread, that's what triggers your schizophrenic hallucinations. Do you believe that? Do you believe that bread is not just not the best for you, but that one in 17 people are triggered into essentially some kind of schizophrenic thing? I don't know. I don't trust science as much as I once did. Just to say the least, to say the least. But maybe. I don't know, maybe. That was in the Telegraph.

Do you remember that of course there was a big fire in January in Los Angeles and hundreds of people lost their homes and had financial issues etc. But the good news is that the musical stars pulled together and they held a concert to raise money. It was called FireAid and it was to raise money for the LA wildfire victims. So what political party do you think most of the performers belong to? Well, I don't know, but I'm guessing almost all of them were probably Democrats. What political party is in charge of California and also Los Angeles? Well, Democrats. Democrats. What political party do you think organized the FireAid concert? Well, I'm guessing Democrats, probably Democrats.

So Democrat performers, Democrat management, Democrat government. And what do you think happened to the hundred million they raised that the Democrats raised that was managed by the Democrats in the Democrat state in the Democrat city? What do you think happened? Well, if you said that none of it went directly to the victims of the fire, you would be correct. It's all Democrats.

Now, give me a guess. Where did the money go? Where did it go? If not directly to the people suffering, where'd it go? Well, the answer is it was spread among 120 nonprofits. Can you freaking believe it? 120 nonprofits. And when you hear the names of some of the nonprofits, it's really obvious that they're not providing any kind of service to anybody. I mean, some of them might, but 120 and none of the money, none of it. And as far as I can tell, none of the nonprofits have done anything with the money that would help anybody. It looks like Democrats just stole it from other Democrats. It looks like it was just all stolen.

But they do that the way Democrats steal is they raise money through some legal means and then they channel it all to these nonprofits that are, as far as I can tell, either largely fake or mostly fake or nearly all fake. I mean, I don't know. But so if you hear any nonprofit organization these days, I would just assume it's a scam. So there may have been 120 different scams. I don't know maybe some of them are legitimate but that is the most Democrat thing that ever happened. First the fire is their, you could argue that the Democrats should have done more to make the place not burn up and then they don't get much in the way of approvals for building permits and then they raise money but they steal it all. So far, Democrats doing great. You're doing great.

There's an American woman who just got sentenced to 8 and a half years in prison for running a laptop farm that North Koreans could use to pretend to be working in the US remotely. So as I understand it, she was an American and she would set up a bunch of different laptops in America in her own apartment, it looked like. And then the North Koreans, I'm guessing this is what was happening, could remotely access those laptops and then do the work as if they were doing the work in America. And then she would charge them and they would make a bunch of money for North Korea.

And I have to admit, this is another one of those situations where I want to be all judgy like you criminal, you stole money, but there's no indication that the companies that bought this service didn't get good service. So it might be that the North Korean remote workers were really good workers, but they had to be. They would get executed if they didn't produce money probably. I'm just making that up. But instead of being outraged that this woman ran this scam, I find myself weirdly thinking, well, that was pretty smart. That was kind of awesome. It's not exactly victimless because American money is being sent to North Korea, but it's on the edge of being victimless because if the companies that bought that service got the service, then it's not the worst crime.

So there's a story that's been in the news that I haven't talked about. I'll tell you why. You've seen stories that food is not getting to the starving people in Gaza, the residents, which is a big problem. Now you've probably seen allegations that the IDF, Israel's military, may have shot people who were just trying to get food. Do you believe that's true? My advice is don't believe anything that comes out of a war zone about who's doing what with food or who's got a base under a hospital. None of this stuff is credible. Now, if that happened, I would think, well, that's pretty bad and somebody needs to pay for that. Or then I'm sure the Israel version is that Hamas is the one that's stealing the food and then reselling it to the Gaza residents or something.

So my point is that the reason I don't talk about this one is that if you're not right there, you really can't believe any of it. So I'm not defending Israel, but I'm also not condemning them. I just feel like this is one that you'll never really know who did what or why. So I'm just going to let it go. I'll just I'm just noting that I'm not ignoring it. It's just there's nothing you can do with it. And as I often say, I'm not pro-Israel or anti-Israel. It's not my country. I'm just observing and sometimes predicting.

Here's a weird story in Newsweek. Sophie Clark has a story that Zelensky over there in Ukraine is working on a deal with the US where the US will buy up to $30 billion worth of drones made in Ukraine and that the US military would be essentially acquiring all of these drones. And in return, we would provide other non-drone weapons that Ukraine needs. So we would buy their drones, they would get in return our non-drone weapons they need, and it would be up to $30 billion.

Does that sound real to you? The part that doesn't sound real to me is that Ukraine has extra drones because separately we learn that the Ukraine defense ministry says the drone strikes are now responsible for up to 80% of Russian battlefield casualties. Does that mean that they've actually run out of targets? Because if the drones are killing 80% of the people who are getting killed on the Russian side and they still are able to sell $30 billion worth of drones to the US, doesn't that suggest that they've run out of Russians? There must be no Russians on the ground because surely there are enough Ukrainians. I mean, because you could train women to do the job. You wouldn't need male fighters or anything to operate the drones. So there's something wrong with the story.

I don't understand Ukraine being at war, their primary weapon being drones, and they still have the ability to sell $30 billion worth of them to the US, even if they're getting better weapons or different weapons. Doesn't make sense, does it? Also I would worry that if it's true that it suggests that the US feels there's some kind of time constraint where we're going to need these drones really quickly because otherwise I believe we would just spin up our own factories which I'm sure is already happening and make them ourselves or we should be well on the way to have to make them ourselves. But if this is true, and I guess I'm skeptical that the story itself is true, but if it's true, it would suggest that maybe the US feels it needs a whole bunch of drones really quickly, which would be very scary. Maybe has something to do with Taiwan or something. Anyway, that worries me, but I think it's most likely that the story is fake.

As I told you, I'm finishing the show now. And those of you who would like, you can join Owen Shroyer on a Spaces event that will get fired up within minutes of me ending here. And it's on X and yo