ou should never say you've already given us the best deal in the world. Why would we give you anything else? If you just told us you had the best deal that anybody had in the whole world, which might be true by the way, that's not much incentive for us to give up anything else, is it? It's like, let me see. So you've got the best trade deal in the world is what you're saying, but you're asking for more. Why would we give you any more? You just said you had the best deal in the whole world. The world. Look how many countries there are. Have you counted the number of countries, Carney? It's a bunch. Lots of countries. And you have the best in the world. You're not getting anything else.

So yeah, if you're negotiating, don't start with you've already given us the best deal in the world.

Well, Representative Mike Lawler, I like the fact he has "law" right in his last name. Lawler. So he's floating a bill according to the New York Post to charge fentanyl traffickers with attempted murder. Now that would be a trafficker. So I don't think that necessarily means your local street dealer. I think that means the person who takes it across the border, but I'm not positive. But it would be attempted murder and you could get up to life in prison. Good idea. I like it. Life in prison.

All right. So I had a shocking revelation yesterday. I'm always fascinated when there's something that I just assumed was true and find out is totally untrue. And I feel like you're in the same position. So I'm going to talk about something that probably you think is real. And according to what I learned yesterday is not even a little bit real. And it goes like this.

Do you believe that the company named BlackRock and some other big money companies have been buying up single-family homes in the United States so much so that it's a big force on rising prices and making those homes unaffordable? How many of you believe that that's a real thing that's happening in the real world? Let me say it again and listen carefully, right? So you have to listen carefully.

Do you believe that a company called BlackRock, money company BlackRock, and Vanguard and State Street, do you believe that they buy and have purchased so many single-family homes in the United States that it is raising the price of homes in the United States? I believed that. I kept hearing it over and over again.

All right, you ready? You ready to find out what's true? This is going to blow your mind. And I didn't know this until I saw the Amuse account on X. And you should be following Amuse, just like it sounds. Just Amuse, and follow it. But there's a long thread.

Here's the first thing you got wrong. There is a company that buys single-family homes in the United States, but it's Blackstone. It's not BlackRock. BlackRock's not even in that business. So the first thing is it's not BlackRock and I don't believe it's the others either, but there is a company called Blackstone that has bought some tens of thousands of single-family homes. But the total amount that these money people have bought is 0.1% of the supply. One-tenth of 1%.

Do you believe that the prices of homes in the United States are higher because Blackstone, not BlackRock, and some others own 0.1% of them? Almost certainly not. It's way too small a percentage to be affecting the total price of homes. I mean, maybe a little bit, but you wouldn't even be able to measure it. So my source there is the Amuse account. So if you have anything to fact-check me on, let me know later.

But how many of you did that blow your minds? How many of you thought that was true? That BlackRock had bought so many homes it was raising the price of homes. I actually believed that. I actually believed it that nothing is real. So I've got a little bit of a theme for today. The theme is nothing's real. It's all fake.

Well, the Texas Senate passed their GOP redistricting map and so it looks like they'll gain five seats or the Republicans will gain five seats in Texas. And according to Axios, April Rubin is writing that Trump's plan is to get as many as 100 seats through a combination of having the Republican states redistrict. I assume that means even if the Democrats also do more redistricting that the Republicans could still pull ahead because they're less gerrymandered in general so that they would have more room to grow, so to speak. But on top of that, Trump's trying to get rid of mail-in ballots. And he believes if he does those two things that the Republicans would pick up a 100-seat Republican majority. Does that sound too aggressive? Meaning that there's no way that's going to happ