Back to episode — Episode 2959 CWSA 09/15/25
Context —
. That's a pretty good theory. I don't know if it's true, but another one is there's so much money to be made in AI that no one wants to criticize the energy industry anymore because if you go hard on climate change and clamp down on, let's say, fossil fuels, we would kill our AI industry. But is the AI industry the same as whoever might be funding and talking about and worrying about and astrotur…
← Previous segment →at means.
Well, there have been a bunch of China negotiations. I think Rubio is doing it. And Trump is happy about the outcome. So I guess those talks are over. Trump is planning to speak to President Xi of China on Friday and there Trump is teasing that they have a TikTok deal. Now, do you believe that China agreed to a TikTok deal that Trump would be happy with without agreeing to the overall trade deal? Why would they do that? Why would they give that up unless they had gotten everything they could get from the larger trade deal? Does that sound to you likely that he's got a TikTok deal? To me, it feels like President Xi is playing Lucy with the football. I feel like she's setting him up. I don't think there's going to be a deal. I don't think there's going to be a deal. And I think it will just embarrass Trump because he'll get a little over his skis and he'll brag that he got a deal. And then something will come up as in China will say, "Well, we did think we had a deal, but then you did that thing we didn't like and well, I guess the deal's off." So I feel like it's a trick. I don't trust it at all. I would love to be wrong, but I'm going to put a stake in the ground that says I don't believe that China would give that up unless they had already gotten everything they wanted in a trade deal and the trade deal's not done. So I don't know. But Trump must think that he's pretty close on the larger trade deal issues or he probably wouldn't be planning a phone call. I don't know. We'll see.
Well, the White House has asked for $58 million more for security that I think would include for Congress. And I think we'd all agree that we're in a world where we need more security, but it's terrible that we need a tragedy to get funding for things that we need, but that's our world.
Apparently the FBI is investigating some far-left groups in Utah that might have been involved, they think, might have been, don't know, with the planning or at least knowledge of the Charlie Kirk assassination. And apparently there's a Utah-based trans mission group called Armed Queers of Salt Lake City. And they trained people to use weapons to defend trans rights. But apparently they deleted their account the day Charlie Kirk was killed. The day he was killed. So do I have this wrong? That the day that Charlie was killed, we had no idea that trans was involved in any way. Right? On day one, we didn't know anything about trans. So if the Utah-based group thought they needed to get rid of their account because they didn't want maybe to be dragged into it, why would they think they would be dragged into it?
Context —
Or why would they think that that was a good day to delete it? Unless they thought the trans thing would come out and they already knew more than the FBI knew. So I would say that's pretty suspicious. So we'll find out. Like most of you, I think it's nearly impossible to imagine that at least the romantic partner trans of the shooter, at least the romantic partner knew the plan. Don't you think?…
Next segment → →