mbrero lately. Go back to Mexico.

It'd be even funnier if Trump agreed to debate but only with AOC because she's not even in the chain of command for this topic. Oh yeah I'll do it but only with AOC.

Anyway the smart people are pretty sure that the only way this shutdown ends is with Democrats giving up. Do you think that too? Do you think the only way this ends is with Democrats saying all right, all right, all right. You know we only have to wait seven weeks and then we're back in negotiating the budget so we could just wait seven weeks. I don't see it ending any other way. Do you?

As far as I can tell Trump is perfectly happy torturing them with funny memes, keeping them off the job, and cutting all this fat that he wanted to cut anyway. So it definitely looks like all the cards are in Trump's favor right now. It looks like it. So I can't imagine it would go any direction other than yet another failure. But during that time that they fail they get to highlight their two leaders, Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer. That is all bad every day. Every second that they're on TV, every second makes the Democrats less popular because even the Democrats are not looking at those two guys and saying there's my leaders right there. So I mean I think if it were AOC things might be going in the right direction because they might say all right I'll follow her. But they don't.

Newt Gingrich had a good summary of it. He says the Democrats just pulled off what he calls a double negative. He was talking to Jesse Watters about this. So the double negative is that there are two things that the American people want. Just two things. Well they want more than that but two things the American people want on this topic. Number one, do not close the government. Number two, do not raise spending. And then Newt points out, so what do the Democrats do? They say I'm going to close the government until you raise spending. That's a double negative.

To which I say no you're wrong. You're wrong Newt. It's not a double negative because they're doing it by putting forward Schumer and Jeffries. It's a triple negative. It's a triple. You cannot discount that they're putting their least charismatic, least likable two people as the face of this problem. Yeah that's three things we don't want to do. We don't want to close the government. We don't want to raise spending. And we don't want to spend one more freaking second looking at Hakeem Jeffries or Schumer on camera. Can you give us somebody who's got a little bit of charisma? Just a little bit. Somebody interesting. I'll watch. Like you said I'll watch AOC. Yeah. It's not about being a Democrat. It's about having a little bit of charisma please.

Cash Patel was asked a question about whether he thought Nancy Pelosi was behind planning the January 6th event to turn it into an insurrection narrative. Now I will tell you that I am not persuaded by the new news that there were lots of FBI people in the crowd. I understand what that means. That it means they could have been ordered to cause trouble. Definitely could have. And certainly it looks like the FBI in prior leadership, it looks like they were lying to us about the involvement. But it doesn't necessarily mean that we have a direct smoking gun that they caused the trouble because there's some people that look like they might have been operatives breaking windows and stuff like that. But we don't know. I mean they could have been some other kind of operative, not FBI. So I'm personally not totally persuaded but I'm open to it. Definitely open to it because it certainly opens up the extreme possibility that they were involved. But we don't have that last whistleblower thing. By now we would have at least one whistleblower say here's the deal, I was directly told to go turn this into a riot. Short of that, and I think we would have seen that by now, short of that I'm going to just say fog of war still and could go either way.

But as Kash Patel reminds us, remember when there was a claim that the National Guard had been offered but declined and apparently Pelosi at the time said that was a lie. I think she was claiming if I have the story right, I believe I do, she was claiming that that never happened. There was no declining of the help. Well later after Kash Patel is in there they find the documents that were indeed the declination of the help. So now that's a proven lie that Nancy Pelosi had access to 10 to 20,000 National Guard and only had to say yes. Only had to say yes. And she said no in writing.

Now why woul