ger greenhouse factors than CO2 and we don't understand them at all. So here you have the biggest phenomena we don't understand at all but the science is settled. Who knows what that means?

Now I did understand that they were having trouble with water vapor and modeling it. I don't know that I'd ever heard directly from a top expert that that's a way bigger variable than the one we've been looking at, CO2. I thought I knew it was a big variable. I didn't know it was like an overwhelmingly larger variable. That really doesn't settle everything? If you know that the biggest factor can't be modeled, that's your answer to everything. We don't know. We just don't know. That's it. We don't know.

Anyway, the funniest story of the day. I've been trying to form an opinion about this story but I can't get past the fact that it's funny. Prior to Trump winning his second term he had used an existing process to ask for compensation for all the lawfare that he had experienced. So he wanted the government to pay him $230 million to compensate for the outrageous amount of lawfare they put him through that didn't amount to any jail time at least. Now independent of whether you think that that should be awarded because I think it's not a court process. I believe it's a government process as opposed to going through a court. So when he applied for it he was not the president and so it was a perfectly applicable thing. It's an existing system. People can apply exactly the way he applied for exactly the reason he applied. So he just followed the existing system and applied to see if he could get some money.

Then he wins the presidency. Guess whose job it is to approve the $230 million award should it be approved? Trump, the president. So Trump not only went through the process to request the money, perfectly legal, all transparent, but then he got in a position to be the only one in the world who gets to approve it. I think that's how it works. So he can literally just say yes and the government will give him a quarter billion dollars. Now when it was brought up to him in one of the press events yesterday he said, "Uh, oh, you know, I'll donate that to charity." Was he really thinking that he would donate $230 million from the government to charity? And isn't the government sort of the charity itself? Like wouldn't one thing to do just not take the money so that it goes toward reducing the deficit?

See I'm struggling to find some kind of an angle where I could have like a serious opinion about that topic. I can't get past the fact that it's funny. So part of me wants him to just take the $230 million because I would never stop laughing about that. It would just, you know, we're in a phase where Trump is sort of winning everything all the time anyway. But to win that hard would just be funny because it's just so unexpected out of nowhere. Free money. I always tell you Trump's good at picking up the free money. No example better than that one if he goes ahead and does it. I suspect he won't do it, but we'll see.

So do you know the real reason the government's shut down? We got a lot of mind readers. So the mind readers are telling us the real reason it shut down. They might be right. So apparently there's some Democrat senator who anonymously made some news by saying and I quote that Democrats are afraid of opening the government because quote we'd face the guillotine meaning that the Democrats believe that they would look like the losers to their own team if they're the ones who cave.

Now here's another take. The other reason the Democrats might not want to open the government is that nobody cares if it's shut down. Do you think that the Democrats, the voters are pestering their leaders to open up? No, they're not pestering their own leaders to open up. They're just blaming Republicans. Do Republicans care that Democrats are blaming them? No. Republicans are blaming Democrats. Do the Democrats care that Republicans are blaming the Democrats for being closed? Apparently not. They don't care at all. So we have this weird situation where both sides want the government to reopen, but not much. I mean not much. They don't really want it to open. I mean I'll say I want it open, but I don't really care. Every day that Trump's people can cut the budget of the Democrat programs while it's closed is just going to look like a good day to me.

How many of you are directly impacted by the closing or the people not getting paid or the closing of the government? Have any of you had any impact yet? I believe I have not, although I suspect I would someday, but so far I don't even feel it. And I guess it's the second longest government close. It's the second longest one and we don't even care. It's like this is not even relevant. So I think Trump wins the longer they stay closed.

Tucker Carlson was at what looked like he was talking at a Turning Point event. I saw some video and he had a very handy five-point point of view of what MAGA is. So here are the five things that Tucker says MAGA is. And I didn't spend a ton of time looking at them, but I feel like it's right. So let's see if you would agree that these five things define MAGA. Right. America first. That's MAGA. America first. No pointless wars. Agree. No pointless wars. Bring back meaningful jobs. We're talking about manufacturing mostly. Yes. Bringing back manufacturing. Controlling immigration. Yes. MAGA. And free speech. Yes. I accept those totally. If you told me that we're going to agree to say that MAGA is those five things, it's not the only five things we want. But I would go with that. To me that seems like a very workable, functional definition.

Ted Cruz is trying to help out with all these funded protests. And one of the things Ted Cruz says is that if we add rioting funding they can go after the criminal enterprises that are funding the protests. So in other words it would be a RICO case if you could tie the funders in with the people doing the street protesting. If they're being dangerous, if all of it is non-dangerous then there's no crime. But if there's somebody funding groups known to be dangerous, Antifa for example, then apparently if Congress approves Ted Cruz's idea there'll be some legislation that says if they're doing bad things and they're being funded that's a RICO situation. Now you have a real good solid base to go after them. So I think Ted Cruz is right on. This feels like a real good idea. Good job, Ted, if it gets passed.

Well, John Brennan has now been referred to the Department of Justice by Representative Jim Jordan primarily for lying about the Steele dossier. So we've all seen the video where John Brennan said that the CIA did not rely on the Steele dossier for their post-election intell