Trump has successfully, and I can't even imagine he got to this point, but it's pretty impressive. He's gotten to the point where he beat down the public and he wore people out until he can simply say it's a hoax. Maybe they push back a little bit to get some clarification. But now that's our reality. Our reality is our president thinks it's a hoax and he's got some evidence to back his opinion. And did you ever think we'd get to this point?

You know, because I was sort of on the hoax page the whole time, although I don't think I used that word early on. I definitely use it now. Do you remember, I don't know how old some of you are, but do you remember when we used to use science to figure out what was true and what wasn't true? Is anybody old enough to remember that? If we didn't know if climate change was a problem or not a problem, just to pick one example, what we would do is we would rely on science because the one thing we knew for sure is that if you're trying to figure out what's real and what's not real, science is really the only way to go. Am I right?

And then somewhere during one of the Trump terms, you can pick which one you like, science became so discredited that the thought of using science to figure out what's true seems a little dumb now, doesn't it? It doesn't just seem like sometimes it doesn't work. Now it actually seems dumb because if you were to just do the math of how often science is operating in the pursuit of taking your money and screwing you and giving somebody else power, that's way more than the number of times science tells you the truth, isn't it? Am I wrong about that? Am I subjective? Of course. My subjective impression is that science in 2025 is usually used to mislead, to market, to sell, to get elected, to scare somebody. But how often is it used to find out reality? Now and then, but it's not really the right tool, is it? It's not even the right tool for figuring out reality. Well, it should be, but the way we use it, we abuse it.

So there's a clip of Eric Swalwell demanding that Kash Patel promised that he won't be investigating. I guess there are about 60 people in Congress that Kash might want to investigate. And Swalwell says in this hearing, "Will you recuse yourself from investigating the 60 individuals, including myself, that you identified as government gangsters?" And Kash Patel says, "No." I'm starting to really like the Kash Patel fast answers. Will you do this with these 60 people? No. Moving on.

Now, does it seem weird to you that all of these people got caught with mortgage fraud? Allegedly. So allegedly Letitia James, Adam Schiff, and now Eric Swalwell. What are the odds they would all be involved in a similar kind of mortgage fraud? Is there some kind of class you take when you become a Democrat? You're like, "Okay, I'm registering as a Democrat. All right, here's your documentation that'll teach you how to cheat on your taxes, maybe your insurance, but definitely on your mortgages. Definitely on the mortgages."

So Derek Swalwell, he's doing great. He's my representative, in case you wondered. So he's just doing great.

There's allegedly a new Epstein bombshell they're calling it. Are the Epstein bombshells ever bombshells? It doesn't feel like it, does it? I feel like every day or two there's an Epstein bombshell that will tell us what we already knew. All right, what's this one? Well, apparently Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyer is accusing Repr