, but over time you're going to attract the people who know if I were the mayor of this smaller city, I'll bet I could direct these contracts to my friends, and I'll bet they would find some way to repay me that was not easily trackable. So over time our system largely guarantees because we don't do any real audits in government, it largely guarantees it's going to be corrupt. You just have to wait a little while. The only question is have you waited long enough for the corrupt people to get in and never leave? Because why would you ever leave? I mean, once you get in there, if you're gonna stay, you're gonna stay.

So DOGE completely changed my view of the world. And that's a big deal because I think the same happened with other people.

Speaking of Tim Walz, governor of Minnesota. So Minnesota Department of Human Services, I guess there are 480 employees who have signed on to the idea that the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been stolen by mostly Somali-related gangs who were pretending to have saved the panda and other charitable things, but really they were just completely corrupt. And they stole hundreds of millions. And you wonder how is that even possible? How do you steal hundreds of millions over a lengthy period of time and nobody catches you? Nobody, there's no red flag.

Well, according to 480 people in the Department of Human Services in Minnesota, Tim Walz was in fact informed on multiple occasions about all the red flags of corruption. And instead of looking into it and stopping the corruption, what do you think he did? Take a guess. Tim Walz, who is a Democrat, not only a Democrat, but the one that Kamala Harris thought would be a good choice for her number two, her vice president. What do you think he did the multiple times that credible people said, "Hey, it looks like they're stealing gigantic amounts of our money. Maybe we should look into this." What do you think he did?

Well, I wasn't there, but according to the Department of Human Services, 480 people, he retaliated against the whistleblowers. The worst thing a human can do if you're in government is to punish the whistleblowers. Now, what did they say? They said he disempowered the Office of Legislative Auditor. So they at least had some handwaving at an audit, but he disempowered it so they wouldn't be effective. He allowed agencies to disregard their own audit findings. Okay, well you can do the audit and you can find problems, but then we're going to ignore them. And then he retaliated against the whistleblowers. So it seems like Minnesota was a Ukraine Zelensky level corruption. We're not talking about small dollars. We're not talking about a governor guided a contract to his cousin. We're talking about enormous organized theft. And I can't believe that Walz had no benefit from that. Like why would he try so hard to keep the criminals in power? I don't know.

It also makes me wonder if that's the reason he was chosen as vice president. You know how we speculate that the people who rise to the top at the Democrat side, we speculate that it's only because they are criminals and that the other people who are also criminals want to make sure that they have some kind of blackmail against them. But really it's just a big criminal enterprise. So the people who are themselves criminal make sure that they only choose as their running mate in this case another criminal so that if that criminal ever decided to turn them in, they would then themselves be turned in. So you've got this mutually assured destruction thing. And I would have said honestly a few years ago I would have said that's nonsense and that just sounds like conspiracy thinking. It's like come on. Come on Scott. Do you really think that Kamala picked for her vice president the most criminal person they could find because that's the person they could control? Really Scott? Do you think that actually happened in the real world? Yes, I don't have proof, but come on. I mean, it's just starting to look so obvious that the Democrat party is just a large criminal organization that depends on having people in it who aren't willing to talk or turn in the other people who are in it. It doesn't look like that's necessarily the case on the Republican side, but I wouldn't rule it out. There could be some pockets of that on both sides.

So Trump was asked about Tim Walz and he said that Tim was quote the seriously governor of Minnesota, that he does nothing either through fear, incompetence or both. Trump wrote that in a Truth Social. So then Kristen Welker of Meet the Press asked Tim Walz about Trump's statement that he was quote seriously. And Walz said we cannot allow this to be normalized. You can't use that language. Well, you can, but you shouldn't. He said, well, you know, here I'm going to agree with Tim Walz. I don't think that Trump should have called him seriously because I don't think there's anything serious about that guy. Okay, you were going to do it if I didn't. I don't love the use of that word. I understand why people don't want it to be used. There are too many people who have genuine disabilities etc. So it's not my first choice, but I like free speech. And I do enjoy when Trump entertains his base because it is pretty entertaining while he's doing his job. You know, Trump is the only president who can have an entire floor show of entertainment. And that's what I would call this. It's like a floor show of great entertainment just to watch how people react. Just to watch how Meet the Press handled it, just to make the dumbest Democrats obsess on it, just to make them think of whatever is the least important thing that's happening in the world and get them to treat it like it's the most important. That's funny. And the fact that the base, I'm pretty sure that the Republican base thinks it's just funny. Now, a lot of people probably are where I am, which is I wouldn't use the word in public. I mean, not the way he used it. I wouldn't do it, but I don't care that he did because Trump is a unique character who oversteps the bounds of polite conversation routinely. Once you get used to it, it doesn't seem like the end of the world. It just feels like he's doing a bit. And the bit is how angry can I make them? How much time can I make them spend talking about that and not about my policy. So I kind of love that he does it. It's very funny.

So CNN and Brian Stelter was not happy that the White House has a page on the internet dedicated to all the hoaxes that come out of the media. And so Brian Stelter was saying that the White House has launched a web page that targets reporters. Well, does it target reporters or does it report when reporters are hoaxing and fake? Well, I would argue it's the latter. But then Brian Stelter says he thinks that Trump is doing it, in other words that the page exists for the purpose of quote delegitimizing the media. To which I say, yeah. Yeah, that's exactly why they do it. You didn't discover this. That's the whole point of it is to delegitimize the media. But was the media legitimate before that page went up or is the page a response to the fact that the media is not legitimate? Well, you know my opinion. If the media had been legitimate, then I would not be in favor of a page that incorrectly said that they had had lots of hoaxes. But because the hoaxes that are listed are genuinely hoaxes or at least fake news, if they weren't genuine examples and if there were not lots of them and if they were not spread across multiple media, well then I'd say that's going too far. It's wasting my tax dollars. Why are you putting up this page of lies? But that's not what's happening. The hoax page that the White House put up is because there are a whole bunch of hoaxes. Yeah, he is delegitimizing the media. Is that bad? No, delegitimizing hoaxers is exactly what we need. So thank you for that.

All right. So Amy Klobuchar, Democrat, she was also on CNN and CNN asked her this question. Does Minnesota have a problem with gangs roaming the streets? Now, that would be her state. So what do you think she said to the question, does Minnesota have a problem with gangs roaming the streets? Because apparently that is a problem. But what would Amy Klobuchar say? Because if she says yes, gangs are roaming the streets that would suggest that maybe Trump is doing the right thing by sending the National Guard. So she can't really agree with something that I think is just observably true. And it would be the reason that CNN even a