t was? If I had done that without my hands, would you even be tempted to have sex with me? No. Not even a little bit.

Watch. This will be without the hands. Hey, how would you like to have sex with me? Absolutely nothing. Would you agree? That was not persuasive. Not one of you said, "Oh, that's a pretty good offer. I think I'd like to have sex with him right now, despite his weird looking hat." But watch. Now I'm going to say the same thing again, but with hand motions. Hey, why don't you have sex with me? Do you see how persuasive that was? I know. No, go back. Stop. This was just a demonstration. I know some of you are putting on your jacket and looking up my address and ready to drive over here, but that was only a demonstration. Calm down. Calm down. It may have elevated your oxytocin though for a moment. So if you see any wounds, they're instantly healing. That's for me. You're welcome.

Did you know that according to the University of Vienna that pleasant sounding words are easier to remember? So they actually did a test where they gave people pleasant sounding words versus ugly words. You want to hear some ugly words? Moist. Moist is on the list of moist. So given that pleasant sounding words are easier to remember, that means they're more persuasive because whatever tickles your memory the best tends to be also the most persuasive.

So when I'm writing, let's say professionally, if I'm writing a book, for example, the last step in my writing is I may go through and substitute more pleasant sounding words for words that are just a little ugly. I used to do public speaking a lot. One of the things I would do during my public speaking is I would ask the assembled crowd which of these words is funnier. So I'd give them two words that mean about the same thing. I say which one is funnier? Pull as in you're pulling something or yank which is almost the same thing not exactly. And the entire crowd would say as one, yank. There's something universal about words that sound right.

In general, if you want to do humor, it's good to have words that have some hard sounds to them. Yank, because you get the K, but you also get the Y. So if you're doing humor, words that are not as often used or they use letters that are not as often used, Q's and Z's and Y's, that's usually funnier. So the last level of my writing is I'll change the words to funny words if it's supposed to be a joke or I'll change it to pleasant sounding words. I'll get rid of words like moist.

Now, I did write a whole book where I talked about moist robots. That did not catch on. It probably wasn't my best choice.

All right. You may have heard that the pipe bomber from January 6, at least we think he's been arrested. We're pretty sure we got the right guy. I think as Jake Tapper described him, that white guy. So he says, "We found a white male who was the pipe bomber." The only problem was he is not white at all. He apparently is a black man with a weird mustache. And I know, of course, obviously why Jake Tapper assumed it was a white man. If I told you that somebody planted a bomb in the United States, would you think it was a black guy? You wouldn't, would you? Because I can't think of a single example of a black guy who planted a bomb in America. But if you said, "Have any white guys planted any bombs?" I'd say, "Well, there's a Unabomber." And I would just sort of assume it was a white guy crime.

So Jake got a little ahead of himself there, but and then also, did you see the way he was dressed? The pipe bomber. God, what is that loud thing? It's like a rocket ship outside my door. If you saw the way he was dressed in an unfashionable hoodie with unfashionable footwear, would you have assumed that was a black American? No, because you're racist. You're racist. And you would have said, I think a black American would be far better dressed than that guy. So that's where your racism would have led you in the wrong direction.

But the fascinating part about this story, Sean Davis had a good take on it that captures a lot of what you were thinking. So I'm just going to read what Sean Davis did on X. He of The Federalist, right? I hope I have that right. He said based on the volume and type of evidence about the pipe bomber contained in this affidavit, it is inconceivable that the FBI didn't know who the pipe bomber was back in 2021. It looks a heck of a lot like corrupt FBI agents knew for years who the bomber was, but went out of their way to confuse the investigation so they could refuse to make a definitive identification.

Huh. And that goes a very long way toward explaining the latest anonymous FBI agent op against Dan Bongino and Kash Patel. Bongino and Patel removed the corrupt agents, reviewed the evidence, and swiftly identified and arrested the subject once all the corrupt obstructors were out of the way. Does that sound about what you were thinking? It does, doesn't it? Do you think it's a coincidence that once Bongino fired or reloc