ied and has a young child, and imagine how you'd feel if that were you.

So he had some choice words for Candace. He used the C-word about her several times in one rant. And it's kind of shocking to see that language being used, especially on the conservative side of things. I don't know if he calls himself conservative, by the way. I think of him as independent. But you may have a different opinion. So I'm going to try to not take sides. Are you okay with that? I don't like where it all went. And if I had to take sides, I could, but I don't have to. I just don't have to take sides. So I would like them to figure out how to work it out.

I think that Candace does have a responsibility to make sure that there's no extra or unnecessary risk that's being pointed in Tim's direction. That's not going to be good for anybody. It's not going to be good for Tim or his family. It's definitely not going to be good for Candace. I mean, if something happened to Tim or his family, I don't want to speculate where that would lead, but you can fill in the blanks yourself. There's a risk. There's a very big risk here, and it's not just to Tim. So I choose to like both of them and find value in both of their entertainment, but I don't choose to believe that one of them has all the right answers. And let's obviously I'm talking about Candace when I say having the right answers. I don't know if she has the right answers. I don't know if Brigitte Macron is what she says. I don't know if anything she alleges about Turning Point USA is true. I don't know. But it's also not my biggest concern. So my biggest concern is that the pro-Trump people don't tear themselves apart and that the country stays whole and that we focus on the things that might make a difference and not the things that are just sort of people being mad at each other.

So on top of Tim having to run this business, which is a big enterprise, his podcasting business, and on top of having this drama where he's cast into the spotlight, and on top of having a young child so he's probably not getting nearly enough sleep as he needs to, he's got a lot going on. And Candace seems like she's just having fun. And I would hope, and I assume this is the case, that she's completely aware of what kind of impact her opinions have on his family and on MAGA and all that. So I'm going to trust that she's going to act appropriately, even if it's not as quickly as you think she should. I feel like she'll work it out. And because they're both unusually smart, right? I mean, we're not talking about one of them is a dummy and one of them is not. These are two really capable, smart people, and they would be completely aware of the impact they're having on their audience, the impact they're having on the country. So I think they'll work it out. And I'm not going to take sides. I'm just going to say you two know what makes sense. You know what's a good thing to do, and you know when it's going too far. So I don't need to advise anybody.

Now, some of you are going to say, "But Scott, she just wants to get the most traffic, and she's not really interested in what's good for the world." I don't believe that. I believe that she does care about what's good for the world because most people do. It would be very unusual if you didn't. To me that would be unusual, especially if you spend this much time in the public domain. You end up caring a lot about how your impact is. Anyway, that's enough about that. They'll work it out.

Did you know, according to another study, that swearing, cursing may boost your strength and endurance, according to Frontiers in Psychology? How many of you didn't know that? Have you experienced how much stronger you get when you're cursing at the same time? Now, I don't know if women know this, but doesn't every man know that if you're swearing, you can literally lift more? You can throw a rock farther. You can punch harder. Every guy knows that, right? I don't feel like that's something we just discovered on a Tuesday. No. So when I see that Tim Pool is calling Candace the C-word, I say to myself, well, he's just getting stronger. Otherwise, it's between them.

Did you know that there's a new statistic that says roughly 220,000 people have been arrested by ICE? So that would be people who are getting ready to be shipped back to the country of origin. That one-third of them have no criminal records. Does that seem like too much? One-third? Because we always knew that if ICE went into a room and they were after one person specifically, you know, let's say they knew somebody who was in the room, that they'd probably check everybody in the room. So does it surprise you that people who are not legal citizens, at least in terms of what I mean, does it surprise you that they're often found with people who are also not citizens? And then ICE doesn't really have an option. They don't get to use their own judgment like, "Oh, this one seems nice. Yeah, you seem nice, so we'll leave you alone." They don't really have that option. If they're in the room with you and they've proven that they're not legal residents and it's ICE, they kind of have to move on that. Now, I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm saying that if one-third of them don't have a criminal record on top of entering the country illegally, that wouldn't surprise me. That feels about right. NBC News is reporting that.

The Supreme Court is debating whether the president in his executive capacity can fire experts and scientists in government jobs. And apparently some people think that the president should not have that power, and some people think he should because he's the head of the executive branch. But Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson seems to be one of the people who, if we can judge by the way they're asking questions, we don't know for sure yet, but seems to suggest that she doesn't want the president, whoever the president is, to overrule the experts because then you would have all these experts in the government that you hired because they're experts. And then you would have some president who is not an expert at whatever that domain is, and they'd be overruling experts. Does it ever sound like a good idea for a politician to override an expert? Go ahead in the comments. See, this is a harder question than you think, isn't it? You thought this was a layup, right? Easiest question in the world. Is it a good idea for the politician to override somebody that everybody would agree is an expert? Not even any question about it. Well, it's 2025, people, almost 2026. And let me tell you, if there's one thing you have, if you haven't noticed, there doesn't seem to be that much advantage in being an expert because the number of times the experts are just absolutely full of it is so high that it looks to me almost random. I mean, I don't even see that in a lot of domains it doesn't even feel to me that the experts give you a 5 percent chance of getting a better answer. It looks like there's no chance at all. Because be you an expert or not, you're probably going to be influenced by whether you can get a speaking deal. You don't want to say something if you're an expert that would destroy your chance of getting a speaking gig because a speaking gig could be $10,000, $20,000 just for showing up and saying some expert stuff. Do you want to give that away? No, you don't. So politicians also of course are not experts. So that's a problem. And also they may have their own political reasons to lie. So you've got experts you can't trust versus politicians you can't trust. So I'm not sure we live in a world where you could trust either one of them. But what I definitely don't believe is that it's obvious which one's going to be right. Because how about we could talk about climate change and 10 other things where the politician guessed closer than the expert guessed. So anyway, we don't know how the court's going to rule, but I think the smart people are saying that you want the executive to be in charge of the experts and not the other way around.

Don't look at the bullet. I don't know what that means. It's in the comments. But who else is weighing in on this? Bukele, the president of El Salvador, commented on this topic on X. He said, "Fun fact: checks and balances don't truly exist unless the judicial branch can also be checked and balanced," meaning that you need to be able to get rid of corrupt judges or else you can ne