All right, let's talk about Joe Biden. So I'm gonna be a little bit non-political, if that even makes sense. I'm not even sure that's the thing. Maybe I should take that back. But I'm not going to be going hard at Joe Biden today. I feel like the country deserves one day where we just say, how about not today? Right? How about one day we just be Americans?

And I'm not celebrating Joe Biden's victory or Joe Biden. I'm not celebrating that. What I am celebrating is that we have a system which seems unstoppable by people, which is pretty amazing. The system just grinds along. We may or may not have had an election that enough people think is credible, but I don't think it mattered. We ended up with some kind of professional class politicians that have always been in charge, except for the Trump interlude there.

I don't know that it's the end of the world, because even Biden isn't going to be able to get everything he wants. Congress will still push back. The public will push back when he tries to do things that Trump did better. It's going to be obvious, and that will limit what he can do as well. So if you look at some of the things he's going to do, there are either trivial things or things that maybe can't get done. So we'll have to wait to see how much damage he could do, other than the executive orders and reversing some of the Trump stuff they didn't like.

But here's the thing. I feel as if we've slipped into this place where politics is the politics of revenge and cancelling the legacy of the last president. It feels like that's the game now. Now of course you'd have to blame Trump for doing it first, and so you can't really hold Joe Biden to a different standard. You know, if he didn't complain when Trump did it and tried to erase Obama's legacy, it's hard to complain if Biden just does the same thing and tries to erase Trump. So yeah, he didn't start it.

And well, you know, I gotta say I had a little exchange with Ian Bremmer on Twitter yesterday, and he made a tweet and I responded to his tweet saying that Trump's response to the election was terrible unless he was right. Wouldn't you say? Because how you judge Trump's insistence that the election was rigged depends entirely upon you knowing that it wasn't. How would you know that? How would you know it was or was not rigged? Have you ever looked at the source code? And if you did, would you know what you were looking at? I haven't, and I wouldn't.

Do I have any personal information about the system working perfectly or even being imperfect? Well, everything's imperfect. But I don't have any specific proof of fraud or not. But I also don't have any reason to believe that it was fair.

So this is the part that I would disagree with Ian, because he thought I was joking when I said, well, you know, if Trump could be right. Now we're treating it as though the system has made a decision, and I'm happy with that. I'm okay that the system grinds on even if it's imperfect, because it's better to move forward than it is to fight forever about something you thought was wrong.

So I think what's good for the country is to move forward and then try to adjust. Republicans will have another shot at it, a couple more shots. And I don't buy into the theory that the Democrats will put a lockdown on the government and make rules changes that will put them in power forever. I feel as if there's too much pressure against that and that it would be too much of an overreach. And therefore Biden being — the one thing you can depend on Biden is that he's a moderate. So I think if it looks like a gross overreach, he's exactly the guy who wouldn't do it. So you might have some safety there, at least as long as he's in office. Don't know how that will last.

But here's the thing. How can anybody say they're sure the election was good just because we haven't discovered any specific provable fraud? Does that feel like that statement could be made? Because I'm telling you, I don't know that it was fair, but I also don't know that it wasn't fair. But more importantly, how the heck would I know? How could I possibly know?

So there are two opinions that I consider stupid. All right, there are some opinions that you could be wrong but you're being smart. It's just that everybody gets wrong sometimes, right? So I feel the two stupid positions are 100 percent certainty that the election was fair and 100 percent certainty that it wasn't. If you hold either of those two positions, I feel like that's stupid. Because you and I don't know. How could we? What would we look at as just citizens to know that that was fair or to know that it wasn't?

Now if you put odds on it, I'd say that would be reasonable. Let's say you were pretty sure it was fair and you said, you know, I'll put 95 percent on it based on my experience in life and things I've seen before. If you said 95 that it was fair or even 95 percent that it wasn't fair, I would say to you that's probably not the percentage I would put on it, but at least you're talking logically. You're acknowledging that it can't be known. If you think it could be known, I don't think you should be in this conversation. It feels like not a reasonable position.

Whereas Ruby Freeman — somebody says I think the Ruby thing is one of the most unfair things that came out of it, and I found myself defending Ruby because I watched the same video. You didn't have to see anything even slightly worrying in that video. If you think you did, that's probably confirmation bias. Because all you saw was the counting of votes, and the people who know what's happening and how vote counting worked looked at it, every bit of it before and after all the way through, and they said all we see is vote counting just the way it's supposed to be done.

So if you believe the Ruby story, that would be the least likely one to be true, along with the Venezuela part. That's least likely. The Italian connection, very unlikely. Anything's possible, but I would put a really, really, really low likelihood on any of those three things.

Somebody says she admitted it. No she didn't. She didn't admit anything because there wasn't anything to admit.

And wouldn't you think by now you'd have some kind of a whistleblower? Don't you think you'd have at least one whistleblower? Because I think people have offered large sums of money for a whistleblower. In fact, you could do that tomorrow. If somebody said, all right, let's say Mike Lindell, the MyPillow guy, let's say just hypothetically he said I'll give you a million dollars for a whistleblower who has enough information to show that there was a problem, would you get any takers for a million dollars? You don't think there was somebody? Hypothetically, if somebody was involved in fixing an election, they wouldn't take a million dollars? Because I feel like they would. And probably people would offer a million dollars if they had the money.

So that's another thing. That's a dog not barking. So if you're looking for a reason to believe the election was not fraudulent, the fact that no whistleblowers have come forward, given that there would be an enormous financial benefit to do so, that would be — somebody says and your life would be ruined. Would it? You'd have a million dollars. How many people would take that chance for a million dollars if you didn't have money, you know, you were just getting by? I feel like you'd take the chance for a million dollars. Remember, you were involved in a criminal activity in this hypothetical situation. So I don't know that there are too many criminals who wouldn't take a million dollars even if it caused them a little social anxiety. So that's something.

All right. If you've watched any of the press coverage of Biden so far, since about the time of the inauguration, it's actually hilarious because it's just a love letter to Biden and Harris and how wonderful Harris is and her power suits. There's even something about Harris's style. And I'm thinking to myself, I really don't think of Kamala Harris as a style leader, which is not an insult because I'm not a style leader either. Most people aren't. So I don't even consider that a criticism. I'm just saying if you're gonna pick somebody to be your style symbol, would it be Kamala Harris? I don't know. I'm not saying she dresses poorly. I'm just not sure it's a fashion statement.