hat's the point. He could work with anybody even if they're terrible.

So first part of her tweet, I agree completely. But you know what's funny about it is she's one of the biggest pushers of the fine people hoax. She got fine people hoaxed herself. This whole thing about Biden praising a segregationist never happened. It's fake news. She is the biggest pusher of the fake news about Charlottesville and it happened to her. So karma just gave her her own fine people hoax and she'll probably never get out of it.

But it gets better. There were two parts to her tweet. Here's the second part. Then said no, and Sanders says tweet number two: Let's be honest here. And that she goes on to be dishonest. She goes, let's be honest here. A person currently sits in the White House who has in all capital actually praised white supremacists. That's the fine people hoax. He never did that. In fact, he condemned them. The very thing she says happened is the opposite of what happened. Easy. It's a check. Just read the transcript.

She's been pushing this fine people hoax harder than just about anybody on CNN and she just got totally trapped by it. So I may have tweeted back a couple of responses to her. You might want to read those just for your entertainment.

Let's talk about something else. God, that was a delicious story. That's my favorite story of like the whole month is that she got fine people hoaxed targeted at herself. That could not have been more perfect. It just couldn't.

All right, Iran has shot down a US drone. We say it was in international waters. They say it went over Iran at some point. But here's what's interesting. In our history, our military history on Earth, how often do you get to attack something that doesn't have a human in it? Attacking somebody's drones is starting to get really close to a "Star Trek," you know, the first "Star Trek" series on TV plot. You know which one I'm talking about.

So there's a futuristic scene in "Star Trek" in which they found some planet that was at war, but instead of having a real war where people were getting killed fighting each other, they would have some kind of a simulated war in the computer. And then whoever won the simulated war, the other side, the losers, would have to have their citizens go to voluntary death machine. So we go into some machine which is killing. So instead of having a proper war, there would be the same number of people dead, but they wouldn't do a physical war. They just killed the people who lost.

This shooting down of a drone kind of tells you what the future looks like, right? Here's what the future looks like. Whoever owns the sky will win every war if they care enough to fight it. So because of the power of drones, whoever owns the airspace over a country effectively owns that country in the future, wouldn't you say? And most of that doesn't need to be real people. So the Air Force in the future will be unmanned drones because why would you put a person there? You don't need to. And there will be lots of them and the unmanned drones will fight it out.

Now do the unmanned drones need to kill people? They don't, because whoever owns the airspace can simply tell those people, you'd better do what we want because now we own the airspace. Because we can kill you if we want. We can do anything we want with your country because we own the space above it. So in the future, undoubtedly entire wars will be fought by unmanned vehicles in the sky and they'll be falling like flies as they shoot each other. Even