bably you're gonna be disappointed. So I would say the odds would suggest that there might be some awkward, embarrassing stuff, some stuff you'll talk about, some things for the pundits to chatter about. But I'll bet you nobody's going to jail. I'll bet you no clear and obvious plot to overthrow the government is discovered. It'll probably be a whole bunch of people doing what they thought made sense in their own view of the world. Probably that's all this is. So don't be disappointed if you don't see much out of the IG report.

Yesterday you saw me ask the provocative question: Why is it that we the citizens of the United States do not know the answer to this question, is Trump building a wall? Right? So I asked that yesterday. It's like, do you know, is there actually a wall being built? I mean Trump says yes, the news says no, and then we see pictures of wall being built. What's going on? Now Fox News actually covered this story the same day that I said how come, why don't we know? Now here's how Shepard Smith covered it on Fox News. He said that 60 miles of fence have been reconstructed, meaning that there was already some kind of a barrier there, and that the only fence that's been built is upgrades of existing fence. And therefore President Trump's promise to build a new wall has not happened.

Now let me ask you this. If you were in charge of the border, where would you apply your money first? Let's say it was your job to build a wall. Where would you put it first? Would you build your wall first where there is no wall? Or would you build your wall first where there was a wall because it was an important place to put a wall but the wall wasn't good enough? Which of those two places would be the best place to put your money? Let me say them again. A place where there was already an inadequate wall because it was a perfect place for people to get across the border. Or a place where nobody was much trying to get across the border because it was hard to get to, that remote desert place or whatever. There was something naturally about it that wasn't so good for crossing the border. Which would be the place you start? The place you start is by fixing the broken wall. Because the reason there was a wall there in the first place is because it was possible to build a wall and it was important to have a wall there.

I'm not sure that that distinction between fixing walls that were inadequate and building new walls is quite the way Fox News and Shepard Smith presented it. I think the facts were accurate. I'm not questioning the facts. I'm just saying that what was missing is the context that the smartest, best place to make a difference with the wall is where you already had one because you needed one. It just wasn't good enough. Of course that's where you go first.

Now there's a problem, a question of does he have any extra money to do any extra wall? I don't know. I don't know. But that would probably be in the news. So you saw that the president was criticizing Fox News recently. What was the phrase he used there? They're not working. Fox News is not working for us anymore. And see, you then tried to turn that into, hey, are you saying that Fox News was like working for the campaign? No, it's one of those ambiguous sentences. It doesn't mean you get a paycheck. It doesn't mean that you're taking my commands. It means it just doesn't work for me anymore. If I put on a shirt and it's out of style I would say, oh, I don't know, this shirt just doesn't work for me anymore. That doesn't mean my shirt is an employee. It doesn't mean my shirt takes orders from me and does what it needs. It just doesn't work for my situation. The president was complaining that Fox News is being more critical and that doesn't really work for him as well as it should. So he's putting a little pressure on them because he's a big old dictator? No. Because he is transparent. When something bothers him he mentions it all the time. Doesn't matter who it is. If something bothers him he mentions it. That doesn't make you a dictator.

All right, how about the question of whether Mexico will pay for the wall? Again, Shepard Smith said, you know, that he basically dismissed that as, he was very dismissive, shall we say, about Trump's claim, famous claim that Mexico would pay for the wall. On the same day that the news is showing, I think, or at least the same week that the news is showing footage of the Mexican National Guard or police there, armed professionals in Mexico actually fighting with and having an altercation with African immigrants who are coming, trying to come up the southern border of Mexico. Why is Mexico spending so much money to put human troops on their southern border? It's because Trump and the United States has pressured them to do it. Because those people would otherwise traverse Mexico and cross our southern border. So Mexico is paying, seems to me, a lot of money to put human beings there to stop other human beings from crossing.

Do you know how Mexico could save some money? Anybody? Anybody raise your hand. How could Mexico save some money on their own, just their own money? I'm not talking about anybody else's money, just Mexico's own budget. What would be a way to control your border without having to put a standing army on every incident? Thinking, thinking. What could you do? Some kind of a non-human solution for a border area? A wall. A wall. Who's gonna pay for that wall? Will Costa Rica pay for Mexico's wall? Will Honduras? Will Africa pay for Mexico's wall? Will the United States pay for Mexico's wall? Probably not. I think Mexico is going to be looking pretty hard at building a fricking wall. Maybe not today. Maybe they'll say, well let's put our troops on the southern border and see how this goes. Maybe this is a temporary problem. Maybe in a year we won't need to do this and we'll be glad we didn't build a big expensive wall.

But time is on Trump's side. As long as Mexico is draining their own budget to keep their military on the border in place of a wall, they're wasting money. Mexico, I guara