mean, "No, I don't uptalk." Oh look what I did. I automatically did a downtalk. I think I'm going to practice that.

Speaking of people who have interesting ways of speaking, one of my favorite TV senators, and maybe one of yours as well, is Senator Kennedy. So you know Senator Kennedy. He's got, I don't know what state he's from, he's got an accent. It makes him sound, I assume it's southern. It's a little bit slower. It's interesting to listen to. And what he's talking about, between the fact that what he says tends to be very clever, often funny, and because he says it in a certain way and there's a variation in the way he talks, you can't look away when he's on television because something interesting is going to happen.

And I was watching him. He was on Martha MacCallum's show on Fox, and he was making the case for why he thinks essentially that the virus came from a Wuhan biological lab of some sort as opposed to a wet market. And one of the things that I do appreciate about our elected officials is that while I normally hate the fact there's so many of them, and they're all lawyers, I feel like we have too many lawyers. Some lawyers are very good. You know, a few lawyers, yeah you want some good advice. The lawyers are smart. They're solid thinkers. But certainly there's too much of a good thing sometimes, right? I mean you could have too many lawyers and that would argue, you know, maybe we've reached that level.

But that said though, the ones who are good enough lawyers that they become well known, run for office, and win tend to be pretty good lawyers. And so when you watch, you say, Lindsey Graham argue something on TV or you're watching Senator Kennedy, they just do a really good job of making a case in a way that other people just aren't as clever.

So here is some of the evidence and you can make up your own mind. So Senator Kennedy says, and I think this is a fact — he says as a fact. I know that there was a study and an article that alleges this is the fact but I'm gonna say I'm skeptical of this fact. I'm not skeptical of his overall conclusion but this fact has me with a little bit of skepticism. And the fact is somebody said that there were no bats at the Wuhan wet markets. And so the implication is the virus could not have spread from the bat to a human in the wet market because there were no bats there to do that.

Now I feel as if — I just feel as if that might not be true. Maybe there was a bat or two. Now that doesn't mean it came from the bat. I'm just saying that I don't know if we would try to make a cover story that couldn't possibly be possible because there were no bats. Maybe because whatever they did is pretty remarkable so you almost can't put anything