Come on mom bumble. Everybody come on in here in the year, come on gather around grab your beverage because. even though it's rainy day here in California, it's time for coffee was got Adams, it's time for you to give ear and grab your mug grab your cup. You're Stein, you're vessels. You're jealous you're thermos. If you will follow If ever look what I like coffee and join me now for the simultaneous sip.

oh yeah, that's the good stuff. So I hope that many of you saw my periscope from yesterday afternoon, in which I talk to involve rather gaunt, and I use the new periscope feature where you can add a guest, and so we talked for an hour and a half and is probably no definitely The most interesting ninety minutes over spent my life. It was it There was so much fun, o darn. It appears that I'm still in guest mood now, one year and gas mode. It doesn't give aid notification to Twitter automatically, so

didn't notice that I was starting. This investment is so there will be fewer people here today because they will not be giving their notifications or something like that. Many way, the talk in a valley, Nevada yesterday was so good that I listened to it as a does an audience member after was done so after an hour and a half of talking to live or later I played the entire hour and a half again for my own, and I was great all the way through. So if you don't watch anything else is here, watch that you may have to go to.

My periscope to see her to, or actually I tweeted is, was on my twitter feed them. I must talk about a few things in the news, so apparently this just blows my mind, but the president's ex lawyer, Dowered Unenviously, said that he doesn't think Mahler will we produce a report to which I said, and he said literally there may be no report, he might just say a candle and then set because if there's nothing illegal, nothing to follow up on

no need for report is apparently the law does not require a report to think about that the law doesn't require report. So, according to somebody who is close to it, knew at sea the lot of the evidence and has a good idea that nothing's going to come out of it says he doesn't think they'll be report, is totally mine blowing how in the world did we get to February Thirteenth, twenty nineteen and for the first time were hearing, you know that Mueller Report, maybe It's not there's no reason she has to give her report. He might give her report. Maybe you won't. That was just mind blowing that we got all the way here and it's the first time we're hearing that. so it is looking more and more certain that the mother, Russia collusion thing, will be a big nuthin

as I am most of you protected- Let's talk about the war for name so the war committee which, in the face of the amount of the voters and there's just no other, wait upon it. The the committee that worked on the wall funding absolutely disrespected the voters by producing nothing. There shows us what the extra said and then compared to what they decided to do without that they didn't do anything. Then do anything you can respect do anything you shouldn't back therein,

knew anything. That's a good job and the elders rift lose their jobs sensational before now, author Republicans and Democrats has been wasted. Time now, don't think that'll happen, but I'm just saying that day they let us down completely the this. This is as a com, lead failure as you could. Even imagine you, you couldn't even draw up on paper as more of a complete failure and what are and what I mean by that is that they had experts. They have experts and they're trying to figure out what to do that makes sense, and if their national

are in the public hears what the experts say: here's what we're gonna do in widely different if it's different, they ve done nothing complete wasted time now, there's some thought that the president, my sign that anyway, here's the funny bar here's, the forty four about all this and I think this it's gonna, be maybe hilarious funny does even cover up. This might be hilarious adheres. Why said that the way we ve been thinking up until now, literally until today- we ve been thinking that isn't this committee will give trump his money or the other plan is the Trump would do something unilaterally and apparently there are several ways he could do that one of those ways

they declaring an emergency totally within his powers, totally normal. Something presence do all the time I would totally. care of things. You know, there's always gonna be legal challenge, but it appears fairly straightforward that you could do that and then a couple other budgets that he has access to as well. Now is that while we got did we get a binary situation in which either the plan is approved with way less money they asked for, or he doesn't emergency declaration. Nope is way better that it turns out not making this up. I'm pretty sure this is true. he can sign the bill take the money they gave him and then declare an emergency to have both there's nothing to stop them. There's nothing. There, there's no prohibition, there's no

nah. I don't think there's any legal obstacle whatsoever. He can take all of their money, which is way Leslie S were start building, say these guys radiates. I don't respect their output. I don't agree with. It is now best for the country, but I'll take their money. Why? Wouldn't I take their money? Why would you not take them? money that would make sense, take the money and then do what you're gonna do so it's the funniest outcome I had for some reason. I dont know why this never occurred to me and I think it has to do with the way the news coverage, is to make everything a team sport that there's no such thing, as partly winning or you coming to you There is always one who wins who loses, but I think that he can take the w and still and still when. I right here

the hell you can lose negotiations and still when, if he wants to we'll see if that Ngos that way now the other funny part about that is apparently old, chap, oh God convicted. I assume there some money that gets confiscated from El Chapo. How do you have it already or we can get it now their works, but in general, what we keep the president from going after the cartels and their money and just using it to build the wall, because I wouldn't be making Mexico pay for the wall. So even if most of the money doesn't come from EL job, I keep hearing this fourteen billion dollars. Adele chapel has by a door. Imagine we can get our hands on it. I dont

imagine that we can just now. Sabena is money or whatever the hell wires do, but there's probably a whole bunch of other cartel people who have a whole bunch of their money and we're probably seizing their money on a regular basis. would be hilarious. Did you say all right? Everything we see is that's an asset, there's some kind of Mexico connection that goes towards them, I don't know if anybody would somebody says, are governed already confiscated it. If that's true and the president decided to use that money, it would be hilarious now, apparently, there is one of the sources, meaning that confiscated confiscated. Drug money is clearly one of the sources that tromp has control over so yeah, she can use money. I don't know how much is L chap only people here

that we already got forty million. I would say that's not confirmed by me, but that's what people are saying in the comments. I hear some other funny things happening today. So apparently, the United States, as has drawn up a list of russian oligarchs who are close to Putin, is basically it's exactly. This non basically is exactly the same as Forbes your list of the richest Russians. So we now have this this list, where we ve put these russian. The guards on notice. What are we doing with the list? This is a funny park. Nothing. We just made a list of all the oligarchy who is hey all you oligarchy, you now on our list and the oligarchy losing weight,

Why why on the list was solicit, do nothing is just a list but were watching you here on our list now, Sir Sir fairly, apparently just being on the list, which is really our way of saying. You know really you just now, the list now? But you could be sanctioned your honor, I'm your only the first part of the process, the thing the sanction you, it might be enough. The people will stop doing business with him like its on their head is at all, it does is to them I'm game, so it is a psychological play which is kind of brilliant. I love it. It doesn't cost us anything. We literally just me lest there's no there's nothing legal about it.

things reddening directly about it. It's just the list, but if you're on that list is pretty good chance, pretty the chance that some bad is coming your way. If you don't show up, and even apparently even Putin said, what's all this list about, we don't even know what this is about. So is a total mine game, but is backed by real potential for escalation to being sanctioned and ban from travelling. All cases so it's a hilariously out like this is effective because we don't know that yet, but it's a hilariously good risk manage, and on the part of the United States, because what did it cost us to make a list a basically it's pretty is risk ray. We just made a list of oligarchy, says

the list I just tell you were just looking at her list. Oh you run list, don't know what that means, but I wouldn't want to be a little less retire ears, I wouldn't want be on that list. You know when you know I am now saying we're doing anything with the list is just a list. I wouldn't want to be on it. So that's making me last night: Once even funnier than that, what's he funnier than that is Mcconnell. Taking the green new deal to a vote, Did you see that there now that's funny. I. So let me give you some background for the green new deal, as you know, is the a and a Senator Marcie. I guess it corresponds to the and the industry and all these pie in the sky ideas about Getting rid of fossil fuels and and making everybody happy

moving, are stored, socialism, etc. Now the defining characteristic of the green new deal is that it thoroughly impractical and very popular among the Democrats, at least the ones running for president and about seventy others, ethics, so Mcconnell with this shit it in grin that they can get off his face, says he's gonna. Take it to a vote now why this is funny. Is that the only purpose of the vote in these as well

is to get people on record, because the plan is so ridiculous in terms of being a practical seller. Steps is so impractical that he thinks it's hilarious to make the Democrats commit to being on that team, because it's so attack able that its is is literally just funny. It's just funny that he's doing this and I have to admit I was never you until the euro tromp? I was not a big mention. Macao, fair, but people said yeah he's really good at what he does and now he's very effective and staff and resources now carries not necessarily doing things. want to do anyway, so he wasn't really on my radar, but since watching him operate in the year of Trump, I have to say whether you, whether you love or hate what he does damn he's good.

What do you say? He seems really good what are effective in the same way that as closely as I have said, the same thing about Nancy Policy, I think Mister Carlyle and policy are a plus politicians in terms yeah their effectiveness and assures humours on the same same level as either close here or Mccall so that is hilarious. He's gonna bring it to a vote just to show how stupid it is now. I of course have said that a green new deal is brilliant, ass persuasion, so as brilliant persuasion, because it's this big pie in the sky, stuff free things its bold and get your attention so on all the all the levels of Persuasion- that's just great, but when you come down to, let's make a law out of it. You there's nothing there and its quality

a wonderful way to shed light on the nothingness, Jennifer Reuben Rights for the Washington Post, who is widely considered the least credible journalists journalism. What will you say gesture? Is there anybody less credible as a journalist and Jennifer Reuben Parade the top of the list? The least believable of all the journalist away, so if you saw their baino had is I was sort of danger. The castor now dosage it'll cost as a journalist because he is more of a tv papers.

Now the right, but of the people who write articles, I would say, Jennifer Reuben would be the least least credible writer whose working today and she s comments about Baino, better work or better, better better, and you did his his deal and there's a perfect example of the two movies player. One scream So Jennifer Reuben referred to his speech as soaring rhetoric. Soaring rhetoric sounds almost like. Martin Luther king right sounds sounds almost like. I know, Abraham Lincoln with a soaring rhetoric, his lifting us above our small problems with his soaring rhetoric. Now, that's what one movie looks like that. He was

He was a candidate who he was using his soaring rhetoric inspired us all. At the same time, MAX boots wife, I forget her name. I tweeted was it was issued. The tweeted now wasn't a mixing up stories. Somebody tweeted too. So I won't listen loser, but somebody tweeted that he look like a college buoyant coke and I thought. he doesn't before. I didn't you look at the club before I thought I heard that somebody goes. He looks like he's on coke and these years fat boy job around awkwardly Coke thought was off. He doesn't look like that when I play the lip and you play the club and I'm thinking to myself, he looks exactly like a frog boy on Coke

I'm not saying he was on coke, so I want to be clear: I'm not making an accusation. He was under the influence of any kind of drug, I'm always say he sure look like he was under the influence of drugs. Will you? Maybe that's just is personally, but what I saw did not look like the soaring rhetoric. There were big words, but a kind of looked disturbing Sort of hyper do face the Andrea who solid, jumpy and hyper and use he was going around and that a hawk, realistic, careful, let's not make any accusations, were not making any accusations, there's no evidence of any of anything like a drug use. So I'm not saying that- and you say that

we are looking at it, and somebody's already put that in your head is hard to get that he read, because what are you looking at you I don't know what is really on or if he's, I think she looks like it, which was funny and there's not much else happening today, except They see, then ran this long pouring article about things that the Trump Administration is claimed about. Mahler investigations are various Things about the Don Junior meeting in Bali Luck and they there. This big article of the things that they had said once and then things they said later that are different than what they said the first time and I try to read it and was it was unreasonably boring. It was reasonably unnecessary.

Because, on some level you knew that okay, the story is changing blah blah. What difference does it never makes? Any of us doesn't make any difference. It's true the report, I'm sure it's true. They showed their sources. Here's what they said that here's what they said later, but I just couldn't find myself carrying because just being true, Is not really enough to make a news and those like scratching from last year's, alas, and dreams of of stuff, I can get another smaller report was still active. then then, apparently, Corey Bucker is coming out against against barbecue Xo Corey Booker has eliminated himself run any chance of becoming.

and by by being- and I made earlier Reagan now. I do not disagree with his dietary choices, so in terms of whether that would be good for the world, for people who may be ahead of its time, but in terms of a political message, man is Anna Loser the the eyes of the United States, electing a vision to president is about. The same as electing won't be less light. An atheist. The odds of an atheist becoming president are equal to the odds of a vague and becoming president Hillah. Hitler was a vague,

there's a Hitler analogy very heated to a gamble never even heard of a vague and live births. Ninety well, that might be because there are any regions who started long enough ago that they would be ninety. I think you might be maybe look in the wrong place for that any thoughts of Andrew Yang for twenty twenty. Now really he hasn't. He hasn't told us enough about him, but could be interesting. All I'm gonna keep the short today:

because I have nothing to say, and you shall watch the year the interview with Nepal. If you haven't watch that that someone to watch it will make you had spent in ways, you never mentioned some areas for president an atheist rig it, although I would be interested I'd. Oh, let me give you one update on an update on climate sites, so now that I've tested out successfully this new periscope feature where I can have a guest. I am planning to bring some one or more climate scientists experts on this

to have them battle it out. Now. I think the best format to would be to have a pro and con with me, as the will say, as the host. trying to decide who that would be. My first choice for the claim is science. Critics would be Tony Heller, and my I dont have a first choice for a approach. Climate scientists, alarm, sorcerer, somebody who would like to suggest themselves as the person to debate I haven't and by the way I haven't, I haven't asked only Heller but based on other conversations online. I would assume you will say yes, but I have an accident. If he does a US, I would like to figure find somebody who is the prevalent level of knowledge and somebody who can be and on this periscope at the same time

I believe I shall be abstaining. Evidences trouble is, I would want. I would want Tony's adversary to be the strongest adversary. Possible, because the unnatural bill nigh has the gravitas that you. If they say the debate didn't go his way. Evil would certainly well ask us. Was built, I gotta actual scientists someday, saying Sceptic, Bjorn Lombard When he would be great to talk to you, but he's not a sceptic in the classic sense, the classic sceptic would say: there's something wrong with the way you did the science, so there would be Tony Heller's position that you measure things wrong, reuse values

Yeah you do in your science wrong. Lombards lombards position is that we haven't done the the economics right. Essentially is basically saying that the economic, Sir, are not that bad. So dont use a word and that's a great message and he could be a great guessed, but he's not right he's not the right person to talk the science with now here's my here's, where I'm heading with all this, where I'm heading is I'm trying to figure out.

the few, let's say fewer than five claims, that the sceptics make better their best five skeptical claims rikers at the trouble. Is there so many of them there just yet dozens literally dozens of skeptical claims, you'd Judas curry, would be great as well, and I have to look into that look at more. She would be a great person to invite- and I might do more than one of these- is it my table and want to get to it, but if I could get just five claims that are the strongest ones, the ones that the sceptics wooden I on the hill, in other words, if the five things are true than the sceptics win and this those five things are debunked, we can ignore the other. Twenty five skeptical claims right. If they have the top five fall apart, then I'm not even look at them.

so, I'm gonna try to limit it to the best ones and see if we can focus our fire on those in trying to try to come to some kind of understanding. I will talk to all tomorrow