Bump bump bump Bumpo, hello, everybody, if you like me, and why, wouldn't you be really, you already have your beverage hello, again, hello, Jack, and if you have your beverage. You know what time it is it's time for coffee was got atoms and the simultaneous sip. Yes, I did get Erika, not a good one, but I just get Erika. Are you ready. Well, what do we want to talk about First Roseanne or the portal to Hell that I opened up in my twitter feed? Quite accidentally, let's we'll start with Rosa

Some of you know that I have supported very Comedians who have gotten in trouble for things I said under thee, under the principle that committee. Your comedians and jokes and jokes. I defended Cathy Griffin when she showed the severed head of President Trump Offensive mistake, yes funny. I didn't think so was meant to be a joke. Yes, let's get over it move on, Likewise the was it Michel Wolf who did the routine at the The whatever dinner, there was the one who insulted sirocco, be Sanders, and the jokes were not funny to me, but other people laughed.

Or in the form of jokes. They were told by a professional humorist. I got over it pretty quickly so now we have Roseanne who is in deep trouble and keep in mind that the Do I just defended and have consistently defended, were on the left. So now, Roseanne does something which we must all disavow for its offensiveness and its As some people said racial undertones, but let's talk about it a little bit one once we ve started by disavowing. It then than we're all good people right so you disavowed. I disavowed this of ours and I'll. Give you my thoughts on. The first thought is that I would like to be shared with the team whose approaches you know you the way you look etc

so the whole notion of going after the person instead of the idea, is just such a gigantic mistake. So forget about it. You know before we even talked of yet about, but before we even talk about the racial aspect of Rosen's joke. Why are we doing this? While? Why are we going after people? individually. Instead of their ideas is just it's just not helpful, it doesn't help the person you who does it doesn't help the people it's done to its just nothing but angry So I disagree with nobody from Cathy Griffin to Roseanne after individuals, without any regard to what's the point, was the policy. What surreal probably says my first problem. The second problem is that in

for you to be mad at Roseanne. Mad enough for her to lose your job and and all that you have to make a certain assumption. Do you know what that assumption is go ahead? What is what is the assumption you have to make this nodded evidence an assumption. You have to make about Roseanne in order for you to be, her for this. It has nothing to do with the joke. Actually, we have to racist well, actually, that's that's a pretty good answer. That's not what I was going for years I'm sure you have to make you have to make the following a sum. That when she was preparing that tweet the hermit No state was something like this: I'm going to send the sweet

people are gonna, certainly see this is racist? That's ok! Now, do you think that's a valid assumption that There too rosy I was thinking well, here's the others is clearly racist. That's why I'm saying it I dont anything wrong with a bad I have. I have a brand new tv show what could go wrong, saying an overt obvious racist thing on Twitter. Now in order to make that assumption. Which is not in evidence right. What's in the evidence is that she did something that was hugely offensive. I founded offensive most without a defensive. A hundred per cent of people agree. It was offensive, but the second part- in the offensive parties objective.

Meaning that even if people subjectively or offended we can observe them, say oh that guy's offended that person's offended. So the offensive part is in evidence no doubt about that, but why she's thinking of it and also the fact that people are offended because of the racial element to it. So these things are in in evidence there, in fact, but the part that makes it the big problem is that have to read their mind you have to, Red rose ends, mind and imagine something in Sanely unlikely happened in order for year. Your mental model of this whole situation to make sense and that has to be that she was actually sitting there say. Yes, I know this tweet is racial. I'm going to send it anyway. Well, it was

we saw in the sense mention the now. I should imagine race at all, but everybody sought that way right. So separating help people saw it because we all saw it the same way. I think everybody reside settlers, Rachel, undertones, innocence, bad. Do you think she was thinking that when she sent it, let me ask you how many of you think thinking thinking over tweed interracial terms when she sent it which doesn't excuse by the way, is completely not excused. I, You too slow, but in her mind how many You think she was thinking all this is racist this'll be funny funny erases way. Somebody said? Probably not. I would say A million to one against it, nothing's, impossible right but

Would you like a million to one against it, because now. We would she not do that, but nobody would do that. So, or to have the view that is the common view of this situation. You have to assume something. That's not and evidence is nearly impossible, well impossible, so strong and so on. Equally, the anybody would make that set of decisions now. Here's the second part. Rose at once. It was pointed out to her how people were accepting, why she thought was a joke. She apologized public and in her apology she said yeah, she understood it was offensive, so she understood the problem she apologized she apologized to everybody who was offended he apologized with what I want. I took to be sincerity.

Why do I think, we're sincerity? Well again, carried her mind, but let me let me you if your impression is the same as mine do They have you have an impression of Roseanne, though she ever shades her personal opinion. Another words: Do you feel the Roseanne, where the don't like her, whether you like a message, you don't like it? feel she ever so something there, she doesn't mean she's, not really that person right he seems to be the person whose biggest problem is that she. Hey, what's on your mind, she doesn't have a proper. Have a problem of not being straight with the public is fair to say so she has very long, credible history of not being fully crap, though she says things that. Things, even if you don't agree with them right, sir,

to me. It looked sincere. It was public happened immediately. She showed an understanding of what the problem was. As apologies go, it was complete. Would you agree Would you agree that the apology was complete. She she apologized to the public. She apologized the target. She did it quickly publicly. I saw sincerity in it because very credibility. Now she she's a strange shooter in that sense and here's what she didn't do. She did not do. Anything like I'm doing right now, which is but I was thinking there. Sir? Are you to ban offended, see any that they do? It was a straight timely, complete apology, here's my question. You do you want to live in the world were up

who makes an honest mistake: offends people apologizes, word company early in exactly the form the everybody likes to see. Apologies quickly, publicly everything there do you want to live in the world where that person losing their job because and here's a key, part of something you imagined she was thinking when she wrote the tweet. That is almost certainly not true Do you want to live in their world? I doubt it. And I would apply this to anybody. If somebody offended me as much as an endless list the amount of offence that the Roseanne and I received

We are a hundred times over just yesterday on Twitter, just. Typical Tuesday on Twitter, so on twitter people are massively offend, people all day, long and sort of what it is if somebody theoretically offended me and is pretty hard for me to be a when at one of the downsides of being a professional humorist is if we don't get offended, and so is harder for us to see other people getting in other words, all people work and humor? We tend to get me Jaded Edgy, because you're, if you're dealing with all the time Unita you need a bigger fix. You know you need a little edgier stuff than the normal public does and sometimes it's easy to forget overshoot. That's just me the rest of them. Why can't handle this level of you know I'll, say edginess were offensiveness depending on your point of view.

So it's easy to make the mistake. I've made a million times, but if somebody this to me, what want to live in a world where a sincere, quick, perfect apology isn't good enough Our living our world so ABC, I think I agree with the young and pretty much every I've heard talk about this ABC. I will not criticise their decision there. A business and businesses make this and is based on how their public will respond, I can say that was a. Long decision from the shareholders point of view? I don't know, but is there it is to make another second guess, but I don't want to live in the world. The ABC just created.

Why do you want to live in a world where and apologies and good enough and again I apply the same thing to Cathy Griffin. I don't remember she ever apologized or not now Let me take us to the next level how many times so people asked how many times have people asked president trumpet to apologize for. Offensive and how many times has you poligized well, depending on how you count, you might say, was at one time. He almost apologize for their thing, but not quite, but basically president rub dozen apologize for offensive things that other people have cooked up in their head, he also doesn't. He doesn't apologized for things. They actually say either. End will say to me. Well, that's you isn't like crazy. You should apologise when you offend

people and I would remind them if president trample apologized for offending people, there wouldn't be time to do anything else. Because somebody is always offended you you couldn't you couldn't you couldn't make enough time in your scheduled to apologise to all the people who demanded so I've I've, suggested that president from strategy of never apologizing first of all keeps him looking like a stronger force, which is good for the branding and how he deals with the rest of the world. He just like stronger that way Actually it's just now practical because everybody would be asked, four apologies all day, and you know what happens if you do apologize, what people say if you do apologize, they say it wasn't good enough and you're still fired by ABC. What was the point.

Don't ask for an apology ever again, if Roseanne can't keep her job after that apology. Do you get it, Don't ever talk to me again. Anybody about anybody apologizing for anything ever again, apologizing no longer works, because both the left and the right? I think that the bowed equally guilty in different ways. You folks have created the world, whereas Sera apology to what clearly an accidental offence, yours Norton Roseanne knew what she was doing when she tweeted China was offensive in one way. I can't believe that she intentionally Senate now

that it would be received. The way was it? Wouldn't it didn't help her a bit, stop asking for apologies if you knock and accept them. So that's my thing with and then other people said limit me. Let me take it to another level, give myself in trouble, because I'm betting trouble lately. So people said: hey that wasn't a joke. Well, here again, I'm a professional humorist rose Anders jokes reliving. The basic set up by the joke is looks like the other. The the result. This berries. This is the most common joke, you'll ever see on Twitter, what is What is the thing you see all the time? How many. Times have. I done. I've said, for example, that

clapper Breton look like those two markets here that the old guys muppets now Do clapper and Brennan actually look like those muppets. No, then, actually, look like the markets is just money, because here's what makes this money for those of you who need your humor explained to you, the reason that is funny to compare collaborator to those two markets. The old man Muppets is because simultaneously they remind you of each other, but they don't look like if they looked just like on it, wouldn't be as funny it's because it doesn't like em, but is still reminds you of them by design. Congruity the makes a funny. I shall tell you another one, president trump

is not actually a cheat. Oh Jesus, if you looked at present from you, would seem nothing, that's actually like it it oh, except in a vague way. The color of his hair these are really very close to Jesus in terms of how it looks or acts but when you say its veto Jesus about tromp its immediately funny because you can see True, even though there's nothing like that, that actually looks like him. That's what makes a funny it's funny, because he's not that. Let me give you people ever compared Mitch, Macao to a turtle. Now, if you are looking actual picture, maternal and a picture of Mitch Mcconnell- and you go point by point: you say organisers. Actually, nothing about in the dark Look like a total accept big either does like a turtle, so the

doesn't really looked like a turtle, but you still see it is what makes it funny it's the end congruity there they are trying to hold two thoughts. They can both be true. At the same time, I a joke before that the best in Seoul. I saw about myself on the internet with somebody said, I looked like a toilet brush with the mouth. I think that's good, America? So much. If you imagine yo my my silvery here being a little bushehr somebody said, I you look like a toiler brush with a mouth. Now, if you are at put me next to actual toilet brought Even if your mouth, you would say, ok,

yeah, there's nothing actually they'll looks like that, but you still see it. That's what makes a body that I dont look like toiler brush where the mouth points you can still kind of feel it right as the vine, so that style of joke is both. Areas and common and the most ordinary thing you ever see on the internet If you're asking me was this a joke. While is a professional comedian telling some? thus in the format of a joke which indeed made some people laugh? That's as close as you can get to a joke is as anything but was it also carrying a political message? Yes, sometimes you can have two variables. It was ok, carrying a message, a political message. She doesn't

barely Rosanna. Some problem with Valerie Jarrett are remunerated us soon, there's something be two things: it could be a joke, the carry the message, it's also offensive. It could be three things that's enough about Roseanne, I don't want to live in a world where an apology for offence has not been enough. Do you let me just ask you: do you want to live in a world where Roseanne can't make an apology and still keep her job? so I put, I'll tell you about my portal to hell when I open up in Twitter. I mentioned this little day yesterday by it. It just got worse and worse

I was responding to and I've deleted all the tweets, because I had to close the portal portal to Hell. I spend as much time as I can looking at both sides of the political spectrum, I make make sure I'm sampling heavily from all sides, but but looking CNN is still the the clean version of YO that that point of view, will you actually see The actual demons coming through the portal- and here I am talking about these citizens who came on twitter to to attack me. It's a whole different level of. And then I'm gonna be careful. With my language, you, my worldview? The movie, I mean they look like demons coming through a portal in Hell. Because they're not rational and they're, just

angry and evil. They don't even see they dont register, entirely as human released on twitter cause, you don't see, faces and self you to see their ideas, if it were true that there were actually do means in the world. Now that sort of lived among us, then young. These would be them. And they came after me hard and, of course, the thing they came after me, which made made it more frustrating, is it I had done reply that somebody, but the way Twitter is organized. It looks like I was replying to the top comment in the thread instead of the commenter, and I could have deleted the top person's name from the throw, but I didn't, I was lazy and that caused the top com and her to come back to me and as people said, and I quote, the law, you got owned dude

you got own so hard, ha, ha ha ha ha. That's what it looks like this. Oh, oh, and do after demon came through the portal. There were other Dale Demon, all type and they all said man, you got owned now I would have been owned. Had I've been talking to the person they thought I was talking to and had her response to me made any sense. That wasn't talking to her in the first place, if any of that, if any of them, they fought happened had had actually happened than men I certainly would have been owned. So they work the demons they came through. The portal were, were creating this movie in their mind, in which I had done something that quite obviously didn't happen and is easy to demonstrate because you just click on the tweet

and you look at the first name, and you can see who I was responding to. You can also see what that person said. You see how My response to that person was completely in context, and it would make sense that I would have responded to that of the person. Sorry to make their story supporting so yeah, if you explaining you're losing. That is exactly right. So I was no win situation where I was completely demonstrably correct, meaning that might This was right there on twitter. You could actually just look at it and it was obvious that what I was saying was true and people still not people. The demons kept saying after I pointed out that it was obvious that there were mistaken demons from hell respond when you show them or look just click on this? We Then you can see that you're wrong, I'm just replying to that other guy. Do they say? Oh I see, I guess my comment and may sense because now

I see that you're replying to somebody else. Did they say that no they do not. They said something more like this shores I was replying to. Other person nice try own. You got on So that's what I was dealing with much of yesterday, so I ended up deleting those tweets just so I don't have to look at them. More. But do you know what happens when you delete your tweet, in which everything you did was right and everything your critics did was actually talking about the wrong point. Do they say I was smart delete ass, he didn't have to deal with those demons comes through the portal. No, they don't. He deleted a sweet, we'll go to the way back. Machine will take a picture that,

It's coming back its govern back. That's what When you delete your tweets, saw mix, hour later today, no cure the other thing there was served, movies. I won scream situation. The thing that, get off. As I said, I had noted some successes of the trumpet the things like North Korea is going well and ISIS been down and the economy was raging? Now I thought I let me check this with you. I thought that those three items were not in question in the other movie. And I dont know how I miss this because I think I've been watching the CNN even CNN says the account is doing well right. An ironic. Right, even MSNBC, says vehicle

means doing well. I don't I'm imagining that? But if you talk to the demons who comes through the portal, they say that my claim that the Trump economy is doing great is false because of two reasons: here's why they say trumped does not get credit for the good economy Two reasons: number one is not good that the economy right now is actually bad, because the data is high and slowing down. YO five other reasons. Certain reason number one term doesn't get credit

The economy now is actually terrible. Reason number to the term doesn't get credit for the economy. Is that a bomb? I guess the credit you get that, let me say it in the voice of deal so it makes more sense. Well, I got to the two problems with you scurry. What study? I know you think this good economy has something to do. Will present the whole your own, your own, but two problems The economy is actually terrible and Obama gets credit for it. Wait that needs

Three because Obama was great with the economy and everything he did was really good so, but the economy is bad now. I know I'm mad. But I'm no longer sure why well anyway,. There is no peace in North Korea. Ha ha ha I believe you like that president job did somebody with North Korea. Do you see any peace, where's bees? I don't see any peace. Do you see peace owned? You go on now. Sure enough. The North Korea situation is far from solved. But can you really watch somebody says you did get on over the little blue, so summit. Humans have made it over enter under the periscope hello. Do

from Hell and by the way I don't mean to, I don't mean to be dismissive of the demons, because gave in mind in their movie here the demons so the demons from the portal of hell in both different movies. Captain there movie, I'm the diamond in my movie there, the demons and don't make sense But can you really look at North Korea and see the pictures Kim Jong noon, literally hugging, President Moon, like they're they're, getting ready to kiss like there and apparently there's a very clear indications that the it is going forward because we must be at least close to a deal have ever been this close,

and if we ever been talking in such a friendly, congenial manner to say there has been no progress or that we're not well, let me put it in more stark terms. I said that we already have peace with North Korea? Is that not fair Wouldn't wouldn't you say that if you are looking at this month, There we are literally at peace not technically in terms of aid, the paperwork, but we're not threatening them. We're saying: let's go to lunch. Does that look like war? was there ever was a row point with you now in every other war, where we said to Saddam Hussein hastened on one come over for a hug, things have been banned the past, but let's just let's just hung it out. This maybe have a meeting talk. How would you work things out and buy the wasted on we'd like to him, a lot of money in your country,

I gotta happened because I was reckon war whatever happening with North Korea. Right now could turn to a war. It certainly was more warlike not long ago, just a few months ago. But right now right now does look like war or does it look like peace, I've, never seen anything that look look more like piece of my life. How do you miss that huh? Look like bad news, it's a strange world and then the argument that ISIS is not defeat it well. If you have to take the point that ices has clearly been, you largely yet I want to choose my word correctly, so ices physical territorial ambitions have been eventually obliterated? They exist,

as an idea and they ve got they ve got training camps in Yemen or whatever so they're not defeated as an ideology. But to say that nothing good happened in terms of the fight against ISIS sort of crazy. Now, I'd like to back up to the question of who gets credit for a good economy during any president's Administration now people are saying that anything good happened in the Trump Administration is because President Obama did such a good job you're, getting their issues. The continuation of his success, to which I say how far do you take that chain of cause and effect back? Doesn't George Washington get the credit because he sorted got the ball rolling? You know that the economy has largely gone up.

The founding of the republic we ve had, if you don't count world depression which young sort of a liar and a couple of couple, a pull backs, but basically the economy's just going up forever. What point do say? Do you go back and say? Well, you know without James Poke. None of this would happen. The other things can be crazy, is at the demons from the portal of hell are now getting comparing things. I think I think I'm seeing somebody doing in the comments. Let me let me explain some math President Obama inherited an economy that was on the brink of destruction. It was beaten down, like you, rarely see an economy beaten down now.

You're on the bottom, the gains a? U get are the big gains, the easy gains because you're coming off a base. I give President Obama hi graze for navigating a very tricky situation from the from the precipice the edge to a solid base there, after President Trump. I give him full credit for that. I think that's. I think history will be kind to him for that, but when you reach something closer to full employment, you dont want to keep going at the same rate. In other words, if we had the same. The same le, say, stock market increase the same amount of you actively economic activity as we coming out of the bottom. If you

the same rate at the top. That would be bad because you would get over. Do you wicked hire people? Where would you hire? People were already close to full employment economic terms, by the way that the term full employment doesn't means Ro unemployment, it somewhere word, is now somewhere around forty percent. You economist, say that's full employment, because there's always a little bit of people in between jobs, but they can get ya. Easily so if you're an employer, you're almost certainly gonna have to pay more higher wages, because it's gonna be hard to get employees. You can have the bride them to work, for you well said, but there have been no increases in people's real wages depending on what

statue, look there how you slice it. You can say that it's true or not true, it was more under a bomber whenever. But the fact is that, with employment, this good and growth, the strong, almost have to get our wages and if you don't I'm not sure that's the problem of the president right, if, if the if the mechanism of economics just stops working for some reason there wouldn't be, any president's problem right, the president's job is to talk me me up to high growth rate, get get employment as good as you can and then try to enjoy the benefits.

Right and then I'm also seeing complaints that all trump did was drive up the national debt and you because he's driving up the debt a failure that were whatever economic benefits were seeing are really just because he borrowed so much money to get done and here's the thing I ask who is the beneficiary of the debt, so before we talk about who has to pay off the debt, which is a more complicated question than any of us can handle. Who is the beneficiary of the debt where, where was the money spent? What do you think gimme your answer, the so we took on debt to create.

Money that got spent on stuff. It seems to me that our money was down military, the big, the bigger ticket, Ireland's military social programmes, healthcare, the poor so seems to me that the country borrowed to take care of the peace we need a most and the military. You could argue about what's the right amount of funding, but you can't argue the fact that everybody is better off with it with a military that can keep a safe So the first thing is now who pays a back but who got the benefit of the money in the first place now say that that that was pretty well distributed, probably was more concentrated with lower class. I would think now you say you up, but the tax breaks went to the rich

So here is a fun question to ask your next get together. Hey you're talking with somebody No, it doesn't even better if you're talking to somebody on the left or the right. I think this work see the way so you ve saved somebody. You know, do you think the taxes should be fair and, of course, most people say should be fair. That doesn't mean that you pay the same. That Ebay right does are all what's the difference variables, you know you might wanna progressing etc. But everybody wants a system, this fair. So here's the trick, question you're, ready for Susie. I guess we all want a fair tax system. How to measure fairness.

Is it in the dollar amount or the percentage of your income that you pay. Do you see the trick questioner? So let's see your answer. So what do you think is a fair tax Everybody pays the same percentage or everybody pays. The same dollar amount. Yeah. I think if you ask me that People on the right are probably a little more likely to say they like a flat tax, but is a fair that day billionaire pays ten percent and a person whose barely scraping bypassed and percent, because that ten percent for the person is barely scraping by.

Is all the money they had left the affair, so so you say asked now I guess I think I'm learning here by your answers that this would be funnier. If you asked the assembly on the left, because I guarantee you that they will pick

Those answers will either say: dollar amount or percentage and almost certainly say percentage. Cassandras feels fair, and the moment they say that you can point out that that's not even their own preferred plan, because the idea is that rich people higher pay both a bigger higher bigger percentage and a higher dollar mouth. That's their own preferred plan. Socio many people. You can trap into saying that they agree with fairness means the same percentage were the same dollar amount, because neither though neither them is what people in the left think is fair.

If we talk about taxes will go down the rabble hole too deeply. So that was my experience with the opening the portal from Hell, and were definitely indifferent movies, and there are some terrible, terrible people in the world, and I don't want to live in a world where offending people and then apologizing isn't good enough. I want else's happening Understanding Kim Kardashian is going to be visiting the White House talking to President Trop maybe today and that she might ask for a pardon for, sixty two year old grandmother who went to jail for long time on a drug events,

and in the context of reading about that, I read an article, and maybe you can confirm whether this is true or not, and for some reason blame myself or not. Knowing this, oh, can you confirm that this is true, so, in this article I read, it said that Jeff sessions changed the. What would you call it the guidelines on sentencing for relatively minor drug crimes? you're standing is a judge sessions. Maybe the charging for minor drug crimes worse yet more more massive, then under the Obama administration, which had guidelines. That said, I am busy on this stuff- is that you can somebody confirmed that has actually true.

So I saw one yes if it's true and those of you who seemed in our saying ass, somebody said about a flip. Yes,. Sessions past ago, so that reason alone is disqualifying, and I want to put this in context for you, Some of you remember that I've I've said consistently pause the things about the Obama presidency in general, while likewise I can criticise individual things seem, as with President Trump, I can say, is looking good in general, but I can criticise individual things. My biggest problem with Obama and the reason that I briefly blog back, I think when he was running for re election,

That Romney was a better choice, even if you didn't know anything about Romney Nother words, I said Romney is the only person running. That was my argument: love because Obama had slipped on what he wanted to do about canvas selling places in California. He, campaigned. We're gonna leave him alone and then without explaining why he said no we're gonna go hard at these dispensaries and care. Forty, that our legal in California, but not legal, under federal law, which way You either have to explain why you change your mind, or we must be left with the assumption that you ve been bought by whoever the private profit private, british private prison lobby. Maybe the the alcohol lobby, maybe

big donor, who doesn't like Canada? Maybe we don't? We don't know under the situation where he made a major change in policy. They have impact on my state and didn't explain. There's no other rational way to explain it other than he got bored. I consider that disqualifying so likewise, if it's true that, Jeff sessions change the guidelines for minor drug climbs to make them worse. He's gonna go if it's true their president is on the same side with that. I need to find out if this is really true, and I need to see how this fits in the context of the

there's prison reform, which I understand, does not include and sentencing, I believe Errors argument is first to get the prison reform and the. Deal with. Prison reform is that people would get credits for training themselves and in in jail. Four things that would allow them to get new gainful employment after jail, so as a way to ease people into a productive life after jail. And they can get less.

Time for that- and I believe Jared argument is that if you get that far right, it's easier to make the argument that you should reduce the mandatory sentencing, because this is a way to reduce the it's all part of the same package. I'm not convinced, I'm not convinced somebody needs to make an argument that sessions and by definition, Trump have made the right decision on minor on sentencing for minor drug crimes. It looks disqualifying to me write to me now. I dont think there's really given that guy the present trump has a history obeying you have

Mary Anti Drug and given that sessions as an even longer history of being a hard ass on drugs. When those two people- act hard on drugs that may be that they think there s the right thing to do, which is a different situation from Obama who clearly put a policy in place. There was the opposite of his previous Paul. And was inconsistent with his own, his own philosophy, which indeed he turned back to in his second term- the actually went back to his originals stance of leaving the dispensaries loan so I guess I would be a little less hard on someone who's at least philosophically consistent, even there completely wrong. Probably in my idea in my, in my view, Obama was

consistent with his own promises or his own philosophy and didn't explain it. In that case, you have to assume money was involved. If it wasn't, a simple explanation would have been fine. That's all it would have taken to change my mind. Something like I thought about it. Here's. My reason does it. I don't even have to agree with the reason I just have to say. That's a reason. Also, So the Trump administration is simply somebody just said there they're doing saying, if as a law, work and enforce it so they're just across the board,

whatever laws will just enforces? That's not good enough. There really is, and you know that the laws are designed to be managed by people and people. Can you make reasonable decisions to say this? Is this? Is this laws and helping us as much as issued seven? These cases will will go easy. This is congresses job, it's congresses, job to make the laws, but you some obey this argument before, if police officer has a level leeway about Yahoo arrest and baby somebody's an informant. Maybe somebody did something this technically

since the law- but I didn't mean it was no big deal. You don't want to ruin their whole life, so I think we're happier when they, when the police have a little bit of judgment involved when the when the court's use a little better judgment and when, when the Justice Department uses a little bit a judgment on things, I think that's a healthier situation, even though the law has to be obeyed. Humans are involved, a little bit of wiggle room is ok. What's your history with drug laws, friends or family, my history is: I've, seen people whose lives even currently are completely destroyed by drugs, but they usually opium types.

Haven't seen anybody that I know go to jail for drug charge I thought about it. I might be able to think of somebody, but I can't think of any. I know personally. Of course I know a number of addicts. Lavender Zachary Stoner in Chicago last week. Wake up. I never heard the name on another story. You dont know any attic. Somebody just said that they don't know any attics. Do you think? That's true. Do you think there's somebody in the will ass? I was familiar in the United States, but it might be. Do you think there's anybody in the United States who doesn't know any attics. You know that means right of

as you know, ethics, you just don't another attics. If you're me we'll know they can tell me pretty much anything and I'm not going to judge them like a determined and lacking to judge them, unlike could be talking about so I get. It there things that other people are hearing because their judgmental so in my world people are just alcoholics fanatics. Every problem in the world only because they are willing to tell me, because I know I am not going to judge him for many- are hiding the indicative addictions. So I think that's all I had for today. What is your prediction for the energy report? I don't have one, I think that's a wait and see. Oh, so I want to say so: there's a story about immigrants,

illegal immigrant children being separated from their parents, and people quite quite understandably, are shocked and aghast that children and can be separated from their parents and, as a human being I, sir, at every part of that right. You know that just une here that parents separated from their children and its it reaches us alike, surely depth, I'm not even though biological parents, but even Even I can feel it just as a human being is like all my god. That's that's the worst thing. But but there's something missing in the conversation. What was the alternative.

I kept waiting for somebody say: yes, it's terrible that their separating children from fed from parents, here's the good alternative- is yes, there's a good alternative arm all over it and if there's a good alternative. What the hell are we doing, but I haven't heard one of you do, but we don't really send them all back together right, don't we so if somebody rob a bank And they bring their children along, doesn't appear going to jail and the children get separated because the children don't go to jail. I dont know what the alternative is

Somebody says not use a candle. I think the capitol pictures were from an entirely different situation centre. Back together, but that's not what we do right when we first catch them, Dewey doing. If we, if you catch a family, Do you actually put them in a ban in the Van starts driving toward the border as I work, and do we have jails and her family jails should. Should we build family jails there like a little one room?

parliament, so you can put the whole family and their including the kids. Should the kids go to jail? I mean temporarily until you until you deportees was so here's the thing I feel it when anybody says separating kids from the parents is is bad. I have all the same feelings, but I'd like to see the alternative, and I dont know I haven't heard, because it must be an alternative. I saw Stephan more news tweet this morning, some are related. He said there were twenty six billion dollars in remittances money paid by mexican citizens, mostly they're paying back into Mexico to support families, I suppose mostly Anders twenty six billion. I suppose, mostly,

and those twenty six billion between whatever months you specified, but it was just a part of the year and Steffens Point was it's like Mexico's is begging us to tax it and Is there a problem with that plan, because it seems to me we that the president would have already suggested that specifically, if that was a practical plan, is exactly the sort of thing that the president would say. Even if you, even if it was, yeah just sort of spitballs things like I will do this or will do that. I dont believe

ever mention it can anybody factually and it has the president ever specifically mentioned taxing remittances and, if not, is there some good reason for that? What's the somebody saying flip flop a hundred times some gonna block you just for saying the same thing over. However, some people saying he has and other people saying he has not so if plus a has and other people say he has not. It seems more reasonable to say that he has because the people say he has not, maybe just in here it. Then the people saying he has there are none of them. That makes me think, probably said something like that. So.

Controversial. It seems like that would be the least controversial tax of all time. Wouldn't that be the least controversial tax, every taxes controversial nobody wants to pay them. What's wrong with Cruz's idea, somebody needs to remind me what TED Cruz's idea is for paying for the wall. Is it legal? Is it legal to tax anybody for anything? The fact that it happens tells you all you need to know if they can tweeting it to you

somebody's twenty me. The answer is yes and then, of course, there is the air, the crowd funding after this going on now too, so that citizens can pay for the war. Let me ask you, assuming that crowd funding legislation goes through, which would allow you to donate specifically to a trust fund to the in the government, that would only go towards the wall, how many of you would donate and put it? And if you just one dollar mount the same per year,

Gimme A per year, you would donate for five years some seeing twenty Box under box. This is four per year five. Fifty two hundred thousand hundred hundred ten twenty. Now, if you get ten million people who would give a hundred dollars a year that's a lie star along with all these them all these people are willing to give fairly substantial amounts I'm not totally opposed to crowd funding the wall. But they should do the same thing with birth control planter emerges the year that the situation where

It may be illegal to get an abortion, but why people who were opposed to abortion? on moral grounds, don't wanna fund it. I think that's a fair argument. But as long as worsens legal and the people who need them, no money, would it wouldn't work if just private people fund them wizened through wizened third crowd fun for that, and then all the people who say Dammit Split plan parenthood should be funded, there's nothing, there would stop them. In fact, plan pyramid might be funded more than the governor. We found them because the government is gonna, pay what the government pays. But if it's privately there's a fund that anybody can contribute to couldn't be bigger, couldn't be better

So I don't hate this model where the most controversial things, where the other side has a legitimate moral objection to it. They just don't have to pay for it. You don't have to do that. You can't do that, for everything can do for the military year, healthcare in other something's. They, even though people objective at its more that the objective. The gold or financial reasons you can't you can't do that, but when people have a real serious moral problem, was something paying for abortion or building the wall as long as they're, both legal and somebody's willing to pay for it on their own. Let's just make that possible Did you do to somebody says they're girlfriend donate to plan parenthood, yeah yeah was how much today

mostly made you have planned. Parenthood is now getting enough money. They should be saying that ok, the government's cutting funding, but you can donate through this website. I think that's it for today, and I will talk to you tomorrow. If all goes well, I will be assuming just make sure that that such tomorrow in my periscope, I'm gonna be talking to an expert in Korea, so I'll be talking to someone incur in South Korea together get a feel for the

the temperature over their guess or even on the ground impression of what people are talking about, what their feeling. I think it's gotta be really interesting and I'll. Tell you more about that and introduce my. Special guest tomorrow, assuming all my technology works. So that's probably gonna happen tomorrow. Don't miss that I can't wait for that one by the way. Yes, what somebody in South Korea right now that I'll be talking to Walter in South Korea and somebody who lives are an ex pat? No, it's a private citizen living in South Korea for awhile, who will give us the temperature and note not Gordon Jane Gordon Jane is awesome, but I will talk to somebody is actually living in South Korea, which is all different perspective. I I'll talk to you later.