Nikki started a fire. Dad's revenge is burning. Hollywood is turning. Nikki started a fire. So sorry. I couldn't help myself. Hello, everyone. Welcome back to Under Reported Stories where I cover the news that CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News failed to report on or don't report on. Enough. And I sang that wonderful jingle for you, which I could not stop. I couldn't stop singing it.
I've been singing it for, like, 24 hours since I made a reel about this subject, which is this conspiracy theory, quote unquote, that's been spreading throughout Christian online circles about why the fires in LA started. It's kind of a nutso idea, but when you look at the evidence, it's also pretty damning. Yeah? So I'm gonna get into it. The big question here is whether a comedian named Nikki Glaser, hence Nikki started the fire.
The question is whether Nikki Glaser brought the vengeance of the Lord on Los Angeles. So here's the theory all fleshed out for you. Back on January 5th, in LA, the Golden Globes were held and Nikki Glaser who, by the way, I thought was a very good host. She was very self deprecating and made fun of all of the people in Hollywood that we kinda hate. So I thought she does a great job. But she made a joke that pointed out that Hollywood is a godless town and a godless industry.
And her joke, which really actually wasn't much of a joke at all. We're gonna watch it together. It was just a bunch of facts. It was met with laughter from the Hollywood elites. So let's watch this video together, and I kinda wanna get your feedback and also give you my opinion as well. It's time for our mid show recap, and I'm here on the floor with all of my peers. Just go with it. And this is so exciting because everywhere you look, there's a fanning.
So much has already happened in the first half and the acceptance speeches have been on fire. Who got shouted out the most? Let's Note there that she said the acceptance speeches have been on fire. This is part of the conspiracy that she utilized the word fire before she went into her next little bit. Look at the numbers. Alright. Cast and crew are leading the way with 11 mentions. Moms are holding strong with 3 shout outs.
God, creator of the universe, 0 mentions, and Mario Lopez, host of Access Hollywood, won. Now I'm not gonna lie. When I saw this at first, I didn't think it was Nikki Glaser making fun of the Lord. I more so heard it from a perspective of, like, you guys are heathens because, look, you're giving shout outs to your cast and crew, but you haven't really talked about your parents, your mother, the people that have helped you most in this world.
You certainly haven't mentioned God who is single handedly responsible for your every single breath, and yet you still somehow mention Mario Lopez. Like, I thought that it was more reflective than maybe teasing at God. That was just my perspective, but I understand that a lot of people in the Christian community don't feel that way. But Nikki Glaser did kinda top it off with, I guess maybe more of an explanation for why I feel the way I feel. No surprise in this godless town.
The So after that transpired at the Golden Globes, within 48 hours, wildfires began igniting throughout Los Angeles and people noticed that the fires burned a lot of Malibu, but the fires went up a hill towards 3 crosses that were at the top. And the fire stopped just short of the crosses and didn't burn any of them. And I think the utilization of the word fire coupled with the teasing of God has led a lot of people, specifically Christian influencers and Christian conspiracy theorists.
I say conspiracy theorist in the most loving of ways. I myself am a conspiracy theorist because that's what the media likes to call us even though we're usually right. But that is the end of the theory that this was these fires are kind of a spark from the Lord, in his vengeance in a way of do not mock me.
So, obviously, there are a lot of confounding variables as to why these fires were not contained properly, you know, from political mismanagement to obsession with climate change over proper forestry preservation. But we are still searching for answers as to why so many of them started. You know, I've heard stories that homeless people may have started these fires, and in one instance, maybe an illegal immigrant started one of these fires.
At the moment, I can say we don't have 100% confidence that any of this is true. We have suspects. So I am eager to get an answer, but we do not have 100% proof of anything yet. So while we wait for the authorities to do the right thing, hopefully, I am just curious what your theory is and whether you believe the theory that vengeance from the Lord was part of these wild fires. Please drop it in the comments. Very curious to hear your thoughts. We do have a lot of good stories today.
I'm gonna say today was maybe one of my top five favorite days prepping a show ever. It was just good. And I was humming Nikki started the fire the whole time, which is kind of funny and kind of pathetic at the same time. But before we get into the stories, I I have some life updates I feel I owe you. First off, I'm going to the inauguration next week. I'm gonna be there Monday. Don't worry. We have an episode for Tuesday. I'll be back. Don't worry at all.
But Monday, I'm gonna be out of office out at the inauguration in DC. If there is something you would like to see, something you would like behind the scenes looks at, right, please drop it in the comments. I'm going to a Turning Point gala with, with Donald Trump will be there and a bunch of other people. I'm going to a massive influencer party with Waka Flocka Flame and Bryce Hall. I'm going to the actual inauguration.
If there are certain parts of the night or certain parts of inauguration weekend that you feel you really strongly want to see, please comment down below so I know. Also, I had given you guys an update, I wanna say, mid October, right around the time I got married, that I had bought a house. And then literally, like, the next episode, I was like, actually, my house completely fell through.
I was really excited about it, but it actually had termites and broken AC, and the inspection went horrible. And I got all that news while I was passing a kidney stone. So it's it's kinda the worst the worst week. But the good news has come. I am moving to the suburbs. It's crazy. I feel like I'm a city girl through and through. A lot of people assume that because I do conservative commentary and politics and whatnot that I'm gonna go out and, like, get a farm. That is so not me.
I would love to have, like, a chicken or 2 maybe, but that's the extent of my farm life. I've always lived in the city or suburbs. I'm just not a super farm person. That's not my thing. So I will be moving out to the suburbs. And this is a huge massive change as I have lived in the city for the last, like, 10 plus years of my life. So this is gonna be exciting.
And the reason I bring it up to you is not because I'm vain and wanna tell you every update in my life, but because we are going to be moving this studio. This is just my 2nd bedroom in my apartment right now. And since we are moving into something that is bigger, we felt that it was time to maybe say goodbye to the pink and purple e girl Chrissy days and do a little bit of a rebrand. So I love my studio here.
I I wouldn't change a thing about anything that we've done in the last couple of years, but I think it's time to say goodbye to this vibe, this brand. That doesn't change anything about underreported stories. The show will stay the same. We're just gonna get a little bit of a different look, a different feel, perhaps a different logo, etcetera. So expect those changes coming in the next month. And if you have predictions of which way I'm gonna go, because we kinda have something nailed down.
We're just kinda working on it, fine tuning it a little bit. Please give me your thoughts and predictions. I would love nothing more than to hear from you. But let's get into what we have on our docket for today. We have some updates about the corruption going on in Los Angeles between the mayor hiding information from the public and elites paying 1,000 of dollars for private firefighters. I don't even know those exist.
Plus, we're gonna do a deep dive into the $1,000,000,000 lawsuit against CNN, chat about a new sheriff in Michigan that is interested in solving crime in a really weird way, and we also have an update from the queen of scams, Kamala Harris herself. So without further ado, let's get into the 5 underreported stories that you need to know. Today's show is brought to you by Based, my merch line, and we've just unveiled our winter line with a new beanie, a hoodie, a shirt, and a tote bag.
I'm an independent creator, and one of the best ways, if not the best way, to support this show is by purchasing my merch line that represents your views. Instead of just asking you guys for donations to fund my independent journalism, my business partner and I created a line of merch called Based Apparel. Based basically means the opposite of woke. It means you're based in logic, based in truth, based in facts. You get it.
Anyway, head over to basedandlogicapparel.com to check out our latest apparel. My personal favorite right now is our Based 2 Tone shirt, which I'm wearing right now. And remember, when you buy merch, you are directly supporting this show. And when you get your apparel, please be sure to tag me on Instagram so I can repost it.
Last week, we covered how the Los Angeles fire chief, Kristen Crowley, warned city officials and elected officials in November that the department only had half, half the firefighters that they needed to be prepared for an emergency event like what we're seeing now. And, at the time, Chris and Crowley blamed this to or on massive city department budget cuts to the fire department, which is nuts.
If your number one emergency is earthquakes and wildfires, why would you get rid of preparedness for either of those? Doesn't make any sense. But the update to the story here is that that memo, the memo all about how this is problematic, we need more people, yada yada yada, basically saying, you know, we are in desperate need of everything. That memo has been scrubbed from the Internet.
Mayor Karen Bass' administration pulled that memo from the website when she started getting pushback for the fires. This memo was issued to a 5 person board appointed by Karen Bass, and it was dated November 18, 2024. And it told them their goal you know, the goal is the fire department chief tells the board, the board tells Karen Bass. That's kinda the chain of command there. And the fire department said that it needed a massive rehashing because here's the kinda statistics and data around it.
So the National Fire Protection Association, which is the organization that oversees safety standards for firefighters, said that a city like Los Angeles should have about 1 and a half to 1.81 firefighters per a 1000 residents. So you got 50,000 residents. You do the math. You wanna have 1.5 to 1.8 firefighters per those 1,000, 50,000, millions of people, right, in LA. But Los Angeles, according to the fire department chief, only staffs 0.9 firefighters per 1,000 people.
Meaning, they were wildly understaffed. And that resulted, obviously, in these historic wildfires that we're seeing. And as this all unfolded, instead of taking responsibility or accountability for something that we knew about back in November, if not earlier, I believe the memo that has gone mega viral that you're probably thinking about in your head if you understand or you've been following any of this story. There's a very viral memo out there.
That is from 2021. We have known for so long all of the hands of democratic mayoral candidates, democratic staffers, democratic, Everything in LA is run by Democrats. California is run by Democrats. Right? And yet we have had this historic lead up to staffing shortages in one of the departments that is quintessential to keeping Californians safe. And as this unfold, this is what the page now looks like if you go to read this memo. If you are in the listening audience, it says 404.
We are sorry, but the page you requested was not found. Think about that. A Google search can can find, like, a preview of it. So we know it existed, and we also know it existed because the Los Angeles Times cited this. But then the very next day, the Washington free beacon tried to fact check it and double check it, and it was pulled off the website. This happened let me I'm looking at my calendar really quick. That would have been Oh, my gosh. Why can I not read without my glasses?
Okay. That would have been the 10th that the article went out, and then the 11th that the, Karen Bassett's administration took down this memo. All because it was making her look bad. Right? It had nothing to do with actually keeping people safe, with getting the facts out about it. I have a feeling that she's going to dodge and weave this by saying, oh, well, people were making it political, so we wanted to, you know, prioritize the safety of people. Bullshit.
You don't wanna get in trouble for doing a horrible job managing this in the lead up to it. It's quite disgraceful. It's not quite it is disgraceful. This is absolutely pathetic that you're more worried about the political consequences than you are about the people that are in need. The time you spent scrubbing this or whoever's what whatever staffer was tasked with scrubbing this from the Internet could have been doing something far more important with their time.
I wanna jump into our next story because it is more LA fire news. So crazy headline out of the New York Post that the top 1% in LA are spending 1,000 of dollars on private firefighters. There are private fire protection companies. I personally had no idea that any of this existed. Although, when I reflected further, I was like, oh, that makes sense. But there are these private fire protection companies. They have water supplies, their own men, their own trucks, chemicals to help stop fires.
And these companies, what they do is they usually contract out with state and local governments, But, they have been offering on call services to the Hollywood elite. And, they charge $2,000 an hour for their services. Now, I don't wanna criticize them because that might well be the going rate for something like this on average. Like, it just takes a lot of people. These firefighters cost a lot. The equipment costs a lot. There's a lot of overhead for something like this.
Therefore and there's a lot of insurance, I'm probably I'm assuming probably required in this as well. Therefore, a service like this is going to be expensive. I'm not saying that they're price gouging in the economy or in environmental disasters such as this. I don't wanna say that or assume that about people at all. My question is whether there should be a private business operating for private people when there's an entire town on fire.
And I think that's kinda the point about this being a godless town. You'd think that people would want to join in the fight to help save and preserve as much as possible. Now I don't know the extent to which these private firefighters are working with the local government, so, again, I don't want to slander them. But I would really hope that they're focused on fighting fires in the neediest areas, not just where they're getting the most money.
Of course, if they're going to make money going and putting out a fire at a celebrity's home and then they're going back to being part of the state and local government cleanup efforts, I don't necessarily think I have a massive problem with that. However, I don't know the ins and outs and the intricacies of this, and it's really hard to get data and information on it. So if you're out in LA, you've got boots on the ground, and you can give me a little bit more information.
You can always email me, chrissy@underreportedstories.co.comco. You can always email me, and maybe we can get a little bit more information out to the followers, out to the real ones. But with this story, a lot of celebrities are actually getting a ton of flack for hiring these services. Notable character who was involved in this, Rick Caruso. Y'all, he is the mayor or he ran for mayor of LA against Karen Bass.
He's a democrat, but a very moderate pro business democrat, and he hired one of these private contractors to extinguish the fire on his home. There are a lot of other people, I was reading comments, that are upset that these private contractors are opting to work for hire as opposed to contracting with local governments. But like I said, we don't know the extent that they are or are not doing that.
Of course, if they are only work for hire and then they're just letting the city that they live in burn to the ground, that would be awful. I'm just skeptical that that is the reality, but I'm curious. What do you guys think? Is it fair? Is it right for the elites to be able to pay for these services? My mindset is that when natural dis disaster strikes, it really does become the great equalizer of all of us. It showcases our humanity. And celebrities are just people. They're just humans.
And I think if you're in a really desperate situation, you'll do anything to stop the disaster that is coming for you. And if you have the money to do something to ensure loss of sentimental value, property. I your cherished memories. Like, why wouldn't you? And I know that they're celebrities, so we hold them to a different standard, but at the same time, I don't know. I just I They're just people.
I guess the big flaw in my argument or my rationale or just my feelings is something I've been seeing a lot in the comments that you know, the reason why this is also problematic is that celebrities likely have great insurance coverage that the average person in LA simply does not. Because major insurance companies were pulling out of fire protection insurance in the past 2 years. Because, let's be honest, they saw the writing on the wall.
They saw these memos that were put out by the fire department chief. And while Karen Bass was over there doing god knows what, putting together god knows what DEI program, the insurance company saw the writing on the wall. So that's where people be feel like, you know, it's unfair. It's elitist. Your home is going to be able to be rebuilt. Other people's will not, so you're taking away those resources from them.
But again, I don't think people are thinking as rationally, or celebrities, or people with money are thinking as rationally, or about the PR of all of it. They're in a very desperate situation because, again, they are just humans. But I don't know. Let me know your thoughts. Maybe I'm being too nice to the celebs. Let me know. Anyway, I wanna move on to our next story because it's absolutely insane. Okay? CNN is being sued for a $1,000,000,000 and no one is talking about it.
So this veteran, his name is Zachary Young. I don't know if he goes by Zach. So I'm just gonna call him Zachary. Zachary Young sued CNN for defamation. And the defamation cases, by the way, they are traditionally very hard to win. You have to not only show that you were slandered, but that the journalist, or in this case, the pseudo journalist, had malice or malintent towards the subject or the person that is being defamed.
But the jury seems keen to force CNN to pay out, $1,000,000,000, I guess, for a segment that it ran on Zachary Young. Here are all the details. Following the massive failure of the Biden administration's pull out of Afghanistan, Zachary Young and his company, Nemnex. Nemex? Nemex. That's how you say it. It's called Nemex Enterprises. And, Nemex reportedly worked to evacuate Afghans fleeing their home country after the Taliban started its takeover when Biden and America pulled out of the country.
Now, obviously, it is not free to fly massive planes and assist 100 of refugees fleeing a fallen country. So Young, Zachary Young, and Nemex Enterprises charged money for those services. And then in November of 2021, as these evacuations were ongoing, a CNN correspondent ran a segment called Zachary Young is illegally profiteering and operating a, quote, black market. Oh my gosh. Let me set the stage for you. Okay? So this segment aired on a show called The Lead with Jake Tapper.
I'm sure you're all very familiar with who Jake Tapper is. But it wasn't Jake Tapper who wrote this or said it. It was a correspondent who put this segment together and aired it on Jake Tapper's show. So correspondents are the people like the news person, like Jake Tapper, would be sitting at his desk. We have, I don't know, Harper Shark, that's my dog, out in Washington DC. Harper? What do you have for us?
And then we would go to a shot of my dog at the capitol building and he would be like, hello, mom. I'm here covering Capitol Hill. Okay. You get the picture. Right? That is what a correspondent is. And the correspondent in question, his name is Alex Marquard. And in this segment, Alex Marquard called Zachary Young, the veteran, a war profiteer.
And he took the stand at the trial that's now ongoing and said he was not going to apologize to Zachary Young for this segment because he believes that everything in his story was factual, accurate, and fair. But in the same testimony, he admitted that there was quote no evidence of Zachary Young taking advantage of Afghans. I would like to note here that he likely is doubling down on the advice of his legal team. He might actually feel very apologetic.
He might not feel this is his best journalistic work. But getting up on the stand and saying, hey, my journalism was shit. It's not a it's not a winning legal strategy. So I'm not shocked that this is his testimony. But another telling part of this testimony that just happened was when correspondent Alex Marquard said, quote, I don't do hit pieces. And then, jurors were shown this.
Text messages from Alex Merclod to his associate or assistant managing editor, Matthew Phillips, reading, we gonna nail this Zachary Young m effer. Yikes. Not a good look. The Washington Free to begin did a really good write up on this, on how Zachary Young testified last week that he hasn't worked or made any money since the segment aired back in 2021. An accountant expert came on and testified and said that Young lost more than $21,000,000 of work as a result of the CNN segment.
And in light of this report, it actually got Marquard a promotion to chief national security correspondent. So he very much benefited this chief national security correspondent and kind of destroyed a guy, not kind of, very much destroyed a guy, whose standards were helping people in a time of need but also profiting off of the very expensive help or kind of work. Right?
So the other damning material that we saw inside of this testimony that's been taking place at the CNN trial is that Marquardt denied, on the stand that he, quote, zeroed in on Young, but he told his source we have, quote, zeroed in on an American offering outrageous prices and saying that they don't have proof that Americans, including Zach Young, were extorting Afghanis, and they don't have proof that any of this is a scam. They don't have proof of anything.
They just have proof that it makes them feel icky because the Biden administration didn't do this and private companies were taking on for the lack of management by the individual, by these people. I just it boggles my mind. The Biden administration should have been doing this. They weren't doing it. They failed to do it. So Marquardt or not Marquardt, Zachary Young came in and kind of went and did some of that extra help as a veteran.
And the craziest part, certainly not the craziest, but one of the craziest parts, is just the way that Marquard talked about Zachary Young in text messages. He said f f s for fuck's sake. Fucking Young, which is him, text just texted And he testified. He, you know, he was never angry. Marquard said, you know, I'm not angry about any of this. And then yet at the same time, he was texting that he was angry.
It was not a good look for Alex Marquard because they seem to have all of these things, all of these proof, all these messages showcasing this malice towards Zachary Young. And in one instance, a CNN producer named Michael Contee said that Young had a quote, punchable face and Alex McQuad responded, right? Oh my gosh. This is clear malice on the part of these journalists.
So when I look at the standard of defamation, I asked I phoned a legal friend and I asked what are the standards of defamation and I understand now that it takes 4 things. 1st, a false statement, which would be that Zachary Young's work was illegal profiteering. There is not proof of that. 2nd, it takes publication or communication of these inaccurate statements to a third person. Okay? We seemingly have that in these text messages and these emails. Right? The third element is fault.
That is, at a minimum, negligent and at maximum intent to harm. Now this is kinda where it gets debatable. Of course, the emails show political or partisan intent through the conservative person's eye. But we have to give grace from the liberal person's eye, as you know, this is a court case, that he may have viewed and by he, I mean, Alex Marquard, may have viewed his work as important to exposing a scheme if he legitimately thought it was a scheme.
However, the text saying, I have proof of the extortion. I don't have proof if it's a scam, without then showcasing any proof of extortion. I don't I don't know if that'll be enough. It'll be very interesting to see if more information comes through the text messages that we get. The final portion of whether a defamation suit can really go through and and really CNN could actually lose this comes down to the damages. Right?
Obviously, if Zachary Young can't get hired for being too controversial, that standard is met. So I think there is absolutely a situation in which CNN loses this defamation case. I will note that this is just the beginning of the trial. Okay? This is the information we have right now. However, there's another 2 weeks and a lot more CNN executives and other people who are set to take the stand.
However, another person that did take the stand was an editor and he admitted that he didn't approve of some language used in the on air report by Alex McQuad. So I will keep you updated as always. However, I just have to caveat for myself. When journalists start getting more interested in pursuing gotcha stories on their political enemies, I think that this is the very sad result of it.
And while you're gonna see a lot of the media say that this is anti free speech and the Trump administration and people on the right weaponizing freedom of speech, I don't think that's true at all. This is the result of poor journalism and not seeking truth. If people are interested in seeking the truth, you can't just go after people you don't like because you don't agree with their politics. Period. End of sentence.
And I think that's what's happening here, but I will keep an open mind as we continue to cover this. But I'm pulling up our next story right away because the headline in and of itself is nuts. A new sheriff in a major Michigan county wants to fight violent crime through environmental justice. Yes. I'm sitting here wondering the same thing as you. What in the fudge balls? I know that's what you're thinking. You absolutely thought, yes. What in the fudge balls? Maybe not.
But that's what came to my mind. Anyway, this plan, as I understand it, is that a major it's called to knock county in Michigan. This major sheriff, her name is Alicia Dyer, is going to create an environmental crimes unit, which focuses on air pollution, water contamination, and waste management. And this is all coming from the sheriff. She's a Democrat, and she won the sheriff's race in Washtenaw County, Michigan.
She said that this is, you know, very historic and the sheriff's office doesn't usually do this kind of work, but there's simply no reason why they shouldn't be involved in creating an environmental crimes unit. I don't know about you. I could think of a couple. Maybe, like, stay in your lane and focus on violent crime. Now something I'd like to know, because I just think it's fair, is that this area is incredibly liberal. Like, this is the county that is home to Ann Arbor.
The I I have to say it. Hold on. The University of the University of Michigan grows. Yucky. But, unfortunately, those farts over at University of Michigan, they live for this kind of shit. They absolutely love this kind of emotional, racial, and climate change pandering. And so I think that this is what the population wants even though it is abjectly insane.
One of the parts of this that I found to be also nuts is that Dyer, the sheriff, said that bringing down violent crime is connected to fighting environmental justice. And when pressed on why does that make sense, she went on to say that, well, actually it's also prioritizing the mental health and wellness of our officers. And when pressed on that, she said, well, it's all connected.
Because the officers' mental and health mental health and wellness, they can do their jobs better if they love the and steward the environment better. And people are gonna be nicer and communities are gonna be better if the environment is nicer. You know, the environment's not gonna be nice if if the violent crime keeps going up. Just just a thought. I feel like maybe it might be just too based in logic for these people. Maybe.
And this is just one of the many radical stances that the police have taken in this area. My father-in-law is actually a police officer in Michigan and I'm not gonna say what town. It's not Ann Arbor, but he's not super far from Ann Arbor And I sent him this story from the Daily Wire yesterday, and I just said, what in the world? And he responded, that's crazy. You know, that's Ann Arbor, so it makes sense with the county that he's in.
They don't allow cops to stop for minor offense anymore, like an expired license plate or a headlight out because of discrimination. Now when I read that text message, which I responded absolutely nutty, that was nuts, part of it was like, you know, I I understand our priorities are not stopping people with expired license plates or with a headlight out, you know, if we are focused on violent crime or larceny or burglaries that are going on, etcetera, etcetera.
I understand if that's not the top priorities, but it's not your top priority because of discrimination. I think that just gave a little bit of extra insight as to why this is so nutty and why this woman got elected in the first place. But that's actually kind of a really good segue into our last story, which is horrible women who luckily didn't get elected. Kamala Harris. We've got an update on what I am calling Kamala. So Kamala Harris's 2024 victory fund, which is the, it's not even a pack.
It's like a a an organization that takes up money and funds it into our funnels it into her presidential campaign. That campaign is still charging supporters for recurring donations that were set up while she was running for office. So the Harris victory fund, it never sought donors approval to keep withdrawing money after the election.
Instead, they just like quietly sent an email saying, they're gonna continue to charge people and then funnel that money to the DNC until democratic donors contact them to stop. And if you're wondering whether this is me being political or biased, it's not. This is not normal. Most campaigns and all recurring donations following a loss. That is my understanding of this. The 2012 Mitt Romney campaign came out and said, this is really abnormal.
Every presidential campaign we've seen thus far, as soon as they lose or terminate the campaign, they terminate the recurring payments. And given the economic state that Kamala and Joe left our country in, you'd think they they wouldn't continue to f over the people that they they keep closest to them. Like, this is not a good look for you, and it's certainly not a good look when you're doing this to your best supporters. People who support you the most, even though you lost horribly for them.
They deserve transparency. And I think this was just an absolute sham. It's a scam that the DNC is using to pay back all the money because Kamala Harris has become a quintessential female trope of bitches spend too much money. That's a problem. I feel for them, but at the same time, it's like, yeah. Okay. Whatever. Keep taking money out and funneling it over the DNC. They spent, I believe, $2,800,000 to the RNC's 1.8 or something like that, and we still walloped them. So whatever.
Keep fundraising if you think that's gonna win. You have so many other problems ranging from the transgender issue to the wokeness issue that's infected your party and the crazy, I mean, political correctness and all of it. That is gonna plague your party and the democrats for far longer than the mini scam Allah scandal like this. But that's all I've got for you today.
If you're a real one and you made it to the end of today's show, will you drop the fire truck emoji as an homage to the hero firefighters in LA? And while you're on your way out, please be sure to like, subscribe. And if you know someone who would love this show, share it with them on their way out because this channel is growing, and we'd love for new friends to be a part of it. Alright. That's all I've got for you. I will see you Thursday. Thanks so much for watching.
If you like what you heard, please be sure to give this video a thumbs up and leave a comment about how beautiful, stunning, and funny I am. And if you want more content based on logic, be sure to click over here for more videos and clips of my show. If you have the means to financially support the show, consider purchasing from my merch line, Based Apparel, linked right below. I really appreciate it, and I'll see you back here next time. Bye, friends.