 At a press conference today, Joe Biden called on an ABC News reporter and this reporter with a straight face asked the president of the United States if he was too quick to rule out World War Three. That is not me being hyperbolic in describing her framing of the question. See for yourself. So silly ABC. There you are. Oh. Oh, thank you. Sir, you've made it very clear in this conflict that you do not want to see World War Three. But is it possible that in expressing that so early that you were too quick to rule out direct military intervention in this war, could Putin have been emboldened knowing that you are not going to get involved directly in this conflict? No and no. You cannot believe that. I don't think there's any other way to answer that absurd question and not be rude. What do you even say to that? How do you not just stare at her for like 10 minutes just to get her to maybe hopefully acknowledge? Wow. The question that I asked was a little bit insane. Maybe I should be a bit more introspective. Maybe I should think about the things that I ask given how important this position that I have is. I mean, look, she's not an outlier, right? We just talked about last week at a press conference with Jansaki. Three single question was from the standpoint of why aren't you being more aggressive? Why aren't you escalating? Why aren't you instituting a no fly zone? Why are you so afraid of the prospect of a direct confrontation with Russia? And only one question from Ryan Grimm was asked in the sense of how do we facilitate a diplomatic solution? How do we end the war? Not how do we make it worse? It's insane. Now if we're being overly charitable to that reporter here, perhaps she was playing devil's advocate. Perhaps she wasn't necessarily saying that Biden should start World War Three, just that maybe he should pretend like he's willing to start World War Three. Maybe he should bluff. But even that is still insane if we grant her that. Because do you really want to play chicken with Russia when combined? The United States and Russia have 90 percent of the world's nukes. Is that really a game you want to play? I mean, one of these days, I just want Biden or Jansaki to respond by saying, do you have a death wish? Do you honestly want all of humanity to go extinct? Do you think that World War Three is just going to be some easy, breezy thing? Even if it doesn't lead to nuclear annihilation, it's still going to be incredibly catastrophic. But there is a likelihood that if we see World War Three, that will result in the use of nuclear weapons, which which will lead to the end of life on the planet. Do you want to die? Do you want to be wiped out in nuclear holocaust? I mean, I just I want to know the psychology. What's going through their heads when these reporters ask these insane questions? I just I don't get it. It's almost like they want to be antagonistic towards Russia because they want something to talk about. They want the sensationalist clickbait story. But guess what? You can't have clickbait. You can't profit off of your news being your business. You can't do shit if you're fucking dead. If humanity goes extinct, all of this goes away. So they have to find some way to think beyond sensationalism, think beyond headlines. Maybe, you know, for also trying to be charitable here, she was trying to get some sort of a headline. She was clickbait farming. I'm not even sure. But to ask that question, I mean, if I had the opportunity to speak to Joe Biden, I don't know what I would ask him. I admit that that would be pretty overwhelming because there's countless questions that I'd ask him. But if I limited it to the parameters of this conflict, it would be about what he's doing to ensure this ends diplomatically and not in nuclear annihilation. It would be what he could be doing better in terms of the messaging to the American people describing why a no fly zone is not an option because that is tantamount to a declaration of war. There's there's so much questions to ask, but I absolutely would never ask a question and frame it in the sense that, hey, why are you so weak? Why aren't you doing more? I just I don't get it. I don't get it. Again, she didn't even try to hide it. She said, you've made it very clear in this conflict that you do not want to see World War Three. But you don't have to continue that sentence. Just with the but it tells you everything. There should be no buts there. You've made it very clear in this conflict that you do not want to see World War Three. That's the reasonable position. But is it possible in expressing that so early that you were too quick to rule out direct military intervention? Could Putin have been involved in knowing that you are not going to get directly involved in this conflict? I just I want to know what benefits do they think this will grant us and grant Ukraine if Russia thinks he should be on even higher alert when it comes to war with the United States? I just I don't know what goes through these people's heads. But I feel like they're probably not thinking it's insane. Nobody should want World War Three because that would likely lead to nuclear annihilation. Nobody should want to see a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia. Everyone should be trying as hard as they possibly can to advocate for a diplomatic end to this invasion. I shouldn't have to say that. But here we are. The mainstream media is so hawkish, so insane in their saber rattling and war mongering that it's scary to watch the questions that they ask. It's horrifying to see their coverage of it. I mean, it wasn't that long ago when Brian Williams on MSNBC talked about how beautiful weapons of war was when Trump decided to bomb Syria. So they love war. It's almost like they get off to it. And I don't I just I don't get it. And this, honestly, it kind of makes me feel speechless because to ask, hey, were you too quick to rule out to rule out World War Three? Holy shit. No, no, you're never too quick to rule out World War Three. Holy shit. What are you thinking?