Episode 1854 Scott Adams: I Bet You Want Me To Talk About Biden's Scary Speech
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
The guy in charge of the military said WHAT?
Priming the public for what's to come
Biden gave up the high ground last night
Should domestic government propaganda be legal?
Goading republicans, hoping for violence
Biden team embraces "Dark Brandon"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
And welcome to the highlight of civilization, where everything is good.
I overslept a little bit, so I haven't checked the news today to see if anything's happening.
Let's see. Checking the news.
It says Biden gave some kind of a speech, it looks like.
What are they saying about it?
Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
Uh-huh. Uh-huh. No, just kidding.
I got up early and listened to the whole speech.
So, what's your mood this morning?
How do you feel after that Biden speech?
Do you feel unified?
We're going to get into all of that.
But how would you like to take it up a level?
Yeah, I know you would.
And all you need to do that is a cupper mugger, a glass of tanker, chalice, and a canteen jugger flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine here of the day, the thing that makes everything better, including unity.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
It happens now.
Go.
Oh.
Well, that was the first perfect moment of my day.
I feel like the rest is going to be pretty good, too.
What would surprise you the most about this live stream?
What would be the most surprising thing I could do today?
Be an optimist.
I could be an optimist.
You didn't see that coming, did you?
Everything is good.
Everything is good. Not everything.
But we're heading in the right direction.
And I'm going to change your mind very soon.
By the end of this livestream, you're going to say to yourself, huh, I woke up all worked up and angry, and now I'm feeling kind of cool.
That's what's going to happen. That's coming at you.
And I feel sorry for the people who are not here.
Here's a question I asked on Twitter.
I didn't see the answer yet. Which would save more lives from this point forward?
So we're not talking about the past.
So we're not talking about however many people have already died in the pandemic.
That's the past. From this point forward, which of these two actions would save more lives?
Getting everybody vaccinated and boosted, Or asking everybody in the United States to keep Narcan in their cars.
And in their homes, too.
But the car would be even more useful, because the car goes where you go.
It's not even close.
So Narcan is what you take for an overdose.
Now, can somebody clarify?
Is Narcan only for fentanyl overdose?
Or does it work for generic overdose?
Any opioid, right? So any opioid?
Okay. So Narcan is pretty magic stuff.
The only thing bad about Narcan that I understand, I may not be fully informed, but the only thing bad about Narcan is whether you have it available.
If somebody's got an overdose and you've got the Narcan...
You don't have to be a doctor.
Apparently you just, I don't know, spray it up their nose or whatever the hell you do with it.
I don't know how you administer it.
But apparently it's something an individual can do.
And we've got 100,000 people dying of overdoses every year.
How many of the 100,000 who died of overdoses were close to an automobile?
Meaning one was parked somewhere in the neighborhood.
All of them, probably. Probably every single person was near an automobile somewhere, like parked on the street or something.
So if we just said, hey, let's just put a Narcan in every car, it doesn't stop the epidemic.
But are you telling me that wouldn't save more people?
And by the way, it should be voluntary.
So the two things our government should be telling us to do is where to get the Narcan, maybe paying for it.
Maybe even paying for it like they did with vaccinations.
But telling us to keep it in the car because China and the cartels are attacking the United States and you need to defend yourself.
You need to defend your fellow citizens.
It's not even about you.
So you may say to yourself, damn those addicts, it's their own fault.
Yeah, yeah, but it costs you money too.
So take care of yourself.
By making sure that your citizens are not dying for no reason.
That's how you take care of yourself as well.
So that's my public service idea for the day.
Rasmussen says the Republicans have a five-point lead going into the congressional ballots.
I don't know how much to trust that five-point lead or any of these congressional things, but...
Seems consistent. It seems like everybody is giving the Republicans at least a little bit of an edge.
Trump quite smartly started dangling pardons for the January 6th protesters.
Now, there might be some, you know, some of you would have to make an exception for, because obviously some of them did some dangerous stuff, violent stuff.
I don't think they need to get pardoned, do you?
Does anybody think that the ones who actually committed violence should be pardoned?
Yeah, that's not...
Oh, I got a yes.
Somebody said yes. Somebody said all of them.
You know, I'm going to...
I think I'm going to surprise you.
Yeah, he could do all of them.
He could do all of them.
See, here's the thing, is that I believe they were...
They were incited, but not necessarily just by Trump.
Yeah, you can't keep people alive if they want to overdose, that's true.
So... I don't know.
I like this as a political strategy.
If we just talk about it politically and don't talk about it in right and wrong terms, because that's a separate question, it matters.
The right and wrong matters.
But for the moment, is it a good political move?
I think yes.
Because I don't see anybody voting against Trump because of this.
Do you? Do you think anybody would vote against Trump solely because of the January 6th potential pardons?
You think so? I don't know.
I don't see many people doing that.
But I can certainly see it being a single point of voting for some conservatives.
Because when I heard that, you know what the first thing I thought was?
Oh shit, I might actually register and vote.
Because then I wouldn't be voting for Trump, would I? Basically, it would give me a way to vote for citizens.
Wouldn't it? If Trump says, I'll give a pardon to all of them, or the ones who didn't do violent stuff, let's say, whatever it is, that gives you a direct way to vote for the citizens, assuming he keeps his promise and wins.
So that didn't exist before, did it?
Usually you're voting for the candidate, but he's actually giving you an opportunity to vote to free American citizens.
I don't think I would necessarily walk to the voting booth or even mail in a ballot If all I'm getting out of it is the president that I voted for.
If that's all I'm getting out of it, I don't know if I bother, honestly.
I mean, I don't vote for other reasons.
I don't like it to bias me.
But I wouldn't feel like it was biasing me if I were not voting for the candidate.
I'm just voting to free the citizens.
And only one of them offers that option, so I'll go, okay, I'll take the option of freeing these citizens.
So, to me, it looks like Trump played it correct.
Because it does activate people who feel like me, anyway.
I don't know if it'll activate any of you, but I could feel it.
I could feel the persuasion, like I actually was incentivized to act, to actually get up and move and register, like I felt all that really strongly.
And it wasn't because of Trump.
I want to say that again clearly.
It wasn't because of voting for Trump.
It's because there was an option to free some citizens.
That's all. Don Lemon was arguing that when Biden calls the mega-extremist semi-fascist, that's not nearly bad as fascist.
That's not nearly as bad.
So stop saying that he's calling them fascist, because he's calling them semi-fascist.
So it's not like calling somebody a Nazi.
It's like, you're a neo-Nazi.
You're not a full Nazi.
You're more neo, sort of new age.
You're not fully as bad as the other ones.
And then... To Don Lemon, I think I'd have to agree with him, just in terms of how language works.
Semi is lessonful, so he's not wrong about that.
And that's sort of a half-wit thing to say.
Half-assed? Semi-fascist?
All right. How many of you have seen the Democrats' video compilation of Republicans calling Democrats fascists?
Have you seen it?
Or are you in a news bubble?
This is a test of your news bubble.
How many of you have seen the compilation clip of how many times Republicans have called Democrats fascists?
Because it turns out that they've done it quite a bit in public.
But, oh, play it, you say.
Play it. It's on my Twitter feed if you want to play it.
But here's my point. I saw a Democrat tweet that around.
Who was it? Mehdi Hassan.
So he's on Twitter.
I don't know what else he is.
But... He tweets, Fox and the Republicans are losing their minds over Joe Biden calling MAGA semi-fascist.
But they'd never call their political opponents fascist, right?
Right? You'll be shocked.
Shocked, I tell you. Roll the tape.
And then he shows the compilation.
But here's where he goes slightly wrong.
The compilation that he's showing shows Republicans saying fascist policies.
Fascist policies.
This is acting fascist.
It's fascist-like.
It's similar to fascism.
And they were always talking about politicians.
Politicians. Politicians having policies similar to fascism.
That's normal political speech.
What is not normal is saying that the voters are fascists or semi-fascists.
Yeah, let's say semi-fascists.
That's different. So that compilation was clever because if you were not very discerning, you'd think, oh, those look the same.
But they are completely different.
There's a big difference between, say, these policies are getting a little bit too controlling and taking too much of our freedom, and people will call that some fascist, right?
That is really different, really different than calling people and voters fascists, or even semi-fascists.
So I did wake up and watch.
I'm glad that I didn't watch it before I went to sleep.
Did any of you watch the Biden speech and then try to go to sleep?
Because that feels like that would have been a bad strategy.
I watched it in the morning, when I wasn't yet full of hate.
My tank was empty, so I had lots of room for some extra hate to fill it up.
But I woke up this morning, and the first tweet I saw was a Sertovich tweet talking about, what did he say, a Hitler aesthetic?
And I thought, well, that's perfect.
The speech did, in fact, have a Hitler aesthetic.
Now, it was sort of Hitler-Satan aesthetic.
I saw a little bit more Satan than Hitler, but you could definitely see both, right?
It was sort of a Satan-dominant A hybrid?
It was definitely a hybrid of Satan plus Hitler, but I think it was a sativa, I'm sorry, not sativa, Satan dominant.
Satan dominant. Yeah.
Because I compare everything to weed, but that's just me.
One of the things I... Have you seen the hashtag pedo Hitler?
Hashtag pedo Hitler.
Now, here again, here again, we see the difference between Republicans and Democrats.
When Democrats call Trump Hiller, don't they act like they're totally serious?
They do, right? I mean, it comes off as serious to me.
But when you see the hashtag GeppettoHiller, does that come off as totally serious to you?
That doesn't feel totally serious, does it?
Even though the accusations are serious, right?
They're both based on serious accusations.
But when somebody says hashtag pedo-hiller, some of that's fun.
Would you give me that?
Some of that's about the spirit of the fight, right?
It's about just enjoying the dust-up.
But it was funny as hell, and I laughed at it.
Now, I have not been on...
I think you would agree...
Can anybody give me a fact check on this?
I have not been on the pedo thing.
That's not my beat.
I'm not covering that at all.
Can we agree? That's just not my thing.
Because it's just too icky, and you never know who did really what, and it's all accusations.
It just isn't where I want to go.
But then Joe Biden went all the way to, you know, labeling a big part of the country as semi-fascist, and I thought, okay, it's fair now.
Now it's fair. I was feeling it was a little too far.
But he's just broadened the, I think he's broadened the game.
It's fair now. In fact, I don't know if I'll ever call him anything else except Petto Hitler.
I don't know if I'll call him anything else.
He's just Petto Hitler from now on.
I'll probably get tired of that, but for now.
All right. So let's talk about...
And people were saying that Trump said bad things, too.
And one of the examples was he said, you know, things about windmills that are not true.
And I thought, yeah, yeah.
On one hand, you've got Pando Hitler declaring civil war against citizens.
And on the other hand, Trump says you can't watch TV if the windmills stop.
Which, of course, he doesn't mean.
He doesn't mean that literally.
And I think the Democrats have decided, ah, it's about equal.
Well, one of them has declared war on citizens of the United States, and the other one thinks that you won't be able to watch TV if the wind stops blowing.
But not really. It's obviously a joke.
So, yeah, that's about the same.
Alright, so here are some of the things that Angry Joe said.
And I will give you again a Cernovich summary.
And by the way, this is one of those situations where the people you need sort of rise.
Have you noticed that? There are some people who just stay dormant until you need them.
It's like, you know, break glass in emergency.
And Cernovich is a break glass in emergency kind of guy.
Like, he's always there, right?
He's always there. You never forget him.
But sometimes, you've got to break the glass.
And I think the glass just got broken.
So, I'm not sure, but I think Cernovich just became unleashed.
Now, he's not pro-Trump, remember.
He's not pro-Trump.
But Cernovich unleashed is just a good time.
So let's see what happens there.
And don't think you can predict it, because that's what's fun about him, is you don't know where he's going to end up on anything.
So here are the things Angry Joe said.
Why did I bring up Cernovich again?
Oh, because he was characterizing the speech as basically foreshadowing Trump's indictment.
Do you go that far?
Do you think that Biden's speech was preparing the country for the certainty of Trump being indicted?
Do you think that's coming?
It feels like it.
So, you know, the future is hard to predict.
But I would agree with Cernovich that it feels like it.
It has that vibe to it, doesn't it?
Doesn't mean it's true, but definitely feels like it.
So from a political standpoint, this is one of the biggest mistakes I've ever seen.
But we'll see how it plays out.
So here's some more of the things that Angry Joe said.
I just wrote down, like, pieces of sentences.
Democracy under assault.
Threats we face.
He actually made the phrase, we the people, sound evil.
Did you notice that? Have you ever heard the phrase, we the people, ever sound dangerous?
He actually made it sound dangerous the way he angry shouted it.
I thought, whoa, how do you make those words sound evil?
Those are like the most unevil words ever written in the English language, we the people.
And he made it sound dangerous.
Oh, my God. All right, he said that Trump and the MAGA extremists threaten the core of the republic.
Huh, what do you do to people who threaten the core of the republic?
What would be the appropriate reaction to people who threaten the core of the republic?
Pretty extreme. He said, not every republican is MAGA. But he said, MAGA is a threat to this country.
He said that the MAGA people do not believe in the Constitution.
Um... That is literally the opposite of their brand.
That's the most opposite gaslighting you'll ever see.
Even if you said the worst things about the January Sixers and MAGA were all true.
Let's say you just accepted all the worst accusations.
None of them are about not wanting the Constitution.
The Constitution is all they want.
It's literally rule one.
I mean, it's just so weird that he can say that in public, and the Democrats will...
I feel like the Democrats will be, yeah, yeah, that's a good point.
The people whose entire philosophy is wrapped around strict adherence to the Constitution...
And they were so worried that the Constitution had not been followed in a non-fraudulent way that they actually put their lives and livelihoods on the line to see if they could fix it.
The people who cared so much about the Constitution that they risked their lives to protect it.
And Biden has painted them as not believing in the Constitution.
It's just mind-boggling.
You know, there are lots of things where you can say to yourself, oh, okay, I see your point.
Like, even if you don't agree with it, sometimes you can say, yeah, I don't agree with that, but I see where you're coming from.
I get the point. There's no point here at all.
This is purely saying zero is one and wet is dry and up is down.
That's all that is.
And it works. And it works.
Because the news bubbles will keep anybody from hearing the counter to it.
All right, here's some other things he says.
He says that the MAGA people don't accept the results of elections, as if that's limited to one side, that they give power to partisan cronies, they undermine democracy itself, taking the country backwards.
They might say that you have no right to marry who you love.
Biden says that the risk of these MAGA extremists is that you won't be able to marry who you love.
Okay. They're fanning the flames of political violence.
And more about the soul of the country.
And they're a mob that stormed the Capitol.
They're insurrectionists, not patriots.
Clear and present danger to our democracy.
There it is. Clear and present danger.
What do you do when there's a clear and present danger?
Well, you don't just talk about it, do you?
Do you just make a speech? If there's a clear and present danger, those are words of action, not talk.
Clear and present danger says we're putting assets in action.
Am I wrong? If the president, who's the head of the military, says there's a clear and present danger, that means the talking is done.
Am I wrong? Am I interpreting that wrong?
To me, that means the talking is done.
Clear and present danger.
You wouldn't use that language if you're talking about a potential danger, a future danger, a thing that might be bad, a thing to be aware of, a thing to be wary of, a thing to vote against.
You wouldn't say clear and present danger.
Clear and present danger says fire the missiles, right?
I don't know how else to interpret that.
He says, you know, extreme mega, fear, division, and darkness.
They thrive on chaos, anger, shadows of lies.
We're a nation that honors the rule of law, meaning that they don't.
Blind loyalty to a single leader and willingness to engage in violence.
Extremists who pursue power over any blah, blah, blah.
Mega Republicans are destroying American democracy.
Violence is never an acceptable tool.
So you can see the setup here, right?
The setup is that the government is planning to do something to Republicans that Republicans might naturally think a violent response was appropriate.
And so he's making sure that he's primed you to say that violence is never acceptable.
Let me be really clear, violence is totally acceptable.
How do you think the country was formed?
The United States was formed entirely on violence.
Violence is completely acceptable.
That's one reason we have the Second Amendment.
Violence is not only acceptable, it's required.
It's required.
And so don't let anybody tell you that violence is unacceptable in a context where some of the country might get rounded up.
It's definitely not acceptable in normal times under normal situations.
And we're definitely still under normal times.
So let me say as clearly as I can, we're nowhere near a revolution.
We're nowhere near it.
If you walk outside and you stop looking at Twitter and your TV, everything's fine.
You should try it.
Just walk outside.
There's nothing happening out there.
As soon as I walk out my door, there's just nothing happening.
It's like the neighbors are walking the dogs.
Like, hey, Scott, how you doing?
How's Snickers doing? Ah, she's great.
She's slowing down a little bit.
All right. I like your show.
Thanks. See you tomorrow.
That's what happens when I walk outside.
What happens to you? Yeah, we're nowhere near it.
This is just political fuckery.
That's all it is. Everything's fine.
Not only that, but wait till I get to the good part.
There's a good part coming. So, let's see.
We've got almost 4,000 people on YouTube.
The locals people wanted to know how many people would show up.
All right, so here's what else they say.
All right.
And we can't allow violence to be normalized.
Well, I agree with that.
You don't want violence to be normalized, for sure.
Here's what Charlie Kirk noticed about the speech in a tweet.
Here are the number of things that Biden mentioned.
The number of times he mentioned China?
Zero. Crime?
Zero. Inflation?
Zero. Fentanyl?
Zero. The border?
Zero. Charlottesville?
The fine people hoax, once.
January 6th hoax, twice.
The insurrection hoax, same thing, so I guess that's five times he mentioned that.
Trump, three times.
Extremism, seven times.
Violence, 10. MAGA, 13.
And Republicans, 16.
Now, you do not have to be a political genius to conclude the following.
They are trying to distract you from The more complicated things that don't work for their side.
They don't want you to think about the economy.
They don't want you to think about Afghanistan.
They don't want you to think about anything but this.
So the reason that they're stoking your emotions is to get you off the trail of the other stuff.
But also, as Mike Serovich pointed out quite accurately, they could be priming us for some arrests that would include Trump.
So they could be priming the country and also testing it, maybe testing the attitude of the country.
But here's something else that Joe Biden just did.
I don't know if you noticed.
He just gave up the high ground.
He just gave up the high ground.
Now, how do you fight Trump?
Trump likes to fight in the gutter, right?
He likes to fight in the gutter.
What happens if you go down into the gutter and fight Trump where he likes to fight?
How does that work out for you?
How did it work out for Marco Rubio and, you know, the other Republicans who tried to do it for about a minute?
Doesn't work. Doesn't work.
So if you try to fight Trump in the gutter, Trump wins.
Right? What happens if you try to take the high road?
What happens if you take the high road?
Well, you could argue that that's what Biden did when he ran for president.
And how did he do? Well, allegedly he won.
Allegedly. So Biden knows how to beat Trump.
Biden absolutely knows how to beat him.
Just take the high road. Now, do you think that Trump is not smart enough to know that the high road has been abandoned?
It's completely vacant.
It's the best real...
Let me put it in Trump terms.
Biden just evacuated the best real estate in the country.
The best real estate in the country is the high ground.
Everybody loves the high ground.
That's why it's the high ground.
It's the high ground because you don't argue with it.
Now, let me tell you a Trump strategy where he takes this boner from Biden and just walks into the White House with practically no friction.
Now, everybody does this, and it's really annoying when you pretend like you're telling the president what he should say or do.
Here's why that's annoying.
If anybody could tell Trump what to say or do, they would have told him to do things differently than he did them, and he wouldn't have been president.
So every time you think you know how to give him advice, just take a step back.
Just consider your humility for a moment.
Just consider that whatever he's doing seems to get a certain effect, and you don't know if you could do that.
So when he does things that you wouldn't do, doesn't mean it's wrong.
Doesn't mean it won't work out.
It's just you wouldn't have done it that way.
So I'm going to do the same cringy thing, but I'm doing it in the context of trying to give you a lesson on persuasion.
So my context is more about explaining why it would work.
I don't have any illusion that Trump will do it.
So it's more about the lesson.
Imagine if you will, and again, it's purely imaginary, that Trump says, I'm going to give a speech on national unity.
Boom. Mic drop.
And it's going to be in a week.
Boom. Now, what might that national unity speech say?
Well, we would have a week to talk about nothing else.
Imagine having the whole weekend to wonder what Trump will say.
Because it's going to be a slow news weekend, right?
Trump can completely kneecap everything that Biden said by saying that he's planning to give a unity speech.
You would be so curious what that fucking speech would be about.
You wouldn't be able to think about anything else.
Because you'd ask yourself, is he going to go hard at Biden, or is he going to take a more clever, you know, Trump-like tactic that you just didn't see coming?
Like, the Trump way is the thing you didn't see coming, basically.
Let me just give you some suggestions of something Trump could say from the high ground.
Are you ready? Now watch to see if you get goose bumps.
This will be your test.
If any of this gives you a goose bump, then you know I'm on the right track, right?
Persuasion-wise. Because one of the good ways to test persuasion is if it has a physical effect on you.
Like I said earlier, that, you know, if something has a physical effect on you, you know that's good persuasion.
All right, so here are some things he could say.
Imagine saying, folks, let's forget about the 2020 election, but what I would like to bring the country together with is a bipartisan election reform commission.
Bipartisan election reform.
You don't trust us.
We don't trust you.
Let's see if we can fix that.
Goosebumps yet? Yeah?
Did you get it? I'm not done.
Number two, ask for bipartisan FBI reform.
Bipartisan FBI reform.
Some people think the FBI kept Clinton out of office, and maybe they did.
Maybe they did. I'm not sure I buy that, but it's not crazy.
So the FBI has moved against both Republicans and Democrats, am I right?
They've embarrassed both Democrats and Republicans.
The one thing we can agree is that we need to reform them.
Did you know, for example, that it's legal now to do domestic propaganda?
So the government can do domestic propaganda, it's legal.
Obama signed the law making it, it was illegal, and now it's legal again.
Don't you think that the president could say, let's revisit that law?
Huh? How about that?
Now, I don't know if that law is good or bad, because I haven't heard the arguments on both sides, but wouldn't you love to see them say, let's have a bipartisan commission decide if that law still makes sense?
Because nobody's going to say no to that.
Am I right? You might say no to changing it, but you're not going to say no to looking into it with a bipartisan commission.
How about this? Ask for a bipartisan commission to study both climate risks and the risks from cutting fossil fuels too quickly.
But if he does this, he's going to have to say in a full-throated way, there is risk of climate change, which I don't know if he's ever said clearly, but he could.
He could say, scientists tell us there's a risk.
I'm not going to ignore that.
But what I always worry about is that the risks of overreaction are not included.
Let's do a bipartisan commission where we look at both the risks of acting too quickly, with, you know, let's say cutting fossil fuels too quickly, compared to the risks of not doing it, and make sure we have a complete picture.
Now, it's got to be a bipartisan commission, not some Republican-led thing, right?
Now that one you might want to leave out because climate change is too provocative.
But imagine those things.
So who's going to say no to bipartisan election reform recommendations?
Because it would just be recommendations.
Bipartisan look at the FBI. Bipartisan look at climate risks and all of the risks, you know, to basically save the third world countries.
And then bipartisan look at government propaganda.
Am I wrong? How about he says the border is a mess, but if you listen to Elon Musk, we have two problems.
One is, you know, the border and crime and things coming across.
But the other is a lack of population.
Our population might be growing too slowly.
So I'm going to recommend a bipartisan commission of economists to give us a number of how many people should come in and under what conditions.
And just say, let the economics drive it.
I'll just let the economics drive it.
Now, some of my examples, you say, oh, don't do that one.
But the election bipartisan commission, there's no way that doesn't work.
That just works.
That's just the high ground.
You can't take it away. How about saying, I want a Narcan in every car?
How about there's one thing we can all agree on?
We put an Narcan in everybody's car.
Not required. Not a mandate.
Not a mandate. But maybe the government can help you know where it is and know to use it and get it in your car.
So, somebody says no to that.
Now, let me ask you.
Here's my proposition and the only thing I want to sell to you today.
Should you be in a worked-up, bad mood because of Biden saying all these things?
Or should you say to yourself, he just left the most valuable real estate in the entire country for the candidate that you might prefer, if you prefer Trump?
Don't let them talk you into doing what they're trying to talk you into, which is acting crazy.
Don't let them make you act crazy.
Don't do it. Because that's what they're trying to do.
They're goading you into acting crazy.
They're goading you into supporting the people who did the violence, which, by the way, you did this morning.
When I said, should Trump pardon everybody, there were a bunch of people who immediately backed the violent people.
That's what they want you to do.
Now, I get where you're coming from, by the way.
I understand that completely, and I'm not even disagreeing.
But I wouldn't say it out loud.
I wouldn't say it out loud.
Because that's what they want you to do.
Now, what happens if they indict Trump?
What are you going to do? What would you do if they indicted Trump before, let's say before the presidential election, but after the midterms?
What would you do? You'd vote?
You'd protest? Yeah, maybe you would.
Maybe you would. But would you get violent if he's indicted and they show the evidence?
Not if it goes through the legal process.
If it's transparent, it's transparent.
I might not like it, but it's not like revolution time.
Now, I think that in the end, they're not going to do it.
In the end, I don't think they're going to indict him, because I think they know that would be too far.
And not too far in terms of it would spark a revolution, because we're nowhere near a revolution, but too far in terms of it would get too many Republican voters to get off their ass and vote.
What if they convict for some BS crime?
Well, conviction is different.
Conviction would take, what, a year or two?
So you're not even going to have to worry about the conviction part until after the election.
And if he gets elected, he probably won't be convicted because he's in office.
And if he doesn't get elected, then it doesn't change politics directly.
All right. So, here's my advice to you.
Don't get angry and violent and act crazy.
The memes that people are doing about Biden are exactly right.
But make sure people know you're joking, right?
When people talk about Trump, they actually say they think he's going to put people in prison camps and stuff.
I do think Biden is dangerous to, let's say, public figures who are Republican.
If there was any way he could take a player off the board, I think he would.
But that's politics in general.
I feel it works both ways, right?
Republicans would take a Democrat off the board any time they could, any opportunity.
So I don't think that's going to change.
And I think that whatever they were going to do with Trump, they were going to do anyway.
So none of this changes that.
So don't let them fall for it, and make sure you keep a distinction between the mockery that you're giving to Biden and the actual genuine feelings that the TDS people have that he's actually Hiller.
That's a mental illness.
Don't go down the mental illness line.
Now, I do know, I mean, it's not lost on me, that the way Biden talks does sound like angry Hiller.
That's what it sounds like.
It sounds like he's crazy and angry and dangerous.
But he's probably not.
Well, he might be crazy, but he's probably not dangerous.
Just make sure that you keep it on the mocking, funny memes, Hitler, Satan stuff, because you want to mock him out of office.
You don't want to give him any kind of fodder.
Because the thing they'd like most...
It's for you to start blaming them for being Hitler without having the goods.
And then it, you know, then it looks like a tie.
Our leaders used to sound that masculine on a regular basis.
Did they? Not in my lifetime.
Who wrote his speech?
Good question. All right.
To me, there was a disconnect between the words in his speech and the way he delivered it.
Did anybody catch that?
Because if you read that speech, I don't know if it would sound the way he spoke it.
Because he spoke it angry crazy, didn't he?
He spoke it in Dementia Joe voice.
And even as provocative as the words were, It's easy to imagine Obama giving that speech, isn't it?
You can imagine Obama giving the speech in his calm Obama voice and you would say, oh, well, he's just warning us of some dangerous stuff.
That's okay. That's fine.
He's just warning us.
You know, there might be some bad stuff.
Don't be like that. You know, be more American.
That sounds fine. If you just read the words in normal voice, even though the words are plenty provocative, but if you read them in a normal voice, they would sound different.
Now, a lot of people are giving me credit this morning for accurately predicting that Republicans would be hunted.
Which the Democrats say, ha, ha, ha, that's your worst prediction you've ever made.
And Republicans say, well, you nailed it.
You're right on there. Being hunted like crazy.
But I don't think I can convince anybody that I'm right or wrong on that.
Everybody's just going to see the wrong movie.
Now, whoever wrote that speech and whoever staged it, They...
I don't think that they knew it was going to look like a satanic setting.
But the reds and the lights actually did...
It was impossible not to think of Satan.
Is there anybody who didn't think of Satan when they watched that?
Is there even one person who watched that and didn't immediately think of Satan?
Am I right? I think everybody thought of Satan as soon as they saw it, didn't they?
It wasn't just me. Somebody says CNN changed the color saturation and made it pink.
But I saw a video that claims they were doing it on that video and it didn't look different to me.
So you think that it was orchestrated to look like Satan?
No, it wasn't. I'm going to say with complete confidence it was not intentionally made to look like a satanic set.
Not intentionally.
I think they just didn't know how it would look on camera until it was too late.
Too late to change it, probably.
All right. To get his base terrified?
Oh, you think it was to scare his base?
Maybe. I think it was supposed to look...
Here's what I think.
Let me modify my answer a little bit.
So I said it was totally not intentional.
I think the intentional part...
Was they were trying to make it dangerous looking.
I think they intentionally made it dangerous looking.
Would you agree? I think they didn't know that it would look actually satanic.
I think that was just a mistake.
To scare the poor and the ignorant?
Yeah, maybe. So...
What do you think of my general thesis that he's made it easy for Trump to win the presidency?
All Trump would have to do is act more mainstream, and that's it.
That's it. Just talk about bipartisan stuff and just walk right into the Oval Office.
I don't even think he has to fight at this point.
All right.
Pardon the nonviolent ones.
Yeah, I think that part's simple.
It's a blind spot because they're used to attending satanic sacrifices, somebody says.
Maybe, I don't think so.
Yeah, I think they're going to regret embracing Dirk Brandon.
Because remember I taught you that when Hillary Clinton started saying that Trump's speech was dark, and I called that down as a professional word, which I think it turned out it was, that the reason you don't name your own candidate dark is that it has too many negative connotations.
Even if you think it's cool and hip, the word itself carries a little program with it.
You can't strip out of the word.
They think the strategy is going to work?
I would love to see CNN's coverage today.
I'm going to make you a prediction.
Here's my prediction. That at least some of the CNN opinion people will say that he blew it.
Anybody want to take the bet?
Now, MSNBC will say he nailed it, but I'm going to bet that at least one, at least one opinion person who's not a Republican, but a Democrat, will say he went too far.
Oh, MSNBC already says he blew it?
Who said it, though? Has it already happened?
Yeah, only the guests?
Well, that's what I'm talking about.
You know, the pundits. Now, that's a good question.
What will Van Jones say?
Have I told you recently how much I like Van Jones?
He does seem to be able to tell the truth in an environment where other people can't figure out how to do it.
Smirkanish is top shelf as well.
Yeah, Smirkanish is solid.
All right. What truth?
Well, you know, Van Johnson called the...
What did he call the Russian collusion a nothing burger?
Was that the one he called a nothing burger?
All right. So there's not much else to say.
So that's my advice to you.
Don't allow yourself to get too worked up because that's the plan.
Make sure that you mock Dark Brandon and his Hitlerian stuff, but make sure that you're having fun with it.
Because we don't think he's necessarily in control, do we?
And to me, it looks like he blew the plan.
Whatever the communication plan was, I think he blew it.
And so I think you're better off than before.
So if what you wanted was a Republican to win the presidency, I think you got closer to it.
I don't think you got further away from it.
So you should say today was probably a good day for you if you're a Republican.
It just doesn't look that way right away.
All right. Ridicule is your favorite weapon?
It should be. Is there any topic I left down today?
Anything else that you wanted me to talk about?
Now that artificial intelligence is sentient, it doesn't matter any of the stuff, I don't think.
All right. Best episode ever.
I'm sure that's true. And I think that's all we need to talk about today.
Oh, the electricity in California.
Let's talk about that. So we're in a little heat bomb at the moment.
I believe there was some power company in another state where the power company actually took over the thermostats of their customers for a while.
And that's some scary stuff.
Was it Denver? Yeah, it was Colorado.
And is the baby yours?
No. Nope.
As far as I know.
I mean, as far as I know, it's not mine.
Pleasant had an outage by a crow?
I don't know about that.
You know what else Trump could do that would be a great unity speech?
Do a unity speech and describe all 15 hoaxes that the Democrats have played.
Just read them off.
He doesn't even have to spend much time with them.
Just read that there's 15 hoaxes.
Because the news would have to cover them.
And then they'd have to write these tortured articles where they say, no, no, he really meant the Nazis were good people in Charlottesville, which is ridiculous.
Yeah, the top 15 hoaxes, he should just put them out there and let the other team know that they're there.
Oh, there's a Trump rally tomorrow.
Most Democrats believe all of them.
They do, but it would require the news to deal with them and publish them.
So that's where you get the win.
Can you reframe going through a bankruptcy?
Well, a bankruptcy is not not paying your bills.
It's just giving you time to reorganize.
And given that we came off a pandemic, bankruptcy isn't what it used to be.
So bankruptcy doesn't mean you failed, it just means it was a pandemic.
And even if the reason you're bankrupt is because of something you did, not the pandemic, or something you didn't do, it's still going to look to other people like it was the pandemic, because of the timing.
So I don't think you have to worry about the reputation.
You don't have to worry about whether you failed because there are just too many external variables going on right now.
And it's just something you have to work through.
There are plenty of bankrupt people who did fine.
Plenty of them. You know, bankruptcy exists for your benefit.
It's not your penalty. It's for your benefit, so that you don't go completely broke immediately paying off creditors.
So bankruptcy is the thing that's saving you, not the thing that's ending you.
At least that's how it's on paper.
It should work.
All right.
They would just say Trump lied about a list of fake hoaxes.
They would say that, but it would still make them look at them all.
How do you reframe a crazy wife?
Well, no comment.
All right, that's all for now, and I will talk to you.
