Episode 2211 Scott Adams: Let's Talk About The Winged Monkeys Running The Palace & More Fun News
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Reframe Your Brain, President Biden's Legacy, President Trump Persecution, Elon Musk Persecution, Lawfare Civil War, Vivek Ramaswamy, Governor DeSantis, America's Criminal Government, Trump's Mugshot, 14th Amendment, Mark Meadows Targeted, Fake Prosecutions, Brainwashing Improvements, J6 Transfer of Power, Scott Adams
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and I don't believe there's ever been a better time in the, well, the entire recorded history since the beginning of the Big Bang.
And if you'd like to take it up to levels which nobody could have even imagined, even yesterday, all you need is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or gels or stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
Go.
Go.
Well, congratulations.
This makes you a trained sypnotist.
That's right.
You're a sypnotist now.
Use that power kindly.
All right.
Had to make sure my coffee warmer was on, and it is.
Who makes a coffee warmer where you can't see if it's on because the coffee cup is on it?
The indicator light to say that it's on is hidden behind your coffee cup.
Come on.
Who designed that?
All right, well, here's the good news.
My book, Reframe Your Brain, the audiobook, is now available.
You can get that on Amazon, for example.
You can just search for it.
Reframe Your Brain.
My link's on Twitter.
And I will remind you of something I taught you once before about how to predict a hit.
Here's how you predict a product or service or something would be a hit.
And this is very reliable.
It's if somebody takes your product and they immediately extend it.
In other words, they turn your product into some form of another product.
Now, ideally, it's not because your product was bad and they needed to fix it.
That's bad.
That's what I did with my shop vac.
I bought a shop vac, but it was terrible.
So I had to add my own wheels and a thing to hold the cables and stuff.
And then it was a good shop vac.
But that would be an example of a product that's terrible, like a regular shop vac, if you use them, they always fall over and all the cords get, you know, the hose and the cords are all tangled.
So a shop vac is something that predicts success a different way.
The way the shop vac predicts that you're going to want it anyway is that you will put up with the worst design of a product in the history of products, a shop vac.
I think I'll move it one foot.
Oh, it fell over.
Let me untangle everything and move it one more foot.
Oh, it fell over again.
I fixed all of that.
Now the fact that I would put like two days of effort into fixing my shop vac just so it doesn't fall over every time I move it and get tangled up means that I really wanted a shop vac.
That's a good prediction.
Cell phones, when you first got them, dropped the call, too slow, 3G, but you couldn't get enough of them.
So it's the fact that it's a bad form and people are still begging for it, that's one prediction.
But the second prediction, second method of prediction, is the extended product.
Now this is almost the opposite of the first case.
The first case is there's something wrong with it and people are trying to fix it or put up with it.
The second case is that they like it so much they want more of it.
So it took all of one day from the time that the softcover was published for Reframe Your Brain that two people ripped it off and put up what they call workbooks which is essentially my book with my name on it and my title But they put workbook above it and they summarize it.
Now, of course, this is deeply illegal and unethical, in my opinion, because this particular book, there's nothing wrong with summarizing a book.
That's actually a different product.
But in this case, the book is sort of in summary form.
Reframes are summaries.
You can't summarize a summary.
The entire reason that I wrote Reframe Your Brain is to take a bunch of complicated stuff and put it in the shortest, literally two-sentence form.
The old sentence, the bad way of thinking of it, and then the new sentence that reprograms your brain.
And somebody immediately, within 24 hours, had published two different books, two different authors.
And I saw it the first time, and my first impression Let me walk you through this.
This is the author brain.
My first impression was, ahhh, plagiarists, they must be killed.
You know, I reported them, of course.
But my second impression was, whoa, that hasn't happened before.
I've never had anybody rip off my book.
The moment, well, no, I take that back.
I take that back.
This happened once before.
It was my biggest hit.
My first book, proper book, with text and everything, was The Dilbert Principle.
Within hours of The Dilbert Principle being published, it was completely pirated and available everywhere for free.
Within hours.
I'd never seen that before.
People actually scanned the book.
They took the book, scanned every page, and within hours it was free all over the world.
Now, of course I was not happy about that, but what does that demonstrate?
That's almost always a reliable indicator of a hit, and it was a wild number one bestseller.
So the fact that this book is hitting that same kind of energy, that people are stealing it the moment it appears, it's just like massively being stolen.
That is a good sign.
That is a predictable sign.
So keep an eye on that.
They're now a soft cover in Audiobook and Kindle.
And I have to tell you, I did not read the narration for the book.
I tried.
I booked a studio.
I showed up, I worked all morning, but my dyslexia was just out of control.
So I just couldn't read the sentences in the order they were written.
I tried.
I mean, I really gave it my maximum effort.
But Andrew Baldwin is reading this.
I chose him myself, out of lots of choices, because I thought he had just the right tone.
Let's talk about the bad government and everything that's happening here.
I have a hypothesis that I'm working on.
It goes like this.
We'll talk about these other stories in detail.
We'll talk about Trump and we'll talk about Elon Musk.
But if you don't know, Both Musk and Trump were targeted in what looks like really transparently obvious political attacks from the Biden administration.
Now, you could say it's not the administration, it's individual, you know, prosecutors.
No, it isn't.
Yeah, there's some kind of coordinated quality to it that's somewhat obvious.
But how coordinated is it?
Here's my hypothesis.
We would not be seeing the things we're seeing if we had an actual president who was in charge.
In other words, my belief is that it's now so obviously a criminal enterprise, and it's so obviously a political prosecution, and it's so far over the line that no president would do that and turn his legacy to garbage.
At this point, I would say that Biden's legacy is just criminal and garbage.
Now, it wasn't bad enough, you know, that there was the Biden crime family allegations, but I don't even know what was illegal about that.
It might have been just unseemly and, you know, we wish it didn't happen.
I'm not even sure what's illegal.
But when we're watching this stuff, like what's happening to Trump, what's happening today to Musk, we'll tell you about it if you haven't heard, these seem so obviously over the line.
And at the same time, we're not hearing anything from the administration about whether they would or would not put up with more mandates for COVID.
I mean, just imagine that.
If Biden were in charge, you'd see a lot more of him, obviously.
And I don't think he would allow things to go where they are now, because it's just so, so obvious that it's criminal.
And I don't think he would do that.
I think a president would tell everybody to be cool, because things are working okay, it looks like he can get re-elected if he tries hard, right?
This isn't really the time where all the individual winged monkeys would be going crazy, because it's just too far.
I mean, we've reached the point where it's too far everywhere.
I mean, it's just absurd.
So here's my hypothesis.
What we're observing looks like an unlead country.
Certainly for the domestic political stuff.
I think we're just unlead.
I don't believe we would have this situation with an actual president who is functioning.
Because it just looks like too much chaos and I mean, it's almost turning into like a legal civil war.
You know, lawfare civil war.
And I don't think we can ignore the fact that we don't have a leader.
So everything looks like a bunch of people doing what they think makes sense for their team.
You know, you got some Democrat prosecutors over here, another pocket over here.
They're saying, well, those other guys are getting away with everything.
Let's try something over here.
Yeah, so I guess what has happened is the Democrats have turned into a zombie party.
You know, zombies always act in a coordinated fashion, but they have no leader, right?
If you're the last living person in the cabin, And there are zombies around.
The zombies don't need to be, you know, ordered.
Hey, everybody.
Zombies.
Zombies over here.
Gather around.
Here's our idea.
We found some living people with brains.
They're over here.
We're going to surround it.
I need you guys to try to do the hands through the window thing.
Could you do that?
You over here, we need you to be knocking on this door.
If anybody can get any kind of a roof thing going.
I like the zombies on the roof.
And try digging.
Do we have any digging zombies?
Did anybody bring a shovel?
Nobody brought a shovel.
All right.
Use your hands.
Try to dig under the, you know, so that's what it would look like if it were organized.
But instead we've got, prosecute Trump!
No!
No, I must prosecute Trump!
Who likes Trump?
Or at least doesn't hate him?
Who also is not on our side?
Mosk!
Mosk!
What about that cartoonist?
Get the cartoonist!
The cartoonist!
Zombie!
So that's basically our government.
So even a threat won't work in this situation.
You know, I keep thinking, well, what can you do about it?
You know, what can we do about this situation?
And I thought, well, you know, what if the people who are, you know, on the other side of this, the conservatives, let's say, suppose they banded together to do what?
What?
You know, everybody's individual house is being attacked by zombies.
You're lucky if you can protect your own house.
And if you were going to attack, there's no leader to attack.
There's nobody to attack.
There's nothing you could do to Biden that would make any difference at all.
You could say, well, we're going to vote against you, like that makes any difference.
I don't think it does.
I mean, we're at the point where You have to say again, the most important reframe, in my opinion, is that citizens are innocent until proven guilty.
I'll say it a million times.
The government is guilty until proven innocence by transparency.
Transparency is the only thing that gets you a pass.
If you can let us inside, let us look around, Audit when we need to, you know, let people have access to whatever we need to.
Well then, then I'm willing to say, all right, we looked around, didn't find anything, carry on.
But the moment transparency is not fully in effect, the assumption has to be the worst case.
So while I have zero evidence that anything happened with all 50 of the state elections, I know I don't have transparency.
And while I don't know exactly what's going on with all these decisions about Trump being indicted everywhere and whatever's happening to musta looks like, you know, transparently political, I have to assume that that's all dirty.
The operating assumption is that it's all crooked.
So in my opinion, the lack of transparency allows a reasonable person to say you have a criminal enterprise, but I don't believe it's organized.
It doesn't look organized.
It looks like a whole bunch of zombies who know where there are brains and they're going to eat them.
And that's it.
So if you've got a brain, look out.
Coming for you.
Coming for you.
Wall Street Journal had their top editorial piece today was on Vivek Ramaswamy.
And the general take was that he's too inexperienced in international geopolitical stuff and that he'd get us in trouble with his lack of experience.
He's no Nikki Haley, for example.
And so two examples would be that he would be willing to end the Ukraine war You know, negotiate something, make sure Putin doesn't feel threatened from NATO, and try to wind that down.
And the Wall Street editorial board believes that there's a way better, there's a better option than that.
And that he's doing the dumb one.
Do you know what the better option is?
Does everybody know what the better option is than stopping a war that we don't need?
That has no purpose?
This is the Wall Street Journal.
They had a better option than stopping the war that is completely optional as far as I can tell.
Do you know what it was?
Alright.
Let me say in advance that I'm not joking when I say this.
Their situation was to beat Russia.
To beat them in the war.
Do I even have to say anything about that?
What happened to the Wall Street Journal?
That's like their top editorial.
That it would be better to beat... Now, when I say beat him, I mean, you know, beat him down to the point where China would say, I mean, just hold this in your head, that their better idea than ending an optional war, the better idea, is to beat down that superpower until China didn't want to deal with them.
How does that happen?
Like, connect those dots for me.
Why does China stop dealing with their neighbor who has energy assets they need?
Why do they do that?
Because Putin didn't win a war?
So they're not going to buy his cheap oil?
How does that even connect?
And then here's the other one that, because Vivek doesn't want to protect Taiwan forever, he says, once we get our microchip business here, then that's China's business.
And the Wall Street Journal says, but if you let Taiwan go, you're selling out Japan because China's obvious intentions are to take over the whole South China Sea.
Maybe.
Maybe.
Maybe that is their intention.
But is Taiwan the thing you're going to defend?
Really?
Now, I get that we should defend, to some extent, our allies.
That's sort of what the ally thing is about.
But do we have to be everybody's police force?
On the other side of the world, on the beach, practically, of China?
That's where we're going to be the police?
You know, I don't have a great idea, by the way.
I'm not sure what's the right thing to do on Taiwan.
It looks like it's tough either way.
There might be something you can negotiate that some other element besides Taiwan that gives everybody something like a good result.
I don't know.
Maybe.
But I'm kind of suspicious of that editorial.
Speaking of suspicion, and I'll get to Trump and his mugshot and all that.
I'm not sure I want to support Vivek anymore.
And I have the same problem with Trump.
So I wouldn't move to Trump because I've got the same fucking problem.
And here's the problem.
They're not defending themselves.
I feel like the burden's on their supporters.
Every fucking day I wake up and I see another person on social media say that he's a Soros puppet.
He's not.
He's in the WEF so he loves them.
He's not.
I mean, just ridiculous fucking shit.
And, like, you know, I dutifully, you know, try to correct them or whatever.
And it's just exhausting.
Because whatever level of brainwashing got to that part of the public, it's really working.
So every day there's something like, I've got these vague suspicions.
And it's usually because of one of those five or six things that he gets accused of.
I don't quite trust him.
And both he and Trump need to have a web page that says, I've been accused of this.
It's bullshit, and here's why.
So that every fucking time I wake up, I don't have to explain in an essay why somebody is hallucinating.
I can just say, have you seen this link?
Now why the fuck doesn't that already exist?
Are they even trying?
Do they understand that their biggest problem is that there are things unexplained that are easily explained, I assume.
Now, if a vape doesn't have explanations for these things, well, then, you know, I'm out.
I'm out.
Because they're easy to explain as far as I can tell.
So now, by the way, I could be completely wrong.
So let me say it might exist.
But I haven't seen it.
Does it exist?
Is there any place on his page that says, I've been accused of this or this or this?
Here's why it's not true.
Or even an interview in which somebody said, all right, there's about six things you've been accused of.
You know, go.
Or here's the thing I'm worried about.
Vivek is starting to give political answers instead of real ones.
Have you noticed that?
Vivek has started to give political answers.
Do you know what a political answer is?
Did you murder Bob?
Well, a lot of people have murders.
There's a lot of murders all over.
I don't know what you'd call a murder, but sometimes it's a homicide and not a murder.
Sometimes you can... Seriously.
How about yes or no, and then give us your answer.
Yes or no, followed by context.
Context first is just politics.
Because, yeah, it's trying to take you off the scent and everything.
You know, we like him because he was direct.
But I feel like he's becoming less direct every moment.
So, I don't know.
I think I'm not willing to support him under these conditions.
But I'll wait.
I'll see if maybe there's something that gets spun up.
I'm not going to change my support.
But at the moment, I'm unwilling to support under these conditions.
Because the candidate has to do a little work.
And we can't do it all.
He does a lot of work.
So that's an unfair accusation.
He does a lot of work.
Well, yeah, there's no website powerful enough.
But it would make my life easier.
If I could just include the link and say, all right, here we go.
Is Scott a Pence guy now?
No.
Oh, OK.
That's a good question.
Who would I support if I didn't support Vivek and I didn't support Trump?
I like both of them, by the way, but we're just hypothesizing.
RFK Jr., I support him in terms of I want his voice to be fully considered.
I don't know that he has any chance of winning the nomination, so what would it mean to support him?
Exactly.
I don't know what that would mean, exactly.
But yeah, I consider him a strong voice whose policies maybe I'm not fully aligned with.
Yeah.
What's better with DeSantis?
Tell me from... I know what Democrats will say.
No, boring's not the right answer.
Aside from campaigning, tell me what's wrong with DeSantis.
Aside from, you know, excitement.
He's not Trump.
Don't you think DeSantis has no backbone?
How in the world would he come up with that?
No backbone, DeSantis?
All he's done and everything he's done in Florida is backbone stuff.
He's got more backbone than any governor.
Name a governor with more backbone.
I don't even know what you're talking about when you say that.
You think he's a wussy?
Are you serious?
All evidence is in the other direction.
All evidence.
Now, I would agree that he's not the strongest, you know, speaker or campaigner.
But would you throw away his effectiveness, which looks pretty good, because he wasn't exciting you?
Is that the choice you'd make?
Or are you just saying he can't win because he's not exciting and therefore I just wondered how you're thinking.
So thank you for that input.
Well, today's theme is our criminal government.
And it's pretty criminal at this point.
I think we should just stop kidding ourselves.
We don't have an actual functioning democratic republic situation at the moment.
Whatever is happening, to me it looks like the winged monkeys have taken over the palace.
So I think we're seeing winged monkeys, zombie situation, not any kind of leadership thing.
Evidence number one, exhibit A for that thesis, is Trump's mugshot.
I'm guessing every one of you have seen the mugshot by now.
Right?
In case there's one person who hasn't.
You know, frankly, I don't think we can see it enough.
Just answer that.
And...
One moment.
You know, what is less fun than waiting for somebody to find something on their phone?
Nothing.
But you've all seen it.
He's giving the Trump stare, the I'm-gonna-come-for-you stare.
It's pretty good.
Do you wonder if he practiced that in the mirror?
I feel like he might have practiced it.
Did he nail it?
If he had to score him 1 to 10 on mugshot, did he nail it?
Yeah.
Yeah, that was a 10.
That was a 10.
And then he rejoins Twitter, tweets his mugshot with his words on it, and connects it to his fundraising.
Probably the best counter move you've ever seen.
The mugshot is an instant meme.
Everybody loved it.
It became popular.
It's so memeable.
He knew that.
Do you think Trump didn't know he was creating the meme of memes that will be the single most popular meme in the history of human civilization?
You don't think he knew that?
Oh, he knew that.
He knew it, and he delivered.
Do you notice his hair?
I believe his hair is legitimately now white, right?
It looks like he's not orange anymore.
So it's not going to be fun to say, you know, white man bad.
You know, I was enjoying the orange theme for a while, but apparently we're off the orange.
All right.
Well, so Trump played it as well as you can play that.
But I don't know that that moves the needle in terms of, you know, anybody but his supporters.
He's allegedly 215 pounds and six foot three.
Do you think they weighed him?
Or do they ask him for his weight?
Does anybody know how that works in jail?
They ask, they ask.
I suspect that that's what it was.
Yeah, apparently he's been suggested that he's been happier than that.
I'll just leave it at that.
They asked.
This is my favorite example of him not passing the fact check.
Imagine him standing in front of you.
Mr. Trump, I have to ask you this question.
What's your weight?
215.
What?
215.
250?
215.
215.
Yes.
What?
215. 250?
215.
Yes.
All right.
I just wonder how the actual interaction went.
What?
I don't know.
them.
Well, there's a thing called the 14th Amendment, if you didn't know that, that says you can't run for federal office if you supported or gave aid or comfort to an insurrection or rebellion.
Huh.
I wonder why they called January 6th an insurrection instead of what it obviously was, a protest that had violent elements.
Hmm.
I wonder why they're calling it an insurrection.
Notice they don't call it a rebellion.
Do you know why they don't call it a rebellion?
Because that would work just as well.
Rebellion.
Do you know why?
Because we like rebellions.
Rebellions are cool.
Our entire country is based on rebellion.
When we talk about people who are rebels, it's usually a compliment.
Is it not?
Yeah.
That artist is a rebel.
If you're not thinking of it in civil war terms, if you're thinking of it outside of civil war terms of a rebel.
But I like rebellions.
You know, rebellion actually sounds kind of cool.
Insurrection sounds, ooh, ooh, sounds like you're not on my team now.
You're insurrection.
Rebellion, I want to sign up with the rebels instantly.
So, you know, Jonathan Turley's all over this.
And so obviously the game is up at this point.
So did you know that Trump hasn't been charged with insurrection?
That's right.
After all the investigations, insurrection was never demonstrated with evidence.
But it's not going to matter, because I don't think that the Constitution requires that the law found you guilty of insurrection.
Do you see how corrupt this is?
Imagine that.
Now, I think I'm right about that, that you don't have to be legally found to be an insurrectionist.
I think it's just you were insurrection-y so you can't run.
Like, who decides?
Is it the court?
Who exactly decides that insurrection has been satisfied to the point?
And who would stop him?
Right?
If somebody puts their name in for the ballot, Whose decision is it that you can't run?
Oh, is it the governor?
Does each governor say, oh, you're an insurrectionist, so I'll make sure you're not on the ballot in my state?
Who decides?
You know there's nobody that can make that decision, right?
The Supreme Court?
No, I don't think so.
I mean, maybe they could, but it's not where you want to see it.
Yeah.
So, The level of fuckery that's involved here is, there is the worst part.
What percentage of the general public do you think understands what I just told you?
Specifically, that the Constitution bars you from running for a federal office if you were an insurrectionist, and two, that January 6th was a protest
That the Democrats tried to make an insurrection for the purpose of using this constitutional little technicality to take somebody who won at least close to half of the votes, or more, depends who you're talking to.
How much of the public understands this?
2%?
I'm going to say 2%.
Yeah.
It's easy to imagine that if you hang out with other people who care about what you care about, it's easy to imagine everybody knows the same stuff.
They don't.
It can't be more than 2% of the public would understand this.
That's why it works.
It works because the news won't cover it.
Do you think CNN is explaining this to their audience every day?
All right, CNN audience, let me see if you understand this.
January 6th could be called several things, but if you call it an insurrection, you might get to trigger this part of the Constitution to keep somebody out of office for a reason that was clearly not anticipated in the Constitution.
The Constitution didn't say that asking for a recount, or doubting the election, or having a protest, or even a protest that got violent.
None of those things should trigger the 14th Amendment.
But they're going to make a try.
They're going to make a run at it.
Is CNN telling their audience that?
No.
How would anybody know?
If it's not in the news, how would you know?
If you didn't follow Jonathan Turley, You probably wouldn't even know if you're on the right, would you?
If I didn't read his writing specifically, honestly, I wouldn't know this.
Because I read all the news and I didn't see it in the regular news.
I saw one person who has a platform and he doesn't have the biggest platforms.
He gets published in a number of places.
Yeah, Dershowitz would be also on the same side, I'm sure.
But I don't know how big Dershowitz's audience is.
All right.
Well, that's the criminal activity that the zombie Democrats are putting together for Trump.
But what about Elon Musk?
This story is such a head shaker.
So the Department of Justice, I guess, is coming after SpaceX for not hiring immigrants.
If they hired immigrants, they would all go to jail because it's illegal.
So the government has law that says you can't hire immigrants for this particular business.
It's illegal.
You have to be a citizen.
That's the law.
citizen.
That's the law.
But also you can't discriminate.
So the government has put two incompatible laws on SpaceX and decided that they're going to pursue one of them that's in complete conflict with the other.
Now, somebody smart He goes by the name of Compass Prime, said this, and give me a fact check on this if you know.
He said, quote, they'll try to get Elon on a process crime.
Going after SpaceX was so they can use Pfizer to collect every communication Musk makes.
Two hops away.
Because it's not just who you talk to, but then maybe you can get to the who you talk to, who you talk to.
And there are national security considerations with ITAR.
I guess that's the part that says you can only hire Americans for certain businesses.
You know, if they're defense related, I guess.
And that makes it FISA eligible.
Because they're ITAR.
I guess ITAR would have something with international.
Now, does that feel real?
Is this the right take?
Is this another one of those cases where, no?
I see no's and yes's.
I don't think we know.
No.
I haven't seen a number of no's to this.
But a lot of yes's.
So here's what I ask.
Is it not a common Department of Justice, FBI technique To use one kind of action to get access to communications, and then the communications will suggest the actual crime that they had never known about.
Because you can always find something.
If it's a big enough entity, there's always something you can go after.
So this looks like a political act, does it not?
Does anybody think that this is a legitimate action?
I don't think so.
I believe there's nobody who sees this in detail.
Nobody would see this as actually legal, legitimate, non-criminal action.
It looks like a criminal action.
Now let me ask you this.
Let's go back to my theme that Biden is not in charge.
Do you think Biden If he knew what was happening, would have allowed Trump's mugshot to come out on the same day that Musk is attacked in what looks like an obvious government action against him.
Same day?
Same day?
How do your minds not connect those?
Because they happened the same day.
To me that's an obvious pattern.
What are the chances that the two strongest people That would be, let's say, some kind of a bulwark against, you know, the Biden crime family running wild.
So Elon's in charge of free speech, right?
I mean, it's basically the only place you can get free speech anymore.
In my opinion, it's the only place.
Because you could go to other places that'll let you publish whatever you want, but nobody's going to read them, right?
You know, some little article from conservatives, nobody sees it.
But if it's on Twitter, people are going to see it.
So there's basically one free speech outlet, and that's what they have to kill, along with Trump, in order to run free.
Do you think that Biden would have been so dumb after, you know, 50 years of politics, if you were functioning, if you were in charge and functioning, do you think you would have let those things drop at the same time?
No.
That's why it looks like winged monkeys.
It looks like the zombies are just doing what zombies do, because if it were coordinated from the top, in other words, if we had an actual leader, it wouldn't look like this.
I don't think so.
To me, it looks like chaos.
It looks like no leadership whatsoever.
All right.
So, Mark Meadows was targeted.
Not only did Georgia indict nine of Trump's lawyers, which to me is proof that it's a political action.
I mean, I don't think it could be any more obvious.
But again, how many of the general public would assume that it's obviously political, or would they assume they finally got that Trump guy and all of his criminal accomplices?
Don't you think that's what the entire left thinks?
That it was totally legitimate?
You know, I don't see anything wrong here, they must have been trying to overthrow the government with their insurrection.
And that wanting to find votes, suddenly that's illegal to use the word find because it could be interpreted as something stupid, which they did.
All right.
So Mark Meadows being targeted.
So we've got Mark Meadows, nine lawyers, Trump, Elon Musk.
Have I mentioned I was cancelled recently?
But it's not part of this story.
This is really obvious.
This is really, really obvious that whatever norms we used to operate under, we're not operating anymore.
So here's my take.
No masks, no mandatory vaccinations, no pandemic mandates, no 14th Amendment bullshit, and no fake prosecutions.
I'm not going to say, you know, something specific will happen if those lines are crossed.
Here's the only thing I'm going to say.
If those lines are crossed, any one of them, we cannot predict the outcome.
That's all I'm going to say.
I'm just going to say, if you want to get into completely unpredictable territory, here's the path.
Give us a mask mandate, and you can no longer predict The next two weeks.
Give us mandatory vaccinations?
You cannot predict the next two weeks.
Give us mandates where we're going to stay home and keep our kids on Zoom?
You cannot predict the next two weeks.
Give us the 14th Amendment and make it stick and keep somebody off the ballot on bullshit?
You can't predict the next two weeks.
Put Trump in jail for one day?
You can't predict the next 24 hours.
So, while violence is never, you know, I would never recommend violence, I will predict that the norms will drop.
If you want to drop all the norms, I cannot tell you what will happen.
I can't help you.
I can't help you.
You just have to know where you're going, right?
You have to know what too far looks like.
This is too far.
No masks, no mandatory vaccinations, no mandates, no 14th Amendment bullshit, no political prosecutions.
If they spend a day in jail, even one of Trump's lawyers, Mark Meadows, Trump, and certainly Musk, If they spend one day in jail, any one of them, I will not be able to predict the next two weeks, but even maybe the next 24 hours if it's Trump.
Now, that's not a threat.
I don't want that to sound like a threat.
I feel like good fences make good neighbors, you know what I mean?
Good fences make good neighbors.
Here's the fence.
If you don't know where the fence is, you're just going to keep walking.
And that's sort of on you, right?
That would be on us.
It would be my fault if I were not clear where the norms fall.
If you cross any of these lines, everything's unpredictable.
If you want to live in a country where nothing's predictable tomorrow, here's how to get it.
Here's how you get it.
And let me say again, the first big corporation, I think Lionsgate was a special case, so I wouldn't make a big deal about that, but the first real, the real corporation that does a mask mandate, even if there are ten of them at the same time, just pick the first one alphabetically.
Just pick one.
You have to actually drive it out of business and then move on to the next one.
And just drive companies out of business until it just can't be done.
Because right now the government is using the corporations as their army to control you.
They can control the corporations easily because they're easy to threaten.
The government can, you know, fuck with them too many ways.
So they're using corporations to control the population in a variety of ways.
Isn't that classic fascism, or am I wrong about that?
I never know what fascism is, because everybody just uses it like it's just a generic word.
But wouldn't it be fascism for the government and the corporations to effectively collude, but really it's the government, to force citizens into a slavery situation?
That's the most classic case, isn't it?
Wouldn't you call that the most perfect case?
Because we like to throw the word around when everybody, anytime we don't like a leader.
But I think that's right on the definition, if I'm correct.
I think so.
Which is amazing.
We always talk about the corporations bow to them, and the corporations do what they want.
But we're not really framing that right.
Alexa, quit.
I worry about that.
My digital device listening to everything I say and reporting it to Jeff Bezos.
Maybe that's why I keep getting cancelled.
Jeff is on the other end of that.
I just see Jeff, like, you know, Jeff Bezos with his own, like, he's got the same device.
And when I'm talking, he's just listening to it like, oh man, this guy.
Oh, this guy.
I don't know.
That's not happening, but it feels like it.
All right.
Trump said climate change is a hoax and Vivek fixed that by saying climate change agenda is a hoax.
How many people on the left are going to understand when he says agenda?
Do you think they're going to say, oh, I get what you're saying.
You're not questioning science.
You're saying that all the funding and stuff like that is illegitimate.
Ah, we get it now.
All right.
So that's totally not like being a science denier.
So there's nobody on the left who understands that the models are not science.
You know, one of the most interesting things is I keep seeing tweets that show some kind of graphic of the planet heating up and reaching highs it has never reached before.
Now, I feel like that is happening.
I feel like there are certainly places that are reaching highs we haven't seen, at least since we started recording stuff.
That feels like it's happening.
But here's the thing I don't know.
Was it always happening?
Has there always been some place that broke a record that's never been broken?
I feel like my entire life, so in my 66 years of life, my memory is that from, let's say, 8 years old, so we're going back close to 60 years, from 8 years old when I'd watch television, every single day a weatherman would tell me a new record had been hit.
Sometimes cold, sometimes hot, but every day.
And now every day I see that a record has been broken, except it's reported that I'm going to die.
Well, what am I supposed to believe?
You know, there's a Steve Malloy on Twitter.
I hope I got his name right.
I think he's the one who most often I see the counterfactual argument that the temperature hasn't changed.
In years.
And you know there's a thing where if you look at the thermostats on the ground and the ones that are floating in the water, you get one answer.
But if you use the satellites, which can measure the atmospheric temperature, I guess, you get a different answer.
So you have this weird situation where the water temperature could be, you know, maybe doing one thing, land temperatures doing another, and the air doing a third thing.
So there are basically three different temperatures which are, you know, somehow trading energy around.
So, given that the energy... I guess it does dissipate, doesn't it?
The energy from the sun, it does radiate back into space, right?
So we're losing energy?
Right?
Yeah.
So energy is coming in, but it's also going out.
And I was going to make a point about that, but I don't remember.
So I'm just going to babble on like you don't notice that I started a point and didn't even finish it.
You won't even notice.
I'll just talk fast.
All right.
So, We'll see if Vivek's better branding on climate change agenda works or not.
Here's my big take of every problem we're seeing.
I'll just read my tweet because I spent time writing it just right.
I tweeted that most of our national problems are because weak minds have been brainwashed so hard that they don't know their gender, can't distinguish victims from oppressors, the past from the present, or anything else of substance.
And that's not because the people are stupid.
If you think that's where I'm going, absolutely not.
They're not any dumber than they ever were.
People are all over the map, but we didn't get dumber.
What happened was the tools of mass brainwashing got really good in the last five years.
So here's the formula for persuasion.
It goes like this.
Persuasion skill times reach.
That's how much persuasion power you have.
Because if you're real persuasive, but you never leave your room and never talk to anybody, you have no influence.
If you have a big platform where millions of people can see what you're saying, you get a little influence just by people seeing it.
But if you're not good at it, you're not sending powerful messages.
So it's just a lot of people hear you, which is persuasive.
But there's a whole different level Where you use science to test which messages are working and then you have access to the entire planet and every mind on the planet through the social networks.
We've never had this situation before.
So the brainwashers, and that's what they are, the brainwashers, the brainwashers now have a tool that can just cancel your brain.
Before, you would see messages and you'd say, oh, that looks like BS.
That's just my team saying stuff.
I know that they don't mean it.
And you'd say to yourself, I don't know what's real, what's not.
And then you'd have a little bit of ability to analyze what the message is and then make up something like an independent opinion.
But that's when brainwashing was not advanced.
The current level of brainwashing is so good that they can convince half the country that a President of the United States recommended drinking bleach or some kind of liquid disinfectant.
Half of the country thinks that actually happened.
Half of the country thinks January 6th was an armed insurrection, whereas Bill Maher, who is deeply brainwashed, and there's no other way to say it, he's just brainwashed.
And that's not an insult, by the way.
If you think that's an insult to Bill Maher, absolutely not.
The brainwashers are so good that even a nimble, well-informed mind can be completely corrupted by it.
He actually believes there was not a peaceful transfer of power, or that there was a risk that there wouldn't be.
Here's how you know that's brainwashing.
Explain that to me.
So explain how the non-peaceful transfer of power was going to happen in your hallucination.
What'd that look like?
Because so far nobody in the story had a gun.
Well, I'm sorry.
Let me get Dale for a moment.
Hold on.
Scott!
You forgot about those few incidents of violence!
Yeah, I know, I know.
But January 6th, mostly, was a protest.
But what about the few people?
What about the people who died?
Yeah, I know, I know.
There was some violence.
Everybody knows there was some violence.
But the general nature of it was an unarmed protest.
But what about the violence?
What about the violence?
What about the violence?
All right.
So I just wanted you to know that there's a counter-argument because I don't want to seem biased.
I want to show you both sides of the issue.
So half of the country, like Dale, actually believed there was something like an actual risk that at any moment now there would not be a peaceful transfer of power.
How?
You could just leave all the protesters in the Capitol forever, and the Congress would have just found another building.
They would have certified the election.
If there was an alternate group of electors, let's say there were.
Let's say an alternate group of electors competed for it and said, no, we're the real ones.
We're the real ones.
What happens next?
Is the next thing that happens is that the fake electors, so-called, and the real electors, do they then pull out their weapons, and then it's a gunfight?
And then the last one living He gets to choose the president?
Is that Bill Maher's fucking theory?
Is that as soon as the paperwork was done, we'd start shooting each other?
What the fuck are they thinking?
These are pure brainwashed, brainwashed, ridiculous things to believe.
The worst case scenario is that the Supreme Court would have looked at the fake electors, they would have looked at the real ones, and they would have said, well, one of these is real, the other one isn't.
Or they would have said, you know, check the election to make sure.
They would have said something like that.
But at which point do the guns come out?
Where's the violent part?
of the transfer of power.
There was never even the slightest risk that there would be a stoppage of a transfer of power because of violence.
Because you could have actually blown up the Capitol building.
You know, that didn't happen.
But the transfer of power would have still happened.
Just the way it always does.
We would have argued about it, the Supreme Court might get involved, it would make a decision, and everybody would say, well damn it, I wish it had gone the other way.
Bush v. Gore.
Bush v. Gore.
Wasn't that one of those violent insurrections?
Because people didn't like it and talked about it?
What about believing that the President of the United States saw a Nazi march with tiki torches and decided that in public, after thinking about it, that he would label them as fine people.
Of course, that was all a hoax and a brainwashing thing.
He didn't.
You know, I don't have to go through that because you all know the story.
But think about the things that people have been brainwashed into believing in the last few years.
It's just a brainwashing problem.
We've never had brainwashing, let's say, technology that was this bulletproof.
They can actually make their side believe anything.
Anything.
And I don't think that the right is exempt, by the way.
If you're thinking this is like, oh, all those weak-brained Democrats No, that's not what I'm saying.
Because you know, there are weak minds everywhere.
That's not limited to one side.
But the weak minds are completely brainwashed.
And there are only a few people who even have the capability of avoiding it.
In order to avoid the brainwashing, what would you have to do?
And what would you have to be?
Well, let me tell you.
At minimum, you'd have to be very skilled at comparing things and knowing what is likely bullshit and what is not.
I would argue that my audience is the least susceptible to brainwashing because they're the most trained specifically on avoiding it.
And it's actually a skill.
Avoiding brainwashing is a skill.
Let me increase all of your skills.
If anybody's new, let's say there's somebody here the first day.
Let me tell you something that would be like the beginning of your journey.
No news about public figures is real.
Now, that takes some development to make that case.
But although the thing you saw might be real, there's a thing called a root bar, right?
Now, you all know what a root bar is because I've explained it so many times.
It's when you can use a real video, but if you cut out just a little piece of it on either end, it doesn't just confuse the video, it reverses its meaning 100%.
Now, unless you see several examples of it, you know, like the Covington kids and fine people and the bleach oaks, unless you've seen several examples where it's done exactly that way, you don't really think that's real.
Right?
But once I teach you, oh yeah, all news about public figures is a root bar.
They leave out the context, and everything you think about it would be different if you knew the context.
So let's say you've seen a bunch of examples.
That would give you some, a little bit of protection, because the next story you see, your brain has at least a chance of saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's one of those.
It's a story where something's out of context.
Do you know the story about Vivek and Soros?
Right?
You've all heard there's something about Vivek and Soros and you're a little suspicious about it?
Have I mentioned that all news about public figures is fake?
Do you think you know the context of that story?
Of course not.
The only reason it's still a story is because people don't know the context.
The moment you knew the context, it would go away.
But you don't.
So, and that's why I'm mad at Vivek for not putting the context out there in a more digestible, simple form where everybody can just tweet it and look at it.
So, the brainwashing is the biggest problem in the country because Americans are really good at solving problems when they know what the real problem is.
We're really bad at solving problems when we're working on the wrong problem.
And the problem we're working on now is all those criminal MAGAs.
That's the problem we're working on.
The United States is trying to solve for all the white supremacy and the criminal MAGA people.
That's the problem.
Now, if you think we can get a good result by solving only the wrong problems, That would be insane.
And 50% of the country thinks that sounds right.
Half of the country believes that you can leave the border basically wide open.
I mean, we're playing with words when we say that.
But pretty much everybody who tries to get in legally, just going through the checkpoints, they all get in.
So you could say that they're all legal immigrants because Biden has made them all legal in unlimited amounts.
And we're supposed to act as if that's not a problem.
But the real problem is things which give money to people who buy into climate change.
People who buy into the military industrial complex story that every country in the world is our problem.
We better put some bullets over there.
So The only thing I see here that's maybe a way out...
is some kind of a, literally, a brainwashing technology, or an unbrainwashing technology, which I believe is totally doable.
It would require a lot of work, like you'd have to create, say, a video.
But, hypothetically, I don't think I have time to do this, but I wish I did.
I'd love it.
Hypothetically, one could create a video that unbrainwashes people.
I don't know if anybody would watch it though, because people don't want to be unbrainwashed.
It's really painful.
So even if you could do it, getting people to consume it would be nearly impossible.
I mean, you already see that the left won't consume.
Have you ever had this experience where somebody will make a ridiculous accusation because they were brainwashed?
You'll show them the two minute video that proves they're wrong and they can't even click on it?
You know what I mean?
Because they know if they click on it, it's going to hurt.
So they'll just call you a white supremacist and make it a day.
Yeah, you've seen it.
You know what I'm talking about.
So Memory Man says in the comments, let's talk about Vivek's fake history.
So there's a number of people who have fallen for some persuasion that I think is coming from one source.
I don't know who, in terms of names.
But it appears to me that the anti-Vivek stuff is organized by somebody who knows how to do this.
Here's the tell.
Again, teaching you how to not be brainwashed.
So the tell for persuasion against Trump in the 2016 election was the word dark.
Right?
As soon as you heard that thing, dark.
Like, oh, I'm going to attach everything to that.
And with The Vague, he is apparently being branded with some W-E-F Soros thing.
And they can find some connection that is real.
There's a real connection.
But you know what?
I am also connected to the worst things in the world.
If you were to look at all the people I've ever talked to, even had, you know, I visited with, had lunch with.
Oh, let me give you an example.
Today I'm going to talk to Roger Stone.
Yeah, I think it's recorded for Sunday.
I'll tell you the details.
So if somebody says, oh, he's one of those Roger Stone people.
Enough said.
Enough said, right?
That's how it works.
You can find the connection to anything.
Do you think somebody could say I have a connection to Roger Stone now because he asked to talk to me for his radio show and I said yes?
Because I'm on a book tour?
Yeah.
So now I have a connection to MAGA.
Now I have a connection with.
I have an association with.
When you see all those associated with stories, you're being brainwashed.
All the stories about Vivek that are by association, that's pure brainwashing.
If you want to know what he actually did and thinks, you could ask him.
But the whole, he's associated with, so I don't quite trust him.
That's like dark.
Right?
So the dark...
You know, play, the persuasion play for Trump just turned into the world globalist, maybe something suspicious.
Oh, I've got questions.
What about his history?
That's all brainwashing.
If you find yourself mouthing those words, here are the things you can tell yourself if you're brainwashed.
If you say the following, you know, I like, I like what he says, but I don't quite trust him.
Right?
Do you know why that's obvious brainwashing?
Because it applies to 100% of politicians.
You don't know what they're up to.
Do you think you have any facility to know what somebody's secret thoughts are and what the real deal is?
You don't.
Who is Chris Christie's political backer?
Tell me.
Who's paying Chris Christie to go around and make fun of Trump?
Do you know?
Right.
Do you trust Chris Christie that he's really just running for president and that's the real reason he's there?
No, obviously not.
No.
Even people that are on your team.
are just completely untrustable.
So if you said to yourself, you know those other people I may like or not like how they perform, but there's just this one guy, out of all the nine, there's just this one guy.
I've got some questions.
I'm a little distrustful about just the one.
Now my first thought was it was just racist.
That was my first thought.
I was like, really?
It's the brown guy?
Like, everybody's cool but the brown guy, right?
Like, that's your first thought.
But then you look at the specific accusations, and they're all, like, dark.
And like, that's not a coincidence.
That's not a coincidence.
So every time you see somebody who says something like, yeah, I like what he says, and he's pretty smart, but my spider sense is telling me there's something, just something vague.
I can't put my, that's what dark is.
That's what dark is.
That's the sign of a professional.
So there's somebody professional who decided that taking Vivek out by these vague association kind of problems would be enough to spook conservatives and it worked perfectly.
Worked perfectly.
Now, I started out by saying that I can't support Vivek anymore if he doesn't defend himself by making it easy for us to defend him.
Which would be put all those rumors on one page on a website, put his answers there, Just let us tweet that, please.
So he needs to help us out.
But the accusations against him are obviously, and clearly, brainwashing fodder.
They're not based on anything you would care about.
Norm says, Scott loves the brown guy.
Why is it always that?
It's always something about the person.
All right.
Those, by the way, are the stories I wanted to talk about.
There's more news about Purgosian, but we're never going to know the real truth there, or we could guess.
If you didn't know, Roseanne's conversation with me is now available, so you can watch the Roseanne interview.
People are saying it's amazing.
I'm happy about that.
Actually, I'm getting some of the best feedback from that of anything I've done.
So go to... you can just go to YouTube or Rumble or wherever.
Just Google it.
You can find it in my Twitter feed.
Or you find it in Roseanne's Twitter feed as well.
Thank you.
Yeah, I'm getting... I honestly don't know exactly what I did right, but people are liking that a lot.
All right.
Vivek's pure talent will change the Republican Party.
Yeah, if they let him.
If he gets there.
All right, ladies and gentlemen.
How weird.
Yeah, weird racist comments today.
Scott.
Would you let James Baldwin read your book?
Who's James Baldwin?
I don't even know who James Baldwin is.
Andrew Baldwin is the one reading the audiobook for my book.
All right.
He's dead?
Persuade for peace?
Yeah.
All right.
Oh, I get it, okay.
No, I don't think Tucker's going to run for office.
All right.
Anything else?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Goliath, what?
All right, I'm just reading your comments for a moment here.
Vivek doesn't show emotional contrast, somebody says.
Hmm, interesting.
I have to think about that.
That might be a good point.
Alright, ladies and gentlemen, thanks for joining over on YouTube.
