All Episodes
March 6, 2024 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
01:10:11
Episode 2405 CWSA 03/06/24

My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8 Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: Politics, Venetian Testicle Scorpion, Hoax Generation Machinery, Insurrection Hoax Strategy, Liberal Women Mental Illness, MSNBC Gollums, President Biden Accomplishments, National Debt Crisis, Trump Flawless Campaign, President Trump, Violent Crime Stats, Election Year Stories, TikTok Ban Bill, Terrorist Migrant Fears, Victoria Nuland, Adam Schiff, Steve Garvey, Cattle Tracking Funds, Gay Whales, Scott Adams ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams because that's what it is.
And if you'd like to take your experience up another notch, and it's almost impossible to believe that there could be a higher level than what you're experiencing right now, It can happen.
And all you need for that is a cup, or a mug, or a glass, a tankard, chalice, 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.
Here in the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the subtleties.
Sip and it happens now.
Go.
Mmm.
Yes.
Delightful.
Well, if you are listening to this recorded today later on Spotify, I don't know if I'm going to stay on Spotify.
I got demonetized recently, but I can't tell if it has something to do with me.
I don't think it does.
Or something to do with a change in their user interface that I can't figure out.
So something changed.
So I went from being monetized to demonetized.
Uh, you know, there was a change in how they do the advertisements, but I don't know.
So if it disappears on Spotify, you can watch it commercial-free on X or Locals if you're a subscriber, or on YouTube if you're paying for YouTube, you don't see commercials, or you can see it on Rumble as well.
So lots of choices.
Well, the most important story of the day, while we're waiting for people to stream on in here, obviously we'll talk about Super Tuesday, but in even bigger news, a Southern California man, he was staying at the Venetian Palazzo Tower in Las Vegas, and he reports being stung by a scorpion on his testicles, while sleeping at the hotel.
Stung by a scorpion on his testicles.
Well, that's how I feel, Every time I read the news, am I right?
I feel like I've been stung on my testicles by a scorpion.
So let's talk about the news today.
By the time I'm done, Probably at least 80% of you will feel like you've been stung by a scorpion on your testicles.
But the rest of you, you'll feel great today.
Alright?
Congratulations to the anonymous account on X called EndWokeness.
Now probably every single day, I mentioned one of their posts.
I don't know who it is.
It's an anonymous account.
But it has built quite a system here.
So for reasons that I don't completely understand, and Wokeness seems to get all the Wokeness stories that you haven't heard anywhere else yet.
And I think yesterday alone had three successes.
Now, let me explain the model.
Apparently the Endwokeness account got enough attention that if anyone anywhere sees some stuff that looks like it would make sense for that account, they send it to them.
And then the Endwokeness figures out which ones to post.
And because they're so good, whoever it is, I often repost them, as do a number of other large accounts.
So although the Ann Wokeness account is several hundred thousand, I think, I don't know what the number is, but, you know, I send it to another million of my followers, a number of other people post it.
So probably this one account.
It's probably pinging 50 million people a day.
Just a gigantic number through the, you know, the multiplier effect.
But here's two things that happened because of that clever business model.
So you heard the story about the Veterans Administration.
They banned the use of the iconic World War II photo where there's a sailor coming in from the war, war's over, and grabs a young lady and Ben's Rover and kisses her passionately, but they didn't know each other.
And so the idea was that it was not a consented, there was no consent.
So the Veterans Administration said, well, we've got to get rid of this iconic photo.
There's no consent.
But, and Wokeness made fun of that, it became a big thing on the X platform, and the next thing you know, when the, apparently the boss, of whoever made the decision, found out about it on X.
In other words, somebody made a decision that their boss didn't know about, and if not for end wokeness, probably wouldn't have found out.
Now, it's not the biggest important story in the world, but it got reversed.
So there's that.
Then you probably heard the story about the Spanish Doritos marketing people.
They started using a transgender influencer who apparently had said some alarming things about doing thuggish things to a minor at some point in the past.
And Endwokeness brought that up.
And Doritos changed their policy.
They just reversed it in, like, one day.
So, and there was one other I forgot to write down, maybe you know.
There was a third thing that all in one day, the EndWokeness account got reversed, and it was just because of sunlight.
It was literally just because it got attention and the people who were in charge said, uh, uh, I don't think we always, I was at Johns Hopkins where they, did they get rid of, they got rid of some racist thing they were doing, right?
Might've been that.
That sounds familiar.
But three victories because they've a business model that is very clever and well executed with a lot of energy.
Facebook, Michael Schellenberger says in his newest reports, there's secret emails that show that Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook fact-checking program was compromised by biased activists, says Michael Schellenberger.
Now, is that the kind of story that is new but not new?
Was there anybody watching this who was not fully aware that the fact-checking organizations were fake and always were fake?
So the fun thing about this election year is that, well, I'm just going to say it.
The 50 people who signed the laptop letter, the Hunter laptop letter hoax, that turned out to be like the Rosetta Stone for figuring out everything.
Because I was really confused.
I used to be wondering, like, I wonder if Obama's really in charge.
I wonder if he's really in charge.
No, apparently not.
It looks like the laptop people are in charge.
So just look at the fact that nobody who signed the laptop letter got any blowback.
Nobody got fired.
Nothing.
Nothing.
So whoever has that kind of power where they can do a hoax that blatantly right in front of you with no consequences whatsoever.
A few people asked some questions on the news but Nothing.
I mean, that shows you he was in charge.
Now, once you see the people who did that, you say to yourself, huh, if it looks like they were in charge with that laptop thing, have those same people done anything else that we should know about?
Oh yeah.
The entire Russia collusion hoax was Brennan and Clapper.
Hmm.
Same people on the laptop hoax.
Hmm.
Same people seem associated with some other shadowy ex-Intel people, like on the Atlantic Council and other places.
So I would say that we now understand the entire network of the fake NGOs, the Soros funding of the prosecutors.
We see that the entire news organization is fake.
It's exactly what Trump said.
You know, when Trump started saying the news was fake, Did you have the same impression I did, which is, well, I mean, not completely fake.
You know, it's just, it's just not ideal.
It's not where you'd want it to be.
No, it's actually completely made up.
It's like completely made up.
Just insanely, ridiculously, not even trying to be news.
Now, I'm not sure I was totally aware of that before.
I mean, let's say before the last seven years.
But we're certainly aware of it now.
So we all understand that the fact checkers are fake.
Do you need any proof that the fact checkers were always fake?
Where have they been?
They disappeared for the Biden administration.
He barely ever says anything that's true, and the fact-checkers just disappeared.
When was the last time you even heard about how many times he got fact-checked?
Do you remember they used to keep a running total of all of the tens of thousands of fact-check problems that Trump had?
How many times has Biden said the Fine People Oaks?
Just that one.
Just that one.
Yeah.
If you were to fact check all of Biden's hoaxes, it would be pretty impressive.
And the only difference would be he doesn't talk as much in public because he's not capable.
If he had more energy, his lying would be way more impressive.
It doesn't have the energy to lie well enough.
Anyway, so would you agree that we can now see the entire, you can see the entire machinery of the Democrat slash intelligence people who run the country?
You see it, right?
And we have the ability now to call the plays before they happen.
Does anybody think there won't be a new hoax over the summer?
Of course there will.
Of course there will.
We'll talk more about how transparent the entire thing is.
It's really different this time.
And when you watch MSNBC, you can do it just for the entertainment.
We'll talk about that.
All right, Nikki Haley is out after Super Tuesday, because Trump had a good day.
I don't know what happened in Vermont, but Vermont picked Nikki Haley.
Oh well.
So David Axelrod, you know, one of the prime reframers and shapers and message people of the Democrat machine, he was talking about that, and it's kind of shocked that Republicans would pick this, pick a candidate who is involved in the insurrection.
So, I think the Democrats are pretty desperate to lock into their message that they can beat Trump.
And it looks like they're gonna go with the insurrection hoax.
That'll be their primary message.
So they, I mean, Biden did win one election, allegedly.
He won one election with a hoax.
The fine people hoax.
So why not do it again?
It worked.
It might work again.
How many of you heard the news that the winner of the American Samoa Democratic Caucus... I don't think I could find American Samoa on a map.
Could you?
I don't even know what ocean it's in.
Where the hell is American Samoa?
Pacific?
I want to guess Pacific, but near Bora Bora.
Why is there an American Samoa?
I don't even know why we have it.
Anyway, somebody named Jason Palmer won the Democratic caucus there.
Now, I guess that's some venture capitalist money guy.
And he's been running for president.
You never heard of him because he got dozens of votes in a few states.
But he actually conquered American Samoa.
And I'd love to know his real story.
I'd love to know if it's just a practical joke.
Because I don't think he planned on winning.
So why was he doing it?
And it makes me think, I kind of want to see if I can win American Samoa next time.
Who wants me to do that?
I mean, I don't know if it's a nice place to visit, but if it is, I think I could spend two weeks there and take the whole place.
I think there were only like 100 votes.
The entire caucus was like 100 votes.
I could visit all of them.
I could have a party.
Say, hey, everybody.
So maybe I'll win that next cycle.
Well, as you know, studies say that liberal women have the most mental illness.
Did you know that?
Liberal women have the highest rate of mental illness.
I wonder what their favorite sources of news are.
I believe it would be TikTok and MSNBC.
And also they have the highest level of mental illness.
Well, that's probably a total coincidence.
Speaking of batshit crazy MSNBC, now, I say this not just as a joke, even though it's funny.
After the Super Tuesday win of Trump, how many of you said, oh, I gotta see what MSNBC is doing?
I'm not the only one, right?
You had to see their meltdown?
Oh my god, it was funny.
Watching Joy Reid, Meltdown, and Racial Mad Now, it was just crazy.
You should see the body language.
There were at least three women whose bodies contorted into witch-like creatures as they talked.
Did you watch it?
Here would be a normal person talking.
Well, we're very unhappy because we wish somebody else had done better in the primary, but Donald Trump had an unusually good day.
So that would be one way to cover it.
Here's how the three golems covered it.
Well, Trump, who's really responsible for...
And then there were words as well. - Uh.
But mostly, you could watch the show with the sound turned off, and just watch them be in full cognitive stress.
So whatever world they've created for themselves, And then inserted themselves into that hellscape.
It must be pretty bad in there.
Their bodies are actually tortured by whatever's going on in their heads.
Now I'd also like to make a wardrobe suggestion for Rachel Maddow.
I don't usually make wardrobe recommendations.
But I don't know if you noticed she was wearing a plunging neckline.
And she also has a long, very nice neck.
She actually has very nice features.
But the head to neck to chest created a disturbing amount of nudity for a news show.
Did anybody else have that impression?
It's like, wow, I'm just trying to watch you talk about the news, but I see way too much of your body.
Nobody had that?
Now, this has nothing to do with their gender preference or anything like that, in case you're wondering.
No, it's just purely a fashion thing.
It was really... ugh!
There was just something gross about it.
There was just too much skin.
And by the way, to be fair, if any man had been reading the news showing that much of the man's body, I'd be... same reaction.
So it has nothing to do with their gender preference or anything like that.
Just way too much skin.
Anyway, Trump heir Joy Reid was the funniest one.
Just total meltdown.
And she had some just so batshit crazy stuff.
She went on a complete meltdown about how Trump only had one crisis to deal with in his presidency.
Just one.
He just had one crisis.
Just one.
COVID.
Just one.
He only had one thing to deal with and he bollocksed it up.
Now, is that the way you handle the biggest pandemic of our lifetime?
It's just that one thing?
He only had one thing to do and he got it wrong?
I really feel... Come on.
I'm seeing a very... You guys are bastards.
I'm just watching a very funny meme on the locals' comments because they can put photos in their comments.
I wish I could share it with you, but it's cruel.
I couldn't possibly do it.
Anyway, yeah, imagine treating COVID like it was like a normal thing.
And then they try to deal with discussing the economy.
Which none of them understand.
And trying to make it sound like the pandemic was somehow not an important part of the Trump economic story.
I mean, the whole thing is just crazy and stupid.
And it just gets worse and worse.
And don't know how to compare anything.
I'll give you some examples in a minute.
So, you know, there are pundits who are saying that the economy is great.
So the economy is great.
And why don't people understand?
That, you know, jobs are good, the stock market's up, inflation rate has come down.
You know, we all understand that the pandemic was part of that as well.
And it basically looks like everything's good.
And the MSNBC people were trying to understand that.
Like, why aren't people understanding?
That if they're paying more... See, we don't understand.
People are paying way more for food and way more for gas, but why don't they understand that the numbers that we're giving them show that it's not happening?
Like, why don't they understand that?
And they act confused that people don't understand that when they're paying more for gas and food, That they should be more influenced not by what they're actually paying, and how they know it's way more than it used to be, but that there's a statistic showing that if you pick the right starting point, and you look at rate instead of amount, technically, it's really good.
That was her argument.
Okay.
But here are the good things that Biden has done.
I asked this question before, so I got an answer.
Here are the good things that he did that were listed as positives, things that really made a difference.
There's the infrastructure bill, which, I don't know, are any of you making a little more money because of the infrastructure bill?
I've been waiting for the indication that that's making a difference.
I'm not aware of anything that anybody's building anywhere.
But OK, at least it was a bill that got passed.
I'll give them that.
I mean, we probably needed the infrastructure.
Then apparently Joe Biden negotiated lower pharmaceutical costs.
Lower pharmaceutical costs.
Have any of you seen Lower Pharmaceutical Costs?
Has anybody seen that?
I didn't even know that happened.
What exactly is this story about lower pharmaceutical costs?
I have no idea that any of that happened.
Or that I'm paying less?
Am I?
Is there something that will happen in the future?
What kind of meds is he talking about?
And wasn't Trump going to do the same thing?
So we don't know much about that.
Then apparently Biden tried to lower credit card fees.
Did that happen in the real world?
Did anybody's credit card fees go down?
I mean, I haven't noticed.
But then they didn't mention, but they could have, just think about this.
Even the pundits didn't mention Shrinkflation.
Even his biggest supporters weren't willing to get on the bandwagon with, you don't have enough snacks.
They're staying away from that, which is hilarious, because it's like his main theme at the moment.
It's the only thing he can talk about and remember is what he was going to say.
So, here's what I say.
So the MSNBC take is that the economy is basically good everywhere, but one of the pundits did say, you know, there's some inflation and there's some debt.
Now, here's what that sounds like to me.
If your take on the economy is that everything looks good except the impossible-to-ever-pay-back debt, That's not an economic opinion.
Now that's a confession that you should never talk about the economy in public.
Do you know what it sounds like if you say, all the numbers are good, the GDP is good, jobs are good.
The only problem is $35 trillion that we can't pay back.
That's the only problem.
Do you know what that sounds like?
OJ Simpson only had one bad day.
That's what that sounds like.
Do you know what that sounds like?
Lahaina in Maui is great, except for no buildings.
They're all ashes.
But otherwise, excellent.
It's a really good vacation destination if you like ashes.
That's what that sounds like.
Here's what they don't seem to understand.
Do you know what helps the GDP?
Borrowing too much money.
Do you know what helps your employment?
Borrowing too much money.
The things that look good are because we borrowed too much money.
And then we're doing better than all the other countries, which apparently seems to be true if you ignore $35 trillion in debt.
So if you don't know that all of the other numbers are looking good because you did this one catastrophic thing that will kill us all, I don't know if it will, but it looks bad.
I suspect we'll figure a way out, but I don't know what that will be.
Something about digital money?
Something about inflating it away?
Now, I did hear one opinion that I've been thinking about for a while.
A way to understand the national debt.
You all know the national debt is not like a mortgage, right?
It's not like a regular debt.
And somebody pointed out, and I've been just mulling this because I don't think it's completely right, but it might be partly right.
And it's that the debt pays for itself as soon as it's issued.
Meaning that all we did is reduce the amount, the value of the money that was already out there by $35 trillion.
Does that make sense?
Economically?
That the debt is paid for upon issuance by making all of our other money worth less.
So it's the value that was in all the other money that was already out there that is sort of taken up and absorbed by the debt.
I don't know if that quite handles the whole situation, but it's different than mortgage, right?
If you get a mortgage, you owe the money.
But if they inflate everything else away, you know, they can inflate it away.
They can make it go away if they want, in a very bad way.
It's essentially just a tax that looks like inflation.
All right, here's a dog down barking.
Is it my imagination or has the Trump campaign been flawless?
Have I missed anything?
I think the Trump campaign has been maybe one of the best I've ever seen.
And it's just so quietly perfect that you don't notice how good it is.
Have you noticed that his discipline, his message discipline, is unprecedented?
Trump's message discipline, which was really the thing, the one thing that would guarantee a victory, just message discipline, he hasn't.
Now, I don't know why.
It could be that he just competes to win, and he knows he has to do it, so he's just doing it.
It could be just that.
Could be that he has better advisors.
All indications are that he's getting better advice.
Vivek would be at the top of the list.
But lots of other, you know, I'm sure plenty of other good advice.
But you have to give him credit for taking good advice.
Right?
You don't give the credit to the advisors.
That's not how anything works.
The boss still has to decide whose advice to take, has to decide who's going to be giving the advice.
So the boss always gets the credit, even if the advice is good.
That's just the way it has to work.
So yeah, to me it looks like he's handling 91 indictments at the same time he's running one of the best political campaigns I've ever seen.
And it reminded me of Ginger Rogers, the dance partner for Fred Astaire, who famously said, you know, Fred Astaire got all the attention for being the great dancer, but his dance partner, who danced with him, had to dance backwards and in high heels.
So that's sort of the old joke.
She did the same moves but backwards in high heels.
And it feels like that's what Trump's doing.
He's doing the best campaign at the same time he's handling all the lawfare.
91 indictments.
So somehow he's made the indictments just part of his campaign.
It's weird because I think the campaign is paying his legal bills.
Is that true?
The campaign is paying the legal bills.
Do we have a confirmation on that?
I don't know if that's completely true or even legal or what.
I think it is, but to me that's a good expense.
That's a campaign expense.
Because he's made the legal battle a key part of the messaging.
Yeah, I think the campaign should absolutely pay for it.
I think it's legal.
How many of you have ever done this?
Do any of you write Trump fan fiction in your head?
Am I the only one?
Where I imagine something that only he could do, that there's no other politician you'd even consider.
But I have a fan fiction in my head that he's never gonna do, but he's the only person who ever could.
And that's what makes it fun.
I want you to imagine the scene, and again, I'm not recommending it.
I'm not predicting it.
I'm not recommending it.
Just for fun.
This is literally Trump fan fiction.
It's an inner city.
Limousines pull up unexpectedly.
Press doesn't expect it.
Nobody expects it at the destination.
The destination is a black barber shop.
Maybe not even in the safest part of town.
But he's got plenty of Secret Service.
Trump gets out of his limo and the only press that's there is no press.
The only people there are campaign staff and citizens who have their own phones.
It's not planned.
He just gets out of the car and walks into a black barbershop.
Everything stops because everybody recognizes him and of course the secret service are there and everything stops and People start taking out their phones and you know that his own campaign they'd have their phones out too And then he says he wants a haircut And then he waits his turn He just waits his turn Like let's say there's three people in front of him So he just sits down, just waits his turn.
And then he gets in a conversation, because you know a conversation would start.
And then he gets in the chair, and people are talking to him and asking him questions, and he's using his famous Trump charisma.
How do you think they would treat him?
Even if they were totally anti-Trump, if he walks in your door, in your barbershop, And says to you, I'm not allowing the press in here, but you're welcome to use your own phones if you want to take some photos.
Everybody pulls out their phone.
Suddenly, Trump made every single person who just happened to be in the barbershop, by chance, he turned every one of them into a social media star.
They all have phones.
They all pulled them out.
Everyone who posts that video online is going to get 10 million views.
Every one of them.
Every person there is going to get 10 million views on their social media for free.
It's just a gift.
So then he gets in the chair.
Here's the good part.
He says, give me the Charles Barkley.
Right?
Shave it all off.
Imagine, if you will, watching, you know, 20 different video, home video cameras of Trump sitting in the chair, answering questions, like in his usual funny charismatic way, while they shaved his head.
Just imagine.
While they shaved his head.
Then he walks out looking like Danny Warbucks, and he wins the black vote.
Now you're going to say to me, Scott, how racist that you would dismiss the entire black voting bloc Like they're gonna vote for him because of sneakers, or they're gonna vote for him because he has some legal risk, or they're gonna vote for him just because he got a haircut at a black barbershop.
No, I'm not saying that.
I'm saying that would be a show of respect.
That's it.
That's the winning play.
A show of respect.
But it would be genuine.
I mean, obviously it would be a blatant political prank.
But if you actually sat there and got your head shaved, that is a show of humility.
It's a show of respect.
It's a show of trust.
You know, even with the Secret Service there, there's some trust.
Because unless they're doing a full body cavity search of everybody who was there, there's some trust.
Right?
Even with the people with guns standing nearby, there's still some trust involved.
Now, again, I'm not recommending it.
He's not going to do that.
His hair is iconic, and I'm sure he'll keep it.
But am I right that it's just great fan fiction?
Did you enjoy it just as an imaginary story?
I don't know.
For some reason, he's the only politician I've ever written fan fiction for in my head, just because he could pull it off.
Anyway, China's gross domestic product may have been overstated according to the Wall Street Journal.
Wow.
China's GDP is overstated.
You know, I'm starting to think we can't trust their data.
I don't know.
Keep an eye on this.
But starting to get just that hint, you know, a little whiff of maybe their economic data is not as credible as I used to think it was.
Well, it's a good thing that in America, we don't have that problem.
We don't have the problem of just making up data and trying to sell it to the world, huh?
Thank goodness you live in America.
Paul Krugman is a famous economist.
He's showing there's a great drop in violent crime.
And he makes a good point, he says, on X platform.
He says, Trump seems to be doubling down on the, quote, scary brown people that are terrorizing our cities.
Meanwhile, here's what the FBI says.
It's 2023 numbers and the third quarter.
And it said that the violent crime is way down.
So third quarter of 2023, violent crime, way down.
Is he right?
Is he right?
Is there anything missing from the story?
What's missing?
How about the reason?
What's the reason?
He left out the reason.
Feels like that's the most important part.
A sudden and unexpected drop in violent crime.
Why?
Well, I've got some theories.
I think the violent crime went down because there are fewer police officers.
No, probably not that.
No, it's because there are more migrants.
No, that doesn't make sense.
Unless they're actually preventing other people from doing crimes.
No, that doesn't make sense.
So, is it... What is it?
Does anybody have an idea?
Is it that the fentanyl killed so many people that there's nobody left to kill anybody?
Is it that maybe our crime data is no better than China's GDP data?
Is it possible that the data is bullshit?
Is it possible that... Now, remember, you have to make a distinction between violent crime Violent crime?
We agree on that?
that they're not prosecuting.
I don't think they're not prosecuting, or at least arresting, violent crime.
We agree on that?
The people who are just not getting arrested are the thieves for the most part.
And that wouldn't show up.
And by the way, if 50 people rob a Target store, so badly that Target closes all their stores, one crime.
That's just one crime.
So some of it's probably in the data, but that's not what's happening for the violent crime.
As far as I know, if you report the crime, it shows up as a statistic.
It doesn't have to be solved, and it doesn't matter what happens to the perpetrator, whether they go free or not.
It's still a crime, right?
So, isn't this one of the biggest mysteries in the country?
Can you give me any reason that there would be a sudden drop in violent crime?
It's not just because the pandemic's over, is it?
Or is it?
Maybe it is.
All right.
So Biden did his dementia anger thing when asked about the polls, and he said, my poll numbers, the last five polls, you guys don't report.
I'm winning five, five in a row.
Just imagine that was like dementia anger.
Now, Where's Daniel Dale, the fact-checker?
Did the fact-checkers fact-check that?
And here's the other thing I wonder.
Is it possible he doesn't know he's behind in the polls?
He might not know.
Because he only knows what people tell him.
I doubt he's doing a lot of reading.
Okay, I'm seeing the comments.
Soros DAs are dismissing more crimes.
That has nothing to do with violent crimes.
I'm sure they're not dismissing violent crimes.
Now, I'll take a fact check on that.
If you say they are, I'll be amazed.
But dismissing?
They might be lowering what it is, but I don't think they're dismissing.
All right, so I'm seeing people saying that, yes, they're dismissing violent crime.
Dismissing.
Not just downrating it, or letting people out on bail, but dismissing.
All right, I'm gonna call bullshit on that.
I'm seeing a stream of people who believe that that's happening.
But I'll take a fact check.
So I'm open to you being right.
I'm not going to fight you if you've got a source.
But I think you're probably conflating the violent crime and the non-violent crime.
Give me a fact check on that.
But don't send me more data about non-violent crimes and say that you made your case, because I know that's happening.
So there's some difference of opinion on whether the Soros DAs are letting violent crimes be just not counted as crimes.
I say that's not really happening in the real world, but many of you, a lot of people, are saying, oh, absolutely, that's happening.
So I'll take a fact check.
This is why I love doing this live.
Isn't this so much better than if I just said that and then you watch the show and you're like, oh, he got that wrong and nobody fact-checked him?
So I don't know who's right, but just note there's a disagreement on that fact.
All right.
Tonight, apparently, Biden will be doing his hate of the union message.
I call it the hate of the Union because now the bad guys have signaled what they're going to do.
They're going to use the following words.
Chaos, extreme, darkness, existential Trump threat, and dictator.
And also end of democracy.
So those are the brainwashing words.
Chaos, extreme darkness, existential threat, Trump dictator, etc.
Or, as Hakeem Jeffries, House Minority Leader, said, that the do-nothing Republicans like their chaos and dysfunction and extremism.
Chaos and dysfunction and extremism.
Chaos.
Dysfunction.
Extremism.
Oh my!
Chaos.
Dysfunction.
Extremism.
Oh my!
Chaos.
Dysfunction.
Extremism.
Oh my!
Wizard of Oz.
Dorothy.
So I say it's time to turn on the mockery cannons and embrace all of these ridiculous brainwashing intelligence agency words.
And just do the Dorothy thing every time you see him.
Chaos.
Dysfunction.
Extremism.
Oh my.
Hey, is Trump under your bed with his chaos and extremism?
MAGA.
Extreme MAGAs.
Gonna getcha.
Well, I think it's funny.
All right, so let's see.
Some of the extremism that the Democrats are talking about is, this is pretty extreme.
There are Republicans who think you shouldn't kill your baby if it's nine months in the womb already.
They think you shouldn't transition your kid to another gender.
Maybe they think you shouldn't be spending so much in Ukraine.
It depends which Republicans you're talking to.
But it really sort of opens the question of what extreme means.
Would extreme be opening the border to 10 million strangers?
To me, that sounds a little bit extreme.
So anyway, we can see their whole play now, and it's pretty obvious.
You should also know that any news story you see from now until Election Day is probably a presidential news story in disguise.
Let's see if you recognize these.
These are presidential stories that don't look like it.
So NBC News, I think it was NBC, maybe it was somebody else, Had a report that electric cars are worse for the environment than regular cars.
Now, do you think if it were not a race between Biden and Trump, and if Elon Musk were not one of the most important voices in politics at the moment, do you think a major news entity, which always leans left and they like their green stuff, do you think that they would be ragging on electric cars?
Do you think that would happen in a non-election year in which Musk was not a player?
I don't think so.
I think they would have spiked that story, and they'd say, no, no, we like electric cars because we've got to save the climate.
But in an election year, oh, fuck those electric cars, am I right?
Now, to me, that looks purely like an attack on Musk, because you can see that it's an all... Biden likes to talk about this all-government approach.
Well, there looks to be an all-government approach to attack Elon Musk, because he's attacked, you know, legally, politically, in the news.
And these are all entities that the Democrats control directly or indirectly.
So you should see that as a political story in a political year.
NBC BLK.
What the heck is NBC BLK?
Because the story is about black Americans.
Is there such a thing as a black NBC?
Or does BLK stand for something that is obvious and I don't know what it is?
Anyway, somebody named NBC BLK reported that in the U.S., black women are six times more likely to be killed than their white counterpoints.
Now, that sounds like a story of somebody who wants to drum up some racial animosity during an election year.
Now, is there anything left out of that story?
Is there anything you'd like to know about the fact that black women are tragically six times more likely to be killed than their white counterpoints?
Well, Endwokeness, once again for the win, the Endwokeness account, fills in the context for us.
93% of those black women are killed by black men.
Now, some might suggest that black women should try to get away from the black men, but that's pretty hard to do.
And some might say that this is purely a political story and you never would have seen it except that it's a political season.
Maybe.
Don't know.
I saw even on CNN, Jake Tapper was making sure that people understood that Trump was getting a lot more of the black male vote.
The black male vote.
So, do you think that's happening?
Because now it's even a thing.
So, the fact that CNN and Jake Tapper would inject it into a conversation where he didn't need to.
So actually, that's the part that caught my attention.
He didn't need to inject it.
It mattered.
But he wanted to make sure that his viewers knew that black men, not women, but black men seemed to be moving more toward Trump than people expected.
Now, I feel that that puts it into the narrative.
Because the Republicans and Fox News can say it all day long and nobody hears it on the other side.
But if CNN says it, it starts to become a narrative.
And what happens if the narrative reaches black men?
What if black men start hearing that other black men are becoming more pro-Trump?
Would that have an effect?
It should.
Because we're all herd instinct animals, so you like your social proofs, you like other people like you to be doing things, and you're likely to copy them.
Anyway.
So I think that's really happening.
We'll see how much.
There is a new bipartisan bill to ban TikTok in Congress.
I think it'll fail, but I think it will tell us everything we need to know about who's in charge and what the priorities are.
So I think that it will fail because either there are people who want to use it for politics, there'll be some people like that, but I think it's going to just show us who's running the country.
I think that the reason for TikTok is that maybe our own intelligence people are already in it, as well as China.
It could be that our intelligence services use it just like they would use other platforms to influence America somehow.
So it could be that China isn't the only one using TikTok to influence Americans.
It could be our own intelligence service using all of the platforms the same way.
Now, how could they influence that?
Well, simply by having super users.
You know, if they had users who were getting big accounts sort of miraculously.
And I'm sure they could artificially make an account bigger if they wanted to.
So, I think that we're going to learn From who says no.
I wouldn't pay attention to, let's say, a Thomas Massey or a Rand Paul wanting to keep, or at least not wanting to ban it, because they're the freedom absolutists.
So the absolutists are just, don't ban things, let the market work it out.
And I can respect that point of view.
I don't mind that that exists.
But for the rest of the people, you might find out more than you thought you were gonna find out.
Alright, apparently Canada has made, I'm a little unclear on the timing, has made or is about to make thought crimes a crime, so that if you suspected somebody might say something bad about you that would be a hate crime in your opinion, they can go to jail for life.
For life.
For life.
Not for saying something, but for being accused of maybe going to say something in the future that somebody would interpret as a hate crime.
That's actually real.
You can actually see the language in the bill.
It doesn't have to be an actual crime that happened.
They can lock you up for life under the suspicion that you might say something in the future.
No, I'm not kidding.
I swear to God, I'm not kidding.
It actually says that in direct words that you can't misinterpret.
It's very clear.
It's not even legalese.
Just direct words.
Pre-crime.
Yeah.
So, yeah.
Wow.
So B.J.
Dichter.
I hope I pronounced his last name right.
D-I-C-H-T-E-R.
Is it Dichter?
Does anybody know the proper pronunciation?
Dichter or Dichter?
Dichter?
Maybe?
If it were my name, I'd probably say Dichter.
But I don't know.
Anyway, you remember him from the Canadian truckers protest.
So he's talking to us about this.
All right.
Musk is worried about maybe another 9-11, a terrorist attack.
And he's quite concerned about the fact that the Biden administration apparently flew in over 300,000 people.
Some say it's so they didn't show up in the statistics.
So I think it's very obvious now, as Musk points out, that the administration is not trying to stop people.
They're trying to bring them in as many as they can.
And it looks like for the purpose of converting them into voters, So they can control the country.
So, Musk, you know, is worried that with that many people coming in without enough regulate, you know, enough checking, I guess, some could be terrorists and we're probably in for some kind of a terrorist attack.
Now, I'm going to disagree.
I don't like to disagree with Elon Musk.
Usually I agree.
But I think he's totally wrong here.
I wouldn't worry if I were you.
I would not worry about a 9-11 attack.
Unless some other things happen that would indicate it's likely, right?
For example, I wouldn't worry about a 9-11 attack unless Trump had a commanding lead in the polls.
Or unless, and probably it'd have to happen at the same time.
I mean, this would really scare me.
Imagine if Victoria Nuland, our most famous country overthrower, the coup plotter who was in Ukraine, unless she decided to come back to America and work on the Biden campaign, I wouldn't worry at all about any kind of Oh, she is.
She is.
Oh, she is coming back to America.
The most famous coup plotter is coming back to America to work on Biden's campaign?
Huh.
At the same time that Trump has a commanding lead in the polls?
Almost suggesting that the only way that Biden could win would be some kind of combination of dirty tricks like we play on 80 other countries so far, including Ukraine.
So Victoria Nuland's coming back at exactly the same time.
As Trump has commanding lead, and there seems like no other way Biden could win unless there was some kind of coup or something.
But I wouldn't worry about that.
So you don't have to worry about, you know, I'm just exaggerating, obviously.
You don't have to worry about a coup.
You don't have to worry about a 9-11 type attack.
Unless, if you started hearing that the Biden campaign was saying that Trump was, for example, an existential threat to democracy.
If you heard that, at the same time Trump had a commanding lead, at the same time Victoria Nuland, the greatest coup person, was brought to work on the Biden campaign, well those signals would pretty much guarantee you'd see a terrorist attack.
So, anyway.
Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey, ex-baseball player, Republican, voted for Trump twice.
They're the top two vote-getters yesterday, which means they have a runoff.
Now, the news is so broken.
Let me see if I have this right.
So there were several people in the primary.
The Democrat votes were split between Schiff and a couple other strong candidates.
Under the condition that Schiff was getting not the full set of Democrat votes, he still beat Garvey by only a little bit.
Statistical tie, basically.
Why isn't your news telling you that Garvey has no chance whatsoever in the general?
I feel like that's the obvious thing to say, because the nature of the strange way that California does the things where the last two people always do a runoff, it guarantees that the Republican loses, doesn't it?
So it guarantees that the lone Republican should look good, In the primary, because there's nobody else running, but also should lose like a dog when all the Democrats turn out to vote.
So, am I missing something?
Or does Steve Garvey really have no chance whatsoever?
He has no chance, right?
And the news just sort of doesn't act as if that's a thing.
They're acting like it's a contest or something.
I don't think it is.
Anyway.
So we'll see.
If I were Garvey, this is what I would do.
I would go after Schiff for his hoaxes.
And even in losing, I would do his service for the country by making sure that the news had to cover me talking about all of his hoaxes.
The Schiff hoaxes.
Now that would be losing in style.
And I don't know much about Steve Garvey, but he looks like a classy guy.
Who knows how to play a game, right?
Professional athlete, he knows how to play a game.
And I would guess that he would find some, let's say, satisfaction in helping the narrative along that's bad for Schiff, because I don't think he wants to be a senator as much as he wants... I'm just guessing.
I can't read his mind.
I don't think Steve Garvey wants to be a senator at his current age nearly as much as he doesn't want Schiff to be the senator.
So he can at least damage Schiff, you know, in losing, if that's what happens.
And he could win if he does a good enough job at the hoax debunking.
Facebook had a big technical outage and all of its other products like WhatsApp and Instagram.
Nobody knows exactly why.
Do they?
Does anybody know?
We don't know why, right?
But it's kind of scary if any major system goes down.
All right, speaking of Thomas Massey, he's one of those people who actually reads these omnibus bills, this legislation that's so complicated and a million things are in it.
And he said that the lobbyists hid this in it.
$15 million for electronic tracking of cattle in the U.S.
Somehow the lobbyists got $15 million to track our cattle.
Now, there's probably some practical reason to do that, but as Massey points out, there's no law that authorizes you having to track your cattle.
Are they trying to make a law just by funding it?
And then it somehow becomes a law because there's money for it or something?
So, I don't know exactly if this is a bad idea, but I know that the people voting for it won't know.
The people voting for it won't know it's there.
And if they knew it was there, they'd be like me.
They'd be like, I don't even know if that's a good idea or a bad idea.
But it does seem like, according to Massey, it'll be used by the Green Agenda to limit beef production.
Which it could.
Because it would tell you, where's the beef?
Ah, where's the beef?
beef.
Ah, where's the beef?
Literally, where's the beef?
It's literally, where's the beef?
That's funny.
Anyway, so he thinks it's a play to dominate the small ranchers, and it may in fact be that.
Let's talk about Rasmussen poll and people asked if they think that Biden took any money from foreign companies or foreign entities.
57% of likely U.S.
voters do think it's likely that Biden personally profited from deals from Chinese companies.
And 42% think it's very likely.
Now, you wouldn't be surprised that that is dominated by Republicans who think that.
But let's see.
But 21% of the voters say it's not at all likely.
1% of the voters say it's not at all likely.
They couldn't even get 25% to say it's not at all likely.
25%, as I remind you, every poll, at least 25% get the wrong answer.
Well, why am I saying it's a wrong answer?
How do I know if Biden took money from China?
Well, I don't know, but there is a deposition in a congressional impeachment inquiry that says that Biden got $40,000 from CEFC, Chinese energy company.
So we do have some depositions I guess that means under oath So there's evidence under oath that he took money.
I Think everybody who's really paying attention knows he took money from foreign countries Anyway I live in an area which I would call very non-political and I don't think Black Lives Matter ever marched in my town.
Or if they did, I didn't notice.
And you don't see a ton of political signs.
I don't see any Biden or Trump signs.
Don't see any Trump hats.
You know, we're generally considered, you know, part of the blue California.
But in person, it's not nearly as blue as people think.
I can tell you with personal experience, That at least where I live, people are not super political, but they're also not super progressive in the way that, you know, you think other Californians are.
So, it is notable when there's exactly one issue in which my region is very politically active.
Every time I go to the grocery store, there's a petition to recall the Soros prosecutor in my area.
Her name is Pam Price, and she's the Alameda County Prosecutor, so that includes me.
That includes me.
And she's got a million dollars for Soros, and there's 123,000 signatures to recall her.
So to recall her.
and 23,000 signatures to recall her.
So to recall her, I signed it.
So, and the recall is because she's jeopardizing the safety of every resident.
So that's sort of a big deal.
Just think about it.
I think of all the things that have happened in the last several years and my town Didn't give a flying fuck about any of it.
I mean at least in terms of being politically active on the streets except for this This is what my town decided was too far.
Soros buying prosecutors to destroy our way of life.
That was too far.
So, looks like Alameda's gonna fight back.
So we'll see.
All right, big win for Corey DeAngelis, who you might know has been tirelessly fighting the fight for school choice.
And apparently he backed a number of candidates in the primary, and they all did well.
They just all dominated the competition.
So the suggestion is that candidates, at least in Texas, who are pro-choice for school, Do really well.
So that might be the beginning of something big.
You might know that Musk is suing OpenAI, saying that when he originally funded it, he thought it would be a public, open thing, and then it turned into a for-profit thing.
Well, OpenAI has responded, and they make a pretty good argument.
So we'll see how this goes.
So their response is, and they show some emails, I guess, In which the internal conversation before OpenAI got started was that everybody agreed it would need billions of dollars really quick because the computing requirement would be so massive, you know, you can't just, you can't creep into it.
You can't get a little angel investment of $100,000 and see what you can do and then build it from there.
You have to do the whole thing.
Like you got to build a data center or don't bother.
So you're talking billions fast.
And apparently the people having that conversation were aware that private industry is the only place you can get billions of dollars fast.
Now, I do think there's enough wiggle room in the emails back and forth, including Musk's comments, that it doesn't say they all knew it, that it had to be private.
There's a little ambiguity there, so it's going to be fun to see how they suss out who knew what, who thought what, and who wanted what.
We'll watch that.
Meanwhile, the New York Post is reporting that some humpback whales are gay, and the boys will start humping each other.
And they showed a picture of a whale.
It looked like it was on top of another whale humping it.
They're literally called humpback whales.
And it's a story about one of the whales humping the back of another whale.
Now, I don't know.
This feels a little too simulation-y to me.
And then somebody else said, they're not gay.
There's just, you know, one is just abusing the other with his penis.
Well, That's a fine distinction.
But I know that you're expecting I might say something about a whale's blowhole.
But no.
No, I'm going to show you the kind of restraint that you don't usually associate with me.
Not only am I not going to say anything about the whale's blowhole, but I'm going to let you do it.
Well, I have a delicious sip of my coffee.
So if you don't mind, 15 seconds in the comments, go wild, make your own gay whale blowhole jokes, while I casually sip my coffee and watch your work.
Okay, good.
Good first entries.
You're doing well.
Good.
Good.
All right.
Good.
Good.
You're doing great.
Keep it up.
You got five seconds left.
Come on, bring the gold.
Well, I can't quit you.
I can't quit you.
That's pretty good.
All right.
Good.
I think you all did a really good job.
All right, then Rasmussen also reports on next that regarding the 2020 election in Georgia, apparently a court in Georgia.
No, it's a court testimony.
So they have court testimony.
That means it's a sworn affidavit that there was no signature verification done for 148,000 mail-in ballots.
Now, if I understand the story, it's not that there was just a witness.
I think it's somebody who was involved with the actual process, like somebody who did the work.
Not somebody who stood there and said, I think I saw something.
No, it was somebody who did the work.
So there's no question of whether they knew that they didn't do it.
They're saying on the affidavit, we didn't do a signature match.
Now, It's 2024, and we've been hearing for the entire time that our elections are real secure.
But they didn't tell us that in a swing state with a very close count, that there were 148,000 votes in which they didn't do a signature verification.
Now, does that mean that the election was rigged?
No.
But it does mean that everything you've been told about how secure the system is was always a lie.
It was always a lie.
Of course it was.
So keep an eye on that, is what I like to say.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes my amazing, amazing live stream.
Is there any stories I missed that I really should have?
Really should have?
McConnell endorsed Trump.
Did that just happen?
I guess that makes sense.
Yeah, there are lots of other Georgia accusations.
Oh, Musk said he's not donating to either candidate.
There was a story that Musk might have met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago.
Now, I don't know if that happened, but it would be a mistake for Musk to donate to either candidate.
Yeah.
But we do think they might have met.
Now that would have been an interesting meeting.
Yeah, so Elon did meet Trump, apparently.
People are saying that's confirmed.
You say you bet Elon by his truth social.
I'll bet he doesn't.
I'll take that bet.
I'll bet he doesn't.
Can you reject an endorsement?
I guess you can.
All right.
Okay, I think we covered everything.
Thanks for joining on the X-Platform and on.
Rumble and YouTube.
If you're listening to this on Spotify, I might have to pull it off of Spotify because I've been demonetized, but it might be my fault.
There's a user interface mystery that was injected into the system.
I just know I'm not monetized.
I don't know if it's my fault or not.
So either way, whether it's my fault or somebody else's, if I can't get it monetized, I'm going to pull it off of Spotify.
But you can find it on X or YouTube or Rumble or Locals.
Bye for now.
Export Selection