My book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Zelensky Popularity Poll, Robber Baron Theory, Biden's Demon Face, Biden's Empty Vessel Face, Jaime Raskin, Justice Alito, Charlamagne Tha God, Open Border Migration Policy, CNN Harry Enten, Dwindling Male Democrat Voters, President Trump, Anti-Trump Lawfare, Greg Gutfeld, Mock & Meme Strategy, America First Legal, Trump Trial Jurors, 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
But for now, I'm hoping most of you are here for the simultaneous zip.
Oh, there we go.
Video everywhere.
Do do do do do.
Welcome to Coffee with Scott Adams, the highlight of human civilization.
Aren't you happy you're here?
It's going to be fun today.
The news is really serving up delights, and I'm gonna give every one of them to you, because you deserve it.
And if you'd like to take your experience up to levels that nobody can understand with their smooth, tiny human brains, all you need is a copper mug or a glass of tanker chalice to stay in the canteen, jugular flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid, I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dope beat at the end of the day, the thing that Makes everything better.
It's called a simultaneous sip.
except for that one's now gone.
Ah.
Now everything's better.
I saw a video today that I'm not going to try to sell to you as based on a true thing, but there's a fascinating Let's say conspiracy theory that the Challenger shuttle explosion in 1986 was faked, and that all the astronauts are alive, and they just took new jobs with their same names and same faces.
Now, I'm going to say that that seems pretty unlikely to me, so I wouldn't ask you to believe it.
I love the fact that reality has become so unclear that this is in the mix.
I mean, it's not going to get a lot of attention, but the fact that it happened at all is just so crazy, because there's so little difference between fiction and reality now, in our constructed reality, that this got a little attention.
There's a shocking survey that nearly half of Gen Z people live double lives online, meaning that they have an online personality that is different from their regular personality.
Wouldn't that apply to everyone?
Does anybody have their same personality online as they do in person?
I don't.
Yeah, there's no way you could have the same personality online.
I feel like the online experience changes who you are.
We change our personality for every situation.
Here's me talking to a CEO.
Hey Bob, how's your investments in the market?
Here's me talking to a child.
Hey, how's it going?
Oh, that's a nice toy.
You change your personality completely.
For every situation.
Why wouldn't you change it for online?
Of course you do.
I do.
I'm a little more strident online than I am in person.
I think people expect me to be way more intense when they meet me in person.
And they think, oh, you're not really swearing and screaming nearly as much as I thought you would.
I don't really do that in person.
There's something about this experience that brings that out.
I mean, I'm not faking it.
When I do it online, you know, I get worked up.
I'm actually worked up, but it just doesn't happen in person.
All right.
The White House is doing something good, but I think it has more to do with the Department of Energy.
But on Wednesday, they're going to do a bunch of things that are sort of semi-unspecified to make it easier to build nuclear power plants in the United States.
Now, I worry that the suite of things they're allegedly doing to make it easier to build power plants might be a suite of regulations and committees that would make it much harder to build power plants.
However, at least we can see the intention is pointing in the right direction.
How many of you were with me in the early days when I was spending untold hours trying to convince people that nuclear energy is actually the green energy of the future?
And we're there now.
We're there.
There's no disagreement anywhere, really.
I think all disagreement on nuclear just went away.
And it went away because of better information.
I don't know that I've ever seen it work before.
Have you?
When was the last time there was a gigantic, incorrect idea?
In this case, the safety of nuclear and how necessary it is.
Have you ever seen something this big get changed?
I'm not taking credit for it or anything.
I'm just saying I was a small part of a very big change, and I think we should be happy about that.
Rasmussen did a poll on what people think of Zelensky.
I'll just ask you one question from this.
What percentage of the public do you think, roughly, have, quote, a very favorable impression of the Ukrainian president?
These would be likely voters, I believe.
What percent do you think have a very favorable impression of Zelensky?
Let's see how many.
Oh wow, good guesses.
You're right on.
You're so good.
You're so good.
The answer is 24, but I will accept 25.
Yeah, I will accept 25.
So good.
All right.
I have a hard time believing that we're back in that guy.
I feel like there are a lot of leaders Who are literally just on cocaine or Adderall or something.
We're just all about them, because they act so interesting when they're all hyped up.
Anyway, I won't name any names, but there might be a few other world leaders who've got a little extra in them, if you know what I mean.
A little bit extra.
All right.
The appeals court, the U.S.
appeals court, is going to hear TikTok's challenge.
They're going to challenge the ban, which is really a divestment.
If I had to guess, I feel like TikTok is going to succeed.
Meaning that they will block the ban.
Because here's what TikTok needs to do.
I hate to give them legal strategy, but I will anyway.
Here's what TikTok needs to do to not make the ban go into effect.
They have to stall until the war in Israel is over.
That's it.
Because the ban is largely driven by the fact that it was so anti-Semitic.
There was a push to ban it anyway, but it wasn't anywhere near the finish line.
It didn't look like it was going to be.
So it was the Israel situation in Gaza that caused it immediately to flip enough votes that the ban was approved by Congress and signed by the president.
But I think that one issue was so important that if they just wear it out and just let Israel do what it needs to do and get back to some kind of business as usual in a year or so, that's probably all they need.
Because the energy will go away and people will say, ah, it does seem a little more like a free speech thing.
Right?
And when you're in the war, like you're in a hot war, and TikTok's not on your side, that's the way you feel about it, then you're going to act, you know, in a war-like way.
You're going to do things you wouldn't do in a non-war situation.
So when the war is over, I'm not so sure the ban is going to pass all the legal challenges.
Yeah, I think it might.
I think TikTok might win in the long run.
All right.
So there was a Mexican mayor who got assassinated in the middle of a crowd while he was campaigning.
And you know, when you usually see the, uh, you've seen videos of other politicians being assassinated and you know how it's always, you don't really see the moment it happened.
It's usually like, Oh, there's a bustling in the crowd.
In this one, the guy is being filmed up close, and you see the gun go up to the back of his head.
And you hear the shot.
Now, the film didn't show the actual moment of the person being hit, because everything went crazy at that point.
But the fact that that could happen at all is just crazy.
Colin Rugg was reporting this on X.
And I'd like to make a comparison and a prediction.
So if you think of Mexico in 2024, you think, oh my God, the cartels are in charge, and the government's sort of a puppet, and people being murdered in the streets and all kinds of illegality.
Here's my question to you.
Does it look to you like early United States?
Because it looks that way to me.
Do you remember the robber barons?
You know, the railroad people and the bankers and everything?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the history of the early United States huge criminal enterprises that happened to also want the country to succeed?
So like the mafia cleans up its own neighborhood?
I feel like these gigantic criminal entities wanted the country to be a country so they could, you know, live in it and Do what they do.
So I have a very counterintuitive prediction about Mexico.
I think the cartels will want to transform into legitimate businesses.
I think they're going to do a Las Vegas, you know, Las Vegas started out as a, like a mafia town, but they could make more money just running a legitimate operation.
So over time it's in their interest and the interest of their offspring.
To somehow figure out how to get that dirty money into a clean enterprise and just run a successful business.
So it could get to the point where being drug mules and drug runners is really profitable, but it's not what you want to be in forever and you know your kids will someday be slayed by the competitors.
So I feel like there's a natural evolution where the criminals have to be so powerful that they're effectively the government.
And then once they become the government, it may always be a criminal enterprise, but they'll try to transform it into a less murderous one.
Because if the murder goes down, the Mexicans are going to say, I don't know, you know, the lights are on.
Somebody's building roads.
It's going to look like everything's working.
So I feel like the best case scenario is that the cartels get full control.
And then they try to transform into something legitimate, because the alternative would be the United States goes in with the army and just kills them all.
So it feels like that's the obvious way this goes, is that Mexico will maybe get worse, but then the people in power who are the criminals are going to want to launder their crime into something more legitimate.
That's the most optimistic thing you'll ever hear about Mexico.
But it might get worse first.
There's a rumor that Trump has been talking to Musk about having some role in the administration.
There's news that they may have met once at some billionaire's house.
And then the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Musk and the billionaire whose name is Nelson Peltz and Musk, they all met.
So it was Peltz's house, and allegedly Musk and Trump met there.
And here's the fun part.
We don't know what this means yet, but listen to how fun this is.
Are you ready for this?
Musk and fellow billionaire Nelson Peltz, quote, have told acquaintances they're working on a data-driven project to ensure votes are fairly counted.
And they have also, quote, briefed Trump on a plan they have developed to invest in a data-driven project to prevent voter fraud.
So, how much do you love that?
I'm trying to imagine what that would look like, because it could take lots of forms.
I'll tell you an idea I had, just in case they're still mulling over ideas.
Here's what I'd love to see.
I would love to see parallel voting systems.
Literally two legitimate voting systems.
And optionally, you wouldn't have to, you could vote in both.
You see where I'm going yet?
So optionally, you don't have to.
You can vote in one.
And maybe one is the only one that they count.
So there's one official one.
But there's also a shadow one, and you can go in there and also vote.
Now, when everything's done, they'll look at the votes of just the people who chose to vote in the shadow election, which would be counted and tabulated in an entirely different process.
Perhaps it's just an app.
It could be as simple as having an app where you go in and vote, and then as soon as you're done, or even before, you go to your app and you just vote again.
Then later they survey just the people who voted on the app and they find out if there's any huge difference in the second.
Now this doesn't quite work.
So as I'm thinking through it, it doesn't quite work.
But the general concept would be to have some way that people can check their own vote.
The ultimate responsibility is that you can check that your own vote got to the end.
But that won't, that doesn't solve the problem of the fake votes, does it?
Which is a bigger problem.
Yeah.
I think the counting the votes is less of a problem than the fact that there are extra votes that got into the system they shouldn't have.
So I'd love to know what they have in mind.
Uh, I don't have a better idea, but, uh, if the smartest person in the world who seems to be able to get things done as well, you know, Musk, if he's got an idea, I'd sure like to hear it.
There isn't much I would be more curious about than how would you do this?
Maybe some kind of blockchain situation?
I don't know.
Apparently there's a poll coming out now that says that Trump and Biden are virtually tied in Virginia.
That's a big deal apparently because Because Democrats have won Virginia since 2004 or something.
So Virginia used to be more of a toss up and at one point was a Republican state, but now it's not.
And the fact that Trump is tied with Biden in what had been a reliably blue state lately is a pretty big deal.
But here's the part that scares me the most.
All right.
The New York Times, there's this guy, Nate Cohn.
Who tells us that the race is still close?
The race is still close.
Now, if you watch Fox News and right-leaning things, and you follow right-leaning people, would you agree with that characterization?
That the election is still close?
Because if you're like me, you're fed a continuous diet of, it's not close.
Trump's way ahead.
It's not close.
But then why would You know, a prominent voice in the New York Times.
He's one of their regulars.
I mean, he works there, I think.
Why would he say the race is still close?
Is this what it looks like?
Because what it looks like is preparation to steal the election.
It looks like they need to have some record that says that somebody was saying before the election that it was close.
So then when it is close and Biden wins, they can say, well, it's not a surprise.
We told you it was close the whole time.
Doesn't it feel like an op?
I mean, I think everything's like priming in an op now.
I just don't believe anything's real.
So I'm real worried about this.
But the other possibility, which I would like to alert you to, is that you and I, because I think you're in the same boat as me in this, have been brainwashed into thinking it's not close.
What if it is close?
Because I can't tell.
I mean, I can't tell just because there's some polls.
I mean, who knows?
But it's a very interesting question that the media could be reporting that it's close at the same time other media is saying it doesn't look close anymore.
Those are two completely different worlds.
I don't know if that's just because they're reading the data differently.
Feels like it's something deeper.
Well, I think I'm the only one saying this, but I can't get past it.
There are some people in government who look like they're honest people, a few of them.
There are some people who look like they're liars, but they're perfectly in control of their faculties, and they're not crazy, they're just liars.
They're just political team players, that sort of thing.
And then there are other people who come off as demons to me.
They have faces that don't, there's just something wrong with it.
Like the, it looks like they're possessed.
And one of them is, you know, Adam Schiff, others, Jamie Raskin, and then Biden himself.
And I am so curious about what is up with Biden's two faces.
You've all noticed he has two completely different faces, right?
He has the empty vessel face that looks like Hillary Clinton looking at a balloon drop.
It's like his mouth forms an O and his eyes are wide open and it looks like there's nobody home at all.
That's the face when he's done with a speech and he's in Right.
And then there's the one he was displaying when he was giving a speech at some, I don't know, black college or something.
And he does the demon face.
I call it a demon face, but you could also call it looks exactly like your cat's asshole all puckered up.
Like his eyes are closed and he's all flinty and looking so mean the whole time.
And he can't get out of that face.
Once he gets in that face, he's stuck there.
And I swear to God, I just see a demon.
Is anybody else seeing it?
I'm not saying there's any demons.
I don't believe in demons, just to be clear.
I do not believe there are demons running free on the earth.
I'm just saying that I can't get past the fact that when I see his face, it just screams demon.
It doesn't look human.
And the same thing with Raskin and Schiff.
There's something happening there that's Not happening with the other Democrats.
You've never heard me say, oh, Hillary Clinton has a demon face.
Because she doesn't.
She just looks like an ordinary liar.
So, I don't know what's up with that.
I've been trying not to follow the stupid story about Judge Alito, Supreme Court Justice, and his upside-down flag that his wife flew at their beach house or something.
Because I thought, whatever this story is, it couldn't possibly be interesting or important.
But then it goes all the way to Jamie Raskin insisting that That Justice Alito could be forced to recuse himself from the January 6th issues.
Oh my God, they're so corrupt!
They are so, so corrupt, the Democrats, and this demon-faced Raskin guy.
The level of corruption is so obvious, it's so in your face.
Now, do I think that Alito or his wife should be flying the flag that had some political dimension to it?
Eh, I don't give a fuck.
It was his wife.
If there's one standard we should accept, it's that if your spouse does something and you're in public office, you should get a pass.
Now, people are saying, but, but, but, he had to know about it.
I don't care.
If his wife decided to do it, if his wife hung it up, it's just a married thing.
Why do we have to drag him into it at all?
Yeah, maybe he knew about it.
So?
Why does that matter?
We can't kick him out of office because his wife has an opinion.
That doesn't work.
All right.
But apparently Alito has said he is not going to recuse himself from anything, and Trump has congratulated him.
We have the intelligence, courage, and guts, and I would like to echo that and congratulate Alito for not recusing himself, because that's the last bastion of hope, the Supreme Court.
So Glenn Greenwald has this take.
He says, the now amply documented lies fed to the public about COVID have for dumb reasons turned into a liberal versus conservative culture.
Now, isn't that weird?
That we watch every little issue turn into a political issue, when I can't imagine anything that would be less political than the pandemic.
Because we got similar behavior on the left and the right.
You know, there were people on the left and the right promoting vaccines, you know, masks and stuff.
I mean, granted, the right was more loud about resisting stuff, or a lot more loud.
But I don't think they were resisting for political reasons.
Were they?
The resistors are just people who didn't trust the government, and they got this one right.
How often are you going to be right if you just guess that the government is lying this next time?
You have a pretty good track record, right?
If you just said, whatever the next thing is, I don't even know what it is, whatever the next thing is the government tells you, I predict will be a total lie.
You're going to be pretty accurate.
You look like a You know, it's a pretty good guess.
So a lot of people were just on that theme and got this one completely right.
It saved their life in some cases.
Maybe it worked the other way in some cases.
But the thing that surprised me the most about Glenn Greenwald's statement is the first part, the now amply documented lies fed to the public.
You know, you've been watching all the stuff trickle out.
You know, this email, that email, this whistleblower, that.
But by the time Glenn Greenwald, who I would trust to not make statements without what he calls ample documentation, the fact that he could just casually state that the whole thing was a fucking fraud is just mind-boggling.
And I think their biggest problem is that we're so mind-boggled By so many bad behaviors that we don't know how to deal with any of them.
There's just too much.
Like, you could spend your whole life just trying to fix this one thing, but there are 10 more, and they're all happening at the same time.
So we're just overwhelmed with details of stuff.
All right, Charlemagne, the god, has a new book out, so he's hitting the circuit.
And I gotta give him credit.
I know he's selling a book, so we're all chasing money.
But still, you have lots of flexibility within that process.
And he's going right into the belly of the beast.
He was on the Greg Guffield Show, and now he was on Fox & Friends.
And I just have to tell you what he said, so I'm just going to read it, just quote him.
So, Charlemagne the God, if you're not familiar with his name, he's a black, would you say podcaster or radio host or both?
I think both is the right answer, but prominent voice in the black community.
Anyway, he says he was mad at MSNBC for claiming he spread MAGA views.
He said, people got mad at me.
Back when I was talking about Governor Greg Abbott in DeSantis in Florida, saying, hey man, it's inhumane and cruel what they're doing to the migrants, but it's actually kind of genius, right?
Because if you're saying that you're a sanctuary city, and you're saying, welcome, welcome, we'll take them, we'll take them, okay.
So now that they sent them there, they're like, send them back.
We don't have enough room for them.
He says, what it makes is, it seems like the people is, Republicans were always right on that issue.
And the Democrats were always wrong.
And then he clarifies.
He says, I'm personally against red states sending illegals to blue states, because he thought that they needed to be deported.
So basically, it was on Trump's side on immigration that they needed to be deported, not sent to other states.
But he says, it looks like a blessing in disguise, because it woke up many liberals to just how bad the Biden administration open border policies are.
That's incredible.
That's incredible.
I'm so impressed.
You know, again, he's selling the book, but he has lots of choices about how to do it.
And I don't think he's sold a lot of books to his base by going on Fox News and saying, well, it turns out the Republicans were totally right on this immigration thing, you know, like the biggest issue in the country.
And that he was willing to go into the, you know, the, I don't want to say the enemy camp because they're not enemies at all, but he was willing to go where he knew it was the most dangerous for free speech.
Now also selling a book.
Like I say, he had options on how to do that.
He didn't have to do it this one way.
So every time this happens, I know I get in trouble.
You know, somebody is going to say, Scott, stop giving oxygen to Democrats just because they agree with this one obvious thing, to which I say, no, I'm not going to stop doing that.
I'm going to give credit to anybody who's a free speech person who's willing to look at the whole field.
That's how I'm going to play this.
If the next thing he says I don't like, I'll say, I'll tell you, I don't like it.
But this was awesome.
And this, this is what we need more of.
This is actual leadership.
I would call this, Uh, actual serious leadership.
And I've said for a long time that the black American community is lacking good leaders that leaders, but you know, if you're worshiping George Floyd and listening to the, uh, the people on MSNBC, you're not really following your best, most capable people.
You know, if you're, if you're listening to King Randall, you're doing well.
If you listen to Charlemagne on this topic, well, that's some real leadership.
All right, CNN is so close to the truth now.
Harry Enten, their pollster, he's doing a good job of just laying out the facts without the spin, but he's not quite there yet.
Listen to how close he gets.
This is CNN in general, though.
He's talking about how Trump's support among black voters doubled, up to 21%, and that it's especially a big difference for black voters under 50.
So for the black voters under 50, Trump has 27% support.
And if that held, Trump would be setting records for black support that we haven't seen since, you know, a few decades.
Two decades, I think.
Now, is that an accurate statement of what's happening?
That black support is doubling, and Trump's doing great with black support, and it's especially obvious among the young black voters.
What's missing?
There's something missing there, isn't there?
What's missing?
It's men.
It's men.
It's the men who are moving to Trump.
Do you know why they can't say that?
Do you think they don't know?
Do you think that the CNN pollster is unaware that men are making the massive move among black Americans?
Of course they know it.
What would be a reason that they wouldn't mention it?
Now, I'm not going to say that this is specifically Harry Enten's issue, because he's on a network where presumably everybody gets direction about what they can and cannot do.
Why is there nobody even on the Democrat side?
Because, you know, you've seen Carville.
You've seen people say, hey, we're losing black support.
We need to fix our messaging.
So they talk about it.
I mean, it's an open topic.
Why don't they say men?
I'll tell you why, if it's not already obvious to you.
The minute they say men, the whole Democrat Party will collapse.
As soon as that becomes a narrative, the entire Democratic Party will collapse.
It's teetering on the edge right now.
The only thing that's keeping all the men from leaving is they haven't seen enough leaders leave yet.
But they will, because everything's moving in the same direction.
And eventually it will be safe.
So the men who go first are the ones who are the bravest.
They're just like, okay, I'm done with this.
Uh, but if you support Trump, bad things will happen to you.
Yup.
Is there anything else?
So you got to get men to the point where they will take physical danger and accept it with a, with a shrug.
And I think, uh, black men in America, many of them have reached that point.
If you can't be a black man in America and support Trump, Think of the bad things that will happen to you.
Yup.
What's your point?
So, that's what's happening.
Men are done.
Men are fed up.
And men are going to destroy the Democrat Party by gutting it and leaving it.
And it will be nothing but a worn-out shell.
And there's a good chance that will happen before Election Day.
You're going to see the trickle.
Well, it's more than a trickle now.
It's more of a full stream of men leaving.
That full stream is going to break the whole dike, right?
The dike's about to break, and it's going to happen quickly.
So you've heard it said before that things go slowly until they go fast.
We're still in the slowly version, right?
But it's going to go fast, and it could happen before the election day.
I think Trump is only a few words away from bringing that to 40%.
I'll put a target on it.
If Trump says the right things, which he has not done, by the way, he has not done, and therefore we do not predict that he will, but if he says the right things, he's going to get 40% of the black vote.
He's not there yet.
He hasn't said the right things.
All right.
Even Nate Silver used to work for the New York Times.
I always assumed he leaned a little bit left.
Maybe he does.
But I love the fact that I can't tell.
Because if you were just looking at his posts, they just seem like smart opinions based on data and some conjecture.
You really can't suss out his political leanings by his posts, and I love that.
I love any public figure Who could operate in a political domain and you can't tell their party affiliation?
That's pretty, that's laudable.
Anyway, he says, I'm sorry, but I'm going to come at this one more time.
Democrats spend every available moment complaining that the media doesn't cover Trump's misdeeds enough.
And now there's an actual criminal trial and the Biden campaign is complaining that he's being covered too much.
So, apparently there are two ways to lose to Trump.
You don't cover him enough, or you cover him enough.
Two ways to lose, no way to win.
Does it remind you of the trial itself?
What happens if Trump is found completely innocent and acquitted?
His numbers will go up because it will show you that the trial was BS.
What happens if it's a hung jury?
His numbers will go up because he didn't get convicted and everybody sees it's lawfare.
What happens if he's convicted?
numbers will go up, the higher courts will overturn it.
He won't go to jail because the nature of the offense, you know, even though the highest level is bad, if you don't have a criminal record, you pretty much are going to be free.
You'll just have to report in or something.
So Trump has managed to get himself in a situation where every path has him winning.
And the Democrats created that.
He didn't create that.
There was no part of Trump who said, hey, you know what would be good for me?
If you do some stupid lawfare trials, let's do lots of them all over the country.
He didn't say that.
The Democrat plan, executed perfectly, as you see, has created the situation where Trump can win in every path.
He didn't create that.
They did.
If he had just been out there talking, who knows what would have happened?
He might have said something else they could take out of context.
But they found the only way they can guarantee his election.
Unless the election is rigged.
So Trump issued a truth today, in which he was quoting Greg Guffield.
And so, in other words, if he quoted Greg, it means he agrees with the statement.
So let me read the statement.
See if you agree too.
So this is from Greg Guffield.
Uh, no one knows what the crime is, uh, but it's the trial.
Uh, that is the crime.
What is interesting about this is it paints Trump in an incredibly appealing way.
He's up against the wall.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden needs a wall to stand up on.
And this guy, he's best when he's angry and he's focused and he's direct.
Meaning Trump.
When you compare the way he is and, uh, that kind of energy.
To what is in the White House now is persuasive.
I mean, you look at this guy and go, I get it.
That guy's pissed off and he's clear.
Meanwhile, this guy, meaning Biden, speaks in these amorphous fantasies about, quote, a threat to democracy.
And he says he can't solve anything.
Uh, he doesn't know what's going on.
And this guy is, I mean, well, he's got this guy a few times.
So when he's talking about, uh, fighting for his life, that's Trump.
And I mean, he's pretty stark choice for Americans.
All right.
So here's the part I wanted to call out.
The key part of that is saying that Biden speaks in these amorphous fantasies about a threat to democracy.
Trump spotted that and called it out.
Oh, he's so close.
He's so close.
Mock and meme.
Mock and meme.
I want to see Trump mocking the idea that he's going to steal your democracy and you'll never get to vote again.
I want to see him laughing about it in an interview or a rally.
I want him to treat it the way it should be treated as the election is over.
Because they've capitulated on policies and competence.
And what else do you want?
You want somebody who has the right policies, and they're competent, to pull it off.
Democrats have conceded policy and competence, because they don't really talk about those things anymore.
They only talk about magical things, like, what if Trump finds a magic lamp on the beach and rubs it, and the GD makes him A dictator for life!
Because unless it comes from a genie, how in the world is this one guy supposed to take over the country?
With his private army that doesn't exist?
With his base of MAGUS supporters who would have none of that?
There's no MAGUS supporters who are going to say, you know what?
Let's get rid of our constitution and try dictatorship.
The fact that they're even selling this to their own idiot base, That Republicans don't like the Constitution and what they really want is a dictator?
Have you met a fucking Republican even once in your whole life?
No Republican is going to put up with a dictator, even if it's their guy.
None!
I don't think you could find one.
If you search the whole country, find one Republican who genuinely thinks we should turn into a Trump dictatorship.
I'm pretty sure that's zero.
Right.
And yet they're selling that to their base, like it's real.
All right.
Well, at least Trump has caught the scent.
He reads the room better than anybody.
In my mind, Trump is the most natural, most gifted politician of our time.
Bill Clinton was amazing as a politician.
I think Trump's got him.
I think he's the best.
He's the, he's the goat.
All right.
Here's the Democrat imaginary issues update.
So Biden said that, that whatever gathering, I think it was a black college.
He said, was it a church or a college?
I can't remember, but it was a gathering of a black audience and Biden was talking to him and he said, they're trying to erase black history.
Who?
What?
Who's trying to erase black history?
Are you talking about DeSantis, you know, not wanting CRT in the schools or something?
This is not a real thing.
There's not a single Republican in the world who thinks it's a good idea to get rid of black history.
There might be something about emphasis and context and, you know, making sure all the bases are touched and stuff like that.
There's nobody who wants to get rid of black history.
It's not a thing.
It's totally imaginary.
So, add that imaginary thing, they're trying to erase black history to, he's stealing my democracy, and there will never be another election.
That's what Punchy DeNiro says, there'll never be another election.
Now, at the same time, Biden starts telling the audience, he says, diversity, equality, and inclusion are literally the core strengths of America.
That's why I'm proud to have the most diverse administration in history.
It starts at the top with the vice president.
I don't know how they heard that, but the way I heard it was, I'm hiring based on race.
Did you hear it differently?
I mean, to me, it looks like he was just saying I'm a giant racist and I'm going to get worse.
Because I'm hiring based on race.
And we observed that he has a very diverse group.
His campaign staff, the top two people, I believe, unless it's changed recently, the top two people would be a Hispanic woman at the top and a black man, I think, is number two.
Now, did they scour all the talent in the world and decided that those two were the ones?
Or do you think there's any possibility that his Wanting to make sure that our core strengths of diversity, equality, and inclusion drove him to favor people based on their color and gender and background.
I don't know.
But to me, it looked pretty racist.
You ready for the punchline of this all?
I saved the theme for the end.
All right.
This is kind of delicious.
You ready for this?
Turn on your pattern recognition.
Pattern recognition on.
I'm going to tie a few stories together.
You remember James Carville said that the messaging is basically stupid and whoever's running the campaign must be idiots.
I'm paraphrasing, but he basically said it as clearly as that.
Right?
So that's James Carville.
Just hold them in your mind.
I'm going to give you three names, and while I'm talking about them, I want you to hold a picture, and it's going to be like a split screen, but three.
There's going to be three people.
So I want you to imagine the three of them.
Next one is, there's a story that Democrat advisor type Doug Schoen.
So he's a white guy, if you don't know what he looks like.
He's one of me.
You know, bald white guys with glasses, I think.
You know, we all look like a thumb with glasses, but just imagine him.
And he says the White House is, quote, near total freeze out on outside advice, outside advice.
Has one Democratic strategist concerned that it could be big trouble for the campaign?
Fox and Friends, Shown, outlined how the administration is failing to heed warnings, basically listening to the voters.
So Doug Shown says that, quote, outside advice has been blocked.
Outside advice?
Would outside advice be James Carville?
Sounds like they're freezing him out.
How about Doug Shown himself?
Well, he's the one who brought it up.
So I'm guessing he feels maybe he's a little frozen out.
David Axelrod tweeted today.
He said, whoever at Biden headquarters directed De Niro's performance Tuesday outside the courthouse where Trump is on trial probably should have left it on the cutting room floor.
And they had some more thoughts on the CNN site.
David Axelrod.
White guy.
Put him on the list.
Now just imagine them.
James Carville, Doug Schoen, David Axelrod.
Have you seen the pattern yet?
The pattern is there are three older white guys who are saying pretty directly that they're being ignored in favor of whoever's on the inside.
And as we know, the inside is a DEI operation.
So even the white guys in the Democratic Party are calling foul, but they can't use the words directly.
They have to go at it indirectly.
I think you could be taking better advice.
It seems to me that some of the outside advice is being ignored.
I feel as if you might change your direction if you listen to some people who have been there before.
You see how carefully they have to approach it?
But here's what you could have predicted about DEI.
It will definitely crash the country, and you can see a massive wave of incompetence because of it.
Not because of anybody's genes and not because of anybody's culture.
I have to say that every time.
It's because of math.
If you favor hiring from a group that has the smallest pool of applicants, because the pipeline is pathetic.
The pipeline from early education to qualified employees is pathetic.
It needs to be fixed.
But because of that situation, the math of it is that if you use diversity as your primary variable, which Biden says he does, he's saying it pretty directly, you should end up with incompetence everywhere.
So what we're seeing now is the DEI campaign collapsing right in front of you, and the white men in the Democratic Party trying to sound the alarm, but they can't.
They're in a dream where they're trying to scream, but have you ever been in that dream?
Where you're trying to scream to warn somebody, but your voice doesn't work?
You're like... And you can't talk?
You've had that dream, right?
I think there are a whole bunch of white advisors who are having that dream right now.
If you would just listen to me for like a minute, I might be able to fix this shit.
And they're not being listened to.
So I think what you're seeing is a very public example of DEI collapse.
So you can, if you take a good organization and you inject a few people who are not up to speed, you know, not quite as good as the people who are already there, it won't make much difference.
You know, you train them, you know, maybe over time they're replaced.
But at some point the ratio of people have been forced into the system because of the diversity goal.
Should destroy every organization it's part of.
So if you want to see what's going to happen to your company, just look at the Biden campaign.
Do you wonder what Apple computer will look like in a few years?
It'll look like the Biden campaign.
Do you wonder what, uh, you know, Nvidia is going to look like in a few years?
It's going to look like this because they will all be forced under the current set of, you know, um, the current way we operate.
They will all be forced to increase their diversity to the point of failure.
And the Biden campaign went first.
You know, as the leaders in this type of approach to the world, they were the most aggressive on pursuing DEI.
And here's the result.
The result is they've destroyed not just their chances of winning, But maybe the party forever.
I think it might be a death blow.
Because if they lose black men, they're just done.
And they're gonna lose black men.
They're losing Hispanic men.
They're losing men.
If they lose men, they're just done.
I'm sorry, that's the end of it.
And we're very close.
They're right on the edge of losing it all.
America First Legal is filing a complaint with the DOJ and the EEOC and the Iowa Civil Rights Group against Tyson Foods for alleged violations of law, including Employing illegal aliens over American citizens, racial discrimination, and exploitation of child labor.
I guess they tossed in that child labor thing just for good measure.
This is the counter power that I've been waiting for, and these guys are doing great.
So, America First Legal.
It's probably one of the few things that's going to keep the country together because there needed to be some counterforce to the extraordinary levels of discrimination against Americans and against especially adult white men.
So are we going to get a trial decision today?
Do you think the jury will decide today?
I think there's a good chance.
But here, let me give you my tea leave reading.
I believe there's a hole down, and here's why.
And I believe that I have a superior opinion than the professional lawyers who have been trial lawyers for decades and are looking at the same situation.
Now, with no trial lawyer experience whatsoever, I'm going to disagree with a number of them I saw.
They said that asking for clarifications doesn't really mean anything.
You can't use that to predict.
I say That would be true in a normal case where the jury has no interest in the situation, they just want to get it right.
If the only thing you care about is getting it right, then yes, there'll be lots of requests for information.
But this isn't that.
This is a case where no case was presented.
So if no case is presented, and we'll talk about all the things that are bad with the case, but I think the fact that somebody asks questions confirms the following.
I think in these situations, based on my own experience as a jurist, I think they always do a vote count early.
So sometime in the first hour, and maybe in the first ten minutes, they would say, alright, here's a piece of paper, everybody tell us how you would vote if you were to vote right now.
Because they want to see how far they are.
Like if it turned out to be 6 and 6, you would approach this thing completely differently than if it's 11 to 1.
If it's 11 to 1, everybody's going to say, all right, our job is to convert the 1, right?
That's what you would think your job was if you're the 11.
All right, we're so close, we've got to convert the 1.
So that would be a normal case.
But in this case, do you think that people made up their own minds because it's Trump?
This is one of those cases where I would assume that not a single person on the jury cared about the evidence.
Too much.
And so when I see that clarification has been requested, my interpretation is, Why would you ask for any clarification if everybody's already decided?
And I think they have.
Because they're deciding politically, not based on the law.
So I think it indicates there's a holdout.
What do you think?
I have a strong feeling that it couldn't mean anything else.
Because here's what it definitely doesn't mean.
It definitely doesn't mean that the 12 people decided he's guilty.
Because if they decided he was guilty, what would they have done differently?
They would have given themselves the weekend off.
Because they would already know that they're already ready to vote guilty.
And then suppose there was a conversation, somebody said to me, Scott, what if they're talking about, you know, which one of those three different crimes they can decide on?
Maybe they disagree on that.
Maybe they're trying to get it all in the, you know, unanimity about some of the details.
To which I say, that's the sort of thing you do when it's not the weekend.
The Friday effect is really strong.
And the other lawyers were saying the same thing.
Jurors really, really, really want to be done on Friday.
And in this case, especially.
They really, really, really didn't want to be there today.
So if they willingly, as a group, accepted the extra pain to be there, it's not about the details.
There's a holdout.
There's at least one.
And the Wall Street Journal gave a little summary of the jurors.
A very, very cursory, high-level summary of who they are.
But I've got a strong feeling about two of them.
Here are my two favorites.
Now, this is all we know about them, all right?
One of them is a man who's an investment banker.
He likes hiking, music, and concerts.
So that part means nothing.
And the news sources he reads are basically everything.
And he follows Michael Cohen, Trump, and quote, anyone who might affect markets on social media.
So the way he described the fact that he follows the news on both sides is that it's part of his job as an investor.
Maybe.
Maybe.
Do you know who else follows both sides of every topic?
Not Democrats.
Have you ever heard of a Democrat saying that Yeah, I'm a Democrat, but I'm also on Truth Social, and I follow a bunch of conservatives, because I like to know the whole story.
None.
It's not a thing.
When somebody says, I basically follow everything in the news, they're screaming I'm a Republican.
Or at the very least, an Independent who leaves a Republican.
Right?
But it gets better.
I guess they were all asked the question what they feel about Trump.
So in his own words, here's what he feels about Trump.
I might not like some of his policies, but there has been some good for the United States.
Do you know what pro-Trump people all like to say?
Well, I don't like everything he does, but overall he's positive.
I mean, that comes right out of the Republican way of talking, basically.
Yeah.
And he's an investment banker.
And he's a man.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
All right, here's the next one.
Juror number four.
This is the funniest one.
All right, this one, I don't know if I can do it without laughing.
Juror number four was asked if he had strong feelings about Trump.
Here was the answer.
Quote, no, not really.
There he is.
There are two patriots who made it onto the jury.
There are two.
Yeah, strong feelings.
Not really.
Gender man, job security engineer for 25 years.
25 years!
That would make him an older gentleman.
And engineer.
Security.
Do you think that people who are concerned about security of anything, be it cyber or any other kind of security, do you think people with a security mindset If they're male and they're older?
You think they might have a little bit of feeling about Trump that maybe would make you a little more secure?
If your whole filter on life is security?
And you're an engineer?
So you're an engineer so you can actually see that the case is bullshit.
Because you're not dealing on an emotional level.
If you're not dealing with it emotionally, you can see it's Clearly the case hasn't been made.
Juror number two and juror number four.
We're counting on you.
News sources.
What do you think the news sources were for the security engineer?
Quote, scattering of all things here and there.
Who says that?
Zero Democrats.
Nope.
There's no Democrat who says, yeah, I sample all the news.
Nope.
Do you want me to take it home?
If you're not sure that this is a conservative yet, hobbies.
Woodworking and metalworking.
And we're done here.
You don't think these two guys They're gonna hang that jury?
Oh, they're gonna hang the jury.
Yeah, they're gonna hang it hard.
You give me the guy with 25 years in security engineering, who works with wood and metal, gets his information from a scattering of all things here and there, and when asked what he feels about Trump, looks you right in the fucking eyes and says, Yeah, not really.
Don't have much of a feeling about it at all.
That man came there to do some business.
That's a man who knows exactly what he's going to do.
Yeah, I think that's a hung jury.
And then I looked at some of the other jurors and they seemed equally likely that they would just convict no matter what the evidence was.
Yeah, mostly women.
All right, here are some problems with the case in case you haven't heard them.
First of all, there's a pattern of the White House meeting with prosecutors and the various lawfare cases, which suggests it's part of a RICO-coordinated government attempt to interfere with the election.
Very obvious.
We can all see it.
That's documented.
We know that the prior DA looked at the case and said, nope, there's nothing here, refused to take it up.
We know that the number three lawyer in the Biden Department of Justice took a demotion to take the case.
Nobody does that, which indicates strongly it's political.
The jury did not, they were not allowed to have the instructions from the judge in writing in the room.
It took 90 minutes for the judge to read the instructions.
That's how complicated they are.
And the instructions will largely determine which way they go, except for the heroes.
And they're not allowed to have a written copy in the room.
Byron York points out that the jury instructions have been posted on the New York court's website.
So now everybody on the planet Earth with access to a web page, except the jurors, the only people who should be reading them, only the jurors can't see it.
So that makes sense.
Okay.
You've got the judge who's totally conflicted, who magically got selected for all three Trump-related things, from Bannon to Weisselberg to now Trump, even though judges are randomly selected.
Obviously not randomly selected.
And he's donated to Democrats, and his daughter is a big Democrat fundraiser who will make a lot of money if Trump gets convicted, people say.
We've got this novel case where they had to Somehow Frankenstein up a felony charge by putting together pieces of misdemeanors and then confusing you and writing the jury instructions just so.
Basically manufacturing a crime that had no victims and nobody gave a fuck about until Trump said he was running for president.
My favorite part is that the Trump defense had to rest, because this is how the process worked in this case, The defense had to rest before the prosecution told the jury what the crime was that he's being charged with.
Now, we could have just said that, right?
Could have just said that.
And then on top of that, they've got these weird instructions where the jury can say, well, it doesn't matter which crime he was covering up.
If he was covering up a crime, it must be a felony.
But they give them a menu choice of things they can pick as the crime, and none of those crimes have to be determined to be true, and they can all decide it's a different crime that they're going to base their opinion on.
completely reversible errors all over the place here.
And then let's see what else.
Uh...
And then there was even a judge on MSDEI that said, that was a surprise to me, because generally jury instructions don't include references to specific pieces of evidence that the judge seems to be pointing to.
So the judge gives them directions on, you know, how to proceed on the findings of fact, but then tells them, sort of points out something specific to focus on.
Which apparently is non-standard, which basically is trying to bias the jury to get whatever he wants, it looks like.
Let's see what else.
So that's just the problems we know about.
That's just the problems we know about.
John Lefebvre, I think I'm pronouncing that wrong.
My French is not good.
But on X, he's talking about how the... Well, first of all, the polls show that people don't care.
I guess CNN was reporting.
The polls show that people don't even care about the trial.
They're not basing their votes on it.
And if he gets convicted or doesn't get convicted, they don't care.
Seems like.
I think his popularity will go up no matter what.
But we'll see.
But John Lefebvre points out that the magnitude of the injustice Trump is facing is lost on most people.
I think that's true.
And I think there's a bit of disbelief involved, and I'll say I'm guilty of it.
My brain can't conceive that he would be put in jail with this process.
And so I can't get as worked up about it being evil Because I also can't see it as happening.
So I think other people might be in that boat too.
It's like, well, it's one of those legal things.
It'll probably work out and I don't have to pay attention to it.
So that's going on.
But as John points out, Trump is facing 34 felony counts for improper paperwork over the use of personal funds nearly a decade ago.
Each count carries a maximum sentence of four years.
And the jury doesn't even have to agree on what Trump is guilty of in order to convict.
Just hold that in your mind.
The jury doesn't have to agree.
In just this case alone, when normally they have to agree on what happened, they don't have to agree.
Those are in the jury instructions.
Unbelievable.
But when you compare that, as John points out, to Hillary Clinton, she invented the Russiagate hoax, lied about it, paid for the Steele dossier, and papered it as legal services with the intention of influencing the election.
And her total punishment was an $8,000 fine that somebody else paid.
Compared to, how are we gonna put Trump in jail for life?
Bye.
For a way, way smaller nothing.
Alright, on other topics, Mario Nafal had some reports from other people.
David Pine claiming that Russia is successfully jamming 90% of the guided missiles headed their way.
So the American missiles, the good stuff, apparently the Russians are really good at jamming the GPS, making them useless.
So I guess we're going to use dumb bombs instead.
Don't know if that's true, but it sounds true.
I saw somebody say that China could invade and take over Taiwan in one hour.
There's a military expert who said that, uh, that within 15 minutes they could take the airports and within 30 minutes they would have the capital.
Yeah.
Well, okay.
Now people say, but you know, that would be the end of the world because they would take over the, uh, chips to which I say, wouldn't they sell them to us?
I mean, it would accelerate our own operation to get more chips, but, They wouldn't want to destroy the chip plants.
And China's got a bad situation, because if they destroy the economy of the United States, they lose their customers.
So you can't really survive that.
So anyway, I don't think necessarily the chips are at risk.
They're at risk, for sure.
And then I did hear that the chip manufacturers had some kind of kill switch where they could blow up the factories if the island gets invaded.
That sounds more like the sort of thing you'd threaten than the sort of thing you'd do.
But maybe.
I mean, maybe the U.S.
CIA would take it out.
It could be that our own spooks have already set it up for the Building 7.
It might get Building 7, if you believe that.
All right.
Here's a story in the Epoch Times.
So there was a study of... I'm not going to spend much time on this, so this is just the last thing.
But they found that masks didn't work during Omicron and made things worse.
So masks didn't work during Omicron.
It made things worse.
However, interestingly, their findings were that the mask did work a little bit before Omicron.
Who said that?
I did.
So once again, you can skip all the science and just ask me.
Yeah, the masks probably worked when it was a deadly virus and everybody was wearing them.
But by the time you got to Omicron, half the people weren't wearing them, and Omicron was way too catchy.
It didn't make any sense.
So it probably made things worse.
But according to the science, which doesn't mean it's true, just this one study, it says that if both people wore a mask during the original virus, there was a statistical advantage.
So that's exactly what I said.
I said it might slow it down a little bit, but it's not enough to make this a mandate.
So I'm only bringing it up because science has caught up to me, or at least this one study.
I am against mask mandates.
Let me be clear.
Here come the people who were fooled by So I'm being called a hypocrite now by the people who are fooled by the 4chan hoax.
So there are lots of people who still believe the 4chan hoax is about my pandemic opinions, but I'll remind you I had the most accurate predictions by far.
It's just that you heard that they were the opposite of what they are.
And somebody says, no, you were fooled.
I was fooled?
I just told you I agreed with the science.
Now that doesn't mean the science is right, but I think it's worth noting that the science took a while and then they came exactly to my position.
Yeah, the people who want to be right are just desperate to want to be right.
But sorry.
Dude, you were blacklisted.
Now you're making a comeback.
I was blacklisted by the people who... there was one cartoonist who made a joke about my pandemic opinions and half the country thought it was real.
Ah, it's a mess, aren't a thing for the cooties, blah blah blah.
Just that you didn't know how to take an experimental...
you didn't know not to take it.
Well, Do I look unhealthy to you?
Or do I look like a person who took some excellent vacations, ended my pandemic experience months before you did, because I got all my rights back, and as far as I can tell, no medical problems, and currently I'm also on the right side of current science.
Because the current science says the vaccinations were probably bad for young people, But probably a good bet for people who are in my category.
So there are a lot of people under 60 who are saying, hey, why did you over 60 people with asthma take this drug?
When I didn't?
Well, you're not really good at analyzing things, are you?
If I were 25, I would not have taken it.
If I didn't need to travel, probably wouldn't have taken it.
But I had an amazing experience.
I got no effects.
So apparently, you being a bunch of fucking pussies, all you got was the same good health that I have, and no vacations.
So, was being a frightened pussy, was that your strategy that worked out really well for you?
Are you proud of it?
Being a frightened pussy?
Because I was frightened neither by the Shots nor by the virus.
You were frightened by one of those two things.
I was frightened by neither and I ended up taking a chance and it worked out.
Which part of that sounds dumb to you?
The part where I have excellent vacations and good health?
All right, that's enough of that.
I just lost half of my followers.
All right, that's all I got.
I've been told that when I say goodbye here, there's a annoying delay, and then it looks like I'm being rude because I just disappear.
So I'm going to say goodbye, and then I'm going to leave this long, awkward pause at the end while the technology catches up with me, all right?
So it's going to look like the show is over, And then I'm just going to sit here drinking my coffee.