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, Floating Nuclear Power Stations, UFO Whistleblower, Bob Lazar, Apple AI, Apple Intelligence, ChatGPT, Elon Musk, Spotify Censorship, Trump Key Supporters, Illegal Immigrant Deportation, Biden Dancing, Steve Bannon, AOC, Nancy Pelosi, J6 National Guard, General Milley, J6 Security Incompetence, Late Stage Empires, NJ Anti-Trump Lawfare, Moral Turpitude, Latinos For Trump, 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
Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and if you'd like to take this up to levels that nobody can even understand with their smooth, tiny human brains, all you need is a cup or mug or glass, a tanker, chalice or stein, a canteen, jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
It happens now.
Go.
Well, I don't want to get you too excited about how good today is going to be, but it's really going to be good.
But yeah.
If you watch the pre-show, which you'd have to be a subscriber on the locals community, You would know that every morning I make three 15 foot putts on my indoor putting green.
Yes, I have a room that's just a putting green.
Used to have something else in there, but I didn't want it in there, so I put it in a putting green, indoor putting green.
And I take a 15 foot putt three times in the morning on camera.
And roughly from that distance, I can make one in five on a good day.
So if I make three in a row, 5 times 5 times 1 and 125.
I drained all 3 today.
3 out of 3.
And that indicates an incredible day ahead.
Not just for me.
For all of you.
Yes, I did it for all of you.
Well, if you're reading Dilbar Reborn, which is a subscription thing only on X or on the scottadams.locals community, You'd know that they've hired an Elbonian engineer because they've got DEI targets.
The Elbonian engineer is, well, he's headless.
He has no head.
But you'll see how that goes.
The headless Elbonian hired for DEI reasons in Dilbert.
There's a new study that says patients in the hospital might not need to use a ventilator because they're developing new technologies where you can breathe through your ass.
I'm not making that up.
Apparently you can breathe through your ass if they introduce the oxygen in just the right way.
So there's a chemical, you know, like a liquid, oxygenated liquid that can shove up your ass and some of it absorbs into your, uh, your body.
You know, and this raises a question that I think we've all been asking you, which is, is there anything your ass can't do?
I mean, it's doing a lot of work.
And now it's going to have to breathe for you, too?
Well, I've been talking through my ass forever, so it can't be that much harder to inhale as well.
So that's what's happening.
Now, of course, you may want to tie this together with some other stories.
You might say to yourself, was President Biden taking a dump on that stage in France, or was he trying to say something?
It looks the same, apparently.
All right, China's putting these floating nuclear power stations in the South China Sea, which they're trying to dominate.
That's a pretty good idea.
I gotta say, China keeps doing smart things for China.
You don't have to love it, but they're really clever about playing the long term.
Their long term game is just unbeatable.
And it's so smart to put energy production where they want to dominate.
Because whoever has the most assets there is going to become the de facto controller.
It looks like that's going to be China.
I don't see anything stopping them.
In my book, some of you haven't gotten yet, there's a part there where countries create battle platforms.
So bigger than a battleship.
Like a giant platform with an energy beam.
I think China is going to build big floating platforms that are just purely military.
That's my prediction.
I think the UFO whistleblowers are coming close to confirming that we live in a simulation.
But here are some of the things we know.
I may have mentioned this before, Bob Lazar, UFO whistleblower, said that there's some big religious document that has something to do with the UFOs.
And if you're wondering, why would there be a religious document?
What does that have to do with UFOs?
And maybe it's the reason that the public can't be informed about whatever's going on.
But Lazar said that he doesn't know the details, but the aliens believe that we're vessels for something.
So you might say souls?
Well, maybe.
But do you know what else is a vessel for somebody else?
A game avatar.
If you're a gamer and you're controlling a little creature that's you, the creature is acting like a person, but it's inhabited by you while you're playing the game.
I think This is my prediction, that whatever this UFO phenomenon is, we're getting more hints that it might not be from other planets.
Now, I think the Tucker Carlson view is that it's, you know, angels and demons, which is one interpretation.
I think the more obvious one is that we're a simulation and that the things visiting us are the game players from the other dimension.
The other dimension meaning the people who are actually with a game controller in their hand controlling the game.
And that they have a way to visit our world to see different views.
And one of them is to create a fake spaceship.
So that within the game, which is our simulation, they could be a player, but they could also be in a spaceship.
And that's what we're seeing.
So that the reason that the government has this on their top, top, top, top secret is not because we're collecting things and reverse engineering them.
I don't think we're reversing reverse engineering anything.
I think we found out we're a simulation and the government doesn't want to tell you because it would be chaos.
But I do think they're preparing you for it.
Watch how many ways we seem to be prepared for it.
Does it strike you as interesting that Elon Musk has been saying we're a simulation for a while now?
So it didn't come from the government, so you didn't have to take it seriously.
It's not like we discovered anything.
Elon is just giving you the logic of it.
It's most likely we're a simulation.
I feel like That's preparing us.
I feel like we're getting prepped for something big.
Maybe.
So here's my prediction.
My prediction is if we ever find out what this UFO phenomenon is, we will simultaneously learn it's not from other planets.
It's from whoever's controlling our simulation.
It will be our actual creators.
That's right.
Within a year, There's an actual possibility we will meet our creators, and it will be us.
That's a possibility.
Let's talk about Apple.
Apple made this big announcement that involves AI, and it's funny that the first wave of information I got made me laugh, because they introduced a calculator on the iPad, which makes me think, Steve Jobs would be so proud that they put a calculator on an iPad.
No, he wouldn't.
He wouldn't be impressed at all.
But they also had a thing where you can schedule when your texts arrive.
Again, Steve Jobs, not impressed if you were around.
And it can also record phone calls, but it tells the person they're being recorded.
So these are very small things, but then I found out it also has a suite of AI stuff it can do.
So I went from, huh, I'm glad I sold my Apple stock because it looks like there's nothing here.
All the way to, oh boy, do I want to upgrade my phone badly.
So here's what I think I understand about the Apple AI announcement.
So there will be two forms, and this will be the thing everybody gets wrong, and I might have it wrong too, but I believe there's two separate AIs.
One of them is on the phone and it lives on the phone and it doesn't have to go to the cloud to do things.
And it's basically like a better Siri.
They can do more things than Siri could.
But more importantly, it can understand you for the first time.
Do you know how many times it takes you to tell your phone, just tell me what the weather is or what time it is?
It takes like three tries.
But if you use AI, it pretty much understands everything every time.
So an upgrade to Siri, just that it would understand what you're saying for the first time would be amazing.
But I was looking at a list by Zain Khan, who Tells us all the things the new phone will do.
Listen to just some of the, oh, just to complete the picture.
So there'll be a local AI that's called Apple Intelligence.
That part isn't going to be talking to anything, they say.
So you wouldn't have to worry about privacy or anything because it just stays on your phone, they say.
Right?
I'm not, I'm not warranting that any of this is true.
I'm just saying that's my understanding.
But on top of that, if you were to ask the phone for some information that wasn't on the phone, such as go find out something from the internet, it would activate ChatGPT.
So ChatGPT is like an app that works when called on, versus the more integrated into the OS part, which is Apple's own AI.
Now, when you hear that, do you say to yourself, well, that sounds safe.
There's no way they're going to get my private information that way.
Well, when you put AI in the mix, you really don't know what it can get or what it's doing or what it's keeping or what it's sending to headquarters back at Microsoft.
You really don't know.
So Elon Musk had said that if his current understanding of what Apple is doing is true, That he would ban its use on X and ban it within his companies because it'd be too dangerous for your privacy.
Now, I think the way this is going to come out is that Apple is going to make a case for why your concerns are overblown.
But people aren't going to believe it.
You know, everything has a credibility problem now.
So even if they make a really good case that they've done everything they can to protect your privacy, As long as the AI is part of the mix, it just feels like the AI can figure out a way around whatever guardrails they put on it.
So that might be an irrational concern, but certainly people would have it.
But listen to all the things they can do.
This is from Zain Khan on X. All right.
So you can ask things.
It'll go to ChatGPT.
But you can also ask questions about your documents.
And you can describe things without knowing the name.
So you can talk to your phone and you can say stuff like, show me the photo, the one I took in Hawaii that was by the tree.
It'll just pop up.
So you just talk to your phone and it can find stuff and do things like a person could, if a person had all knowledge about what was in your phone.
It can create images and text just on command.
It can answer questions about all your files.
It can tell you what your phone can and cannot do.
You can ask it for things like, show me the document I sent to Joshua last week, which is a real thing I actually wanted to do yesterday.
So yesterday I was like, I wish I could remember the name of that document I sent to Joshua.
All I had to do was say, what's the name of that document I sent to Joshua?
Show me that.
And it would just show it to me.
It can play a podcast your friend recommended.
It can find photos with people in it.
Well, it could kind of do that before.
It can auto-fill forms from your license.
So you can say stuff like, look at my driver's license in the photos and take the data from my driver's license and fill out this form.
You can actually do that.
On the other hand, it means that your driver's license information is on your phone, and do you feel comfortable with that?
All right.
It can proofread things.
It can clean up images.
It can change images.
So you can say, show me the photograph of me standing with my ex, but get rid of my ex.
And it'll do it.
This is crazy, crazy stuff.
All right.
What else can it do?
It can generate emojis that didn't exist.
So you can say, give me an emoji that's a person spitting or something, I guess.
You can just make it.
All right.
But nobody yet has figured out the calamity that this is going to cause.
This is sort of an end of civilization technology.
And I haven't heard anybody say why.
You ready?
It's going to make everybody talk to their phone.
Because I believe you can use all these features by texting it.
You know, just typing in what you want to do.
Like, find me the photo of whatever.
You can just type it in.
But people aren't going to.
If you can talk to it and it understands you perfectly, you're not going to type anything.
Why would you?
Everybody's going to be talking to their fucking phone.
Everybody.
The other day I was taking a walk in the park with Snickers.
And there aren't too many people who are in that same park at the same time.
You know, maybe three in the whole park.
But when they got near me, I became very conscious that I happened to be having a conversation with ChatGPT.
I was working something out with the AI.
And I thought to myself, ooh, I don't want to be talking out loud.
To my phone, you know, like a phone call when somebody is just trying to take a nice walk in the park.
So I was like trying to whisper to it.
It's like, Hey, this is what I want.
And I was completely aware that, you know, I might be on the more polite side of the spectrum.
At least I try to be, but I'm rare.
Most people are just going to have a flat out conversation with their phone everywhere they are.
They're going to be sitting in restaurants talking to their phone.
Every public place will be people talking to their phone.
Everywhere.
Now, I don't think anybody mentioned that.
That's like literally an end of civilization fucking problem.
You wouldn't be able to go anywhere without hearing it.
We're talking locust all the time problem.
It would be like the, you know, it'd be like the cicadas were all year, every, every year, everywhere.
It would just be audio pollution, like you can't believe.
Now it could be wrong.
It could be that people just adjust to the new technology and it's no big deal, but it sure looks like it's going to be everybody talking all the time, everywhere.
Because it's so good, it's so useful.
Anyway, so I saw the community notes of fact-checking Elon Musk, which I love more than anything in the world.
You know, let me tell you, if you want credibility in your platform, be the owner of the platform, say something on the platform, and have your own platform fact-check you in real time.
Now that's credible.
You can so put up with, well maybe he got this one wrong.
I don't know if he did.
I think he might be right about this.
Musk.
But you can really put up with people making a mistake, if they do, so long as they're showing their work.
Not only just showing it, but having an automated, not automated, but a system that would completely fact check you the moment you get out of bounds.
That is so good.
That's one of the most Hopeful things you'll ever see about the world.
You see, Elon Musk fact-checked by X. So what it did was it said, you said the assumption, so Elon said that ChatGPT could maybe get your private stuff.
And the fact check was the assumption made here misrepresents what was actually announced.
You control when ChatGPT is used.
And, you know, I guess the idea is it's not built into the operating system.
Now I don't know if any of that's true.
You should see everything about this announcement as the fog of war.
I would just assume everything that you think is true, just hold off a little bit on that.
We're not really knowing what we're seeing.
This is almost like a life form that has been formed.
And we don't really know what this is yet.
Spotify is apparently gearing up to do massive censorship of people they don't like on politics.
Oh, I wonder who that will be.
Will it be the left or will it be the right?
Huh, I wonder who they're going to suppress during the political season.
All right, we all know.
So apparently they're saying out loud that they're going to censor.
But what they say they're censoring, of course, is all the bad stuff.
It's a good thing we have these good people at Spotify who are going to censor all the bad, wrong information.
No, I just assume it's like every other censor.
They're just going to say that whatever the other team says is a lie, and whatever their idiots say is true, and then they'll censor you accordingly.
Now, I have a question.
Is my belief Unsubstantiated that Spotify has been suppressing me.
And, uh, that, you know, I have a cap there as same as YouTube.
So I have the same odor of there's something going on here as Spotify as I do with YouTube, which I don't have with Rumble.
So Rumble traffic just grows as I become more, you'll see more, uh, let's say known on Rumble.
That's the normal way it should go.
How could it possibly cap on a service as, you know, like a billion users?
And it caps at some like little level.
I don't even think that's possible.
So I don't trust them.
Other people not to trust, Kyle Bass was talking about on X, I guess The Economist, that's a publication.
They confirmed everyone's suspicion, Elon Musk said this as well, and everybody who's in the book business already knew this.
That the bestseller list that the New York Times has is not real, meaning that humans decide what's on the list.
Now it is, you know, they're not going to ignore the actual sales numbers, but they're not slavishly devoted to the sales numbers.
They just pretend they are.
And they get to pick the winners and the losers.
And I experienced that in real time with my first number one bestseller that was selling more than any book in the country for weeks.
Before it became a number one bestseller.
So they were putting another book in front of mine for whatever reason.
I don't know what reason it was, but it definitely wasn't based on sales.
Because the publishers can see the sales.
The publishers know what the number one book is, and then they look at the New York Times and it doesn't match.
And that's been true forever.
All right.
And then the concern The concern, of course, is that the conservative-leaning books are the ones that they're keeping off the list.
I would say that that's a matter of obvious, and I don't think the economists needed to study that.
Put this in the category of, you could have just asked me.
Yeah, just ask me.
Once you know that the New York Times list is curated by humans, it's not just sales, then you already know that they're going to pull out the books that they don't like, and they're going to be conservative.
So you didn't really have to study that.
That was kind of obvious from the setup.
I would go further on this story and say that I think this is true, that for a long time, publishers and also authors, we kind of look at the Amazon numbers for what's real.
Because Amazon, you know, is big enough, big enough a proportion of total sales.
It's like 85% of book sales, I think.
If you look at that and you're number one on that, you're number one.
There's no way around that.
Because Amazon just shows what people actually bought.
I don't believe that they mess with those numbers.
I've never seen any indication of that.
Amazon is the real number, but being on the New York Times list is going to get you more publicity.
So the New York Times list should be seen as free publicity from the New York Times.
It's not a list of who sold the most books, or what the best books are.
We have an indication that Optimus, the robot coming from Tesla someday, not right away, is going to be $20,000 to $30,000 in cost.
But I would like to know the operating costs.
Because it seems to me that recharging your robot every day is going to be really expensive.
And it seems to me you're going to need a maintenance plan.
Because if your robot breaks, you're going to need somebody there right away.
So these are expensive robots.
But I also say if you get a robot, let's say you could get a robot that costs you $25,000 to buy.
Let's say it costs you $5,000 a year for extra energy and for a maintenance contract.
Do you think you could buy it and then rent it out to companies that want an extra worker?
I feel like that's going to be a thing.
I feel like ownership of a fleet of robots that people can rent out as they need them is going to be the thing.
Now, if you live in a town like I do, If you go down to the Home Depot store, there'll be a bunch of immigrants or migrants standing on the corner asking for day work.
You could just drive up in your car.
Do you have this in other states?
I think a few states have it.
Where it's so well organized that you just drive up to the curb and you say, I've got some landscaping.
I need to dig a trench.
And you just point to two people and say, get in the car.
And then you take them to your house and they dig your trench and you pay them.
And believe it or not, so by the way, this is one of the reasons that I'm more pro-migrant and pro-immigrant than a lot of you.
The California experience is not like others.
Imagine if you will, just hold this in your head, that completely unvetted migrants standing on a corner And it's not uncommon for a soccer mom to pull up and say, Hey, you two get in the car.
Uh, I got a good work for you today.
Now the truth is it's usually not the woman, but it does happen.
It actually does happen.
It's usually the man who does the hiring, you know, for safety reasons.
But just think about the fact that this has been going on for as long as I've lived in California.
And do you know how many problems I've heard where it didn't work out?
None.
It totally works.
The people coming in from Mexico, on average, are so law-abiding and so interested in just working and taking care of business, they just show up, they work hard all day, they take their money, which isn't that much, and then they leave.
They don't sue you, they don't give you trouble, they just dig that trench, take their money and go home.
So, you know, I'm very pro Hispanic immigrants, because I live in a world where they add so much, you know, to the lifestyle here and ask very little in return.
They just want to, you know, a chance to be part of the system, basically.
So I get it.
You know, you can't have uncontrolled immigration.
I get that we have too many.
You know, you don't have to convince me to close the border.
But if you wondered why I'm sort of emotionally On their team?
It's because they're awesome people.
That's the whole reason.
The Hispanic south of the border people are just a really good class of people and I love having them around.
But we do have to close the border and we have to be tight.
There's no, that's just a separate question.
Well, it's the pandering season.
Biden says he wants to ban medical debt from your credit reports.
Trump says he wants to cancel federal taxes on service workers' tips.
Biden's trying to cancel debt on student loans.
So it's sort of smart and sick and terrible at the same time.
I thought Trump's play was pretty good, because there are so many service workers.
So many service workers.
That probably sounds pretty good.
If your buying power went down by 25% lately, that would look pretty attractive.
So it's a good offer, but it's all pandering and buying votes.
CNN had a bit on home ownership.
Home ownership costs are up 26% since 2020.
Now that's on CNN.
So CNN is making it very clear Under Biden's watch, you just got abused financially.
So, again, I'm going to call out CNN's finding the middle.
When was the last time I did a look at these CNN hosts being crazy?
It's been a while, but I've been doing MSNBC being crazy almost every day.
I mean, they're just terrible at this point.
But CNN legitimately looks like they're heading toward the middle.
I'm going to give them credit.
I saw David Sachs was on Jesse Waters, and Jesse asked him if the Silicon Valley people are moving toward Trump.
And Sachs gave a few reasons that, at least some number of them are, that California is getting regulated too much.
They don't like that.
The business is regulated.
Kamala is in charge of AI.
They're not not big on AI.
Well, not everybody.
Not everybody is big on AI regulations, because as other people have pointed out, if you regulate too hard in the beginning, you just give your opponents, let's say China, a big advantage if they're less regulated.
But you can kind of figure out the regulations as the industry evolves.
Now, others would say, well, that would work in every case except AI, because if it gets out of hand, you can't put it back in the bottle.
But I'm on the page that AI will be less of a risk than people imagine, and that we can let it run a little bit before we decide if something just absolutely has to be regulated.
And I guess Biden is for crypto regulations and I guess there have been regulations against mergers and acquisitions.
So basically the business environment under Biden, especially in California, not so good.
So that probably moves a lot of people.
But I'm going to double down on this and say that there are no smart people anymore who favor Biden for president.
Unless they have an obvious case of TDS.
So let me give you the examples.
Stephen King, obvious TDS, doesn't count, but probably very smart.
Rob Reiner, probably very smart is, you know, his work life and otherwise, but yeah, he's got TDS.
So the actors and the crazy people, I'm not counting them, but a hundred percent of the people who are not partisans or crazy, We're now in favor of Trump.
So, Sachs is in that category.
Elon Musk is in that category.
Bill Ackman is in that category.
A lot of the VCs are just looking at what works.
The people who look at what works first versus what party is saying it, they're all on Trump's side now.
All of them.
It's only the people who can't get out of the Two sides, I'm on this side, you're the enemy mode, the TDS people.
So Joe Rogan went super hard on the Biden regime about the lawfare and the corruption and the banana republic and stuff.
What does Joe Rogan have in common with Elon Musk, Sachs, Bill Ackman?
They're all people who can take whatever side makes sense.
They're not obligated to vote one way or support one way.
Everybody who's able has gone Trump.
Now I keep saying it because I'm waiting for somebody to say, what about this exception?
There's always somebody who's going to say there's an exception, right?
And there isn't.
There's actually no exception.
At least I haven't seen one.
Show me somebody who's smart, capable of seeing things on both sides, has no TDS, I think Biden is a good choice.
I don't think that person exists.
And it's a gigantic story that apparently I'm the only person who wants to talk about.
Anyway, there was a CBS host who was finding out in real time on the show that 62% of registered voters support deporting all illegal immigrants.
62% of the country is in favor of deporting all illegal immigrants.
I think that's the highest that's ever been by far.
Now, of course, that's nearly, you know, pretty much all Republicans, but that doesn't get you to 62%.
So it must be all Republicans plus 30 to 50% of Democrats are willing to ship every single Non-citizen back home?
That's pretty extreme.
I'm shocked by that.
I have to admit, I did not see this coming.
I would have said, if I had to guess, I would have said 40% would be in favor of it.
You know, something closer to Trump voter numbers.
But 62% want to ship back every single one?
25 million people?
Now, I don't think any of that's practical.
But man, the mood of the country, It's very distinct.
Let's just say it's getting very clear to feel what the country feels.
Can't miss it at this point.
Well, there's a hilarious video of Joe Biden in, I don't know if it was some Kamala Harris barbecue or something, but he's standing there trying to dance to some music, but everybody else is swaying with the music, but he went into statue mode.
So I'd like to give you the impression of Uh, the, the black people who were there, it was looking like 98% black people there, except for Joe Biden and the first husband.
And, uh, the black people were listening to the music and they were doing some version of moving with the music and what I would consider an attractive and normal way.
I don't think I can do an impression of it.
I started saying that, but you know, just smiling, just moving with the music, looking natural.
Looking like everything's good.
And then you look at the first husband, Doug Imhoff.
And I swear to God, he's playing a tune from the Eagles in his head, and he's getting ready to break out the air guitar.
He's got the white guy face.
I'm doing it, if you're listening on Spotify, before they suppress me.
Yeah.
And I'm saying, no, Doug!
Doug!
Don't do it!
I swear I could see his fingers ready to form an air guitar.
And I was like, Doug, you're representing all white people and their dancing ability right now.
Don't embarrass us, Doug.
But he did, he did hold off on the air guitar just long enough.
I thought he was going to try to impress the bearded woman next to him.
Yes, it was a bearded woman in a very nice dress next to him.
And, uh, But the funniest thing is that Biden was doing his Dementia Frozen thing.
I understand there's a thing called Dementia Frozen Face.
Have you ever heard of that?
I might be using the wrong name, but it's where, you know, when your dementia is hitting you hard, your face turns into like a solid mask with no impressions.
And we see Biden do that, but his whole body freezes.
So everybody there is like swaying with the music and Biden is literally Like you couldn't even detect that he wasn't a statue?
Now, I don't know how you, if you understand how dangerous that is.
He was in the backyard, full of Democrats, and he was pretending to be a racist statue of a president.
It was very close to somebody trying to topple him, and tear him down, and replace him in protest.
So yeah, never look like a racist statue of a president if you're in a Juneteenth celebration.
That's what I say.
Well, Steve Bannon wants some vengeance.
He looks like he's going to go to jail.
And the worst case scenario for the Democrats is Steve Bannon saying, put me in jail and then going for maybe a few months, I guess.
Because he's not going to come out softer.
He's gonna come out with some tattoos and ready to kill.
So Bannon is saying that a whole bunch of people are going to jail like, you know, Comer and Clapper and Brennan and I think he mentioned some others.
So he's mentioning names.
He's saying, yeah, they all know they broke the law.
That's why they're so panicked.
Because if Trump wins, they know they go to jail for real reasons.
Not for any trumped-up reasons, but for actual real overthrow-the-government kinds of reasons.
Treason.
And I would agree with that.
I think that the crimes are obvious.
And that is probably why they're so panicked.
Now, AOC was worried that if Trump gets elected, that she could be put in jail.
To which I say, Has anybody even accused AOC of a crime?
I'm not aware of any crimes she did.
I'm not in favor of putting AOC in jail.
AOC, in case you're listening, if a Trump administration tried to put you in jail for charges that I thought were as bogus as the things against Trump, I would be on your side.
I will totally take your side, AOC.
I promise.
Really.
I will take your side and try to get you out if anybody tried to put you in jail for a non-crime.
Now, if there's a real crime, that's a different story.
But for a non-crime?
No.
Let me be as clear as possible.
The Republicans don't want to put you in jail for a non-crime.
Nobody wants that.
That's your team.
That's projection.
The Democrats have created a situation where they say, well, if they're all Nazis and Hitler, we don't need a real crime.
We just need to put them away.
No, that's not happening on the other side.
I don't know anybody who's a Republican or a Conservative who says, well, I'm sure they've done something bad, so let's find anything and put them in jail.
Never.
Not once.
It's just not something that happens on the political right.
The political right is entirely formed around the Constitution.
That would be so far off their basic DNA, to do something non-constitutional to get even with the other side?
No!
No, the entire conservative Republican philosophy, character, everything that's important, says don't do that.
That's rule number one.
Do the Democrats not even understand that the right part of the political world is constitutionally driven, and that violating it so you can get back at an enemy Is what we don't want.
That's what the right doesn't want.
They don't do it.
It's what they're trying to stop.
So no, there's no chance of that.
But I would say that the people that Bannon noted, it seems to me have done a horrible, horrible crimes against the country.
And I think they're largely obvious.
So if if the legal system went hard on them, And by the way, what do you see in common with these names?
Some Bannon names.
Comey, Brennan, Clapper.
What do they have in common?
A bunch of white guys.
Yeah.
Yeah, here's another thing that Republicans will do.
They will police their own.
You know, whether it's a white guy or anybody else.
But the Republicans will police their own a little bit.
That's not something you see on the other side.
All right.
And I'm going to say again, other people have said it, that the choice of Attorney General, if Trump gets in, the choice of Attorney General will be the most important thing he does.
Everything else will be subsidiary to that.
I agree with that.
And I'm coming to the view that Bill Barr was a handler.
Meaning that he was pro-Republican, pro-conservative, but he wasn't so pro-Republican and so pro-conservative that he was going to let the full populist energy do what it wanted to do.
So I do think that, you know, certainly around the time he was saying, stop questioning the election and stuff like that, he was operating more as a handler of Trump than an appointee.
So I feel like he had sort of a double Objective there.
He was, you know, genuinely a conservative, but that he was a conservative who didn't want a full Trumpy experience in this country.
That's what it felt like.
So no, he was, in retrospect, well, he would be the wrong person if he were to choose today.
That's for sure.
But I don't know if the left knows how many people have been caught in lies and crimes.
Anyway, Tucker Carlson calls the January 6th thing a hoax, the most corrupt thing he's ever seen.
And I'm not sure if everybody was saying it so clearly two years ago.
I think that the fact that credible people are saying, oh yeah, it was a total setup and hoax and bullshit, is people just feeling uncomfortable with the truth for once.
And I guess we should talk about Nancy Pelosi got caught on the hot mic.
Not in a hot mic, sorry.
On a video that was taken on January 6th by, I think, her daughter, who was doing a documentary.
And she was in the car and it seemed to show her maybe leaving the event, leaving the protest, and she was very upset and complaining to whoever she was talking about that she had failed because it was her responsibility to protect the Capitol and she hadn't done it.
So I would say that based on what we learned from that, I would personally, you know, your mileage might differ, but I would say we can eliminate the hypothesis that she set it up to have somebody attack herself.
I don't think anybody runs an op that involves the possibility that you will be killed when you can do it without that possibility.
So I don't think she was set up.
I think that she took advantage of the fact that knowing it was her problem, Because she said directly that she was taking responsibility for the lapse in security.
But having said that, I think she was just figuring out a way to make it right.
And the way to make it right was to blame Trump for forming an insurrection.
So she had to reframe it with all of her other bad people.
So it looked like an insurrection when clearly it wasn't.
Clearly.
And so I'm now completely of the opinion that General Milley, who was the military guy, head of the military at the time, that he's just a dumb guy who believes the Democrat narrative.
And he thought that Trump was Hitler.
He actually talked about a Reichstag moment coming.
So he was completely brainwashed by his own team.
And so much so that it looks like he was afraid that the National Guard would side with the protesters.
So that's, those are some pretty big hallucinations from the head of the military.
So the head of the military, apparently, was so easily brainwashed that he was living in a complete imaginary world where there was some kind of a Hitler-like character trying to take over the country.
And then he acted on it.
It would be one thing to think of it, to think it, But he was in charge of the military and then he acted on it and people died.
Well, at least one person, a protester.
So, I think it was incompetence for the security.
In the case of Milley, he was just a brainwashed idiot.
And I do think that we should test our leaders for susceptibility to hoaxes.
Because I think you could.
I think you could test them to see if they believe things that aren't true.
Easily.
You know, just easily get into a... So, yeah, Milley just looks like an idiot, basically.
Judge Cannon, one of the lawfare judges for Trump, is denied their effort to dismiss some of the charges, so I guess that continues.
There's a... I saw some criticism of an opinion by Comic Dave Smith.
So Comic Dave Smith was saying that Global empires have an average lifespan of 250 years, and the U.S.
is 240 years old.
And we've got all the symptoms of a late-stage empire.
An overextended military, excessive indebtedness, degenerate culture, and an accelerating money printer.
And then I saw a criticism of this from just a user, an ex, Brian Hatano.
But I loved his criticism, so I'm just going to read the actual words of his criticism.
He goes, this is not how reality works.
This is not how reality works.
There's an old word called historicism that tries to predict deterministic historical trends as scientific.
This is where Marxism comes from.
There's no deterministic timeline that says, bye-bye U.S.
This is not inspired thinking.
And then somebody else added, also, this is not how averages work.
If the average empire lasts 250 years, that's not telling you that yours is going to last 250 years.
That would be the average.
So somebody just goes, that's not how averages work.
But I like, this is not how reality works.
No, history does not repeat.
You cannot predict the future in weird, non-scientific ways by, oh, the magic of the last empire.
Anyway.
No, that's not how anything works.
Now, could everything end in two years?
I suppose anything's possible.
But the most likely thing... Well, let me say this.
Every system that existed before the Internet is broken.
Because the Internet broke everything.
Politics is broken because now we can figure out what they're doing.
So there's too much resistance to the bad guys doing whatever they want, because now we can find out so easily.
So everything, even marriage, marriage can't really survive the internet because it gives people too many options and that's just a death sentence.
So generally speaking, it's rare for anything that worked before the internet to still be working.
Did you have your bookstore?
Oh, after the internet, you can't have a bookstore.
Right?
So basically everything that was a system, except finance.
Finance upgraded and improved with the Internet, but that's the exception that proves the rule.
So finance, instead of fighting the Internet, immediately embraced it and used it in all the right ways and made it better.
Well, I think it's better.
So history does not predict the future, and nothing else does either.
Nothing predicts the future.
Except me.
Sometimes.
All right.
Europe is experiencing some kind of wave of far-right victories, but it's funny because all the fake media is talking about the wave of far-right successes as this horrible thing that's happening, as opposed to an obvious response to opening your borders and destroying your own country, which is what they've done.
How could you not predict that people would say, hey, it looks like you're just destroying our country by opening the door and letting everybody in?
Of course there's going to be a response to that eventually.
Here it is.
So the countries that are allegedly moving right are Germany, France, and Italy.
I think there's a few others.
I'm not sure this is a gigantic trend yet, but it might be.
Anyway, back in the lawfare domain, can you believe that the New Jersey Attorney General is looking into the Trump business' liquor licenses for the Trump National Golf Course and, well, two entities that Trump owns in New Jersey?
And here's how they're trying to get him.
When you have a liquor license, The owner of the company can have what's called bad moral turpitude.
Moral turpitude.
You can lose your liquor license if someone else decides you have bad moral turpitude.
What exactly is that?
Well, you know, I'll tell you from my brief experience getting a liquor license.
So when I owned some restaurants, I had to go through this.
So I got checked.
The same way in California.
They check to see if you have moral turpitude.
But I was told, and I don't know if this is completely true, that the reason they've got that moral turpitude in there is so that they could deny licenses to gangsters, basically.
They just didn't want gangsters to have a lot of liquor licenses.
Criminals.
So now they're going to use that against the past and potential future President of the United States.
Why?
Now, I get that it might be a thing you can do, but why?
Why?
I understand why you'd want to deny a liquor license to a mafia member, or a cartel member, but can you explain why you'd do it in this case?
Given that that moral turpitude thing has, obviously, it's a subjective thing, why would you even look into it?
This is purely crooked.
It is purely crooked.
The Attorney General of New Jersey should be in jail if he does this.
I mean, I don't think there's law against, you know, abusing the legal system this way.
Probably not.
But in terms of how bad it is, it looks like a jail offense to me.
Well, California is also looking to seize profits from big oil companies.
So I guess you can sue the big oil companies if you think your climate change hurt you.
So that's another bad reason To be in California.
So California is trying to drive out the energy companies, the tech companies, that'd be pretty much everything.
So we're very anti-business in California.
We've got the high crime, the high taxes, the assets they can basically just take from you if they say that you're a climate change and the AI regulations and the crypto regulations.
It's basically everything bad for business at the same time.
Trump campaign is launching a Latinos for Trump effort to show that they're trying to get a lot of commitment.
I have mixed feelings about this.
You know, one of the things we like about Trump is he's not pandering to demographic groups.
I mean, compared to most people.
And this is a little pandering.
But maybe it is the right time, because they're trying to get more attention to the fact that other people are already moving to Trump in the Latino community.
So maybe it's good.
I think this was a coin flip.
But maybe.
You know, if you were a member of a demographic group that a candidate targeted and said, hey, you guys in particular should be for us, how would you feel about that?
Would you feel it's like, oh, it's so pandering.
Why are you treating me special?
How about just, I'm a citizen.
So I've got mixed feelings about it.
It might work.
It might just make people say, oh, they really want me.
One of the rules of persuasion is the ask.
And Trump is good at that.
He knows how to sell.
The ask is, I want you to vote for me.
I'm asking you to vote for me.
And if you don't actually ask for it, it's weird.
People won't do it.
Even if they support you, they might not cross the street to do anything about it.
But if you ask, and it forces them to answer, you're much closer to closing a deal.
So always do the ask.
So that's the part that this gets right.
I think Lara Trump is going to be a superstar.
When the election's done, I've got a feeling she's going to get a lot of credit if Trump wins.
It looks like it would be warranted.
There's a new study that says that if at first you don't succeed, you should probably give up because rarely do people who fail go on to succeed later.
Are you buying that?
So apparently if you look at all the situations such as, let's say, taking the LSAT test, the people who fail at once are unlikely to pass it later.
Some do, but they're unlikely.
So the thinking there is that it's a big lie that failing is how you succeed.
All right, since I wrote a book called How to Fail at Almost Everything and still went big, allow me to correct this.
Number one, do not give the same career advice to smart people as you do to dumb people.
That's a very good rule.
Don't give the same career advice to smart people as you'd give to dumb people.
A smart person, you might say, you know what?
You should go as far as you can with your education because PhD is going to open more doors than a master's opens more doors.
So that's what you do to like a really smart person.
If somebody can't do that, you don't say, keep taking that LSAT.
You'll get it.
If you know they can't.
So you don't give the same advice.
To people who don't have the ability to win, as you would to somebody who does have the ability to adjust, correct, try harder, and make it work.
And it is true that every time you fail you do learn something, unless it's just taking a test and you don't learn much.
But in life, if you fail, you're usually learning something.
So, uh, the other day I was playing tennis and I, I, uh, extended myself going for a ball and I pulled a, uh, hamstring.
Now I failed.
So I had to stop playing.
Did I learn anything from it?
Yes.
Yes.
I learned what my new limit is of my current body, you know, cause my brain was still back in my old body.
So I didn't know what I can and cannot do.
So I adjust.
So next time I, you know, as soon as I heal, next time I play, I won't do that.
I just won't, I won't do what I did before.
So no, people do learn from failure, but not dumb people.
All right.
There's a billionaire.
Pierre Amadiar.
I think he's American, but he was born in France.
And where did he get rich?
Was it eBay?
I forget.
Anyway, he has figured out how to do a George Soros.
So you know how George Soros, quite brilliantly, decided that he could change things more by going after the DAs and Attorney Generals?
So if you get the legal people, you can put in jail your enemies.
And so it's a good way to have power.
Well, this billionaire, Pierre, has apparently figured out how to get using his money, getting a network of people into FTC posts and other things in the government that would have sway.
And so if you have your people in the government, then they can control what businesses get away with what.
And basically, it's another way to control the world without getting an elected person Elected.
So I think Soros may have taught him this, you know, accidentally.
You figure out a way to control a mass part of our country without an elected representative.
You just get your appointees and all these key positions in the government.
Now that is terrible.
That is terrible.
Some non-American I have three answers from my American perspective.
as not being an American, said this, serious question, I'm not American, so I might be missing something, but can anyone tell me, why do millions of Americans still support a convicted criminal, a sexual assaulter, a rapist, a fraudster, a religious pretender, and overall, one of the vilest politicians I can recall?
I have three answers from my American perspective.
Number one, I couldn't tell which of the candidates that you were describing.
Thank you.
you Does he know that?
Which part of this doesn't apply to both of them?
I don't know.
It looks like it applies to both of them to me.
In the sense that these are what the enemies of each team says about the other one.
So I'm not saying it's true.
I'm saying that it appears about a tie on all those dimensions.
Number two.
What the non-American doesn't realize, apparently, is the news isn't real.
Where did he find out any of these things about Trump that he thinks he knows?
From the news?
Does he think the news is real?
Do they believe that in Europe?
They still think the news is real?
No, the news isn't real.
So everything you think about both of them is totally made up.
So that's another thing.
And the other thing is, compare it to the alternative.
Yeah.
What exactly would you be willing to vote for just so it isn't Biden?
Almost anything.
So if you're looking at the alternatives, it's just obviously Trump.
So here would be the question I would give back to him.
Can you name any smart American who doesn't have TDS who would be in favor of Biden?
That's my question back to you.
Haven't found one yet.
If you would like to judge the mood of the country, I had a post on X yesterday that I think did it really well.
I don't think that the left understands how much energy they've created in the right.
So yesterday I posted two words, and it got, last I checked, a quarter of a million views, which is a lot for my account.
And this is all I said.
It's time.
Quarter of a million views.
Can you feel it?
Can you feel the just energy?
Yeah.
All I had to do was say it's time.
Everybody knew what that meant.
Here's what that means if you didn't know.
It's time to leave it all out in the field.
If there was anything you were holding back, Don't.
If you thought to yourself, you don't want to be good, if maybe I tried to get my neighbor registered to vote, do it.
It's time.
If you thought, hmm, maybe I should retweet this thing or do this thing or talk to somebody or make that argument, it's time.
Do it now.
Everything that needs to be done, hold back nothing, give everything.
This is for the fate of the whole fucking world.
It's time.
It's time to get serious.
It's time to no longer play.
Some people are going to need to go to jail, and it's time.
We're not going to put up with the bullshit anymore.
We're not going to let you steal an election.
It's just time.
So, full energy.
Let's see it.
Now, speaking of energy, I'd like to give you my strangest hypothesis of the day.
When we talk about climate change, regardless of what's causing it or how much there is, I have this notion.
When is it ever a bad idea to have more energy?
I'm trying to think of a reframe that is the easiest way to understand the risk and reward of any climate warming.
So again, I'm assuming that there might be some warming.
You know, the separate debate that I'm not talking about is what's causing it.
Is it natural or man-made and how much, etc.
But we do know that where there's warming, there's extra greenery and the plants like it.
It's energy.
So warming is energy.
Do you know what the most dangerous thing in the world is?
No energy.
It's called cold.
I remember a question asked in a high school science class.
The professor, or teacher, said that the heat is really just energy.
Basically, the particles are moving around a lot, and that's what heat is.
And if the particles are not moving around, that's called cold.
And somebody raised their hand and said, if you can get energy, if heat and energy are the same thing, what is cold?
And the answer was, it's the absence of energy.
Now let me give you two situations.
It's zero degrees out and it's winter and you have no electricity, no power.
What are you going to do?
Die.
You're gonna die.
Unless you can start a fire, which creates energy, or unleashes it.
What happens if it's too hot?
If it's too hot, you put up more solar panels.
You just convert the energy into air conditioning.
Right.
So when it seems to me that in every situation, unless you're talking about a fire or an explosion, which is a release of energy that's bad.
If you talk about sort of life, you know, not not an emergency, but just life, more energy is almost always more better.
The best career advice I ever gave myself was that really the same week I graduated from college in upstate New York, I traded my car for a one-way ticket to California and ended up in the Bay Area.
Why?
Most energy.
This is where the energy is.
So I went from a low energy place to a high energy place because that's where you get lucky.
It's where everything good.
So it's always moved toward the energy.
Don't move away from it and what so here's the general statement Could it be?
That while I understand there might be some tipping point, you know, if it gets too warm something dies.
I suspect that There's probably a universal law That says unless something's exploding or on fire That more energy always makes you more better In other words, you're gonna live longer with more energy than you would with less energy and it's just always true Now, do you have to adjust to more energy?
Yes.
You might have to put up some solar panels and fire up more air conditioning.
Maybe.
Or you might have to plant more trees or something to adjust.
But you could do that if you have energy.
Can't do it if it's winter.
You can't do it if you don't have energy.
So, I suspect that There's probably a universal law like that that we just haven't discovered.
That more energy is more better.
Just always.
Jury has reached a verdict.
Jury has reached a verdict on the Hunter Biden thing.
And what was the verdict?
I'll tell you what I... Well, it wouldn't be... If they reached a verdict, it's got to be guilty, right?
So here's what I was predicting.
I'll tell you what I was predicting, even if I'm already wrong.
What I was predicting is that it would be a guilty verdict, because that shows that nobody's above the law, followed by a slap on the wrist.
So the best case scenario is that Biden can say, look, I didn't even pardon my own son.
That's how much I'm committed to the law.
But what is the verdict?
I don't see anybody telling me.
The jury was officially hung, somebody says.
What?
Alright, well the messages I'm getting from the internet are all over the place, so I don't trust any of them.
Don Lemon, what about him?
All right.
We are going to check out on that.
The Clinton hung the jury.
It's not announced.
Oh, okay.
That makes sense.
So there's a verdict, but we don't know what it is.
All right.
Well, that, ladies and gentlemen, is all I had for you today.
Did I miss any big topics?
It reached a verdict.
It's expected to be read in court soon.
All right.
Well, let's all go listen to the verdict.
So I say guilty, followed by no jail time.
And then maybe followed by a pardon later.
Tenure mandatory?
Really?
I don't know.
Don't let the refs decide the game?
You know, yesterday I was contacted by somebody who had an anti-Trump friend who was willing to talk to me on video to be deprogrammed.
And I thought, whoa, really?
And somebody who was a lawyer, it was a woman who was a lawyer.
I thought, well, that's perfect.
I would love talking to somebody who is, like, anti-Trump and is smart enough to, you know, have a good debate, you know, a lawyer.
And woman is even more perfect.
And so I agreed.
It's like, oh, yeah, maybe I would want to talk to her on video.
And then the next thing I hear is, well, she's not a Democrat, she's an Independent.
And then I said, oh, that's no fun.
Do you know how easily I can flip an Independent?
I need a little challenge.
Flipping a Democrat, I believe I can actually do.
I believe I can actually flip a Democrat in real time right in front of you.
But flipping an independent?
You could do that.
I need a little bit of a challenge.
Obviously, I could flip an independent.
That'd take, like, a second.
All right, that's all for now on YouTube and Rumble and Locals.
