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, Apple Privacy, Star Wars Acolyte, Kevin Spacey, Anti-Trump Fears, Justice is Revenge, Legal Revenge, Dark Money Fake News Sites, 2024 Crime Report, U.S. Intel Hoaxocracy, X Free Speech, President Trump, Adam Kinzinger, Climate Change Predictions, Joe Scarborough, Lawrence O'Donnell, CA Prop 47 Repeal, Hunter Biden, Ukraine War Purpose, Weed Smoking Gun Owners, Cenk Uygur, Israel Hamas War, 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
They've corrected that glitch, so it should be available next week.
Meaning, if you order it today, you'll get it next week.
So, God's Debris is destroying its competition in all of its categories on Amazon.
The book that will last forever.
Well, is everybody here?
Looks like we got everybody.
Let me make sure my beloved members of locals are here.
here. There they are.
Well, good morning everybody and welcome to Coffee with Scott Adams, the highlight of human civilization and possibly some other civilizations.
I think there are some other dimensions, but they're probably enjoying it, too.
And if you'd like to take your experience up to levels that nobody can understand with a tiny human, smooth human brain, all you need for that is a cup, a mug, or a glass, a tank, or a chalice, a stein, a canteen jug, or a 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 at the end of the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous syphilis.
us now. Go. That really does start off the day right.
Well, if you're subscribing to Dilbert, either on X or on Locals, You would see that you'd see both the digital calendar that exists only in digital form this year.
Next year it'll be paper by the way.
I'll announce that later.
But you would see two of my finest jokes at the same day.
I rarely laugh out loud when I look at my own comic.
It happens.
But today I laughed out loud at both of them.
Both the one I wrote 10 years ago and the one that's brand new today.
So you're gonna like it.
Well, Apple was zooming up on the stock market yesterday, I think, on the backs of their announcements about things.
And I'm not so surprised.
Not so surprised.
Because when I first heard what, you know, what Apple was doing, and then Elon Musk had his issues with it, I said to myself, ah, you know, it looks like a swing and a miss.
But then I started looking at the things that the AI added to the Apple phone would do for me.
And I immediately knew that I was trapped.
There was nowhere I was going.
I am going to use that phone.
I'm definitely going to upgrade.
And I wouldn't be able to live without the upgrade.
Because the things it's adding are things I really, really, really wanted to do.
And I've always wanted to do.
So I think other people probably have the same gut feeling.
So if you look at it analytically, it's hard to understand Apple.
But if you feel it, you can predict Apple.
And I've always had the feeling that I couldn't escape and I'm definitely going to upgrade.
You know, that's just free money for Apple.
I thought I might lose it on this upgrade, but nope.
Nope, that same irrational thing that says, I must have this product.
It's the most important thing in my life.
It kicked in again.
Apple is so, so good at the persuasion part of the business.
It's crazy.
And probably the tech is good.
We're all concerned about Elon Musk's comment that it might be a hit on your privacy, but I surrendered probably 25 years ago to a lack of privacy.
And in a way I'm like the canary in the coal mine for the rest of you.
You can see what it's like to live with the presumption of no privacy ever.
Meaning that I live my life like all my messages are public.
And have for decades.
And it's the only way I can keep peace of mind.
Because I know as a public figure everything I do is public.
Here's what happens when you're a public figure.
If you're not a public figure and you send a spicy message to your friend, your friend will go, ah, that's a spicy message, might even send one back.
And that's it.
If you're famous and you send a spicy message to somebody, They're gonna show all their friends.
Hey, I got a spicy message from a famous person.
And then everybody knows.
So there's no such thing as a private message once you're a public figure.
It's just, it's a total fantasy.
So once I came to grips with the fact that as a public figure, you don't really have any privacy.
And you also assume that anybody who's on the inside of any entity that you apply to, You know, in other words, if I've got an account for any kind of service or app, I assume they're all over my business just because they can be.
So I live my life like, well, here it is.
You know, if you don't like it, there's nothing that I don't think there's anything that could ever come out that I wouldn't do anything except shrug if it became a public matter, I think.
Could be surprised.
Well, people are talking about the new Star Wars movie.
I saw the best insult.
So the new movie is called The Acolyte.
And somebody said it was so bad it ruins the originals.
It's so bad it ruins things that have already happened in history.
The first three.
And they mean it.
Like, there's actually a reason behind that.
Because the new ones change some of the mythology and narrative of the old ones, but not in a way that people liked.
So, I haven't seen it, but somebody said, you know, something about the Force is no longer magical, and Anakin's no longer special, and, you know, just everything.
The things you assumed about the originals just stopped being true.
But the best part, I don't know if this is true, but I'll call this a recreational belief on my part.
I made no effort to find out if this is true, because it's funny.
So I'm going to treat it as a recreational belief.
Meaning, I don't know if it's true.
I don't know.
But somebody said, uh, in the movie, somebody said that in the movie, uh, lesbians can use the force to have babies without men.
Now that's probably not exactly what the movie is, but as a recreational belief, yeah, I'm going to accept that.
That, uh, in the new movie, they use the force so that lesbians can have babies without men.
Probably not true.
Probably the plot has nothing to do with that, but it's funny.
How many of you saw Kevin Spacey appearing on Piers Morgan and talking about what he would say was accidental and minimal contact with Jeffrey Epstein?
So his story is that indeed he was on flights with Epstein.
But he said it was in the context of Clinton charitable stuff.
So he was just a person using a plane, as others were, in the service of charity.
He says, That he didn't know who Epstein was back in those days, and that he's pretty sure that Epstein was on the plane some of those times, so he's confirmed that's true, but he didn't really know anything about Epstein or even have any contact with him.
Now, how many of you have ever been on a private jet?
Private jet?
How many of you?
And how many of you have been on a private jet with the owner of the private jet?
Some of you.
If you've never experienced it, I don't really think it's a thing that you fly on a private jet with the person who owns the jet and he doesn't introduce himself.
I don't think that's a thing.
Now, I don't know how many people are on the jet, but I feel like if I'm Epstein and my whole job is connecting, imagine or just put yourself in this position.
Imagine you own the jet.
You're on the Jet, and one of the other people on the Jet is Kevin Spacey, at the top of his fame.
And as the owner of the Jet, it never occurred to you to get up and introduce yourself to one of the most famous actors in the world, who's on your Jet, 20 feet away from you, and absolutely would want to say hi to you, because you own the Jet.
And that never happened?
Well, I don't know what's true and what isn't.
I will tell you that it looked to me like he was lying the whole way through, and I base that on body language and the way he acted.
Now, that doesn't mean he did any crimes, so I want to be very clear.
I'm not accusing him of anything, but it looked like It looked like he was selling a narrative, because maybe the truth didn't defend him as well as it could have or should have.
So I'm not saying he did anything wrong.
I personally have no information about that.
But he sure didn't look honest.
And it could be an actor thing.
You know, I feel like if you're a professional actor at that level, That difference between acting and telling the truth gets a little murky.
So when I saw him trying to tell the truth, he looked like he was acting to me.
But the problem is, actors might look like they're acting when they're telling the truth sometimes, if they're really trying to sell the truth because it matters to them.
So I don't know how to judge it.
It looked like not the truth.
It looked like acting.
But it could be the truth.
I mean, it'd be a weird truth.
Hard to believe.
Who knows?
It's a weird world.
Well, the lefties, the Democrats, are trying to warn the world that if Trump gets in back, he's going to get his retribution.
You know, Bolton is warning.
John Bolton is saying, you're not worried enough about his revenge.
And all the left-leaning publications are saying, Yes, Trump is going to come and get revenge.
And I guess AOC and Racial Mad Now believe that he might try to round him up and put him in prison camps.
Because that's what he does.
As if that's even slightly likely.
All right.
But here's what I want to say.
I posted this.
I'll just read it to you.
Here's my take on will Trump get revenge?
Number one, revenge is what holds civilization together.
Why is revenge getting a bad name?
Revenge is the only thing that holds civilization together.
Do you know why?
If you hurt my family, I'm going to get revenge.
That's it.
The entire glue of civilization is revenge.
Now, we like to use other words for it.
Oh, we're going to have it processed through the justice system.
Oh, this is a way to set things right.
We got some justice.
No, it's revenge.
It's all revenge.
You can change the name.
It's so that anybody who fucks with us knows that we're coming for them.
Nothing works unless you have that working.
Your entire social structure depends on revenge, specifically, and more than just about anything else.
So it's essential to collective survival.
So let me say it clearly.
If you lawfare Trump and you hunt Republicans, someone is coming for you.
If you lawfare Trump and you hunt Republicans, both of which are obviously in evidence, someone's coming for you.
Guaranteed.
And there's no free passes.
Now you can call it revenge if you want.
I could call it justice if I want to feel good about it.
But the thing is that whatever you call it, it's still going to happen.
You get that, right?
You can say that, let's say, take Israel.
You can say, oh, Israel's doing a genocide.
Somebody else could say, oh, Israel's defending itself.
I don't care what you call it.
You're still going to watch it happen.
And there's nothing you can fucking do about it.
Do you know why?
Because revenge keeps the world together.
Short of that, we'd all be dead.
From natural causes, and I guess getting robbed by bad people.
So importantly, but here's the thing that they miss and Republicans need to say every time.
Republicans' revenge, or you could call it justice, has to be 100% legal.
And it has to be within the constitutional requirements.
Why?
Because that's who Republicans are.
It's an identity.
The Republican identity is adherence to the Constitution, because it's the only thing that keeps us from being savages.
And they know that.
So even with its flaws, Republicans are absolutely wed to the Constitution.
It's just in their DNA at this point.
It's just the most basic part of their nature.
And I would go further, you know, I see that Trump gets a lot of character hits.
The people who don't want to support him say, well, his character, he can't have a character like that.
Let me explain to people who are not understanding why Trump has so much support, despite what you think is his bad character in some domains.
The only character the Republicans really care about is, what do you think about the Constitution?
And if you like God, that's a plus.
But really, I think Republicans could elect an atheist.
They wouldn't want to.
But it's within their ability if said atheist said, hey, you know what?
The best possible thing under our constitutional system is to have a president who doesn't play favorites with religion.
And by the way, I do understand it's a Christian, let's say, influenced process, and we don't want to change that unless we have a really good reason.
And I don't see one.
If you said that, Christians would say, oh, well, I would really prefer you were a Christian, but you just said everything I want to hear.
You're going to adhere to the Constitution, which was created by people who had at least Christian influence, and that's good enough.
Because there's no Christian that says you have to change.
There's no Christian in the United States that says you must change to be a Christian.
They don't require that.
They just require you don't mess with them.
Let them live their lives.
So as long as your president, uh, has one character, uh, let's say quality, which is an absolute, uh, devotion to the constitution and the country.
You're good.
You're good.
So you don't have to be surprised when a Republican or anybody else supports Trump.
It's simply that we think the character that matters in this case is Constitution?
What do you think of that?
Yes, we're good.
What do you do with women?
I don't care.
I don't care what your genitalia is doing.
I really don't.
And I don't really care what column you mark something down.
As long as you paid your taxes, I don't care what column you mark it down in.
Nobody cares.
All right.
So, but here's the other thing that Democrats need to know.
So I put this in my post.
I said, note to Democrats, if Trump ever becomes an evil tyrant, Republicans will kill him for you.
That's what the guns are for.
And the F-15s aren't going to protect them, no matter what dumbass Biden says.
That's what the guns are for.
To imagine the Republicans would be okay.
With somebody they like becoming a dictator is completely missing the whole point of being a Republican or a conservative, which is if it's not in the Constitution, no.
How about no?
How about if you try to violate the Constitution by becoming a tyrant, we'll kill you.
How about if you were our best friend yesterday, but today you become a tyrant, we're still going to kill you.
It's really clear.
That's what the guns are for.
It's not just for killing somebody that's on the other team.
It's for killing our own team.
It's for killing our own team, if necessary.
Right?
It's always last resort, of course.
Guns are last, last, last resort.
And we're not there.
We're nowhere near gun time.
Anyway, the reason the Republicans don't see any dictator risk Is that they've not been brainwashed by the CIA led corporate media.
So if you've been brainwashed into thinking Trump might become a dictator, despite four years of experience in which nothing like that happened, and the biggest complaint about him is he didn't have enough power to do anything he wanted to do, like even build a fucking wall.
If you could live through that and still think he's going to be a dictator, despite 80 million people with guns who are willing to shoot him the minute he becomes a dictator, like literally, Not hyperbolically.
If he ever became an actual hitler, the Republicans would take him out.
You don't even have to take care of it.
You can just ask us.
I say us because I'm on pro-Trump even though I'm a Democrat.
All right.
So Axios reports that the fake local news sites now exceed the real stuff.
So there are all these dark money sites pretending to be local news, but they've exceeded the actual news.
So your odds of seeing real news now much less than seeing one of the fake sites, but even the real news is fake if it's political stuff.
Why is that?
Well, that's the country we live in.
The FBI has just announced that crime has plummeted for the first quarter of 2024.
Can we all have a laugh about that?
I'm going to take an extra sip while you laugh at the ridiculousness of all the data that you're going to see this between now and election day.
All data is fake.
All data is fake.
Between now and election day, there won't be a single fucking piece of data that you should trust.
Everything about the inflation will be fake.
Everything about the CGI will be fake.
Everything about employment will be fake.
Everything about crime will be fake.
And this one really stands out because apparently there were changes in The reporting requirements.
So what we're seeing is a change in how the data was collected and reported.
We're not seeing a change in crime.
There might be a change in crime, but it would be, you know, hidden by the fact that the reporting structure changed.
So no, don't trust that.
And, you know, one of the biggest lies in America is that voters determine the outcomes of elections.
Would you all agree that we could dispense that fantasy?
It's really, really obvious that that's not what's happening.
What's happening is, basically, we live in a hoaxocracy.
So we live in a world in which lying doesn't have consequences, if you're in the political game, and it's gotten much worse.
It used to be that the candidates could just tell a bunch of lies, and the other one would say, hey, that's a lie, but nothing would really happen.
But now it's extended all the way into the CIA, Can legally, I think, completely interfere with elections, as they obviously did, and, well, the intelligence people in general, and they can just run ops.
They can actually run an op to create a fake narrative.
Not just lie, but pay somebody to develop fake information, pay somebody to act a certain way.
Now, look at these lies.
The Russia collusion hoax, the laptop hoax, the fine people hoax, the insurrection hoax.
These are ops.
This is not just somebody lying.
This is your intelligence agencies running games on the United States just the way they do in other countries when we try to influence them.
So the real competition is not between candidates and their messages.
You can see for yourself that policy is not having a big role in this election, and probably not any election.
We pretend it does, but maybe not.
What we have is a competition between government liars, which include the intelligence community, and something that caught them by surprise, which is the most persuasive populist in the history of the United States.
Maybe the world.
So Trump simply broke the mold by being so persuasive that their various machinations and control over the media wasn't enough.
They didn't know how to control that specific persuasive threat.
But moreover, Trump has a sort of a secret army of hypnotists who have been working with him from the start.
And if you combine Trump's power With a secret cabal of hypnotists.
They can actually match the entire intelligence operation.
That's how good Trump is.
With persuasion.
Especially when he has help.
But here's the important thing.
The only reason this is a fair fight is because Elon Musk bought X.
About Trump wouldn't even be close in the polls, except that there's now something closer to free speech happening, and it's on X, so it's a pretty big footprint.
Our government is a hoaxocracy.
It's just a bunch of hoaxes run by the intelligence units to make you think you should vote one way versus another.
And countering that is the most persuasive populist who is supported by a cabal of super persuasive people that I call hypnotists.
Now the beauty of hypnotists, and also with the intelligence people, is they have one quality in common.
They can operate right in front of you and you can't see them.
Now, we can see them because the various hypnotists who are pro-Trump, and again, I'm using hypnotist as more of a provocative title for just people who understand persuasion and how the persuasion world works.
I'm talking about your Sertoviches, your Jack Posobiec, your Glenn Greenwalds, your Schellenbergers.
I could go on and on.
But it's the people who are not hypnotized.
And the people who have enough experience that they can see the plays.
So for the first time, there's now visibility on what the real system is, which is an intelligence operation backed by rich people, basically.
And the State Department.
And of course, Mike Benz is the other big part of that.
So it's not all persuasion.
You also need some autists.
And I say that because Mike Benz called himself autistic.
I think he doesn't mean that, literally.
But what he does mean is he has a certain kind of mind that can play chess and can play classical music.
And as luck would have it, that specific mind allows him to look deeply into all the connections in the government and tell you how they're all connected, which you and I can't do because we can't beat them in chess.
We can't play, you know, concert, piano.
And our brains aren't wired that way, but his is.
And so he just tells you what's true and you go, Oh my God, now I see it.
He can't see it until he explains it.
But once he says this person worked for this person, you know, this person met with this person, it all makes sense.
So there you go.
It's all possible because of Elon Musk buying X and saving free speech, literally saving free speech.
Well, The Hill is reporting that Democrats want to remind people of all the bad things that Trump has said and to cure what they call the Trump amnesia.
They're worried that voters forgot all the bad things that Trump said.
Can I translate that for you?
All right, I'll be your hypnotist and I'll translate that brainwashing.
What that means is all the bullshit that the Democrats made up about Trump, like Saying drink bleach to cure you, you know, things that didn't happen.
Saying that the soldiers were losers because they died or something like that didn't happen.
Fine people hoax didn't happen.
So what they're calling Trump amnesia is their clever persuasion play to make you think those things were ever true in the first place.
Good luck.
Good luck.
I think that's their counter to Trump derangement syndrome.
Because you notice that there's always a counter.
You know, whenever there's something that they're doing wrong, they will definitely blame you for doing it.
So that's more of that.
I had the bad luck to turn on CNN when they had a guest, Adam Kinzinger, on.
And he talked for, I don't know, five minutes or so.
And all I could see was severe mental illness.
Do you get the same feeling?
Like his face seems all puffed up like he's on some kind of medication and everything he said sounded like a hallucination.
You know, of all the bad things Trump was going to do and the bad things that happened that didn't really happen.
I mean, none of it seemed like it was based in any kind of reality whatsoever.
Now, I don't think he's in the category of a clever operator.
I think he's just crazy.
Like, like there's just mental health problem there.
That's what it looks like.
Well, here's a question I was using my chat GPT for to help me out while I was preparing my notes.
I saw somebody who said on a post, Chris Marks said on X, that in 1988 experts predicted sea level rise would wipe out the Maldives within 30 years, but the Maldives have actually grown instead of shrunk 36 years later.
And then he says, Chris says, the catastrophists are battling zero with their predictions of doom.
Now I said to myself, really?
Is it really zero?
Because they predicted so many dooms, you figure some of them had to hit, right?
Because a lot of them are coin flips.
Either it'll be drier than usual or wetter than usual.
Either there'll be more hurricanes or less hurricanes, you know, fewer hurricanes.
So I wondered if that's true.
Have the Doom predictors really, actually, literally been wrong 100% of the time?
So I asked ChatGPT, and as you know, ChatGPT is totally unbiased.
No, of course not.
It's totally biased for whatever the narrative is to the left, and so it supported the idea That the catastrophists, as Chris calls them, have made correct predictions.
Would you like to hear some of the correct predictions?
If you heard that people correctly predicted the future based on climate change theory, and then they hit their mark, wouldn't that make you think, maybe?
Maybe if you were doubting climate change was a problem, but you heard that they made predictions, like years ago, and then nailed it?
Wouldn't that change your mind?
All right, well, watch me change your mind now.
Here's some predictions that they totally nailed, according to ChatGPT.
That the Pacific Northwest would have a heat wave in 2021, and it caused a bunch of fires and stuff.
So they predicted that.
Did they predict that it would happen in the Pacific Northwest?
No.
No, they predicted that there would be extremes.
So that there would be some places, you know, having extreme dryness, but in other places they said there'd be extreme wetness.
So they predicted extremes in heat waves, but also extremes in flooding.
And sure enough, there were some places that had one in a thousand year floods.
Well, that sounds pretty bad.
Just like they predicted.
And then the Pacific Northwest had an unprecedented heat wave.
Well, that's exactly what they predicted.
Does that sound like a good prediction and they really hit it to you?
This is designed for people who are not good at analysis.
Did you catch the problem?
Watch me make a prediction, and then I guarantee I'm gonna hit it.
You ready?
Sometime in the next year, there will be at least one region of the earth that has a weather-related event that's unprecedented, and it will be caused by me snapping my fingers.
Done.
You watch.
In the next year, there's gonna be an extreme weather event.
I can't tell you where.
I mean, You know, the climate change couldn't tell you it was going to be in the Pacific Northwest in 2021.
I mean, we're not that specific.
I'm just telling you in the next year, somewhere on Earth is going to break a record for weather.
And it's because I snapped my fingers.
Check back with me in a year.
Anybody want to bet against me?
No, you don't.
Because the weather sets records all the time.
I don't remember a single time in my childhood where I turned on a weather report And some weather man, usually man, back then, or weather woman, or weather non-binary, or trans, was telling me that there's a new record in Idaho.
Oh, looks like it's a, there's a drought in, there's a drought in Maine.
Well, probably never.
So, the catastrophists went from predicting things you could measure, you get that?
You could measure the sea level at the Maldives, but every time they predicted something you could measure, it didn't happen.
So what did they do?
Did they say, well, I guess our theories are debunked because every time we predict it doesn't happen?
No!
They changed their predictions to something unlikely will happen.
What?
Something unlikely is guaranteed to happen no matter what, with or without climate change.
The world is a big, you know, changeable ball floating through space.
It's changing all the time for all different reasons, you know, at least in terms of specific geographies.
So no, they just hid the ball.
They're hiding the ball.
By saying, well, we predicted this 2021 Pacific Northwest.
You say, did you predict it would happen there and only there and then 2021?
Well, no, but we correctly predicted things like that.
Yeah, so did I by snapping my fingers.
I just correctly predicted that things like that will happen next year.
Crazy.
So then I asked Chad GPT.
Are there any of the years in that period where they think they're so happy they nailed that Pacific Northwest thing?
I said, can you tell me, did the temperature go up every year?
They said, well, no.
It said between 2017 and 2018, the temperature was stable.
2018, the temperature was stable.
Oh, and between 2019 and 2020, it decreased.
Wait, what?
So 2017 and 2018, the temperature didn't increase.
And then 2019 and 2020, it decreased.
But then they're doing a victory dance because in 2021, there was a heat wave in one place.
Could this be more bullshit?
They're really doing it right in front of us.
It's funny.
I was watching MSNBC again because I watch it for the comedy.
And what you notice is that MSNBC's content is no longer about the news, it's about their reaction to the news.
Have you noticed that?
Once you start seeing it, it becomes funny.
They're creating content by their reaction to the news, even though the news is nothing.
So they're actually inventing reaction news.
It's like those reaction videos of people listening to a great song for the first time.
So I was watching, uh, uh, I guess it was on Morning Joe.
If you really think that Joe Biden is the one losing it, um, I think everyone in the world thinks Joe Biden's losing it.
He said, watch the performance in Las Vegas over the weekend.
This was Trump giving a speech.
And then they didn't show the speech.
Or anything that would make Trump look bad.
They just sort of took something out of context, and then they did reactions.
So, Trump did nothing wrong, he just gave his normal speech.
They took it out of context, and then they made the news, the reaction.
Ho!
Look at that guy!
Ah!
Ha!
Ha!
Woo!
Ah!
Woo!
And that's the news.
The news is the reaction to the thing they made up.
They just make up stuff and they react to it, and then people watch it.
And I do too, because it's funny.
But if you watched it thinking it was news, my God, you'd be lost.
So then I saw somebody on social media say something about Morning Joe and, you know, the intern that died in his office.
Somebody made an allegation that he was involved with her, and I thought, I think I would have heard that news.
So I asked Chat GPT to give me a history of Morning Joe, before he was Morning Joe.
So he was in Congress in 2001.
He won his re-election in November.
But then a few months later he announced he was quitting for personal reasons.
But there was no reporting that he was involved with anybody or having an affair.
That's just an internet thing.
But at least ChatGPT says there was nothing like that going on.
It was just personal reasons unspecified.
Here's a question I ask you.
Who runs for office, wins, and then quits halfway through?
Or like, really?
If he resigns six months or so after he won the election, it kind of suggests to me that maybe he was planning to quit as he was running.
Or there's something happened we don't know about.
So there's a little bit of a mystery there.
But an intern did die.
Somebody young who had an undisclosed heart problem, who had the bad luck of collapsing and hitting her head on exactly the thing that would kill her.
So... Here's the thing.
You know, we always suspect that the intelligence people try to own public figures through the process of having blackmail on them.
Do you think Morning Joe has any blackmail?
Now, I don't know, and I don't see anything in the news that looks, like, reliable that would say anything bad about him.
But he acts like he is.
He acts like he's not under control.
Because the things he says are so laughably stupid.
You know, his complaints about Trump.
He doesn't look like he's doing anything close to an opinion or the news.
It looks like somebody paid him to say bad things about Trump, and that's it.
And if he doesn't, he'll die.
He looks like he'll die if he doesn't insult Trump.
Maybe he would.
I also have a theory about Lawrence O'Donnell, because he has the smug idiot look.
And I always wonder, like, what's behind the smug idiot?
Where he says stupid things, usually about Trump, but then he's got a smile of satisfaction like I've never seen in my life.
And the two things are just so jarring and uncanny valley to me.
And here's my theory.
I think Lawrence O'Donnell is someone who never got enough attention for his good works during his life, because he's actually quite accomplished.
He's done quite a bit before he was on there.
And I think that once he found that all he had to do is cleverly insult Trump, and he would get more public acclaim and more accolades than he did for any of his good work.
I think he was a writer on the West Wing, for example.
That's pretty impressive.
I don't know what he contributed specifically, but if you're a writer on the West Wing, the best written show, of course, I also believe that it was written entirely by the producer of the show and that the writers had almost nothing to do with it, so maybe he had nothing to do with anything.
But, I'm saying that he looks like a guy who found a way to get a pat on the back And rub of the belly and a treat.
And all he has to do is insult Trump.
So he's got this smile on his face like he's discovered infinite candy and he can just stick his beak in and suck out the sugar and it's just a good time.
No real work involved.
He just has to say, and what do you think about Donald Trump?
Am I right?
And people will say, that was a genius show.
Lawrence, you nailed it again.
Watch this.
Watch me nail it again.
Donald Trump.
He's probably a rapist and maybe a racist.
Wow!
The insights that you're bringing to this, Lawrence, are so impressive.
May I buy you lunch?
I feel like that's what's happening.
Like this smug idiot look is that they can literally say any damn thing about Trump, and they know it, and they just get some big reward.
Well, crime might become illegal in California again.
The initiative to end it, Proposition 47.
Proposition 47 was the thing that said you could steal up to $950 and it wouldn't be much of a big deal.
So people did.
Quite a bit of it.
And the Californian public has realized that we don't have a real government, because if we had a real government, we wouldn't have to do this.
They would have changed it themselves.
So the citizens of California are rebelling, and basically, it's an insurrection.
I mean, the ballot initiative to get rid of Prop 47 is very specifically an insurrection, because we're cutting the government out of the decision, because they can't get it right.
And we believe that the government is acting against our interests as citizens.
That's exactly what's happening.
It wouldn't be on the ballot unless a lot of people thought this is wrong.
And I'm pretty sure it's going to win.
Pretty sure it's going to win.
So this might be a little bright spot in the future.
Anyway, so we know a lot about the whole Hunter Biden Burisma CIA thing.
But if you don't know the whole thing, and I'll talk about Hunter's conviction next, so you remember there were 51 signers of the thing that said the laptop was fake.
What we know now is that the CIA was entirely behind the Ukraine revolution, entirely behind the Ukraine war, and that the CIA is licensed to lie, And do illegal acts.
And a lot of the things we've seen are they're licensed to do illegal acts.
So let me put this in context.
Remember you said to yourself, my God, we just found out that 51 intelligence people lied to the public about the nature of the laptop.
And you say to yourself, well, that's gotta be illegal.
Nope.
It's specifically legal to lie to the United States citizens for an app.
They can break the law.
Any law they want, apparently.
And they can lie to the American public.
It's not illegal.
So they were just doing their jobs of covering up a thing.
Now you say to yourself, but is it their job to cover up for Hunter Biden?
Yes, it is.
Because Hunter was part of the op.
Hunter was on the board of Burisma because of the CIA.
Because we wanted them there.
We, the CIA, wanted them there.
So, the Hunter Biden crime family, if they were completely, let's say, we understood everything we did, it would unravel the whole CIA interest, which they can legally lie to you to keep private.
So, did they interfere with the election?
Clearly, yes.
Yes, yes.
Yes, yes, yes.
Would that be illegal under every normal context?
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Is it illegal if the CIA is behind it?
I think no.
I think they're actually authorized to do exactly anything they want.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
I think that they can do that.
Write to us.
I'd love to be wrong about that, but I think that maybe no laws were broken, at least by the people who organized it, if they were doing it under the CIA banner.
So thanks to Mike Benz and a number of other people, but mostly Benz, I think, for unraveling that whole thing.
So we know that Burisma was the vehicle that the CIA was going to use to control Ukrainian's oil production, and that was the reason we were there in the first place.
We wanted to bankrupt Russia and make them non-competitive if we wanted to, you know, control other countries that they also had an interest in.
So, for example, if we wanted to dominate Syria, we would rather that Russia was too weak to stop it.
If we wanted to dominate any other country in which they have a relationship, we wanted them to be too weak to help that other country.
So, I think we understand that quite well.
In that context, how do we look at Hunter's gun conviction?
So, he now would be a convicted felon if all this is finalized.
Guilty on three counts related to guns.
There could be a potential jail term.
Have you noticed that the news keeps talking about the fact he might go to jail?
And yet the news also says he's totally not going to jail.
Why are they running both stories?
Oh, he could go to jail for 25 years.
He's totally not going to jail, of course, because it's the first offense and there wouldn't be any reason to.
But, oh, 25 years, 100 years.
It's to make it sound scarier.
So it's more of a story.
Get your interest.
But maybe it's also to cover up that the conviction is a diversion.
Now, as all the smart people said, and James Comer said something like this, Basically, if James Comer said that if he were going to make a list of the top 10 crimes that Hunter committed, his gun crime wouldn't be on the top 10 because they get all kinds of FARA violations and not paying his taxes and all kinds of stuff.
Yeah.
So, Anyway, do all of you believe that the gun conviction was just so they could say nobody's above the law, but since Hunter wasn't possibly going to go to jail and he could get pardoned by his father any time?
Hunter seemed pretty relaxed after being convicted for something that could send him to jail.
Why do you seem relaxed?
Because his only problem was the court case itself.
That it was, he had to be there and go through the business and pay for it.
That was his problem.
He didn't really have a problem with going to jail.
So once the felony conviction was, you know, in the bag, all his problems were solved because he's not going to jail and it'll be fine.
So it does look exactly like they're sacrificing him, but not really, because he's not going to go to jail and his reputation isn't going to get any worse.
And do you think Joe Biden feels bad that Hunter can't get a gun now?
Imagine you're the father.
Put yourself in Joe Biden's position.
If you pardon him, Correct me if I'm wrong, but he can go get another gun.
Can he?
No, I guess he couldn't because he'd still be a... Well, I don't know.
I'm not sure.
I think he couldn't get another gun.
But it certainly makes sense.
And by the way, I think that Trump should pardon him.
I'd like to see Trump pardon Hunter for this.
To make a point that we don't do bullshit.
Just to make a point that pardons are real and we don't do bullshit.
And I think the Supreme Court should throw it out because I don't, because at the moment, you know, I think 30 million people are illegal.
How many people smoke pot and also have a gun?
Think about it.
How many people smoke pot?
Let's say in a, well, it's federally illegal everywhere.
So if you smoke pot and you own a gun, you could go to jail.
He should be pardoned.
Because the law is too unclear, and it's not one that we should be obeying.
I say.
And a number of Republicans have agreed, by the way.
Thomas Massey said he's not in favor of that law.
I agree.
The Second Amendment has to be above this.
And I get the reason you don't want people who are currently drug addicts to have guns.
But you're going to have to do better.
If it's including marijuana, you've got to throw it out.
All right.
I saw Cenk Uygur.
He was commenting on a Wall Street Journal article that apparently says that the head of Hamas, Sinwar, has a plan, as Cenk Characterizes it, a plan to get Israel to lose by getting them to believe they're winning by how many Palestinians they slaughter, which would be Cenk's word.
So then he says, well, if it's true that Hamas is trying to win by losing, by having the maximum amount of Palestinian deaths, if that's true, per the Wall Street Journal, then why is Israel falling right into his trap?
And Cenk I asked, why is the moron Netanyahu helping Hamas execute their exact plan, which is maximum casualties?
And I volunteered to answer that question.
So I replied to Cenk, and I said, this one is easy.
Israel's enemies gave it a free pass to do anything it wants.
Free pass.
So, here's what I mean.
No matter what Israel does in this situation, It's not really going to change the level of hatred by its enemies who are the dangerous ones.
And the ones who aren't dangerous are not dangerous.
So the people who wanted to destroy Israel are not going to more want to kill them.
If their enemies want to kill all Jews and expel them from Israel or whatever, it's exactly the same.
That Hamas was willing to, like, run toward them, you know, firing and slaughtering people and doing all that.
It didn't get more.
They didn't get more angry.
So they had nothing to lose in terms of the enemy's opinion of them.
And nothing to lose in terms of the supporters of those enemies.
They were already 100% against Israel.
And that was their mistake.
Because they gave Israel a free pass.
How about American support for Israel?
Well, if you're following the news, you might say, well, you know, they're going to lose some American support and in the long run, that's really going to hurt them.
Nah, probably not.
Probably they're not going to lose American support in the long run.
They have a really good relationship and, you know, AIPAC does a good job, et cetera.
So they're not going to lose support from the allies that matter.
Most people don't care about it one way or another, honestly.
And they're not going to make any difference with how their enemies feel about them.
Under those conditions, you can do anything you want because you have a free pass.
And what they want to do is apparently reduce the number of people who can shoot at them to zero.
That's what they're doing.
And they're picking up the free money.
So why wouldn't you take free money if somebody hands it to you?
That's all that's happening.
Is that the bad guy said, we give you no way to win except for killing us all.
So Israel said, wait a minute, say that again?
Yeah, you have no way to win unless you kill us all.
So if I go ahead and try to kill you all, meaning the fighters, not the civilians, then I'm just doing the only thing that I have a choice to do.
But I can also maybe pick up some land and get some benefits while I'm doing it?
That's right!
Okay, then we'll just do the only thing we can do that will make no difference to anybody except we'll come out ahead?
That's right!
So here's what Hamas is doing wrong.
If they'd ever presented Israel with a, if you do less of this, we'll do less of that proposition, Well, then they might have something to work with.
That might be something to talk about.
But nothing like that's happening.
Their position is, we keep our guns and we attack you again later as soon as we're strong enough.
Those people need to go away.
And Israel's making them go away.
So no, don't expect Israel to negotiate when the people that they would negotiate with have said, If you negotiate with us, you're just going to be a sucker because later we'll come back and kill you because that's the only thing we care about.
Design is destiny.
If you design a system in which your enemy must kill you and take your shit because it's the only logical thing to do, they're going to kill you and they're going to take your shit.
Don't complain to me about it.
If you design a system that guarantees that outcome, And then you watch it happen exactly like it would happen on paper.
Huh.
How about we give you no options?
Yeah.
Well, what are you going to do if we give you no options?
Well, if we have no options, I guess we'll do the one thing we can do, which is kill you all.
It's not confusing.
It's not confusing.
People make peace when it's possible.
If you're dealing with somebody that says, the more you kill us, the more we're going to be worth killing, because we'll be even angrier and try to kill you harder.
It's their only choice.
Stop giving people one choice and then being puzzled about why they take the one choice.
Anyway, let's see if I missed anything.
I feel like I did.
There was something I was going to tell you about that I did not.
Yeah, I think I covered it.
All right, we're gonna call that good.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is all I wanted to say today.
The best show you're gonna see today.
Everything else is a mere shadow imitation.
I think the most boring thing about today will be all of the Republicans saying exactly the same thing about the gun conviction.
It's a diversion.
There were worse things.
Uh, the prosecutor was clearly crooked because he first tried to get him infinite, uh, permanent immunity against all things, which nobody gets.
And it was stupid and it was rejected by the judge.
And then when he came back, suddenly he's all about law and order.
Yes, it was a diversion.
It definitely was a diversion.
And it definitely was the only thing that could keep Hunter out of jail.
Well, the Democrats could say, see?
Nobody is above the law.
We told you.
It's all fake.
Well, Hunter has three, actually.
Hunter has three.
But it's the same trick that they use with Trump.
You know, Trump has one issue that they figured out.
He filled out more than one form, so they give him a count on each form.
Oh, yes, good point.
Thank you for making that.
It also creates a precedent for going after Republicans with guns.
So imagine, if you will, that you join the NRA.
So the government, if they needed to, could find out if you have a gun, And then suppose you also use social media and maybe you've purchased marijuana at a dispensary.
The dispensary would have a record of you, possibly, unless you paid cash.
And the NRA would have a record of you.
And then they would say, huh, here's somebody who's buying weed on a regular basis.
Here's somebody who has a gun, according to the NRA.
Let's check the records to make sure they have a gun.
Oh, yes, they do.
I found a Republican who has a gun and has a record of buying weed.
Boom.
Jail.
25 years.
That could happen.
All right.
G. Gordon Liddy has guns as a felon.
His wife bought them.
Oh my goodness.
Does that work?
I suppose if the gun is in the house and you simply use your wife's gun in its self-defense, that's legal, isn't it?
Listen to G. Gordon Liddy.
Yeah.
Get somebody else to buy you a gun and store it at your house.
Just make sure you know what the gun lock combination is.
You're probably in good shape.
All right.
Don't take legal advice from me, because if you do, you'll end up in jail.
Don't listen to any of that.
I'm just speculating that G. Gordon Liddy may have found a clever workaround.
Don't do it, though, because you'll probably end up in jail.
So listen to that last part.
All right.
Everybody on the YouTube and Rumble and X platforms, I'm going to say goodbye now.
See you tomorrow.
And I'm going to keep the locals subscribers here for some extra.
