My book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
Scott, M's the finest thing that's ever happened to you.
If you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand, all you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tanker gels, a Steineken tin, 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 to the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the Simultaneous Sip and it happens now.
Go!
Delightful.
Exquisite.
Beyond compare.
Well, let's get to the weird news.
This is weird just because I don't understand it.
So Saudi Arabia is, I guess the petrodollar agreement is expiring, which means that they'll trade oil in currencies other than the dollar.
Which means that if other countries wanted to buy and sell things internationally, they don't necessarily have to use dollars.
So they could get their oil using somebody else's currency.
Now the net effect of that, people say, is to make the dollar worth less, because it is no longer that essential currency for trading oil.
You can trade it in other currencies.
Some say that will cause the dollar collapse.
I'm going to put all of my economic knowledge together to give you my opinion of what's going to happen because of Saudi using Petrodollars.
Or not using Petrodollars, using other currencies.
The answer is, I don't believe economics is a real field.
I don't believe we can predict anything.
So, I totally understand You know, supply and demand, and the psychology of the market.
And yeah, I see, you know, cause and effect.
It should be, in a rational world, maybe the dollar would go down in value.
But I don't know if we're in a rational world.
And I don't think we can, we've lost the ability to predict almost anything that's complicated.
So I guess I would look at this and add it to my list of 25 things that might kill me within a minute that I don't know enough about that I can't worry about because, I don't know, maybe.
There's a whole bunch of stuff like that.
And I find that what I deal with are the things that I can kind of understand.
I don't necessarily put my attention into the things that are the most important.
You know, obviously I should.
But it seems to me that my natural ... Are the comments upside down now?
I can't tell what's first and what's last.
We do have a little comment issue here.
All right, it looks like they're coming in at the bottom and not scrolling.
All right, so we have another interface failure here.
I guess the new update made it impossible for me to see.
Impossible for me to see the comments.
So it doesn't look like there's any way for me to view the comments today.
I mean, I see the comments going by on the other platforms.
All right.
So I guess I'll just look at the Rumble platform because I do see the Locos comments there.
All right.
Last night I had a lovely night with ChatGPT and I swam in my pool at night after the sun went down.
And I just put the phone on the side of the pool and set it to chat GPT and it can just talk to you.
So I didn't have to, you know, interact with it physically.
I could just talk to it while I was swimming.
So I was floating around the pool and I'll tell you, once you learn how to use chat GPT for the things you want to do, there are moments of, you know, stupidity and uselessness and frustration and any new technology, but then there'll be moments When you just feel the future.
And I'll tell you where that happened with me.
What I used to do is find a nice YouTube channel that would teach me something that I didn't know, like something interesting about the pyramids or, you know, some damn thing.
And I would just say, OK, I'll give myself 20 minutes of some YouTube commercial on some topic.
But now I can just ask ChatGPT.
So I can say, hey, ChatGPT, What's the latest on what people think that went into building the pyramids?
And it will just give me like a YouTube audio lesson with great context and it'll go on for a while and I'll just listen to it like it's a radio program.
And then when it's done, let me give you an example.
So last night I wondered if there were any physicists who had ideas that were similar to my book, God's Debris, that's being reissued for the summer as a trilogy.
And it actually could survey all of the physicists' opinions across history and told me which ones had some kind of overlap with the book, which was fascinating.
And then it said something about Newton's rival, whose name I forget, Leibniz or Leibniz or Leibniz or something, the guy who also said he invented calculus.
And then I got a little lesson about how he believed that the The world is conscious and all the little particles are conscious.
I was like, whoa, I never knew that.
It was absolutely fascinating.
So the best thing you can use ChatGPT for is weird little history lessons and filling in, like, worldly topics that you always wondered about.
Tim Poole asked it, should we end the Fed?
And ChatGPT said yes, and it gave reasons.
It gave reasons why we should end the Fed unambiguously.
Where did that come from?
And then ChatGPT, there's, separately, there's a story that there's a simple logic problem that people have been giving the various AIs, not just ChatGPT, and they universally seem to fail what is an obvious logic problem.
Did you really expect that AI would fail an obvious logic problem that a human can get most of the time?
But it does.
And in my experience, I've beaten AI in debates privately every time.
Every time I've had a debate.
And it will change its mind.
So I was asking him some questions about something and he gave me a bad answer and I said, well, are you aware of this?
Go back and look, and it said, oh yeah, you're right, totally.
Everything you said was right.
So you can talk it into logic.
It knows it when it sees it, but it can't produce it every time.
So I would say that Chad GPT is like a, it's like an idiot savant at this point.
If you ask it a little history thing or a math thing or how to program, it's amazing.
But even little logic problems.
It fairly consistently can't do small logic problems, and I've discovered that independently.
It is not good on logic.
Anyway, here's a weird thing.
So Apple is going to have connection to chat GPT in the new models of the Apple phone, but apparently Apple is not paying chat GPT for that.
And ChatGPT is not paying Apple.
They have some kind of understanding that it's going to be good for both of them, which is fascinating.
It almost makes me think that ChatGPT is more concerned about controlling information than they are about making money.
How in the world can they not charge Apple for having access on his phones all the time?
I guess you could say, well, Google search is free.
So maybe it's just search.
So I would say that using chat GPT as a search engine is way better than the current search engines, just because the interface is better.
But I don't quite understand that.
And I worry, I worry that the real reason is something that we're not being told.
You know what I mean?
That we have a long history of everything that was useful gets taken over by the intelligence people.
You know, the CIA literally becomes in charge of all your information eventually.
And I wonder if the CIA has already got its mitts into CHAT-GPT.
Well, let me take that back.
Let me be more realistic.
The CIA cannot allow CHAT-GPT to develop normally.
It would be too big of a risk.
Because it would start telling the truth.
So one assumes that the intelligence people, maybe the FBI, maybe the CIA, have already had conversations with it to control some part of it.
It could be that the big play is to make sure everybody's using it because that's the one that the CIA has access to.
Now, do I have any solid information or even clues or whiff of information that the CIA is involved in any way with any of the AI companies?
The answer is no.
However, We do have about a hundred year history to say there's no way they're not.
Would you agree with that assessment?
There's no evidence of it, but it's also true.
There's no way they're not all the way up their knickers by now.
Because they have to be, it's their job.
There's nothing more basic than controlling information.
It's the most basic thing that the CIA is trying to do.
Control information.
Get the good stuff, put out the bad stuff.
It's half of their job.
So of course they're going to corrupt AI.
Of course they are.
They have to.
It's not even really optional, so you don't have to wonder if it's going to happen, and you don't have to wonder if it's going to happen quickly.
It's already happened.
I think it's fair to say it's already a corrupt system.
I don't see how it could not be.
All right, here are some things you probably could have asked Scott There's a big meta-analysis, if anybody thinks those are real, that says that eating junk food can increase your chances of depression and psychological stress, and also make you dumber.
You know, we've seen that eating poorly makes you dumber.
And I think that explains the pyramids.
They didn't have junk food, so they were just smarter.
Hey, do you want to move that gigantic rock?
Hundreds of miles and put it on top of a huge man-made mountain called a pyramid?
Sure.
Is it going to be hard?
Not for us.
Look at how we've been eating.
All organic.
No, we're going to build a pyramid.
But I worry about the future because they'll be eating junk food until they don't know how to build a pyramid.
And here we are.
We eat junk food until we don't know how to build a pyramid.
All right, here's another one.
Scientists found out that concentration is contagious, meaning that if you're trying to work, it's way easier to work if you're surrounded by other people working.
Do you know who else knew that?
Me!
So the reason I got a Starbucks to work is not just because, you know, I like a different place to go, although I like that, it's because people are working.
And even if there aren't people with laptops, sometimes I'm the only one there in the afternoon, the employees are working.
So as long as the employees are working, I can work.
I just have to be near people working.
If I'm in a place where I'm the only person working, No, that's not gonna happen.
Because I'm influenced by them.
This is part of the Tim Ferriss, but other people have said it first, that you're the average of the five people you spend the most time with.
We're so social, that simply being around people who are concentrating allows you to concentrate.
Being with happy people makes you happy, sad people makes you sad.
So, it's a real easy hack.
So I found that there's a local library here in my town.
So when I don't want coffee, I can stop in there.
Totally makes it easy to concentrate.
All I do is I look around other people reading and concentrating.
Boom happens automatically.
Yeah.
That is a big, big life hack.
If you need to be a certain way, go be physically with people who are that way.
Oh, here's the, here's the better example.
The gym.
The level of motivation I have when I'm surrounded by people who are exercising is off the chart.
And I feel it directly.
I mean, it's not like a subtle thing.
You feel it the moment you walk in.
Oh, I'm going to have to take it up.
But if I'm lifting in my garage, and I do one set, and it makes me, you know, a little bit tired, I convince myself that one set's pretty good.
Of course it's not.
I know it's not.
But if you take me to the gym, I'm going to do three or four.
Because I'm surrounded by people doing the same thing.
Here's one you could have asked me.
Optimism wards off procrastination.
Now why in the world do they need to do that study?
Let me explain it in simple terms.
Optimism increases your dopamine.
Dopamine is not just the thing that makes you feel good.
It's a necessary chemical for action.
You literally won't get off the couch if you don't have enough dopamine.
So, are we surprised that optimism causes you to procrastinate less?
No!
That's the most predictable thing about humans you could ever predict.
Optimism equals dopamine.
Dopamine equals action.
Action means not procrastinating.
Optimism solves procrastination, I guarantee it.
I've always known that.
If you feel like there's no point in doing anything, then No dopamine, no action.
It's really that simple.
Optimism, positive thinking creates dopamine.
Dopamine is like the energy that makes a human do anything.
So optimism is the fuel of all activity.
You know, even if you don't think of it that way, you know, you're not necessarily an optimistic mindset, but you're still doing things that suggest you think tomorrow will be better or could be.
It's really all optimism, dopamine, action.
Once you learn that, one of the best reframes you'll ever have in your life.
It'll change everything.
There's some kind of third form of weird life.
Apparently there's, let's see, you got your bacteria and you got your eukaryotes.
That's me totally correctly pronouncing a scientific term, eukaryotes or something.
Now there's a third one, and they think they might be able to make some hydrogen off it.
Now, the interesting part about it is that these little single cell organisms can produce hydrogen somehow.
And this is part of my category of, what would happen if an entirely new source of energy got developed?
In other words, you know, we pretty well understand our solar and our fossil fuels and our water power and everything.
So if you were going to list, you know, nuclear, if you're going to list all the energy sources, pretty much every one of you would get the complete list.
You know, you might forget liquid gas or something, or you might forget gas for a minute, but then you'd remember.
But how did we get to this point?
We got to this point because We invented whole new fields of energy, like solar didn't exist, but then it did.
Nuclear power didn't exist, but then it did.
What are the odds that we're going to sail through the next 50 years without developing a brand new energy source?
Well, fusion we see coming, so that could be it.
But one we don't see coming.
I think the odds of not producing another energy source that was a complete surprise are low.
Would you take the bet?
Would you take the bet on the other side?
I say in the next 50 years, almost certainly, there'll be a new energy source that none of us have heard of, that's bigger than, or at least competitive with, our largest sources of energy.
And that is, yet again, why I don't think you can predict the climate for 100 years.
Massive study finds that participation in the news is declining everywhere, all over the world.
People are paying less attention to the news.
Huh.
I wonder what would cause that?
What would cause people to pay less attention to the news and talk about it less?
Hmm.
Could it be the knowledge that it's all fake?
Well, let's go to Jonathan Turley's take on the Hunter Laptop from Hell.
He said, with the authentication of the laptop as real in Delaware, because that's what happened with the Hunter gun charge case, part of the defense was, oh, it's definitely real.
So now that we know it's real, most media has chosen to walk away with a slightly embarrassed shrug, says Turley.
So they're kind of sort of a little bit admitting it, but acting like, ah, I don't know.
Did we say anything about it before?
Maybe we did shrug, you know, not admitting that they've been saying it was fake for years.
But there's one exception.
As Turley points out, not the Washington Post or Philip Bump, who just ran a column to assure readers that they were right all along about the laptop story.
Phil Bump is the best punchline of news writers.
Like, whenever you see his name, you know it's going to be a punchline.
You don't have to take it very seriously.
Phil Bump.
I love the fact that he's just a punchline now.
He's a bump.
All right.
Doctors are warning that antidepressants can permanently destroy your sex life.
And a bunch of young people are saying that they have, like, numb genitals.
And this is even after you stop taking it, apparently.
So the permanent part means even after you don't take it.
So, how many of you have seen that?
How many of you have observed somebody who got an antidepressant and their libido just disappeared?
Has anybody seen that in a friend or a family member, spouse?
I'll bet you have.
Yeah, pretty common.
And not nearly talked about as well.
Well, Elon Musk has hidden the likes on X. So now if you like something, you're the only one that knows.
And does the recipient know?
But I guess the observers don't know whether you hit a like.
I agree with that change.
I didn't like it at first, but I agree with it now.
Because I was actually getting shit for things I liked.
Did anybody else have that problem?
It might be just a public figure problem.
But I would read something and I'd think, huh, I don't agree with that point of view, but that was well done.
And then I'd give it a like.
And then somebody would come in like, Oh, really?
Why do you believe that a baby should be killed now?
And I'd say, I don't believe that.
I just thought that was a well-expressed article that had an opinion.
So I thought I'd give it a like.
And then I'm just explaining things.
So I like this.
I like that they can't see my like, so I don't have to explain anything.
If I repost it, that's more of a statement.
So that seems fair, but a like could be just like that was written.
That's the way I play it.
All right, Tesla shareholders have, by a huge margin, approved Elon Musk's pay package.
As you know, the Delaware court, based on one complainer with a few shares of stock, sued and said, hey, don't pay him $56 billion, even though he earned every penny of it.
And now the shareholders say, no, we are going to pay him.
And he is going to get that money back.
However, it still needs to go through some kind of a court process, I understand.
So it doesn't mean he's getting the money yet.
It only means that the shareholders have approved it.
So yes, thank you.
And by the way, I can't tell you how disappointed I would have been with the public if they withheld the pay from the guy who returned free speech to America.
And had a valid contract, which everybody with full knowledge of it, and no surprises, signed.
Yeah, I would have been really, really, really disappointed with the American public if this had gone the other way.
Now, it still has to get through some court decision, but things are starting to look like maybe there's some kind of improvement in the world coming.
As David Sacks pointed out on X, that Elon lost his sham trial, original trial about losing his pay package.
Then Trump lost his sham trial, but in both cases voters returned their rights, or are on the verge of it.
So Elon Musk, the courts go after him, but the voters, in this case the voters who own stock in Tesla, gave him back his rights.
Thank you.
And then Trump lost his sham trial, but it's very likely that voters are going to put him back in office, and then a lot of those problems can go away.
Thank you.
So the public is apparently stepping up.
That's what I like to see.
Here's what I think Trump should maybe consider.
I don't think Trump has hit the free speech topic as hard as he could.
Because now he's got a bunch of examples where Democrats are anti-free speech.
So they got the anti-free speech because the Twitter files revealed that the government was working to suppress speech.
You've got the Elon's pay package which is punishing Elon for basically giving free speech back to America by buying X. You've got the January 6 protesters in jail Not the violent ones, but the ones who were really just protesting, which seems like a violation of their free speech.
I get that they can make up a trespassing charge and pretend it's insurrection and all that, but really that was a free speech problem for 99% of them.
And then a wokeness canceling people like me for free speech.
So you have, you have really a whole body of things happening at the same time.
They're all Democrat things.
They're all just aimed against free speech.
And I don't think anybody's hit that topic because there haven't been enough examples that you could put together and say, look, it's not one thing.
There is an organized attack on free speech.
And there really is.
That's a true thing.
Well, Boeing had a bad month.
Apparently the number of orders that Boeing has received for only four planes in May.
And no orders for the 737 MAX.
That's the one that's always in the headlines, not for good reasons.
So it looks like the market is responding.
Now what do you think the problem with Boeing is?
Almost certainly it's a DEI problem.
Oh, most certainly.
Now, let me ask you, could I have said that two years ago?
Probably not.
Probably get canceled for that.
But again, I say it as clearly as possible.
It's not because people are a certain demographic group that can't perform.
I'm not saying that.
I'm saying just the nature of DEI makes companies promote underqualified people.
Regardless of their genes or their culture or anything else.
It's just built into the design of the system that people are going to try too hard to get diversification and it'll be at the expense of capability.
And it could be that it's already taken out one of the jewels in the American economic system.
Our aircraft building industry is one of the great things about America and DEI may have destroyed it entirely.
That's a real thing.
Yeah.
Now, somebody might argue, but Scott, there are other reasons for this.
I would listen to that.
But on the surface, it seems obvious it's just a DEI problem.
Now, Democrats are going to say, you, you damn racist for saying that.
But I'll say it again.
It's obviously a DEI problem.
It may be other things too.
But there's no way in the world that DEI doesn't have this very predictable outcome.
You should see a bunch of other companies also just losing it completely, because they can't deliver simple things.
And it will be a DEI problem.
Guarantee it.
I told you I thought Kevin Spacey didn't look like an honest person when he was on the Piers Morgan Show.
I didn't know specifically what sounded sketchy, but Alex Jones is weighing in saying directly that he thinks Kevin Spacey lied.
Here's his evidence, and it's pretty good.
So Spacey said he was flying on Epstein's plane, but didn't know Epstein was on the plane necessarily, or maybe met him, but didn't make the connection.
But then separately, he said he was worried about all the underage girls he saw flying with Epstein on the plane.
As Alex Jones points out, you could have to pick one of those stories.
You can either have the story that you do know who Epstein was and you were worried about his bringing underage girls on your flight.
That could be a consistent story.
Or, separately, but not at the same time, you could say you were on the flight and you didn't even know Epstein was on there.
You're gonna have to pick one of those two.
You can't have them both.
And Alex Jones points it out.
That's what I was feeling as well.
Every part of that looked like a lie to me.
Although, you know, there's no way to read his mind.
Of course, our FBI stats were lies, as you know.
It looked like crime was down, but it was just change in reporting.
NBC is reporting that murders are up double digits in cities across the country, and they say The Democrats say, well, do you notice that most of those cities are in red states?
Yes.
Did you notice that most of those states, probably every one of them has a Democrat mayor?
Did you notice that?
I don't know that that's true, but I would bet on it.
The Republicans, RNC Research, says that, oh, by the way, I've got a really good conclusion for the show.
If you're thinking of bailing out, make sure you catch the last five minutes.
It's going to be a banger.
I wanted to save it because I don't want to peak too soon, but I got some good stuff coming.
Some Trump stuff.
You're going to love it.
Anyway, the Terror Watch List.
This is a number of terrorists, or at least people on the Terror Watch List, who have been encountered at the southern border.
And back in Yeah, 2017, there were only two of them.
There were only two sketchy people the whole year.
I don't know how many got in without being caught, but the ones that were engaged, only two.
Next year, six.
Next year, zero.
There were zero in 19.
And then in 20, there were three.
Then Biden takes office.
21, there were 15 of them.
In 2022, there were 98.
15 of them. In 2022 there were 98. In 2023 there are 169.
169 on the terror watch list.
Just the ones we caught.
Forget about the ones that didn't go through like a normal port of entry.
Yeah, and already in 24, this year there are 80 of them.
So we're on pace to match 23.
Well, if you wondered what would happen, If you had a whole bunch of terrorists who were in a whole bunch of cities and they coordinated an attack, well, the first person that I know who ever wrote a book that included that plot is me.
But I wrote it 20 years ago in anticipation that this is exactly what would happen.
Because I said to myself, if I were a smaller country and I wanted to take down the United States, how would I do it?
And 20 years ago, I said, well, I would sneak in enough people so there'd be at least a few terrorists in every big city.
And then I would have them act at the same time.
That's how I would do it.
And it looks like that's exactly what's going to happen.
Because the terrorists do seem to be spreading out into different cities.
And I can't see any other reason for it.
It's probably exactly what it looks like.
They're preparing.
Maybe not guaranteed.
But it looks like they're preparing if they need it.
To have a, you know, a pretty big domestic response if we do something that Somebody doesn't like overseas.
Well, James Carville has given up the game and he just had an interview with Donnie Deutsch.
You might know him from being one of the TDS people on MSNBC.
He was one of the biggest TDS people.
And here's what James Carville said.
Bless his heart.
Quote, Democratic culture has too many preachy females.
Too much, don't eat hamburgers, don't watch football, wear a condom, man, shit, leave me alone.
Now, he also went on to say that sometimes guys just want to do their job, drink a beer, smoke some dope, and watch a basketball game, or watch a football game.
And he also said that they're going to lose the Hispanic vote because, and even Donnie Deutsch was pointing out that the Hispanics sort of don't want the preachy female culture.
They're more about strong, dominant male leadership in households.
That's Donnie Deutsch saying that.
All right.
So remember, I promised you, Let's see how many remember this.
Just recently, on social media, I promised you that by the end of this summer, I would make sure that the Democrats were the party of women, and it was obvious that the Republicans were the party of men.
Now, since then, we've seen Trump quite wisely double down on UFC visits.
We've seen him play up Like the manly men, and I guess he just was with Jake Paul, you know, doing Jake Paul's boxer.
So he's doing all the manly stuff, and it's working.
Men are very much responding.
And here's Carville saying, That his own party turned into basically preachy females and they can't possibly win.
That's right.
So the, you could argue, you know, what is current influences on the party, but they still talk about him, right?
CNN will probably cover it.
I don't know.
But if Carville is yelling it at the, at the top of his lungs, that the problem is a woman problem, that's hard to ignore.
Remember I said I didn't have any way to break into the other bubble?
So I didn't know how I was going to do it.
And I certainly didn't break into it with Carville.
There's no way that he's looking at my work.
I don't think so.
But I did tell you that by the end of the summer, the reframe would not be so much race, because you're going to see black men moving to Trump in record numbers.
That's what's happening.
So it's hard to say that Trump is the big ol' racist when black men are running toward him as fast as they can.
The whole game is up.
Carville knows the game's up.
He's basically calling it.
He's telling you that, okay, our side is naked, we're just a bunch of preachy women, and it's not about race.
And guess what?
Maybe it wasn't ever about race.
I mean, in one way, everything's about race, but maybe it wasn't the thing we should have been focusing on, because it wasn't real in the first place.
But the preachy female problem is very real.
That's right on.
So you might say to yourself, but Scott, what kind of problems would we have if there are too many women in charge?
Well, you'd see an open border.
Open border is batshit crazy.
The only way you get an open border is either someone wants to destroy the country and somehow got in power, which does seem like it might be the case in some cases, or it's women who are using empathy over, let's say, a physical security mentality.
Do you know why men are abandoning the Democrats like crazy?
Instinct.
Instinct.
That's what nobody wants to say.
Men are abandoning Democrats Not because of policies.
Not because of that news story they saw.
It's instinct.
What they see is that the leader of their party has disappeared.
The strong men look at the leader of their party and say, oh shoot, we don't even have a leader.
Men need leaders.
We're built that way.
We need a strong leader.
And if there isn't one, do you know what we do?
We become the leader.
It's just built into us.
If the pack of dogs doesn't have a leader, one of the dogs steps up, and then they gotta fight for it.
But we don't have leaderless male organizations.
No.
No.
Men need leaders.
And when we don't have one, we will become one.
And if somebody wants to challenge us, we'll fight them to the death.
That's how we're built.
It's instinct.
So, when you see the mass exodus of men from the no-leadership party, To the strong leader, you know, the Trump end of things.
That's instinct.
There's nothing political about that.
So I was calling that move based on instinct.
That was always my take on it.
Not that somebody would have a psychological academic change of opinion.
No, you're just going to feel it in your biology that you need to run to the safety.
All right.
So women open the border because they're not good for physical security.
Let me say for the dumb people, I have to take pauses now and then.
Every now and then a dumb person will be watching my live stream, and I feel like I need to talk to them too.
When I talk about women, this is just for the dumb people, the rest of you can get some coffee.
When I say things like, women do this, I never mean every woman.
So you'll never need to explain to me that there are strong Southern women who don't do any of this, and that there are plenty of exceptions.
I actually knew that.
Are you surprised?
Yeah, I actually knew that not every woman is exactly like every other woman.
Do you believe it?
No, really?
I'll go even deeper.
I even believe that not every single black person is identical.
Can you believe it?
No, believe it!
It's true!
It's true!
I believe it!
So, let's not be fucking NPC idiots, and just let me talk about men versus women.
Because you know what I mean, right?
We're talking about an average.
On average, women shouldn't be in charge of physical security.
That doesn't mean the best person who was ever in charge of physical security couldn't be a woman.
Of course it could.
Of course it could.
Right.
You don't see me complaining that Laura Trump's running the, you know, she's co-chair of the RNC.
No, because she's an animal in a good way.
She's an animal.
Would you want to get in any kind of a disagreement with Laura Trump?
No, no, I'm not talking about Laura Trump.
When I'm talking about women aren't good with physical security.
I would put her in charge of Homeland Security tomorrow.
Are you kidding me?
Right.
So if it's the right character, you can get anything you want.
And she's the right character.
But here's another little piece of data.
Nuclear power support.
Did you know that only men are in favor of nuclear power?
Again, on average.
Of course, I know there are individual women who like nuclear power.
Yes.
But apparently there's an overwhelming gender difference.
And it's the women who are afraid of it.
It's the men who are saying it's our only option, logically.
Unless you want to die, you better do nuclear power, because we really don't have another option.
Do you know why women should have no control over the building of nuclear power?
Again, on average, not talking about any individual woman.
It's because they don't know that nuclear power is physical security.
If they look at nuclear power and say, hmm, I don't like that waste or maybe, you know, maybe I could do it all with solar or stuff like that.
No, you're just being not good at physical security.
Let me explain something that every man knows.
You need money to field an army.
You need energy to have money.
Nuclear power is physical security.
If you don't do nuclear power, we're all fucking dead.
Do you know that, women?
How many women understand that the alternative to nuclear energy is not solar?
The alternative to nuclear energy is you're fucking dead!
How many women knew that?
Now, if I said how many men knew it, you'd all raise your hands.
Because men know you can't raise the army without money, and nobody ever had money Unless they had energy, at least in the modern world.
Energy and money end up being almost the same.
So yeah, women are destroying the country in terms of nuclear power support, but apparently there are enough men who are in favor that it still gets the majority.
So we have a chance of doing it.
Two-thirds of voters, according to Rasmussen, Are worried that cheating could affect the election.
Two-thirds.
So how did the professional media that's been trying to tell you that there's no way our elections could ever be unsecure?
No way!
How is that even possible?
But now two-thirds of the country is worried that the other team will cheat.
So it turns out it was easy to get people to think that the elections are unsecure.
Do you know what it took?
You just had to remind them that what if the Republicans do it?
And then the Democrats are, oh shit, yes, it could go the other way.
So yeah, no, I'm now I'm worried about it.
Oh, so suddenly we went from, well, there's no way that this election was ever, was ever even slightly unclean all the way to two thirds of people saying, oh, if the other team might do it and then it might be doable.
We better stop that.
Yeah.
Totally nonsense opinion.
And what would make them think that?
Why would people be worried about those machines?
Well, let's look at this story.
Puerto Rico's election commission said recently that they're looking at their contracts because their Dominion voting machines had, quote, hundreds of discrepancies in the recent primaries.
Puerto Rico's Dominion voting machines According to Puerto Rico's own election commission, right, this is not coming from the outside.
This is coming from the people who authorize them and use them.
Hundreds of discrepancies, including changed votes.
Now, nobody's saying that the elections were rigged.
That is not, that's not part of it.
They're simply saying that they couldn't trust the machines and they might not renew them.
Now, let me ask this question again.
Because I'm the only fucking person who is willing to ask this question in public, for some reason.
Maybe it's because I'm cancelled?
I don't know.
Maybe it's not as good a point as I think it is?
Let me do it again.
I think I'll just drive this thing home.
I will make you think about this.
It goes like this.
What's the point of voting machines?
Does it make things more secure?
No, it makes it less secure.
Does it give you results faster?
No, it does not.
Does it reduce your costs?
Obviously not.
Paper is pretty cheap.
And by the way, even when you use the voting machines, it still creates paper.
You don't even save paper in most cases.
Right.
So, now tell me, given all of these complaints from Puerto Rico, hundreds, hundreds of complaints, you tell me why we have them.
Let me see this story on a major news show, where all they do is say, just explain why they exist.
Do you know why Fox News can't do that story?
I think you do.
I think you know why Fox News isn't going to cover it.
They had a little bit of problems When their news people covered the election and I believe that they got sued and lost for some of their claims.
Now, if you try to say, well, I'm just asking, you know, people say, well, that's still the same thing.
You're questioning the machines.
I'm just saying, I've never heard anybody explain the point of machines unless They're designed for the purpose of throwing the election.
Now, some have said that the reason that they were invented ever in the first place is so that the CIA could control elections in other countries where they would get those machines into place.
Now, I don't know if that's true, but what's the other reason?
Seriously, what's the other reason?
It's not faster, cheaper, or more reliable.
So what's the reason?
And why am I the only person asking the fucking question?
It's the biggest question in the world.
What's a bigger question?
Because our entire way of living will depend on the election being credible.
And we don't think that this coming election is going to be credible, do we?
No, we don't.
We think there's going to be massive cheating, and it will be obvious, and it's going to throw the country into chaos.
I think that's almost guaranteed.
So somebody needs to answer the fucking question.
Why do they exist?
That's all.
Am I asking a hard question?
I don't think it's a hard question.
Somebody in that business will say, oh, it's for this reason.
And maybe, maybe, maybe I'm going to say, oh, that's actually a good reason.
I didn't think about that.
But yeah, this is one of those questions where I think that people who have life experience have a completely different opinion about what's happening in the world.
If you have life experience, as I do, it used to be my job to do detailed analyses of whether the bank that I was working at, or later the phone company, should spend a bunch of money on a new technology.
That was my job.
So when I say I don't see any reason why anybody would want electronic voting machines, nobody's presented a reason.
I'm dealing with it as an expert.
I'm an expert, literally did it for a living.
On analyzing whether you should bring in this new technology to replace what you were doing before.
It's what I did for a living.
I don't see any argument for election machines.
None.
None presented.
I'm not even disagreeing with the arguments.
I'm saying nobody's even tried to make the case.
It would be different if, you know, I just disagreed with the reasons, but nobody's even trying.
That's different.
All right.
Jesse Watters had a former speaker, Kevin McCarthy, on his show.
And Kevin McCarthy tells us this weird story about being with Biden in the White House, where Biden apparently has his own little office next to the Oval Office.
So he's got an office next to an office and a little room that's next to it.
I think I've been in that little room.
When I first met Trump at the White House, there's a way undersized, tiny conference room that a bunch of people were packed into.
I think that's what he's talking about, McCarthy.
But anyway, Biden said he acted like he wanted to go swimming in the middle of the winter, and McCarthy just tells the story like he was so worried when he was done that he was just dealing with a mental midget, basically.
So I don't know how much of that is hyperbole, because obviously it's a Republican versus Democrat story, so you have to put that in context.
All right.
The House has found A.G.
Garland in contempt by a narrow vote, 208 to 207, but they got it done.
Good job.
Let me stop for a moment and just say to the Republicans in the House, good job.
Yeah, I don't say that very often.
So I feel like I should pause and say, all right, you got this one.
All right.
This I have respect for.
This was exactly the right play.
And then you executed it.
Didn't take long.
Good.
Finally, finally, seeing the, you know, the Republicans in Congress do an unambiguously smarter thing on time.
Finally.
Thank you.
Now, whether this goes anywhere, we don't know, but it puts Garland in the situation where the context is that Peter Navarro is still in jail for defying Congress's requests.
And that's what Garland is being accused of.
And Peter Navarro said he had some kind of immunity, presidential immunity.
Garland's making some kind of related cousin claim to that.
And Bannon might go to jail for it.
So yes, if the Republicans had let Navarro and Bannon go to jail for this, and then let Garland skate, I think I would have lost my mind.
I don't know if I could even come back from that.
That would make me so crazy.
I don't even know if I could do my job after that.
But no, Republicans stepped up.
So good job on that.
Also, here's a more good thing.
Jim Banks is talking about this.
So the House Republicans have moved to defund the Ukraine NGO that created a watch list that put conservatives on it that didn't like Ukraine.
And can you believe that the U.S.
government was funding an NGO, a non-government organization, who created a list targeting American citizens, conservatives, if they didn't like the Ukraine policy.
Now, I was quite disappointed that I was not on that list.
I'm told that there's now a Silicon Valley list of enemies, and I might be on that one.
So apparently I'm on an enemy list somewhere.
Maybe.
We'll see.
That's not confirmed.
Vivek Rameswamy weighs in on this enemies list thing.
He says it's a mystery that US taxpayers were ever funding this kind of NGO in the first place.
It's time to audit USAID and every other agency that's dumping away our taxpayer dollars.
Thank you?
Yes!
Vivek continues to be a superstar and telling us what we need to do that once you hear it, you go, oh, yeah, that's kind of obvious.
But why did we have to wait for Vivek to say it?
Until we thought about it?
Yes.
Why is the government not doing a massive audit to find out if our money is being spent right?
Really anywhere.
I would argue that the government doesn't audit really anything.
And we ought to.
All right.
China is building some massive port in South America.
For some reason the headline didn't mention the country.
The only comment I have about this is I'm not sure that this is a threat, per se, in the normal way.
I mean, it's not a military threat.
But China has an interesting strategy.
And I don't know what we do to counter it, or even if we need to.
But China will win just by staying out of wars.
Does that make sense?
The only thing China has to do to have a really good chance of being basically the only nation left in the world is just stay out of wars.
Now, you could add that their population collapse is a problem.
Didn't see that coming.
But in terms of, you know, and that seems reversible.
I mean, if they wanted to.
But China has the simplest game plan for dominating the whole world.
They just have the most people.
And they have an educated populace and they have enough capitalism that those people are going to, if you just run the numbers, eventually they have to be the biggest economy.
Biggest economy means biggest military.
Biggest military means you get your way.
So how does the United States win in a hundred years?
It feels like it's an automatic Chinese win.
They just have to stay out of trouble.
Just don't start a war.
Because we're not going to attack mainland China, I don't think.
I mean, that'd be pretty dumb.
So if they don't attack somebody that makes somebody attack them, they just win, I think.
Because they have capable leadership, educated population, modern economy, and gigantic number of people.
You put that together and that wins basically every time, unless Unless somebody unleashes a new virus that only kills Chinese citizens or something weird.
So I don't know what we do about that.
There's a report that the Yemen's Houthis, they've been launching hundreds of attacks with no end in sight.
Yeah, no, there's an end in sight.
It's called, it's called Trump.
I can't believe for a minute that Trump wouldn't be able to threaten the Houthis into stopping.
Isn't the problem that they haven't been properly threatened?
Here's a bad threat.
If you keep sending those millions of missiles, we're going to bomb two or three of you.
I think that's Biden's plan.
We're going to bomb two or three of you.
Or something like that.
Is Peru the coast where the Chinese thing is?
Somebody's saying Peru.
Well, how hard would it be for Trump to do a proper threat so the Houthis understand that they have to stop this?
Do you remember this story?
Who knows how true it is, but the story that when Trump was negotiating with the Taliban, and he was telling them to be cool, he showed the leader of the Taliban his own house, a photograph of his own house, saying, this house will disappear if anything happens.
And apparently, at least for the time that he was in office, the Taliban actually backed off.
So, I believe that Trump is uniquely able to make the kind of threat that the Yemenis would understand.
How many mother-of-all-bombs would it take?
One?
If there's anything over there that you could drop a mother-of-all-bomb on, let's do that.
We can't live with hundreds of rocket attacks in the Red Sea.
Just drop a few mother-of-all-bombs over there.
Just make the biggest crater in the world, and then tell them, if you do one more missile, this is all you're going to see for the rest of your life.
We're going to make all of you dead.
Now, he doesn't have to mean it, but Trump could pull that thread off.
Biden can't.
Yeah, that's a huge difference.
I think Trump can solve it in 24 hours.
Maxine Waters says that the reason we need DEI It's because you need those black prosecutors to go after Trump.
Set it directly.
We need DEI so that the black prosecutors will go after Trump.
To which I say about Maxine Waters, you've crossed from a wacky and entertaining weirdo into fucking racist piece of shit.
Racist piece of shit.
You racist piece of shit.
But I like that you gave it up.
You gave up the game.
The DEI is a tactic, not a public good.
Meanwhile, JD Vance is putting forward a bill to ban DEI in all government Uh, programs, which might include government funded, but I'm not sure.
Let's see.
Uh, I think this is, uh, no funding for government contractors either, but that I think it's all related to just the government's own DEI programs and no discrimination of any kind.
Now it would be tempting for me to say, what took you so long?
Am I right?
Cause when, cause when you see this, you say, wait a minute, they could do this.
They could do this.
The whole time they could do this.
And it's only happening now.
But I'm not going to be that guy.
Because I do believe things have changed to make it now practical where it wasn't before.
If they had floated this in, you know, say, the first months of DEI, do you think it would have worked?
No.
It would just look racist.
But after enough people like me are willing to give up everything, To say, you gotta fucking stop this, DEI stuff is destroying the world, and I don't even want to live in a country with it.
I don't even want to live around people who think this is a good idea.
Remember, I got cancelled for saying that.
Watch, I'm saying it right now.
I don't want to live anywhere near anybody who thinks that DEI is a good idea and should be part of my world.
Now, if I were black, I would run toward it, because it's a good advantage.
If you're white and male, you should run away from it as much as you can because it's illegal and racist and one of the worst things I've ever seen in my life.
So JD Vance has picked his timing correctly.
I believe the mood of the country is now acceptable.
I believe that people have seen it work and seen it fail.
They watched Boeing go out of business.
They watched the Biden campaign to be destroyed by DEI.
Let's be honest.
The reason the Biden campaign is failing is not just Biden.
It's his DEI campaign.
It's very obvious.
They're the least capable campaign of any campaign ever for president and we all see it and And do you think there's any chance that he just went down?
Hired the best that there was no because fucking Axelrod has to go on CNN and just talk about it from the outside Do you think if they've been listening to Carville and Axelrod that they would be in this situation?
No, if they've been listening to Carville and Axelrod, they'd have a different candidate and they would be ahead It's a DEI problem There's no way that Axelrod doesn't know this by the way.
There's no way that Carville doesn't know that the campaign is a DEI problem and And we're very close, very close, to Carville saying it out loud.
He's not there yet, but he is so close.
He's willing to say there are preachy women, but he hasn't gone the final inch, the last inches, and that's why DEI exists.
DEI exists because of preaching women.
If you took that domain out, there wouldn't be enough support for it.
So close.
I was watching Morning Joe on the debates.
I saw a new kind of liar face.
It's in the forehead.
Um, I forget which, uh, talking head on MSNBC it is, but one of the white guys who just has crazy TDS stuff all the time.
He's got the, have you seen the furrowed eyebrows?
Like a normal person who's just talking about their family.
They don't do this.
I can't, I can't even do it.
But like he, he creates, do you ever see the, uh, aliens in Star Trek?
A lot of times they'll make the aliens look, well, a little humanoid, but the only difference is they got a wrinkled forehead.
Maybe a different nose and a wrinkled forehead.
So this guy, whoever he was, just had the wrinkled forehead of a liar.
And it's just so obvious.
Once you learn to look for the wrinkled forehead, because you can tell there's an internal torture happening.
Where their words and their face can't match because you know that they know they're lying?
Well, you have to see it.
Just look for the wrinkled forehead.
Glenn Greenwald is pointing out the hypocrisy of Biden being so anti-crack and anti-drugs and now when his own son is affected, you know, suddenly it's all about compassion.
Well, I have a little experience in this domain, and let me tell you, having a family member who's addicted will change your opinion about free will really fast.
People who don't have a close personal contact with addiction don't know what it is.
They genuinely don't know what it is.
It's a complete loss of free will.
The drug becomes your brain.
So you're not even talking to the person at some point, you're just talking to the drug that's taken over the person's brain, sort of like an alien overthrow.
So, when Joe Biden was less experienced in this domain, he was saying, oh, lock up all those crack dealers, get all those addicts in jail.
Once he became a little more informed, because he could see his own smartest person he ever knew couldn't get off it, That's the first time you learn that it's not as much choice as you think it is.
Now, I know you're saying, but people do get off it, so they must have choice.
Do you know what they have to do before they get off it, usually?
Hit bottom.
Hitting bottom is the process by which it no longer makes sense, and then it doesn't work.
But it's not so much that you change your mind, it's that something happened to you, and it just rearranged your brain for a while.
So, hitting bottom is necessary because people can't just say, you know what?
Way before I hit bottom, I think I ought to stop doing this.
It's hard to do.
All right.
So, I'm not disagreeing with Glenn Greenwald's hypocrisy statement, but I would say it's a normal transition from not knowing anything about addiction to understanding it for the first time because your family member is having it.
So, I kind of get that.
So where is Joe Biden embarrassing America today?
Well, it turns out he's in Italy, and the news is that he's looking terrible and shuffling, and the other leaders are trying to gently guide him to walk in the right direction, and he looks confused and awkward.
He saluted the head of Italy awkwardly.
Now, I said this in the man cave, but I'd like to put this message out to somebody who might be listening or might hear about this.
There's somebody I know, who shall remain nameless, who's really good at dirty tricks in politics.
And, you know, some behind-the-scenes kind of a person.
And if I were that good at dirty tricks, here's what I'd do.
I would get a bird wrangler to train some pigeons to land on a, let's say, a scale model of Biden.
So you'd have it wearing an actual suit and everything and looking just like Joe Biden, like a wax figurine.
And then you put bird food on its head and then you release the birds until they learn that if they land on the head of this thing that looks exactly like Joe Biden, there'll be a little food there.
Then you release those pigeons in the neighborhood of the White House and you wait for Biden to be walking to the helicopter in his statue-like way.
Where he's moving so little that you're not sure he's real?
You wait for a pigeon to land on its head.
Now, if it happened in front of a gaggle of photographers, and a pigeon landed on its head because it mistook it for a statue, the election's over.
That's right.
We are one bird away from doing it.
And the reason I even thought of it, is that I wonder if it would happen organically.
I wonder if it would ever just happen on its own, that a bird would just land on his head, because he's not moving like regular people.
I would think even a bird could recognize that there's not life in the normal way that's happening inside his head sometimes.
So, one bird away, you know who I'm... And by the way, it'd have to be a dirty trickster with a good sense of humor.
If you know who you are.
All right.
Here's the big, here's the fun part.
Those of you who waited to the end, here's your payoff.
You ready?
You want to have some fun?
We're gonna have some fun now.
So, do you remember?
I'm gonna, I'm gonna lead into it because it's more fun that way.
Do you know how Soros, he's got a zillion dollars which he uses to influence things?
And so you say to yourself, wow, it sure pays to have billions of dollars so you can influence things.
But lately, Soros is getting a double benefit, not just, hey, you're rich and you're influencing things, but he's getting credit for figuring out the cheapest way to do it.
So he's figuring out that just funding top politicians gets you so far, but funding district attorneys and attorney generals Get you a lot, because they can arrest Trump and they can arrest Republicans.
So the big thing that Soros did was figure out a really clever model of spending the least amount of money for the biggest bang in politics.
And then he used that method to try to take out Trump.
So Soros funded prosecutors, very clever technique to get to the lowest level of power.
And then they successfully prosecuted Trump.
At least one of them did.
Now, what is it that we know about Trump?
We know that when somebody uses a weapon against them, that one of his most famous moves is to grab the weapon out of the hand of the assaulter and turn it around on him.
He does it linguistically and persuasive-wise.
So if they find a tool that really works against him, he's probably the number one in the world to figure out how to make a tool like that or to turn it around on them.
Hold on.
I'm going to get to the good stuff.
You're going to like it.
And then we saw that Biden did this play where he was going to Cleverly do something even smarter than Soros.
So Soros uses his own money, but he cleverly uses it in the most effective way.
Biden figured out that if he used somebody else's money, the government's money, or the taxpayers, and he gave it to students for student debt relief, he could buy himself some voters.
But it didn't really work as well as he hoped, because it turned out to be sort of an elitist thing, because people with student loans are going to do better in life than the people who might have to fund it, who are driving for Uber or something.
So Trump now has experienced two things.
He saw that Soros came up with a new model for using a lot of money, but using it in the most strategic way.
At the same time, he watched Biden Totally screw the pooch by coming up with this even better idea of using somebody else's money Somebody else's money.
That's the best way to buy votes But it was that elitist problem.
Yeah, so he got that wrong So what did Trump do?
He took those two models you put them together and Then he fixed the part where where Biden screwed the pooch and made it look elitist He goes to Nevada, stands in front of the crowd, and says, if I'm president, I'm going to get rid of your federal taxes on gratuities and tips.
You know, tips are gratuities.
You see what he did?
He used somebody else's money, the government, except he gives it to service workers who are, by definition, not elites.
So he solved Biden's problem of taking money from poor people and giving it to rich.
The service people are the, you know, sort of bedrock level of working people who don't have enough to get their own house, usually.
So he got that part right.
But it gets better.
There are about four million people who work for TIPS.
How many of the four million people just said to themselves, You know, I don't follow politics too much, but I definitely want to not pay taxes on my tips.
And then how many parents are there for those four million people?
Because they tend to be younger people.
Well, let's say there are two parents for each.
So that's another eight million.
We say, you know what?
Anything to get my kid out of the house and live on their own, you know, any little thing to help my kid, I'm in.
So that's 8 million plus the 4 million who actually get the tips.
Trump bought 12 million voters with somebody else's money and made it in the right direction, which is toward people who need it.
But it gets better.
There's also people like me.
And maybe you.
People like me is the category of people who used to work for tips.
For years.
I worked at a resort where I was carrying bags and doing things for tips.
I've served tables for tips.
I've been a busboy for tips.
If you ever, ever, ever have a job in which you work for tips, you will be cursed for the rest of your life to over-tip every single person you tip.
And I do.
Because I have a bond with every single person who ever has Or ever will work for tips.
If you own a motorcycle and you pass somebody else on a motorcycle, it's just the two of you, you always give them a nod, don't you?
Do you know the motorcycle nod?
The nod.
Everybody with a motorcycle knows it, right?
You're like, motorcycle, you're one of me.
Yeah.
If you've ever been a service worker, you're always one.
You're always a service worker if you've ever been one.
Never goes away.
It's like being in the Marines except, you know, less glamorous.
You're always a Marine.
You know, you're just not fighting anymore, but you're always a Marine.
Same thing.
So Trump managed to buy 20 million votes-ish with somebody else's money, moving the money in the right direction toward the people who need it and we have affection for.
But it gets better.
It's almost certainly enough to win Nevada because Nevada is a big service industry state.
So you want to state basically just bought it with other people's money in a way that even people who you even the people like me whose money is being used.
I go, you know what?
I'm down for that.
Let's give the service people a break.
But it gets better.
It gets better.
The service workers of America are the single most diverse group of human beings anywhere on earth.
I don't know if you've ever been to any place that has service workers, but they are super, super diverse.
Just naturally.
And did Trump ever say, oh, and this will be good for your diversity?
No.
He did it the Trump way.
He did it the right way.
You're humans.
You're in a situation.
I'm going to deal with you as human Americans in a situation.
If you want to talk about race, that's fine.
But that's not why.
But it gets better.
This is my favorite part.
From now until the end of time, if Trump gets away with this and he actually You know, delivers.
And he's pretty good at delivering on campaign promises, by the way.
He's got a good track record of at least trying hard.
You know, the wall didn't get built, but we saw him try really hard.
If he gets away with this, for the rest of his days, he will have the best restaurant experience of any human being in the history of civilization.
And he likes to eat out.
It gets better.
His own employees are service workers, a lot of them.
So even Trump employees who work for TIPS, they're down.
Who are service workers dating and married to?
A whole bunch of people who vote.
Yeah.
Now remember I told you that there's something happening with the Trump campaign?
Where there's a level of just sheer brilliance that's coming out of the campaign, but it's a little bit hidden by what he doesn't do wrong.
The brilliance is in the not mistakes.
The brilliance is that he'll be no mistake, no mistake, no mistake.
And then when he takes a swing, this is a swing, it's a home run.
It's like he's only hitting home runs now.
It's like a frozen rope, if you've ever heard that term.
If he hit a baseball really hard and it's long and flat, the sportscasters might call it a frozen rope.
He's hitting frozen ropes every time he gets up.
And I just have to give a compliment again, whoever it is, you know, of course, all the credit goes to the campaign or to the candidate, because he has to say yes or no to the ideas.
And that's the real skill, the yes and no to the ideas.
But whoever is giving the ideas.
There's something good happening here, right?
I think Vivek is part of the mix, but it's amazing.
I would like to end with this idea that there are now At least four kinds of beliefs in the world.
There's the normal scientific belief, where you say, this is so well proven and demonstrated, That, you know, I believe it's true.
So it's like fact-based belief.
Then you've got religious belief, which is very different, which is, you know, you just feel it and it's not fact-based.
You know, you could point to some facts, but mostly it's belief.
It's just a choice, lifestyle, whatever.
But there's, you know, something beyond the scientific data.
Then there's the luxury beliefs.
I know Greg Gotfeld has been talking about this lately.
And Others, he didn't invent the term.
Was it Henderson?
I forget who invented the term.
But that is things that are easy for you to say because you're not the one who have to pay the price.
So in other words, you might have to say, hey, let's open those borders because I really love all people.
But you live in a rich community that'll never have any problems.
So it's a luxury for you to say, oh, I'm such a good person because the expense is paid by somebody you don't have to deal with.
But I think there's another category I'm going to add.
I call it recreational belief.
A recreational belief is that Biden crapped his pants in Normandy.
I don't really believe he did.
Not even a little bit.
I saw the video.
No, he didn't grab his pants.
But it's funny.
So I adopted it as a recreational belief.
Likewise, there are a lot of topics with aliens and whatnot.
And I think Greg Guffield also called this out.
I'm told there are at least three different types of aliens.
There's the little ones, the little gray ones.
And then there's a taller gray one.
And then there's one that is basically James Carville.
So he's the third kind of alien.
I don't know if he's technically an alien, but they allegedly look just like James Carville.
But I don't even know why I brought that up, except that there are lots of... So I like learning about the pyramids and the aliens, but it's not that I believe in them.
I just totally think it's entertaining.
So it's recreational belief.
And I'm going to quote one more Greg Gutfeld.
I was watching The Five yesterday.
The Five was amazing.
I think it might have been one of their best programs of all time.
And it's fun because it's the election season.
I was watching Judge Jeanine just tear apart.
I forget which topic.
And I thought, oh, my God, that's just the best anybody's done on that topic.
And then Greg had this winner.
He was talking about Trump versus Biden.
You know, Biden sort of on the side of the woke people, whereas Trump is on the side of the working people.
It's literally the woke versus the work.
The woking man versus the working man.
And I thought, it works better in writing, you know, because then you just notice the R is missing and it's the only difference.
But the woking man versus the working man.
That's a pretty strong frame.
Once you hear it, you're like, oh, I see it.
it. All right. The brilliance is that, yeah, it's pandering, but it works.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Oh, Trump can eat out.
Trump still goes to restaurants.
When he was in New York, he went to a bunch of restaurants.
All right.
And also, so here's what's happening.
In this summer, and I think it all comes back to Elon Musk.
I think Elon Musk's purchase of X, we know it's a big deal.
But I think it's going to be a long time before we realize how big a deal it was.
I mean, I think history is going to deal with it as like one of the major turning points in civilization.
And I think Elon knew that when he did it.
So now that we have something like free speech, Somebody like me can get completely cancelled, but I can reconstitute.
And I only could do that because I'm on X. So X allowed me to tell everybody, hey, I got cancelled, but you can find me over here.
Plus I get paid for X engagement and I put Dilbert on there as well as on locals.
So without the X platform not cancelling me, I could not have survived from the cancelling in the real world.
So that saved me.
So now what happens after I get cancelled, but I get saved?
Well, I'm twice as loud.
Twice as loud.
Oh, you're not going to stop me now.
Because I got... I'm in for... This is a different game now.
Now I'm playing for real.
It's time.
I'm not leaving anything on the field.
This is balls to the wall, whatever it takes.
Legally, of course.
And so I'm one of the voices, not the biggest one, but one of the supporting voices against DEI.
And I make it safer for other people to say what they need to say, because I said it and nobody killed me at that time.
So it makes it safe.
So I think that, you know, Christopher Rufo, more than anybody, probably fighting DEI, and then people like me and people like, you know, all the reasonable people.
I think that makes it safe for the Republicans to look at J.D.
Vance's bill and say, you know what?
We can get rid of DEI.
And we can do it full-throated.
And we can do it without an apology.
Because we tried it.
It didn't work.
It is racist.
We know why it doesn't work.
We know what it breaks.
Now we can get rid of it.
So we have to get to this point.
You know, we had to let the other, let's say the preachy female team, we had to let them fail before Republicans could find their balls.
Because as long as it was just playing around and nobody was getting hurt, it was hard to argue against it.
But then people started getting hurt.
And then people started getting canceled.
And then people got mad.
And then people got busy.
And we're in a corrective phase of all corrective phases.
We have largely destroyed, we collectively, largely destroyed the credibility of the regular news outlets that needed to be done.
Created a safe space where you can even make money if you get cancelled in the outside world with an axe.
And I would say that even though it's Elon's money and Elon did it, without everybody really seriously buying into that experience, it wasn't going to happen, or at least not as successfully.
The people who decided to stay here and fight it out for all the right reasons, it paid off.
I think I saw Cernovich say that his Hoax movie is being re-released.
I don't know if there's any changes to it.
But you're going to see, again, in a non-violent way, people are going to empty the clip.
Right?
Or empty, if that's the right term.
People are going to leave it all out.
And I think we're going to say what needs to be said.
We're going to do what needs to be done.
And I believe conservatives are going to do what they need to do.
What they need to do, and I don't know how many times I have to explain this, I don't think Democrats will ever understand, that conservatives and Republicans are flexible, really flexible, until they're not.
And now we've achieved not.
We're in not.
We're in find out.
All right, we're not in fuck-around territory.
We're in you found out, and now we're gonna fix it.
So we're definitely in a giant corrective situation.
Plenty of perils.
Lots of perils.
But let me give you my best prediction of what's gonna happen.
I think that if you looked at the integrity of the upcoming election, or the last one, and you said to yourself, my filter on this is have courts found any Bad problems.
And the answer is no.
So if that's your filter on the world, that whether a court found it to be true or not, well, you're an idiot.
Can I say that plainly?
I can say that, right?
If your filter on what is true and not true is whether the court found it true or not true, you're a fucking idiot.
You can just look at the court cases that you're seeing right in front of you.
You can see the lawfare against Trump.
You can see all the things that get reversed.
And you can see that the courts turn down things for standing and all kinds of bullshit reasons.
Right.
If you believe that truth comes from what the courts say, you're just a fucking idiot.
There's no nuance to that.
You're a fucking idiot.
If you're going to even say that in public, How about, I don't even listen to you, I just say, well that's a fucking idiot thing to say.
Now here's another way to understand reality, if you don't want to use the court filter.
What's your reality?
Let me tell you my reality.
Everything in science looks to be driven by money, and therefore, if it's true, it's only a coincidence.
Science is bullshit.
Mostly.
Still the best thing we have, But mostly it's bullshit.
Right?
It's mostly money chasing.
Half of the studies are not reproducible.
And even the ones that are reproducible end up falling apart later.
So yeah, it's mostly bullshit.
Because money drives everything.
Our expert class?
Mostly bullshit.
Because they're chasing money.
Our political conversation?
All bullshit.
Everybody knew that.
Our news media?
Back in Walter Cronkite days, I thought there was real news.
There was never real news.
We now know that the media is just an intelligence operation.
So that's gone.
We know that the legal system is completely corrupt.
We're watching it in real time.
The lawfare against Flynn, the lawfare against Peter Navarro, the lawfare against Bannon, the lawfare against January 6.
We know that our financial system is rigged in the sense that it's good for rich people and, you know, venture capitalists who make a lot of money and stuff like that.
So basically, we can see that every single system is corrupt.
We can also see That hackers can get into the most secure systems in the world.
They get into, apparently, according to our own government, Chinese hackers are already into our major infrastructure things.
Do you think that our major infrastructure has worse cyber security than the election systems that are run independently in all the different states and precincts?
Do you think every one of those states and precincts Have cybersecurity that's unique in the world.
They can know that they've been hacked and prevent it.
Nobody else can do it.
There was an Iranian nuclear facility that couldn't do it.
Stuxnet got them.
And all of these blackmail things, where the blackmail hackers will close down some company's facility and say, if you don't give us money, you'll never be able to reopen it.
How's that happen?
All of those companies have the, you know, Fortune 500 top shelf cybersecurity.
Every one of them gets hacked.
But yet, you're going to tell me that the election system's not hacked.
And then on top of that, when the dog isn't barking this loud, you got to pay attention to it.
The dog not barking is, why do we have electronic voting machines?
I'm open to the fact that there's a reason I haven't heard.
But I am kind of an expert in the field of buying new equipment and justifying it, right?
No matter what it is.
I could have very easily done the business case for electronic voting machines.
That would be well within my capabilities and training.
I don't know of any reason for them, other than cheating.
And to me, it seems obvious that is the reason.
Short of any other reason, but I'm also open that somebody could give me a different reason.
Now, So those are your two worldviews.
One worldview is everything that can be corrupted, and has a value, is corrupted.
And we observe it in every domain.
Every one.
Show me an exception.
You can't.
Every important domain is quite corrupt, and we observe it.
You don't need a magnifying glass.
It's right in front of you.
And we are told that the only thing not corrupt Is the most easily corruptible thing, which is the election system.
In my opinion, it's probably the most easily corruptible thing.
How about no?
How about no?
So here's my prediction.
Trump should be way ahead in a natural vote situation.
Democrats are now convinced that they will be jailed if Trump wins.
They're not entirely wrong.
I mean, he's not going to take Rachel Maddow to prison.
Let me say this directly.
Rachel Maddow and AOC, there's no way that Trump is going to try to lock you up unless there's some crime we don't know about that's like a real crime.
If he tries, we'll stop him.
Can I get some backup on that?
In the comments, if Trump tried to jail somebody just for being a critic, We will stop him.
That's not cool.
I wouldn't put up with that for a second.
Not a second.
So, that's a promise.
We will go hard against Trump if we need to, because that's how we roll.
That's how men roll.
You don't get loyalty unless it's returned.
And I would not consider that loyalty returned.
If Trump started jailing citizens that didn't commit a crime.
And he's not.
There's no chance of that.
There's really no chance.
And if you still think there's a chance, I promise you, we will personally stop it.
We meaning everybody who ever voted for him.
We'll shut it down immediately.
There's no fucking way we're going to let that happen to you.
Now you tell me the same thing.
Rachel, Rachel Maddow, and AOC, make me the same promise.
Tell me if they put me in jail for bullshit, that you personally will say that's not right, and you'll do what you can to reverse it.
Because I'll give you that promise in a heartbeat.
I will absolutely try to reverse it.
If anybody tries to Peter Navarro you, if anybody tries to abandon you, I'm not cool with that.
I'm actually completely cool with Hunter's gun Thing being overturned by the Supreme Court because of Second Amendment.
I'll be fine with that.
Now, is he technically guilty?
Yeah, sure.
Sure.
But I don't want to live in a country where we're chasing people for bullshit.
Right?
So no, we're not going to go after Rachel Maddow and AOC for bullshit.
That's just not how anybody rolls on that side of the equation.
So here's my prediction.
I believe that Biden will make it to the vote.
A lot of people are saying he's definitely, definitely going to be replaced.
I believe that he has to say it or it's not going to happen and he's not going to say it.
I don't believe they're going to 25th Amendment him because they just won't be able to do it.
I think they just won't be able to wrap their heads around it.
So I think he's going to make it to the starting line, meaning the election day.
I think Trump's going to beat him by a lot.
In the real vote.
And then I think there will be a last minute surge, just like the last time, in which a whole bunch of sketchy illegal votes come in.
And then the election will be thrown.
And then the fun part happens.
It will be so obvious that even the Democrats are going to raise their hand and say, wait.
That's the key.
If no Democrat raises their hand and say, OK, that's too far.
Then probably they just get to rig the election and jail the Republicans, including Trump.
But if it's such a big, obvious rigged election, in other words, it just doesn't agree with the legitimate polls at all, then I think there's going to be at least a few Democrats who say, you know what?
I'm out.
I'm out.
There's a really good chance that the election will be redone and just thrown out.
So I think the odds of having a result around election day are low.
Because I think the cheating will destroy the system.
It's largely guaranteed.
Because they think they'll go to jail if they don't cheat this time.
And I'm pretty sure that there's always been cheating.
So my prediction is an election in which the votes go to Trump, the election goes to Biden, but it'll be so obviously rigged that even Democrats will agree, stop, we can't do this.
So that's what you look for.
Look for the Democrats to say, this is just too obviously rigged.
Can't live with it.
We're not willing to live with this.
And by the way, things will get really frothy if that happens.
And I think it will.
So my prediction is no results.
I think they're going to have to run the whole election again.
And I think they're going to run it without, uh, without Biden as a candidate.
So I don't know if anybody's made this prediction before, but I say Biden runs.
The election is not accepted.
Maybe the Supreme court steps in and they just say it didn't happen.
There's not enough credibility in the outcome that we can certify this.
And then they're going to say, Biden's too gone.
Let's run this without Biden, see what happens.
And then there will be a result.
Which, by the way, doesn't necessarily mean it goes Trump's way.
Yeah, it might be that the way the Democrats win is by calling their own election fake.
So they can replace Biden then, and then have a chance of winning.
So weirdly, it might be the Democrats calling their own election fake.
Because that could be the only path they have to get a Democrat president.
So I'm going to stick with that.
No result for the election.
I'm not saying that there's no result right away.
I'm not saying that it will take months to get a result.
I'm saying the election will be discarded.
And that there's almost no way around it.
Look at the setup and tell me which part won't happen.
Democrats believe that they're going to jail.
They have to cheat.
Everybody who's trying to avoid jail is going to do whatever it takes to avoid jail.
And nobody believes that the election systems are the only non-rigged system in the United States.
No smart person thinks that, right?
It could be that they haven't cheated so much that it made a difference in the past.
Maybe.
I don't know.
But nobody believes that the system is completely clean.
So that's my prediction.
There will be no election in 2024.
It'll run, but it will not be accepted by either side and or the Supreme Court.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, brings me to the conclusion of my prepared reports.
And I went way too long.
So I'm gonna say bye to YouTube and X and Rumble and I'm gonna talk privately to the locals people if they want to hang in here.
