God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorks
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, GARM, World Federation of Advertisers, SCOTUS Packing, Joy Reid, Agenda By Joel Pollak, President Trump Golf Video, Cackling Copilot, President Biden, Hunter Biden, AI Enhanced Biden, Michael Ian Black, MAGA Demonizing, VP Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Gavin Newsom, Republican Boundaries, Tucker Zelensky Interview, Ticketing Waymo, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, a special July 4th Independence Day, or at least one of them.
And if you'd like to take your January or what the hell is this month?
I feel like Joe Biden.
July 4th.
Everything feels like it should be January 6th, but July 4th.
If you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny human brains.
Smooth as they are.
All you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tankard, gels, a sty, and a canteen jug or flask of best living economy and fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.
Dopamine here today.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens now.
Perfection.
You know, I understand that there are a lot of creators who are taking the day off.
Taking the day off.
Oh my goodness.
Aren't you glad I'm here?
And then worse, you turn on your favorite show.
You know, let's say you're going to watch The Five.
It's like five different people.
And you're like, no, no, that's not the five.
That's five different people.
That should be a different show, but not here.
I'm the original.
Well, if you subscribe to the Dilbert Reborn comic, which you can only see on X by subscription or that plus lots of other stuff on Locals at scottadams.locals.com, you would know that Wally, my useless member of the office, he sometimes tries to get away with not working.
His new trick is to put a Neuralink chip in his head and claim that he's working while he's just sitting there.
Now, I think that that's kind of brilliant.
Anyway, you'll see that in the Dover comic today.
The question of the day, and I think an important one, is, we'll talk about this some more, but let's say, for example, Kamala Harris runs as either vice president or the top of the ticket.
And what if she doesn't make it?
You know, you can't really go back to the Senate, right?
After you've been vice president.
It doesn't feel like you, I mean, you can, but it doesn't feel like it'd be a, you know, a step forward.
So what are you going to do?
Now, my suggestion is that she should start a, uh, a car towing company.
A car towing company.
Yeah.
And I was, I was brainstorming before we went live here.
I was talking to the subscribers on Locals and they had some ideas for what would be the, the name of the business.
So if Kamala Harris had a car towing company, what would you call it?
Some of the suggestions were Hotow.
Very unkind.
That's unkind.
It's uncalled for.
Um, my suggestion was Kamalatoe.
Kamalatoe.
And if you think that that's naughty, well, I think that's in your mind, because that's her name and that's what they do.
They tow things.
Um, but I think the, um, the best name was, uh, suggested by somebody on Locals who said, uh, should call that Blow-and-Tow.
Okay, that's a winner.
Blow in tow.
All right, there's a study that says that when people take tests, as in examinations, and they do it in a room with a high ceiling, they don't do as well.
Do you believe that?
Do you believe that when people take tests, that the height of the ceiling makes a difference in their performance?
What do you think?
Does that sound like real science or fake science?
I think it's probably real.
Let me tell you an experience I had yesterday.
I had some jackhammering happening in part of my house, as I often do, and I was trying to find any place that was, you know, less jackhammer noise, but I could work.
So I've got a portable work table, it's got wheels, and I can You know, take it anywhere I want in the house.
And I had the hardest time trying to figure out where I could put it that I would feel like work.
It's really hard.
So you have to have exactly the right, you know, feng shui, the right space, the right feel.
Or, in my case, I just can't work.
So, for example, in the morning, when I have to do my most intense concentration, I keep the drapes closed and I keep it dark.
Because I can't even have I can't even have visual distractions anywhere except right around my workspace.
It makes a big difference.
So I had to go to a room where I could darken it, you know, blackout curtains and had to find just the right space.
And then I was great.
The work was easy.
But I do, I have noticed that high ceilings are a problem.
Like you can actually feel the difference with a high ceiling.
And here's my, here's what I think it is.
I think that humans, and even animals, we like to be in a safe little cave.
And if the ceiling is low enough that you have like a feeling of a ceiling, then you feel like you're safe.
Because that's one fewer place that they can attack you.
It's like, I see the ceiling, they can't get to me.
But if the ceiling is high, I can see how you lose a sense that there is a ceiling.
Which would make you feel exposed, which if you're male especially, it would turn on your defense instincts.
So it's like, you know, when men go into the restaurant, they're checking for the entrances and the exits and the attack vectors and they're picking a seat based on the war that's going to happen in their head.
I think that you can't do a test and concentrate if you also have to concentrate about your self-defense.
So I think that's what that is.
You know what you rarely see?
You rarely see people working outdoors.
I mean, you see it.
But if you take me outdoors, I have a problem.
I have a problem working just because it's outdoors.
So I actually believe that one.
I think that high ceilings make a difference.
All right.
It's not guaranteed.
They'd have to do more tests.
Do you remember Sam Brinton?
He was the gender-fluid Biden official who's no longer a Biden staffer.
Not a staffer, but he was in the administration.
And he was caught stealing luggage and then wearing the outfits from the luggage.
And he's not going to jail.
He's not going to jail.
So he's going to get mental health treatment instead.
So he's a mustached, shaved head individual who sometimes is man and sometimes is woman.
And the hint that he might have some mental problems was that he was stealing clothes.
And they said, stealing clothes?
That's weird.
You might have some mental problems.
And he said, well, I was doing a good job of covering it up until now.
And so what we've learned is that You can take the identity of women, but not their clothes.
No, don't touch their clothes, because you're going to go to the mental institution if you do that.
Well, you'll get some mental therapy.
Breitbart is reporting, ironically, that Jim Jordan is going to get some testimony from some corporate executives.
Because there's this big advertising group called GARM.
It's an initiative of the World Federation of Advertisers.
So you probably didn't know there was a World Federation of Advertisers.
And the allegation is that they have colluded Hey, it sounds like they're doing garbage pickup on 4th of July.
I can hear a garbage truck.
Hmm, maybe.
Anyway, so this group, GARM, that's a subset of that larger group of advertisers, have allegedly coordinated to discriminate against some conservative leaning entities.
Chief among them would be Breitbart, Fox News and Daily Wire.
And here's my suggestion.
You know, when the founders came up with their ideas about free speech, the world was a different place.
So the things that they could contemplate, you know, was limited.
They couldn't see that far in the future, of course.
But a weird aspect of free speech in the modern world is that it's often tied to advertisers.
Meaning that if no advertiser wants to give you money for what you do, to have an advertisement, then it's hard to do it.
Hard to do it.
So I'm wondering if there shouldn't be some kind of legislation that says you can't distinguish by somebody's political leanings.
Now, their argument would be, oh, we don't want to pair our advertisements with this unpleasant person or philosophy.
To which I say, we should get over that.
I think we should just have a law that says you can't discriminate where you advertise strictly based on the fact that there might be some advertising that is conservative.
Now, it'd be one thing if you, if you simply chose one entity over another and you chose ones that, you know, were left leaning.
But if you're using some kind of general platform where everybody should be advertising if they can, if it's legal, and everybody should be using the platform if they want to.
I think in those cases where it's sort of a quasi public, but not really.
I feel like there should be a limitation about discriminating against some kinds of speech.
I don't know.
I don't love more regulations, but this seems like it would just be supporting free speech in the modern version of it.
If you disagreed with that, I don't think I would fault you for it.
If you want to be a purist and say free speech is just the government, it's not corporations, they can do what they want, I would entertain that argument.
I just think that in a practical sense, if advertising is driving our speech, it needs to be a little bit equally applied.
All right.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board wants us to know that there's no such thing as a MAGA Supreme Court, meaning that if you look at the decisions that came out, there were some that went by party, let's say, By the presumed bias of the court.
So 6-3 would look like they just lined up by their bias.
But it turns out that I think the majority of the decisions, at least one person crossed over.
In many cases, they were unanimous.
So if you really look at the full body of work, it's actually quite credible.
Quite credible.
You know, I don't like it when it's 6-3.
That's, to me, that's sketchy.
But there weren't that many.
If you look at the full body, they had lots of crossovers and unanimity, etc.
And why that's important is it makes it almost impossible to pack the court.
If you told me all the decisions went 6-3, and then you said the Democrats don't like that, so they're going to pack the court, I would have said, well, I don't like that, but you have a good argument.
If they were all 6-3, and Democrats said, we can't live with that, we're gonna have to pack the court, I wouldn't even complain about it.
Because if they were all 6-3, it would tell me we don't really have a court anyway.
It's just a bullshit.
Right?
So, you know, I probably would have said, let's get, you know, if it were me, my perfect world is it's balanced.
That the court is 4-4.
That would be my perfect situation.
Because if you can't break that 4-4 bias, maybe it shouldn't be done.
Maybe that's good enough reason not to do it.
If you can't get one person on the other team to say, all right, that's reasonable, maybe you shouldn't do it.
I do like 5-4 just in the sense that you usually have a majority.
Well, usually, always.
So anyway, I don't think the court's going to get packed.
So if you thought that was a risk, I think that risk is way, way down just because the court was credible in their decisions.
I would like to, uh, once again, call out the dog, not barking, but in this case in a real good way, the dog that isn't barking is Trump.
You know, the old saying that when your enemy is destroying itself, don't get involved.
Stay out of it.
And so Biden and the Democrats are destroying themselves, and Trump is just deliciously staying out of it.
Just deliciously.
I mean, every day he doesn't get into it, you know, just sort of plays around the edges, is a good day for him.
Because the biggest thing he has to worry about is that he looks chaotic and out of control.
Every day that Trump says, I can control this, watch.
I don't even have to say anything today.
Because there's no reason to.
I'll say it again.
The advice that Trump is getting, I don't know who it's from, is just excellent.
And he gets the credit.
You know, the candidate gets the credit for what advice they take and which advisors they listen to.
So the candidate gets the credit.
But that doesn't stop, it doesn't stop me from noticing that the advice is just the best he's ever had by far.
You could just see it in everything.
All right, so have you seen the Trump leaked golf video?
I don't know if I can call it up here.
I'm going to try to go full boomer.
I have no idea what's going to happen next.
Oh, this is funny.
Let's see.
I don't know if I can get video on these.
Let's see.
If I view the tab over here... Okay, I can't stop laughing at that.
That's not the one I wanted to show you though.
Have you seen this one?
So, let's do this.
Now, what you're watching for is my book, William Bigelow.
William Bigelow is going to be in the background there this time.
There's still the energy in this commercial.
Winnie the Piglin?
I'm gonna bop the shit out of him.
The Winnie the Piglin is gonna be in the background there.
This time.
Over.
It's still the energy in this commercial.
Isn't that horrible?
You're fake too.
This is a perfect campaign strategy.
Unbelievable.
You just feel it.
So decisive.
Mr. President.
Mr. President.
Pardon me, ma'am.
Mr. President.
Mr. President.
That's enough.
Put down the mic.
By the way, is this working?
You can see it, right?
Not entirely sure what you can see and what you can't.
Donald Trump, the cheaper, oh you mama's son.
There it is, Winn-Digley.
We're paying all in music, yes, keeping time.
By the way, is this working?
You can see it, right?
I'm not entirely sure why you can see and why you can't.
All right, we're going to go back here.
But I wanted to show you Trump's, where is he?
I think I went past it.
Trump's video that came out.
Oh, this is good.
Let me know when you guys are finished fighting amongst yourselves who I gotta vote for in November to keep Hitler out the White House.
That's all I want to know.
Who I gotta vote for to keep Hitler out the White House.
Y'all do your thing.
Play in traffic all you want in front of these Republicans, acting a fool in front of these people instead of privately declaring your stuff.
But don't text me no more because I'm not taking no more of these texts.
Just let me know when you guys are finished figuring it out, Democrats, because I know y'all the freak out people.
Go ahead and freak out.
Have your conversation.
Now, am I wrong to say that that's obvious mental health problem?
Is that just am I just being political?
Am I being biased?
Or can everyone see that?
That is just 100% mental health problem.
And when I watch Rachel Maddow, I have the same reaction.
It's like, that's just mental health.
You know, I don't even hear what she says politically.
Politically, it's just nonsense.
When do we get to stop pretending it's political?
Because that's not helping us at all.
We're just in this magical world where this is part of the political process.
It's not.
All right.
Why can't I find Trump on his golf cart?
I'll find it.
Trump on his golf cart.
Okay, that's so weird, because... Oh, here's something new.
Check this out.
This is Joel Pollack's book.
Just hit.
It's called Agenda.
What Trump should do in his first hundred days.
Now, I have to tell you, I saw an early version of this.
I've got an endorsement on it.
And it's one of the most exciting things I've ever seen.
Now, you're not going to believe this, because Joel's a friend, so it sounds like I'm just being nice to a friend.
I actually got chills when I read it.
So what it is, it's a very small book that is just... how many ideas?
Basically, it's a whole bunch of executive orders Or things like executive orders that Trump could do immediately upon getting into office.
Now remember, there's that Heritage report, that something 2025 report that's scaring everybody?
The Heritage Foundation has their own big 300-page thing that's kind of scary, but it's not exactly what Trump would do.
It's not exactly in line with what he would want to do.
But I think this might be a little more to your liking.
When do you see how many good ideas there is?
I mean, it's just like one good idea after another, and they're all doable.
So imagine like, you know, just dozens and dozens of doable ideas that you could do on day one.
It's actually really inspirational.
I recommend it.
All right, but that's not what I was trying to do.
I can't find that video.
I don't know why.
Anyway, so let's talk about it.
There's a leaked video of Trump in his golf course, golf cart, talking to, I think, a caddy and maybe some people, some fans or something.
And the Daily Beast leaks it.
It's this grainy video.
In which Trump is, you know, saying, asking how he did in the debate.
And then he starts talking about Biden.
So on video, he calls Biden an old broken down pile of crap.
Then he talks about Kamala because he says it's going to be Kamala.
He goes, I think she's going to do better.
She's bad.
So pathetic.
Now, I think he said she's an effing bitch.
Did I hear that correctly or am I having an audio illusion?
Did you hear him say that?
And then here's the fun part.
And then he takes out a $20 bill.
I think it was a 20 and you know, it gives a nice tip to whoever it was that he was talking to.
So just think about this setup.
It was a, you know, a hidden video.
Somebody must have their camera in their pocket or something.
And, And he's on camera calling his competition, old broken down pile of crap.
And the other one, uh, pathetic and she's just a effing biatch.
I think he said that.
Then Trump himself posted on True Social.
And here's the only comment he puts on it.
He posts the secret video of him saying that.
And the only, the only words he puts on it, in all capital letters, No tax on tips.
The only thing he wants you to remember from that is that he gave a nice tip to the guy.
No tax on tips.
Now, again, my guess is that was probably just Trump himself.
That looks like his instincts.
But how could that be more perfect?
To imagine that the Democrats have anything that can compete with this.
They don't, I don't think they have any understanding the level of subtlety and entertainment and intelligence that Trump is bringing, because they're just seeing the Joy Reid, the Hitler movie.
Imagine if you're in the Joy Reid mental breakdown, the Hitler movie, and you're missing the funniest movie ever.
I mean, he's doing Caddyshack.
Uh, you know, at the same time he's running for office.
It doesn't get better than that.
Oh, maybe it does.
Then there was a Trump official, uh, some kind of letter or press release or something, uh, talking about the collapsing Democratic Party, you know, sort of dancing on the grave.
But one of the, one of the descriptions of Kamala Harris, This is in writing.
This is official, you know, official document from the Trump campaign.
And here's how they referred to Kamala Harris, the Vice President of the United States.
The cackling co-pilot.
Kamala Harris.
Cackling co-pilot.
Kamala Harris.
Oh my God, that's good.
Cackling co-pilot.
That's so good.
It's not even a vice president.
She's like a co-pilot because she has to be there, you know, with her hands on the steering wheel at the same time.
She's not the one that they say, is there anybody here who can fly a plane?
She's got to have her hands on the hands on the whatever you call that in an airplane.
Anyway.
So Joe Biden did another one of his cuckoo clock appearances.
You know the cuckoo clock where he just walks out like a cuckoo in a clock?
Walks out, cuckoo, and then goes right back without any questions.
So they thought he would look kind of presidential because he would just walk out and do his thing and go back.
But I don't know if anybody saw the video of him trying to walk.
He's the only person who can walk like he has dementia.
I mean, I don't know how you could broadcast your mental state any more clearly in the way you walk.
It's a complete disaster.
And the fact that his debate was so bad is the only reason you don't see it for the disaster it was.
He couldn't walk a straight line without looking like he was mentally degraded.
Now, I mean, it's hard to pull off, but he did it.
Apparently, so Hunter Biden was in attendance.
And I don't think I've seen him that wide-eyed since he was snorting parmesan off the carpet.
And so now the question is, Representative Mike Turner is asking the question, is Hunter Biden receiving classified briefings in the White House?
If we know that Hunter Biden is now the, you know, maybe the single most important advisor to the president under his degraded state, Wouldn't Hunter Biden also need to be, you know, have the highest clearance?
Because how can he really help unless he knew everything that there is to know that's important?
So I doubt he's getting classified briefings, and I doubt he's hearing secret things, but he might be.
The fact that we can't rule that out just adds to the story.
Now here's a question I have for you.
If you don't know who's running the country, and it could be Obama, could be Jill Biden, could be Jill, could be Joe Biden, could be Kamala, you know, who's running the country right now, but it could be Hunter.
Of all those characters, who would you feel most comfortable in making decisions about the fate of your country?
You know, here's the weird part.
I might pick Hunter.
You know, here's the thing.
Hunter is genuinely smarter than Kamala.
He's genuinely smarter than Joe Biden at the moment.
I'm not sure Obama has, you know, has our best interests in mind at the moment.
And I don't know much about Jill Biden.
Some people say Jill Biden is brilliant, by the way.
If you haven't heard that, you've heard it now.
But I don't know that.
The weird thing is that if those were your only choices, you might actually go for Hunter.
That's the weird part.
Now, I'm not saying he would do a good job and, of course, you have all the problems of his own problems and, you know, maybe that gets complicated, too.
I don't know.
Of that group, he might be the star of the group.
Now here's what people seem to be worried about that they should not.
They're worried that our enemies will take advantage of us and try to do something to attack us.
That's the last thing you should worry about.
Because let me get you into the mind of an evil enemy of the United States who would ever attack us.
Number one, You've got to be really sure you're going to finish us off, because we have nuclear weapons.
Can you really attack the United States and destroy all our nuclear weapons before we launch?
No.
Nobody thinks they can.
Nobody would take that choice.
But suppose it wasn't nuclear and they thought they could just, you know, get away with something.
Here's the problem if you attack the United States when it doesn't have clear leadership.
We will retaliate, so that part you can depend on.
So even with a degraded president, it's a 100% chance that he would say, yeah, fight back.
I mean, he'd understand that.
So the military would do what it does.
So there's no chance whatsoever that there would not be a strong response.
It might be delayed a week or something, but there would be a strong response.
So that's what the enemies need to know.
But there's an even better reason not to attack.
If you want to attack somebody, you want predictability.
You don't always know if you're going to win a war, but you want a predictability about how the other side will respond if they're in the position of either winning or losing.
And you don't want to get into a battle with a nuclear power who doesn't have somebody who could say no.
You need somebody who can negotiate a peace deal.
And if they don't have an effective leader, You could end up starting a war that can't be stopped.
It's the stopping the war that's the important part, right?
Everybody can start one.
Stopping is the hard part.
How hard was it to start a war in Ukraine?
Pretty easy.
How hard is it to stop it?
Really, really hard.
So, you don't want to be on the other end of American weaponry, and no chance it's going to stop.
You want to at least say, oh, sorry, sorry, didn't mean to attack you.
You're right.
Let's settle this.
The scariest thing would be somebody who has unlimited nuclear power, and there's nobody you can talk to.
That's scary.
So I guarantee you, we might be the safest we've ever been from an attack on the homeland.
Oddly, we're the safest we've ever been.
So it's the opposite.
There's not even a single chance that we're going to get attacked.
And you know what the other reason we won't get attacked is?
Because people don't attack you when you're busy destroying yourself.
And if you're watching this from another country, you're thinking, you know what?
Let this run a few months.
Because it looks like they're just destroying themselves.
It would be the last thing they'd want to do would be to attack us and unify us behind a strong president.
Because that's what would happen.
We would be instantly unified.
And we would be unified behind somebody strong, and it wouldn't be Joe Biden.
It might be Hunter.
No, I'm just kidding.
It wouldn't be Hunter.
We would unify, and it would happen fast.
So no, there's no chance, there's no risk whatsoever somebody's going to attack us because Joe Biden is degraded.
None.
That is the most zero risk that we have in every category.
None.
Zero, zero, zero risk.
So stop worrying about it.
All right.
The Huffington Post has an idea, and Wokeness is reporting this on X, that they're suggesting that AI be used to smooth out Biden's presentations.
In other words, it would still be Biden, but maybe an enhanced Biden, with a little AI so you don't see the dumb parts.
Can you believe that that's actually a published opinion?
That That Biden is so far gone and the Democrats are so far into TDS delusion, Joy Reid style, that they're literally saying out loud in public, you know, maybe we should just run AI and tell you it's the president.
I don't even have a comment about that.
That is so wildly indicative of where we're at.
That it just tells its own story.
There's nothing to add to that.
It's like, really?
Well, I guess I always add that.
Really?
Really?
You're just gonna pretend that the person in charge is not degraded by making some AI cheap fake?
All right.
But I don't think you're going to need any of that if this upcoming interview, I guess tomorrow there'll be the interview we'll see of President Biden with George Slopinopoulos, if I pronounce that right, Slopinopoulos.
And it's a 15 minute interview and it's recorded and it's being done by the number one fan of Democrats, George Slopinopoulos.
Now, given that it will be a two-camera shoot, at least, it might be three, which means that they can cut from this reaction to this person talking to wide shot, etc., that gives them everything they need to edit.
But not just edit, edit in a way you can't tell.
Remember we saw Biden trying to give his little commercial where it was just him talking, but they had to edit it eight times?
So, and you can see all the edits.
Well, you wouldn't see these edits.
Because they would do the edit, you know, they'd use a different camera angle and then stick in the edit that way.
So, we're never going to know what they cut out.
It's going to be like the Her Report all over again.
We're going to see something that looks mildly capable.
And we're going to have no idea if it's real.
No way to know.
I suppose the only way, I think the only way ABC News could prove it was real is to make available the, I think what they'll have is two cameras over the shoulders, so you can see the view of each of the people talking, but probably one distant camera that shows the two of them.
So if you release the distant shot, Without edits, we might feel comfortable.
You know, if the only edits are the camera angles, that's fine.
But if they don't release the one that's all the way through, I would be very suspicious.
Very suspicious.
All right.
My ongoing conversations on politics with Michael, Ian Black, any of you who are watching the show, continues to get fascinating.
It's just so interesting to have somebody who's willing to engage with the other point of view to the point of actually listening to it.
And you don't have to like his opinions.
You know, it's a big world.
But I do think you have to appreciate that he is breaking the silo.
He's letting in opinions from MAGA, fully looking at them, and he's releasing opinions that I can see that I've never seen before.
It's stuff that, in my own silo, I think, really?
Are there more people who think like that?
Because I never see it.
So there's a tremendous public service happening, and today Michael Ian Black was pushing back on some comment Somebody asked, I guess he said MAGA is demonizing people, or somebody said it, and the question was asked of him on X, who exactly is MAGA demonizing?
And here's his answer.
So he said, off the top of my head, these would be the people that he says the MAGA people are demonizing.
Immigrants, Muslims, LGBT community, the FBI, the intelligence community, the scientific community, the justice system, the electoral system, A lot of elected officials, all GFPU who don't agree, those would be the rhinos, all Democrats and the press.
Now here's my first reaction.
Huh.
Huh.
Imagine if you were a Democrat and you thought that MAGA was demonizing all of those groups.
How would you feel about MAGA?
Not too good.
If this were an accurate statement of what's going on, and that would be, I guess, the message that Democrats are getting, that the Republicans and MAGA are demonizing all these groups.
So, I tried to do my thing, which is match his transparency and his willingness to say something that the other side sees, basically.
And so I thought I would give some clarification, and I said, Republicans call this setting boundaries.
And I said, gave some examples, I said, the FBI, it's good, except when they target Republicans, you know, in an illegal way.
But it's not like MAGA doesn't like FBI rank and file, you know, regular workers.
Or how about immigrants?
As far as I know, everybody in MAGA likes legal immigrants.
I've never heard anybody say there should be zero immigrants.
Now, there's always the extreme people, right?
So there's, you know, there's always the two percent tail that says everything and anything.
But we're not really talking about that.
If you talk about just, you know, the majority of the MAGA so-called people, they're all pro-immigrant, as long as the immigrants want to follow the law and do it the legal way.
How about science?
I've never met A conservative who didn't like science?
We have specific complaints.
You know, I caucus with the Republicans in this sense.
Technically, I'm a Democrat.
But science is terrific over time.
Over time, the scientific process is the best we have.
If you lie about the pandemic, don't you think we're allowed to talk about that?
If climate models look like they're obvious scams, in my opinion, you know, independent of whether there's actually any warming or people are causing it, the climate models are really obvious scams.
I can't say that?
I can't love science and appreciate all it's done, but also say, this little corner of it is weird.
I can't say that string theory hasn't quite delivered.
I can't say that, you know, it got the food pyramid wrong.
I feel like these are pretty valid.
So, and then on the LGBTQ thing, I don't see demonizing.
I see boundary setting.
You do you, but don't do it to my kids.
It's just a boundary.
Yeah, you go live your life as long as we're both obeying the laws.
Just stay away from my kids.
That's just a boundary.
Now, Who's right?
Which of these two narratives are right?
Is MAGA demonizing all these groups?
Or are they just saying, hey, there have to be boundaries.
If you have a no-boundary world, everything falls apart.
Every expert would tell you that even if you're raising children, the boundaries are not bad news.
The boundaries are what make the child into a useful person.
The boundaries are necessary for mental health.
And probably, this is one of the reasons that Republicans have far better mental health.
Because they think of the world in terms of boundaries.
Boundaries are good for your mental health, and they allow you to build a system that has been time-tested.
Stay out of jail, go to church.
I'm not recommending this stuff.
I'm saying it's time-tested.
It's just time-tested.
I'm not personally a believer, but Christianity It's time-tested.
Christians turn out to be good people in the United States, in the modern world.
Everything has a bad history.
But in the modern world, it works.
So it's a boundary.
And they have boundaries for everything.
And it's a good system.
But I'm going to surprise you by completely agreeing with Michael Ian Black that MAGA does in fact demonize immigrants, Muslims, LGBT, FBI.
They do.
They do demonize them.
It's just that in their minds, they're thinking in terms of boundaries.
What they say is definitely demonizing.
I'm going to have to agree with them completely on this.
I agree completely.
There's a whole bunch of demonizing going on.
Way too much.
And it's scary.
And if there's pushback for it, well, you fucking deserved it.
Honestly.
Right?
If you get a little bit too demonizing and you're not clear with your, you know, we're just talking about boundaries, then you deserve some pushback.
Now, everybody's different.
I'm not saying you specifically are, you know, doing anything wrong, but there are members of the excited MAGA community who say things that even when I look at them, and I probably agree with them about almost everything, but even when I look at it, I think, I don't know, I feel like you're not being clear enough about the boundary.
It looks like it's a little bit too much about the people.
So I would take this as a positive feedback.
But I hope it works both ways.
You know, I hope that Michael can see that, at least in people's minds, they're thinking in terms of boundaries.
They're not really thinking about demonizing.
Let me give you an example.
Have you ever heard anybody say anything bad about Rick Grinnell because he's gay?
No.
Nobody's demonizing Rick Grinnell.
He's just a really effective, you know, public servant, had important jobs.
He gets talked about for president all the time, right?
He's one of the names that comes up as somebody who should be considered for higher office.
I've never heard one person ever demonize him for being gay.
Have you?
Have any of you?
Yeah, it's the same with a lot of them.
Have you ever heard of a Republican demonizing Elon Musk because he was born in another country?
No, no, that doesn't happen.
There's no demonizing of immigrants, at least in their minds.
So again, I'd like to thank Michael Ian Black for what is really kind of impressive bravery.
For even being willing to mix it up with the other silo of information just to find out what happens.
And to me, it's been a productive and really eye-opening.
But if you don't use it to fix your own game, and you just think, oh, it's telling you what's wrong with the other people, then you're missing the value.
The value is how you fix your own team.
That's the value.
So take his comments seriously.
A little less demonizing would go a long way.
Or a little less looking like you're demonizing, right?
Work on the impression, because it matters.
All right, I'm getting a little tired of the conversation about who it's going to be, because I think that's settled.
And unless Biden gets way worse really fast, I think it's pretty obvious where things are going to go.
It's not going to be Michelle Obama.
It's not going to be Newsom.
Because they can't get rid of the DEI Vice President.
There's just no way to really do it.
No matter how much they want to, there's not really a way to do it.
There's not enough time.
She has the control of all the campaign money.
It can't go to anywhere else.
And it's just obvious.
It's going to be Kamala.
Now, what's not obvious, Is if she's going to be running from the top of the ticket or the bottom.
My prediction is that Biden will stay in the race, but that even the Democrats will say, I want you, all of you voters to understand you're voting for Kamala Harris.
Biden will be the head of the ticket.
And if you'd like to vote for him, because you want to sort of reward him for what you think is a good job, vote for Joe Biden, but just know That you're voting for Kamala Harris, because he doesn't plan to stay in the job.
His plan and his commitment, maybe.
He might even promise it.
You know, toward the end, he might say, look, here's the deal.
I think you're right.
I think I lost a step, but I guarantee Kamala Harris can do the job.
And I will, as soon as, as soon as I'm sworn in, we'll just turn it over to Kamala.
So you can vote for me.
But just know you're voting for Kamala.
Let's all be in the same page.
My name will be on the top, but you're voting for Kamala Harris.
I think that's the play.
And the reason is, what else is it going to be?
I don't think there's time to put her in the top of the ticket and do all the things they need to do and change all the collateral and the marketing and reword everything.
And then she's got to pick a vice president, right?
Then you've got all the drama of who she picks.
I saw that there was some thought that if she were at the top of the ticket, she would pick Whitmer or Buttigieg or somebody else.
But what was not considered were any white men or any men, straight men.
There were no straight men considered for Vice President slot.
How would you feel about that?
If you were a straight man, who is a Democrat?
Because they're not really hiding it.
When Republicans pick, you know, a Mike Pence or a straight white male, they're not saying these are the only people who can be president.
Nobody thinks it.
Well, Ann Coulter maybe.
But it's not a Republican thing.
They think who's the best for the job, And then it's not their fault that there are a whole bunch of people who have had experience who look white.
And if Tim Scott were just maybe a little bit stronger or, uh, you know, Dr. Carson, they're absolutely acceptable choices.
There's no, the Republican party is absolutely going to take the best choice.
If Republicans had a A Obama-level person, you know, somebody who was that good politically, it wouldn't matter who it was.
It wouldn't matter how gay they were.
It wouldn't matter how black they were, how female they were.
None of it would matter to the Republicans.
And they would get over it immediately.
Like, they would, you know, the 2% would whine, and then they would just get over it.
But the Democrats are really serious about this DEI stuff, and there is no way it's going to be anybody but Kamala.
Whether she's running from the second or first position, it's just going to be her.
And there's no way she can pick Gavin Newsom as her number two.
It's just not an option.
Now, if you're in a party that won't accept you in the party you're in, are you going to stay?
It would be crazy.
It would be insane to vote Democrat when you know they're going to discriminate against you.
And by the way, if they had a choice between a, uh, if the Democrats had two good candidates and one was a black man and the other was a black woman, you know that the black man doesn't have a chance, right?
You all know that?
I would even go so far as to say, I think within the Democrat Party, although they would not say this, I think they would pick a white woman over a black man.
Because it's a female party.
And I think they want a woman way more than they want a second black president.
They want their first woman president way more than they want their second black president.
So, they have a hierarchy.
It's like the Indian caste system, right?
The white men, the straight white men are the untouchables.
And then you got the Brahmins, whoever's at the top, that would be the women.
Of all types, but just women.
Anyway, Van Jones says the Democrats are discussing how to replace Biden, not whether.
And I think the how is going to come down to not replacing him.
But that is one way to replace him.
So, the how would be just talk about him not really being the head of the ticket.
And then nothing changes.
You don't have to do any paperwork.
So, given the choice of doing a no paperwork, don't lose any money, don't stir up a new controversy, don't have to worry about who the new vice president is, not having a bloodbath in the convention, nobody's polling better than Kamala as a replacement, if satisfies DEI, satisfies time, and it satisfies money.
Let's stop talking about anybody but Kamala Harris.
It's so blindingly, screamingly obvious that I don't know.
I don't know what to say about it.
It's fun to talk about, but it's going to be Kamala.
One way or the other.
So she's the Schrodinger's candidate.
You don't know if you're getting the dead one Biden or the living one Kamala.
However, using the Elon Musk theory, which is my theory as well, that the funniest path is most likely.
What's the funniest path?
The funniest path.
If you had to think of all the things they could do, what's the funniest?
The funniest is leaving Biden in the race and then saying you're not really voting for him.
That's the funniest, because it's the dumbest.
It's the most lame and pathetic.
It's the one that most shows the lie, that the Democrats are not even a little bit invested in giving you a good candidate.
It's not even something they care about.
So that would be the funniest, and that also supports why it's probably going to happen.
All right.
CNN poll says Harris runs closer to Trump than even Biden, according to The Hill.
How would you like to be Kamala Harris and know that your polling is just slightly better than a guy with no brain?
If you're ever compared to somebody who clearly doesn't have a functioning brain, and you only best them by 2%, do you feel good about that?
Well, here's the good news, Scott.
You took the SATs at the same time as a guy in a coma.
Um, and I'll be like, well, how'd I do?
Good.
Good.
You, you beat the guy in the coma.
And I'd be like, thank God you only beat him by 2%.
What?
Yeah.
The guy in the coma, you beat him.
No question about it.
You beat him 2%.
I don't go, I don't go home feeling good about that.
I don't.
Biden 2024?
Biden in quotes.
I've seen the sign Biden in quotes.
It took me a minute.
That's pretty funny.
All right.
Let's see, Sean Davis, who's a great follow on X, very provocative, and he's sort of definitely in his best form talking about the current events at the moment.
And here's a warning he gives.
He says, everyone needs to remember this.
Democrats are not just going to give up power.
They're in way too deep and that they know they're in massive legal trouble when Trump takes over.
This is an existential battle for many of them, which means that nothing is off the table.
Yup.
Yeah.
Now, A lot of people are being hyperbolic about, you know, there's going to be revolution in the streets no matter what happens and all that.
And certainly there are going to be protests no matter what happens.
But I don't know how Democrats who know they would go to jail would not be in favor of radical actions to prevent it.
And you are talking about people who are literally killers.
People have ordered people to be killed.
That's what a government is.
So there's no shortage of people who will be in the Democrat, you know, inner circle toward the top, who have literally ordered people to be killed.
Obama has ordered people to be killed.
Right?
It's a thing.
They have killed people.
So to imagine that they would be squeamish about killing Trump, who many of them believe is Hitler, is a little naive.
They absolutely would be willing to kill him.
I guarantee that somewhere in the government, they're talking about it, at least floating the idea.
Well, hypothetically, if we were going to do such a thing, you could hypothetically do it this way.
Now, I don't think it's like an operational plan, but I do think That they have to consider it because their options are the end of their lives.
Meaning some of them really need to go to jail for 20 years.
I've got a list of my own, but I feel like I don't want to demonize anybody.
If you have a list of people that you think should go to jail when Trump takes office, keep it to yourself.
You're not helping.
And I like to think all of you are on the same page.
Nobody goes to jail unless you really got the goods.
Can we agree on that?
No Democrats go to jail unless it's really clear they broke some serious laws.
Right?
We're all good on that?
I know you want your revenge for them law-fearing Trump, but you're not going to win by turning into them.
Don't turn into them.
Make sure that if you ever talk about, you know, Trump might Pursue somebody.
Just make sure you throw in there, it's got to be within the realm of the law.
And by the way, that's what Trump should say when they say, but you said you want to get revenge.
Trump should say, winning is revenge.
And anything beyond that has to be within the strict letter of the law.
Because we've seen the law get stretched to the point of ridiculous where they chased after me.
I'm not in favor of anything like that.
Shouldn't happen to any American, Democrat or Republican.
But if there are any examples of grotesque laws being broken, I think you'd all agree, nobody's above the law.
So there's a way to say it where people don't argue and they go, yeah, I guess you have to.
And there's a way to say it that sounds like you're going to lock up all the, the, the chattering hosts on MSNBC.
So don't say it the way, It's not going to happen, which is nobody, no Republicans are going to be in favor of locking up Joy Reid.
Can I say that as clearly as possible?
Joy Reid, Rachel Maddow, if you're listening, there's no Republican who's going to put up with you being jailed for your free speech.
They don't do that.
There would be zero support for that.
And there would be so many people would be on your side who are Republicans, you'd be safe.
The thing that Democrats also don't seem to understand is the Republicans do police themselves when the Constitution is involved.
Would you agree?
That, you know, neither side is perfect.
Everybody's got their thing you wish were different.
But my observation is that when the Constitution is involved, Republicans say, nope, nope.
I love you, but you just violated the Constitution.
Nope.
That's a hard no.
So Democrats don't understand that the thing that would stop Trump is Republicans.
Because apparently they don't have that.
Because if they don't have standards, see, this is that boundaries thing again.
The boundaries that Republicans apply to everybody else, as in, I don't care how gay you are, but could you give me a heads up if you're telling my kids something?
That's just a boundary.
But they put the same boundaries on each other.
What Republican would be okay with Trump violating the Constitution?
None.
None.
Who would be okay with Trump getting revenge on his enemies using lawfare alone?
None.
I don't know anybody who'd be in favor of that.
Now, again, when I say none, you know, I have to be, I'll give a wink to Michael Ian Black again.
It never means none, because there's always some crazies in the fringe, but you don't have to worry about them.
Right?
They're not important.
So when I say none, I mean effectively none.
For all practical purposes, it'd be like it's zero.
So, the people who have boundaries, always have boundaries.
And it applies to the thing that scares you, too.
There's no exception.
Nobody's going to be okay with a Trump or anybody else violating the Constitution.
There's no Republican impulse for that.
There's only impulse for whoa, hold on.
That's too far.
Boundaries.
There's a Russian prankster who allegedly called Hillary and said they had some dirt they could use on Trump.
And allegedly Hillary said, go ahead.
You know, he's a bad person, but I would just remind you that in the age of AI, When somebody says, I've got this audio tape of a famous person doing a sketchy thing, you gotta wait.
I mean, if I had to bet on it, it looks true, but I would definitely not trust an audio recording that included a public figure saying something sketchy.
And by the way, she didn't say anything sketchy.
So that's the best indication it's real.
Remember I told you that in reality, things are always never perfect?
The way that you can tell something's fake is it's too on the nose.
If this were fake, they would have done a better job of making it provocative.
If it were fake, it would have been something like Hillary saying, if you don't take him out, I'll have to kill him myself.
You know, just crazy shit.
So, if it doesn't have that stuff in it, it's probably not fake.
What she did say was actually something that doesn't bother me at all.
She said, Trump's a bad person.
If you dig up some dirt, great.
Is that a problem?
Is it a problem just because they're Russian?
Because she didn't say, she didn't say, I want to collude with you.
She was simply acknowledging what they said.
And if something bad happened to Trump because they had some information that was real, I suppose, then she'd be okay with that.
Technically, I guess that would be colluding.
If it were a Republican, they'd say it's colluding.
But I don't have a problem with it.
At all.
So that makes it, it looks real just because it's not that provocative.
Well, speaking of provocative, Tucker Carlson has lined up a meeting with Zelensky.
Now things are getting interesting.
Why do you think Zelensky now would talk to Tucker?
Tucker is the most anti-Ukraine funding person with a high profile you can think of.
Why would he want to give Tucker more energy?
Because he knows Tucker is going to say, are you a lying, stealing, coke-sniffing weasel who's stealing all our money?
He will.
And Zelensky must know that.
Why would he do this?
I can think of one good reason.
He expects Trump to win.
I think this is another fallout from the debate.
Remember Trump said he thought he could, am I imagining this?
Didn't Trump say he thought he could end the wars before he took the oath?
You know, once he got elected, but before he takes the oath?
I think maybe he could.
And I think Zelensky knows that he needs to start sucking up to Trump supporters, prominent ones, or he doesn't have a chance.
And Tucker Carlson would be the alpha predator of Republican-leaning opinion, let's say.
I don't know if Tucker is Republican or Independent or what, but he would be the apex predator within that ecosystem.
Now, here's the interesting part.
I've never seen a tease for an interview They had the legitimate potential to end a war.
Now, I'm not going to predict it, but it's within the realm of possibility that this would go the way the debate went.
Not in terms of somebody being mentally degraded, but in terms of something that shocked the world.
So I definitely am going to recommend that you watch it when it happens.
They haven't talked yet.
But there's no way that Tucker is going to go easy on him.
He's not going to go easy on him.
So it might be the first time Zelensky's really been interviewed.
Like a real interview.
And Tucker is smart enough to know that if he asks the right questions, he's going to end the war.
I've never seen anything like this.
If he asks the right questions, He can end the war.
Just think about that.
Now, I'm not going to predict it.
I'm not going to say he's going to do it.
But it is totally within the realm of... It's reasonable, actually.
It's not even extreme or unlikely.
I'd say it's closer to a 25% chance that Tucker can embarrass Zelensky enough in public That he can't, he can't wage the war.
It might actually just take him out of the war footing.
It could just reveal the mess of it.
Now let me give you some examples.
Now I'm just going to make up some stuff to, you know, try to make the point.
We've sent you X billions of dollars.
Uh, there are reports that X billions have been stolen.
Can you tell me that it hasn't been?
And he can't.
You might say, oh yeah, we take care of everything.
Then you say, but is there some kind of auditing or accounting system?
Why is it that in the United States we think that you can't?
You're telling us we can, but what system is doing that auditing?
Now, one Zelensky completely fails to say that he's a good steward with our money, and he will fail, and I'm pretty sure that Tucker will make sure you know he failed.
That's it.
There's no war without money.
And all you need to stop the money is some person to ask the most obvious questions that the people who are giving them the money should be asking.
Just ask the obvious questions.
Can you make sure it's being used?
Can you tell us it's going to be good for the United States, and how?
I think he, I think Tucker has, he's going to do to Zelensky what Trump did to Joe Biden.
I think he's going to reveal him for who he is, and it's going to be brutal.
Maybe.
The other possibility is they just have a nice chat.
So, 75% chance no news is made that really matters.
Of course, it'll be newsworthy.
And 25% chance that Tucker Carlson will individually and personally end one of the biggest wars in Europe.
Now, I know that's a lot of pressure to put on Tucker, but it's totally within the realm.
And by the way, I could probably do it.
I'm a hypnotist.
If Zelensky ever agreed to... No, I couldn't because of the language.
No, I wouldn't be able to hypnotize Zelensky because of the language difference.
You can't do it through a translator.
All right, there's a funny video of a police officer pulling over a vehicle for a going the wrong way on a one-way street, except it turns out to be one of these Waymo Driverless cars.
I think it's one of the driverless taxis.
And the cop walks up to it, and the video is running, and the window goes down, and the car talks to him.
I don't know if he was talking to somebody back in the back office, or if the car's AI was talking to the police officer, but he actually pulled over a driverless car to give it a ticket, and had an interaction with it.
It was wild.
Absolutely wild.
All right.
It's the 4th of July and we don't need to spend too much time doing this, even though it's the best thing you've ever done today.
We are going to do a simultaneous ending sip before I go talk privately to the locals people.
So, All of you on every platform.
How about we give a toast to the... I'm going to say the toast to the citizens of the United States.
The citizens of the United States.
We're not too happy with our government at the moment.
So we don't have to celebrate them.
In fact, it would feel icky at the moment.
But we certainly would like to celebrate each other.
Those people who choose to be here, whether they came here and became Americans, which I love, by the way.
I love somebody who chooses to be an American and then does all the right stuff and does it legally.
To me, that's just the highest level of being an American, in my opinion.
Because if you want to do it by choice, that feels better than just being born into it and putting up with it.
By choice.
So, to them.
And also to the rest of you, to Americans, as imperfect as we may be.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, that's enough for me for X and Rumble and YouTube.
