All Episodes
Previous Next
July 22, 2024 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
01:22:08
Episode 2543 CWSA 07/22/24
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Oh my god.
of Chelsea Stein, a canteen, jug of flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid, I like coffee.
Enjoy me now for the unparalleled pleasure that dopamine at the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous 7-Eleven.
Now go.
Oh my God.
Well, you probably know we're gonna talk about the pullout by Joe Biden from the race.
But first I need to tell you that if you are subscribing to the Dilbert comic, which you can only get on the X platform or on locals at scottadams.locals.com, you would know that Dilbert's company, who we just found out makes some kind of security software, has crashed the entire internet.
Bye.
And now Dilbert has to figure out what to do about that.
That's right.
So if you thought CrowdStrike was having a bad week, Well, they just made it into Dilbert.
So congratulations, guys.
So that's only for subscribers.
All right.
So here's the big news.
Biden has decided to pull out of the campaign.
Or has he?
Or has he?
That's right, people.
For your entertainment and possibly your education, We are going to go into full recreational conspiracy theory mode.
Is everybody up for that?
All right, just so you know the spirit of it.
We're not going to assume any of it's true, because we don't know exactly what's true.
But we're going to have a hell of a good time with it.
I'm going to embrace all the conspiracies.
Most of them will be debunked.
Oh, I like them!
Everybody's up for this, right?
You're up for the conspiracies?
Because the conspiracies might turn out to be 100% true.
They might.
We just don't know.
That's what makes it fun.
Shall we begin?
I would like to begin with just a little bit of a history lesson going back to January 18th, 2020.
Here's where I made a prediction That turned out 100% wrong.
So I'd like to confess my terrible, terrible prediction.
Now, it's only wrong because of the date.
If I'd said it more recently, it'd be correct.
But here's what I said when Biden was running for the 2020 election.
And this is before he had selected a running mate.
Or actually, yeah, I think just before he had.
And I said that this was going to happen.
Now remember, This is not talking about the current situation.
This is talking about the last election.
That's the context.
And what you should be looking here for here is, could I tell them in 2020, was it obvious to me that Biden wasn't going to make it?
I said, um, 2020, I said, step one, uh, that Kamala Harris would become a perfect compliment to the Biden ticket.
Step two, Biden picks Harris as a running mate.
Step three, Biden shows his age on the campaign trail.
Step four, the weaponized press persuades the Dems to put her at the top of the ticket before election day, either literally or in kind.
Now that didn't happen.
Instead, Biden and Kamala Harris just ran for office and won.
Some say.
And however, it was accurate this year.
So Kamala was the vice president.
Biden showed his age and the media, of course, is surrounding, putting her on the top of the ticket.
So if you say nobody could have seen this coming, you have to explain why I saw it coming.
Why did I say it in public?
I mean, I said it in public, that's a pretty bold thing to do for something that's crazy.
No, it was obvious that he was falling apart in 2020.
So it's also obvious at this point that there had been a huge cover-up for years.
So let's get to the fun part.
So if you haven't heard the story, just quickly, there was a letter that came out, allegedly signed by Biden, They said he was pulling out of the campaign, but he would stay president.
He didn't say why he was pulling out of the campaign, didn't mention health, didn't mention anything else, just said, you know, it'd be better in some way.
And apparently the White House aides learned of it by reading it on X, although they were told by a memo, look on X and you'll, you'll see it.
And that seemed a little suspicious.
And people said, huh, I wonder, I wonder why he didn't do it in person.
But then you say to yourself, oh, oh, he's got the COVID.
So he might not be able to speak well or might not be able to present too well.
So, uh, well, I understand.
Special case.
In any other situation, you would certainly, you would certainly expect there'd be a national, you know, some kind of national, uh, address, but given that he's known to be having COVID and that he's stopping because of his health, probably, um, you know, you say, okay, I can see why you do it by a letter.
But some people said, you know, that doesn't look like official stationery.
But then I said to myself, well, you know, he's not at the White House.
You could easily see why, you know, maybe nobody brought any official stationery to his beach house.
So I'm like, nah, that doesn't mean that much.
There's not an official stationery.
And then somebody said, why didn't they at least take a photograph of him signing it?
To which I say again, well, he might be just in his pajamas and, you know, with his hair messed up and, you know, looking terrible.
So you don't want a picture of him looking like a, you know, like a corpse, you know, signing the thing.
So I thought, okay, then it makes sense that we don't have a photograph.
And then there seems to be no schedule of when we're going to see him, which seems suspicious.
But I said to myself, well, But again, they don't know when he's going to recover.
They haven't quite made plans.
There's a lot of things in motion.
You can see why we don't yet know his schedule, but maybe we will later.
All perfectly, perfectly reasonable.
And then somebody said, why haven't we heard anything from him?
And why hasn't anybody else heard from him?
Such as, let's say, a phone call to, I don't know, somebody who's a Democrat who's important.
A private phone call to maybe a reporter, a friendly reporter.
It seems that there's no signs of life.
Does that seem a little suspicious?
And then we've got Elon Musk, who mentioned that he said that the people in the know have known that Biden was going to Uh, known that he was going to resign, and even the hour he was going to do it.
The day and the hour.
Now, how could they know that a week ahead of time?
Even before he had the COVID?
Huh.
Well, now that's a little suspicious, isn't it?
Well, it could be that just maybe Sunday's an obvious time, and, you know, people were just guessing the obvious time it would happen.
And then it happened in the obvious time, so it's not really much of anything except the obvious happened in the obvious time.
Maybe.
Maybe.
But, uh, I would like to suggest, unless you can find somebody who beat me, that, uh, I don't know, did anybody notice that it took me a long time to respond when the news dropped?
Because people were contacting me and saying, where are you?
Where are you?
Why haven't you weighed in yet?
And I'll tell you, my first reaction was, there's something wrong with this.
That was my first reaction.
Something wrong with this?
Why is it a letter?
A letter?
I don't know.
Seemed unusual.
And so, I went to X and I just posted, I'm paraphrasing, I wonder if he'll wake up from his nap and realize that he resigned.
So in other words, my first thought was that he was not aware he had resigned.
I don't think anybody said it before I did.
It was my first thought.
Now, why was that my first thought?
Because I'm now trained to believe that 100% of any important news about politics is fake.
100%.
If you're not quite there, you probably had a few moments where you said, oh, Biden has decided to resign from the race because that's what they said.
Maybe your first reaction should be whatever they say is not true, because it never is.
It never is.
Why would this be the first thing that was ever true?
What are the odds that this is the first time they decided to be honest?
I mean, I guess sometimes things go their way so they can just be honest about it, but it's not your best bet.
So then I watched, and it didn't take long, A little bit of time goes by and next thing you know, other people are saying, hey, shouldn't we have seen by now some signs that Biden's actually awake and coherent and made a conscious decision about this?
Some way, you know, there are probably a hundred ways it could happen.
For example, suppose Jill Biden went public and said, you know, Joe's not feeling good today.
But I can tell you that he was in good spirits.
He was completely alert.
Sharp as a tack, in fact.
Sharp as a tack.
And that's when he made the decision.
He'd been considering it a while.
But I don't see Jill.
Now I can understand why Hunter doesn't do it.
Because, you know, Hunter's Hunter.
But it seems like they could have figured out some way to show us that it was a real decision by a real person who's still aware and awake.
Yet that hasn't happened yet.
Can somebody give me a fact check?
It hasn't happened since I started the show, has it?
Because it could happen while I'm talking to you.
I mean, that would be the normal thing I'd expect.
If everything was fine, that's what I'd expect.
But then a number of people started thinking along the lines I was thinking, and that includes, let's see, President, or maybe future President Trump.
He said, it's a new day, this is what he said this morning, it's a new day and Joe Biden doesn't remember quitting the race yesterday.
Babylon B says, Biden wakes up from nap, asks if he missed anything.
Now these are today.
But already, you know, an hour after I'd posted that he might be napping and not be aware of it, that became the major dominant conspiracy theory.
Now, let's just analyze how practical that would be.
How practical would it be for the bad people to say he resigned when he hadn't actually resigned, and therefore force it to happen in a very awkward way?
Well, Let's look at how difficult it would be to get him to do something he didn't know he was doing.
You could simply wait until he has a bad evening, because we understand he has periods of extreme confusion, and also periods of where he's sharp as a tack.
So all they'd have to do is wait until he was really bad, and I'll give you my impression I did last night on the man cave.
All right, here's Here's a conversation.
And by the way, if you've never had any elderly parents or you've never experienced what people are like, you know, when they reach this stage of cognitive behavior, it would look a little like this.
Joe?
Joe?
I think it's time.
I think it's time you sign this document.
And it's time to let it go.
And then Joe says... Yeah, that's right, Joe.
And so we've written this up for you.
And all you need to do is sign it.
What?
Yeah.
Here.
Here's the pen.
No.
Hold it.
And we just need you to sign this, Joe.
It's you resigning.
What?
Just sign it.
No.
Put your hand down on it.
Just sign it.
And you're done.
How hard would that be?
It would be really easy.
Because if it's true that he has periods where he doesn't know where he is, doesn't remember, isn't quite coherent, you just put the pen in his hand, put it there and tell him it was a good idea.
That's all it takes.
Now suppose he didn't have a period in which he was that bad.
How hard would it be to give him a period that was that bad?
Real easy.
Because presumably he has meds that make him feel better during the day, probably different meds that help him sleep at night.
All they'd have to do is cut the dose on the meds or just not give it to him.
The doctors could say, you know, we normally give you this med that makes you awake and alert during the day, but because of your COVID, we're going to change things up a little bit.
And then he doesn't have a good moment.
And then there's no way he can't argue because he simply isn't medicated to have any good moments.
How hard would it be to change his meds or give him new ones?
It'd be easy.
How hard would it be to isolate him from Jill and Hunter until the deed is done?
That would be hard.
Do you know what you would have to do to isolate him from his own wife?
Well, you might have to say he has COVID.
Right?
You might, and that would be enough to make sure they didn't sleep together.
And then you just make sure that the wife and Hunter are asleep at some point.
Because they've got to take naps too, right?
They're not super people.
They've got to take naps.
They've got to go to sleep.
So you wait for them to be asleep.
You take in, you get the signature.
They wake up and they say, what the hell just happened?
And then you say, talk to Joe.
He just resigned.
And then Jill goes crazy and mad and Hunter goes crazy and mad.
This is all, if you're just joining, we're doing recreational conspiracy theories.
So I'm not, I'm not claiming any of this is true.
We're just having fun with it based on what it looks like.
So then you imagine that the family goes crazy when they find out what happened, but by then it's already released.
By then it's in the news.
Now, what are you going to do if you're the family?
Do you say, no, everybody, I need to tell you what really happened.
Joe was incoherent when he signed the document.
Can they do that?
Can they tell you that Joe Biden, who is currently the president of the United States, in charge of the nuclear triad, Can they tell you, I just have to tell you the truth, he was incoherent when he signed the document resigning from the campaign?
No, they cannot do that.
Cause that would be a confession that they've known all along that he was incompetent.
You know, nobody's going to believe it just happened that day and that they were lying.
So they would be trapped and then the machine would start churning forward.
The news would instantly embrace Kamala.
And by the way, there was a second document that endorsed Kamala, but not a document.
Was it a post on X?
And so there are two things that we know could come from other sources, not necessarily Biden himself.
And then the machine starts cranking.
And Obama weighs in and says, ah, yes, we've got to run, you know, run a little quick primary thing.
The Clintons weigh in and they're backing her and the entire machine changes.
The funding, the funding changes immediately and goes to Kamala.
Everything changes.
Now it's way too late.
The machine is in motion.
You can't stop the machine.
So Nancy Pelosi simply had to create a situation where the machine would start operating and then you can't pull back the machine.
It's going to run some kind of convention thing and Biden won't have control of that.
So I think it's entirely possible that he was not aware that he resigned from the campaign.
Now the, the natural, uh, next part of that is, um, everybody's saying, Hey, he should be 25th amendment and, um, take it out because why can he be president?
If he can't campaign, obviously he's not capable of being president.
I think staying president was nothing but allowing the family to adjust.
In other words, if he had resigned from the presidency, There would be too many questions too fast.
That would be way too much of a reach.
And the family would be immediately put out in the street-ish, you know.
I mean, basically, they'd have to move out of the White House, I guess.
And that would be a gigantic, impractical problem.
And it might also cause them to be honest.
I can imagine easily that Jill Biden, if hypothetically, she learned that a trick had been played to get him to resign, even though he didn't know it, that she would feel really, really mad about that, but might just eat it and just stay quiet.
Because presumably there are also some carrots, not just sticks.
But if they had said, you have to quit the presidency today, I think Jill Biden would have said, I don't care what you've done so far, I'm going to tell the world that that didn't happen.
He's still president.
That would be a problem.
But suppose he does a fake quit from the campaign, all the gears of the machine show that everything's moved on and it's a fait accompli and there's no way back.
At that point, he only has to wait a few weeks and then resign.
Because nobody thinks he's going to be president again, and nobody cares about the next few months.
I mean, that's not material.
So he could just wait a few weeks and resign.
So I think that his resignation as president is just a given.
And I think that they might do it to boost Kamala's chances.
I don't think they'll do it until she has a nomination.
I think that's important, because you wouldn't want a situation where somebody else somehow got nominated.
And then she became the sitting president, like before the election.
That would be a problem because then nobody would be happy with it.
They'd be like, she's the sitting president.
How do you, how do you skip the sitting president?
So I think it's a guarantee that the Democrats did plan that the cat's on the roof.
Oh yeah.
Just the cat's on the roof.
He's, he's really just, it's only the campaign he's stopping.
Oh, not the presidency.
Did you think it was the presidency?
No, no, it's just the campaign.
The cat's on the roof.
Oh, it looks like the cat fell off the roof.
Well, it's still alive.
Well, we better take it to the vet.
And then later the cat dies.
So I think we're in the cat's on the roof version of Biden dropping out of being president.
And then I think that they'll do that primarily because it makes Kamala Harris the first black female president.
And they'll want to have that as part of her campaign.
It's like, my God, you can't just remove the first black female president after being president only two months.
So that's what I expect.
But everything could change the moment Biden wakes up and talks.
Every minute he doesn't wake up and talk, the entire right part of the country believes that this is all a anti-democratic, un-American plot from the inside to gain power despite any democratic process.
And that's where we are.
Here's what I would look for to find out if this conspiracy theory is true.
Watch for, and by the way, here's the larger context, but one of the things that's happened since the last several years, and I talked about this before, is that the political right, specifically the pro-Trump or at least the Trump acceptable groups, have become insanely good at understanding and explaining the process.
If you want to see an example of that, look in my feed.
You'll find a description by Balaji Srinivasan describing all of the anti-democratic things that Democrats have done.
It's a pretty long list.
It's like the BLM riots were apparently coordinated by the top.
None of that was organic.
Those were coordinated riots to make it look like there was too much chaos under Trump.
Basically, exactly what it looked like.
There was, you know, y'all remember the 51 intelligence officials who lied about the laptop?
That was basically a coup.
Yeah, we remember the Whitmer kidnapping in which the feds showed that they will create fake crimes by being the ones who drive them and just make sure some conservatives are part of it so they can get them too.
We saw the Biden primary handled in a non-democratic way.
Essentially, other people couldn't run, and now we're watching them game it again.
So that's twice gaming the system that was supposed to have some kind of a democratic element to it, and now it doesn't.
It's gone.
You remember the Russia collusion hoax?
You remember the fine people hoax?
You remember the January 6th?
I'm gonna call that a hoax.
The hoax part is that it was a attempt to take over the country, which it was obviously the opposite.
It was an attempt to make sure the country had not been taken over.
That was what it was.
But the news said the opposite and sold it hard.
In fact, if any Democrat, it's unlikely, but if any Democrat is watching this, you're saying, are you kidding?
No, that was obviously an insurrection attempt.
The president tried to stay in office.
If you believe that, you are deeply hypnotized.
Nothing like that happened.
I promise you, nothing like that happened.
The news hasn't been real for a long time, and if you still believe the news, you're going to be really confused about what happens in the next few weeks.
Everybody who thinks the news was ever honest, you've got some big surprises coming.
News has not been real since I don't know when, at least for the big political stuff.
And then, of course, we saw the impeachment hoaxes.
We saw the lawfare trying to end Trump.
These are all anti-democratic in the biggest way.
We saw the Secret Service failure to protect Trump.
Again, we say, huh, that seems like a conveniently well-planned failure of security, doesn't it?
That almost got the candidate killed.
We know that the Democrats wanted to end the Electoral College, and we know they wanted to pack the Supreme Court.
And we know that the Democrats like to use projection to cover their crimes.
In other words, if they can accuse you of the crime they're doing right in front of you, it blinds other Democrats to what they're doing.
It doesn't blind Republicans.
It only works on their own team.
But they could murder somebody.
And then say, Trump's a murderer, and then make all of the news talk about Trump being a murderer, even if he's not.
And people will just not notice that the Democrats just murdered somebody, hypothetically.
All right.
So Trump is going to need to destroy their argument about stealing the democracy.
See, I think all they have left is he's in it for himself.
You steal your democracy.
And he's got bad character or something.
That's all they have left.
Imagine having your entire campaign unrelated to what he did the first term, and unrelated to his current policies.
Oh, and then they're also doing that Project 25 hoax, where Trump says, these are not my policies, and they say, they are your policies.
Now, the truth is, That there are people who were associated with his regime who would love those to be his policies.
But they're trying to convince him.
And he's not convinced.
But nobody wants to report that, honestly.
So on the right, you know, people act like, oh, it's just not his plan.
It's not.
But I think it is worth saying that people who used to work with him put it together and would like it to be his plan.
I think that should be stated.
So, I think Trump is a little overplaying it by saying, I don't know what's in here and that.
I think he should just be a little bit more honest.
Well, no, he did say the last time that he knows some of the people.
I would go a little, I would embrace it a little harder.
I would say, yeah, there's some people who worked with me, very well-meaning people, who have some ideas that I promise you I'm not in favor of.
If you've got some specific things you're concerned about in that Project 25 thing, just ask me, and I'll tell you my view, and we'll compare it to that view, which I consider too extreme for where the country is, and really it doesn't match my own preferences either.
So, definitely not going to be doing the most extreme things that you see in that document, but it is true that there are some Republicans who'd like to see that stuff.
I just don't think any of that's likely or practical or useful at the moment.
Now I think that would be honest enough.
So I think there's a strong argument against that.
All right, here's the other conspiracy, recreational conspiracy theory is.
I'm not entirely sure that the Obama power of center and the Democrats and the Clinton power of center and the Democrats are on the same page.
Because Obama said he didn't endorse Kamala.
And he said that there should be a process to pick her.
Now, other people say, oh, there'll be a process, but the process will be so gamed that nobody else can get picked.
It'll simply be a way to coronate her and make it look like it was a little bit democratic.
So there probably will be a process that will be so obviously biased in her favor that it's like it didn't happen.
And the biggest problem, of course, is that she's the only one who can spend that $240 million in the campaign.
Now, if you think that doesn't matter, of course it matters.
I don't think there's anything else that matters, really.
If one of them has the money and the other doesn't, well, I think it's going to go that way.
But it is possible that Obama and the Clintons both would want some candidate who's their more perfect candidate.
Someone who would definitely do what Obama wants.
Might be.
Might be.
Different from the person who would do whatever Clintons want.
Now, here's the connection between the Clintons and Harris.
I remember at one point, Harris's staff was mostly ex-Hillary Clinton people, meaning that they had a close connection, at least through their intermediaries.
I suspect that the Clintons feel that they have some control over Kamala Harris.
Beyond that, now that you know that Huma Abedin is going to marry Alex Soros, and let me just say out loud, as far as I can tell from looking at photos of Alex Soros, he is and has been gay for a long time.
That's what the photos would suggest.
I mean, not suggest, it's super obvious.
And again, this is not, if you're new to this, this is not a camp, it's not any kind of comment about somebody's lifestyle.
I love the gays.
I love the LGBTQ community, but sometimes you need to point out just factual things about it, so that's all I'm doing.
So, I think that his alleged marriage to Uma Abedin has more to do with a connection to the Clintons, giving Clintons control over the Soros fortune through Uma Abedin and her control over Alex Soros, who looks like maybe he's not the brightest guy, and that maybe they knew he needed a handler.
So, uh, and then Alex Soros immediately said, uh, he endorses Harris.
So I'm seeing the Soros Clinton machine looking to consolidate power and maybe take that power from the Obama power center.
So Obama might be seeing his, the last of his power taken away.
Now you want to get even better because remember we're doing recreational conspiracy theories.
One possibility.
is that Obama is going to uncover the whole thing.
Because if Obama has some feelings, and some of them might actually be just what's good for the country.
You're right.
It's easy for us to imagine, you know, if you've been in the political fight too long, it's easy to imagine Obama's just a thoroughly bad guy, and he only wants what Obama wants, and it's just for Democrats, etc.
But I could easily imagine Obama being a human being and an American.
I know, right?
What if he's a human being?
And what if he's an American?
And what if he's an American first?
Because he's been president.
If you go through being president, it's hard not to be America first after you're done with that.
So what if he's watching this and he's saying to himself, If they game this, you know, this instant contest that Kamala will be in, and it's clear that they're just installing their person, and it looks like Hillary Clinton has controlled the Soros money, and it looks like she's going to control the candidate, Obama might say, this is too far, even for me.
And he might actually sell out the entire Democrat plan and say, here's the deal.
You went too far.
This is no longer the democracy that I was president of.
So, whether or not it becomes Obama, I think there's a very high likelihood there's going to be a whistleblower at a high level.
Could be a staffer, could be a consultant of some kind, but I'm expecting a whistleblower.
And if that whistleblower turns out to be Obama or somebody he authorizes, which could be even more clever perhaps, we may be at the beginning of how exciting this is going to get.
We might be just at the beginning.
To imagine that this is the exciting part and it's going to calm down, well, that might be optimistic.
We might rip the lid off this whole thing.
And I think one of the keys will be how soon it takes Biden to surface and say, oh yeah, I was in my full thinking mode when I did that.
Now, the New York Times had one very, very short and quick article in which one person Seem to know that the inside story is that Biden had been considering resigning for days, had talked to his advisors on Saturday, and made it sound like a very well-organized, planned, inevitable outcome.
But it was very short, it lacked a lot of detail, happened kind of quickly, and it was in the New York Times.
And nobody else could get that story.
Does that sound like a real story to you?
Not to me!
No, that sounds like exactly the kind of fake stories that we've been watching for years, in which they need a cover, so they need one trustable outlet to say that this happened the way the Democrats say.
They just needed one, but it had to be the New York Times, because if anybody else said it, it would look a little sketchy.
So everything depends on what Biden says and does, and especially what Jill Biden says and does.
If Jill Biden comes out of this with something that looks like peace, as in she's come to peace with a decision, it might have been real.
It might have been real.
If Jill Biden Completely goes off the, let's say, the public track, and you don't hear anything from her for a month?
It wasn't real.
Because remember, if she was part of the decision, and she would have to be, she would have to be agreeing with the decision, or Biden wouldn't do it.
If she was part of the decision, she would be at peace.
She wouldn't like it, nobody would like it, but she would be at peace.
And when she talks about it, you would see it.
You know, it was a very difficult decision.
Things turned faster than we hoped.
When we looked at it objectively, had some time away, the more we thought about it, the more we thought, you know, maybe it's time.
Maybe the people who are advising us are right.
Maybe we need to do what's good for the country.
If she says that, and she says it tomorrow, it might have been real.
I'd look for that not to happen.
I think that she knows she got gamed, and I think she's going to have to go quiet, because if she doesn't go quiet, it's going to be big trouble.
Big trouble.
So, let's see.
Then Harris, who has apparently good advisors at this point, because, you know, the best advisors would end up with her, of course.
She has named six of her potential rivals as possible running mates.
All right, as Cenk Uygur said, that's brilliant.
Strategically, that's brilliant.
Because instead of just saying, I'm one of six people who you might consider to be your nominee, she immediately reframes her competitors as potential vice presidents and the names of, oh yeah, we got this guy, Shapiro, we got this other person.
And then you automatically think that they're vice president material.
So that's smart.
That's way smarter than Kamala Harris, which means that the smartest people on the Democrat side are now in her camp.
Because that's really, that's actually extra smart.
That's an IQ kind of thing we haven't seen her do.
I've not seen her do one thing that is smart ever.
But here it is.
As soon as she has the best high-end advisors, She pulls a play that, if Trump had done this, I would spend half an hour telling you how smart it was.
That's how good it is.
That's good stuff.
We'll see how much other good stuff she has.
All right, as Brit Hume pointed out in Fox News, it will be hard for anybody to oppose her because of the DEI aspect.
He doesn't use that word, but let me just say what Brigham said.
Um, um, she says, uh, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
What does Brett say?
Yeah.
Bye.
Basically, he says that nobody's going to be able to just replace her because you'd be skipping the black woman.
And nobody can come out and say, no, it's not time for the black woman.
Somebody more capable should do it.
So he's being a realist.
So I posted this on X today because I thought this sums up What Mark Cuban has been talking about, I'll just read it to you, because I took some time to put it in perfect words.
I said, this is what Mark Cuban allegedly does not understand about DEI.
It's a system design problem.
And then I went on and said, Democrats have the entire United States as their pool of applicants for VP.
They pick perhaps the worst candidate in the history of candidates.
This outcome is not because of anyone's genes or culture or race or gender.
The outcome is because systemic racism, and my example is public school failure, etc., has limited the pool of qualified applicants for this specific high-end job.
Right?
For this specific high-end job, there's just a small pool.
But DEI thinking requires picking a diverse candidate.
You can debate requires, You know, you could say, well, it's not required.
But I would say, if you live in the real world, you know how this goes every time.
No, it's not required.
But it's required.
It's required.
And now the smart observers like Brit Hume are agreeing there's no practical way to skip over the DEIVP at this point.
Now, for those of you who are new to me, I have to give this clarification.
I like having diversity in government and business.
I think the country is stronger when we have reasonable diversity in both government and business.
It's better for everything.
Now, all other things being equal, it's better to have diversity.
But you've got to fix it at the childhood level.
Otherwise, you get this situation.
The childhood level means, why is the school system so bad for black Americans?
You know, it has to do with income, etc.
But, gotta fix that.
You gotta fix that.
So, if we were honest brokers of the country, we'd say, yes, we like diversity, here's how we're gonna fix it.
We're going to work like mad to make sure that childhood education is good.
Everybody sees the same opportunities.
Everybody has the same, you know, path toward those opportunities, but you gotta fix it at the childhood level.
When you try to fix it at the time somebody is 59, you get this.
It's just an unreasonable approach to a system that's broken.
You have to fix the system.
And then you'll get, maybe your supply and your demand for diversity will start to be equal, and then you don't have this problem.
Would I be talking about this if Biden had looked into this vast pool of potential applicants and said, God, there's so many, I'll just pick the best one.
And then I look at him and go, oh, that's pretty good.
That looks pretty good.
No, I wouldn't be having this conversation.
Yeah.
All right, Nicole Shanahan, as you know, VP for RFK Jr., VP candidate.
She says this whole process of picking Kamala is corrupt and un-American and a true threat to American democracy.
And she points out how that $240 million can only go to Kamala.
So there's nothing like a real contest that's going to happen.
So it's not like RFK Jr.
is suddenly in the mix.
It's not like Dan Goldman suddenly has a good shot at the top.
Those are not true.
Nothing like that's happening.
It's just the money is going to go to Kamala because there's so much money and nobody else could get it.
So she's DEI.
She has all the money.
She's endorsed by the Clintons.
We're kind of done here.
And then, of course, the media has just immediately acted like she's the nominee.
All right.
The talking points that the Democrats are using.
I don't know if you've had this experience, but when you see somebody on CNN who you think is a reasonable, smart, independent thinker, and then they repeat nothing but the talking point, like the exact talking point, Don't you lose all respect for him?
I think a number of times I've said in public that one of my favorite commentators on CNN is Fareed Zakaria.
And I think he's a brilliant guy, and I've loved a lot of his shows, and a lot of his reframes and the way he looks at things.
Very, very smart.
Very clever.
And then, he posted a... that...
About Biden giving up power, he says that history being made, a rare political leader who gave up power.
So the talking point is that he is a brave and wonderful leader, because like George Washington, he gave up power.
Nothing like that happened.
Who believes he gave up power?
If anything, it had to be ripped from him at a great fight.
Now, we all know that.
We all know he didn't give up power.
Nobody thinks that.
If he was a person who gave up power, he would have done it before he ran for office because all the conditions were obvious then.
He is the opposite of running for power.
So let me just say this.
Fareed Zakaria, you're a fucking asshole.
You're just a fucking asshole.
Because you have the ability to understand the situation.
You have the ability to be honest.
You could say this for what it is.
We all see it.
And for you to embrace the talking point in this is disgusting.
I mean, it's almost revolting.
I hate being a citizen in the same fucking country with you right now, and not you specifically, but everybody's going to repeat that talking point.
You know it's not true.
It disgusts me.
To watch you do it.
It disgusts me.
Now, I get that both sides do the talking point thing, right?
Of course.
Both sides, you know.
But it does seem different.
Here's my observation.
When people on the right conform on a message, even if I don't agree with it, it always looks like it started with somebody and other people said, oh, I like that.
That sounded right.
I'll say that.
It never is coordinated.
Now, if anybody wants to disprove me, I would actually be fascinated by that, if I could be debunked on this.
But I don't believe the Republicans give out talking points.
I believe the Republicans have developed such a fine, let's say, group of commentators, that they wake up in the morning and they see what people say, and then they say, that makes sense, I think I'll say that too.
That's completely different Then getting a memo that tells you what to say.
And I think that literally, literally, happens on the Democrat side.
And when I see all these fucking little ducks just say whatever they're told, I lose all respect for them.
Intellectually, as a citizen, as a human being.
I lose all respect.
Now, and it's different.
You know, when the Republicans are doing it, you know, conforming on some kind of a message, Then it just looks like they decided what message works, and they latched onto the one that looks most effective.
How many of you have noticed that when I reframe things in the morning, because I'm one of the first shows in the morning, how many of you have noticed that sometimes the Republican message looks a lot like what I said in the morning?
Has anybody noticed that?
It's not a coincidence.
It's because every now and then I'll hit a good reframe, And then other people will say, yeah, that was pretty good.
So I'll use that too.
That's all it is.
There's nobody talking to me who says, Scott, when you do the show, make sure you say it this way.
Never.
Not once.
Don't you think somebody would reach down to me at least once to say, you know, you better say it this way, because this is the way we're all going.
Not once.
Not once.
And I don't believe I've ever heard Any Republican or any pundit ever say anything like that has happened, and I know so many.
By now, I would know about that.
So it's really, really different.
On the Republican side, there's something like a collective intelligence operating, meaning that we operate like one big brain now.
I'll give you an example.
If you weren't quite sure how to understand this stealing of democracy stuff, well, there's Balaji Sreenivasan.
Giving you a very clear and very succinct explanation of where you're at and how to look at it with no politics at all.
It's just describing things that are well documented.
No, no conspiracy theories needed.
Just stuff that's real.
When you look at, uh, you know, Elon Musk saying this was known a week ago, that's not politics.
That's information coming from a smart, credible person.
When you see Mike Cernovich say, I'm not so sure that Biden was aware of what he did, you say to yourself, whoa, this isn't an ordinary person.
This is somebody who's been right about a lot of stuff for a long time.
And then you say, all right, I'm going to take that seriously.
We don't know it's true, but we're going to take it seriously because serious people are taking it seriously.
So you're seeing something wonderful happening.
You're watching the Republican constellation, the entire collected intelligence, standing up.
And you're seeing them no longer afraid, because we used to be a little bit afraid of what we could say.
Not everybody, but somewhere.
And now nobody's afraid, and people know who to trust.
Who are you going to look to?
I'll tell you who I'm going to check out today.
I'm going to check out whatever Glenn Greenwald says.
Why?
Because he has a long history of being really, really right about stuff like this.
Who am I going to look at?
Michael Schellenberger.
I'm going to look at what he says and how he frames this.
Why?
Because he's freaking brilliant, and he's good at this, and he's showed us he can do it in a way that just takes us to another level of understanding on a bunch of topics.
So, I would guess that my traffic today is probably some kind of a record traffic, because some number of people are doing the same thing right now.
You're saying, I better find out what Scott says, not the only person, of course, but you're going to find out what I say, you're going to compare it to what you hear later from your most capable other voices, and you're going to see That most of us, of course there's always a political spin this time of year, but you're going to see that most of us are talking about this objectively, meaning we're just going to say what's true and what's not true, and what to suspect, what not to suspect.
We're going to describe to you how the system works.
We're going to give you context.
And you're going to see this show unfold like you've never seen any show unfold before, because we know all the tricks now.
We've documented all the hoaxes.
We know about all the, you know, everything from the 51 Intel people to the Russia collusion hoax, the fine people hoax, the drinking bleach hoax.
We know we live in a hoaxocracy.
We know how they do it.
We know which members of the press are captured.
We know that when we hear them, we'll know exactly what's going on.
And that's different, people.
So the biggest untold story is that the collective intelligence of Republicans has gone through the roof.
Do you think it's meaningless that the all-in pod hosts are, well, I guess at least two out of four, are clearly pro-Trump?
It's a big deal.
When I told you that Andreessen Horowitz Turned pro-Trump, and I said, you might not know that world, but this is not a small deal.
You know what the big deal is?
How smart they are.
And the fact that everybody knows how smart they are.
There's no, there's no question when you talk about Andreessen Horowitz, real, real smart, right?
Bill Ackman, real smart.
Jamie Dimon, not pro-Trump, but says, hey, Let's be honest, a few things he got right.
Smart guy, right?
So when you add, you know, Elon Musk to the mix, and you add a number of other people to the mix, and add JD Vance especially, you add Vivek Ramaswamy, the collective IQ of the influential Republican people is through the fucking roof right now.
And if you don't think that makes a difference, Buckle up!
Because whatever the Democrats thought that were their advantages, they are grossly underestimating the collective intelligence of the other team, because they can't see it yet.
But boy, they're gonna!
All right, as Bongino points out, it's not a selfless act for Biden to drop out, because he knew he was going to lose.
Of course, even if you assume that Biden was aware that he quit, it's not selfless.
It's the opposite of selfless.
He knew he couldn't do it, knew he couldn't win.
So dropping out saves you the loss.
It's the opposite of selfless.
It's not even close to being selfless.
And of course, immediately the argument on the left has gone from, well, age doesn't matter, to Trump's too old.
Which we knew would happen instantly, because we knew they were lying the whole time before, about Biden's age not making that much difference.
But here's something you didn't know, maybe.
Have you ever noticed that on MSNBC and sometimes CNN, they have what I call the fake historians?
It's one thing to have fake news, fake pundits, but they even have fake history now.
And by fake history, I don't mean they necessarily make up the history.
I mean that they choose the history and they framed it in a way that is pure propaganda.
Now, what bothers me the most is their faces.
And I'm not going to name names, but the next time you see a historian on CNN or MSNBC, look at the, look at the fucked up smile.
They can't get the smile off their face because they know they're not talking about real history.
They're just being propagandists.
They have these faces like, well, let me tell you, I can't even get this, I can't even get this smile off my face.
Well, let me tell you, this is really, historically speaking, proof that Trump is obviously Hitler.
And if they could at least say it with a straight fucking face, it wouldn't be so obvious that they're there as fake historians.
Now, they're real historians.
It's just they're there for propaganda.
That's the fake part.
Well, Naval Ravikant has weighed in.
And again, if you're not familiar with that world, you know, the tech world and the personalities in the tech world, here's what you most need to know.
Naval is famously non-political.
So if he says anything that even intersects a little bit with the political realm, he is probably the most credible, smart person in all of Silicon Valley.
Well known, I mean really well known for being brilliant, basically.
And he said this, On X this morning.
It's the battle of the masculine men and the feminine women versus the masculine women and the feminine men. And we're done.
That's what it is.
Republicans are masculine men with women who like masculine men, and respond with the complement of that, which is femininity.
Against masculine women, And the men who are too weak to argue with him, basically.
And that is what's happening.
Now, here's where this gets interesting.
I saw somebody say that the black vote was going to automatically go to Democrats because of Kamala, assuming Kamala is the nominee.
And the argument was that Obama got 97% and it wasn't because of his policies, it was because he was black.
She's black, it's going to be the same thing.
So all those gains that you thought that Trump pulled off of the Democrats are just going to be turned around and applied to Kamala.
Do you think that?
Is that what you think is going to happen?
It might.
By the way, it might happen.
I would say there's a reasonably good chance that's exactly what will happen.
But if you take a look at the Naval reframe, And you say to yourself, it feels like the masculine men against some other force.
How do the black men feel about Kamala?
I don't know.
I'd be real interested if there's some kind of survey coming up.
That would be fascinating.
So I don't know.
I don't think that I have the... I don't have the understanding of the black community sufficient that I can call this one.
This one's going to be fun.
Fun and intellectually fascinating to find out how the black Americans line up on this.
Because let me say as, you know, loudly and clearly as possible.
If you're a black man, Republicans want you.
They want you bad.
And, you know, I told you the story yesterday about the young black man, I think he's a TikTok influencer, who kept saying, I keep looking for all the white supremacy, but every time I talk to somebody in a MAGA hat, they seem nice to me.
Why is everybody so kind and friendly when they're supposed to be having exactly the opposite, I'm told?
I feel like black American men just woke the fuck up.
Now, it would be easy to get ahead of it and, you know, maybe imagine it's happening because I saw some anecdotes and, you know, saw like a little sliver of something that looked like that.
So I don't think that's confirmed, but things can change quickly and it would not be hard for me to imagine.
Especially after Trump's, uh, you know, the, the fight that Trump put up.
If you're a black man and you can't relate at all to Trump at this point, I'd be surprised because even though, um, you know, races are first and often dominant filter on stuff, unfortunately, experience is stronger.
Would you agree?
If you, let's say you went to war and one of your, you know, soldiers who was your, in your foxhole was black and you were white and you survived the war and you both, you know, you help each other and you save each other's lives and, you know, you go through the war and you make it out.
How are you going to feel about each other?
Well, you're not going to be thinking much about the black stuff, are you?
You're going to think you're the guy who was in the foxhole with me.
We fought the enemy.
You saved my life.
I saved your life.
You're going to think about the experience and the and what you relate to the experience.
I think Trump.
And I'm going to say it, you know, I realize that people are going to get their get their feelings hurt by this, but I do believe that the lawfare against Trump probably registers with black men.
Who say, I feel like the legal system doesn't like me either, which would be reasonable.
That would be a completely reasonable, you know, association.
And then I think the attempted murder probably generates all kinds of feelings about the relative safety of being a black man in America and not trusting the people with authority to not shoot you.
So I've got a feeling that As much as the Democrats want to say, oh, you racist, how can you believe that black Americans are going to like Trump more because he has a mugshot and because he got shot at?
Well, it's because of decades and decades of indoctrination that says those things should be at the top of your mind.
If black men had been trained for 50 years to think about their educational attainment, Then they wouldn't be relating to Trump at all.
They'd say, well, nobody's trying to shoot me, and, you know, I didn't break any laws.
Why would I relate to that?
But if you live in a world where you think that the system is trying to get you, and maybe it is, and you think that the police might be more likely to shoot you, and then you see him get, you know, shot, I don't know how you can't associate with that.
I think color falls away.
When you, when danger is there, because fear is the bigger filter than race, right?
Fear is the bigger filter than race by far.
And so that, that stimulates the fear response in people who, people who could maybe have something in their life that relates to it.
All right.
So the, the old way of thinking was pretending that Biden was sharp as attack.
When everybody could see that he wasn't.
And now we've moved to the new mode, which is pretending that Kamala Harris isn't a drunk.
Now, given that I predicted Biden's decline in 2019 and 2020, and, you know, nailed it, because you could see it early, I'm going to make the following claim.
I don't believe everybody's good at reading people.
And you know, maybe I have my problems with that too.
But there's definitely a big difference in how well people can read other people.
I think I'm pretty good at it.
And to me, the way she acts when she gets all giggly and somewhat incoherent in public, that doesn't look to me like somebody who is a bad public speaker.
That looks drunk.
And I'd be interested, I asked the locals people before we got on, I was talking to them privately, But let me ask the rest of you.
I want to see in the comments.
How many of you would say that it seems obvious to you that at least some of her public appearances were alcohol affected?
How many think that they've seen her drunk in public?
I'd love to see how many people would agree with that.
On locals, it was probably 80% agreed that to them they look that she looks drunk in public.
Uh, yeah, there's some question about whether she's natural born, but I'm not going to get into that.
I think that that's not, that's not a useful path.
There's no way that that's going to hold.
All right.
I'm just looking at your comments and the locals people are pretty much saying, yes, it looks drunk to her.
Now, are we going to just do this again?
Because there's nobody on, there's probably nobody on the Republican side who can say that out loud.
Because I don't have any proof.
I can't prove it.
Here's what we do know.
She is apparently a, what would be the word, a wine hobbyist.
So she's somebody who knows about wine, cares about wine, enjoys wine.
Now, there would be nothing wrong with that in the history of presidents, right?
Lots of presidents enjoy a glass of wine.
Here's my personal observation.
It's very rare to meet somebody who is a wine hobbyist who's not an alcoholic.
They may be functional.
She looks functional.
But they have a wine hobby so they can open a bottle of wine every day.
And they can get together with their other wine hobbyist friends and they can all open wine every day.
Now if you've never noticed that the wine hobbyists are really just running a cover for their alcoholism, usually functional alcoholism, then you're not really noticing very well.
Right?
She is a wine hobbyist.
If the only thing you knew was that she's a wine hobbyist, that's an 80% chance that she's a functional alcoholic.
Now, functional means that she can show up for work.
It doesn't mean she's going to be good at it.
Because we've seen her speak in public and it didn't look good to me.
But she showed up and she said things and people clapped.
So it's functional.
But are we really, really going to go through another campaign where the people who are important in this country are just going to say, yeah, I don't see anything.
I don't notice anything.
Yeah.
Now others have said it's not alcohol.
It's, you know, something else.
Maybe.
But I would put a pretty high bet on it being alcohol, because she's a wine hobbyist, and probably has lunch before she gives a speech.
All right, the fine people hoax has returned, and the three horsemen of defeating it will rise again.
Steve Cortez, Joel Pollack, And I will have to get back in the fight to make sure everybody knows the fine people hoax is one of the greatest hoaxes ever pulled on the American people.
Snopes has already debunked it.
Mike Pence debunked it during his debate with Kamala Harris.
It's debunked.
But we'll have to fight that again.
The Post Millennial says or some rapid poll that said one third of Democrats wish Trump had been killed by the would be assassins bullet.
Uh, does that sound true?
Do you think one third of Democrats wish that Trump had been assassinated?
I say, yes, that sounds true, if not low.
My, my real belief is that one third were willing to say it out loud, but at least one third believed he's really Hiller.
Right?
So should you be surprised that people who had been brainwashed into thinking he's Hiller, Would be maybe glad if he got killed.
Wouldn't be surprising at all.
Now, um, let me just say that if I heard someday, and I hope this doesn't happen and I'm opposed to any kind of violence.
So no violence, no violence, no violence.
I'm just going to say, I understand these Democrats.
Here's why.
If I heard someday that somebody had been jailed in the January 6th thing, And when they got out, they bought a high-powered rifle and killed Biden.
I would first of all say that's just the worst thing.
That's the worst thing.
But I would also completely understand it.
That's all I'm going to say about that.
I don't want any violence.
It's a bad idea.
It's bad for everybody.
It's bad for the country.
It's bad for the person who does it.
It's bad for the person who gets killed.
There's no good from it.
But I'd certainly understand it.
Because if you put me in jail, and you knew it was no reason for it, I'd want to kill you when I got out.
I wouldn't do it, because it'd be crazy.
But I'd sure want to, and I'd understand if anybody else wanted to as well.
Don't do it, by the way.
Don't do it.
All right.
So, I'm going to end on a few points that go into the category I call Everything Democrats knew is wrong.
So now Democrats are finding out that their selection for president, that they had been told was perfectly sharp as a tack, was in fact so declined that, you know, he's gone now.
Now, do you think that they learned to say to themselves, wait a minute, wait a minute.
If, if they lied to us about that, Is it possible they've lied to us about other big things?
So here are a few things that, maybe, they might find out.
Now this is, remember, the context of today's live stream is recreational conspiracy theories.
So there's nothing I said today that's not within the recreational mode.
I don't know how true any of it is.
I just have no way to know.
But it sure is fun to talk about.
And all of it is within the realm of possible, based on things we know have happened.
But let me give you another example.
There's an account on X called Mad Liberals, who has been doing this analysis.
Let's see if this works.
Analysis of the 2020 election in Fulton County.
And I don't have the skill to analyze this.
So I can't tell if this is like a really good point or it's missing in some way.
But I post it because I'd love to get somebody smart to look at it.
And I can't explain it entirely, but it's something like this.
If you do an analysis, you can determine somehow that...
He was able to show how and where the original ballots were used to create the double counted ballots So the idea is that original ballots were somehow used To create fake ballots and that the evidence is clear and obvious It's public and all you have to do is look at what connects to what and you can see it clearly now I do not make the claim that that's true.
I Make the claim that somebody looks a lot smarter than me Did a lot of work And he's showing the work.
And the work comes from public sources, the data does.
And so nothing's made up.
And I believe there's nothing hidden.
Because if you know the data is public, you can check.
And the analysis is just, you know, clearly shown, literally with lines.
You know, this line connects to this, so you can see it's the same.
And multiple examples.
Now, I just want to hear somebody else's opinion on it.
Because I don't have a way to judge that.
But, as you know, I do believe that it's unlikely our elections have ever been fair for a long time.
It's possible.
I think it's just really unlikely.
Because we live in a system where everything that can be rigged has been rigged.
I don't know how many times you have to see another example where everything that can be rigged has been in fact rigged.
So it'd be quite an amazing thing if that was the one example.
We also learned today, Breitbart News is reporting that The FBI broke into the Trump attacker's phone using some technology from Israel called Celebrite.
And once they had that technology, even though they had an unhackable Samsung Android phone, it took about 40 minutes to unload everything in it.
That's right.
If you believed there was such a thing as private information, well, you need to lose that.
There is nothing that they can't get into.
Nothing they can't get into.
Now, I'm a little surprised that the FBI had to go to Israel to get that software, because they didn't already have that software.
It's for sale.
They didn't already have a copy?
They had to just go get it for this one situation?
Are you telling me that the FBI has never had a reason to get into an Android phone recently?
I mean, everything about this story is a little suspicious.
But the scary thing is, nothing's ever been private.
For a long time, probably.
And then here's a story that just blows my mind.
It's from the Telegraph.
But there's a study that's very small, and I wouldn't say this is true yet.
But here's the claim.
And I just want to say this because it's fun to think about.
Autism can be reversed.
Apparently, there was a study with some twins where they used a series of interventions.
So it wasn't one pill or one thing.
It was, I think there were lifestyle things, educational changes, stimulation changes, maybe something with nutrition, but the collective effect of it was to almost eliminate autism in individuals.
Now again, it's not a big study, so it's way too early to say it works, but is this possible?
Is it possible that we'll figure out how to unwind autism?
And that maybe that just dropped?
I would vote against it, meaning that, you know, if I had to bet, I'd say, well, this is probably like most of the news stories that turn out not to be true.
But because I want it to be true, and because we're doing recreational conspiracy theories, recreationally, I'm going to think it's possible.
Because I feel good when I think that.
And then lastly, the NOAA, the National Organization of Atmospheric Something, you know, the official body that is measuring temperatures and stuff, says that the USA heat waves were much hotter in the past.
That's it.
Basically, the official word is, you know, you think that climate change is real because of our heat waves, right?
Nope!
They were worse in the past when CO2 was lower.
But at least it's true that the Great Coral Reef is getting bleached by all the climate warming.
So what?
Oh, no, it turns out that was all wrong.
In the last three years, the Great Coral Reef has greatly increased and improved.
Doesn't make sense because the world keeps getting warmer, right?
But at least, you know, we still have all the hurricanes, the hurricanes being much worse than what?
Oh, it turns out the hurricanes aren't any worse than they used to be, but they're a lot more frequent.
Okay.
They're not more frequent and they're not worse, but you all know that the sea level has risen.
Okay.
The sea level hasn't risen, but a lot of ice has been about the same, but at least, you know, the heat is just destroying all the, okay.
The greenery is higher than it's ever been and deserts are disappearing.
So, but I'm positive there's some evidence for this climate change stuff.
I'm sure of it.
I just haven't seen any.
But, at least you know they can measure the temperature of the Earth accurately.
Because, well, let me give my best argument.
We know they're measuring the temperature of the Earth accurately because of how important it is.
Am I right?
When something is that important, it's like an existential threat to the entire planet.
You're going to put your best people on it, and they're going to make sure that there's no areas of incompetence or no miscommunications.
It's going to be the top crack experts And they're going to get that right.
Thank goodness.
In fact, if you were to compare it, you know, if I, if I were to compare it to something, it'd be like, what else would be vitally important?
Like life and death important to the whole nation, if not the world.
Uh, Oh, here's an example, the secret service.
So the secret service would be, you know, handpicked professionals who are the best of the best doing the most important job in the world.
Which is protecting a presidential candidate.
And since we know that the Secret Service is just amazingly efficient and effective, and they don't really leave any holes, there's no gaps in their work.
So, since we know that when it matters that much, and you put your best people on it, you do get excellent, excellent results.
As they did, you know, with President Trump.
A what?
Oh!
Oh, wait.
Oh, the new news is that they had three different communication channels for the three entities so they couldn't talk to each other.
Okay, that's not perfect.
That's really the dumbest thing you could do.
But at least it was all their best Oh, it wasn't their best people.
Because the best people had to go to the NATO and take care of Jill.
So they had sort of stand-ins.
But at least the stand-ins were fully trained.
Maybe not fully trained.
Okay.
But at least you had all the roofs covered in the most basic thing that you... Okay, maybe there's a little miscommunication about the roofs.
But at least, this is the important part, as soon as the bad stuff happened, at least the investigators and the government were completely transparent.
They told us what they knew, when they knew, and we immediately knew what?
Oh, it's the opposite of that.
It looks like they're covering up and lying.
And they lied about the slope of the roof mattering.
And basically everything they told us is a lie.
But hey, Those climate change temperatures have been accurately measured for decades.
Ladies and gentlemen, we live in a crazy, crazy world.
I have not seen in the comments anybody saying yet that Biden has emerged.
Can I do a quick check?
Has anything happened in the last hour?
Has Biden emerged?
Have we seen any signs of life?
Because a lot of people are saying, literally, if this were a kidnapping, we would not believe he's still alive.
And by the way, it's literally possible he's deceased.
It is literally possible he's deceased.
That's not my assumption, but remember, we're doing recreational conspiracy theories today, and so you might as well take it to the next level.
It's entirely possible he's already deceased, and they may have needed to make it look like he was turning it over and, you know, and endorsing Kamala.
But they needed to get him out of office.
Or maybe it just happened on its own.
It's also possible they killed him.
Let me be blunt about it.
It looks to me like JFK was killed by government operatives.
It looks to me.
So that was in my lifetime.
So if we believe that government operatives can kill the president, And we have the situation where killing the president would be really the smartest thing they could do if they could get away with it.
And then you've got a president who's surrounded by hand-picked doctors.
How hard is it for a doctor to give the wrong injection?
And then another doctor to do the autopsy and say, nope, died of old age.
Dementia got him.
That COVID was a little more than we thought.
They may have already literally murdered him.
That is within the realm of what we've observed in America.
I don't think it's likely because it'd be too many, you know, too many people would know about it.
It's just within the realm.
Amazingly, it's within the realm of possible.
So we're going to have to watch to find out what happens.
If I had to bet, I think it's a coin flip.
So I'd say there's a 50% chance That Biden was reasonably competent and awake when he signed it.
He just doesn't want to talk to people.
And there's nothing really suspicious.
The other 50% is it's everything that we theorize as a conspiracy.
It's at least a 50% chance that the worst case scenario just happened.
At least a 50%.
Now, I don't mean 50% chance they murdered him.
But a 50% chance that he was Let's say abused while he was not thinking clearly.
I think that's at least 50% chance.
Or maybe even just faked his signature.
That's possible, too.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, that's what I've got for today.
There's going to be a lot of news on this.
We'll go watch it.
Hope you enjoyed the show.
I'm going to say a few words privately to the locals people who are subscribers, but I'm going to say goodbye to YouTube and RumbleNX.
▲
Export Selection