God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorks
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Maduro vs Musk, US vs Venezuela, Venezuela Election, US Elections, Anti-Trump Hoax, Anti-Harris Hoax, Deportations Hoax, Paris Accords Hoax, President Trump, Entering Their Illusion Persuasion, NABJ, Identity Politics, Russian Prisoner Swap, VP Kamala Harris, Thomas Crooks Influencers, Chevron Leaves California, Drone vs Helicopter Warfare, 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
All you need is a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or gel, a cistern, a canteen, a jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine at the end of the day.
The thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
And it happens now.
Oh, delightful.
Spectacular.
Orgasmic.
Well, my favorite story of the year is that there's a woman who just woke up after a five-year coma.
Boy, has she got some fun ahead.
I've been gone for five years.
Has anything happened?
Yeah, a few things happened since 2019.
She's got some surprises coming.
Well, let's talk about some of those that happened recently, shall we?
Well, as you know, in our perfectly normal world, the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, has been challenged to a physical fight by Venezuela's dictator, Maduro, who allegedly won an election, but the United States says, no, you didn't.
It was cheating.
So it looks like the fight is on, and Maduro says, I accept the challenge.
Let's give it a try.
But come here.
If I beat you, I accept the trip to Mars.
But you're going with me.
OK, apparently there's a bet involved that if Maduro wins, he gets a trip to Mars.
Well, this just keeps getting better and better.
But now he's also claiming that the election irregularities were caused by—can you guess?
Who do you think Maduro is blaming for the election irregularities in Venezuela?
Elon Musk.
Yeah, he's decided that Elon Musk has hacked Venezuela.
He goes, the attacks, that there was computer hacking to undermine the election, he says, We're directed by the power of Elon Musk.
And then Maduro goes on, Venezuela, as I said yesterday and today, is facing domestic and international aggression from world powers.
And now it is evident that Elon Musk is obsessed with the idea of taking over Venezuela and ruling it from abroad.
He is largely responsible for these attacks and acts of aggression.
How weird would it be to be Elon Musk?
You know, it's not weird enough that you're the richest person in the world and, you know, your life is insanely interesting.
But you wake up and you find out that you've been blamed for all the problems in Venezuela.
How could that be more fun?
Imagine waking up and finding out that you've been blamed for the problems in Venezuela.
There's nothing that can't happen today.
All right.
Allergy is terrible.
The US unemployment rate has jumped to 4.3 from 4.1, which kind of surprised me because I think the numbers, economic numbers, are always fake in an election year.
So I would have expected these numbers to be faked a little bit more.
Maybe they'll get corrected later.
But at the moment, it's looking like the stock market was down.
Maybe it's coming back a little today.
Give me an update on that.
But anyway, so that's what's happening with the economy.
It's looking a little dull.
And I would think if unemployment is creeping up and joblessness is creeping up, which is what's happening, I don't know how a Democrat could win under that situation.
But we're going to find out because the brainwashing is strong.
Meanwhile, the United States and Anthony Blinken, the Secretary of State, It's decided that the United States is going to accept the loser in the Venezuela election, saying that it was rigged and that the real rightful leader of the country is the person who lost.
And so we're going to be backing the loser.
Now, if you follow Mike Benz, he talks about John Bolton admitting that under Trump administration, he attempted to run a coup in Venezuela.
And he just sort of says that in public, like that's just okay.
And then there's a clip of Trump saying that, you know, we had a chance that we could have gotten all the resources.
So apparently there was an explicit Coup attempt for Venezuela, which would give the United States some kind of, you know, greater influence down there, but it didn't work out.
So it looks like the United States is just trying again, which is interesting because it would mean that the effort was the same across two administrations.
So that would mean that a Republican and a Democrat presidency acted exactly the same, trying to conquer Venezuela.
Now, I would argue that this is business as usual, and that we've tried to influence indirectly or directly every country in our hemisphere, and that's probably good for stability in the world.
Might even be good for those countries in some cases.
So, isn't it amazing seeing the gears of the machine?
When you don't have to wonder, like, ah, I wonder if we're doing something in Venezuela that's a little, you know, not above board.
Yes, of course we are.
We are totally trying to conquer Venezuela through a variety of, you know, persuasion plus dirty tricks, I'm sure, and money and blackmail, and I'm sure that we're doing just about everything.
Looks like things aren't looking too good on the stock market today.
Anyway, so we'll be more news on that coming, I'm sure.
Let's see, but at least the elections in the United States are not like Venezuela.
Can you imagine?
Imagine if the elections in the United States were as non-credible as the Venezuelan elections.
Oh my goodness, we'd be in trouble, wouldn't we?
Yeah.
So here's a story from InsurrectionBarbie is reporting this on X.
That a new lawsuit has been filed by a Florida resident against Mayorkas and a bunch of other people like the Florida Secretary of State, among others.
And there's, it's alleged that there's a conspiracy to commit election fraud.
Hmm.
It's not even, not even in, um, in Venezuela.
This is in the United States.
And the alleged allegation is that these NGOs, these non-government organizations, are registering non-citizens to vote.
And that once they're registered, the NGOs request the ballots, which gets sent to them by mail.
And as Instruction Barbie says, you can guess the rest.
Well, if that's true, I mean, it's an allegation, it hasn't been proven.
But if it's true, the NGOs are registering non-citizens to vote so they can get ahold of their blank ballots and vote for them, well, that would be pretty bad, wouldn't it?
But it's just an allegation.
People, people, we're not as bad as Venezuela.
We just have that one allegation.
Okay, there's another allegation, this was in the Federalist, that America has nearly 300,000 double-registered voters.
Oh, okay.
A watchdog group found nearly 300,000 people are double-registered to vote, and thousands who voted at least twice in recent elections.
Well, that would be A big problem, if that were true.
But that's unproven.
It's unproven.
So unlike Venezuela, where their elections were all rigged, we just have these unproven allegations.
Let's see what else is happening.
Oh, there's a report by some military experts talking about how TikTok is clearly part of the military operation to influence the United States.
Two former military and intelligence experts warned.
And this would be part of what is called the Three Warfare Doctrine of China, in which they would use, of course, physical force if needed, but they would use economic and persuasion and other soft forces.
So let's see.
China has specifically said that their warfare includes all of these persuasion elements.
And they do have control over TikTok, which is the greatest persuader for young people in America.
Huh.
I wonder if there's any risk there.
I would like to add this to the list of studies that you could have saved a lot of money if you just asked me, Hey, we're thinking of spending thousands of dollars on this study.
Why don't we just ask Scott?
And I would say, well, China does have a doctrine of using every tool they can for Hoax alert!
Hoax alert!
It would be one of the strongest tools anybody can imagine for persuasion So yes, it is absolutely part of the Chinese military warfare doctrine There look how much money I could have saved them Same answer. I just didn't have to do the studying because it's kind of obvious Hoax alert hoax alert doo-doo-doo-doo-doo-doo-doo
All right, so apparently the Washington Post is reporting.
One of their reporters is going to be on Morning Joe.
Let's see.
Let's see if we can piece this together.
Remember I told you that you have to know the players.
If you only know the story, you don't know anything.
You have to know the players.
The players who are telling you the story is the story.
Then you know everything.
So let's see, we've got the Washington Post.
And their reporter's going to go on Morning Joe.
So those are the players.
The Washington Post and Morning Joe.
And they've got, oh, they've got a big story here about the possibility that Donald Trump took $10 million cash from some Egyptian source.
Now, if you only knew the story, that would sound bad for Trump, wouldn't it?
Because the story is that somebody alleges that he took money from a foreign country.
Well, bad story.
But, suppose you knew the players.
The Washington Post and Morning Joe.
Those are the least credible news outlets in the entire world.
You could not become less credible.
And if the two of them join together, that's like non-credible squared.
So you don't even need to watch this story.
You can dismiss it on its surface because of the players.
Now, will it become a bigger story?
Maybe, because the Washington Post is known as a newsmaker in the business, meaning that if it's in the Washington Post or the New York Times, those are the big ones, then the other outlets say, well, that's a story.
So we'll cover it too, because the big newspaper says it's a story.
So there are tons of things that could be stories on any given day.
But the news makers tell the other news business what's the story.
That's what's happening here.
But these are the two biggest fake news entities, and if they're teaming up, there's not really any chance this is real.
If you want to put a percent likelihood this story is real, without even knowing the story.
You don't even need to know the story.
You just need to know it's about Trump.
If it were true, it would be bad for Trump.
It's the Washington Post and Morning Joe.
There's nothing else you need to know.
There's so little chance this is true that you don't even need to look into it.
That would be my take.
Now, do the hoaxes only work in one direction?
No.
Here's a hoax about Kamala Harris.
Yeah, look at me, shown both sides.
Michael Ian Black would be so proud of me right now.
So here's a hoax about Kamal Harris.
And remember, here's my hoax trick.
One way you can tell a hoax is ask yourself this question.
Would anybody in the world ever say or do the thing that somebody is accused of saying or doing?
Would anybody under any circumstance ever do that?
If your answer is, well, honestly, no, nobody would ever do that.
It didn't happen.
You can really rely on that not happening.
I'll give you an example.
So there's stories about Kamala Harris being a terrible boss back when she was Attorney General in California.
But, you know, the story goes on that she's always a terrible boss.
But listen to the example.
So there's somebody who has apparently worked on it.
And so the information comes from somebody who was on her staff.
And Gregory, is the name of the person, was given instructions to never address Harris.
Nor look her in the eye, as that privilege was only allowed to senior staff members.
Now, number one, that's something that allegedly was told by a staffer.
So this is not about Harris.
This is about what a staffer said to another staffer.
Do you think the experienced staffers ever tell some bullshit to the new people?
Of course they do!
In fact, you would hear this story in Hollywood all the time.
About the interns and stuff on the set are told, don't make eye contact with the star.
Don't try to talk to him.
But it's not the star.
The star might have no problem with it at all.
You know, although, you know, they have to concentrate.
So there's, you know, there's a practical element to not bothering them when they're working, but it's usually the staff who says, Oh, whatever you do, don't make eye contact with Brad Pitt.
It's probably not Brad Pitt who cares.
It's the staff who said don't talk to Brad Pitt.
So the first part of the hoax is that it conflates what Harris may want or have said with something a staff member may have wanted or said.
Very different, but it gets worse.
The story says that Harris instructed her entire staff to stand every morning as she entered her office and say, good morning, General.
Okay, she was Attorney General.
Now, here's where it all falls apart.
Is there anybody listening who thinks that's true?
That anybody anywhere ever in the history of the United States ever said, when I enter every single morning, you should all stand up and say, good morning, General.
Do you think that's ever happened in the history of the world?
I don't.
I think nobody has ever said that.
That's not words that have come out of anybody's mouth at any time ever.
And if you're the Attorney General, do you really want people standing and calling you General?
It's not even something a woman would ever ask for.
No woman says, call me General and stand when I enter the office.
Nobody.
At the very least, they'd worry that it would get out.
Like even if you wanted to do it, you wouldn't do it.
Because you're a public person and it would get out.
Of course this didn't happen.
How many of you think that she really asked her staff to stand up every time she walked in the office in the morning and say good morning general?
Does anybody believe that's true?
Nobody.
So remember, the way to detect bullshit is to ask yourself, would anybody do that under any circumstance?
That's what they do to Trump all the time.
Would anybody stand in front of the world and say, those neo-Nazis are fine people?
No, not anybody.
Not anybody who was president.
Would any president suggest maybe drinking bleach would be good?
No.
That's why you know it didn't happen.
So this is another one.
No, this did not happen.
I'm sorry.
There's nothing you could do to make me believe this.
Now, is she a bad boss?
Very possibly.
Yes.
But keep in mind that female bosses do get a little extra, you know what I mean?
They get a little extra bitch treatment, even when it's not necessarily deserved.
You know, I think that's, that's a fair statement from women.
That a man can be tough and other people say, oh, there's a tough man.
That's a good thing.
And then if a woman did something very similar, it would be maybe regarded as that bitch.
So that is a double standard.
And when you see people evaluating bosses just now, every boss gets this treatment.
Every strong boss gets the, you're a bad boss treatment by some disgruntled person.
Now that doesn't mean she's a good boss.
So if you think I'm defending Kamala Harris's management, I'm not.
I'm just telling you that the nature of these claims is pretty, pretty sketchy.
Pretty sketchy.
Well, here's some more things that aren't true.
The Biden administration and Harris, I guess, are saying that they deported more immigrants, illegal immigrants than Trump did.
Is that true?
Do you think it's true that the Biden administration deported way more, quite a bit more, people than Trump did?
It's true.
That's actually true.
Is there anything left out that would change how you think about that?
Let's see.
If the Biden administration deported the most people compared to Trump, and it's a pretty big difference, then that's all you need to know, isn't it?
That's all you need to know.
Wait, what?
Oh, you would also need to know how many total people got in, wouldn't you?
Because if one let a hundred times more people in, and they deported twice as many as the previous administration, that's actually a terrible job.
It's a terrible job if you look at it in context.
If you let in a million people, and you deport ten of them, and Trump let in A thousand people and deported one of them.
It's not the same.
Not the same.
Well, but at least everything we know about the climate is true.
There's a report by Roger Pielke Jr.
in the Climate Change Dispatch.
So he looked at how successful the big countries have been in decarbonizing, in other words, putting less CO2 in the air, after the Paris Accord.
Was that what it's called?
The big Paris Convention on Climate Change?
This is back in 2015.
So now we've got eight years of data to see how that works.
Now remember, Trump didn't want to be part of that Paris climate thing, but Democrats did.
So if the Democrats were right, And this was a good thing to do.
We would see some big changes in the countries that joined because they would have all agreed to decarbonize and you'd see that change.
So how are we doing?
No change.
No change, really.
The world is adding about the same amount of carbon as they always did.
Yeah, there are a couple of countries that actually went down.
But overall, United States and Europe, mostly no change.
So Trump was certainly right that the meeting had no impact, and it was a waste of time.
I think that's validated by these numbers.
Now, of course, I always say all data is made up and fake, but if you don't have data that shows that it worked, that would counter this data, then you're sort of left with, we don't see any reason to do it, because you can't prove it worked.
All right.
Let me give you a lesson.
This is the most fun part of today's, uh, today's show.
Um, there is a technique of persuasion called entering their illusion or entering your illusion.
Now, this is something that I've taught my subscribers and regular folks for years.
It's something I mentioned all the time.
And what it is, is instead of arguing with somebody who's acting crazy, you enter their illusion.
You accept what they say is true, even though you know it's ridiculous, and then you operate within their illusion to ruin it for them.
So you can't ruin it from the outside because they'll have their defenses up.
Oh, you're on the outside.
I just reject what you say.
But if you enter their illusion, it really messes them up because you're using their own rules against them.
So you're acting like what the illusion makes sense, and then they can see it doesn't make sense because you're in the illusion, simply acting out what logic would require if the illusion were true.
So now let's get back to Trump.
When he went to the National Association of Black Journalists, he went to an organization that was defined by its identity.
Black and a journalist.
And he wanted to talk about the identity of Kamala Harris.
Now, if he had just come up with this idea and of no context whatsoever, it would just look super racist to me.
Like, if nobody had ever talked about identity before, and then suddenly he just goes up there and starts talking about her race, I would be, whoa, what's this?
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
Why are you bringing a race into this?
That sounds really racist.
That would have been my response, if there had been no context to it whatsoever.
But the context is that for years, Democrats have been telling us that identity is your primary variable.
It's the number one thing you consider.
So what did Trump do?
Did he go there and say, stop considering identity?
Because that would be a failing technique.
If you're in the illusion that identity is always the primary, and everything else just sort of follows that, then you cannot, if somebody from the outside says, no, your model is wrong, you're hallucinating, this can never be a good idea, that won't be heard.
So what Trump did instead was he accepted their illusion without arguing it.
He simply entered the illusion that identity is so important, you really need to get it right.
And so, as a helpful person within their illusion, he helped them with the conversation about what is their identity.
Because if identity is primary, you want to make sure that you're accurate in your identification of the identity.
And so he simply brought up what Democrats have talked about forever, what's clearly in the public record.
And you know, he might've used his hyperbole a little bit to say that Kamala was making more of it than she was.
But what is true, and we could all observe from looking at the videos of the past, is that she certainly allowed people to identify her the way that would help the most in that situation.
So if she happened to be talking to some Asian Americans, then she was a person of Indian descent, and it worked really well in California.
But if she wants to be the president of the United States, maybe it helps a little bit more to let people call you black and identify as black.
Now, I don't have an opinion about any of that.
It's irrelevant, what I think.
And I accept that people can identify whatever they want, and that's up to them.
But what Trump did, Was he got into their illusion, and then he took a giant shit in their living room and walked away.
Now if somebody takes a giant shit in your living room in the middle of the floor, here's what you can't do.
Something else.
You can't do something else.
You've got to deal with the fact that there's a giant shit in the middle of your living room.
You can't do something else.
That's first.
You got to deal with that.
And so you watch the news.
Do you remember when the news was saying, everybody's weird?
Trump's weird.
And you could tell right away that that wasn't going to be like a long term plan, because it didn't really have legs.
It was just maybe something to say in the short run.
But they had to deal with the identity question because it's their primary illusion.
So they had to deal with the fact that within their primary illusion there was a giant turd in the middle of their living room and they had to explain it away.
And it was hard to explain away.
Do you know why?
Because it's an illusion.
They're living in an illusion.
They're trying to look for the logical argument where Trump is wrong to have brought up the very important question of identity when their primary interest is identity.
So The magic and beauty and the power of that will increase over time, which is what makes it really diabolical in a fun way, that it's going to marinate.
It's going to sink in over time.
He doesn't have to say another word about it.
Just that whole conversation is going to make the whole illusion look sketchy and stupid.
He doesn't even have to say it.
It just does its own work over time.
And watching the Democrats give fake mad about it?
It's all fake mad.
They just had to bring on everybody who is black and would be willing to make a face.
All right, are you black?
Yes, I am.
Would you like to go on TV?
Yes, I would.
Well, first we're going to have to see your face.
Can you do a deeply disappointed face, but also quickly transition into a smile when you found out when somebody says something bad about Trump?
Yes, I can.
All right, let's start with your unhappy face.
All right, I'm doing, if you're listening on audio only, I'm doing a hilarious unhappy face.
Ooh, Trump said what?
Racist!
All right, now let's see if you can quickly transition from your disgusted face to a happy little smiling face when you find out that Trump might get in a lot of trouble for what he said.
Can you do that?
Okay, start with the unhappy face.
Now transition.
Nailed it!
Nailed it!
You got the mouth up, but the eyes are still sad.
You nailed it!
And that's their programming.
Is black faces, they're disappointed but a little bit happy.
Now imagine that your opponent forced you into that.
Desperately trying to find more black faces that can look super unhappy but smile also at the same time.
Well, Smirkonish over on CNN Always one of the most interesting signposts of how CNN is going and what's allowable.
He's somewhat on the edge.
He had an Indian-American come on who wrote a book called Almost Black, in which he talks about his experience of he couldn't get into medical school because he only had a 3.1 GPA.
So he decided to identify as black.
Got right in.
So he knew that as an Indian American with a 3.1, he had no chance of going to medical school.
But as long as he said he was black, he was quite dark skinned, so he got away with it.
Fine.
And it worked out just great.
Wrote a book about it.
So I think it's fascinating that Smirkonish would have that kind of content on in the middle of Trump's turd in the living room.
It means that they're thinking about the topic Has expanded.
And I don't know that this kind of content would have been as acceptable, even from Smirconish, who I think is more interestingly independent on CNN than other people.
I think this is allowed now.
But I want to give you sort of a summary of how racist the country is.
You know, it's one of the biggest issues in the country is how racist we are.
So, I'm just going to summarize it.
This is how bad it is in this country.
Are you ready?
This will be a one-sentence description of how bad racism has gotten this country.
Racism is so bad in this country that a woman has to claim to be black just to run for president.
Am I wrong?
In order to be qualified to be president, she had to claim she was black when she couldn't go on either way.
Like the Indian guy who got into med school claimed he was black because he got him elected.
Do you think that Kamala Harris would be, she's about tie in the polls right now.
Do you think she'd be a tie in the polls if she had identified as strictly Indian?
No, I don't think so.
I don't think so.
I think identity is a pretty big draw.
Nate Silver has decided that the presidential race is a toss up based on current polling.
I think that he is correct.
That it's a toss-up in the sense that you really can't predict it.
If you're trying to straight-line it from today, it's like, OK, based on today, who's going to win?
I agree with Nate Silver.
It's a coin toss.
I don't even feel it leaning in one direction at this point.
Now, I've said, and Joe Rogan got in trouble for saying this, that Kamala Harris, if you were just to look at a snapshot today, she's in the winning position.
Because the media is just, just so powerful.
And she's hitting the right identity buttons.
If enough people think that she's black enough for the black community to say, you know, she's one of us, then that's probably all they need.
And you can count on some more fake stories about Trump and some October surprises and stuff.
So if I were to, and then, and then I do fully expect that the election will be rigged.
I expect the election will be rigged.
Now, that's what a lot of people say, but let me say why.
It's because the stakes are so high, and we don't have a system that's fully auditable, and we have a government which clearly doesn't mind overthrowing countries such as Venezuela, using any means they can, whenever it seems to make sense to the people who are deciding to do it or not do it.
And since we know that the intelligence people are willing to do their intelligence thing internally, which you would hope would not even be legal, but apparently it is, there's not really any hope of a fair election.
I mean, I don't, not really.
I mean, if you look at just the setup, how could it be?
Now, if we had the kind of elections that some people have been hypnotized into thinking we have, which is you could tell if there was cheating, No, we don't have that.
There may be some really specific areas where if somebody cheated, you could tell, but not in general.
In general, there are all kinds of holes, all kinds of ways you can cheat.
And, you know, we've seen lots of smaller issues and lots of allegations that would certainly suggest there are plenty of opportunities.
A lot of it has to do with mail-ins and getting a hold of those ballots from people who weren't going to vote.
But certainly the mechanism is there, the desire is there, the incentive is there.
So if you have the motive and the means, and you're going to tell me it's not going to happen?
Does everybody agree that they have the motive and the means?
Let's say if Trump actually had more votes at the end, don't they have the means to cheat?
If you tell me they don't have a mechanism to cheat, I would say you haven't lived in this world very long.
Even if they're not using it, they certainly have the mechanism.
I'm more certain of that than anything I've ever been certain of.
That even if they don't cheat, oh, they have the mechanism.
They do have the mechanism.
So, let's talk about this Russia prisoner swap, the big news.
Sixteen people held by Moscow were released, including Wall Street Journal reporter and former Marine Paul Whelan and some other journalists, etc.
And they'd all been convicted of charges that the U.S.
and others thought were made-up charges.
I've read all about this story and I haven't seen what we gave up in exchange.
Have you?
Has anybody seen the list of who we traded to them?
I know it's out there, but for some reason it wasn't in the headlines.
So we don't know exactly what was traded, do we?
And we get this generic statement from Kamala Harris.
It's the extraordinary testament to having a president who understands the power of diplomacy and strengthening the alliances.
In the test of time, the alliances Strengthened by the extraordinary testaments of the presidents.
Well, it was something like that.
I don't know.
It was just basically some word salad.
So as others have pointed out, it was the first time she spoke spontaneously, you know, without notes.
And it was a train wreck.
It was just, she tried to string two sentences together and failed.
And she was standing next to Biden, who probably couldn't have even strung one sentence together.
So all I was thinking of was Trump's framing of where they're trying to figure out who's dumber, because they must have figured out that Kamala Harris would do a better job with this, you know, two sentences statement when the prisoners were coming back on the plane.
And did you see the video where Biden appears to not know what he's doing?
He's on the tarmac, And he suddenly walks toward a plane and starts walking up the stairs and everybody's like, uh, Joe, uh, Joe, uh, uh, well, what are you doing?
Uh, uh, uh, you walking on that plane for no reason?
Um, um, what's happening?
What's happening?
And so he actually just got on the plane and then got off by himself.
Maybe he thought the He was going to go say hi to the people being released before they came out of the plane?
Or were they already out?
I'm a little confused on why he got on the plane, but it just looked like he was lost.
He just looked like a dementia patient who wandered off.
I mean, I don't know what the real story is, but that's what it looked like.
So the two of them looking like idiots, he was wandering around and she couldn't put two sentences together.
And literally, I thought to myself, they are actually literally trying to decide who's dumber.
Trump had that so nailed.
They're trying to decide who's dumber.
Because you know, if they thought that Biden maybe could do a better statement, he's still president.
So he would have done the statement to put that on his legacy, but he couldn't.
He was just sort of standing there and like, oh, we'll take a chance on Kamala.
Then she starts talking.
And it practically sounded like that in the, you know, the time, the passage of time and the, you know, it sounded like that a little bit.
And you know everybody was like, oh God, oh God, we should have picked the other one.
She's dumber than Joe.
Anyway.
So Rasmussen did a poll asking people if they believe that there was only one shooter in the assassination attempt on Trump.
53% said they believe the gunman acted alone.
But I have some question what that means.
Acted alone.
I think he was probably alone at the event.
But is that the same as acting alone?
If somebody, let's say, taught him how to make bombs, because he had some bombs.
If somebody, for example, gave him some money so he could buy the gun from his father, I think that's, he bought the gun.
Maybe he wouldn't have been able to afford it without a little help.
Maybe whoever he was talking to through his encrypted apps was working on him to do what he did.
So, I still think the question of whether there was somebody who was brainwashing him existed, because my guess is yes.
If I had to guess, I would say there's somebody who was influencing him, because it just doesn't smell right as a lone act.
You know, the not being on social media, and we still don't know if that was really his Gab account.
Everything about this is a little sketchy.
Now I guess the Secret Service is in charge of investigating itself to find out how it did.
How do you think that'll go?
Yeah, how do you think that'll go?
Investigating itself.
Anyway, I'll be Is the stock market tanking right now, or is it stable?
Give me an update on the stock market, because Japan was way down, and Europe was taking a hit this morning, but I heard somebody say that the US stock market was maybe stabilizing a little.
All right.
Friday sell-off.
A little bit of stability, so it's not terrible in the United States yet.
But it might be.
So here's the thing.
I would not expect the stock market to fall before elections.
I feel like elections are times when the Democrats at least will say, well, we can't make the stock market go down before election day.
So I would think that all the Democrats would want to hold their stocks or buy stocks if they want the stock market to look good on election day, because that would be good for Harris.
So we'll see.
But on the other hand, there are really big things happening that the investors might say, well, hell with that political stuff.
I just need my money taken out.
So anything could happen.
We're in uncharted territories.
Biden said that the killing of, which we assume Israel did, the killing of Hamas's political leader was not helpful for getting a ceasefire agreement.
He says it doesn't help.
Now, I would ask this following question.
Maybe that's why it was done.
Maybe that's why Israel decided it was a good time to do it.
Now, it was also opportunistic, because allegedly they'd hidden a bomb in that guest house months before, and they were just waiting for... So I'm saying we've got some trolls.
Scott supported Kamala in 2020 and promoted jabs.
You're such a bad troll.
Like, why do the trolls yell in all caps so that you know that they're not real people?
You could at least put some effort into upper and lowercase if you're going to tell lies about me in public.
It's the least I ask.
I want my trolls to be at least capable of doing upper and lowercase.
Can I get that?
Do you really have to be the lowest quality of trolls where you don't have anything real to say about me, but you have to scream it in caps?
Yes, we have lots of all caps trolls today.
I can't tell if these are the paid ones.
If they're paid ones, they're overpaid.
Somebody needs to just get their money back.
Anyway, NBC is reporting that the Democrats continue to hemorrhage support among Hispanic voters in Pennsylvania.
Now, I will say this again.
Anybody who knows the Hispanic community is not surprised that they're friendlier to Republicans than the Democrats expected.
Doesn't surprise me that they're the most Republican acting Demographic in the United States.
They love their families.
They love working hard.
Once they get in the country, certainly that could be illegal in some cases, but once they get here, they are quite law-abiding as a general group of people and they're just trying to make their kids succeed and Yeah, it's probably one of the most solid and desirable demographics in the country.
Desirable in the sense that if you've never spent time around that group, you're really missing something.
It is a fun, fun demographic.
So don't be surprised if Hispanics sort of just keep trending Republican.
They like their work.
They like their religion.
They like their families.
That's a Republican.
All right.
Independent voters appear to be less interested in Harris, but I'm not sure if it matters if the polls are tied.
I mean, I don't know how that can be true.
But let me add something that I learned yesterday about polling.
What I learned about polling is it gets wonky in the summer.
Thank you.
Because if you're just calling people in general, you're going to get a different group of people in the summer than you would get during regular scheduled months.
So there's something that in mid-September, when kids are back in school and vacations are done, that you're just going to see what I'd call a natural change in the polling that's unrelated to anybody changing their minds.
It would just be some natural kind of thing.
Anyway, so we'll see.
I wouldn't trust any of the polling over the summer.
Chevron, the company, announced it's going to be moving its headquarters from over there, basically my neighbors, to Texas.
So I used to work next to the Chevron headquarters.
It was in San Ramon in California, and that's where Pacific Bell was too.
So the two campuses were right next to each other.
And true story, there was an employee at Chevron named Scott Adams, Who, when Dilbert became famous, people kept saying, are you Scott Adams, the cartoonist?
And he would say, well, I'm black.
And he's not.
So probably not.
Maybe that should have been your first clue.
But I did meet him.
He was a lovely guy.
And he's probably not working there still, but Chevron's moving to Texas.
And I think Chevron said we won't be the last company moving to Texas.
Now, in my town, this is going to be a big hit.
Because it was the Chevron headquarters.
That's a pretty big building with a lot of employees.
High-end, high-pay employees.
That's just gone.
So, San Ramon, the town two towns away from me, just took a gigantic hit in their economic, in their tax base that, you know, schools will probably suffer.
This is some serious shit.
When a major company like that just says, we're out of your state, we can't even work in your state, this is really serious.
Now, is it serious enough that we could get a Republican president and maybe something would get fixed?
Probably not.
Because I think California is completely mentally incapable.
If it's possible for a state to have a mental problem, that would be us.
That would be us.
All right.
It looks like my usual troll may have two different accounts.
Ukraine allegedly blew up a 12-ton Russian helicopter with a little drone.
Now, apparently they've been trying to do this for a long time, but they finally got one.
And I said to myself, how in the world can helicopters still be useful tools in the future of drones?
Now, I completely understand how a jet would be maybe hard to destroy with a drone, but wouldn't a helicopter always be a drone?
Like, couldn't you get all the helicopters with drones?
I mean, how does a helicopter protect itself from a drone?
Because the drone can travel as fast or faster.
It seems to be the helicopters will no longer be a tool of war.
There are two tools of war that I expect will just completely go away.
Tanks and helicopters, because you can't be a slow moving, uh, weapon of war.
If you're slow moving, the drones are going to take you on every time.
So warfare is really, really going to change.
There's just no point in having a big, slow thing like a helicopter or a tank.
Anyway, Apparently, AI is being useful to the OnlyFans stars who are using AI to pretend to be them and text with their fans, but they can't get the AI to talk dirty, so it's sort of a giveaway.
Hey, this AI won't talk dirty!
Which is interesting, because there's a study, Science Blog has this report, that large language models were studied, and sure enough, 24 of the large language model AIs were studied, and they have a left-leaning bias.
Oh, surprise!
They have a left-leaning bias.
Of course they do.
Yeah.
So it has a left-leaning bias, and yet it can't talk nerdy.
So what the hell good is it?
What are you going to use it for?
If it can't talk nerdy, and it can't tell you the truth, What's left?
The only context in which I want the AI to lie to me would be if it's talking dirty.
Then lie all you want.
Just make sure your dirty talk is on point.
Lying's fine.
But that's the only time it won't lie, is when you ask it to talk dirty.
No, that would be not appropriate.
I will not do that.
All right.
And then finally, the most important story from the Daily Sabah, that scientists have implanted human brain cells in rats for the first time.
And so the idea is that if they put these human brain cells in rats, they can study stuff like psychiatric disorders, autism and schizophrenia and stuff.
So now you've got these rats that are going to be Part human and part rats.
What would you call them?
Well, really, they're going to be like demons in a way, but also part rat.
I would call them demon rats.
Demon rats.
You might call them Democrats.
But in both cases, rats at the end.
You can't spell Democrat without rat.
It's true.
It's true.
So yeah, we're gonna have these possibly super AI-driven rats.
I suspect at some point they'll be fitted with lasers.
And then game on.
All right, that, ladies and gentlemen, it's all the news and views that you've been waiting for.
Did I miss anything?
Any big news?
Wait, Chevron Phillips?
Hold on, hold on.
Not Chevron, okay.
Alright, looks like I got everything.
So that, ladies and gentlemen, is the show for today.
I'm going to go talk to the subscribers and locals privately.
And say goodbye to X and Rumble and YouTube right now.
