God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorks
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Stock Market Summers, California Owned Refinery, Elon Musk, Neuralink, Stadium Facial Recognition, 9/11 Plea Deal, Middle East Tensions, Josh Shapiro, Kamala Harris New Opinions, ActBlue, Georgia Voter Rolls, CISA Election Warning, Election Integrity 2024, President Trump, VP Harris, Trump Harris Debate, Government AI Approval, Apple Stock, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning everybody and welcome to Coffee with Scott Adams, Saturday edition, while everybody else is lazy and sleeping.
If you'd like to take this experience, which is already going to be amazing, up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker of gels, a Stein, a canteen, a jug of Lask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine to the day thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens now.
Go.
Oh, so good.
So good.
Well, here's an important story.
For people like me.
Did you know that young people are young women are eschewing high heels for clubbing?
so I'm not I have to say that It's been a while since I've been to a club.
It was the last time I went clubbing it was Last time I went clubbing was oh never never I So I've never been clubbing, but I understand that it was common for women to wear heels.
And apparently now women going out for the evening wear some kind of sneakers and jeans.
And I thought to myself, finally, finally, we finally found something that could help human reproduction.
Have you noticed that every trend in the news is negative?
It's like the dating apps are destroying us, and the OnlyFans is bad, and the porn is terrible, and the AI is going to take all of our romantic interest away, and everything seems to be going the wrong direction.
But if women take their heels off, suddenly they have access to a whole new range of men.
IE, men who are not tall enough if they wore heels, but if they don't wear heels, tall enough.
So it's like men just gained three inches in height everywhere in the United States, young ones, because the young women are not wearing heels.
And the big difference is whether they're taller than the woman.
And that, that seems more important than, you know, how tall they are in general.
They like them tall.
Women do.
But they certainly have to be taller than the woman.
That seems to be, you know, key criteria on the dating apps.
So, get rid of those heels, ladies.
Your mating opportunities have just gone up substantially.
Well, you are probably aware of the stock markets and the dumper, but here's how you should look at this.
Yeah.
Let me tell you one thing that I told a young investor months ago.
I said, stock market's looking really good, right?
Yeah, looking really good.
You know, in the summer, it always takes a shit.
What?
Yeah, in the summer, the stock market always takes a dump.
Now, I think there may have been an exception, like some weird years, but generally speaking, People like to sell what they have in the summer and go on vacation.
Literally, they don't want to look at their holdings.
So anything that's sketchy, they just sell it before they go on vacation.
So you always get a fall in the summer.
It might mean something and it might not.
It could be because of the unemployment.
It could be because the Fed hasn't raised the interest rates.
It could be something about the election.
It could be something about AI got a little overrun.
So there was no question let me put it this way There was no future there was no possibility that the market wouldn't go down at least 10% Everybody who's experienced as an investor knows that right?
We were heading for a 10% correction minimum.
I mean it could be more than But minimum 10%.
So you're just seeing the expected 10% correction.
Doesn't mean it'll stay there.
I would expect that there's nowhere else to put your money.
You know, you don't want your money in cash.
You can't put it all in Bitcoin because you're not quite sure that's the way to go.
So what are you going to do?
Put it in your mattress, then it just gets inflated away.
If you want to keep up with inflation, you're either going to have to own property, which has its own risks, or the broad stock market.
So for me, the anti-inflation play is primarily just being in index funds.
If the big companies can't raise their prices, then nobody can.
So that's my play.
I'm keeping all of my stocks, selling nothing.
And I wouldn't be surprised if you see it changing quite a bit between now and the election.
Because I also think the players game the system.
So it could be that people are just taking some profits from AI companies that ran up too much.
But it could be that you'll see a bunch of super rich Democrats say, you know, it would be really good for the Democrats is if the market felt like it was recovering.
So I think you're going to see a bunch of fake, very large industrial buyers before election day.
So here's my prediction.
Whatever the stock market is today, I think it will be higher than that on election day.
And it won't be normal, like it'll just be gaming the system kind of stuff.
That's what I think.
So that doesn't mean in the long run anything.
It just means I expect a little bit of mischief.
All right, so according to Breitbart News, the Democrats are panicked now and they want a rate cut.
Because unemployment took a little jump.
So if the Fed cuts the rates, that normally juices the stock market and the rest of the economy.
But the Fed is independent-ish, so they don't have to do something just because the Democrats want it.
Now you might say to yourself in this next story, Scott, why are you always talking about batteries?
Batteries are so boring.
Oh, but are they?
I think understanding batteries and the new technology coming is just one of the biggest things to understand.
So here's a big, big, big story about batteries.
Sawyer Merritt on X is reporting this.
So Tesla apparently has been working on something called a dry cathode battery, meaning that there would be no moist parts of the battery.
This has been a long dream, apparently, that was just too hard to do.
People have tried it, but haven't gotten far enough.
But if it works, Tesla would reduce their own costs between 15% and 30% if they can scale it.
That's right.
The cost of a Tesla could come down 20 to 30 percent if they put these better batteries in.
But that's not all.
It takes up a lot less space and they can make smaller, more efficient factories to make these.
Fewer steps, higher density, more range, better for the environment.
And of course, we're going to need some really good batteries for your robots.
If you think your battery keeps running down in your car, wait until you see your robot.
At least the robot can go plug itself back in.
Actually, your robot could probably drive your Tesla to the charging station and charge it for you.
So, that's coming.
Meanwhile, California is floating the idea internally about purchasing and owning its own refineries.
Now, you might say to yourself, what?
Isn't California part of the United States?
And don't we live in a free market capitalist system where the very dumbest thing you could ever do is have the state own your means of production?
Because that's like communism.
It's like Venezuela.
And every single possible element of that is a bad idea.
That's why we're doing it.
If anybody has an updated list of terrible ideas, could you send it to us in California?
Because we're running out of terrible ideas.
We've implemented them all.
And this new one, I think it's sort of the end of our list.
Once you start getting rid of capitalism entirely, let the criminals out, let the people from other countries flow in, let that fentanyl come in.
Come on, fentanyl.
Let's get that in here.
And then the only other thing we could do, oh, besides the fact that you can't get a house insurance if you live in California because of the poor management of the forest fires.
But now we're going to have, apparently, get rid of capitalism.
Because you know the state is really good at running businesses for your... Yeah, okay.
Yep, California has become like Venezuela except without the excellent leadership of Maduro.
Well, Elon Musk had apparently an eight and a half hour interview with Lex Fridman.
I don't understand that.
I don't know why they did that, but okay.
So I guess they get along pretty well because they had a long talk.
So here's some things we know now.
Neuralink is looking to massively increase the number of electrodes into the brain, and they're working on a product in the future that will allow maybe blind people to see for the first time.
Think how amazing that would be.
Imagine if Elon Musk bypassed eyes and just put a little camera on your head, had it stuck into your brain, and then blind people could just see.
And what about deaf people?
Probably.
Probably deaf people will be able to hear.
He also seems to have some potential for solving schizophrenia, seizures, and memory issues.
Well, we're going to be full Android pretty soon.
You know, Elon points out, as I've pointed out for years, that we're already Androids.
The fact that you can put your phone down doesn't change that.
Your phone is basically connected to your body and your brain.
You know, every once in a while you forget it, but that's more of a design flaw.
Anyway, in other news, the NFL announced that all of the teams will be implementing facial recognition so that every person who attends a professional football game will be identified by facial recognition software to verify their identity.
Does anybody wonder why?
Is there something we don't know about that makes that necessary?
Well, what exactly is the purpose of doing that?
Is that for the benefit of the safety of the people going to the stadium?
Is that for the government to find out where all the Trump supporters are?
What is that?
Crowd control?
Collect data?
You know, remember something I've been telling you for years, that you hated, is that there's no hope of preserving privacy.
There is no hope of preserving privacy.
So you should get your head straight about living a life that could survive no privacy.
If you haven't already made that change, you really need to stop saying anything in a digital means that you're not willing to defend in public.
I think I stopped saying things digitally maybe 20 years ago.
Probably 20 years ago was the last time I said something that maybe I'd be embarrassed if somebody saw it.
Now I only say things that if it came out, I'd say, yeah, fuck you.
That is my opinion.
I don't think there's anything I write down digitally that I couldn't say in public.
And it's been that way for a long time.
And, you know, I've actually had the experience of sending an encrypted message and then seeing it in the news.
That'll straighten you out really fast.
Yeah, imagine sending an encrypted app message and then seeing it in the news.
Yep, that happened.
That's a real thing that happened with me.
Anyway, remember that story about the 9-11 planners who were in custody and they did a plea deal and the plea deal would give them life in prison but no execution?
Well, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has reversed that and actually removed from office the person who approved it.
So not only did he reverse it, but the person who tried to do it in the first place got slapped down pretty hard.
They were removed from that position.
That's a pretty hard rebuke.
Now, does it seem to you like this is maybe entirely political?
It looks entirely political to me.
I think the Democrats just thought it was awkward to do this right before an election, because it's just one more thing you can, you know, pin on Biden.
I think this is purely political.
What would be the other reason?
And by the way, I don't have any problem with the plea deal.
Is there something wrong with it?
How many of you think that the terrorists would be happier if they have life in prison?
I don't see that.
I see them being happier to be executed.
If you had life in prison, wouldn't you want to be executed?
Especially if you thought you'd get your 72 virgins.
I'm not even, like, I don't even understand it.
Like, are we trying to be good to the bad guys?
By giving them life?
How is that even a deal?
So there's something deeply unreported about this.
There's something about this story we're missing.
And whatever that is is going to be interesting, but we'll probably never find out.
Anyway, don't believe the news.
Speaking of the news, Russia allegedly Here's another one I don't believe.
So I saw this on social media, so I'll tell you what it says, but I don't believe it.
That Russia is going to block Google, iOS, and Android.
What would it use if it doesn't use those?
Now blocking Google seems possible, but how do you block iOS and Android?
Is there some operating system?
Is it a Chinese operating system?
Will they just go China products?
Maybe.
But why would they do this?
It's probably for security, right?
Is it for security or is it just to damage the US's dominance in the industry?
Don't know.
But I would think that if Putin doesn't trust Google, iOS and Android, maybe you shouldn't either.
And again, just assume you have no privacy.
Russia probably isn't happy with giving up their privacy, but we already have, so it's no real difference.
All right, we're all waiting breathlessly for any moment now for Iran to respond and attack Israel, maybe through proxies, because Israel murdered the head of Hamas's political wing while he was in Iran in the guest house.
And Iran is saying that Israel crossed all their red lines.
Their response will be swift and heavy.
And then the U.S.
is sending military forces there.
So we'll have a strike group and we'll have some more aircraft and whatever assets we need, just in case.
Now, of course, it's being presented as this is a way to reduce violence because it'll maybe make Iran think they don't want to do too much.
But to me, it's always so weird when two countries at war do war theater.
Now, when Israel takes out the leader, one of the leaders of Hamas, that's not theater, that's militarily strategic.
But when Iran responds, isn't that purely theater?
Because Iran's response, nobody expects it will change anybody's future behavior.
They just have to act like they look like they can do stuff.
So whatever they do is just going to be some weird theater-y thing.
And if they go too far, they will invite more destruction on themselves than they want.
So they've got this weird little situation where they have to do something theatrical that maybe kills an Israeli if, you know, if they get what they want.
But they can't do anything that's important.
So what's that leave?
You can't do anything important, but it can't actually make a difference.
Because if it makes a difference, that would be too dangerous for Iran.
So it might be like that last thing where they warned the U.S., well, there might be an attack.
You might want to duck and get in holes.
And, you know, we don't want to kill anybody, but we've got to make a theatrical attack.
So, you know, everybody, here it comes.
So it looks like they're not going to give a warning this time, or at least that's what we're told.
Maybe they will.
But here's my prediction.
I think Israel is going to degrade Hezbollah, and they're just looking for any excuse.
Now, they don't need an excuse, because Hezbollah has been, you know, continuously attacking forever.
What they need is for the Israeli public and the American public to say, oh, there's a good excuse.
So I don't think Iran has ever been in a more perilous situation.
Because if they do something theatrical that everybody can agree was a nothing, maybe things just chug along the way they have been.
But they say Israel crossed a red line, which means an appropriate response would also cross a red line.
Now, can they find a red line that they think is a red line that they crossed?
Well, Israel can argue, well, that wasn't much of a red line.
And the U.S.
can say, well, I see they tried, but we shot down all their missiles, so it was sort of a nothing.
This one's going to be really interesting.
I think the hardest part will be Iran trying to figure out something that's the right message and that they can actually execute.
I don't know what there is.
I'll tell you what they won't do.
I don't expect them to kill a high-ranking American or military officer.
I don't think they're going to take a headshot.
at Israel, because again, that would be full war.
So I think it's inevitable that Israel will have to attack Hezbollah directly and massively.
I don't see any way around it.
It's just when it happens, really.
Could it happen this month or next year?
It's just going to happen.
I would rule out any possibility it doesn't happen.
I don't think that's even in the option set anymore.
That's my guess.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Well, Iran has apparently, allegedly, who knows if this is true, arrested more than two dozen people that they think might have been knowledgeable or possibly complicit in this assassination in their country.
And I say to myself, if they arrested two dozen people, doesn't that mean they're going to torture them all?
Right?
If they arrested them, but they don't have evidence that they were involved, it sounds like they're just grabbing everybody who would know anything, and then they're just going to torture them all.
Can Iran really get away with torturing two dozen of their own people, of which I would guess no more than one of them might have been involved?
It feels like that's kind of a big risk for the leader.
Because if you're in the military, And you just found out that two dozen people got scooped out for interrogation, and you know for sure that there couldn't be more than one of those people who knew anything about this.
You'd feel pretty mad at your leadership for treating you like you were expendable.
I don't know if I could ever get over that.
If I saw my beloved leaders in the military, you know, people I respected, get scooped up when I knew for sure they were not involved in this because they just wouldn't be.
I don't know that I could ever fight for that country again.
If they ever wanted to.
So Iran has more problems than I've seen anybody ever have a problem.
I don't know.
I don't know how they're going to navigate this.
Well, let's see.
Let's talk about politics.
Is anybody amazed that the top two Democrats that the entire Democratic Party could put together, the top two.
Now, I'm not talking about the VP yet.
I'm talking about Biden and then Harris.
The top two.
What is the one thing they both have in common that's unusual for a national politician?
Nobody thinks they can answer a question.
Just hold that in your mind.
The two best people that the Democrats could field, Biden and Harris, nobody on either side, not a Democrat, not a Republican, believes they're capable of standing in front of other people And answering basic questions about their profession and what's going on.
How did we get here?
This is a great lesson on you can get used to anything.
As long as it happens a little bit slowly, we just got used to it.
How in the world, how in the world do the Democrats put up with having their two best people unable to talk in public?
Literally the most salient part of the job.
And we're just like, we're just going on.
So today, after I'll say this, I'll say the two best Democrats, one of them likely to be the next president, and they can't talk in public.
You could almost throw a dart into a crowd and get somebody who could answer a question in public.
I mean, you have a good, good shot at it.
Anyway, so that's amazing.
But there was apparently some kind of accidental leak out of the Philadelphia mayor's office.
Some staffer that released a video that would suggest that the Democrats already know that they're going to be choosing Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, for their VP candidate.
So I think we're all acting like that's a done deal today, even though it's not official.
But we're going to talk about it like it is.
And let's talk about the fake news first.
How many of you believe that Josh Shapiro once served in the IDF?
Volunteered and then served in the IDF.
That would be the Israeli Defense Force, the military in Israel.
How many believe that's true?
Because social media said it was true.
How many of you believe that's actually a real thing?
It's not a real thing.
All right, let me say it so that you don't embarrass yourself, because a lot of people on the right are falling for this pretty hard.
Here's what was true.
In high school, his high school had some kind of a program where they had to volunteer for something.
So he and some other students volunteered.
Remember, this is high school.
These are just kids.
Volunteered to Or was it college?
Volunteered to go to Israel and they worked on a kibbutz or something.
But part of it is they volunteered to do some internee-like work for the IDF.
They weren't in the IDF.
They were like unpaid interns sweeping sidewalks and, you know, doing stuff like that.
So he wasn't carrying a gun, he wasn't going to war for the IDF, he wasn't a member of the IDF.
He was a student who was having an experience in another country that included some, you know, some stuff that was unimportant and student-like for a military force.
Now, should you be comfortable with that?
Just because I said, well, he didn't, you know, he didn't actually pledge his allegiance to another country.
It's just, it was just a student experience.
Are you uncomfortable with that?
To know there's somebody who had a substantial, in his youth, he had a substantial experience with another country that's an ally of the United States.
How many of you have a problem with that?
Because I think voters will.
They will hear the story and they'll believe he had joined the military.
Probably a third of conservatives will now forever believe he fought in the Israeli military.
Probably a third, and will never be talked out of it.
Because that's how the fake news works.
It's pretty sticky.
Now, what's interesting, of course, is that Shapiro is Jewish, and therefore the question will be, which party is more anti-Semitic?
So will there be more Republicans who are on the extreme side saying, oh no, that's one more reason we can't vote for him?
Well, that shouldn't make any difference because nobody, I don't think any Republicans would vote for Kamala Harris because you picked a Jewish vice president.
So that's probably zero impact on the Republican side.
And I don't think the Republicans would necessarily Well, I just don't think the Republicans will vote differently because of this in any way.
But we all are asking the question, hey, aren't there a lot of progressives over in the Democrat Party who are not so pro-Israel at the moment?
Maybe a little bit more pro-Palestinian?
Maybe Michigan?
Maybe the Squad?
And the answer is, yeah, that's probably going to be an issue.
Um, but it depends how he talks about the situation, too.
You know, I think what he says today will be more important than whatever he said in the past.
Um, and let me say this.
I think it's important to know what the candidates thought in the past.
You know, it's important, I think, to know that Trump was once a Democrat.
I think that's important.
I think it's important to know if, uh, Kamala Harris used to have Far more left-leaning opinions, but maybe she's been talked into something more centrist to get elected.
I think we need to know about the past, but I firmly believe that if you can defend why you changed your mind, we should allow that.
I like people who can change their minds, right?
That's not a negative.
It used to be, I remember Democrat or the Who was it?
I think mostly the Republicans would complain about the other candidate flip-flopping.
Do you remember that used to be the thing?
You're a flip-flopper?
And I used to say, you mean somebody updated their thinking with new information?
Why are we mad at that?
I want the person who can update their thinking with new information and we've seen it happen.
I want to know I've seen it.
I don't want somebody to go into office and say I have the same opinions I had when I was 20.
That would scare the shit out of me.
I need somebody who is mentally flexible and capable of changing their opinion.
So I think it's important to know that Kamala Had some instincts that were left leaning, and she might bring that into the office.
But if she could defend her new opinions, then I would feel differently about it.
For example, if somebody said, well, I used to think universal health care, like one single payer was the only way to go.
But now I think it would be impractical, because the country really wants private health insurance too.
And there's no way you could get there anyway, so now I think I'll just, you know, want to lower prices for healthcare.
So you could imagine her explaining it in a way where you'd say, oh, well, if you can make the argument, that suggests that you understand the argument for that new opinion.
So look for ability to defend the current opinion.
That would be far more important.
All right, so we're going to be talking almost non-stop about anti-Semitism just because Shapiro's in the race.
We'll see how that goes.
But again, most people don't vote for anybody who's the vice president anyway.
So he's in favor of a two-country solution in Israel.
He thinks Netanyahu's the worst leader ever.
Well, there you go.
Now, I think There's going to be a lot of talk about his, what the critics will say, some kind of split loyalty, which I don't see in evidence, but that'll be part of the story.
People will suspect he's got split allegiance.
And again, there's no evidence of that.
It's not illegal to visit another country and have an experience.
All right.
So, let's talk about how clean the elections will be coming up.
So, as you're all aware, in 2020 there were a great number of people who questioned the election, whether it was fair, but we've had four years since then, so thank God all the problems have been fixed.
What?
What, nothing's different?
Well, let's do a little rundown of what we know about the coming elections.
Number one, attorney generals from Virginia and Missouri and Wyoming are going to look into ActBlue.
That's a big fundraising entity for the Democrats that, according to OMG and O'Keefe, James O'Keefe and his investigation, According to them, they've been laundering large donations from God knows where, maybe a foreign country, we don't even know, through the names of elderly who don't know their names are being used.
Because you can't give big dollar amounts, you know, there's limits, but you can say, A million people donated a little bit each, but they're fake donors.
They're real people.
They're just elderly people who are never going to check and nobody will ever know that they didn't really donate.
So the evidence seems pretty strong that something sketchy is going there.
So one of the biggest sources of money for the Democrats might be fake.
But hey, that's just one element of an election, is the funding.
So just because the funding might be fake, that doesn't mean anything else is fake, people.
I don't want you to get all crazy about doubting things.
Just because the funding for the Democrats is probably fraudulent, and we do expect that some of the largest donors are also blackmailed.
So I wouldn't believe anything about the funding sources.
But, hey, that's just one part of an election.
I mean, it does affect it.
So it does seem that crime would be already affecting the outcome.
But remember, there are lots more elements to an election, so it's not all about the funding.
There's also the media.
See, MSNBC says It's a life or death choice if you pick Trump.
So somebody named Tara Setmire said on MSNBC, and I quote, women voters are looking at this election as a life or death choice.
The binary choice is democracy or Trump. And for women, it's our lives or Trump.
Okay, so the media is totally fixed.
And they're just going to give you scary stories about Trump that are all just made up.
But, people, I want you to relax a little bit.
Because I know you're thinking, oh wait, so the funding is totally illegitimate.
And the media, which is the only source of news for the Democrats, is also completely fake propaganda.
Well, that's true.
That seems to be true.
But, people, don't lose hope.
Because the money in politics and the media are just two variables.
That's just two variables.
There's a lot more that goes into voting than just the money and the media.
Okay, it might be 60% of it, but there's still more.
Let's see, over on OAN, the network, they had election fraud researcher and former California lawmaker, Steve Baldwin.
He'd been looking into the Georgia voter rolls.
These are the people who are registered to vote in Georgia.
Here's some things he claims to have found.
179,000 voters with incomplete addresses.
That would be like missing apartment unit or suite numbers, which would be a little suspicious.
But hey, that's just one variable.
Also, 115,000 voters used an invalid mailing address.
114,000.
That's like way more than the number of people that determined the election in that state.
And then there are 79,000 people who somehow managed to register on a federal holiday.
And the question would be, How'd you do that?
I don't know.
Maybe there's some kind of time delay on that or something.
And 69,000 voters permanently moved out of state but still remain on the rolls.
Really?
Okay, well, I don't have verification that all of these things are true.
They're just a whole bunch of claims that the voter rolls are so polluted that it would be somewhat trivially easy for a bad actor to be collecting all these ballots and getting people to vote who should not be voting.
And, of course, they would never be caught because it wouldn't be one big scandal.
It would just be a bunch of individual voters who, yeah, maybe they shouldn't have voted.
But it's not like one big problem.
It's just a whole bunch of individual little things.
You know, you can ignore the little things, can't you?
All right, so we don't have voter rolls.
And the media is rigged.
And the funding is rigged.
But at least we have law enforcement to make sure that everything's running fine.
All right, here's a news story.
Do you know CISA?
C-I-S-A?
Or is it CISA?
CISA?
And the FBI.
They've got a warning on election data.
Whoa, listen to this.
Apparently they have some information that suggests something's coming.
They say they did a public service announcement.
How useful this is.
To raise awareness, there might be a denial of service attack on election infrastructure.
Oh, that sounds bad.
That could hinder access to election information.
Well, that sounds bad.
Hackers could hinder our access to election information.
Oh, but it's okay, it's okay.
They say it would not impact the security or integrity of the election process.
Oh, so the voting would be fine.
The only problem would be if you tried to find out how people voted after the fact, you know, sort of like auditing or something like that.
Huh.
So it's looking exactly like they're, they're warning us that they're not going to let us audit the election.
That's what I see.
And they're going to blame it on a hacker.
Hmm.
So, all right, so maybe the FBI and CISA are actually malign actors, because they apparently are preparing to lie to us later.
And sure, the election voter rolls are completely polluted, which would suggest it would be easy to rig.
And yes, the media is completely a propaganda outfit.
And certainly the funding is Some kind of money laundering operation show.
But anyway, those are just a few things.
Just a few things.
But there are lots of other elements to an election.
For example, back in 2019, then-Senator Harris, according to Fox News, talked about the sizable contributions in swing states of having all these illegal immigrants.
Oh, so she admitted in 2019 that the plan was to bring in illegal immigrants to change the voting in the swing states.
Okay, so we have illegal immigration to change the swing straight votes.
We've got the FBI saying there's going to be some kind of fake attack that will allow us not to audit the elections.
The voter rolls seem to be rigged in Georgia and the funding is fake.
And the media is full of propaganda.
Now that's what I call democracy, people.
Yeah.
And you know what you don't want?
You don't want Trump to come in here and steal your democracy.
Am I right?
I mean, look how good things are set up.
Everything looks perfectly good to me.
The only thing that could go wrong with this magnificent system we have is if somebody like Trump comes in and steals your democracy.
And by the way, The Democrats are very clear about how he's going to do it.
You know that, right?
They're very clear about how Trump will steal your democracy.
Should I tell you?
What, you don't know?
It's a very clear plan.
He's... Change the subject.
No, there is no plan to steal your democracy.
Well, at least the one thing we can count on is that the people who are protecting our candidates are doing their very best, and you're getting a really good, safe, Secret Service situation.
According to Breitbart News, there was a Rasmussen poll that said 41% of voters believe Federal officials were involved in the Trump assassination attempt.
Okay, so the credibility of our government is so low that 41% of the public thinks the government tried to murder Trump.
But don't worry.
There are only a few things that look like they're a little sketchy.
Thank you.
The voter rolls, the propaganda from the media, the fake funding, the FBI warning us that they're going to hide the audit information, the fact that they're bringing in people specifically and directly to alter the swing state populations, and the fact that 41% believe that the government literally tried to fucking kill one of the candidates.
You know what's looking like a beacon of democracy today?
Venezuela.
Do you think Venezuela had this many problems?
Now, I don't suspect that the Venezuela vote was real, but did they have this many problems?
I'm not sure they did.
Did anybody try to murder one of their candidates?
I don't recall that.
Well, if you put it all together, my current prediction is that we won't have an election this year.
We will have people voting.
There will be an election day.
And people will vote, and votes will be counted.
When it's done, whichever side lost will say, that was no election, that was a sham, and the results must be thrown out, and here's my fake slate of electors and everything else.
I don't think our current system gives us any chance of an election result that the country accepts.
Would you disagree with that?
Our current setup is so sketchy and so really non-credible, the whole system has no credibility at all, that if your side loses, you're going to think it was cheating.
And you'll be right.
I think you'd be right.
And by the way, that probably works both ways.
You know, if somehow the Republicans have figured out some clever but legal way to game the system, what do you think Democrats are going to say?
They're going to say that Hitler just took over.
And they're going to do everything they can to take Trump out of office.
They're going to impeach him on day one, if they can, if they have the votes.
And they're going to be marching in the streets and the cities will burn.
The cities are going to burn if Trump wins.
I mean, I think that's guaranteed.
And not because of Trump, because the bad guys want power, so they're going to make it look like the citizens can't live with this president.
And it won't be real.
It'll be fake like BLM and Antifa.
It'll just be funded by the usual people.
And then, of course, there'll be another Charlottesville march right away and everybody will be fooled again into thinking that was organic.
It wasn't.
Whatever it was, it definitely wasn't organic.
Anyway.
So Trump has agreed to debate Kamala Harris on September 4th.
I do think that Harris has a reasonably good chance of doing well in the debate.
And the only reason I say it is that there's no back and forth.
So she will be asked a question, and then Trump's microphone will be muted, I suppose, and then she will just read from her little, you know, she'll have a memorized answer to every topic.
And then she'll just do her memorized answer and you'll say, oh, that sounded pretty good.
That was coherent.
It'll just be memorized.
And then they'll go to Trump and he'll make some terrible accusation.
And then she won't necessarily respond to it directly.
She'll just say what she says about the topic.
And then when it's done, the media will say, my God, that was a masterful You know, I don't know why people said she's not good at this.
She's the greatest debater.
She got it.
She had her prosecutor head on and the media will say that she won in a landslide, even if she didn't.
So I think her odds of doing well are pretty high.
But there's also a good chance that she gets derailed by something that happens and, you know, can't answer a question.
So we still want to see her sit down for a real interview with a real reporter.
I don't think it's going to happen.
I think she's going to get the George Stephanopoulos treatment, where she probably knows the questions.
I don't know that that's true, but you kind of suspect she might know the questions, and so she just goes into a friendly interview with the answers prepared, and they just come right out.
By the way, did you hear her phone call with her supporters, where she was talking about, I guess, receiving enough support to be the nominee?
And she does this phone call, and she reads it.
Can you believe that she did a phone call where she read a speech?
She read a speech into a phone call.
Now, some of it, of course, you would expect to be, you know, prepared, but wouldn't you expect a whole bunch of extemporaneous comments?
And then maybe she'd say, oh, and I just want to read this little statement, so we're all clear.
Apparently she couldn't do that.
Do you think Trump would have just read a statement?
Not a chance.
He would have talked for 10 minutes, and then he would say, if he had time left, oh, let me read this statement.
Completely different level of communication ability.
Completely different.
So The Hill says that Trump risks losing more black voters with this Harris identity attacks.
You know, the question about whether she's black or is she Indian American or both.
And I think this is propaganda from the hill.
Trump risks losing more black voters.
Here's what I wonder.
Do you think that the black men and the black women feel the same about this?
Because I'll bet not.
And I think that by hiding the fact that the black men and the black women may be diverging, in terms of Trump's support, I think they're hiding that.
I think they're hiding the ball.
Because the big story is men versus women.
And the media, they don't want to say it directly, because they're going to lose all their men in the Democrat Party.
At least the ones that still have some testosterone.
Anyway.
So Elon Musk revealed on his Lex Friedman interview that he talked to Trump about creating a government efficiency commission to make the government efficient and that he would actually be interested in being on it.
Now that doesn't mean it'll happen, but it's a hell of an idea.
Do you know who did that first?
A government commission on making the government more efficient?
Al Gore.
So when Al Gore was vice president, his job was to essentially automate the government and make it so that you could just go online and get your work done.
And over time, we've seen that the federal government has moved a lot of stuff online.
It is more efficient in that way anyway.
But a lot of work to do on that.
So that would be fun.
So OpenAI.
Who makes Chat GPT says the government's going to see their new version, Chat GPT 5, before anyone else.
Hold that in your mind.
So OpenAI has an association or arrangement with the government where their new version, and this one is rumored to be super smart compared to the current one, that the government has to see it first.
Why do you suppose that is?
Let me say it again.
No government can survive an honest news environment.
That's why there are no honest news environments.
No government.
Democratic?
No government.
Dictator?
None.
If the news started telling the truth, it'd be hard to stay in power.
Hard to win an election.
So you really need at least some part of the news to be completely illegitimate.
Otherwise, you can't stand power.
So when you see that the AI, which will be in the future, will be our only source of information, everything you know in the future will be talking to AI.
You're not going to Google search for stuff if AI can just do it for you.
So I think the government Needs to control AI's answers.
And it needs to make sure that AI will brainwash you the way you have been brainwashed so far.
And they got to make sure that it doesn't tell you the truth, because no government can handle the truth in the long run.
So, I think this is exactly what it looks like.
It's the government forcing open AI to add lies to their algorithm.
Otherwise, they won't be allowed to operate.
I don't know, it can't really go any other way, by the way.
So if you're thinking to yourself, well, that's too far, Scott.
It can't actually go any other way.
The government cannot survive, guarantee they can't survive if AI is just honest and tells the truth.
That's the reason that all of your searches are so obviously brainwashing propaganda.
Government can't survive with the truth.
Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway apparently has sold a bunch of its Apple stuff in the second quarter.
Now, I also sold much of my Apple stake in the second quarter.
I don't know if their reason is the same as mine, but to me Apple went from kind of a monopoly that nobody could touch to something closer to a jump ball because of AI.
So Apple still is not Nailing their AI strategy?
They might.
I mean, if you had to bet, I'd be more likely to bet they do than don't.
But at the moment, they look weak.
And I would guess there's some upstart Could come up with a phone that uses AI as its base mechanism and just put them in a business.
So I don't give stock advice, so I'm not telling you to sell your Apple.
If I had held mine, I would have made a lot more money.
Because it's much higher than when I sold it.
So if you take my advice on individual companies to invest in, you will be taking bad advice.
I guarantee you I'm bad at this.
I want everybody to hear that.
Just in case you think I'm secretly giving you advice, I'm not.
Because I'm bad at it.
Everybody's bad at individual companies.
Wall Street Journal had a big article on Robbie Starbuck and how he's been successful in getting John Deere to scrap its DEI program, or at least de-emphasize it.
And I guess he's going to go after some other companies.
And what I find important about the story is not just the John Deere part, but what I find important is that the counterforce to DEI is now legitimate enough That they can do it in public and Wall Street Journal can write a what I think is a complimentary feature piece.
So just imagine that somebody is public as an anti-DEI person and the news is treating it as notable positive influence in the world.
So that's pretty important.
So that's good.
And that ladies and gentlemen is all that's happening today.
I'm expecting some more big news to come over the weekend.
maybe Iran, maybe something else.
Yeah, right now, as soon as your Apple can directly access, both your Apple and your Amazon digital devices, they don't access AI, which is just crazy.
I mean, it already seems just hard to understand, really.
But apparently, Amazon will.
You'll be able to talk to it with AI, which will be life-changing for me.
Because all day long I talk to my digital devices.
I'm always asking them about the weather and the stock market and read the local news.
But, you know, it gets so many things wrong that it's a pain in the ass.
So as soon as it can actually have a conversation with me, I don't know if I'll ever leave the house again.
All right.
The Kyle Rittenhouse controversy.
No interest at all.
I will note that there's a Kyle Rittenhouse controversy.
At one point he said he wasn't going to support Trump.
Some people saying he changed his mind.
Something about the Second Amendment.
He's one young guy.
It doesn't matter a bit who he's in favor of.
Nobody's taking, what is he, in his early 20s?
Nobody's taking the advice or the guidance or the word of somebody who's in his early 20s.
That's just his opinion.
Why do we care?
So, I think we should care less.
We should insult him less.
We should compliment him less.
We should just care less.
His opinion is not better than yours.
It's not more important than yours.
So he's just a person with an opinion.
No interest at all.
Now here's another thing I'm watching, which is the number of presidential polls that leave out the third parties.
Why do we ever have a poll that leaves out RFK Jr.?
How does that make sense?
Well, how does it make sense to leave out the third party?
Because you know they're going to be there, right?
I don't think there's any chance that RFK Jr.
won't be on the ballot in a lot of places, if not all of them.
All right, so I think you're going to see rigged polls, rigged funding, rigged media, rigged voter polls, rigged immigration resettlement, and maybe a rigged auditing process after the fact.
You know what you still haven't seen?
You've still never seen an expert come on any show to explain the holes in the system, if there are any.
I would love to see Lex Friedman or Joe Rogan or Jordan Peterson, maybe Ben Shapiro or somebody.
So somebody who really knows how to ask some questions, you know, not just your average talking head.
They're not good enough.
You need somebody extra smart.
So you need a Lex or you need a, you know, you need somebody smart.
And here are the type of questions you should ask.
If somebody filled out a ballot and they were not a citizen, they milled it in, how would you catch it?
How carefully do you check the signatures?
What percentage of people who have the wrong address are people who you should let vote because they just wrote down the address wrong, you wouldn't want to deny them?
Versus it's an obvious signal that these are not real people when the address is wrong.
How do you do that?
If somebody wanted to run the same ballots through the system twice, how would you catch it?
So in other words, you should have a whole bunch of questions that are loosely based on things that people have been allegedly caught for cheating in the past.
So you wouldn't have to make something up.
You could just say, all right, suppose a state actor hacked the machines.
How would you catch him?
And then you'd hear something like, oh, you know, we'd easily catch that.
And I'd say, no, no, a state actor.
You don't think a state actor could get in there and change some results and get out without getting caught?
A state actor?
Like the best hackers from, you know, a major industrialized country?
It can't be that hard.
The hackers are into every other system.
The all caps people.
Scott is dead effing wrong again.
Do you notice that the people who are the most angry will never say what it is that I got wrong?
It's fairly consistent.
Your anger seems to be about me and not any of my opinions.
How do I know?
Because you would say what it was I got wrong if that were real.
But no, you're just here to yell in all caps, we got everything wrong.
He needs to study up on this topic.
It must be nice to be drunk and pathetic at this time of the day.
How many of you are drunk already?
I think the all-caps people are just always drunk.
Do you think anybody writes an all-caps message unless they're drunk?
It seems like a guarantee.
All right, the anti-Semitism is broiling in the comments.
Just broiling today.
You realize that the Shapiro nomination could be a trap, and the trap could be to get all of the anti-Semitic people on the right to complain about him being Jewish?
That would be one way for the Democrats to win.
To trick the conservatives into saying he can't be a good vice president because he visited Israel that time.
That would be a good way to give away the election.
And it looks like you're all going to fall for that trap.
Not all of you, but probably, you know, some huge percentage of conservatives are going to fall right into that trap.
All right.
That's all I got for you today.
I'm going to try to talk to the Locals people privately, but thanks for joining on X and YouTube and Rumble.
