Find my Dilbert 2025 Calendar at: https://dilbert.com/
God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorks
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Green Energy Subsidies, Election Integrity Claims, NYT Media Matters YouTube Ploy, Female Abortion Voters, Male Survival Voters, AIPAC-Sponsored Congress Trips, President Biden Garbage Trump Supporters, IRS Whistleblowers, Off-Book 2016 Honeypot Spies, Michael Shellenberger, 2016 Disinformation Campaigns, Victoria Nuland, Elon Musk, Strava App Fitness Tracking, Post-Election Expectations, Peaceful Transfer of Power, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and I'm pretty sure there's never been a better time in your life.
But if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains...
All you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen 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 hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
And it happens now.
Go.
Oh, so good.
Well, as you know, today is Wednesday.
And Wednesday in my town, well, actually in my neighborhood, is garbage day.
So today is garbage day.
I'll be taking out my garbage today.
You know what?
I should just do it now.
Yeah, let's just do it now.
I'm in the garbage.
You're welcome.
Was that what I was supposed to do?
I'll be doing the rest of the show from the garbage.
No, it's not true.
It's not true.
I'm not garbage!
I'm a man!
I'm a man!
Not garbage.
We'll get to that.
We'll get to that.
Anyway, here, according to the Guardian, some science that you didn't need to read because you can just ask me, did you know that if you experience intense emotions with other people, it makes you feel more connected to them?
Yeah, you do.
You knew that.
Everybody knew that.
Everybody in the entire world knew that if you experience, you know, you have some experience with somebody that you bond with them forever.
That is why people who are in the military together tend to bond forever.
College roommates tend to bond forever because of these big experiences.
If you go to a movie and it's a scary movie, if you take a woman, which is a good idea...
You can maybe make that woman fall in love with you because people confuse fear and strong emotions with love, actually.
I learned that from Cialdini in his book, Influence Me.
So yes, if you want to bond with somebody, you have to do things.
That's why guys like to bond over sports.
Because even though sports are not important if you're just playing them for fun, it's really emotional.
You have like a really good time when you win and a really bad time when you lose and you're mad at your teammates and you're mad at the other team.
And when you're done, you bond like crazy.
Just because you've had this physical and emotional experience together.
Now, keep that in mind.
This science will come back later as a callback when we talk about politics.
Yeah.
Did you know that also in a completely unrelated story that there's a new kind of algae called chuncus that has been discovered, according to the Weiss Institute at Harvard, And it can suck up an amazing amount of CO2 and then it's heavier than water and then it sinks in the ocean.
So if you've got a whole bunch of this algae, you can suck the CO2 out of the air and into the ocean and save the world from climate change.
I'd like to take a moment for the NPCs.
Now, as you know, whenever this topic comes up, the idea of removing CO2 from the air, there's something that the NPCs must say.
They have to say.
They can't prevent themselves.
They try not to say it, but they can't.
They have to say it.
So I'm going to say it for you to save you some time.
All right.
Speaking on behalf of all NPCs.
Stop taking all the plant food out of the air.
The plants need the CO2. If you take the plant food out of the air...
The plants will all die, and then we will all starve to death for the lack of plants.
So please, please, do not take all the CO2 out of my air.
I would like to live.
I want to live.
Let me live!
End scene.
Meanwhile, California built the first carbon capture plant.
They got greenlit.
And it's according to IFL Science.
And it's going to absorb 46 million tons of CO2. Hold on, hold on.
CO2? Stop taking my CO2. You're taking my plant food again.
You're taking my plant food with the algae.
And you're taking my plant food with the California CO2. Please, please give me my plant food back.
Please, please, give me my plant food back!
Are we all good?
All right, well, here's some more good news.
Yeah, except for the part where you won't have any plants.
Billionaire investor John Paulson He's being considered a potential Treasury Secretary if Trump wins.
And he said he would plan to work with Elon Musk to slash federal spending, particularly in the green energy subsidy.
Wait, what?
He might slash all the green energy subsidy?
Good news, people.
Good news.
Your plant food is coming back.
Yep.
Looks like we're going to have some people who are going to bring you back your CO2. Your plants will be fine.
Don't worry.
All you need is Trump.
He'll save the cats and save the dogs, and you'll eat the plants.
So that's really the primary difference between the Democrat ticket and the Republican.
Democrat ticket, you're going to eat your cat and your dog because the plants will all be dead because you sucked all the CO2 out of the air.
But with Trump, you'll keep some COT in the air, you'll eat the plants, you'll pet the dogs, you'll pet the cats.
What do you want?
Do you want to pet the dogs and cats, or do you want to eat them?
Choose wisely, because that's all that matters in this election.
Meanwhile, Joe Rogan says he's not agreeing with Kamala Harris's campaign to do an interview.
Kamala did say she would do an interview with Joe Rogan.
So that seemed like a change, but she wanted it to last only one hour, which I totally understand, having done the show.
Three hours is a long time for your bladder, I'll tell you.
If your bladder could go three hours of the Joe Rogan show, you're a better man than I am.
But he would have had to go to wherever she was, and he thinks it would be better if he did it in his studios, and I don't think he liked the one-hour thing either.
So it looks like that's not going to happen.
Well, sketchy things are happening with the elections.
I don't know how many of these to believe.
I read today a debunk of a number of claims of election fraud.
So there are these smaller claims of somebody did something with a box or something.
And you should be aware that for most of the claims you've been hearing, there's a counterclaim.
As in, well, you got the context wrong, or it's not what you think, or it's such a small number, that sort of thing.
So I haven't seen anything that looks like it would change the overall result, but we got lots of sketchy stuff happening.
For example, in Pennsylvania, residents are getting these fake texts telling them that they've already voted.
Presumably that would Cause them not to vote, or they might think they get in trouble for voting twice, so keep them home.
Allegedly, according to Andy Ngo, there's an organization called All Vote that has done some sketchy stuff before, some say, and is behind it.
It's run by a trans activist, I think.
But thousands of Pennsylvanians allegedly got these fake things asking them, or telling them that they've already voted.
In other news, here's my own personal scoop.
I know from only one person, so this is an anecdote of one.
There is one European in Europe who is getting texts on a regular basis encouraging him to vote in the American election.
Now, he's not a citizen.
But it doesn't look like there would be anything that would stop him from voting if he clicked on the links and voted.
He's not going to vote because he's not a citizen.
He's not going to break the law.
But he wants me to know, and now I want you to know, that there's at least somebody in Europe who's getting repeated texts.
You know, it's not just once.
He's getting slammed with texts to vote.
How many people in Europe are going to vote Just because I got a text and they thought, well, what the hell?
Nobody's going to arrest me here in Europe.
I mean, if I voted in, let's say, the Russian election, because I got a text that said I could, and then I voted, you know, follow some link or something, I wouldn't worry about Putin arresting me, right?
He's not going to come over here and arrest me.
So I can't imagine that any non-American...
Somebody living in another country would really care too much if they voted in America and it was illegal.
So how big a deal is that?
No way to know.
But it seems to me that election rigging, if it exists, hypothetically, would be a distributed model.
Because then you could catch every distributed piece of it and it would never add up to changing the election result.
So if you had, let's say, 15 different ways that you were cheating and people caught three of them, they'd add them up and the courts would say, ah, if you added it all together, it wouldn't even change the election.
So get out of here, you guys.
But there were 15 of them.
You only caught three.
So it looks to me like, based on all the small anecdotal reports that wouldn't have changed the entire election, probably, that there might be a multi-pronged approach where nobody has too much risk because their own crimes are smallish.
But if you added them all together, they would change the election.
Now, who knows if it's coordinated?
I don't.
Could be.
Just a bunch of people know what to do and have access, and they don't need any orders from above.
They just want their side to win.
So we're never going to know how much the cheating and irregularities are affecting anything.
There's a homeless man who admits that he set some ballot boxes on fire.
A mailbox, I guess, a mailbox.
And it had some ballots in it.
We don't know how many.
According to the Post, millennial.
I wouldn't be worried about that either.
That's just sort of a one-off somebody, homeless guy.
Let's see.
What else have we got here?
Apparently, according to Reclaim the Net, the New York Times is reaching out to conservatives to comment on an article that takes a look at how political commentators Have discussed the upcoming elections on YouTube.
So here's one of those stories where if you know what is happening, you don't know anything.
You have to know the players.
If you know who is involved, then suddenly it all snaps into place.
So what I told you so far, you don't know enough.
So far, all you know is that The New York Times wanted to talk to a bunch of conservative people like Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, Tim Pool, that kind of people, and ask them about their content on YouTube.
Now, if that's all you knew, you'd say, huh, I don't know what kind of his story is even there.
But suppose you knew that it was based on an analysis conducted by researchers at Media Matters for America.
Oh, now it all makes sense.
It all came together just then, but you had to know the players.
So Media Matters is basically the worst reputation of an organization you could possibly have for being a biased political entity.
So it's basically just the dirty tricks media portion of the Democrat machine.
So it's sort of a publication, but it's pure propaganda.
It's dishonest.
It's just garbage.
But the New York Times is the highest level of credibility for the people who don't understand the media landscape, which is most people.
So the lowest level of credibility did an analysis.
And because the analysis exists, that allows the highest level of credibility, but not really.
They're actually low credibility to the New York Times.
To launder the lowest credibility analysis into the highest level of credibility, and then if they talk to the political people, then they've got a story to make them all look bad.
I don't even know what the story was about, but obviously it was to make them look bad.
So I think...
I believe Tucker Carlson's response was, fuck you.
Ben Shapiro, fuck you.
Tim Pool, fuck you.
I don't know if anybody talked to him.
They didn't actually use those exact words.
But I think the conservatives were smart enough that they saw media matters.
Bing, bing, bing, bing, bing.
They saw New York Times.
Bing, bing, bing, bing, bing.
And it was a story about YouTube.
Bing, bing, bing, bing, bing.
And they said, that's three strikes, you're out.
There's no way I'm going to talk to you.
And that was the right answer.
Now, compare this to how, let's say, naive we all were in 2016.
There was a time when I would have taken that interview.
You know, I was not contacted.
But if I had been, Unless I didn't, unless they called and I thought it was spam or something.
But in 2016, I would have taken the interview.
In 2024, I would have laughed at them, probably insulted them, and just let it go.
So things are really different.
The thing that the Democrats have not quite grasped yet is the degree to which the political right has decoded their entire program.
The right now understands all the players.
We know all the players and we know which networks of players are connected to which people.
We know how they do the fakes.
We know how they create the fake news.
We know how they bolster each other.
We know how they do a wrap-up smear.
We know how they edit and create root bar videos.
We know it all now.
So all the things that would have worked in 2016 It's going to be a lot harder to make them work this time.
And I don't know that they have enough new ideas that they can get past the fact that the right has caught up to them.
We'll see.
Anyway, did you know that most voters will be women?
So if the election in 2020 was 52% women voters in America, That would not be enough maybe to beat Trump this time, but they think that if the female vote gets to 54 or 55 percent, then Harris is going to win easily.
And it could.
It does seem to me that the abortion question could be big enough to motivate the women.
The thing that I'm wondering about is organization.
I'm kind of wondering if you had a contest of anything, just any contest, and you said it's going to be the boys against the girls, and the contest will be really determined based on who is better at organizing.
So it's not even the performance of the people, the individual players.
The side that's best organized strategically is going to be the ones that win.
Who would you bet on?
American women or American men, adults, to be the most organized and actually get out to vote and get their friends to vote and all that.
Who would be most organized?
I think women.
If we can be sexist and real for a moment, I think women, under the following circumstances, they care more than the men.
If the women care about the outcome more than the men care, then the women will be better organized and get a better outcome.
However, if it becomes life and death as in protecting the country from complete destruction, the men will be better organized because they'll have a biological trigger that says, oh, now I run toward danger.
I don't think women have the same trigger.
Now, women have an extreme trigger Because the whole bodily autonomy thing is such a big issue.
So you have in this race two forces that we've never seen before this size.
I've never seen the abortion energy this big.
And I've also never seen the, uh-oh, this time we actually have to save the country.
We're literally in an existential risk.
I've never seen that before.
This is the first time I think it's really...
We're looking at an endgame.
When the endgame becomes obvious, men are activated.
So I think you're going to see probably the biggest turnout we've ever seen.
And I think both will be better than normal.
Because they'll both organize better than normal.
But women are fighting for bodily autonomy.
As important as that is to every individual...
The survival of the collective is bigger.
No matter how much you care about your own life and the life of the unborn, let's say, it's smaller than the care for the entire country.
So I think the risk to the entire country is what men are responding to.
The risk to women who would be in this specific situation, highly important to the people who are in this situation.
But if you're not in the situation where you're not dealing with an unwanted pregnancy, it doesn't affect you that much.
But the end of America itself?
It's hard to ignore that.
So I'm going to say, and this is very tentative, I think men will be surprisingly well organized.
And by organized, it doesn't even mean somebody necessarily talked to you or organized you or offered you a ride.
I think men self-organize when they just get the call, right?
The call is so clear.
Let me ask you.
Let me ask the men.
So most of my audience is usually more men than women.
So probably 85% men.
How many of you feel what I'm talking about?
Like you feel it biologically that this is one you can't sit out.
Other elections, you might have really wanted to vote, but you think, well, if I didn't, it wouldn't be the end of the world.
But it feels like this could be the end of the world.
This doesn't feel like anything else I've ever been involved with.
This feels like this is the one.
It feels like 1776.
It feels like you're gonna have to put everything on the field.
You can't leave anything behind.
If you've got a friend or a co-worker or somebody you think is gonna vote, they don't have a ride, this time you offer them a ride.
Maybe if it was another election, you say, you'll figure it out.
But not this time.
This time you say, I'll give you a ride.
Because we're all in this time.
This is the big one.
So we'll see, boys against the girls.
Did you know that AIPAC, that is the American lobbying entity that lobbies for the benefit of Israel, They're all very public and everything's above board and legal and transparent and everything.
But did you know that they sponsor a tremendous amount of trips for our politicians to go to Israel?
And more than a quarter of the 4,100 privately sponsored foreign trips were to Israel since 2012.
According to a study by the Howard Center.
So that's more trips to Israel than to the entire Western Hemisphere and the continent of Africa combined.
Now, do you remember my first story?
My first story was that if you have an intense emotional experience, With anybody, you bonded with them completely.
And it doesn't matter what the experience is.
It could be a war experience, a movie that made you both cry, you both saw an accident somewhere, you both helped somebody out of a burning building, something like that.
Well, now consider the persuasion power of Israel, which by its nature, because it's Israel, it's the holy lands for so many people, that if you bring somebody over in a luxury place, And presumably they're not flying coach, I assume, right?
So you get your nice first class ticket.
You're staying at the best hotel.
And really friendly hosts greet you.
Make sure you've got a basket when you get there of goods and things to chew on.
And then they take you on tours.
And it blows you away.
Like, you actually put your hand on the wailing wall, and, like, you can feel history.
And you hear stuff like, all right, now you're walking the same path that Jesus walked.
I don't know if that's really a thing, but, you know, something of that nature.
And you're going to be saying, oh, my.
Really?
Like, Jesus walked the same little pathway?
Well, we think so.
Or whatever it is.
Presumably...
People would have an emotional experience going to Israel, probably more than most destinations, and especially if the trip is made to be very impactful.
That is so persuasive as a process that I'm not entirely sure it should be legal.
It is legal.
It's all above board, and the reason we know about it is it's all public.
So one of the reasons that when people say to me, but Scott, you should be complaining about AIPAC distorting the policies of the United States, I say back to you, what law are they breaking?
What are they hiding?
Nothing.
I think the mission of the organization says exactly what they are and what they do, and then they do exactly what they are and what they do right in front of you, and it's really, really effective.
All I'm adding is it's so effective that I don't know if anybody contemplated how effective this could be.
So we should at least give a thought, at least give a thought to how powerful this is.
When you take somebody on an emotional trip, And they come back, I'll bet they're not supporting the Palestinians so much as they're supporting Israel.
Now, Israel's our ally, so it's not like it's a problem, right?
I'm not treating it as a problem.
I'm saying, are we doing this intentionally?
Is it our desire that we would have one country, an ally, a very close ally, having this much control over our mental faculties?
Maybe there's nothing wrong with it.
But just be aware that this level of persuasion is not like anything else.
Right?
Our opinions of, let's say, Japan I don't think our influence by having our politicians fly over and have great times in Japan, although there's probably a little bit of that.
But it's so, so powerful.
I guess I'm just complimenting them for doing something that's totally legal and really powerful.
Bang for the buck.
All right.
Let's talk about Biden calling Trump supporters garbage.
Now, you're not going to love everything I say about this topic.
But here's what...
Biden said.
He said he was talking about the comedian who said that, jokingly said that Puerto Rico was a floating island of garbage because Puerto Rico apparently has this massive floating garbage problem.
They just, the island has literally got a big garbage problem.
So, Since that seemed offensive to Puerto Ricans and to other people, Biden wanted to get into it.
And he said, quote, the only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters.
His demonization of Latinos is unconscionable, and it's un-American.
So let me read it again.
The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters.
So, did he just call...
Did Biden just call half of the country, the ones who support Trump, did he just call them garbage?
Like me?
I'm looking at your walls of yeses.
Now, the reason you're saying yes, if I can read your mind, and you can tell me if I'm getting it correctly, is you heard it with your own ears, correct?
Correct.
Everybody, you heard it with your own ears, probably.
If you didn't hear it with your own ears, you probably read it.
So you read the transcript, you heard it.
Some of you may have seen it.
So you saw it, you heard it, you read the transcript.
How could it possibly not be true?
Do you remember when the news told you that President Trump suggested injecting bleach?
Do you know why people said that was true?
They heard it with their own ears.
They saw him say it.
And they saw the transcript.
It didn't happen.
And he wasn't talking about any liquid disinfectants either.
He was talking about light.
But they took out the light parts.
And if you take out his reference to light before and after he was talking, it looks like it was something else.
Do you remember the fine people hoax?
Of course you do.
Do you know what people said when I said, that's a hoax?
They said, Scott, I heard it with my own ears, I saw it with my own eyes, and I read the transcript.
Of course it happened, except that it didn't.
The part you heard and saw and what you wrote in the transcript were edited, and they were edited to actually reverse the meaning of what he said.
Now, if you didn't learn from those two examples that you can see it, hear it, and read the transcript and it's completely false, then you're definitely not going to believe what I'm going to tell you next.
This story is total bullshit.
He didn't say that.
No, he didn't say that.
Let me tell you what he said.
The supporters, the word supporters...
If you thought the supporters was apostrophe S, then what it means is the only garbage I see floating out there is coming from his supporters, meaning the things they say about Puerto Rico.
The only garbage is Something that belongs to his supporters, possessive S. Now, can you hear it?
Let me pronounce them differently, all right?
They're supporters with just an S, in which case if he says supporters with just an S, he called Republicans garbage.
But if he was saying supporters, he was saying something that they possess, which is the things they say.
So here's how it sounds when there's no apostrophe.
Supporters.
Here's how it sounds with the apostrophe.
Supporters.
You want to hear it again?
See if you can guess which one it is.
Guess which one has the apostrophe.
Supporters.
And now the second one.
Supporters.
So you know what happened because you heard it with your own ears, right?
I guess that's pretty reliable.
But you also saw it with your own eyes.
Could you see the apostrophe with your own eyes?
Did it come out of his mouth?
Can you see it floating there for a little while?
No, your eyes didn't help you in this case.
Your eyes were not useful.
How about the transcript?
You read the transcript.
Well, who made the transcript?
The Republicans who made the transcript left off the apostrophe or decided it wasn't there in the first place.
When the Democrats showed you the transcript, well, there it was.
There's that apostrophe.
Now, what makes me think that one interpretation is favored over the other interpretation?
Why would I think that Biden, who's called Trump supporters a lot of things, I mean essentially fascists and everything else, why would I think that he would not call them garbage?
It's the fine people hoax people.
It's the drinking bleach people.
There is no president who stands in front of the world and calls neo-Nazis fine people.
You didn't need to check the transcript.
You didn't need to hear it again.
You didn't need to hear it without the edit.
There's no president, no president, not Trump, not anybody, In the United States who stands in front of the world and says, yep, those Nazis are fine people.
You didn't need to do any research.
How about that Trump said, what about injecting bleach?
No, you didn't need to look at the transcript.
You didn't need to hear it.
You didn't need to see it to know it didn't happen.
There's no such thing as a president who goes in front of the world and suggests, hey, what about injecting bleach or even injecting some kind of household cleaner?
That didn't happen.
You don't have to research it.
On its surface, you can tell it didn't happen.
Now, do you think that the president of the United States, Joe Biden, went in front of the world and said and meant it, Half of the country are garbage.
No, he didn't fucking say that.
Nobody would say that.
Nobody would say that.
Not Biden, not with dementia, not Clinton, even as bad as she is.
Even Clinton said it at a private event, and even she said it was referring to a portion, you know, it wasn't all Republicans.
So it's never happened and never will happen.
You're never going to see a president call anybody fine people Nazis.
You're never going to see a president suggest injecting bleach into your body.
And you're never going to see a president saying half of the country are garbage.
But you're definitely going to see a president say that if somebody said something terrible that they were talking garbage.
That would be ordinary.
So, I give you my 100% certainty that Joe Biden and you could have replaced him with any president And I would say the same thing.
There's no way in fucking hell he meant that the people are garbage.
If you were so primed to believe that anybody would have said that, you have to ask yourself, how easy was it for the Democrats to believe the fine people hoax?
Pretty easy.
Pretty easy.
How easy was it for the Democrats to believe the liars and suckers hoax?
Pretty easy.
It's easy to believe bullshit.
Like really, really easy.
Now, having said that, Joe Biden, the biggest piece of lying piece of shit in the whole world, a corrupt, divisive piece of shit, ran on the fine people hoax.
He knew it was a hoax.
He divided the country in terrible in half.
And so, with your permission, I'm going to treat this like he really called half the country garbage.
You okay with that?
Everybody okay?
I'm going to, from this point on, I'm going to repost any funny memes.
I will make jokes about him calling us garbage.
I will treat it as though it's true.
Why?
Because he does not deserve my honesty.
He doesn't deserve it.
Nope.
I can think of 100 Republicans or 100 Democrats who, even if I didn't like their policies, I would say, well, this is too far.
This is too far.
I don't like this politician's policies, but I'm not going to say that you just called half the country garbage because that didn't happen.
No, you piece of fucking shit, Biden.
You called the fine people hoax the reason for running.
You are the lowest, lyingest, most despicable piece of garbage in the whole fucking country.
So yes, I'm going to act like you actually said this because of the fine people hoax.
And if you have a problem with it, just tell everybody it's because of the fine people hoax, right?
It's not any other reason.
So, yes, on Halloween, I expect to dress up as a piece of garbage.
I'm going to put on an old shirt and I'm going to get some pins or some tape and I'm going to get some garbage out of my garbage and I'm going to attach it to my shirt and I'm not going to say a thing and I'm going to answer the door trick-or-treating in my neighborhood and I'm going to act like I think Biden, the biggest piece of shit in the whole fucking world, actually called the country garbage.
So I'm 100% in on that.
It just isn't real.
Sertovich was on Jeff Bezos.
He goes, Jeff Bezos wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post describing why people don't trust the news.
So that happened yesterday.
And then as Cerno points out, today the Washington Post lied about Joe Biden's comments, which are on video where he called Trump voters garbage.
I agree with you, Mike Cernovich.
That's exactly what happened.
Politico went further and just changed the quote.
Here's what Politico did to try to save him.
They changed his quote to, the only garbage, and then they go, Was the, then quote, hatred.
So now they're just taking his words and rearranging them.
The only garbage was the hatred that Trump supporters said.
So they actually had to change the words and put them in quotes.
Do you understand that?
They put the words in quotes, but they are not what he said.
Do you know what quotes are for?
Quotes are to tell the reader this is exactly what he said.
They put the quotes around three words that are exactly what he said, but not in the context which he said it.
And then they put quotes around one word, hatred, which also is out of context of how he said it.
No, you don't just put a quote around every word in the dictionary and then say that this guy said everything in the dictionary, every possible word combination because he's used all these words.
No, you don't get to do that, Politico.
Politico, you are just propaganda at this point.
Just propaganda.
Well, Catherine Herridge has a, looks like a scoop about a whistleblower, an IRS whistleblower, who says that when the Hunter laptop thing first came up and the IRS was looking at it, that they knew it was real immediately.
So the government lied to us for a long time.
And that there were a lot of over-investigated steps that were not allowed to So exactly what you thought.
The government said, don't investigate this because it's the president's son.
And the prosecutors told us that they didn't want to ask about, quote, the big guy that was mentioned in the laptop because that would have made it clear that Biden was corrupt and working deals with his son in other countries.
The whistleblower says that they corroborated that the big guy was Joe Biden and there was never any question about it.
And that the reason they held back was for the purpose of affecting the 2020 election.
So here we have an actual witness to government FBI corruption and affecting the election.
But we also have another whistleblower, according to Carrie Pickett in The Washington Times, that James Comey, and this is the first time I've heard this story, had FBI, quote, honeypot spies infiltrate Trump's 2016 campaign.
This was an off-the-books investigation, allegedly, from a whistleblower, that was before the Russia collusion probe.
So in other words, James Comey authorized inserting some agents to spy on Trump without any indication that there was anything that was a reason for spying.
That would be very illegal.
And that he was targeted soon after he announced his campaign.
My God.
An FBI agent involved in the probe revealed the off-books criminal investigation.
All right, if you're going to call it off-book, Let's be a little more clear.
Off book means it's fucking illegal, right?
Does the FBI just get to do any little secret things looking for dirt?
Now, I don't think off book is exactly just the right word for this.
You know, maybe they've got some term of art like that, but if it's off book, Sounds illegal to me.
Sounds like somebody should go to prison for this.
To me, if it's true.
Remember, it's a week before the election, and they're whistleblowers.
So you got to put a little grain of salt on the whistleblower, you know, a week before an election.
And apparently the whistleblower says that there were two female FBI undercover agents, and that's the honeypot part.
The honeypot part.
The honeypot is that men especially will tell attractive women things they won't tell anybody else.
So, this was really just fishing around for some way to take him out of office.
I would say this looks like, well, it's got to be some kind of crime.
I mean, I would think that most of the FBI has to be eliminated, at least at the management level.
And let's see, Michael Schellenberger.
He gives us a little summary here.
He says, all the major elements of the FBI and CIA conspiracy to interfere in the 2020 elections on behalf of Joe Biden are now confirmed.
So these are the things that Michael Schellenberger, who does a really good job of making sure things are accurate and have sources and are confirmed, he says the following things are confirmed.
Now again, remember I told you, if you only know what's in the news, you don't know anything.
You have to know the people.
So in this case, the people is Schellenberger.
So if you didn't know that his credibility is sky high compared to any of these other entities you're hearing about, this wouldn't sound as powerful.
This is one of the most credible people, if not the most credible, in the entire media landscape.
Here's what he says.
FBI had the Hunter Biden laptop in 2019 and knew it was real.
The FBI were spying on Giuliani and knew he would give the laptop to the media.
FBI ran a disinformation campaign in 2020 to pre-bunk the story.
That's where they told the media, oh, there might be this fake Russia thing, so don't trust it.
Then former FBI general counsel turned Twitter Counsel Jim Baker convinced colleagues at what was Twitter to censor the New York Post story after they had determined that it was not in violation.
So they censored it even knowing that they didn't have a rule that would cause them to censor it.
CIA Director Gina Haspel approved within a few hours a disinformation campaign by the 51 former CIA and other intelligence people.
So that came from the top.
The very top of the CIA authorized a domestic disinformation campaign.
Did you ever wonder why Brennan and Clapper never went to jail or got punished?
Because they had orders.
They were totally within the legal structure of our spies, I guess.
And so millions of people almost certainly changed the election outcome.
So there's that.
And now Victoria Nuland is making accusations that Putin's got a brand new, very, very powerful tool, which is Elon Musk.
So now Elon Musk is being...
Branded like Trump was as the best friend of Putin, which, you know, there's no evidence of that, of course.
But if you didn't know that Victoria Nuland tends to be mentioned in the stories about the worst behavior of the American government, it would be one thing if an ordinary pundit said, hey, I think Elon Musk and Putin are getting too close.
But when it comes from Victoria Nuland, it suggests that the darkest, worst parts of our government are going to target Musk.
That's what it looks like.
It looks like he'll be targeted.
He's obviously already targeted.
But when Victoria Nuland gets in the game, again, remember...
It's not what's happening, because it would sound like nothing's happening, this story.
If all you heard was, oh, there's somebody in the government who's mocking Elon for having, you know, communicated with Putin, that wouldn't be much of anything.
But if it's Victoria Nuland, and she's saying it in public, she's basically sending the signal to all the other dark parts of the government, this guy's our enemy.
And that is super dangerous.
Anyway, Breitbart is talking about a fitness app called Strava, and this is very clever.
Apparently, you can tell where the other Strava users are.
I'm not sure if every user can do that or you have to have access to the company, but you can tell where some of them are at some time.
And unfortunately, some of the Secret Service people who guard our top politicians use the app, which means you can tell where the top politician is By where the secret service is.
Now, I don't believe the secret service gets to use personal devices when they're on the clock.
So if you're actually at the rally, I don't think they've got their own phone in their pocket with an app on it that can be traced.
But when they're off-duty, they go back to the hotel, I assume they use a regular phone, and maybe you could tell he's at least in town, which is more information than maybe you want to give out.
So I don't know if that's a gigantic problem or not, but it's one I'd take a look at.
In other news, there's a dramatic drop in marijuana use among the youth in the United States.
It's really big, and I have no idea why.
Why would marijuana use drastically drop in high schools in the last few years?
Is it because the parents are doing it and it became uncool?
Is that the whole thing?
Because I think the young people are doing less drinking and nothing changed with that.
So is it just because it became legal it wasn't cool anymore?
Or did people just catch on that the people who were Getting high in, you know, eighth grade, we're not exactly excelling later on.
I don't know.
There's a mystery to that.
I do wonder if the data is accurate.
So maybe it's just bad data.
That's a possibility.
All right, ladies and gentlemen.
That is what I had prepared, and I am open to questions.
So I'm going to look at your questions coming in on the app and see if you've got anything you want me to talk about.
The big question, I think, for all of us is what's going to happen after Election Day?
Because it doesn't look to me like there's really any chance we'll have a result.
It does look like there will be just lots of claims of fraud.
Most of them will not be real.
Remember, 95 to 98% of all claims of election fraud are not going to check out.
Or somebody won't have a standing, or it won't be enough to change the result, or it'll be delayed or something.
So most of them aren't going to mean anything.
But there's going to be a lot of them.
So what do you do?
What do you do?
Well, Here's where I default to my frame for what happens after the election.
I say that the American system is where...
Our political system is an adversarial system, meaning that you're supposed to run against somebody.
You're running against the other team, so you're adversaries politically.
But we're not adversaries in life, right?
If my neighbor wants to vote a different way from me, I still like my neighbor.
That doesn't bother me at all, if you like different policies.
I might have a problem with the politician, but if the neighbor wants a different set of policies, I still love my neighbor.
But here's how I see it.
We need this peaceful transfer of power, and I agree with everybody who has ever said that's foundational to what is America.
You take that away, and everything's gone.
That's the thing.
Now, of course, you need an honest media landscape in order for any of this to be useful, because otherwise we'd just get brainwashed to pick whoever they want us to pick.
But if you have a media that's functioning, and X is really making a big difference at this point, And you have peaceful transfers of power.
You're in pretty good shape.
Pretty good shape.
Because it'd be harder for the bad guys to take over than that.
But I would add this part of the frame.
January 20th is the peaceful transfer of power.
November 5th is the election.
Everything that happens between November 5th and January 20th, including January 6th, when an election should be certified, but maybe it won't someday.
Everything that happens between the election and January 20th is the adversarial process.
And as long as nobody pulls a gun, and if they do, they need to be taken down and go to jail.
But if nobody pulls a gun, We can fight it out.
And when I say fight, I don't mean physical, duh.
I mean, take it to court, protest, talk to your neighbors, make phone calls, donate money, whatever you have to do.
So, we're going to have a hell of a fight until January 20th.
But I'm very committed to a peaceful transfer.
Be as loud as you need to be until January 20th.
But we should also make it an objective that January 20th is the end of the fight.
No matter what happens.
Now, I think that we've got a Supreme Court that would protect us from the worst excesses that you can imagine because the court is leaning right and they're more originalist, etc.
So I think we'll be fine.
But whatever happens between election and January 20th, that is not how we should judge each other.
That's one of my problems with January 6th.
We shouldn't have been judging each other on that day.
That was well within the fight it out phase.
That was well within the, hey, this is the period where we always bitch about the outcome.
This is the period where somebody always says it's unfair.
This is the part where legal challenges are made.
Let's do all of that.
Let's do it up.
And the other team will be doing it.
And we'll both do it.
But let's be clear that January 6th is between those dates.
It's not the key date.
It's between the key dates.
There's the election, really important.
And then there's the peaceful transfer of power that, damn it, we're going to get.
We're going to get a peaceful transfer of power.
But between the election and that peaceful transfer of power...
It's an adversarial process, and it's going to get dark.
It's going to be tough.
It's going to be full of fake news.
You're going to see some of the worst behavior you've ever seen in your life.
You might see Jamie Raskin trying to do something to get Trump disqualified, etc.
But January 20th, I believe there will be a peaceful transfer of power.
I hope it's to Trump.
But the Second Amendment still exists.
So I'm 100% in favor of peaceful everything and a peaceful transfer of power.
But you can imagine, and most of you are imagining, a worst-case scenario.
Don't shoot your neighbor.
Do me a favor.
Don't shoot anybody who's your neighbor.
We can't make this about the voters.
If it turns out we have an enemy, it's a common enemy.
Let me give you this reframe.
I'll give you this reframe.
If we can't pick a president that will give us all a peaceful transfer of power, then we have a common enemy and it has nothing to do with the candidates.
The common enemy is the election system.
If we have a system that has been imposed upon us by whom?
I don't even know.
Who gave us this system that guarantees we're going to be fighting for three months?
Who gave us that?
I want to know who gave us the system that made us fight.
Because if you want to find an enemy, find out who's behind the election systems.
Now again, don't hurt anybody.
We're not talking violence here.
But we will have a common enemy.
If we don't have an effective, peaceful transfer of power, Democrats and Republicans were on the same team after that.
We've got to figure out who's running the election because it's not us.
We're going to have to figure out how to fix that so we don't do it again.
So I hope we can find a common enemy if we need one.
All right, I'm going to say hi to the Locals people privately because they're so awesome.
And they're also subscribers.
If you'd like to be a subscriber and get some of the extra good stuff, that's at scottadams.locals.com.
And you might see over my shoulder, if I go this way, the books and calendar that you can buy for your friends and family and co-workers.
For Christmas.
Remember, it's almost November.
Get your Dilbert calendars.
They will be shipping in November, the first ones.
