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, Hunter Biden Pardon, Biden Administration Full Pardon, Presidential Self-Pardons, Eric Swalwell, Anti-Nixon Coup, Aluminum Food Allergies, Shaun Maguire, Hunter Biden Unpaid Rent, Skilled Migrant Debate, Pete Hegseth, Military Audit Failures, Adam Schiff, Patrick Byrne, Ukraine Peace, Middle East Peace, NYC Migrant Criminals, President Trump, 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
There's an interface problem with the Rumble Studio.
There's a button that I have to push every morning to make sure that the sound is on.
But it doesn't always work.
Sometimes you can very carefully press it and it just doesn't connect.
But if I'm in a hurry, I don't notice.
Anyway.
Welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
And if you'd like to take this experience up to a level that nobody's ever experienced before, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice, a stein, a canteen, a jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And now, join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
It happens now.
Go.
So good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
It's funny, I had this weird feeling that something was off before I realized the sound was not working.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, if you did not already see the Dilbert comic, which is now called Dilbert Reborn, Dogbert is starting a new business.
This is only for subscribers, of course, so you should be one either on X or on the Locals platform at scottadams.locals.com.
Dogbert will be selling genitalia to robots.
I don't know if you've noticed, but the robots have no genitalia.
It seems to me it's going to be an obvious marketplace for add-ons.
So Dogger will be selling add-on genitalia to robots.
I think it'll be a trillion-dollar business.
They've got various models, including the LeBron.
It'll be popular.
It's called the LeBron.
Yeah.
What?
You're writing your own jokes in your head?
That's just the name of it.
Well, there is a new experiment, I guess it's been going for a while, in Oregon.
In which they're trying to solve loneliness of living alone.
And what they do is they took a whole bunch of people who would feel lonely if they were just sort of home all day with their kids and they built a planned community where basically they just share a lot of tasks.
So it's basically everybody lives in their own space.
They have their own jobs.
They have their own cars.
They're not tiny houses.
And all they do is they coordinate on some of the things that they all want to get done.
So they do complain about all the coordinating, but that's part of the not being lonely.
Now, I'd like to make a special appeal to the NPCs who are watching this.
Because I like to satisfy everybody.
When I mention a new type of housing that solves loneliness, I would like you to yell, tiny houses.
I'm not going to live in a tiny house.
Okay, it's not really about tiny houses.
The tininess isn't really an element of the story.
15-minute houses, 15-minute cities.
Don't take my car.
15-minute cities is communism.
Okay?
It's not communism.
Everybody just has their own job and pays their own rent.
Yeah.
And they're not going to take your car.
So it's not a tiny house.
It's not communism.
They're not going to take your car.
And the World Economic Forum doesn't even know they exist.
So that's for the NPCs.
Because I know you'd ask.
I know you'd ask.
Well, according to IEEE Explorer, researchers in Tokyo have found a way with some kind of little skin-conducting kind of device to try to figure out the emotions of a human in any given moment.
So they can tell if they're afraid or happy or whatever.
Now, I think...
Once the robots become a major part of our living situation, if you've got a robot in your house or at work, those robots are going to need to learn how to read your emotions.
And I think you're going to want them to.
So for your own benefit, because we do, we like to project our emotions so other people will respond.
So I think that people are going to be wearing some kind of watches or rings or something all the time.
They just transmit to robots what their mental state is.
So your robot will be much better at communicating with you if they know how you feel.
And sometimes the robot might walk over and you give the robot that look, like, why are you bothering me?
And the robot will take one look and check your vitals and say, never mind, I was going to ask you for a question, but I'll come back later.
You don't seem to be in a good mood.
So that's common.
Robots that can tell your emotions, and that way they can control you totally.
They should be able to read most of your emotions from your face, but it'd be good if they can get it from your galvanic skin response.
Here's an amazing study.
You won't believe this.
According to Sinhala Guide, whatever that is, they did a study and they found out that attractive female students' grades plummet when they go remote.
So when an attractive female student is no longer there so that the teacher can see how attractive they are, and they only judge them on their work, their grades go way down.
So the pretty payment, what is it called?
The pretty bonus or something?
Is real.
Now, what do you think happens with the attractive boys?
Because they did the same experiment with boys.
So when attractive boys are in class, they actually overperform unattractive people.
Did you know that?
Did you know that the attractive boys get better grades than unattractive boys?
But if you take the attractive boys and make them work remotely, you know, like you did with the experiment with the attractive girls, what do you think happens to their grades?
Nothing.
They don't go down at all.
You know why?
Because although they were boys and they were attractive, the boys got no extra benefit from being attractive.
They were just good at school.
They were just good at school.
So as soon as you took them to remote work, their grades stayed the same.
They were just good at school.
Yeah, didn't see that one coming.
Well, one of the founders of Spotify has built something kind of cool, Daniel Ek.
He's a co-founder of Spotify.
He built Neco Health, N-E-K-O, and they've got this scanning device that's very Star Trekian.
You just go stand in it like you're going through airport security.
And it scans all of you and figures out if there's anything wrong with you.
I think it takes a tiny blood sample at the same time.
So in something like 15 minutes, you can find out everything that's wrong with you.
Do you know what the problem with that is?
It's not all good.
I once heard this from a guy who did imaging.
That everybody that he images has some kind of horrible problem inside their body.
Everybody.
But how many of those people with a horrible problem in their body that is discovered on imaging, how many of them ever have an actual problem in their real life from the thing that's inside their body that they didn't know about?
Well...
Turns out it's sort of a mixed bag.
So for every person that you find something, oh, it's a good thing we found this, whatever it was, a tumor or something, and that gets fixed, so that saves their life.
But there's probably three people Where they find some kind of weird mass or problem and then they've got to do an operation and basically just throws their whole life into a swirl.
So it can work both ways.
But I would think that with AI, I don't know if they've combined AI with this yet, but assuming they will, maybe they can just find the ones that matter.
So maybe they can get to the next level.
I hope so.
Well, the big story is that Hunter Biden got pardoned by his daddy.
I would like to ruin all of the afternoon news shows for you.
Would you like that?
So this will be the news all day long, from morning to night.
Pardon's Hunter.
And they're all going to say the same four or five things.
So I'm going to say all the five things.
And then I'm going to say, if anybody says these, you're just a copycat person.
Sorry, Greg.
You're just a copycat.
All right?
Because everybody's saying the same thing already this morning.
All right, number one.
Joe Biden promised he wouldn't do it.
What?
He promised he wouldn't, and then he did it.
Can I pretend to act surprised?
I'm going to do my best surprise.
Wait, what?
Joe Biden said he wouldn't do this.
What?
That's the best I can do.
That's why I'm not in any kind of a theater profession.
No theater skills whatsoever.
So, yes, he promised he wouldn't.
I'm starting to think that politicians don't always say what they mean.
I don't know.
I'm getting close to starting to think.
They don't always tell the truth.
I'm going to keep an eye on that.
Let's say that the pardon will cover all the crimes, not just the ones he's been convicted of, and it will go back to 2014. Huh.
2014, that's way before the crimes that he's committed, he was accused of.
Why would they go back to 2014 to pardon him of all crimes, whether he's committed to them or not?
Well...
That's about the time he got involved with Burisma, which would be a set of crimes, if there were any, that would involve dad and brother and the whole family, I guess.
So probably the pardon is, at least in part, a way to cover up future problems with the larger...
The larger legal jeopardy of Burisma in Ukraine.
But the smart people are saying that since he takes a pardon deal, he can't take the fifth if he's asked to testify about it.
Now, he can take the sixth, the sixth amendment.
I'm just making that up.
I don't know if there is one.
But he can just claim he doesn't remember the All he has to do is say, I don't know, I was really high that day.
Don't really remember.
Did I take $3 million from China?
Don't remember.
Did I take a few million dollars from Ukraine?
Now that's a good question.
I was really high, I can't tell you.
I don't know, maybe.
It's hard to remember.
Let's see.
Other obvious things that everybody's going to say?
Oh, no one is above the law.
If you haven't taken some time today to watch these sincere Democrats tell you that nobody's above the law and that the President Biden is an honest person who's going to make sure that his son...
He's not held above the law.
And then, of course, he's being held above the law exactly like you imagined.
By the way, let me just say this.
If you're in the news business and you didn't know from the first moment that Hunter Biden would be pardoned of everything, how could you not know that?
How did that sneak up on you?
You're in the news business.
You're a professional news expert.
And you didn't know that a father would protect his son?
You've got to be a full-on cat lady to not get that.
So, let me say unambiguously, if I were Joe Biden, I would have pardoned him.
Is that okay?
I'm completely okay with it.
Completely okay with it.
And I'm okay with it because those are the rules.
The rules are transparent.
Trump has these rules as well.
If Trump does some things that you don't like, it's also going to be legal.
And Trump has pardoned people in the past that maybe he didn't like.
So I'm not going to complain one bit about the legality of it.
I'm not going to complain one bit.
About the ethical or moral part of it?
Because it's a dad.
Dad first.
No, absolutely.
Dad first.
Is it bad for the country?
I don't know.
Maybe.
But dad first.
Let's not lose that, right?
So if he can get away with it, yeah.
Absolutely.
As long as he can get away with it.
It's not ideal.
But I do think that it works in favor of Republicans and Trump.
But let me talk about a few other things.
So the no one is above the law.
You have to watch the compilation clips.
I just stared at it just loving every second of it.
Because the liars are so bad at theater that they're almost as bad as I am.
So they try to do the sincere thing.
So it was Wiseman, the lawyer, trying to sincerely say that Joe Biden is the kind of person who has character.
And when he says he's not going to pardon his son, that's because of character.
Someone who cares about the law and the country.
And, of course, he pardoned his son.
But you have to watch it.
It's like, no one's above the law.
And no one, no one is above the law.
And you have to add the drama at the end.
Like, no one is above the law.
And, oh, my God.
So yeah, let me just say as clearly as possible, if you didn't see this coming, you probably shouldn't talk about politics ever again.
Ever again.
Even community notes got into it.
So Biden said, and no one's above the law.
And then the community notes on X said that apparently his son's above the law because he just pardoned him.
I'm paraphrasing.
Well, prominent Democrat writer Ezra Klein is worried because he says Trump's team made it brutally clear that they want revenge and especially against Hunter.
So what could a father do given that bad old mean old Trump?
That's right.
There's a Democrat who's trying to blame Trump for the pardon.
All right.
Sure.
And now Democrats are calling on Biden to pardon his entire administration.
Why wouldn't he?
Is there any reason not to?
Maybe that'll be a standard that you'll see all presidents do.
And their last month of work, they'll pardon everybody in their administration for everything.
I can say that.
I can totally see that becoming a thing.
All right.
As Mike Cernovich points out, and I completely agree, that if you're pro-Trump, this is all upside.
There wasn't really anything that you and I would gain if Hunter went to jail, is there?
I can't think of anything I would have gained by that.
But it does, as Cerno says, it makes the regime look less legitimate than ever.
So you remember all that moral authority that they thought they had?
Gone.
It's all gone.
The moral authority.
You know the part where they were pretty sure that ethically they were better?
Not so much.
Imagine waking up from your gaslighting to find out that most of the country wanted Hitler as opposed to the person you thought was the good guy.
And then further you find out that after years of saying that Trump was the liar, And we've discovered that Biden doesn't keep his word.
He's a gigantic liar.
And all that matters is he's protecting his family, which is the opposite of what he said he would do.
And, of course, if you were in favor of him, you were actually backing the biggest liar in the race.
He's the same guy who said the fine people hoax was real.
Joe Biden is the most famous liar in all of politics.
Before you even knew that Trump was a politician, Biden had 40 years of lying on his resume.
40 years of being one of the most prolific liars in all of politics, and then he gets up against Trump and his team forgets the last 40 years.
Well, this will remind you, a little reminder about those last 40 years, that he is completely immoral, Joe Biden is, completely immoral, completely unethical, and one of the biggest liars you've ever seen.
I saw Bill Ackman asking if presidents can pardon themselves, and I don't think it's been tested.
However, as the Amuse account points out, here's something that Biden can do.
If he's worried about pardoning himself and he's not sure it'll stick, here's what he can do to make it a stick.
He can go in for another prostate exam and You can declare Kamala Harris as the interim president while he's under anesthesia, or at least not available medically.
And while she's the president, totally legally, she can pardon him.
And then 15 minutes later, he's back on the job.
And that apparently has been tested.
So, yep, if he wants a pardon, there's nothing that would stop him from getting it.
Eric Swalwell.
So remember, I always tell you that you have to know the players.
It's not enough to know what happened.
If you know the players, then you kind of know what's going on.
And I always tell you that Eric Swalwell is one of the people they bring on when they need a really big lie.
If they need an ordinary lie, like just an ordinary political lie, such as somebody to say, oh, crime really went down when it actually went up, that's an ordinary lie.
Or to say that the job situation is a little better than the numbers show, that's an ordinary lie.
So you bring on an ordinary politician, To tell an ordinary lie.
But sometimes you need a big one, like a really big one.
That's when you bring on the Raskins and the Swalwells and the Brennans and the Clappers, like the really big ones.
So, of course, Representative Swalwell is in the news.
And he posted today, if you defended the 34 felon count guy who committed sexual assault, stole national security documents, and tried running a coup on this country, you can sit out the Hunter Biden pardon discussion.
Eric, none of those things are true.
There's a little bit of a difference between a guy who did real crimes and got pardoned and somebody who got law-fared with a whole bunch of shit that wasn't true.
Just look at his list.
The 34 felonies.
34 felonies for things that even Democrats say nobody else would have been charged with.
The bank that got the loan would love to do business with him again because he paid it back on time.
And there's no way in the world that that would have been charged with anybody else.
Then committed sexual assault.
Well, we don't know that.
And they couldn't convince the entire jury that he did.
Instead, they had to go to a legal or a civil process where you don't need all the jury to agree.
And then they had to change the law so that it could even be brought up because it was passed the statute of limitations.
And then it didn't check out, really, because their story matched a TV show and there were no direct witnesses.
So that was bullshit.
Stole national security documents.
Well, that never went to court, but the claim is that he owned the documents.
So that's really different than stealing them.
If he didn't own them, would he have to give them back?
I imagine so.
But was he accused of being a thief?
I don't think that was the claim.
He tried running a coup on this country.
No.
He tried to stop a coup on this country.
And anybody who still thinks that January 6th was about having a coup versus stopping what everybody saw was obviously a coup, at least the voting irregularities seemed obviously like a coup, in their opinion.
In their opinions, it looked obviously like a coup, and they thought they were stopping it.
So Eric Swalwell had to give you four lies To try to compensate for the one thing that actually is true.
So do four lies equal one truth?
I don't know.
Good try.
But yeah, you needed a Swalwell to come up with like four serious lies and put them all together.
The other thing I like is that some people are acting like Joe Biden was a great public servant, one of the more honest and great guys.
And he ruined his legacy at the end.
What?
He ruined his legacy at the end?
He ran for office in 2020 on the fine people hoax.
His entire family apparently was involved in a major criminal operation that involved Ukraine, which may have killed about a million people so far.
Are you kidding?
That he ruined it at the end?
No.
This is who he always was.
He was one of the worst human beings in the history of human beings.
Always.
He was a terrible, terrible human being.
From top to bottom.
Just one of the worst.
Of all time.
And he proved it.
So it makes me wonder, are people just having cognitive dissonance and now they're getting out of it?
I don't know.
Anyway.
Here's what it's reminding me of, you know, just watching the whole situation and when you see the size of what, in my opinion, is a somewhat obvious gigantic criminal enterprise involving the Bidens and others, the Ukraine situation specifically.
I again think about Tucker the other day talking about how Watergate was really a CIA-FBI plot to take out Nixon.
And that the journalist, Bob Woodward, had never been a journalist, but he's been in Intel before that.
So they take an Intel guy, put him in the Washington Post, and give him the biggest story in the world.
The Washington Post known for being kind of connected with the Intel world.
And then his source is the number two guy in the FBI. And then it gets better.
Before they replace Nixon, they don't want to have his loyal vice president just take over.
So first they get rid of the vice president.
So Spiro Agnew goes away on some tax-related things that probably they could get any public figure on.
And then the replacement for Nixon becomes, what's his name?
Gerald Ford.
Gerald Ford served on the Warren Commission, the most famously corrupt commission of all time, the ones who knew for sure that the American entities killed Kennedy and told the country that it was some lone shooter.
So every single thing about the whole Nixon, Watergate, every bit of that was just an internal plot to essentially control the country.
Now, when you look at that, and then you look at the context of the entire Biden situation, you look at the attempted assassination of Trump, two of them, it does look like there's quite a war going on between the people who don't want to be found out and the people who might find them out.
So, I wouldn't be surprised to see members of the government just get murdered.
So I'm worried about people just dropping dead in the Trump administration.
That's a real concern.
So it might get bad.
RFK Jr. is talking about the link between aluminum and food allergies.
I'd never heard this before.
But apparently...
Kids have just way more allergic rhinitis.
Now, that would be something I had all my life.
Just seemingly allergic to just everything.
And it was only recently, as I've told you too many times, that I massively restricted the type of things I eat to get rid of processed foods mostly.
Not 100%, but mostly.
And get rid of wheat.
And so, if I did those two things, I may have also gotten rid of some of the aluminum, but I guess I got a lot in me.
But the science suggests that the aluminum...
Oh, so I guess the aluminum was in some vaccines, and that if you put the aluminum in there, it can give you allergies that you didn't have before, and they will last forever.
Now, I'm not saying that's true.
I'm saying that there seems to be some suspicion and some studies that would indicate it.
Now, if it's true, it would certainly explain a lot.
Because do you know it's been a mystery forever about why there's so much adult asthma?
When I was a kid, If you had asthma when you were a little kid, you know, it was genetic, and you'd have it all your life.
But if you didn't have it when you were a kid, you weren't going to get it as an adult.
I got it as an adult.
Boy, did I get it.
Like, I ended up in the hospital, couldn't breathe.
And so I've had it all my adult life.
And then I have to be on a drug.
Like, every day for my whole adult life.
Do you think that that could be because of vaccinations?
It's about something in the environment or the food.
So it's something I got injected with, ate, touched, breathed, sucked in, you know, was exposed to, something.
Because you don't just get asthma when you're in your 30s.
It's just not really a thing.
But it happened to me, and it happened to a lot of people.
And science didn't know why.
Something changed in the environment.
Yeah, no, I don't think it was weed.
Anyway, so that one concerns me.
This is another good reason that RFK Jr., being in the seat of power when it comes to these chronic illnesses, seems really important to me.
Now, here's the weirdest coincidence in the world.
Do you remember that Sean McGuire, who's a venture capitalist, a successful one, he was one of the people who famously and publicly turned away from the Democrats and said, nope, I guess I've been fooled.
I guess I've been fooled.
You know, I'm going to back Trump now.
Now, he's in the news for that very public reversal on politics.
But at the same time, he just revealed today that his family was renting a home to Hunter Biden, and Hunter Biden owed them $300,000 in back pay and rent that they hadn't paid from 2019 to 2020. So not only is he in the news for changing his politics, but by coincidence, he was Hunter Biden's landlord.
And Hunter Biden didn't pay.
And he couldn't do anything about it because Hunter changed the locks and the Secret Service protected him so he couldn't get near it.
Imagine being the landlord and not being able to collect your rent because the Secret Service won't let you near the house that you own.
Can you imagine being quiet about that?
That the government stole his house and The government stole his house.
The government stole his house.
And then just used it.
And then when they were done with it, they walked away.
That's not really just somebody who didn't do back taxes.
That's the government stole his house.
Now he got it back when they left.
But for the time that he was in there, the government stole his house.
I'm almost positive the Constitution doesn't let them do that.
But they sure as hell did.
So I think somebody needs to go to jail for that.
Which part of the Secret Service was allowed to stop a homeowner from having access to his own home?
Can you tell me that that was legal?
I would say that the Secret Service that allowed this to happen should be jailed.
The Secret Service.
If the Secret Service keeps you away from your own home and somebody's not paying the rent, I don't think it matters who was in there.
I mean, it'd be one thing if we were being attacked by a foreign nation and we had to house some soldiers to fight back.
I mean, maybe I'd look at it differently.
But, yeah, no, I think the Secret Service should go to jail if they kept the homeowners away from their own home.
But do you think I'm done with this?
It gets a little bit weirder in just the way you'd wish it happened.
This next part, I'm not making up.
Okay?
It's a two-parter.
The first part, you're going to shake your head and go, oh my God, I knew it.
The second part, you're going to say, really?
Did that really happen?
All right, here's the first part.
Hunter offered to pay the rent in the form of some of his own art.
Now you're not surprised, are you?
Yeah, that's no surprise.
You offered to pay with the sum of his art.
There's a second part to the story.
It wasn't his best art.
Or it might have been his best art, but it wasn't his usual art.
Apparently this art was a book of art made from his own feces.
Really.
That actually happened?
I'm not making that up.
Now, what I'm wondering is, I have all kinds of questions about that.
Did he put a canvas on the ground and just...
I mean, did he go full Jackson Pollock and hook it up to a paint can and a...
Did he just suspend himself from a rope like Jackson Pollock and have himself make random trips across the painting?
Or did he?
Oh no.
Oh, no, no, no.
How could that be better?
Really?
You tell me we're not living in a simulation.
That not only did he try to pay his rent with his own poop...
But the landlord was somebody we know.
How is that possible?
That's not possible.
That can't all happen at the same time, can it?
Well, Fareed Zakaria did a little bit on CNN about why the Democrats lost.
And it's a larger piece, but he had this one kind of closing sentence that I liked.
He said that risk-seeking young men, after a while having begun to notice that the party doesn't like them, are now returning the favor.
I feel like that describes what happened better than anything else.
Risk-seeking young men.
Notice that the party didn't care for them.
And that was risk-seeking young men of every type.
So we're not talking about white guys.
We're talking about every group moved toward Trump, except for white women, I guess.
So yes, men realized that they were not the favorite group, and they said, well, why don't I go somewhere I am?
Not the favorite group, but at least treated equally.
So there's a bit of a debate I'm seeing on the right on immigration.
And I would put it into the category of, well, let's call it Elon versus Stephen Miller.
Now, I believe Stephen Miller would like to have no immigration from high-skilled people from other countries because even the people who bring skills to the United States would be depressing the wages of the high-skilled people who are already here.
Now, do you think that's true?
Do you think that bringing in high-skilled people from other countries, technical skills in particular, do you think that it lowers the pay of the high-skilled people who are here?
It might in some specific domains, but there are a lot of domains in which there just aren't enough of those kinds of people, so it wouldn't make any difference there.
Or it wouldn't make much.
But we're also talking about lowering the pay of the people in the top 2% of pay.
Right?
That the highly skilled people are going to be in the top 2%.
So, even though I don't think I like the idea of the top 2% losing money because of people coming in, doesn't it feel like it's better for the country If you bring in a bunch of people who have the skill to start their own businesses, you know, maybe after they work for somebody for a while, they start their own businesses and then they're hiring their own people too.
Isn't that better?
If the top 2% took a little bit of a hit, but just the top 2%, they barely notice it.
And the benefit is that you bring in people who can build all new companies.
Now, looking at the comments, I'm seeing the difference in opinions.
I'm saying, no, no, no, no.
But I haven't seen the reasons.
What's the reason for that?
See, my argument is that skilled migrants that can build companies are good for the GDP and good for America in every way from defense to lower crime to better jobs to everything.
My understanding of how the economy works is that it would be way, way positive.
It wouldn't even be close.
So I don't even think this is a question that any economist would argue about, actually.
So here's my question.
Could you find an economist on the left or the right?
Democrat or Republican, an actual economist, not you, but somebody who works as an economist, who would tell you that bringing in skilled, and again, it depends which skill you're bringing in, I suppose, but bringing in skilled people who are likely to not only elevate the companies that they're working for, but likely later to also become entrepreneurs and build new companies themselves.
Is there any economist who thinks that's a bad idea?
And I wouldn't trust any of you who thought it was.
All right, now let's go deeper.
Elon Musk says it's a very good idea to bring in the skilled people.
Trump says it's a very good idea to bring in the skilled people.
Stephen Miller maybe is less convinced that that's a good idea.
Whose side would you take?
Trump and Elon Musk and me or Stephen Miller?
Well, it's a trick question, because Stephen Miller knows more than all of us about this question.
So it could be that he's got some studies that show some things I don't know.
Maybe.
I'm open to the argument.
I'm completely open to the argument.
But it seems to me, based on my own experience, as I tell you way too often, I have a degree in economics.
I have an MBA from a good school.
I worked in the business world for 16 years.
I'm almost positive that America is way better off if we let the skilled people in.
Almost positive.
It's like probably one of the most confident things I can say about anything.
Probably the highest level of confidence.
But I'm also open to a public debate on it.
So I'd love to see if there are people on both sides who actually know what they're talking about.
I'd be willing to open my mind and say I could be wrong about that.
Are you okay with that?
Is everybody okay that I'm open to that argument?
You don't have to get mad at me then.
I'm open to it.
I'm just telling you that it's something I've watched for a long time.
And with my background, which may be, not in every case, but might be more extensive than your own background in economics and business, you should listen to me.
It doesn't mean I'm right.
And that's why I'm open to listening to a better argument.
But I really think this was a slam dunk.
I don't think there's even...
I don't think it's close.
I think that Elon is 100% right.
Stephen Miller might have an argument that is a little bit more, let's say, America first and a little bit less economic.
I don't know.
I haven't heard it yet.
But if he's got an economic argument, if he's got an economic argument to match it, I'll listen.
I'll listen to it.
All right.
Daily Mail is dunking on Pete Hegseth, and I'm feeling like he's not going to get confirmed based on this.
Now, this is not my preference.
This is my prediction, not my preference.
There are additional reports of his drinking in public to the point where it would be hard for me to imagine he's not an alcoholic.
So, unfortunately, the question now must be asked.
I need to know if he's actually an alcoholic.
Because the reports would suggest that pretty heavily, that in public he's pretty much hard to handle.
Now, I don't want that to be true, and I have nothing against Pete, and I hope that this is just fake news, and that maybe he just likes to have a good time, and there's nothing else to it.
But I will tell you that the nature of the complaints...
If they hold up, I can't imagine him getting approved.
And that's not my preference.
It's not my preference.
I'm just saying, if these latest accusations hold up, yeah, it's not going to work out.
So I'd worry about that one.
But I would also listen to people who know him better because, let's say, his Fox News co-hosts and stuff, they get to see him up close and for a long time.
If they say it's not a problem, I think I'd believe them.
If you hear several of his co-workers say, no, no, he likes to have a good time, but there's nothing to worry about here.
I think I'd take that opinion as being meaningful.
Here's something I love.
Bernie Sanders, you may have heard, he doesn't like defense spending, and neither does Elon Musk.
They both think it's too much.
So Bernie Sanders says in direct language that Elon Musk is right about reducing the size of the military spending.
But now, wouldn't you call that common sense?
If the Pentagon has failed seven audits in a row, I would say that it's common sense that they need to take a look at the military budget.
Common sense.
Is that Republican?
No.
Is it Democrat?
No.
It's just common sense.
If you fail audits, you should look at your budget.
Duh.
Here's another one.
Randy Weingarten, as you know, head of the, I think, second biggest teachers union, she basically said, quote, my members don't really care about whether they have a bureaucracy at the Department of Education or not.
In fact, Alice Shanker of the AFT, I guess that was an earlier head of their department, wasn't into the Department of Education at all.
So, Randy Weingarten said, Sounds like she's agreeing with Trump and Musk that there's this entity that's not doing anything for teachers, according to the teachers union, which is a pretty valid place to get that opinion.
And it feels like just common sense.
Like Randy Weingarten can say, yeah, they're not doing anything for us.
And Trumpkin saying, well, it doesn't look like they're doing enough for us either.
How about we just both agree to look at if we can change this?
Common sense.
I feel like common sense is breaking out.
I'm not saying that Bernie Sanders is going to become a Republican.
I'm just saying there were always a whole bunch of places where we could have easily agreed.
And we simply, for political stupid reasons, decided that we would fight everything.
If you want it, I can't want it.
But how about if Bernie Sanders wants something and Elon Musk wants it and Trump wants it and I want it and you want it, how about we can get it?
How about that for a change?
Let's try that.
How about if Randy Weingarten, who is someone I'm a great critic of, but if she thinks this Department of Education isn't useful and Trump doesn't think it is and I haven't heard a good argument for it, how about we agree on that?
Just that.
We'll agree on that.
How about if the Democrats think the border is a little too open and Republicans think the border is a little too open, why don't we close it?
Why don't we close a little bit?
Why don't we just agree on that?
How about that?
If Ukraine and Russia are clearly ready for peace, and it's time to end that war, and Republicans think so, and Democrats say, you know, we're not getting anything out of this war, let's end it.
Why not?
Let's do that.
Why not?
Can we not agree on the things that are just really obvious common sense?
We can.
But we couldn't do it until now, apparently.
And I think one of the big helps One of the things Trump's going to have going for him is that Biden has so thoroughly disgraced himself and become the liar, criminal thing that people aren't going to want to stay with that brand, right?
And it's all they'll have because it's not like a new leader on the Democrat side is rising that's shiny and beautiful.
They're going to have to live with the rusted, crumbling bones of the past as their brand, right?
And they're going to feel a lot better if they can at least back some things that make common sense for Democrats and Republicans.
Fix the border.
Fix the budget.
Get out of wars that don't make any benefit except to maybe a few families.
There are things we can agree on.
Patrick Byrne.
I had an interesting post on X today about Adam Schiff.
So Patrick Byrne says, well, so Adam Schiff was worried that Pam Bondi, who's going to be the AG, would start looking into voter fraud in 2020. And Adam Schiff wanted to criticize that idea.
He said that if Pam Bondi is determined to spend time and energy of the Justice Department investigating nonexistent voter fraud in the 2020 election, it means millions of taxpayer dollars wasted and less done to address fentanyl and smash-and-grab robberies and threats to public safety.
So in response to that, Patrick Byrne says...
Don't worry, Adam.
We've already gathered all the proof.
It will only take about 45 minutes to brief a couple agents and turn it over, and then the handcuffs can come out.
Does Patrick Byrne have enough information to put Adam Schiff in jail?
Or is he just talking about people, not Adam Schiff?
Because he doesn't say Adam Schiff.
He says the handcuffs will come out.
Is it possible he's got the Kraken?
Does he have the Kraken?
Well, I don't know.
I don't know.
But he's not being shy about it.
If you see somebody who's that well-informed and that prominent, you know, a public figure, and he's going to say something this clear, that he has the goods, I'm going to at least listen to it.
Now, I know, I know, some of you have warned me.
You said, watch out for that Patrick Byrne.
He might have some stories to tell that don't check out.
To which I say, how would I know either way?
But what I don't know is why he would be doing this unless he was trying to set something right and fix the country.
I don't see any way it could be some kind of an op or a play.
And I'm going to do a little deeper dive on this topic.
I'll let you know.
But I'm not too optimistic that anybody has something that would put anybody in jail for 2020. Meanwhile, speaking of Ukraine, an estimated 200,000 Ukrainian soldiers have gone AWOL, meaning just ran away so they don't have to fight.
My question is, why don't they all run away?
I feel like the smart ones maybe were the ones that ran away.
Because if you fight, your odds of getting killed or mutilated seem really, really high.
If you go AWOL, your odds of being caught and shot or arrested or something are pretty good, but probably not as high.
I'll bet the odds of running away And ending up, you know, happy that you did it later is probably a lot better than the odds of staying and fighting.
So given that you know that both your government and the government you're fighting against have already ended the war, mentally, mentally they're already done.
You know, details, they have to work it out.
But neither of them think there's going to be some major property change going forward.
So every person who dies in this fight is just wasted.
And honestly, if you have a way to escape and you haven't taken it, and you're under, like, immediate threat of death every day, well, maybe you should think about taking it.
I would.
I would definitely think about deserting my country because your country deserted you.
Let's be honest.
If you're a Ukrainian soldier, your country deserted you big time.
You don't owe them a fucking thing at all.
You owe them nothing.
They're not even on your side, really.
If they're rounding up people to force them to fight, they're not on your side.
If they put a hood on you and throw you in a van and tell you they're going to kill you unless you kill these other people, that's not your team.
I don't know.
Is that not clear?
The people who force you to kill other people are not your side.
That's not your side.
You're alone.
You don't have a country.
Obviously, you're not on the other side.
You're not on Russia's side, but no, you don't have a side if they're making you do it.
If you had a volunteer army, well, maybe that's something, but you don't.
Anyway, in related news...
There's a lot of fighting going on in Syria.
Apparently, America military stuff is going on over there.
So Americans are in it.
I think the Russians are in it.
The rebels are in it trying to take over the Syrian government.
Now, here is my speculation about what's really happening.
I think the Syria action is really about Russia and really about Iran.
And it could be that the United States is getting ready, and Trump in particular, for a very large deal.
A deal that would touch maybe 15 areas as opposed to let's just stop shooting each other.
I think Trump wants to solve Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Ukraine.
He wants to do it at the same time.
I think he wants to negotiate maybe some weapons limits at the same time.
And probably some energy deals and economics and tariffs and boycotts at the same time.
And maybe even some larger geopolitical realignment.
As in, okay, we won't put NATO in Ukraine, just to pick one example.
So, I think that the Syria stuff is just to stretch Russia a little bit further, because Russia wants to put all their assets in Ukraine, and if they have to put some in Syria, it's hard.
Iran is being stretched pretty far, so maybe it's, again, to make them feel a little weakened in the process.
And it could be that Syria is just something we want to cause problems so that we can negotiate it in a way.
For example, if we say we want three of those Donbass areas back or whatever, you know, three of those areas that they took back, the answer would obviously be no.
But suppose we said, how about you had total control over a warm port and Syria and we just left you alone?
Would they say no then?
Probably still no.
But suppose we said, but what if we also start letting you sell more energy to Europe?
You know, we started throwing things in.
I'm not sure if that's a good idea, but we started sweetening it.
And you get to about the 15th thing.
And they go, you know what?
13 out of these 15 things look pretty good.
You got a deal.
So I would not think this is possible, except again, we have the following situation.
President Trump, dealmaker.
Netanyahu, dealmaker.
Putin, dealmaker.
Zelensky, he'll do what he's told, so he's a dealmaker.
The Prince Salman.
Salman?
What's his name?
The Saudi Crown Prince.
Dealmaker.
Iran?
Maybe.
You know, the Iranians are dealmakers.
Whether they can keep deals or not, that'd be something else.
But this is the same setup that Trump had, similar setup, when he got the Abraham Accords done.
Meaning that the people he would need to get something done with were all dealmakers.
You cannot underestimate that.
People are either dealmakers or not dealmakers.
And it's hard to change.
They're all dealmakers.
This is very doable.
There's never been a time...
When you could do more in the Middle East because you've got Russia completely interested.
Iran, you have their attention.
Israel has already cleared the board so that they have lots of options they didn't have before.
And Hezbollah is a mess, so they're probably looking for something stable.
There has never been...
A better setup for a really big deal.
And I think that the Trump administration is salivating.
Because this is once ever.
This is once ever.
You're never going to see this again.
Probably.
Just a coincidence that all these strong deal makers are in the same place at the same time and all want to make a deal.
I've never seen them before.
So, I mean, all you have to do is throw one Yasser Arafat into it and nothing's going to happen, right?
It doesn't take much.
Or one elderly Saudi leader, and then you're dead.
But you have a young dealmaker, you've got dealmakers top to bottom.
So, maybe.
I think there's something very big is coming in that area.
Very big.
Bigger than anything you've ever seen.
It'd be like the biggest of the big possible deals.
And that would be irresistible to Trump and Putin, I think.
According to the New York Post, New York City is now home to over 58,000 criminal migrants.
What?
58,000?
You know, I always tell you that you need to hear the percentage plus the raw number, or else you don't know anything.
Well, so New York City has got 8 or 9 million people.
Or is it 14 million now if you count the wider area?
So several million.
Is 58,000 additional criminals?
Is that a lot?
So what's missing here is the number of criminals that are in New York already.
Aren't there at least a million criminals in New York?
Maybe one out of eight, something like that.
So if you added 58,000 to the million that we have, would you notice it?
5% difference, 6%.
I don't know.
But more than 1,000 of them are gang members.
I think you're going to notice that, 1,000 gang members, because I don't think the gang member number is going to go down unless somebody mows the lawn.
And close to 670,000 across the country That are felons or facing criminal charges, I guess.
Jeez.
So I think that it would be fair to say that 58,000 people in any one city, 58,000 extra criminals, that feels like a big problem.
Yeah, you've got to solve that.
That's a big problem.
Rasmussen said that 53% of likely U.S. voters have a favorable impression of Trump.
And I think that's the highest ever.
Which would be another prediction I made that was very unlikely.
That after he lost in 2020, he would become more popular every day from then on.
Isn't that the weirdest prediction?
That after he lost, he would get more popular every day?
Here we are.
He got more popular every day.
Won the election.
Kept on getting more popular.
Trump has a very good chance of being, according to history, the best president we've ever had.
You know, history's kind of hinky because most of it's fake, but he's got a good shot at it.
He would have to do more than he's done, but does he have a shot at it?
Yeah.
Yeah, he does.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, That's what I wanted to tell you, except that, did you know, you can buy the 2025 Dilbert calendar right now.
Right now.
But only at the link you'll find at Dilbert.com.
It's right at the top.
So you'll see the calendar.
Just click on it.
Dilbert.com.
Dilbert calendar.
Get it now.
You still have time to get it by Christmas.
And you'll love it.
Get more than one so the shipping costs don't look so bad.
I'm going to talk to the locals people privately because they're awesome.
And I'm going to say goodbye to the YouTube and Rumble and X people right now.
