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, California EV Rebate, Tesla CA Rebate Exclusion, Elon Musk, Tesla Pay Package Blocked, Judge Kathaleen McCormick, 2000 Mules Debunked, Advertising Influenced News Media, Spasmodic Dysphonia Surgery Cure, Spasmodic Dysphonia Scott Adams Cured, Dr. Gerald Berke Spasmodic Dysphonia, Google Search, Grok AI, Daniel Penny Trial, President Trump, Trump's Canadian Tariffs Threat, Trump's Hamas Hostages Threat, S. Korea Martial Law Declared, J6 Political Prisoners, Election System Credibility, The View Legal Notices, Sunny Hostin, Whoopi Goldberg, Stephen A. Smith, Hunter Biden Pardon, President Biden, Biden Crime Family, Select Subcommittee COVID Report, Mike Benz Ukraine, Pro-America Honesty, Terrorist Warfare Drones, Rachel Maddow, 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
Nope, heading in the wrong direction, but not too bad.
However, we'll put up the comments from the local subscribers here because they're the best.
All right.
We're going to make some trouble today.
Do-do-do-do-do.
Do-do-do-do-do.
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
Careful, I'm on my own cord.
There.
There we go.
There we go.
all wrapped up in my own electric cords.
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 is a kepper mugger, a glass, a tankard, chalice, a styne, a canteen jug, or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid diet like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine that the day the thing makes everything better.
It's called Simultaneous Sip.
And it happens now.
Go.
Extraordinary.
Bye.
The best I've had all morning.
I wonder if there is a scientific study that suggests that coffee is good for you.
Oh, here's one.
There's a study that says it might be a 17% reduction in all-cause mortality.
Two to three cups per day.
So you'll live on average 1.8 years of life.
Substantial benefits across diverse populations.
As life reduces your frailty.
Oh my god, I gotta have another sip.
I'm reducing my frailty a little bit.
My frailty seems a little high.
Let me see what I can do about that.
Yeah, I think that's working.
My frailty has decreased 63% with one sip.
That's called science, people.
It's called science.
Don't get it confused with anecdotes.
Well, today is a big day.
As you know, there will be an alien space war.
The United States and the rest of the world will be in a global combat with UFOs.
That's what I'm told, right?
Now, that wouldn't be fake news, would it?
Would it?
Well, I hope that there's an alien-UFO war.
That's all I want.
If you'd like to see more of me...
What?
You know you do.
Wouldn't you want to see more of me?
Come on.
But if you did want to see more of me...
I'll be on Newsmax today at 4.15 Eastern Time.
So for you Californians, that's 1.15 Eastern Time today.
And I'll be talking about stuff, things and stuff and the news and things and whatnot.
Well, according to SciTech Daily, there's a new kind of tattoo that can read your mind.
So it's not exactly what it sounds like, but they've got some kind of ink that they can put a, I think it's a temporary tattoo, and the temporary tattoo will act like a brain sensor.
So instead of putting a little sensor device on your head, they'll just put a little temporary tattoo, and then somehow they can read it and Pick up your brain scans, I guess.
I don't think it's quite ready to go, but it has some promise.
So, if you see a tattoo on somebody's head, they might be a cyborg.
All right, according to SciPost.
All right, let's see if you can get this one right before I tell you.
They tested virtual reality feedback to see if it could reduce depression and anxiety.
Do you think that putting somebody in a different, what feels like a different physical environment because it's virtual reality, do you think that that can reduce their anxiety and depression?
The answer is yes.
Yes, I can.
I guess as well as a therapist.
So therapists aren't needed anymore.
So that's a good job you should no longer try to be.
But it seems like it would depend exactly what kind of virtual reality you're experiencing.
I still think it's going to be better to walk outdoors.
So here's what they need to do.
They need to test the virtual reality.
Compared to sitting indoors and being sad, that's probably what they did.
And then compared to taking a long walk in the park in the morning.
I feel like I'd still bet on the long walk in the park in the morning over the virtual reality.
So next time, just ask me.
You don't need to do that study.
Scott, what will reduce my anxiety and my depression more?
Using some kind of digital device in a clever way or a walk in the park?
Hmm.
I'm going to go with a walk in the park.
Well, California is trying to rev up its...
Electric car business.
So it's going to give rebates, maybe up to $7,500.
It's going to replace the federal rebates that went away.
But it's going to exclude Tesla.
So if you buy an electric car, you can get a rebate.
Unless it's a Tesla.
Unless it's a Tesla.
Does that sound personal?
No.
Does that sound like it's a political statement against Elon Musk?
Well, their argument goes like this.
If your penetration in the market is above a certain level, and Tesla has good penetration, then you don't need to boost that market because that market's doing okay by itself.
But if you want competition to Tesla, and those guys are not doing so well in selling so many cars, then maybe you need to put the money where the competition is.
Now, does that sound fair to you, that the company that's doing the best is not eligible to get the rebate?
I don't know.
I think you could argue this either way.
If you're arguing that you want to have as much competition as possible, Then maybe.
But if you're trying to have as many electric cars as possible, because the whole point is not about having more electric cars, the point is about saving the planet, right?
So in every case, having more electric cars is better.
So that would argue that you should give a rebate for every kind of electric car.
But what if everybody said, well, if I'm getting a 7,500 rebate, now I'm definitely going to get a Tesla.
So I'm not sure there's a right answer.
Yeah, I mean, it does seem unfair to Tesla, but fairness is an idea that was invented so kids and idiots would have something to talk about.
And there I did.
I had something to talk about.
Speaking of unfairness, while Tesla will maybe not get that California rebate, Musk has been denied again his $56 billion pay compensation package.
But interestingly, it's the same judge.
So the same judge has now turned it down twice, which is weird because the stockholders have approved it.
So, why is the judge getting involved in stockholder decisions?
Doesn't feel right to me.
I hope there's some kind of court that that can be appealed to.
I don't know if there is.
But...
Here's the ironic part.
It's the same judge that forced Musk to go ahead and buy Twitter when he was changing his mind.
And he was like, ooh, maybe this isn't such a good idea.
And she's the one who forced him to buy it.
So the same judge who's screwing him out of $56 billion, which I assume he'll figure out how to get.
Because I don't know how you could not solve that problem.
It just feels like it's solvable some way.
Yeah, I mean, given that there's somebody who wants to receive the money, and there's somebody who wants to give it to them.
How could you not solve that?
Why does the court get in between, I'd like to give you money, I would like to receive it.
And the court was like, whoa, no, hold on here.
We've got to stop you from giving money that you want to give to the person who wants to receive it.
We better shut that down right now.
But by forcing Musk to buy what was Twitter, she ended up saving the country.
The unintended consequence of forcing him to buy the thing that he changed his mind and wished he didn't have to buy at that moment saved America.
And I feel that that's legitimately true.
It actually saved the country.
Because I don't think if Trump had not gotten elected, I really think we'd be in trouble.
Like, actually, I don't know how we can get out of it.
Now, we're still in a lot of trouble.
Because the data is out of control, etc.
But at least we have something like a legitimate plan to take a real hard look at it with our smartest people and take aggressive action against it.
So we didn't have that before.
So this judge may have screwed Musk and saved the planet at the same time.
Well, Dinesh D'Souza has announced, and I guess apologized, for his documentary 2,000 Mules, which claimed that there were 2,000 human beings acting as mules, meaning transporting stuff.
There were ballots, two ballot boxes.
And the claim was that they were not all legitimate votes and that they were cheating.
But people like me asked for a little bit more evidence because I wasn't sure that all the dots had been connected.
And I asked, can we get some kind of evidence that these people are really doing something wrong?
Or is it just people who picked up their relatives' ballots and mailed them?
What's going on?
So then I guess the validation was the cell phone data to show that certain cell phones were near certain boxes at certain times.
But apparently the data was bullshit.
So Dinesh, I think, only recently found out that the data he was trusting came from a source that he should not have trusted.
And so, the strongest part of the evidence for the 2,000 mules has been debunked by the maker of the documentary.
I'm not sure what to think about this.
On one hand, I think, hey, that was a big mistake.
On the other hand, the fact that he's saying it in public, I have a lot of respect for that.
So the fact that he's taking it on the chin and just...
I think he's just putting it right out there.
I did this wrong.
This was a mistake.
I apologize.
I don't know.
It certainly...
It certainly makes me feel better than if it hadn't happened.
But I would like to make this one comment for those of you who are watching who can predict things well.
Do you know how many of you asked me to comment on 2,000 mules?
And how many of you said, why are you not admitting that 2,000 mules proves everything we've been suspecting?
And I kept saying, it might, but I'm not feeling comfortable.
That the data has quite made that case.
So I'm going to do a victory lap for having been consistently skeptical and not asking you to believe that.
Now, I didn't debunk it.
I didn't debunk it, because I don't have information to debunk it.
I was rather not confident that you should believe it.
And that turned out to be the right instinct.
So, if you're keeping track, who's good on the BS spotting?
I'm going to add that one to my list.
So it turns out that OpenA is weighing on making money from advertising in chat GPT.
Now, as Tucker Carlson recently said on the video, If you're in the news business and you take advertising, you're not in the news business.
I'm paraphrasing.
This is my own framing of it.
But if you're in the news business and your business makes money from advertisement, you're not in the news business for long.
Because the people doing the advertising, Big Pharma, for example, allegedly is more interested in making sure you don't say bad things about them So they become a major advertiser, and then if something comes up in their domain, well, there's a lot of things you could talk about, and maybe that one you ignore.
So allegedly, according to Tucker, who's been in the news business for longer than some people have been alive, says absolutely, positively, that's what's going on.
That the news business is tainted by the advertisement.
So what happens if AI also becomes tainted by advertising?
And how bad could it be?
I'm now going to do a little demonstration for you.
To show you how bad it could be if advertisements affect search engines.
You ready for this?
This will be a live demonstration.
Now, it's based on the fact that earlier today, I got a message that a journalist was trying to find somebody, anybody, who also had spasmodic dysphonia, the voice condition that RFK Jr. has, and I used to have.
And it was looking for anybody who'd had it, who'd been cured of it, and couldn't find anybody.
And I thought to myself, how could you not find me?
I'm a public figure.
I've been featured in People Magazine for getting over this.
I've been in, I don't know how many publications have talked about me being cured of it.
I've posted on it.
I've talked about it on social media.
I've done interviews on it.
Obviously, if you Google me, it's going to come up and say, it's curable, and here's this guy who cured it, right?
Want to test it?
So if I Google me, a public figure, who obviously is speaking correctly, you can tell I don't have that spasmodic dysphonia, do you think it will say, yes, there are a number of cures?
A notable one would be this cartoonist guy who's disgraced, but cured.
What do you think it'll say?
Let's try.
So we'll go to Google, and the search term, which I already put in, was, who has been cured of spasmodic dysphonia?
Who has been cured of spasmodic dysphonia?
So the first sentence should be, well, a number of people, and one of them would be cartoonist Scott Adams and some other names, for example, right?
Here's the first sentence.
There is no cure for spasmodic dysphonia.
What's your head doing right now?
You're listening to me in real time.
I'm not the only person who was cured of this.
I met lots of people who were cured of it.
I talked to them personally.
What's the second sentence?
But treatments can help reduce the symptoms.
Treatments.
Treatments.
What kind of treatments do you think?
Do you think the treatment would be somebody who spends a lot of money to advertise?
Could it be a big pharma?
Somebody who advertises on Google?
Let's check.
But treatments can help reduce symptoms.
The first one listed is Botox.
Botox.
It's the first thing.
Listen.
Injections of this bacterial toxin into the vocal cords can help for three to four months.
The effect may need to be repeated.
Oh, guess what?
Guess what?
It's a treatment that you have to do forever.
And at the time I was doing it, I think it cost $9,000 per treatment every three months.
Now, I wouldn't have paid that.
The insurance would have.
But $9,000 for some injections.
Do you know what the injections are like?
The injection goes through the front of your throat to get to the vocal cords on the back of your throat.
Yeah.
But that would be so painful that they give you a shot to numb the front of your throat because otherwise you would go insane if they put a needle big enough to reach the back of your throat through the front of your throat.
Because the real one is a big needle.
So they give you a little needle to numb you.
And then do you know how they find the right place to put it?
They have you go, ah, and then when it sounds about right on their little device, they shove it in.
So they don't even see where they're putting it.
They do it by feel.
Not even feel, by sound and device.
So sometimes they get the right place, and sometimes they don't.
If they don't, then your next three or four months, you don't speak well, because they don't get the right place.
So my vocal cords were a little non-standard, so when I tried it, it didn't always work.
So I decided to stop doing it because I knew that if I were continuing to do the Botox, if I were to find something else that worked, I wouldn't know because it would mask the effect.
So I took the baller approach to discontinue everything that allowed me to communicate with other human beings for as long as it took to find something that worked.
And I said, guess what?
Google Alerts My Google alerts for this condition.
And then every time there was some alleged, you know, treatment or some idea, I would get an alert and check it.
One of them was a surgeon, Dr. Gerald Burke, down at USC. And he was sort of like the big expert in this field.
And allegedly he had a surgery to cure it, which I took and got cured, as did a number of other people.
At the time, he claimed it was about 85% effective, and 15%, he didn't get the result he wanted.
Now, 85% means 85% had a big improvement.
Not always as much as I got, but a big improvement.
The other things it lists are speech therapy and psychological counseling and some medications that I've never heard of and some technology that makes you speak louder.
It says other treatments include surgery.
Oh, here it is.
Here it is.
So after one, two, three, four, five, six things, it mentions surgery, and it mentions the one I got, and it says other.
It's just other.
And it doesn't say if it works.
Unfortunately, it's a condition that providers can't cure.
I am cured.
I am talking to you with a voice which has no trace of spasmodic dysphonia.
It is curable.
Many, many people have been cured.
I know them personally.
But the search engine tells you that Big Pharma has the answer.
And that's not a cure.
You'll have to take it forever.
Do you see where I'm going with this?
You see what world you live in, right?
If Google is your source of truth and they take advertisement from Big Pharma, is it a coincidence that their answer is that Big Pharma is the only way to go and there is no cure?
Now, let's try Grok.
You ready for this?
Let's try Grok.
I ask Grok, who has been cured of spasmodic dysphonia?
Grok says, while there is no definitive cure for it in the traditional sense, some individuals have experienced significant improvement or resolution of symptoms through various treatments.
And then it calls me out by name.
And it says, Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, has publicly stated that he was cured of spasmodic dysphonia through surgery performed by Dr. Gerald S. Burke, MD. The medical community generally does not use the term cured for the condition because treatments are managing symptoms.
Does it sound like I'm managing my symptoms?
Or am I just talking?
I'm not managing my symptoms.
I don't have any symptoms.
Now, do you see the difference?
Grok is built as a device that's trying to give you truth.
Do you think that Google was trying to give me truth?
It doesn't look like it.
It looks like it gave me the pharma's best answer.
Right?
Now, I just did this right in front of you.
You can reproduce this where you are.
And I think that perplexity didn't get it right or did.
Yes, I am cured.
This is a cure.
Now, I've been erased from the internet.
When I first got cured, I agreed to do a publicity tour, and the purpose of it was to make sure that Google couldn't miss me if anybody googled spasmodic dysphonia.
The idea was that since I'm a celebrity, And I'm cured.
That anybody who was looking for spasmodic dysphonia and cure, I would pop up.
Guess who pops up?
RFK Jr. who isn't cured.
And then an advertisement for Botox.
That's your world.
So you tell me, if they do advertisements and chat GPT, there's no point never using it again.
There's no point in using an AI that takes advertisement.
Because any question you ask in that domain won't be trustworthy.
They'll have to manage the answer to keep the advertisers happy.
Just like this.
How many of you are having your head explode right now?
Because usually you don't get to see how clear this pharma distortion is.
This is the cleanest, clearest example you'll ever see.
And by the way, I knew that the experiment would turn out this way before I did it.
Right?
That's how obvious and clear and bad it is.
Yeah, asymptomatic.
Exactly.
Well, Daniel Penny is, I guess the jury is going to be deciding today, unless they have.
Maybe they're already done.
Daniel Penny doesn't have a verdict yet, right?
They're just resting their case today.
And apparently he was greeted with shouts of guilty, and there was protesters outside as he went in.
Man, I'm going to say it again.
There's going to be a whole lot of my opinion of the country of America that depends on this verdict.
So it's not like the jurors aren't listening to me, but maybe there's some court of appeals later.
I need this to go the right way.
This really, really needs to go the right way.
I'm not going to be comfortable living in this country.
Otherwise.
And you know what?
I think men should actually go on a strike and say, if you're in trouble, good luck.
Good luck, ladies.
I want every woman on that jury, because I assume there are women on the jury, I want them to know that they just killed a thousand women.
Because that's the man that didn't step in.
If you get this wrong, my head is just going to fucking explode.
And I'm definitely not going to be helping anybody who's in trouble.
I don't want to go to jail.
Crazy.
Crazy.
All right.
Now, that's probably not true.
I probably would, but I wouldn't like it.
According to the world of statistics, 1.4 million American women do OnlyFans, but only like 0.01% of them make money at it.
1.4 million.
So 1.4 million of the probably the most sexable women in the United States just became kind of...
So there's the top 1.4.
And then you take the social media influencers out.
It feels to me that women above a certain level of attractiveness have taken themselves off the dating field.
As in, if you're involved in these worlds, I can't really have you involved in sort of the family traditional world.
I don't know what happens when you take the top 10% of all the attractive people and say, these ones you can't have sex with, or you won't want to, based on when you find out what they're up to.
Yeah, online dating, and this kind of made the whole dating thing look like a waste of time.
But luckily, as I already told you, in the Dilbert Reborn comic, There is a solution coming.
So Dogbert has started a little startup in the Dilbert comic in which he's creating add-on genitalia for robots.
Because, you know, robots come without any genitalia.
And...
Men and women are not doing so well with each other lately, so you're going to need some kind of an outlet.
Hey, don't write it off yet.
It'll be quite reasonably priced.
Anyway, Peter Doocy reports they're getting new information about the dinner that Trudeau had with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, and according to people who were there, the following conversation happened.
That Trudeau told Trump that Trump's new tariffs would kill the Canadian economy, if he goes ahead and puts them on there.
And Trump allegedly joked to him that if Canada can't survive without ripping off the U.S. $100 billion a year, then maybe Canada should become the 51st state and Trudeau should become its governor.
Come on.
How much do you love that president?
Come on.
You love that.
You love it.
Was it polite of Trump to say that?
Probably not.
Was it diplomatic for Trump to say that?
Not too diplomatic.
Was it useful for Trump to say that?
Probably not.
Was it funny for Trump to say that?
Yes.
Therefore, approved.
Approved.
Now, it was more than funny.
It was more like reminding him who was the big dog, which I just love.
I just love the fact that he did that.
Now, it does have use.
It does have use.
He's telling him, I'm much bigger than you, and if I want to threaten you economically, you're going to have to go along with it, because you don't have any hand to play.
Well done, negotiator-in-chief Trump.
Trump is really testing out the Trump effect.
Now, the Trump effect, as I like to call it, Is when people are sort of putting their own house in order before Trump gets there.
Because they know he's going to force them to go back to common sense, and they want to get there before he forces them.
So Trump just put out a big threat to Hamas to release the prisoners before he gets signed into office, January 20th.
What do you call it?
What's the word?
Not signed into office.
What did he do on January 20th?
The word is when you're officially signed into office, you're...
What the hell is that word?
Inauguration.
Thank you.
Inauguration.
So here's what's funny about that.
He said that if they don't give the prisoners back by then, they'll be all hell to pay in caps.
And he'll hit them harder than anybody has been hit in the long and storied history of the United States of America.
Now, do you like that idea?
Do you like that threat?
Here's the funny part.
If you didn't catch the funny part...
Biden has one last chance to do something to recover a little bit of his reputation, which is now more tattered than anybody who's ever left office except Nixon, and he was pushed down by a coup.
So the only thing that Biden has, the only thing he has is if it's a long shot, it's a Hail Mary, but if he can get those hostages back before he's out of office, Well, if those hostages come back now, before Biden is out of office, Trump gets to say it was because of him, because he threatened him.
So he just removed from Biden the only hope that Biden had of doing a positive thing before he left office.
He left him nothing.
Do you know the movie 300?
There's that famous scene where whoever's the hero of the movie is a take from them everything.
Leave them nothing.
He didn't leave them a crumb.
There was one crumb he could have left them.
Well, why don't you see if we get those hostages back?
Because it's winding down anyway, you know.
It's winding down.
So you kind of suspect sometime in the next several weeks would be a good time for them to come back under the, you know, just normal conditions of how things work.
But I just love the fact that he just completely took that away from Biden.
Biden has no chance of getting anything.
Leonidas, thank you.
Leonidas.
Meanwhile, South Korea has allegedly declared martial law, which made all of us say, what?
Martial law?
South Korea?
Is there some news that maybe I should have been following for the last several weeks that I'm not aware of?
What the hell is happening in South Korea?
So, allegedly, there's some anti-government forces that have been too active in shutting down their progress, but it looks like he's just going domestic fascist against the opposing party.
So, let's keep an eye on this one, but it doesn't look like good news.
Maybe we'll never know what is really behind it.
It could be some trying to catch some North Korean spy or something.
I'm not sure we'll know exactly why this happened.
Could be one of those things where it's a head fake and there's some other thing going on.
Anyway, according to Rasmussen, 49% favor pardoning the January Sixers.
But most people, I think two-thirds or so, want them to be on an individual basis.
Let's see if I got that right.
No, yeah, 67% want the pardons to be on a case-by-case basis.
That was my opinion until...
Today.
My current opinion is let them all go.
Because there would not be a single person at that event had not the election been stolen and had not everything looked sketchy.
Now, here's the thing.
If you say to me, Scott, can you prove the election was stolen?
My answer is no, I don't need to.
I can prove that you ran an election in 2020 in which it looked stolen and we couldn't tell the difference.
If you do that, it's your problem if there's a riot.
It's your problem if somebody gets hurt.
Responsibility is on whoever puts together an election system that the public can't trust.
If the public could have trusted our system, and then I saw these hooligans go and protest and cause trouble, I would have said, you damn hooligans, you know we can trust this system.
What are you doing?
You're making America worse.
You're hurting people for no reason.
You go to jail, you assholes.
That's what I would say.
But we don't have an election system that is credible.
And we knew it.
And the people in charge knew it.
And they ran that system again, like they always do.
And it was sketchy as hell, the way it came out.
I don't know if it was cheated or not, but it looked like it.
I can tell you it looked like it.
So if you're going to give me an election system that we told you was sketchy, and then you give me a result that looks exactly like a stolen election, no, it's your fault if somebody gets hurt.
It's your fucking fault if somebody gets hurt.
So now I want every one of the January Sixers released, including the violent ones.
Including the violent ones.
Because if that election had actually been stolen, I wouldn't have been so against violence.
Let me say that again.
If there were proof that the election had been stolen, we don't have that.
There is not proof of the election being stolen.
But if there had been, I would have been in favor of some violence.
Now, don't do any violence.
So if you see some problems in the next election, don't do any violence.
So let me say I don't want to encourage violence.
However, looking at the past instead of the future, if it had happened and we knew that the election had been rigged, I wouldn't be in favor of violence against the police officers.
They were just doing their jobs.
But yeah, if you try to overthrow my country, violence will happen.
That's what violence is for.
Let me be as clear as possible.
Violence has a purpose.
It's to keep the country together.
We use violence against criminals.
We use violence against people to attack us.
If somebody had used violence against somebody who had hypothetically tried to run a coup in this country, I would not care about that one bit.
If the violence was aimed at the right people.
Not the law enforcement.
Law enforcement was just doing law enforcement stuff.
So I don't approve of that.
But I do say that the cause of it is not the people who attend it.
The cause is the people who ran an election that looked to all of us, at least all of us who are watching this, it looked rigged.
I don't have proof of it, but it sure looked rigged.
So yes, I say pardon every one of them, and don't even look at them individually.
I do it on the first day, and I would not look at any one of them individually.
Boy, will people complain, and I don't care.
Well, The View continues to embarrass itself, so I guess management is coming down pretty hard on The View.
Because they made co-host Sonny Hostin read yet another legal note.
Is this the fifth or sixth time they've had to do it?
Regarding comments she made about Pete Hegseth.
And then Whoopi also related to the view being crazy.
Whoopi said that we shouldn't call it a lie That Hunter Biden said he wouldn't pardon Hunter, and then he did.
He's like, well, I don't think we should call it a lie.
That's almost the exact definition of a lie.
A thing you know you're going to do when you say the opposite multiple times as clearly as possible.
What would be the other word for that?
I'm not aware of it.
Anyway.
So Whoopi wants people to stop accusing Biden of lying for saying he wouldn't pardon his son.
I think maybe your argument is that he meant it when he said it, but in the weight of larger issues, maybe he changed his mind.
No, he didn't.
We don't have to read minds to know that nobody's going to let their son go to prison if they can simply sign a piece of paper.
I would have hated Biden if he let his own son go to jail and he didn't need to.
I mean, I don't love him as a politician already.
To me, he has the lowest level of respect.
But if he had not protected his own family, when it would be easy to do so, I mean, that would be even less respect.
So, it was legal.
It was possible.
Of course he was going to do it.
Of course.
Stephen A. Smith has some interesting points about this.
He says people feel like fools supporting the Democratic Party, and he thinks they should feel scammed.
So the whole Joe Biden is fine, there's nothing wrong with his brain.
Oh, yes, there is.
And then you get to, I'm never going to pardon my son.
Oh, yes, I did.
And if you want to go further, think about the fact that Trump was impeached for trying to look into the very thing that Hunter just got pardoned for.
Why did Hunter get pardoned all the way back to 2014, which would not include, includes the gun charges, but it goes way further back?
Why did Why would they need to pardon him unless Trump was on the right path when he was looking into investigating?
So this goes all the way back to the fake impeachment.
The Democrats could not have disgraced their party and their voters any harder than they did.
They really made their voters look like idiots.
They did.
Because they fooled them with something that didn't fool a single Republican.
How would you like to be in that situation?
There wasn't a single Republican Who was fooled by anything they tried.
But all of them were fooled.
Every Republican thought that Joe Biden looked fine.
His brain is fine.
And yet every Republican said, what are you looking at?
There's clearly something wrong.
Then they ran Kamala Harris and they convinced themselves that she was like the next coming and she'd be great.
And every Republican said, what are you looking at?
She might be the worst candidate of all time, of all candidates ever.
So, this is yet again, you know, this reversal on the pardon from Biden.
And the media is talking about how this is tainting his positive reputation.
Tainting Biden's positive reputation...
Biden is the most famous liar in all of politics and has been for 60 years or however long he's been there.
50 years?
He's the most famous serial liar.
He's famous for lying.
It's not even something he does also.
He's famous for lying.
And it seems pretty clear to me that he was involved in some sketchy stuff with the family business.
So he might be the most famous, corrupt, lying politician of all time.
And the media did such a job of shining his turd that when it all fell apart and you couldn't protect it anymore, the media acts like it was a new change.
Huh, things were going so well until that bad part at the end.
No, it was just the media making you think that the biggest liar and crook we've ever seen in that office was almost angelic.
Good job, media.
According to the conversation, James Goodwin, there's a study about the COVID lockdowns, says it was bad for young people's brain structures.
So adolescents, their brains did not develop in the way that they normally would.
They used MRI to look at them.
I guess the brains folded differently than normal.
But here's my question.
It does make sense that young people would be more affected because their brains are more likely to be in a maturing state.
But don't you think that everybody got totally changed by the pandemic?
I can speak for myself.
My brain is completely different after the pandemic, meaning that even my preferences for things changed.
I mean, I'm not even the same person.
So I think that the damage from the pandemic is certainly in the young.
And maybe mostly.
But boy, did it affect everybody.
That's my take.
Would most of you say the same thing?
That the pandemic gave you a permanent change and not necessarily a good one.
It's definitely permanent in my case.
And Axios says that...
This is funny.
Axios actually said that Biden sacrificed the moral high ground.
The moral high ground, Biden actually ran on being a racist.
He ran on being a racist and saying he would be anti-white and he would make sure that he didn't hire a white person for a vice president.
And then he pushed DEI and the fine people hoax.
He was the biggest lying, racist piece of shit and a crook that the country has ever known.
And Axios refers to that as abandoning the high ground.
Abandoning the high ground.
Anyway.
And even Jon Stewart just totally mocked the Democrats for all their statements about nobody's above the law.
And he played the compilation clip.
Yeah.
So even the Democrats are embarrassed by this.
And of course, as all the smart people have noted, that the pardon of Hunter is really a larger play to make sure there's not a criminal investigation that could find out about all of his Biden family crimes in Ukraine and China and who knows where else. that the pardon of Hunter is really a larger play So the real play here was not just to protect Hunter.
The real play was to protect the whole Biden family and the Democrat Party in general from what is, I would say, somewhat obviously a criminal enterprise.
I don't have proof of it.
But I would say that what we've seen so far would make it appear obvious to me that it was a criminal operation.
And this might be one way to protect it.
Chuck Todd seems to have turned on Biden for his selfishness.
He says that Biden deciding to run for president, this is actually a pretty good point from Chuck Todd, when he knew that his son had these problems, And he knew that it would put his son right in the middle of the arena.
So not only did Biden run for president knowing it would affect his family negatively, but it destroyed the Democrat Party and almost the country.
He is clearly the worst president of all time.
It was bad for his family.
Completely destroyed the Democrat Party.
There's nothing left, really.
And America almost went down, too.
He almost took down the strongest country in the world from incompetence and selfishness and crime and racism.
So, worst president of all time?
Yes.
very easily the worst president of all time.
Anyway.
Anyway, And they're pretty sure that he had all that loyalty and honesty.
So Joe Manchin has called for Biden to pardon Trump to sort of clean things up and balance it after the pardon of Hunter.
Now, I'm almost on board with that, except the pardon that Hunter got was unprecedented.
It covered things that weren't even mentioned, things that were further back in time than the crimes that were on the table.
That was unprecedented.
Do you think that Biden would give Trump a completely unprecedented, from the time you came down the golden staircase till now, everything you did is fine?
No.
Should he?
Probably.
Probably should.
Is there any chance of it?
No, there's no chance of it.
Because the Democrats are not an honorable, honest, high ground kind of organization.
We'll be lucky if they don't try to kill them.
There's a report in the National Pulse that Canada is actually boosting their own border security because of Trump's threats.
Do you think that's true?
I'm not entirely sure that's true, but maybe.
I see people criticizing Operation Warp Speed and Trump because Trump says it was a success, but I think that most of you would say it wasn't.
Now, did you know that there's now a...
There's now a report.
That's coming out about the COVID situation from the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.
Now, the Select Subcommittee is not a bunch of Democrats, as far as I can tell.
Is it all Republicans?
Give me a fact check on this.
Is the Congressional Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, is it all Republicans?
Because they have kind of a Republican take on it, so I think it is.
Here's what they found.
They said that the virus probably came out of the Wuhan lab.
It was funded by an American group, U.S. taxpayers, through EcoHealth Alliance.
And that the rules and the mandates, like to stay six feet apart and shut everything down, was not based on any kind of science, as you imagined.
And mostly that was just bad and wrecked the economy, destroyed small businesses, and left kids with massive learning loss and mental health problems.
And that the vaccine did not prevent transmission.
But here's what it also said.
Now, this is not my claim.
This is what it said.
And these are the Republicans that looked into everything to see what was a lie and what was true.
So their claim is that Operation Warp Speed was a tremendous success and a model to build upon in the future.
The vaccines, which are better characterized as therapeutics, so they're being honest that they did not stop any transmission to speak of.
But as therapeutics, they say, undoubtedly, quote, saved millions of lives by diminishing the likelihood of severe disease and death.
All right?
Does that sound like what you believe is true?
Because I think most of you don't believe that's true.
And I don't know if it's true.
All I know is it's something I read from somebody I don't know.
So I don't know one way or the other.
But the official story is this.
The official story is that the vaccinations were a huge success.
But you're not there, are you?
Probably none of you.
But your Republicans are.
The people you vote for say it's a huge success.
A huge success.
Saved millions.
At the expense of mental health of children and stuff.
If you care about that.
Anyway, so I don't know what's true, but I want you to know what your team says is true.
So if you're on the Republican team, your team leaders are saying that the vaccinations were a huge success and something we should do again, but without the close downs and without the mandatory stuff.
Are you pleased with that?
If it's not mandatory.
I don't know.
If it's not mandatory, it feels a lot different.
Speaking of...
I have to get back to Hunter for a second.
If you're not familiar with Mike Benz and his characterization of what the U.S. has been trying to do in Ukraine since 2014 and before...
You don't understand anything about the Hunter Biden story.
Your minimum entry to even know what's going on is to know Mike Benz's take.
Now, I'll do my best to summarize it, but you have to hear his version for the convincing version.
So apparently America has always been basically a robber baron country.
We try to bully and conquer and overthrow any country that we can get their resources or get some kind of leverage.
So basically we are and have been the bad guys always.
That's the first thing you need to know.
America is not the high ground.
America is the lowest of the low ground.
We're in it for the money of the richest Americans, not everybody's money, and that the government is basically a puppet of the rich people.
And what they really want to do is get Russia out of the energy business so they can have all of that for themselves.
Now, that would be good for America if you could actually get away with that and cripple Russia, which is a big question mark.
I don't know if we can't.
But if you could, you can imagine it'd be good for America and really, really good for the rich people.
Especially in the energy business.
So, did you know that the US government, the CIA, ran a coup to overthrow Ukraine and we've been moving...
We lied to the Soviet Union a long time ago when we said we would not move NATO one step closer to Russia as long as they allowed Germany to reunite.
So they said yes on reuniting.
We said yes, we won't move NATO. And then we lied about it four years later and we just started moving NATO and bases and missiles and basically creating a military front right on their front door.
Then we used that leverage and that power to hope that we could simply run a coup and take over one of Russia's biggest assets, Ukraine, which has gigantic You know, mineral deposits in at least two places.
Now, key to that, according to Benz, was Burisma was going to become sort of America's fake private entity.
So it would act like it's a big private company.
But it would be doing what America wanted it to do if everything worked out.
So it would be the answer to Russia's big state company, Gazprom.
So they'd have some counterbalance there, and they would try to put Gazprom out of business and take all their gas and pipeline and oil business.
But Russia, of course not wanting us to steal all their business, did some military intervention and in a few different phases they got Crimea and the Donbass.
So if you look at the areas that Russia controls now, they've got About half of all the mineral and mining resource rights that had belonged to Burisma.
So the war in Ukraine is largely about getting Burisma back in business, reclaiming as much of their mineral rights and territories as possible so that we can use warfare, lawfare, and economics to crush Russia for our profits.
And that Hunter was probably a key member of the CAA larger plan for controlling Burisma and overthrowing Ukraine and destroying Russia.
Now, that's not the story you hear on the news, is it?
So, if you're not listening to people like Glenn Greenberg and Glenn Greenwald and Michael Schellenberger and Mike Benz, the people who actually have studied it and know all the players, you don't know what's going on, right?
The whole Ukraine thing was dirty from top to bottom.
And it wasn't necessarily for your benefit or mine.
It was for the benefit of rich people, basically.
And then the rich people got the military people to say it's a good idea because they could make money too.
So the Bidens were making money in Ukraine.
Democrats were making money.
The arms people were making money.
And the energy people were trying to make money.
And that was your war.
And that so far, 600,000 Ukrainians have died for us to try to make some more extra money over there.
We are the bad guys entirely.
Just entirely.
Now, here's the complicated part.
Only the bad guys survive.
So I'd also like to survive.
And it's true that countries that are growing, meaning conquering and colonizing, are stronger than ones that are shrinking or trying to stick to themselves because they'll get conquered or colonized.
So on one hand, America has been very, very bad with this Ukraine stuff, and not the first time.
We've been very, very bad with, what, overthrowing 80 countries so far and, you know, don't even get me started about Columbus.
So we've been a very, very bad, bad country for 250 years.
But that's why we survived.
Because we were colonizing like crazy and growing and building our army and making sure nobody could conquer us.
We had advantages, like two oceans that really kept us safe.
So that helped a lot.
But I'm still pro-America, in case you wondered, but it is still nonetheless fair to say that America has been a bully and a thief for all of its time, I think.
And we try to paint it as we're the moral ones with the high ground, and nothing like that's true.
It is true, however, that if America does well, it's probably good for most of the world.
So that's the only part that I feel comfortable with, that having one strong America that's the dominant superpower, it's not fair.
And we'll definitely do some super dickish things if we have all the power.
But it might be better than all of the alternatives, because almost everything else would be worse.
So I'm still pro-America.
But we have to be honest.
We have to be honest about who we are and what we do, because otherwise we're just going to be confused and gaslit and we're not going to know what's going on.
So yeah, I think that Trump can solve Ukraine.
Do you know why he can solve Ukraine?
Here's the fast answer why Trump can solve Ukraine.
He's going to treat it like what it actually is.
That's all you need.
You just have to tell the truth about what anybody is doing there, and then you can negotiate.
But if you say stuff like, oh, Russia is trying to steal their democracy, well, you got nothing.
Oh, Putin's a monster.
Well, you got nothing.
Oh, we can't let Russia turn into the old Soviet Union.
You got nothing.
You got nothing.
Here's how you could turn that into something you could negotiate.
Looks like you guys want to make money on energy.
We want to make money on energy, too.
We want to compete with you.
Here's what we think you could ever capture militarily.
Here's what we think we probably would end up with if we keep fighting.
Let's just sort of split it in the middle because we don't know exactly how it would go, but you keep what you got, we'll keep what we got, and we won't do any more NATO expansion, but you're going to have to get out of Syria.
For example.
And you're going to have to stop boosting Iran.
For example.
And by the way, if you want a warm water port, we're open to it.
So what Trump can do is simply treat it like what it is.
It's an economic situation with a military layer.
And now it's part of several military and economic situations that are all connected through some kind of Russian or U.S. connection.
So Trump can simply treat them for what they are, economics with a military filter, and just say, what do you need?
What do we need?
What's the best either one of us can do?
Let's stop shooting each other and see if we can make it work without the killing.
I think he can do that.
It's all there.
I mean, it's all doable.
And all the right people are involved at this point.
Vaccine efficacy proof is a thesis as proving...
That didn't make any sense.
That's a bad analogy.
What is this big chart somebody keeps sending to me?
Public from scratch, less than 50 years old.
So it's a map showing that the European Union basically hasn't created any big tech startups or basically anything successful in 50 years.
And the U.S. has been crushing it for 50 years.
True.
All right.
So, China is banning the exports of some rare minerals that are important, like gallium and germanium and antimony.
Now, if you've never heard of antimony, that's when ants get divorced and one of them has a job.
And the ant with the job will have to pay antimony to the other ant.
It's probably not what that means.
I think it's actually a rare earth material.
But they have lots of military applications And that's probably in response to the Biden administration putting restrictions on chips sent to China.
So semiconductor chips.
Just the News is reporting that we won't be sending them our good stuff.
So I thought we already didn't send them our good stuff, but there must be more good stuff that we were sending that we're not.
Then China is responding.
I feel like it would be easier for the U.S. to find other sources of gallium, germanium, and antimony than it would be for China to get these high-end chips.
So I feel like we still have a negotiating edge on that.
There's a new scariest drone you've ever heard of in your life.
It can't be jammed.
And it's a little X-wing.
So it's like a little...
The wings cross each other like an X, just like Star Wars.
And they're small.
They're, you know, sort of a hand-launched kind of size thing.
And they can go 62 miles...
Wait, you'll see the top speed.
It can go 136 miles an hour in speed.
It can travel for 62 miles.
And the onboard AI gives that electronic warfare immunity, meaning so it avoids the jamming, allowing an operator control of the drone without a continuous data connection.
I don't know how the operator could operate it without a continuous data connection.
And anyway, but somehow they do it.
And it's also jamming resistant and I don't remember if it had AI on it or a facial recognition.
Anyway, human remains in control of the critical decisions.
But you've already seen that there's all these strange drones that are buzzing our military bases and we don't know who's doing it.
And last night there were some big sightings of large-sized drones, people said, and nobody knew where they were coming from.
Now we've got these.
Aren't we going to have a wave of terrorist murders using this exact drone?
Now, I think these are made in Germany, so I don't know how hard they would be to get, but are you telling me that I couldn't buy one of these if I were in a country where they could sell them?
I couldn't buy one of these and know where there's going to be some big political rally and know exactly where the lectern is And you see Trump standing behind the glass.
The glass protects him from the sides, doesn't protect him from the top.
But if you're a drone, you can literally go right above it and then straight down.
How in the world are you going to keep one of these drones from taking out a political leader at the lectern in front of a big crowd of people?
It's made for exactly that.
So I think the days of our leaders appearing in public are probably over.
We might have one year left because Trump is a little braver than most.
We might have one year left where a president can appear in public because of these.
How are you going to stop it?
I don't know how you'd stop it.
Anyway...
Did you know that Rachel Maddow was once a protege of Keith Olbermann?
And Keith Olbermann was important in getting her job and really pushed for her and helped her become one of the biggest people in TV? I have mixed feelings about that.
I have mixed feelings.
Number one, I don't think Rachel Maddow is good for the country.
But number two, she's very successful.
She's a female and a lesbian.
And if Keith was a mentor for her career and really went to bat for her and made it work, I'm just going to compliment him.
From what we know, that looks like just really good private work.
Because I don't remember him bragging about it.
I've never heard of this before.
So if he helped a person who was not on the, let's say, not in the mainstream channel of who the network might have considered, and he boosted her to the point of getting her a $30 million a year career and now $25 million a year, he's not as happy with her at the moment.
But I'm quite impressed with that.
I'm very impressed that he took interest in somebody who was outside his own little defined area and pushed until she succeeded.
I like that.
I think I'll end on the positive note.
Apparently, he's not as happy at the moment, but I like that he did that.
Anyway, That's all we got?
Celebrate DEI? Yeah, you know, I don't mind if it happens on an individual basis.
See, DEI on an individual basis doesn't feel like DEI. If you do it on an individual, like one person is mentoring somebody, that feels like it's because that person has the skill and may have been overlooked otherwise.
So that's what it feels like.
She obviously had the skill.
She pulled it off.
Anyway, See me today on Newsmax at 4.15 Eastern Time.
I'll try to entertain you there.
And I'm going to talk to the folks on Locals Privately right now.
