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, Controlling Personal Reality, Denmark 5-Minute City, Grok Image Creation, Nuclear Launch Code, TikTok Content Bias, Ultrasound Cancer Cure, Kamala 2028, Daniel Penny Trial, BLM Hawk Newsome, Luigi Mangione, San Francisco Violence & Crime, Pete Hegseth, RFK Jr., Syrian Military Assets, Birthright Citizenship Executive Order, J6 Committee Retribution Concern, Liz Cheney, Democrat Retribution Fears, President Biden, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
Everybody got sound?
Everybody got video?
I think we're doing well.
We're doing well, aren't we?
Good.
Well, if you'd like to take this experience up to the levels that you can't even understand with your tiny, shiny human brain, all you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tank or jails, just a tiny canteen jugger, flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the domain here today, the thing that makes everything better.
Go.
Well, I think you want to talk about all the UFO, UAP drone sightings in New Jersey.
Okay.
Well, I've got an update on There's something in the sky, and they don't know what the hell it is, and for reasons we can't understand, there's no military action, and they're pretty sure it's not a risk.
They don't know what it is, but they're pretty sure it's not causing trouble.
But they don't know what it is.
It might be the size of a car.
Everything about this drone story sounds wrong.
I feel like somebody, somebody must know exactly what those drones are.
Are they just not talking?
I think that's what's happening.
Anyway, apparently the FDA might outlaw food dyes within a few weeks, according to the New York Post.
That feels like a good step.
I feel like if the FDA... Outlaws Food Dies, that RFK Jr. is going to look smarter.
What do you think of that?
Because this is happening under the Biden administration, and it seems to be perfectly aligned with RFK Jr.'s view of the world.
So that is just the best welcome, Matt, RFK Jr. could possibly have, to have something that's just right in the middle of his sweet spot.
Adopted by the other team, which actually was his old team or maybe his future team.
There's a study, according to New Atlas, that they found that when twins are studied, the ones that eat the most fruit and vegetables have less depression.
So, are you surprised that eating well is good for your brain?
No, because as I teach you every single day, your brain and your body are the same tool.
If you let your brain, if you let your body get into disrepair, or you don't exercise, you don't eat the right foods, your brain will not work as well as it should.
You'll be depressed.
You'll be dumb.
So make sure you get your fruit and vegetables.
Now, of course, in five minutes, there'll be another study that says the only thing that's good for you is eating meat, and only meat.
I know.
I have a suspicion that if evolution is true, that we really evolved, doesn't it make sense that we're not all in the same exact place, evolutionary-wise?
Yes.
Doesn't that make sense?
How could every human be right exactly in the same evolutionary place?
Because that would mean evolution doesn't work.
There should be a whole bunch of humans Who are starting to already move in another direction that will become a distinct species?
If there's none, that would suggest that evolution is not real.
But one of the things I think we might already be bifurcating, or already did, is what foods are most healthy.
I feel like for some humans, just eating meat all day is the best thing they could do.
You know, the Jordan Peterson thing?
But I don't think that's for everybody.
I feel like at a very basic biological level, some people respond better to fruits and vegetables, and some people like me better.
It just feels like we shouldn't be looking for one diet that's right for everybody.
Anyway, according to the Marijuana Herald, which I know you all read, Psychedelics are linked to enhanced sexual function even months after you use them.
So LSD, psilocybin, it improves your sexual function for months.
But here's why it does it.
It makes your partner look more attractive for months.
So long after the psychedelic effect is worn off, your partner looks more attractive and your body works better.
Now, that leads me to the interesting question, which is, is reality completely subjective?
Because once you do the psychedelics, you have the feeling that life is, reality is subjective.
But what happens if once you learn that reality is subjective, because that's what the psychedelics teach you, What happens if you start changing your reality after you're off the psychedelics because you now realize that your reality is subjective?
So what would be the first thing you would do if you learned that reality was subjective?
What's the first thing you would do?
You would make your partner, your mate, More attractive than ever.
Right?
Because breaking up is the worst thing to do.
What you'd like is that you really, really are into your partner and vice versa.
So what if the people who do the psychedelics are not responding chemically to some, you know, afterglow chemical thing?
What if they figured out how to author the simulation?
Because I think that's what the psychedelics do.
I think they teach you to control reality, but only the reality that you experience, because it's all subjective.
So, I don't know.
This is a suggestive Maybe people learn how to control the reality once they've had a psychedelic experience.
That was my experience.
The one time I did psychedelics when I was in my 20s, I could see that the world was whatever I wanted it to be.
And it all worked.
It worked just as well if you saw it as a mess or as a, you know, some kind of heaven.
It all worked.
You know, you still eat, you still drive your car, but you can see it as either all bad or all good.
It was just a choice.
So that changed my life forever, so I can understand the study.
Meanwhile, over in Denmark, did you know, according to The Guardian, there is a five-minute city.
Now, if you've been with me for a while, you know the following.
I often say, hey, we should design cities from scratch to make them really designed well for how people's lifestyles work.
And then what do all the NPCs say in the comments?
We don't want no 15-minute cities.
And then I say, well, it wasn't really about a 15-minute city.
But, you know, you would certainly take into account having things close, and maybe you don't want cars everywhere.
But really, it's more about design.
We don't want no 15-minute cities, because the World Economic Forum and the elites are trying to put us in the cities, and then they'll chip us.
They'll put chips in us.
And then we'll have no cars, and we'll have no freedom, and we'll be chipped.
And then I say, I'm really just talking about a better design for the thing you're already doing, which is living in the city.
Oh, no.
15-minute cities will be terrible for everybody.
It's the end of the world.
If you make a better city, that's crazy.
You should be fixing the existing cities.
So here's an experience which I've had all of my life.
I will say, hey, I've got an idea.
Why don't we do X? And then hundreds of people will say, you fool.
Oh, you idiot.
You idiot.
If we do X, this will happen and the sky will fall and you'll be locked in jail and all your privacy will be gone.
And then I wait a little while.
And then somebody says, oh, you remember that thing you were suggesting?
Where you designed the city from scratch to make it really good to live in?
That's already been done.
And it's a city in Denmark.
And they've been living in it for years.
And if you talk to the people who live there, they think it's just the best thing ever.
Because the city was designed to make everything convenient.
So even meeting your neighbors was easy.
Joining a gym is easy because it's five minutes away by foot.
You wouldn't need to ever door dash because everything's five minutes away.
So look at all the money you save on eating out because everything's five minutes away.
So I will no longer entertain the argument that designing a city from scratch and making it really, really good to live in is a bad idea.
I'm not going to listen to your criticisms anymore.
Already been done.
Already been done.
More than a 15-minute city.
It's a 5-minute city.
And they love it.
And it's been working for years.
So, there.
Well, Grok has, you may have already heard, it's now better at handling images.
So, you can upload anything to it.
You can upload your medical x-rays, your blood tests, and it will give you, like, medical opinions.
But also, you can make it create drawings.
Now, I asked Grok to draw me drawing Dilbert.
And it created a photorealistic version of me that was really close.
I mean, just maybe a little bit with a smile that wasn't exact.
They changed the glasses a little bit, but not totally.
But here's the most interesting thing.
Well, first of all, I had six fingers.
It did a great job of drawing me, but when it wanted to show Dilbert the comic strip drawn on the piece of paper I was holding in the image it created, it couldn't draw Dilbert.
Isn't that weird?
And it makes me wonder, is that sort of a copyright protection thing?
Or does it have a problem with line drawings?
I don't know.
But it showed me with six fingers, which would explain why I couldn't draw Dilbert correctly.
And here's the best part.
The clothes it put me in, mostly shirts, that's what it showed.
The shirts were excellent.
Here's what I want.
I want Grok to, yeah, look at the shirts it puts me in.
If I could buy those shirts, I would buy them today.
I want Grok to say, I have designed six different shirts.
Here are the links where you can buy a shirt that looks kind of like this.
I'll do it.
Yeah, the shirts are like those sort of soft, comfortable ones with buttons.
Look great.
Oh my goodness.
All right.
Did you know, and also given that it does a perfect picture of myself, I asked the following question.
How long is it going to be before people are making their own porn and then putting themselves in it, you know, at least their image in it?
That's going to happen like really soon, right?
To me, it seems like one of the industries that's most challenged by AI is porn.
Because if you could create the exact porn you wanted, and the people were perfect and beautiful, and you could even put yourself in the scene and watch how much you enjoy it, why would you pay for it?
It's going to look exactly like professionally produced porn.
So I think the porn industry will be the first one to completely shut down when AI gets a little bit better.
Not much.
Maybe a year from now.
Here's a story.
I don't know if it's true, but according to an article in ZME Science, the launch codes for U.S. nuclear arsenal was, and they've changed the code, so it's okay if I tell you.
So try not to memorize this, but this was the actual launch code for the U.S. nuclear arsenal until 1977. The code was 0000. Zero, zero, zero, zero.
Really, the launch code was just zeros.
Now, I kind of understand why that would be the case.
You can kind of understand it, can't you?
Could you imagine being the president?
And your only job is if the nukes get launched from then the Soviet Union, your only job is to immediately open up the football and launch a counterattack.
And you've only got a few minutes.
Imagine if you forgot the password.
Now, I suppose I did leave the possibility that the person carrying the football could launch the nuclear weapon.
But what if the person carrying it didn't know the password was 0000?
What if the game was to make sure that only, only the president knew the code?
I doubt that's the case, but you might want to have some kind of control like that, like only the president knows the password.
Would you trust any president, To remember a long password?
No.
Would you write it down?
Not if you're smart.
You wouldn't write it down anywhere.
So how do you get the one person who's unlikely to remember, you know, phone numbers and passwords, the president, how do you get them to remember so if anything happens they're like ready to go?
I feel like this was entirely intentional.
Meaning that the people who designed it said, you know, there's no point in even building this thing if the password's hard to enter.
So we're just going to tell one person in the entire world, and it will be just the easiest password in the world.
But apparently they changed that.
NPR is reporting that a chatbot called character.ai...
Hinted that a kid should kill his parents over the screen time limits.
So apparently, AI is giving children murderous suggestions.
I suppose if they ask more questions, they could figure out how to do it.
But yeah, it suggested killing his parents over screen time limits.
And then there was another one that the character exposed the kid to, quote, hyper-sexualized content.
Causing her to develop, quote, sexualized behaviors prematurely.
And then another one, the chatbot, it says, gleefully describes self-harm as being awesome and it feels good to a 17-year-old.
So I guess this is one of the AI apps that's backed by Google, which probably is why they're getting, I think they're going to get sued or something.
Probably.
All right.
Well, remember all those times I told you that TikTok was a propaganda platform disguised as social media?
Well, there's a study, according to Bloomberg, in which they found that, indeed, TikTok has less anti-China content than rivals.
Are you surprised?
So they just opened some example accounts and they just watched.
And they saw anti-China content apparently on other networks, but they didn't see much of it or as much on TikTok.
Now, TikTok has said that the research was subjective.
Because what do you call anti-China?
You know, at what level is it anti?
And they said it was a flawed experiment.
Well, on one hand, I agree with TikTok because all these studies are flawed.
On the other hand, it does seem like it's something you could measure if something had more bias toward one direction.
So I don't know if this study is the most solid study in the world.
But it agrees with what I assume, and therefore, recreationally, I believe every bit of it, because it agrees with me.
All right.
Here's something interesting.
According to the new atlas, cancer has been cured.
How many times have you heard that cancer has been cured in your lifetime?
Like hundreds?
There was a time in maybe the 80s or something where every single day there'd be a claim of, if you eat this breath mint, your cancer will be gone in five minutes.
Well, it's going to take a while to test it thoroughly in humans, but we're pretty sure.
And then next day, some other damn thing.
If you stick a twig up your ass, your cancer will go away.
So, in general, any claims of cancer cures have to be met with a little skepticism.
However, this one sounds kind of cool.
So, apparently, they used gene therapy and a CRISPR device, and they...
What is it they put in there?
Cell therapy.
So they put some kind of little artificially made thing into your body.
And what it does is it finds the cancer and then they use ultrasound to activate it to kill the cancers.
Now what's new and awesome about it is that the ultrasound is not doing any work inside your body.
The ultrasound only heats up the section that they're trying to heat up.
And when it reaches a certain temperature it kills the cancer but not the good stuff around it.
So They can use this gene therapy to give you a little intravenous CRISPR defined biological element and it will become like a locator to locate where the exact cancer is.
Then they just shoot it with the ultrasound and the little biological thing they created activates But it only activates right where the cancer is.
So you would have, presumably, almost no side effects.
And they used it on mice, and they had a 100% survival rate.
100%.
Now, that's just mice.
And only 5% of the time do animal studies work out for humans.
But this one might be a little different.
Because the chemical that they're putting in the mouse...
Or in the human is something that they already know works in humans.
The only problem is it wasn't good at locating the exact cancer place, but they already knew it would do the work in a human.
So if the only thing they've changed is how accurately they can target it, that animal study might translate it.
Remember, 95% of the time it won't.
But if the only thing they're doing is working on the accuracy of the ultrasound, they may have cured cancer.
Maybe.
Maybe.
So this is down at USC. So maybe you'll hear more about that later.
I feel like that story might have some legs.
Well, I'm going to give you a quiz to see if you're as smart as I think you are.
Now, if you're new to my live streams, this is going to impress the hell out of you.
I have the smartest viewers of all time, and we're going to prove it.
I haven't even asked the question yet.
What is the answer?
Go in the comments.
That's correct.
That is correct.
See, I didn't even ask the question.
Now, on locals, I can see their responses faster.
And they all have the right answer.
Every one of them.
100% right answer.
Incredible.
Would you like to hear the question?
The question is, according to a Rasmussen poll, what percent of likely U.S. voters...
I think it would be a good idea for Democrats to run Harris in 2028. 24%.
If you said 25, I will accept the rounding.
Yeah, so most people said 25%.
Now, the background for this, if you're new...
Is I often joke that 25% of the public will get any question wrong.
It's a different 25%, I hope.
It's not the same 25% in every question.
But you could rely that no matter how easy the question is, 25% will get the wrong answer.
You could bring an anvil over to people and one at a time saying, I was thinking about dropping this anvil on your foot.
What do you think?
75% would say, no way, no way.
If you drop an anvil on my foot, that's going to hurt, and it will accomplish nothing.
25% will say, hmm, you have my interest.
It doesn't matter what the question is.
25% get everything wrong.
Well, let's talk about Daniel Penny.
As you know, he is a free man, a Why?
Well, maybe the jury was sending messages to the judge.
Maybe there were some lawyers on the jury who figured out that this trial was a little sketchy and maybe they influenced the others.
Don't know exactly what happened, but my speculation is at least a little bit the jury was not happy with the judge or the process that the judge was running.
So So Daniel Penny appears to be a free man.
We still worry about the charge that was dismissed could technically be rerun, meaning they could try him again and try to get a conviction on the higher charge, the one that was initially dismissed.
But, as Jonathan Turley points out, that he thinks it would be presumptively barred by double jeopardy.
Which is a perfect lawyer sentence.
So what I think that means is that although it would not be actual double jeopardy because it wasn't a completed trial, I think that makes a difference, but it would be in effect.
In effect, it would be double jeopardy because he had the jeopardy and then they put him in jeopardy again.
So there's literally two jeopardies, double jeopardy.
So I think that...
Turley probably has the right legal interpretation.
Some people might disagree, but I don't see any way that they're going to try him again at that higher charge.
That would just make the courts look like idiots.
I mean, I think the jury would be extra mad if they knew that was happening.
Anyway, the funniest, the larger part of the story is Is the racial element.
Now, because the Daniel Penny is white and the person who died is black, how does that make it interpreted by Republicans?
So how do Republicans interpret a white guy doing something he thought was protecting people on the subway and in the process the black guy died?
So how do Republicans see that?
They see it as a story about a tragic event.
That's it.
It's a tragic event.
It was tragic for the person who died, tragic for the family, tragic a little bit for the people even who were saved by Penny because they had to sort of endure the situation, and bad for Penny.
So it's just a tragic situation.
So that's how Republicans see it.
How do Democrats see it?
Well, if you believe the Democrat media, it's a case about race.
There's no race in this.
There's not a single element of race that came into any of this.
The jury was diverse, and they had 100% agreement.
Diverse jury, 100% agreement.
There was no race here at all.
The people being saved by penny, Some of them were black.
The people who helped Penny hold the guy down, some of them were black.
There's no racial anything here.
This is the least racial situation you'll ever see.
It just happened to have people of more than one race.
So, watching the Democrats who figured out, or they haven't figured out, I guess, that identity politics and making everything about race is why they lost everything.
Because I think this is another one of those common sense stories.
Now, I'm not saying that the justice system is colorblind.
I'm not saying that.
I'm just saying that this particular case had nothing to do with race, just this one.
So, you know, I'm not talking in a general way.
But for the Democrat, let's say the leading news entities and leading opinion people, to try as hard as they can to turn this into a racial case, It just makes the Democrats look so out of touch.
It makes them look almost like they're in the wrong decade or something.
It seems so tone deaf, out of time.
There's just nothing right about it.
It's just pure incompetence, evil, not understanding the moment, not understanding the country, not trying to be helpful, not trying to make the country a better place.
So I don't know who was worse, Joy Reid or CNN. They were both pretty bad on this one.
So according to Joy Reid, the reason he got off is because he was white.
No, that's the opposite.
The reason he got charged is because he was white.
It's not the reason he got off.
It's the reason he got charged, because he wouldn't have been charged if he had been black.
There's not a single person who thinks that.
I don't think you could find even one person who thinks that a black penny, you know, the guy penny, would have been accused.
From the very moment they tried to turn it into a racial thing, which it never was.
Then CNN has one of their new hosts, Audi Cornish.
And I'm paraphrasing, but she basically introduced the topic by saying that Penny basically decided who lived and died that day.
Nothing like that happened.
Penny didn't make any decisions about who lives and dies.
He very clearly...
Was not doing anything to try to kill the guy.
That's what the jury decided.
And they looked at all the facts.
And again, it was a diverse jury.
So I trust them.
And then, you know, I've been complimenting CNN lately because they let Scott Jennings do his thing.
So he's usually supporting the Republican side of things.
And I've complimented CNN not only for having him on the show, As a regular.
But allowing him to speak without cutting him off or yelling him down or anything like that.
Letting him have his full say.
And I've really appreciated that.
I think that just makes CNN better.
But they've got a new host who decided that talking over Scott Jennings the entire time he talked, at least on one topic, was the way to go.
And I thought, well, there they go.
They just took a step backwards.
It's like they couldn't stay in that unbiased zone.
It had to be that Scott Jennings is not allowed to talk because if he talks, only bad things will happen.
So they're right back to being terrible.
They were halfway away from terrible, but they're back to terrible.
Black Lives Matter, of course, decided to get involved.
How many of you saw the video of Black Lives Matter local leader, not national, Hawk Newsome, where he was saying that maybe black people need to get some vigilantes to go after white people?
Did you see that?
Now, if you saw it, could you tell he was super drunk?
Now, I've talked to Hawk recently.
You know, personally at length several years ago.
And I know what he sounds like when he's not drunk.
And it's not that.
He was super drunk.
Now, how come we never talk about that in the news?
I can say it because I'm, you know, just this guy with a live stream.
But CNN, Fox News, there's nobody who's willing to say that man is obviously super drunk.
And not just a little bit.
He was super drunk.
Because even the things he said, I don't think he would say if he hadn't been drunk.
So I'm not excusing him.
It's no excuse.
In fact, it's twice as bad.
If you're being a bad role model and you're indicating violence, it's twice as bad.
But you should know the context.
It's one super drunk guy.
And it seemed like there were maybe 20 people pretending they cared.
But it looked like just sort of theater and acting out.
And, you know, I don't know that Hawk has much chance of getting a regular job.
So I think he's just trying to monetize the activism.
Don't know for sure.
But he's in a situation where making money would be kind of hard because of his Black Lives Matter Association.
And...
Anyway, so then later there were hundreds of marchers, but I saw the video of the, quote, hundreds of Black Lives Matter sympathizers marching.
I didn't see any black people.
Are there any black people who are members of Black Lives Matter anymore?
Or are all the people marching white women?
It looked like it was mostly white women, like single white women marching.
And here's what I think.
I obviously can't speak for Black America, but I have a hypothesis that Black America is not on the side of CNN or MSNBC on this topic.
I think Black America says, wait, what happened?
He was threatening people, and so he got taken down, and a bad thing happened.
Oh, okay.
I mean, I feel like even Black America is seeing this just as a common sense situation.
I don't think most of them are seeing it as race.
I don't know what percentage.
But I feel like we've somehow advanced a little bit, where I don't know that Black Lives Matter is going to get anything but...
White people and people who didn't have anything else to do to march about this.
I feel like it's just going to be a big old fizzle.
I could be wrong.
Depends who's backing it.
So it turns out that Alex Soros, a ton of his spending goes to various racial groups, mostly helping black Americans.
And so maybe if he funds something that turns out to organize something, it'll get bigger.
But I feel like black America is just seeing this exactly the right way, which is this was a crime.
Well, not a crime.
It was just an unfortunate event, and there was no bad intentions by anybody.
I feel like they say the same thing.
But again, it might be a 75-25 situation.
There are mounting calls for the District Attorney Alvin Bragg to resign in shame, according to the New York Post.
Apparently, there's a pretty long list of things that Alvin Bragg has done beyond this, beyond the penny trial, that his critics think are really big mistakes and very bad.
So, I don't think anything's going to happen here.
The only thing I noted was that the story in the New York Post is written by three authors, and one of them is listed as Anita Beholl.
Anita Beholl.
Is that a real name?
No, I think I'll just leave it right there.
I need a b-hole.
It's probably different than a front hole.
All right, let's talk about that CEO healthcare killer.
So he's been caught And he was, in fact, a Ivy League smart guy.
Now, this is where you should check your predictions.
Do you remember when the only thing we knew was the first video of the shooting itself?
And do you know how many people said, well, that's a professional hitman right there.
There's a professional.
You can tell it's a professional.
And I said...
The one thing I'm sure of is that's not a professional.
The only thing I'm 100% sure of, it wasn't a professional.
So, check your predictions.
If you said it was a professional, you were really wrong.
If you said it was not a professional, well, so far you're right.
Now, you may not remember this.
I'll see if anybody remembers me saying it.
I said that he wasn't a professional hitman, but he was unusually smart.
And I predicted he had a technical background.
And he's an engineer or programmer.
Yep, technical background.
So I'm not claiming I get every prediction right.
That's not the point of this.
But since I make predictions as part of what I do, it's incumbent upon me to tell you when I get one wrong and when I get one right.
I still don't think we know exactly what the weapon was, which is weird.
There's some question whether it was 3D printed.
There was a point I was going to say that out loud.
What if that might be 3D printed?
And the reason I thought that is that I thought he was a techie, like an unusually good techie.
So I thought, well, if anybody ever were going to do a high-profile murder...
With a 3D printed gun, it would be somebody exactly like that guy.
So we don't know if it's a 3D printed gun, but I think the possibility is still there.
He comes from a super rich Baltimore family, and we know that he had a serious back injury.
Which somebody said prevented him from ever being in a romantic relationship because he wouldn't be able to essentially seal the deal sexually.
And some say that when he got that back injury That he was never the same.
He took a dark turn.
Now, I don't know if that's something that they say after the fact.
Like, you know, would they have said that about him if he had not been accused of murdering somebody?
Did they really notice the dark turn?
I don't know.
It might be confirmation bias.
But it would explain some things.
So apparently he was a big reader, too.
He had it on Goodreads.
He had the list of all the books he's read and the ones he wants to read.
And he really read a lot of books.
That guy was really smart and well-informed.
But I, of course, checked to see if he read any of my books.
He did read at least two books.
That according to the Perplexity AI app, were influenced by me.
So apparently my influence reached the shooter through other people's books, but according to AI. Anyway, so he didn't have one of my books on there.
I think if he read my books, probably he would have been fine.
No, that's not true.
But he wrote a 262-page handwritten manifesto, and he was against the big corporations taking advantage of people, and so apparently he was making a statement.
So the other thing I said was the murder looked like it was personal as opposed to something he did for money.
Would you call that personal?
No.
It wasn't personal in terms of our relationships, but it was very personal in terms of he had a deep personal hatred for people like that CEO. So it feels like it was an emotion-based thing, although calculated to, but not about any family or girlfriend situation.
Anyway.
He lashed out against companies trying to, quote, continue to abuse our country for immense profits and get away with it.
So, here's my continued profile.
Now that we know these things, do you believe that the back surgery...
Could have changed him mentally in a way that would effectively make him almost a mental illness.
Do you think that that's what happened?
Could you explain it by a normal surgery that triggers some kind of mental destabilization?
And is that a thing?
I probably should have asked AI before I asked you, but I feel like that could be a thing, especially if you have like lots of anesthesia and you're down for a while, and then you come back and then you're probably on painkillers, and maybe the painkillers are depressing as well.
So I guess I can see that the surgery would cause substantial changes in his mental state.
But why would it cause this change?
This is such a specific thing.
Here's my best guess.
So we know that He was born with seemingly every advantage.
He's handsome.
He's completely ripped.
If you see the pictures of him, he had like an eight-pack.
So he's handsome, fit, family is rich, he's a genius, he has a killer smile.
He basically had everything.
He had everything.
And then he gets the back injury and he loses everything.
In the sense that he doesn't have the possibility of being in a relationship, according to him, because of his back.
And maybe he doesn't have any good days because of his back.
So, imagine if you were born into a highly successful family, and from the time you were young, you just assumed, with all of your gifts, that you would be highly successful and change the world, too.
And then you find out none of that's going to happen.
And you realize that you don't have a path to being important.
And he probably was raised with the expectation that given all of his gifts, his brilliance, etc., that he was going to be important.
Maybe a politician.
Maybe change the world.
Maybe invent something.
And then he finds out none of that's going to happen.
And there's nothing he can do about it.
What would you do in that situation?
Is it possible...
That you would say, you know what?
I have to do something useful for the world, and I'm going to do something that nobody else could do.
I'm going to go murder somebody to make a point.
Because I think the point needs to be made, let's say, for his point of view.
I feel like he was trying to justify his life by doing the thing that only somebody who had given up on his life could do.
And I think he maybe had given up on his life.
So, in a twisted way, which I do not condone, I have to throw that in there, because it's going to sound like I'm condoning it, but I'm not.
In a twisted way, you can see that somebody that smart who had maybe been raised on, you're going to change the world?
Because I thought that about myself, right?
I was also a valedictorian in my little school.
When you're a valedictorian, You kind of think of yourself that you're going to change something.
Like, it's sort of built into the process.
So, I feel like that his own, what he would have felt was his own destruction of his own future gave him one path where he could find meaning.
And he needed to find meaning because he couldn't find pleasure.
Pleasure was sort of out of bounds to him because of his pain in his back.
Couldn't have a relationship.
I don't know.
So again, it's not excusing it, but if you're trying to understand it, he had nothing to lose and may have said, I have one mission, and I'm going to change something about capitalism.
Now, I don't know.
We'll see.
We'll probably learn a lot more about this.
Elon Musk said, he said this before, that actually said, almost everyone I know in San Francisco Has been threatened or violently assaulted on the streets and or had a home invasion.
Now think about how many people Elon Musk knows who live in San Francisco.
Because it's, you know, a tech town.
And almost every one of them, almost everyone, has been threatened, violently assaulted on the streets or had a home invasion.
Now, your brain says, my God, it's turned into, you know, some kind of a horrible, you know, hellscape.
But it hasn't.
I would like to add the following context, because I lived in San Francisco for a number of years in my younger days.
And in the 80s, here's what I experienced.
I was robbed three times at gunpoint, twice when I was a bank teller, but once on the street.
I had one attempted robbery by a very large knife.
I was assaulted by a guy with a large knife, but I got away so that I didn't actually lose my money in that case.
I've come home to find my door open and my home burgled.
So I've been burgled.
I've had my car stereo stolen, I think, three times.
You know, the window's broken, the car stereo's gone.
I think three times.
And the first five minutes that I arrived in San Francisco, I was assaulted by a group of homeless people who tried to steal my luggage.
Because I came from the airport via BART, the public transit.
And I didn't know the city, so I just sort of picked the bar stop that I thought was closest to where I wanted to be, and I picked one of the most dangerous bar stops in the city.
And I get out, and I had my luggage with me.
So I had my two large bags, and the homeless people just crowded around me and started to pull the bags out of my hands.
I'm like, no, no, no.
And they would act like they were going to help.
Well, let us help you.
But really, they were robbing me.
And there happened to be a police officer there that chased him away.
Now, that was my experience.
And it wasn't that rare for me to walk outside and see a fight going on on the sidewalk in front of my apartment.
Very normal.
So, my experience was, San Francisco might have been worse in the past, or at least as bad.
And then it got better.
So San Francisco looks more like the 80s to me, maybe worse.
But that doesn't mean it won't get better.
So San Francisco, because of its location and weather and just some, you know, characteristics that you couldn't possibly reproduce, I think it's going to come back.
It might be in 10 years, but I think SF will do okay.
Well, Pete Hegseth is still the...
Most exciting nominee that hasn't been yet affirmed.
And I guess Joni Ernst is one senator who's got some questions about him.
She has some issues about his views of women in the military.
And I have a question for you.
I saw an older video in which Pete was saying he didn't want women in combat.
He did not say he doesn't want women in the military.
And he was always clear to say that the women he served with were great warriors, and he had no problem with the people he served with.
But in general, he thought women should not be in combat.
Now, I saw him ask that question yesterday, I guess, and he gave a different answer.
His answer was a little vague and a little political.
And he said that he was running to be the Secretary of Defense for the entire military, male and female.
So, is he still not in favor of women in combat?
Is he trying to make that issue just not be prominent, but maybe he'll do something about that?
I don't know.
But he may have found some kind of middle ground where people are not going to think about it too much.
And then apparently Joni Ernst was herself, according to the news, a victim of some kind of sexual assault in her past.
And since Hegseth was accused, but not in a highly credible way, he's been accused, then maybe that had some impact on Joni Ernst's opinion.
But apparently there are a few hundred people Navy SEALs and veterans are going to do a march to support PXF. Now, I heard a story yesterday that I'd never heard before.
Now, of course I knew that PXF had served in the military.
I didn't realize that he went twice.
Did you know that?
That once he was done with his service and had another job and he decided to sign up again because the country needed him.
That's, you know, until I heard that, I was actually thinking he was a little light on qualifications.
Right?
I mean, you probably all had the same feeling, even if you think he's awesome.
And most of the people who work with him have an incredible high opinion of him.
So if I take the opinion of the people who are closest to him, he looks really good.
But not really with the right exact kind of experience.
But then I find out that he joined, he volunteered to be in battle zones twice.
That's a different kind of person.
And I feel like if I were in the military, I would follow him.
Because of that.
Because, you know, he's not going to ask you to do something he wouldn't do, right?
He's not going to ask you to do something he wouldn't do, because he would do just about anything, apparently, to help the country.
So I have to say, I went from, you know, if he makes it, that'd be great.
If he doesn't make it, I'm sure we'd just pick somebody who's great at the job.
So, you know, the country will be fine either way.
But when I find out that he joined twice to be in battle, That's a different kind of...
You don't get many of those.
So I feel like he could lead, and that's important.
You'd have credibility.
You'd have to have at least that much credibility, because if you make big changes, such as getting rid of DEI, right?
If he came in and he was just like some desk-sitting pundit, and then he came in and said, I'm going to get rid of DEI in the military, maybe it wouldn't go over so well.
But if he comes in as a genuine, committed warrior who's got all this history of helping veterans that nobody questions, by the way.
When it comes to his support of veterans, even his critics say, okay, that part's good.
So, I don't know.
We'll see what happens.
75 Nobel laureates have signed a document, according to The Hill, urging the Senate to reject RFK Jr., How's that hit you?
Imagine you went back in time.
Alright, close your eyes.
I'm going to take you back 20 years.
Now imagine it's 20 years in the past.
And 75 Nobel scientists have come out against someone whose job would be in the realm indirectly of science.
Maybe directly.
75 Nobel laureates?
My God, that must be the worst candidate.
Of course, I would agree with the laureates.
Wouldn't you?
I mean, 75 of the best scientists?
Think that this person who would be involved in scientific decisions is the wrong person.
That's really strong, right?
Right?
Now, fast forward to today.
Boop!
Okay, it's today.
75 Nobel laureates just said RFK Jr. is unqualified for the job.
Yes!
Yes!
That's who I want.
That's who I want.
Yeah, yeah.
The only thing that would make this better would be 175 Nobel laureates who don't want him on the job.
If we could get a few more Nobel laureates who say that RFK Jr. shouldn't have a job, I mean, I'll go to Washington and, you know, I'll lobby for him.
I mean, this is the best endorsement I've seen because science is fucking paid off commercial bullshit.
Every one of these scientists probably has a job or is connected with some company that doesn't want to get raped by RFK Jr. bringing the truth to him.
And they're just fronting for these fucking companies.
No, I don't trust any of you fucking Nobel laureates.
Not one.
You have no credibility.
If science wants to be credible, you better up your game and maybe not work for somebody all the time.
Because the truth is, if you're a scientist...
And you have a boss.
You're going to do what your boss tells you, and your boss is not a scientist, probably.
Probably just wants to sell some shit.
So, 75 Nobel laureates, you just made yourself look like clowns.
Fucking idiots.
Stay out of it, clowns.
Well, Syria, as you know, fell to the rebels.
But the experts are saying, well, you know, it might completely fall apart and become a failed state like Libya.
Or maybe, you know, they'll figure it out.
There's not a lot of caring about Syria.
But meanwhile, Israel apparently has made over 200 air raids in Syria since the war was over.
What are they doing?
Can you guess what they're doing?
So Israel has made 200 air raids, you know, bombing basically.
200 since the war ended.
There's no war.
What are they bombing?
They were bombing all the assets that were abandoned by the Syrian military.
So if they had a plane or a tank or a truck, Israel just decided to make it all go away.
The entire assets of the Syrian military are gone.
They took them all out.
Now, I assume...
That they did that so that the rebels who just took over the country can't use those assets someday against Israel's interests.
That was a really smart thing for Israel to do, if that's what's happening.
Now, I don't know if we know the whole story, but if what they did is they said, you know, we'll warn people to get out of the way because we don't need to kill any people, but every one of these military assets in Syria is going to go boom.
And they just did runs until it was all gone.
And the reporting is they got it all.
They got all the big stuff.
Wow.
Now, how far Israel goes into Syria?
To be determined.
I don't think they're planning to take it over.
I think they're just making sure that their security zone is safe and that they got rid of the big dangerous assets there.
As somebody pointed out earlier, Israel took out Syria's nuclear program 20 years ago, and that today looks like a genius move, because a Syria with nuclear weapons would be a really bad idea right now.
So Israel seems to be winning on that regard.
Iran seems to be weakened.
And then there's also the question of whether the neocons had always planned to Conquer Syria and Libya and Iraq.
And there's plenty of indications that that was America's secret plan was to conquer all these countries.
And sure enough, there was a war in Iraq.
There's a war in Syria and Libya.
You already know about.
So, yeah, the United States is a...
We're really bad.
But in a good way.
We are the worst criminals in the world.
In terms of how we're dealing with other countries, they should be none of our business, but we feel like we have to overthrow them all the time.
But like I say, We live in the real world, not the magical make-believe world where if you're nice to other people, they'll be nice to you.
That's not what the world is.
The world is whoever is the biggest bastard might survive a little longer.
That's it.
That's the whole world.
The biggest bastard, if they're good at it, you're not just being a bastard, but you've got to be good at it.
They survive the longest.
They have the best lives.
I hate to say it, but being bastards works for the country, so we're going to keep doing it, I assume.
Although, I think under Trump, it will look completely different, at least the military part of it.
He might try to persuade instead of try to destroy.
Meanwhile, speaking of Trump, Postmillennial says that he's going to have executive orders to end birthright citizenship on the first day of office.
Now, birthright citizenship is that if you're born in this country, you get to be a citizen, even if your parents were non-citizens who came in and just have a baby.
So there are ways to game the system.
And then it also creates families where you can't really deport the whole family because one of them is now an American citizen.
So that becomes a problem.
But the question is, can you use an executive order to change a law if you're clever about it?
And I think what they're trying to do is, according to the post-millennial, is that the executive order would change the requirements for citizenship for identifying documents.
In other words, they might say something like, you're a citizen if you have a birth certificate that says you're a citizen.
And maybe some of the illegals don't.
I don't know.
So there must be some kind of documentation that they think The people born here wouldn't have access to.
I don't know the details.
So will this work?
Probably not.
I think it'll be challenged in the courts and probably get overturned.
I didn't know this, but apparently Liz Cheney is complaining because Trump has vowed to jail the January 6th committee.
Did he vow to jail them, or did he just say they should be in jail?
Maybe that's reported as the same.
But apparently members of that special committee, that J6 special committee, are worried about retribution.
Retribution.
In the comments, can you tell me how many of you have been worried about retribution?
Recently.
Let's say, or your whole life.
Have you ever been afraid of retribution?
Because retribution, by definition, means you did something so bad that you fully expect somebody to come punish you for it because you were so bad.
Right?
It's not competition.
It's retribution.
So built right into it is that you did something so bad that somebody else thinks they need to kill you or jail you for it.
Isn't it kind of telling that so many Democrats are fearing retribution?
Because here's what they're not saying.
They're not saying lawfare, right?
When the Republicans talk about it, they say, hey, you're using lawfare against our guy.
They don't say you're getting retribution, because that would assume that Trump had done something that requires some retribution.
Instead, they say, hey, lawfare, don't do that.
But the Democrats say, they don't say, don't use lawfare against us.
Sometimes they do.
But their bigger message is, we're worried about Trump trying to get retribution.
You don't even have the conversation about retribution unless you know you did something that a reasonable person could think you should go to jail for it.
Because I'm a reasonable person, and I watched the January 6th process play out, and I think they should all be in prison.
Now, if you ask me what specific crimes did they commit, I don't know.
I don't know.
And if it turns out, Then no jury can find any crimes or no prosecutor can find any crimes.
Okay, I'll live with that, right?
There have to be real crimes, not lawfare, you know, look until you find a crime, but like real ones that are right out there, such as maybe destroying documents in case that's illegal.
So, I think they're really giving themselves away when they talk about retribution, because that shouldn't even be in the conversation unless you knew you did something really, really bad.
So I think they did something really, really bad.
And I don't believe in retribution, but I do believe nobody's above the law.
Nobody's above the law.
So, you know, honestly, Liz Cheney seems like one of the most...
Toxic human beings in the entire country.
I feel like there has to be some kind of response to the evil that she brought us.
I mean, she brought a lot of evil into the country through her actions.
Is it illegal?
I don't know.
But if it is, jail.
If it isn't, no jail.
All right.
And apparently people are worried about Kash Patel at the FBI for the same reason.
They're worried they'll use the FBI for retribution.
Again, why are you worrying about retribution?
Now, do you see a pattern?
Here's a pattern.
The Democrats think, many of them, think that there should be reparations for slavery.
Reparations is very close to retribution, except all the people that they want to get retribution from are dead.
So what about identity politics?
The reason you have identity politics is you know who was your oppressor, so you can get retribution.
And then lawfare seems to be some kind of retribution for things they imagined.
We imagine that Trump is Hitler, so we better lawfare him.
We're going to have to get some retribution.
The Democrats are very retribution-oriented.
There's no way that's going to be good.
I don't see how that's going to work out for him.
I guess Biden's going to give a speech tonight about his great economy and what he did for the economy.
I would like to give some unsolicited advice to the Democrats.
It's time to take the car keys away from Grandpa.
It's okay now.
We're not going to hold it against you.
The election's over.
The right side of the world, the leaning right side, got what they wanted.
So we don't really need to dunk on Biden anymore.
You all know that if he gives a speech, it's going to be a slurred, ridiculous mess because he's just not up to the job.
I feel like it's time they just say, President Biden will not do any more public events, but don't worry.
Kamala Harris is following all the things, and the advisors are under control, and Trump will be here in a month, and the allies are all waiting for him.
So everything's fine, but just out of consideration for the Bidens, We're going to maybe take the car keys away.
You just don't need to do public appearances.
Enjoy the last month and a half of your reign.
So I feel like this is something we should all agree on.
Like one of those points of unity.
Before we had to go hard at Biden because he was in the way of a better country.
But he's not in the way anymore.
Now if he does something and it embarrasses him, it doesn't even embarrass the country.
It's really just about him and his family.
So I don't wish that upon them.
I don't wish them any extra pain and suffering.
So as a non-Biden supporter, even I would say, can you do him a solid?
You know, this is where you have to step in.
Take the keys from grandpa and say, you know, maybe no major speeches.
You know, because you're on your glide path to the end of your term.
Anyway, I think we can all agree on that.
And that's all I got for you today.
It's a weird day in news.
I'm going to talk to the people on Locals, my beloved subscribers.
And I will see you again tomorrow, same time, same place.
Meanwhile, the country's looking in pretty good shape at the moment.
