God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Members-Only Clubs, Hair Restoration Product, Trump Admin Hoax List, President Trump, Trump ABC Interview, DOGE Fraud Referrals, MS-13 Knuckle Tattoos, Tariff Tax Replacement, Unpredictable Tariff Policy, China Meds Tariff Exemption, Spain Renewables Blackout, California Policy Failures, Governor Newsom, Oil Prices Decline, Robby Starbuck's Lawsuit, META AI Defamatory Allegations, James Carville, Jaime Raskin, Hitler's Big Lie Technique, Harvard President's Apology, Fake Polls, AG Leticia James, Jack Posobiec Roughed Up, Democrat Violence, John Bolton, Complexity Corruption Technique, Michael Shellenberger, USAID Money Machine, USGLC IRI NDI, DataRepublican, Anti-Drone Swarm Weapon, Ukraine Mineral Deal, Mexico Water Deal, UK Refugee Asylum, Red States Reading Performance, 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.
Let me get your comments working so that we have a full and satisfying podcast.
The best you've ever seen, probably.
Do do do do do do.
Do do do do do.
Bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum.
you you
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and you've never had a better time.
But if you'd like to take it up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tank or shells, a tiny canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
And guess what?
Happens right now.
go. Ah...
Now I feel complete.
All right.
Thank you, Paul.
Good to know.
Everything's working.
Well, UPS is talking to the robot company called Figure.
And they're talking about maybe bringing in these 546 robots to work on sorting boxes, according to Bloomberg.
Do you think that's real or fake news?
I don't think there's any robot company that's making a robot that doesn't act like it's stoned.
Like, all the robots are like, pick up a box, look at the box, walk slowly.
I don't know.
I just do not think we're quite ready to replace a bunch of warehouse people with robots.
So maybe they're just looking at the future.
According to CNBC, 30% of Microsoft's code is now AI-generated.
According to the CEO, there might even be some other software that is completely written by AI.
So I'm thinking of becoming a programmer because apparently all you need is AI and you can make anything.
Is anybody tempted to just...
Become a computer programmer without any experience?
I don't think we can get there yet.
I think you have to be a programmer to make sure that AI is doing what it's supposed to do.
Meanwhile, Waymo, the self-driving car company, and Toyota are in some kind of partnership.
I assume they have to do that because they're going to be competing with Tesla really quickly.
And Tesla is going to lap them unless they do something big and bold.
So we'll see if Waymo and Toyota can make something work.
So does that mean that your Toyotas will have a self-driving car option?
I don't know.
Or maybe it's just a cheaper way to get the Waymo cars.
Could be either one.
We'll see.
I saw a post by Michael Miraflor that apparently in New York City there's a sudden boom in what they call members clubs.
So you pay some amount of money and you can go to a members club and there's just a bunch of them that popped up.
And so Michael's theory is that the reason that these are all popping up is the deterioration of civil society.
In other words, People are looking for a place they can go where they don't have to worry about their laptop getting stolen and getting beaten up and some fentanyl addict falling on their lap.
So they're starting their own little private member clubs.
Now, you can get canceled for that kind of thinking, that you have to start at your own private member club just to get away from the riffraff.
But it looks like it's going to be kind of popular.
So you might want to start your own members club to stay away from the people you want to avoid.
I've often thought that the secret to happiness is who you avoid.
You think of it in terms of making friends and being with people you love and stuff like that.
And that's good.
You should be with good people.
At least half of happiness is avoiding bad people.
So these member clubs get you there.
Well, there's a hair loss pill.
I didn't even know this existed.
But apparently there's this pill you can take to grow back your hair.
But now the doctors, the top urologist, is saying that It might have a really bad side effect, which is it will affect your penis if you're a man.
So it can make your testicles burn and give you suicidal thoughts and make your penis bend and get smaller.
Now, this reminds me of a rule that I developed 30 years ago.
Every time I saw anything that was supposed to help you grow hair, it would be bad for your penis.
Every time.
How in the world is your hair and your penis so connected?
So if you see a bald guy, probably has a great penis.
But if you see a guy who's like 50 and has a full head of hair, I don't know.
One in ten chance he's got something going on down there.
So that's the iron rule of science.
That whatever's good for your hair is...
Bad for your penis.
So remember that.
Apparently the Trump administration has published a hoax list.
So don't you love that?
So you're probably, most of you are aware that I used to publish a hoax list.
You know, the top 12, and then it was the top 14, and then it was the top 20. And it got a lot of attention.
And now the White House is publishing their own hoax list.
So it shows all the fake news and Trump deranged syndrome.
Now, it's not the same as the list that I would post so that there's no overlap.
So theirs is more like the more recent stuff.
And, of course, they have plenty of material to work with.
The hoax list.
Good idea.
Well, if you didn't see it, Trump did an interview with ABC News with a reporter named Moran, last name Moran.
Here are some of the highlights from the interview.
So the ABC News guy says to Trump, do you have a 100% confidence in PAG, Seth?
And Trump says, that's a stupid question.
I don't have 100% confidence that we're going to finish this interview.
I will never get enough of that.
Every time Trump insults a reporter who had it coming, it just gets funnier.
Do you have 100% confidence?
That's a stupid question.
I don't have 100% confidence that we're going to finish this interview.
Oh, then the same interviewer said to Trump that there had been no fraud referrals from Doge, so he couldn't understand why nothing had been referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution if they found all these fraud instances.
And Trump says, well, you don't know that, do you?
And he forced the reporter to admit that he wouldn't know if any referrals had been made or not.
So the question was more like an accusation, but Trump very cleverly made him sort of admit, okay, I have no idea whether you've referred anything or not, because it'd be too early to know.
But Trump says yes, that there have been fraud referrals.
Do you believe that?
We'll find out.
Then there's a, I hate to say this, but there's a little fake news that I think Trump himself fell for.
So the topic of that so-called Maryland dad, the potential or alleged MS-13 gang member came up.
And the topic of his tattoos on his hand, his knuckles came up.
Now, you might remember that Trump held up a photo that showed that each of his knuckles had a tattoo, and that the images on the knuckles, if you took the first letter of each of the images,
it would say MS-13.
And so the thinking was that it was just a sort of a clever, subtle way to say he was MS-13 without actually using the letters MS-13.
To make it easier to know that that was the point, the photo had just the actual letters M, S, and 13 to help you know what each of the images was standing for.
But apparently, and I'll take a fact check on this, but it sure sounded like Trump believed that the actual text letters were part of the tattoo.
Because the way it was put on the page, it looked like...
That was actually my first thought, too.
The first time I saw it, I was like, really?
Why does he have the letters on his knuckles?
But the letters are not on his knuckles.
It's only the images.
And the reporter knew that.
So he fact-checked Trump in real time.
But Trump wasn't having it.
And he was insisting that it actually said MS-13.
And the reporter said, well, you know, the...
Tattoos suggested that it could be, but it didn't actually say.
And Trump was, oh yes, he said it.
It was right there.
Didn't you see the picture?
And I thought, oh, well, that's not good.
But I have to admit, the very first time I saw the same picture, I thought that was part of the tattoo.
And I couldn't believe it when I saw it, but then...
After thinking about it a little bit, I thought, oh no, they're labeling the tattoo.
That's not the actual tattoo.
Speaking of fake news, you've heard that when scientific studies get rechecked to see if they're reproducible, that at least in the United States, half of them turn out to be not reproducible, which means that the science was bad.
And Brazil did the same thing with their Biomedical studies.
Guess how many Brazilian biomedical studies are reproducible, meaning valid?
50%.
So they got the same result as in America.
So half of the things that we consider science, because there's some study that says something worked, half are not true.
And nobody knows which half.
So if it's either true or false, and half of them are not reproducible, science and flipping a coin are very, very similar in accuracy, because you really can't tell if it's a 50-50 proposition.
Well, apparently, Paramount, the board is ready to settle with Trump on his 60-minute lawsuit.
Newsmax money is reporting on this.
You remember that Kamala Harris was interviewed by 60 Minutes, and allegedly they edited in a different answer than the one she gave for the question, which made her look smarter, and Trump was suing because it, you know,
basically it looked like they were helping her win the election.
Now, you could argue, as Jake Tapper does, That the edit was sort of a normal edit and didn't really change anything.
I would confirm that it's also normal for big entities like that to change a quote or to put in a quote that wasn't exactly what you said,
but maybe you said it at a different time.
It's not that unusual.
But...
Because Paramount wants to do some kind of big merger, which would require the Trump administration to approve it, Trump sort of has them by the gonads.
So it looks like they're going to pay up some big money.
We'll see what they come up with.
Also during that ABC interview, Trump may have gotten himself in a bit of a legal problem because when he was talking about the Maryland ad, According to Jonathan Turley, Trump said that he could get Garcia back,
but does not want to do so.
And he said that he's got lawyers, basically the ones that tell him he can't do it or shouldn't do it.
But as Turley points out, if he admits that he can do it, it's going to look like he's ignoring the court order to facilitate it, which he sort of is.
So that story could change pretty quickly, based on what he said in that ABC interview.
Here's some more fake news.
Do you remember the story that said that Amazon was going to show the tariffs as part of your checkout basket, so you can see how much more expensive things were with the tariffs?
That was never true.
Apparently there's some...
There was a sub-entity within Amazon where they were plagued with that idea, but it was never Amazon.
It was just some sub-entity that you and I have never seen.
And then Trump's version is that he called Jeff Bezos and asked him to get rid of those tariff things, and then Jeff Bezos was a great guy, according to Trump, but did exactly what he was asked.
I think all they did was change that little subunit that had some special purpose that you and I never seen anyway.
Then, but just so you have a little better understanding of the whole tariff situation, I saw a post by Dr. Insensitive Jerk, who is a working economist.
He obviously doesn't go by his real name.
And he was explaining that even if Amazon had, Showing the tariff cost on top of the base price, you still wouldn't know how much extra you're paying because the vendor might be eating some of it.
So, for example, if somebody was producing something for $0.10 and selling it for $2 and they had a big tariff, They might say, our margins are so good,
we won't pass it all on to the consumer.
We'll just lower our base price.
And then when you add the tariff on, it'll be pretty close to the price you were paying before.
So you never know how much the vendor is eating.
So even if you saw the tariff cost, that wouldn't necessarily tell you that you were seeing the extra cost.
It might not be extra.
So just know that.
And Trump had mentioned something about that, too.
He said the tariff costs are not necessarily going to be what you pay because the vendor might have to use some of it.
There's also some, what I think is fake news, that Trump says he might be coming up with a huge tax cut because we'd be making so much money from the tariffs that he would use the tariff income instead of Tax income?
Does anybody think that's true?
I don't think the numbers come even close to working.
Because on one hand, he's put these big tariffs on everybody.
But on the other hand, the whole point of the tariffs is to negotiate away tariffs.
So that they're either really small or they go away.
So he can't have it both ways.
He can't be using it as a negotiating tool.
With the purpose of getting rid of tariffs both directions, at the same time, he's going to use that as a major source of income.
You've got to pick one.
And I don't think the one where he uses that as a source of income makes sense.
And also, it would be a tax.
It would just be a different form of tax.
It wouldn't be replacing a tax.
And I also wonder, would that be better or worse for low-income people?
If you're a low-income person and you're probably not paying a lot in federal income tax in the first place, but everything you buy is going to be a little more expensive if there's a tariff on top of it.
So are you going to be happier because you're paying your taxes through a tariff than if you just paid it directly to the government?
Yeah, none of this works.
And then Trump says, in the coming weeks and months, we'll pass the largest tax cuts in American history.
I don't think that's even a little bit true, but there may be somebody who gets some tax cuts.
We'll see.
I doubt it will be the biggest one in American history.
According to The Hill, the EU's Ursula von der Leyen, Ursula von der Leyen, She was saying that Trump's tariff policy was, quote, unpredictable.
Now, is that an insult?
To say that his tariff policy is unpredictable?
Well, it feels like she doesn't understand the tariff policy.
Because you know how the Europeans could make the tariff policy predictable?
They could negotiate.
It doesn't matter if they're unpredictable now.
The entire point is that they would sit in a room and come up with a very predictable but different set of tariffs and or no tariffs.
So if anybody wants to solve the problem of the tariffs looking unpredictable, all you have to do is call a meeting and then negotiate it and you'll know exactly what you're getting.
So all the Democrats who are...
Complaining because Trump's tariff rule looks like it was poorly planned and it looks like it's chaos and he keeps changing it and all that.
None of that matters because the entire point is to get you in the same room and then make it predictable so you don't have to worry about any of the unpredictable stuff.
But the unpredictable part is what gets you in the room.
Because you can't handle the unpredictable.
Trump's approach to negotiating the tariffs is kind of perfect.
It just doesn't look like it if you don't know how things work in the real world.
Every one of these people complaining about the chaos and the unpredictability, they have complete control over that.
Just call a meeting, negotiate a trade deal, you'll have all the predictability you want.
Everybody's happy.
Apparently, China has sort of quietly, they say, issued a whitelist, meaning some things that will not be tariffed.
And that would include pharma, microchips, and aircraft parts.
And they're doing it kind of quietly.
Now, the pharma part I had not seen before.
I'd seen the tech part before because I knew that they were...
Getting flexible on microchips and aircraft parts.
But the thing I was most worried about in terms of shortages was the pharma.
And it could be that China has figured out that if they make it difficult for us to buy socks, eh, no big deal.
If they make it difficult for us to buy new paperweight for the office, No big deal.
Most of the things that you buy on Amazon, if you couldn't buy them for three months, how much would that really affect you?
Right?
There are things you want, and there's things you prefer, and it'd be great if he could get it quickly.
But most things are not going to make any difference at all.
But I'll tell you what would make a difference if you can't get your meds.
So they may have correctly determined That if they turn off the meds, China is just done.
Because that's the difference between it would be inconvenient to do business with you versus we can never do this again.
We have to immediately bring all our pharma locally.
We have to speed that up.
So I think China is being smart.
If they cut off our pharma, we're not going to forgive that.
That is a one-way trip.
So, we'll see.
You know the story about all of the power outages in Europe?
I guess it was Spain and Portugal and a little bit of France.
And the story was that it was the renewables.
Oh, it's because you have solar and wind and your renewables don't work.
Well, I saw a report from Reuters.
That it's not the renewables.
So it's not the reliance on renewables that's to blame.
You know what's to blame?
Rather than blaming the renewables, the issue appears to be the management of renewables.
So it's not the renewables.
The renewables are fine.
It's just the management of the renewables in the modern grid.
So...
That's different?
A little bit.
A little bit.
But not super different.
I guess a bunch of conservative groups, mostly libertarian groups, are urging Congress to overturn the Biden administration's approval of California's gas car ban.
This is in just the news, reporting it.
So you might not know this, but California is one of several states, there are 11 states now, that have signed on to sort of match the California plan that would essentially eliminate gas-powered cars by 2035.
And that would start phasing in very quickly in 2026.
So there'd be a real big impact on all that stuff.
So it does seem to me that if Congress stays Republican, that might get overturned.
Now, that would just be one example of something that California is doing to ruin the entire country.
It's ruining the entire automotive industry.
Is there anything else we can do for you?
When was the last time you heard a story about California did something smart or that it was good for the rest of the country?
Well, let's look at a few other things that are in the news from California.
Apparently, Governor Newsom has said about California, quote, we've been doing doge but better for literally six years.
Do you think California has been cutting things with a scalpel for six years?
Does that sound even a little bit true?
I saw Joel Pollack of Breitbart writing about this, and he points out, That Gavin Newsom's first budget in 2019 was $209 billion, and his latest budget proposal for 2025 is $322 billion.
So maybe he should have used the chainsaw and not the scalpel.
And the state, as Joel points out, the state is borrowing money to fund basic health care.
It's unbelievable that Gavin Newsom would even try to convince people that he's been doing Doge for six years.
No, he hasn't.
He's been doing the opposite.
Meanwhile, according to the Financial Times, the big oil companies look like they're going to have their worst year since the pandemic because the price of oil keeps going down.
But is that good news or bad news?
So if the price of oil...
If your inflation goes down, wouldn't that make the Federal Reserve lower interest rates?
And if you've got lower interest rates, wouldn't that make everything better?
So if you're worried about the oil companies themselves, they might be having not their best year coming up.
But if you're looking at the country, what we're looking at is let's get a lot of oil going so that we can, you know, that the supply and demand will fix our inflation.
So that might be happening.
At the same time, and also related to inflation, we got the new jobs report from ADP anyway.
And it doesn't look so good.
So not many jobs were added.
Worse than expected.
We were hoping for 114,000 jobs, but we got about half of that.
And it was the lowest monthly total since February 2022.
And then also February was revised down.
So jobs not looking so strong.
But what happens when jobs are not looking so strong?
Then the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates.
So if you look at the price of energy going down and you look at the employment going down, we should be in a situation where the Fed is almost certainly going to have to lower interest rates.
And when you lower interest rates, the stock market goes up and it's easier to handle your national debt and everything else is a little bit better.
So with economics, it's hard to know what's good news and what's bad news because almost everything that's good news for somebody is bad news for somebody else and vice versa.
This is a perfect example.
According to Newsmax, some Republican senators are trying to make the Trump investment executive order a law.
So apparently Trump has an executive order to accelerate the external investments in the United States.
So if somebody wanted to invest a billion dollars or more in the United States, rather than get a bunch of red tape and regulations and approvals and whatever else, that the United States would make it easy.
And so these, I guess, a couple of Republican senators...
Blackburn and Budd and Ricketts have introduced legislation to make that permanent, which seems to me like just a perfectly good idea.
I don't think there's any downside to that.
Breitbart is actually reporting that.
Well, here's a story that's just shocking.
This is just shocking.
You all know, I think most of you know, Robbie Starbuck.
He's been one of the activists who's gotten a bunch of big companies to change their DEI policy.
So that's one of the things he's most known for.
But apparently he checked on himself on the Meta AI.
And Meta says some really untrue and horribly defamatory things about him.
And I'm going to tell you what they are.
But you have to understand, none of this is true.
Right?
So, before I start, none of it's true.
It's just completely made up.
So, according to Metta, and he's doing a lawsuit to sue Metta for a lot, Metta claims that Robbie Starbucks appeared on Nick Fuente's show and that he's spoken at his rallies.
And supported him.
The truth is, they've never even met.
They've never even met.
Didn't do any of those things.
Meta AI claims that Starbucks engaged in Holocaust denial, which has literally never happened.
It just has never happened.
Meta says that Starbucks tells advertisers not to advertise with him.
Because of the lies it invented.
So that's bad.
That directly goes to the finances.
Meta tells employers not to hire me because of the lies that Meta itself invented.
And, oh my God, this is so bad I can't even believe it.
Meta suggested that Robbie Starbucks' kids be taken away from him.
Because it would be better for them to be raised by someone more friendly to DEI and transgenderism.
Oh, my God.
And Mehta claims that he's been sued for defamation and emotional distress, which has never happened.
So all of this is just completely made up.
And he said he's been trying to fix it privately since last year.
But instead of fixing it, Metta has given them the runaround.
So I decided to go on Metta and see what it says about me.
And Metta says I'm a Holocaust denier, and that's what my podcast is about.
I'm not a Holocaust denier, and I've certainly never said that on a podcast or anywhere else.
So apparently Meta doesn't like me any more than it likes Robbie Starbuck.
Now, I'll let Robbie Starbuck sue him, but oh my god, let me just say this to Meta.
Fuck you, assholes.
Fuck you.
And you pieces of shit.
You absolute pieces of shit.
This is so bad.
You need to fix it right away.
Well, let's talk about some other fake news.
I saw James Carville appeared on Fox News, and he was making some claims about Trump.
Now, this is dangerous territory, so you have to listen carefully to what I actually say so that meta doesn't come up with a whole new rumor about me, okay?
So, have you heard the rumor?
And Carville was making the claim.
That Trump is a Nazi.
And he was giving his evidence.
So here's some of Carville's evidence that Trump is a Nazi.
He claimed that Trump had a copy of Mein Kampf in his bedside.
Do you think that's true?
How many of you think it's true that Trump had a copy of Hitler's book Mein Kampf in his bedside?
No, that's not true.
There is something that Ivana, his first wife, had claimed to someone else who made the claim, so there's some hearsay, but the claim was never Mein Kampf.
That was never even rumored to be true.
What was rumored was that he had a copy of Hitler's speeches that was given to him by somebody else.
Let me ask you this.
How many books has Trump read that you're aware of?
None.
His ghostwriter, Tony Schwartz, said that Trump basically doesn't read books because he doesn't have the attention span to read a whole book.
Do you think that Trump actually read that book?
No, because I don't think he read any other books.
I don't think he read any others.
I asked Grok to give me a list of books that we know Trump did read, and one of the ones was Sun Tzu, The Art of War.
And I'm thinking to myself, do you really think he read that?
You know, I love Trump, but he's not a book reader.
So whether or not this book had been given to him or not, He certainly didn't read it.
Anyway, here's what I think.
I think there's a reason that somebody would give it to him.
And here's where it gets dangerous, so I've got to pick my words carefully.
For the people who are familiar with persuasion or want to learn persuasion, one of the most obvious things that you'd like to do is see what the enemy would do if they were trying to persuade you.
So if you were a sports team, you'd want to watch some film of the opponent.
If you were a persuader, you'd want to see what might someone else be doing to me that I don't know is persuasion.
So it would make perfect sense for somebody interested in persuasion to read Hitler's speeches.
Do you know why I've never read Hitler's speeches or Mein Kampf?
Only one reason.
So if somebody ever asks me if I've read them, I don't have to lie.
And I'll say, nope.
And indeed, I've never read them.
But would it be useful if I did?
Yes, totally.
It would be completely useful.
Because I would be super interested in looking at the technique.
Because that's like the ultimate evil,
persuasion is the biggest part of what Heller was doing, otherwise he couldn't have done anything.
So I would very much like to know what kind of technique he's using, very much like a football coach would very much like to know what kind of plays does the opposing team run.
Of course I'd like to know what the enemy is up to.
Of course.
Now, here's the other thing.
Why would he still have it?
Well, I'm going to make an analogy.
I'm just speculating on this.
If somebody gave you, as a gag gift, a sex toy, let's say they gave you an inflatable woman or something, and you weren't interested in it because that's not your thing, would you feel comfortable just putting it in your normal trash?
Would you?
Because if somebody saw the inflatable woman in your trash, they're going to say, oh, man.
What's going on with this guy?
So even if you want to throw it away, you'd have to find some way to wrap it up or concealing it before it even went in the trash, right?
So throwing away your Hitler's speeches book, not so easy.
So what would you do instead of throwing it away?
Maybe.
You might throw it in a drawer just to get it out of the way.
Because throwing it in the garbage might make it more visible to people who are your housekeepers, etc.
Here's something else.
And we don't even know who put it in the bed stand or if it was in the bed stand or if any of that is real.
But let me tell you why it's important to know what techniques Hitler used.
And the answer is, it's the same technique that Carville is using.
Carville is using Hitler's techniques.
Hitler's techniques, which I don't know from reading any of Hitler's books, but I watch the History Channel and, you know, it's one of those things that anybody in Persuasion knows, is the big lie.
They start with a big lie, so wild that your brain goes, what?
That's so big.
That must be true, or they wouldn't say it.
The big lie is that Trump is somehow Hiller.
You can't get a bigger lie than that, right?
So then, the way you press it is you get the media on your side, and then you repeat it endlessly, and that's the biggest part of the trick.
You find a target, you tell a big lie, and then you repeat it endlessly.
The core of the Hitler persuasion method.
That is exactly what Carville is doing.
So Carville is not only using Hitler's technique very overtly.
I mean, there's no doubt about it.
Jamie Raskin, same thing.
They're both making claims about Trump that are just unbelievably, ridiculously too big of a lie.
For people to even accept, but it's the bigness of the lie that makes them believe it.
Because they think, well, these public figures wouldn't say it unless it was true, right?
Yes, they would.
If they're following Hitler's model, which is what Carville's doing and Raskin are doing.
They're following Hitler's model.
And telling this big lie about these speeches...
That's exactly the Hitler technique right there.
So, watch out for that.
The other thing that Carville brought up is that, you probably heard the story, that Trump once had dinner with Nick Fuentes.
Now, is that true?
Or is that fake?
Well, it's...
It's partly true, but Trump didn't know he was having dinner with Nick Fuentes.
So what happened was there was going to be a dinner at Mar-a-Lago with several people.
One of those people was a troublemaker and invited Nick Fuentes and didn't really fully disclose who Nick Fuentes is, and Trump was not familiar with him, which I believe.
I believe he was not familiar with him.
And so he wouldn't do it again, because once Trump found out, You know, reputationally, what was going on there?
Of course he would never do it again.
So that's fake news.
That's a Hitler technique.
It's a giant lie, and they throw in all the other lies until you've seen so many lies in the same category that when Elon Musk puts his hand in the air, they can tell you that it's a Hitler salute, and it all makes sense because of all the other Hitler things happening.
With the Republicans.
It's pure Hitler technique.
So when you see Carville and Raskin telling these big lies, you know, like the fine people hoax, the fine people hoax was a perfect example of the big lie.
That's a Hitler technique.
So they're using the Hitler technique while projecting onto Trump and Musk that they're Hitler.
It's just classic technique.
And they're completely aware of it, by the way.
It's not some accidental thing.
They're 100% aware of it.
They know they're lying.
And they know that the lie works.
Because a certain number of people do believe them.
Anyway, let's talk about Harvard's racism.
According to Axios, the Harvard president has apologized.
For some of the anti-Semitism that's happened on campus.
And part of it might have been stimulated by the fact that they just got a report in that had been authorized a while ago but just completed.
So they had two internal reports.
One was to find out how much anti-Semitism there was at Harvard.
But the other one was to find out how much Islamophobia there was.
So that's fair.
Might as well look at both.
And it turns out that there is both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, and there's quite a bit of it.
So Harvard finally is sort of admitting, and it might be just because, you know, it's on both sides.
If they had only found anti-Semitism, would he have apologized?
Would they have treated it differently?
Or is it because there's both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia?
Was that the thing that allowed him to finally say, all right, all right, we've got to do better than this?
I don't know.
But it seems to me that that's an unfixable situation because it's a little like Gaza.
You know, if you put the people who are anti-Semitic with the people who are Islamophobic,
Islamophobic.
And you put him in the same college.
It's not going to go well.
So the only way you're going to fix it is a physical separation.
It's not like the college is going to fix either of those things.
They might be able to fix some kind of public behavior, but you're not really going to fix people's internal opinions.
So, Trump's now going after what he calls the fake polls.
Stephen Miller even went after Fox News for their own polling.
So, of course, this whole 100-day thing allows all the fake news to say, oh, the public doesn't like the first 100 days.
Now, why are they focusing on the 100 days?
Just because it's a big round number.
It's a completely random number.
There is no...
No reason in the world that we should be looking at polls of what people think about the first hundred days.
It doesn't make any sense at all.
But it's something that's easy to write about and it doesn't cost the news people much to research it because it's just, you know, a poll.
So Rasmussen, which is a polling company, had recently done some posts on X. About how all the major polls were apparently rigged for Kamala.
And we know that they were rigged because, first of all, Rasmussen is the only one that had the accurate number because they weren't rigging it.
And the only other people who had the accurate number that Kamala was never had was Kamala's internal polling.
And the internal polling apparently is more accurate than the public ones.
So even...
One of Kamala Harris' main advisors had admitted that their own internal polling, the good stuff, had never matched the fact that all of these other TV network polls were saying that Kamala was ahead.
They actually knew those polls were fake.
They knew it the entire time.
And so Stephen Miller is just going at it in an interview.
With Fox News, he even blamed Fox News' polling as being Anahuac, according to him.
So I guess we're going from fake news to fake polls.
I saw some extra accusations about Tish James, Letitia James, the one who prosecuted Trump.
And she had her own problems of allegedly falsifying some mortgage records and something in that domain.
But according to CrowdSource the Truth and two researchers, Charles Ortel and Bob Bishop, there might be something more to it.
So I didn't really understand the argument, so we'll have to wait and see.
But there is something about a fake charity.
And changing the name.
There's a whole complicated thing that looks like maybe she was up to something deeper than just trying to get a good mortgage.
But we'll wait for that.
I don't think the details of this quite make sense to me, but we'll find out.
So just know that there's some deeper accusations, but in my view...
Not really proven.
So I guess it involves a fake non-profit, some kind of sketchy bank in India, some kind of liens, and $100 million of taxpayer dollars.
So what any of those things would have to do with her getting a mortgage on her house?
I don't know.
But that's the accusation.
So we'll wait on that.
You may have seen some clips of Jack Posobiec.
Getting roughed up at a Jamie Raskin event where Raskin was talking to some union guys.
And Jack yelled out some things to Raskin at the end of Raskin's talk.
And the union guys didn't like it because it was not exactly pro-Raskin.
And they actually roughed him up.
They actually roughed him up.
And I guess he's going to get law enforcement involved.
I don't know how bad it was, but just based on the hard-to-determine video, they got physical right away.
Now, does that ever happen in the other direction?
If there had been a Trump event and somebody had yelled out something, because all he did was yell out something, do you think that the Trump supporters would have started roughing that person up?
I don't think so.
I mean, in 2015 or 2016, there were some rallies where there were some accusations that people were going to rough people up, but for the most part, it's not a thing.
But the Democrats just immediately went to violence.
And I think this is all part of the Hitler stuff.
If you believe that the Trump people are all just Hitler supporters, then violence is called for.
It would make sense if that's what you believed.
So if you look at the Carville and Raskin persuasion, you know, they're using Hitler's technique.
That's why Jack Besabek gets roughed up.
I hope it wasn't too bad.
Meanwhile, John Bolton was on CNN.
He was talking about P. Hegseth.
And he actually said the following statement.
He said, Hegseth should resign for his own safety's sake.
His own safety's sake?
Safety from...
from whom?
Safety in the might-be-killed?
Safety in the might-be-beaten-up?
By what?
The Pentagon?
Does John Bolton know something we don't?
Or is he once again doing Hitler-like persuasion?
And making it look like it would be perfectly reasonable for Pete Hegseth to be the subject of some kind of revenge or violence or something.
This is so across the line.
I mean, there's a very big red line of things you shouldn't say on TV because it would stimulate violence.
This is one of them.
He should resign for his own safety's sake.
That's basically giving a green light to violence, in my opinion.
Because he's not saying we should do everything we can to protect them.
He's saying he should run away from the violence because he's almost acting like it would be justified.
This is terrible.
Anyway, as I've told you many times, complexity.
It's how corruption usually hides.
You know, anything that's too complicated, like a financial thing that's too complicated, there's always somebody stealing money when you get to the bottom of it.
Complexity always hides corruption.
I'll give you some examples.
Michael Schellenberger was talking about, and I don't understand this story.
That the CIA director, Gina Haspel, had conspired with something called the OCCRP, you know, one of these USAID NGOs, I guess, Adam Schiff and USAID, to topple the United States government in 2019.
Now, I don't really see how it all fits together because it's complicated.
But the accusation is, and I guess...
Michael Schellenberger was talking to Jesse Waters about this.
I guess I'm not going to get into much more of it, but the idea is that USAID and the CIA had a complicated scheme to try to get Trump impeached and may have tried to change the election on three different occasions.
But it's complicated.
And so even when it's explained to me, I go, uh, what?
You know, I'm sure that Schellenberger explains it well in his substack, which I haven't looked at yet.
But just know that there's an accusation that the CIA, and apparently it seems well documented, tried to overthrow the country three times.
Of course.
And then Data Republican on X has another great investigative reveal about USAID, what you'd call the money machine.
And let me just read it to you.
You'll see how complicated it is, and you'll see how the corruption hides there.
So Congress doesn't stop it, and it in this case is the money laundering and, I would guess, corruption, because Congress is deeply complicit.
Senators and representatives allocate taxpayer dollars to USAID, but that's only the start.
The International Republican Institute, the IRI, and National Democratic Institute, the NDI, both recipients of USAID funding,
including actively serving members of Congress on their boards.
These same organizations also serve on ACVFA, the advisory body that workshops where USAID money flows.
The presidents of IRI, NDI, and the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition known as the USGLC, all hold seats on the ACVFA.
Gates Foundation and other members of USGLC also sit on ACVFA.
USGLC, meanwhile, operates as a revolving door.
Former senators and representatives from both parties serve in its leadership, and internal emails show the group, actively pursuing newly elected members of Congress, To bring them into its fold.
This recruitment involves regular dinners, direct outreach, and strategic lobbying.
Now, how much of that did you understand?
Now, I'm pretty sure it's all accurate, but it's so complicated.
All these NGOs and the State Department and the USAID involves...
You know, Democrats and Republicans, and they've got advisory roles, and the advisory roles tell who gets funded, and the funding goes to someplace that's probably their spouse, or maybe it's them.
Oh, my God.
Just pure corruption.
All right.
So I told you that meta-AI thinks I'm a Holocaust denier.
So I was noticing a few other things online that get to my reputation.
Now, these are just coincidences, but they all happened yesterday.
So I saw a post about how to be a better writer, and it featured Naval as the one recommending this 250-word piece, and there was a thread that went through the details that were in that piece.
Do you know where I'm going with this?
That's my piece.
Now, I am mentioned toward the end of the thread.
It does mention that I'm the author.
But why isn't Naval featured with his picture as the person who recommended it?
And by the way, whenever Naval recommends that piece, he always mentions my name as the author.
So he never doesn't mention it.
And he's mentioned it a number of times.
Shouldn't I be the one that's featured?
Because I wrote it.
It's one of the most successful things I've ever done in my entire career.
And it starts with Naval.
Now, I love Naval, so this is nothing about Naval.
It's about the person who did the thread.
And I'm thinking to myself, am I being subtly erased from the story of the thing that I personally wrote?
So, yeah, I kind of shook my head and went on.
And then I saw somebody else's thread about a book that is just totally amazing.
It's called Atomic Habits by James Clear.
And it's a long thread that shows all the key tips in that book, which has sold 5 million copies.
It's one of the most successful business books of all time.
But nowhere does it mention...
That James Clear has credited me with some of the key aspects of his book, from my book, Had It Failed Almost Everything and Still Went Big.
And I'm not positive this is true, but I don't know that there's anything in his book that isn't also in my book, which he read, and he credits me.
Now, he doesn't credit me for every single thing that has some similarity.
And his book is written for a different audience.
It's more for a business audience, so it has more of a business-y kind of vibe, which worked very well.
He must have done a great job because it's super successful.
My book was written for a 14-year-old and up.
So I was more narrative, storytelling, persuasion to get you to try things.
He's more data-oriented.
But the tips are...
Pretty much right end of my book.
Now, I don't want to over-claim, but I'd love to see what it is that's in his book that wasn't in my book.
I don't know what that would be, because when I look at the thread, I go, oh, yeah, yeah, I said that, I said that.
So, that's weird.
The most successful and important thing I've ever done for civilization is that book.
And so I'm getting erased from that story.
And then I saw that today the Wall Street Journal had a story about a lot of people are waking up at 4 a.m. now.
So apparently it's becoming a thing to get up really early.
And I asked myself before I read the article, I thought, huh, I wonder if I'll be mentioned in the article because I'm one of the public figures who's kind of well-known for getting up at...
You know, today was 3 a.m., but, you know, usually 4, 4.30 or so.
And I start reading the article, and it says that one of the influences about getting up at 4 a.m. was James Clear, the author of Atomic Habits.
So, I'm sure he did.
But I'm pretty sure I might have mentioned it in one of my books, if you know what I mean.
So I seem to be getting sort of erased from history.
You know, maybe not intentionally, but in the weirdest way.
Anyway.
Skip that.
So apparently Anduril, one of the American high-tech military companies, someone knew it's a Lucky Palmer's company.
It has an anti-drone swarm technology that really looks impressive.
It's portable, and it looks like you can just put it on the back of a truck and it's not very big.
And it showed a video.
I think the video was CGI, but it showed it basically taking out a sky full of drones at the same time.
Now, if that's real, then the arms race of drones versus anti-drone...
Stuff is getting really interesting.
So I'm sure it's real.
I don't think that Andrew Hill would put it down if they couldn't do it.
Speaking of fake news, according to Zero Hedge, Ukraine is ready to sign a mineral deal as early as today.
Does anybody think that's going to happen?
How many of you think that Ukraine is going to sign that big mineral deal with the U.S. today?
Anybody?
I don't know.
I'm going to bet against it, but that's what Zero Hedge is saying.
And then apparently Trump's threats to Mexico worked.
There was some issue about Mexico withholding some water that we had some kind of a long-term deal and the water was being withheld from American farmers.
But with Trump's Tariff threats.
Mexico kind of corrected that, and now that water has returned.
So the farmers are getting their water.
Makes you wonder if Biden could have gotten that done.
I think Biden would have waited for them to correct whatever they were going to correct.
There was something they were trying to do while they were withholding the water.
But Trump got it done.
At a recent White House, Presser, Fox News reporting that former Mumford& Son musician who has become political, he was one of the, what would you call it,
one of the press, independent press people in the room, and he asked Carolyn Levitt this question.
He said, he asked if the White House And Donald Trump would give political asylum to UK citizens who were being punished for their speech.
Isn't that a good question?
That's a great question.
And apparently Leavitt said she hadn't had any conversations about that, but she said she'd talk to the national security team and see if it's something the administration would entertain.
So, maybe.
And I would be completely in favor of that, by the way.
If there are people who are risking jail because of something they said on social media, yeah, we should offer them some kind of asylum in the U.S. According to Newsmax,
the Department of Education is investigating Complaint in Chicago that they have some kind of racist program that was only going to be available if you were black.
But since nobody seems to be getting a good education in Chicago, there's some complaints that it was just racist.
And then in related news, according to the Federalist, reading scores have plummeted in the blue states, like the one I'm in, but they're rising in the red ones.
Now, when I first read that, I said to myself, I'll bet that's not real.
Maybe it has something to do with the blue states have more immigrants coming in, so they're not even speaking English, so maybe it lowers all their scores or something.
But apparently Mississippi and Louisiana in particular had implemented some effective changes to their schooling.
And they're focusing more on phonics.
And basically, they're just doing the things that have always worked in the past, but we stopped doing.
And it worked.
So the reading performance of the people in Mississippi and Louisiana is looking great.
So it turns out these are completely fixable problems.
And so good job, Mississippi and Louisiana.
I'm very impressed.
They put money into it.
They trained teachers on literacy and provided dedicated reading coaches in school.
Basically, they did all the things that make sense, that you're sure would work just based on common sense, and they worked, just like you'd think they would.
And lastly, in science, there are tiny 3D-printed materials, according to ZME Science.
They're the strongest deal, but lightest styrofoam.
I guess they used carbon and they print it so it has this little lattice structure, but they used machine learning to figure out the exact nature of the lattice so that it would be as light as styrofoam but as strong as steel.
So that could change a lot.
Imagine how much would change if you had a material that was strong as steel but as light as styrofoam.
Who knows how much they can make of it, but they can 3D print it, so it looks like it's somewhat practical.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, that's what I have for today.
I hope you enjoyed it, and I'll see all you YouTubers and Rumble people and X people tomorrow, same time, same place.
And for locals, I'm going to talk to you privately in 30 seconds.