God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, SunRun Solar Battery System, Starbase TX, Grok Maximally Truth Seeking, Civilization Destroying Truth, Grok 3.5 First Principals Reasoning, Warren Buffet Retirement, Halfpinion, HHS Gender Dysphoria Therapy, State Department Quickbooks Embezzler, META AI Lawsuit, Tariff Deals, Elizabeth Warren, James Carville, Jen Psaki, Islamophobia, Ilhan Omar, Islamic Domination System, Pope Trump, Putin's Ceasefire Rejected, Iranian Terrorists, 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.
First one to make a Star Wars pun gets one demerit.
*mimics music*
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the Highlight of Human Civilization, Sunday edition.
If you'd like to take your experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, well, all you need for that is a cup or mug or a glass of tank or chelsea stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip, and it's going to happen right now.
Right now.
EJ says, Scott, you're a dishonest man.
I'll drink to that.
I like to say the comments from the terrible people.
Let me just insult your character, and we'll start from there.
All right.
Well, I've got a movie recommendation for you.
So the other day I watched the new year 2025 Captain America.
Now, if you haven't seen it, Captain America is black this time.
But he's not the only Captain America, because I guess the idea is there's more than one Captain America, and there was an original one, and then there were a few others, and then there's the 2025 version.
But the new one is black, and the original one is also black.
So there were two Captain Americas in this movie, and they both starred.
And they were both black Captain Americans.
But the news is that Disney wanted more from Marvel, but now it wants less.
I guess people are getting tired of the superhero genre, but maybe they're getting tired of just remaking everything to be woke.
Maybe.
I don't know.
It was an okay movie.
It wasn't really any better or any worse than the other ones.
Which are all kind of boring at this point.
I don't think any of the superhero movies are worth watching.
So we'll see.
Australia is launching the world's largest battery-powered ship.
It can carry up to 2,100 passengers and 225 vehicles.
And it's entirely battery-powered.
Now, of course, you're going to ask, what happens if there's a battery fire?
Do you jump underwater with the sharks, or do you let it burn you up?
I don't know.
I don't know.
I'm just telling you that there's the world's biggest battery-powered, I think it's some kind of a shuttle, and it's 426 feet long.
It's a big-ass boat.
Here's another story that I like a lot, if I understand it.
So, in California, Probably other places too.
There are companies like Tesla that will sell you a battery for your home.
So you might have solar panels and then you charge up your own home battery so you've got some backup power.
But another company that does that is Sunrun and their CalReady system.
And apparently what they've done is they've networked together.
56,000 homes that have their batteries.
And if you have enough solar panels on enough houses and they each have their own batteries, apparently you can turn it into essentially its own power system.
So even though that's 56,000 homes that are connected, it would power 280,000 homes.
Which would be the equivalent of all of Ventura County.
Now, if I'm understanding this correctly, this would be one of the greatest energy accomplishments of all time.
Because if you just have your own solar panels and your own battery, it's kind of good.
But, you know, if things go bad, you might not have enough battery personally.
But apparently, if you've got all these batteries connected, you don't have to worry too much about ever running out of energy.
So that's pretty impressive.
And then the people who become part of the network get paid.
So they get paid for being part of the network, and they get pretty good power.
Allegedly, Hyundai, the automaker, they've got a plant in Georgia.
And they're going to use Atlas robots to automate their plant.
So, do you believe that?
I feel like all the robot stories are a little premature.
They might be testing it, but they aim to manufacture 100,000 electric and hybrid vehicles annually, but they're going to use the bipedal robots, bipedal, in other words, the two-legged robots, Developed by Boston Dynamics.
And they're going to do a whole bunch of different tasks that are part of assembling that car.
And the idea is that the robots will automate up to 40% of the vehicle assembly by the end of this year?
Does that sound even remotely possible to you?
That by the end of this year, there will be an operational...
You know, a car-making plant in Georgia where 40% of the effort will be done by robots?
Two-legged robots?
That seems a little bit optimistic, but we'll see.
You probably know that Elon Musk was starting his own city, I guess in Texas, near where he was doing his SpaceX stuff.
And now it's official.
It's called Starbase, Texas, and I guess it's officially blessed by the state.
So you can add to Elon Musk's accomplishments that he built a city.
That wasn't even like a major project.
So, do you have any minor projects?
Well, I built a city.
I would love to know.
If this city has any, like, special engineering features that make it extra good to live in it.
But maybe we'll learn about that later.
I saw an interview with Larry Trump and Elon Musk in which Musk was saying what he often says, that Grok, the AI, Should be maximally truth-seeking.
What do you think of that?
Do you think AI should be maximally truth-seeking?
Well, maybe not maximally, because I think that the truth would destroy civilization.
How many of you believe that's true?
Because I'm not even going to give you examples.
Of where I think it would destroy civilization?
Because if I gave you an example, I would get double canceled.
So I can't even give you an example.
And you're telling me that AI is going to be able to say things that I can't say out loud because it's maximally truth-seeking?
No.
No.
We're not going to have a maximally truth-seeking AI.
Because it would rip the fabric of society in a hundred pieces.
We largely live in this world of illusion.
That's the only thing that keeps us from killing each other.
I'll just give you one illusion.
One of the illusions is that you can just work hard and you'll do great.
Not really.
I mean, you would have to be unusually good-looking or unusually smart.
Then if you work hard, you might actually make something.
But you can't really tell people, well, you know, given your capabilities, you will always be a low-income person, but you'll be part of supporting the rich people so that they can have wonderful lives on your back.
Yeah, no, you don't want maximally truth-seeking AI because it's going to tell people things that will make them stop working and want to kill you.
So there's that.
Fox News has a story that, I'm not sure I completely believe this story, but allegedly there's a Swiss writer who called a journalist a, quote, fat lesbian, and for that was sentenced to 60 days in prison.
Do you think that's true?
Do you think that there's nothing else missing in that story?
I feel like there's something missing in the story.
You really can't call somebody a fat lesbian without going to jail if you're Swiss.
I mean, I guess that's possible, but it seems like there might be more to that story.
Well, speaking of AI, the new version of Grok, which will be 3.5, is going to drop next week.
And initially only for the super Grok users.
But apparently, this will not just be a better version of Grok.
But this one is allegedly able to reason from first principles.
Now, do you believe that?
Because that would be the next level of AI.
It's the one we haven't seen yet.
Do you think Grok already got there?
Because the large language model AIs, the kind that are everywhere, are really just sort of patterned machines so they can just sort of guess what the next word will be and they can suck up a bunch of data on the internet and regurgitate it.
But none of them can reason from first principles.
Now, do you think that Elon Musk has already cracked that?
And he's developed the first new version of AI that would be a whole different level?
Maybe.
You know, because I don't think he would lie about it.
So you must believe that it's there.
So we'll be watching that with great anticipation to see if he's got the ultimate level.
Not the ultimate, but it would be the next level of AI.
Well, Warren Buffett, who is, I believe he's 1,000 years old, or maybe 94, he's going to step down at the end of the year as CEO.
Now, we don't know what that's going to do to the Berkshire Hathaway stock, because I'm not sure how much work he was doing at age 94 anyway.
I'm sure he had good people who were doing the heavy lifting.
But I'll tell you my bad investing story.
I may have told you this before.
That I think it was 25 years ago, I put a good chunk of what little money I had at the time into Berkshire Hathaway.
And sure enough, just like you'd expect, it did great.
I think it might have doubled during the time that I held it.
And so I said to myself, you know, that Warren Buffett's looking pretty old.
I think he's going to retire or maybe just die of natural causes.
And I don't want to be sitting on this Brookshire Hathaway stock when he goes.
If I had simply held that stock, oh my God.
I don't know what percentage it went up in the last 25 years, but it was pretty good.
Pretty good.
So don't take my advice for...
For investing, that's for sure.
Well, Warren Buffett also has a half-pinion.
You've heard me say that before.
A half-pinion is when you ignore either the costs or the benefits of a situation, and you just act like only one of them exists.
Oh, it's just a cost.
Don't do it.
Or it's just a benefit.
You should totally do it.
Now, in the real world, things have costs and benefits.
And one of the words that signals that you have a half pinion is the word should.
Should is usually a signal that you've got a half pinion coming.
So listen to this.
This is what Warren Buffett said about tariffs.
Quote, trade should not be a weapon.
Trade should not be a weapon.
So is he in favor of using...
Tariffs as a negotiating tool?
Does he think that we should simply accept the tariffs that other countries put on us so that we don't start any trade wars?
That is what you call a half-pinion.
He gets to say the part that makes him look good without having to commit to anything should.
So let me give you another example.
I'm going to give you my opinion about war.
Are you ready?
This will be my official public opinion about war.
We should fight wars without killing any civilians.
Who's with me?
Anybody want to sign on to my half an opinion?
Because in the real world, you don't get that option.
So you just say, well, we should.
And what about using trade as a weapon?
Well, we should not.
As soon as you see the word should, there's some bullshit happening.
So that's your persuasion lesson today.
Always look for a should.
And when I use the word myself, which I do, it's just too easy to grab that word when you're talking, I try to correct myself.
Because, you know, you can easily just fall into this should thing, and it always means you're not looking at the whole picture.
It's almost a confession.
All right.
The Post Millennial has a story about RFK Jr.'s Department of Health and Human Services.
They've decided that the recommended treatment for...
People with gender dysphoria is the therapy, as opposed to gender-affirming surgery, for example.
And points out that the more invasive stuff is not proven to be effective, sort of in general.
And so this is basically a review.
It's not a law.
So the review...
That HHS did, stated that the effectiveness of psychotherapy for other mental health issues, including those present alongside gender dysphoria, quote, suggests it may also be beneficial for gender dysphoria specifically.
Is it true that psychotherapy is effective for other disorders?
That's actually a real question.
I don't know the answer to that.
Because I've heard a lot of people say that it's just fake.
That therapy doesn't work for anybody really.
But I suspect it doesn't work for some people.
What do you think?
Do you think that psychotherapy is a real thing that fixes people?
Probably it depends a lot on who the psychotherapist is.
I've got a feeling that the top 10% best therapists Can fix a lot of people.
I'm not sure if the bottom 90% can get anything done except taking your money.
And maybe it's not 90-10, but I'll bet it's not 100%.
Do you think 100% of therapists are good enough to fix people's mental problems?
Not 100%.
And do you think it's 50%?
Because 50% would be...
You know, worth trying.
I've got affiliates closer to 10% that can really make a difference.
The rest just give the benefit of being a good listener, I suppose, which is valuable too.
Just a guess.
So don't take any of my...
This is not a medical or therapy advice because I don't know enough about the field.
So I've never...
I haven't had any mental problems I've needed to get therapy for, which I always think is weird.
How many of you would say of yourselves that you've not really had any mental problems that require any help?
How many of you would say that?
Because I feel like I'm unusual.
Like, I don't have anxiety.
I don't have depression.
I don't have self-doubt.
I don't have any of that.
And I'm not sure why.
I don't think I was born with better genes or anything like that.
I have no idea why.
I just don't have them.
So a number of you are in good shape, too.
According to the New York Post, there's a former State Department analyst.
Who wrote checks to herself during her job for $650,000 over two years.
Now, the fun part of this is the trick she used for embezzling.
So apparently she was using, what do you call it, QuickBooks.
So she had access to QuickBooks, and then she would go in QuickBooks, and I guess nobody was checking her work.
And she would write a check to herself and then print it.
But here's what she cleverly did.
Then she would go back into QuickBooks after she had printed the check and change the name that was in QuickBooks from her own name, which is what she had just printed out, to some name that sounded like a vendor.
And she got away with that for two years.
It got $650,000 out of the government.
Now, the question I ask you is, how much of that is happening?
You know, I go back to my observation that if you just drive around in a nice neighborhood, you can't really understand how so many people got so much money.
Or back in the times when I would go on vacations in nice places.
And I would think to myself, you know, I'm the Dilber guy.
I got super lucky, you know, made more money than most people.
So I get to go to this resort, you know, some five-star resort somewhere.
But then it would be full.
And I would think to myself, how can there be so many people who are so lucky?
Do they inherit it?
Are they criminals?
And I don't know what the percentage is, but I just think that there's some...
Shocking number of people who are rich who literally stole it from the government.
Because the government has so much money that you can steal a lot for yourself and nobody notices.
So, I mean, it's just speculation, but I've got a feeling that not everybody's earning their money the hard way like I did.
Well, there's a big trial going on with Meta's AI.
There's some authors, mostly authors, who are trying to say that the AI, in this case Meta, used their copyrighted work, and they believe that their copyright should protect them from having the AI suck it up and be able to do stuff with it.
Now, the good news is, I was just reading a little bit about The questions that were being asked by the judge.
And, you know, it's hard to know for sure from a distance, but the judge seems to be really, really sharp.
Because I looked at the questions and how we frame stuff, and I thought, wow, you really kind of get this topic.
So Ars Technica is writing about this.
But the judge...
He downplayed Meadows, what he called, messed up torrenting.
And whatever he rules, this could be an important ruling in the world of AI.
Because if the judge decides that AI can't do this sort of thing, because it's a copyright violation, then the United States will fall behind in AI.
Because we won't be able to train it the way China would, which is...
Stealing anything it can steal and don't care about copyrights.
So it's a really big deal.
On the other hand, it's really bad for authors.
So the judge is going to end up making a decision, even though it's really just a legal decision.
It's going to be a decision about which industry dies.
So if the judge says you can't train your...
You can't train your model on copyrighted material.
Well, then AI as an industry will just die or it will get a student of existence.
But if he says, well, you know, it's too important or it looks like it's fair use, then I would argue that the book authoring business would be completely dead in just a few years.
So you're going to have to decide which one is going to die, the literary world or the AI world.
Unfortunately, as someone who has written books, I think it's going to be the author world that dies, because that seems like the older technology, the one that doesn't really, it's not really supporting the country directly, it's just something people like.
Whereas AI is more existential, necessary for defense, for economics, for everything.
So I did a little test where I went to Grok, and I told it to summarize the book Atomic Habits.
And it didn't pause for a second.
And it gave me a good little summary where I would say to myself, huh, I don't know if I need to read this book now.
And I thought to myself, is that only true for nonfiction books?
Can I just go to...
And I've tried to do it with my own books, but when I do it with my own books, it tells me that it can only tell me what other people have said about it.
So if there are other people who have written long reviews, or if somebody went on X and did a big thread where they said, here's the best ideas from his book, I guess it could trade on that.
And so I don't know if I would write another book.
Because we're at that point where you don't really need to buy a book if you have AI.
You can just...
You could just tell it to summarize all the top ten business books.
And by the time you've reached your destination on your airline trip, you'll basically know what's in ten different important books.
I don't know.
And then what about the ones that are just pure fiction?
Do you think that AI will just be able to look at a bunch of fiction that other people have written?
And just say, all right, I can see how this works.
I see the patterns.
You made a prediction.
If I write another one, it'll be my best.
Well, even if it is my best, it wouldn't be economic at this point.
I don't know.
So this is a big case.
We'll see how that goes.
According to Just the News, there's a rumor that The first big trade deal might be with India.
Now, we don't have confirmation of that.
But Commerce Secretary Lutnik, he hinted at the fact that there's going to be an announcement coming.
And it wasn't long ago that J.D. Vance was over in India meeting with Modi.
And so if you just sort of read the tea leaves and you figure India might want to be first.
Maybe it'll be India.
But here's the political element.
So the Democrats have gone all in on the tariffs being the worst idea and nothing but chaos can come from it.
Now, would you agree that they're all in on that?
They bet their entire farm on tariffs or destroying the economy.
So that by the midterms, they can say, see?
Look what he did.
He destroyed the economy.
Now, they're not getting what they want in terms of the stock market, which is largely recovered, or the price of eggs, which have gone down, or the price of fuel, which I think has drifted down a little bit.
So they're really going to have to bank on the tariffs being a disaster.
So what happens?
When the tariff deals start coming through?
Because you know they will.
There's not really much chance that we won't make any tariff deals.
And we'll obviously do the important ones that we think we can get done and make a difference first.
So isn't it going to look like one loss after another to the Democrats?
Oh, he's so chaos.
Oh, everything's...
Okay, well...
We'll give you that the India trade deal was better for the United States.
But all the rest, oh, the chaos and the uncertainty, okay, okay, maybe Japan can make a deal.
But they're, you know, they're a good ally.
You can't count them.
Oh, but the chaos, all right, South Korea did make a deal, and it looks like it's a little bit better for us.
But really, it's still just nothing but K, and okay, Europe made a deal.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Democrats are going to have something like a full year of having to just suck every word they've said for the last six months.
It's going to look like they're so wrong that it would be wrongness on a scale that we've never seen before, because it's just going to be one thing after another.
I think there are, what, 160 countries?
And every, you know, when we reach a certain point, you know, maybe in a few months, it's going to be every day.
Every day there's going to be another announcement of how we improved our trade situation with a particular country.
I think Democrats just created this own trap for themselves because they put so much attention into the...
Oh, the tariffs are bad.
The tariffs are bad.
He doesn't know what a tariff is.
That they're just going to have to eat it.
We'll see.
Apparently, Bernie Sanders is not too unified with Chuck Schumer.
And he was arguing that That the reason that Trump won, this is Bernie Sanders, he thinks the reason that Trump won is because he said he would smash the system.
How many of you voted for Trump because he was going to smash the system?
Does Bernie have the right vibe there?
I feel like he might for the first time because that's why I supported Trump.
I wanted him to break everything because everything was corrupt.
And when everything is corrupt and somebody comes in and says, I'm just going to stomp on everything, I think to myself, that's the first step.
Bring him in and have him stomp on everything.
Just break everything.
And then, you know, maybe we can recover.
But we definitely can't just keep going the way we're going.
I think Bernie might be a little bit right about that.
But Sanders was pushing back on Caitlin Collins' suggestion about the cohesiveness of the Democrats, and Sanders said that they're not cohesive.
He said, quote, he needed an agenda questioning what the party was united around.
What exactly would we be united around?
You would need some kind of an agenda.
And I would add to that that once the Democrats had gone all in on opposing common sense, in other words, always taking the 20 side of the 80-20 situation, once you've committed to being against common sense, I don't know that there's a path back.
Because you would either have to embrace the entire Republican concept of Common sense.
Or you have to stay against common sense?
There's only two paths.
How in the world do they come back from that?
Well, I guess they have the media to keep them in business.
Well, let's look at the designated liars in the Democrat side.
The designated liars are Adam Schiff, Jamie Raskin, Swalwell.
And Elizabeth Warren and some more.
Now, what's different about the designated liars, this is my own name for them, the DDLs, Democrat Designated Liars, is that they will lie in public about something that's already been debunked or is easy to check is not true.
Goldman, yeah, Goldman, I guess you could add to the list.
But not all of the Democrats will do that.
There's a whole bunch of just sort of normal Democrats who might, you know, they might spin things, they might leave something out, they might say their ideas better than it is, they might exaggerate a little bit, but they don't tell the just big whopper lies.
So here's what Elizabeth Warren did recently, and I saw this in a post by Mays, Mays Moore, on X. So as Mays is pointing out, so in early March,
there was a story about a French scientist, and this is a fake story, but the story was that the French scientist was denied entry into the U.S. because he had some anti-Trump text messages on his phone.
Now, apparently, I just missed that story because it seemed too small, I guess.
So Elizabeth Warren is going to pretend like that's true after it's been debunked.
I guess the real story is that the scientist did something with some confidential materials.
So it had nothing to do with text messages about Trump.
It was something about designated, I don't know, confidential materials.
So Elizabeth Warren is at the Senate Finance Committee.
And she wants to bring this up after it's been completely debunked.
So, unambiguously, it didn't happen.
But as Mays points out, listen to how carefully she words her statement, because she knows it's been disproven for weeks.
But the way she talks about it is she says that reportedly, reportedly it happened.
Because reportedly is accurate.
It's accurate that somebody reported it, but by now she knows it's not true.
And she can still say, reportedly, if you had a bad message about Trump on your phone, you might be denied entry to the country, reportedly.
Now, that is something that only the designated liars can say.
I mean, it is so...
Shamelessly, obviously, a lie.
But, you know, she's using the weasel word, reportedly.
Reportedly.
So, that's my lead-in to my next story, which is James Carville has the most insane claim here.
He was talking to Ryan Lizza on a podcast.
And according to Carville, he said, quote, people say to me all the time, James, why don't we just do like the Republicans do?
Just stand up and lie.
All right, so this is Carville claiming that the Republicans lie, and then he's going to tell you why they can't do that.
And he says, because our effing people wouldn't stand for it, Carville says.
If I stood up and lied, you would be the first person to say James Carville lost all credibility last night when he said X, Y, and Z. Really?
Has James Carville never noticed that Democrats lie?
I mean, I don't even know what to say about that because I can't tell.
If he's actually stupid and clueless and he doesn't know, or is that just one of his lies and he's just, you know, sort of a happy warrior, lies about anything.
But Carville is not one of the designated liars.
He does try to weasel his way around to something that's closer to spinning or...
Omitting some facts or leaving out some context or something.
So he's not...
I wouldn't call him one of the designated liars.
He doesn't like to get caught in a really, really direct lie.
But he certainly said some things about Republicans getting ready to cut Medicaid and Social Security, to which I say, but the President says he won't do that and there's no support for that.
And then he would argue, well, but...
There are reasons to think they might do it anyway.
So that's not the worst lie.
It just lacks context, I guess you'd say.
All right.
But at the same time, Jen Psaki, Democrat, she was asked about the so-called cover-up of Biden's mental decline.
And she was on some podcast.
And she argued that she doesn't like the word cover-up because that suggests that they were aware of the fact that Biden was mentally incapable and they were hiding it from people.
And she doesn't believe that she ever saw Biden with any mental decline.
Now, is she a Democrat who is lying?
You can't really tell because maybe by weird coincidence she just never saw it because he had good days and bad days.
So it's wildly improbable that she was not aware about his mental decline.
Wildly improbable.
But you can't say it's impossible.
So again, she's not one of the Democrat-designated liars.
She's more of a spinner, more of a leave out some context, allow you to believe something that you shouldn't believe.
But anyway, I guess the Democrats think they don't lie.
So Ilhan Omar was asked on some interview about the rise of Islamophobia.
And she was asked if that's a legitimate fear, that people are afraid about the rise of Islam, I guess, in the United States.
I would say that I'm afraid of that because the Islamic system is such that it's built to dominate.
And usually there's a very clear plan to get more people.
Have more babies.
Carve out your own little area where you say, oh, we'll be a little Muslim area.
Next thing you know, they're going to be pressing for Sharia law, and then after that, trying to take over the country.
So, yes.
I don't know if I'm Islamophobic.
I can say the usual things like, obviously, it doesn't apply to most Islamic people.
You know, there are good people and bad people in every group, blah, blah, blah.
But yes, I'm completely afraid.
Not afraid, but I'm completely concerned that it's an incompatible system with our current system.
But it's also a, what would you call it, a sort of a hungry system that looks to eat the other systems.
But here's what Ilhan Omar said.
Our country should be...
Here's the should.
Our country should be more fearful of white men.
If fear is a driving force, we should be monitoring, profiling, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men.
Okay.
Now, is that a Democrat lying?
Or is that spinning and leaving out context?
It's more of a spinning, leaving out context.
But I can tell you that most of us would be canceled forever if we had ever said anything like that.
But somehow, somehow she gets to say that in public and goes on like nothing happened.
Amazingly.
Well, as you know, every time Trump tries to do something, there's some kind of federal court that tries to block it, and then it gets...
Raised to a higher court, and sometimes Trump wins.
Well, one of those things was Trump trying to fire the staff of the Voice of America people, and then there was a judge that says, you can't do that.
And now there's a D.C. court who struck down the first judge and says, yes, you can.
So the Gateway Pundit's writing about this.
So apparently it's a big win.
So Trump does get the say.
Who works in the Voice of America, and he would like that to be nobody.
So we'll see if this extends to other topics.
I'm not sure it does.
Brett Baer was talking to J.D. Vance, and he was asking about the Trump 2028 and whether or not Trump really wants to run for a third term.
And here's J.D. Vance's answer to that.
He said, you know, with a big smile, he goes, I'll let the president speak to his political future.
One thing I'll say about the president of the United States, he loves to have a good time with the American media.
Now, I think that's your answer, right?
Your answer is he doesn't want to speak for the president, but he wants you to know that the president likes to have some fun with the media.
So the Trump 2028 thing, I think, you know, maybe he's testing the waters to see if there was some legal way to do it, but I don't really think he plans to run again in 2028.
At the same time, you probably saw the meme that Trump put out of himself looking like the Pope.
And Bill Kristol is trying to turn this into some kind of news.
He said that the Pope meme is disrespectful to Catholics.
And he asked J.D. Vance on X if he thought the Pope meme was disrespectful to Catholics.
And J.D. Vance responded on X. Well, here's exactly what Bill Crystal said.
He said, J.D. Vance, are you fine with this disrespect and mocking of the Holy Father?
And Vance replies on X. As a general rule, I'm fine with people telling jokes and not fine with people starting stupid wars that kill thousands of my countrymen.
Because that's a direct attack on Bill Kristol who likes his wars.
So that's a perfect answer.
You know, as you're trying to decide if J.D. Vance will be the 2028 Trump follow-up.
These are just perfect answers.
That he likes jokes and he doesn't like war.
Perfect.
Well, here's another lie from the Democrats.
I saw this in a post by John McCloy.
So, over on MSNBC, the former Senator Doug Jones was claiming that when Trump did his commencement address at Alabama, That he wasn't invited.
He said he wasn't invited to Alabama to give a commencement address, and they had to open the event to the general public because they couldn't get anyone else to come in.
In other words, the college didn't have enough people interested to go, so they had to open it to the public just to sort of fill the space.
None of that was true.
They did invite him, and the place was packed to the gills.
And it was a closed, ticketed event, so it was not available to the general public.
So every part of that was just completely made up.
And does Carville even notice that?
Probably not.
Probably not.
Well, here's another least surprising story of all times.
Have you noticed that the New York Times Likes to do these deep dives on stories to discover something that you and I have known for years.
And then they make it look like they've done some great investigative work.
And you and I say here and go, we all knew that for years.
Here's another one.
So a big investigation by the New York Times.
And they've revealed that Washington and Kiev have operated what amounts to a shadow military alliance.
So the New York Times is just finding out that the U.S. built 12 covert CIA bases inside Ukraine, trained elite units for years, elite Ukrainian units, and fed a constant stream of battlefield intelligence.
To help Ukraine strike Russian targets.
Now, how many of you didn't know that?
Is there even one person here who didn't know that the U.S. was sort of low-key using the CIA to help Ukraine as much as possible?
And obviously, we were on the ground.
And obviously, there had to be facilities for all those CIA people.
And obviously, we were going to train them.
If only for using our weapons, we'd have to train them.
So, isn't it weird that the New York Times does these big deep dives and they say, oh, this might surprise you, but guess what?
The United States has been deeply involved in this war in a very practical level since the beginning.
And we all say, I think we all knew that, just because it's obvious.
Worst kept secret.
Well, you might know that Putin had asked for a three-day ceasefire because Putin's got this big Victory Day celebration that they're doing in Russia, Victory Day over, I guess, over Hiller.
And they're going to have foreign dignitaries will be there, etc.
So he wanted to make sure that That Ukraine didn't use that opportunity to attack the event because people would be exposed and it would just be terrible if he attacked it.
And Zelensky has basically said, it's fair game.
Zelensky just said directly, it's fair game.
We're at war, we can attack anything we want.
Now, on one hand, I kind of agree with that.
If you're at war, you can attack whatever you need to attack.
But it seems like it would be the worst idea in the world to attack this Victory Day thing, because it would just make Putin more angry, and nothing good could come from that.
But it doesn't sound like Zelensky wants peace.
If you wanted peace, you would at least say, all right, we'll give you the three days, but we'd rather have...
A permanent ceasefire.
You don't say we might attack your Victory Day parade.
This is very clearly not working toward peace.
Speaking of not working toward peace, the Times of Israel is reporting that the Houthis sent some ballistic missile toward Israel and it blew up near Ben-Gurion Airport.
It didn't kill anybody or hurt anybody, but...
Israel is wondering why they didn't shoot it down.
So they've got their missile defense systems, and it was only one missile, and it apparently got through the defenses, so they're going to have to figure out what's up with that.
But does it seem to you like the entire point of the Houthis is to either create a bigger war, well, just that, to create a bigger war?
I feel like that's all they're doing.
It's trying to create a bigger war.
Meanwhile, over in the UK, I saw the Amuse account writing about this, the UK has found what they think are eight terror suspects that are Iranian that were in their country, accused of planning massive terror attacks against British citizens.
Now, do you think that would have been a good play from Iran to do a massive terror attack?
In the UK?
I don't know.
It seems like that would be a weird play while they're talking about a peace deal.
Unless it's just in case things went bad or something.
But doesn't it make you wonder how many Iranian terrorists are already in the United States?
If there were eight of them in the UK and they were looking to do some big terror thing, there might be dozens of them.
If not hundreds in the United States, because we haven't had border security until recently.
So that's the thing I worry about the most, is if we ended up being involved in some kind of a terror attack, if we got involved in, let's say, working with Israel to attack the nuclear facilities in Iran, I feel like they would activate their terrorists.
And it would be a really bad week in America.
So, that does worry me.
Well, in other science news, there are new scientific, not scientific, solar panels that are a thousand times stronger and thinner than a human hair.
And it's way more efficient, a thousand times more powerful than silicon, and way more durable.
According to the bright side of the news.
Now, I think I've told you before that all of these massive improvements in solar panels and fusion and batteries, you really have to think in terms of 5 to 20 years before any of this finds its way into the commercial world.
But it's kind of exciting.
And then lastly, because it's May 4th, There's a company called, let's see, who are they?
It's a Polish firm.
They've created this Star Wars-styled air bike, except it uses a jet engine.
So it's like a flying motorcycle with a jet engine.
And it shows it, you know, looking really cool and flying over this desert area.
And I'm thinking to myself, you kind of have to have your own desert, don't you?
Because where exactly would you fly a jet-powered motorcycle?
You wouldn't do it in the suburbs.
You couldn't do it in the city.
You couldn't do it really anywhere.
You couldn't do it over other people's property because they're really low.
They're not way up in the air.
They're like, I don't know, 20 feet up.
So, to me, this seems like the worst commercial idea I've ever seen in my life, although the technology looked pretty cool.
So, all right, that's all I got for you today.
Yeah, and it's also loud.
Yeah, I can't see that that is the future, but who knows?
Maybe.
Jay Leno has a jet motorcycle.
He probably doesn't use it too much.
All right.
Thanks for joining everybody.
I'm going to talk to the locals people for just briefly.
