God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Tesla Self-Delivered, Fake Girlfriend Filter, Bot Friends, Governor Newsom, CA Sues Fox News, SCOTUS, Nationwide Injunctions, Birthright Citizenship, Justice KBJ Opinions, Bezos Wedding Celebrities, LGBTQ, Senate Parliamentarian, Zohran Mamdani, White Neighborhood Penalty Taxes, Full Socialism Community Experiment, US Canada Trade Dispute, Iran Enriched Uranium, Harvard Foreign Students, Iran Sanctions, President Trump's Successes, CA Budget Deficit, DOGE Big Balls, 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.
we're going to make sure all your comments are visible especially people on locals rah-bah-bah-bom Good morning, everyone, 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 attempt taking this experience up to levels that no one can understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tankard, chalice, or 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 happens now.
go So good.
Delicious.
Well, after the show, Owen Gregorian will be hosting a spaces on X. That's the audio-only function on X. And you could find that in my feed, as God M says.
You can find the link.
Or you can go to Owen Gregorian's feed, and you'll find the link there.
So yesterday, according to Elon Musk, was the first ever self-delivered Tesla.
So there was a Tesla that was produced in a factory, drove itself away from the factory, and all the way to the end user's house and parked in his driveway.
I guess that's the first time.
Am I impressed?
Yes.
I'm really, really impressed that a Tesla delivered itself.
I'm feeling like I need to do that myself.
Anyway, speaking of electric cars, according to MIT Technology Review, which I know you all read, there's a battery recycling company that recycles the giant batteries from electric cars,
who has realized that the recycled batteries, before they recycle them, they often still have about half of their power ability storage, which is not good enough to still be in a car, but it would make a lot of sense to string them together and make it a, what do they call it?
A industrial power center.
So they're using it to help power AI data centers.
So they just put a bunch of old used up batteries that still have half their energy storage and they can do a little microgrid.
Yeah.
Well, G Appliances is going to move some or all of its, I don't know, a lot of its production out of China and moving it to Kentucky.
And it's a $490 million investment they're bringing back to the U.S., according to Louis Cassiano on Fox Business.
And they want to have a zero distance strategy.
So they want to manufacture closer to where they're going to sell.
And it will create 800 new full-time jobs.
Well, every time there's one of these stories, it makes Trump look like a more successful president.
And I'll say what other people have been saying as well.
This is the best summer any president ever had.
The number of things that Trump has already accomplished before he's even gotten his big beautiful bill, which I guess he'll get.
I don't know.
They're trying pretty hard.
We'll talk about that.
But looks like quite a summer for Trump.
So how many of you have seen the, quote, fake girlfriend filter?
Apparently there's a filter for apps.
I don't know which app, but you can do a little video of yourself and then turn on the filter and a deep fake, perfectly realistic looking girlfriend will walk into the frame, put her arms around you from behind, and kiss you on the cheek.
And not exactly the same way every time.
But wow, you have to see it.
Because normally you would say to yourself, well, yeah, I'm definitely going to know it's AI.
Nope.
Nope.
Based on the ones I saw, you would not know that that was not a real person.
So now imagine that you're not doing it just for social media.
Imagine that you've got a bot, AI bot girlfriend or boyfriend.
And when you look at a screen, they're there with you.
In your real life, they're not there.
But if you look in a screen in the right app, it looks like they're there and talking to you on the screen.
Now, how weird would that be?
Oh, that's coming.
So it's called the fake girlfriend filter.
You have to see it to Believe it.
It's actually amazing.
Well, why would I saw an article by Tim Higgins?
I think he was writing for the Wall Street Journal.
He says that in a lonely world, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg and even Microsoft are vying for affection in the new friend economy, the friend being the bots.
So now you've got the visual image of that friend, you know, in the fake girlfriend filter.
And now you can give it a personality and have an ongoing relationship with the bot.
Yeah.
So what do you think of that?
Do you think that the bot friends are going to be a big deal?
I do.
I think it's going to be a really big deal.
But one of the things that Tim Higgins was speculating about is that the different AIs might look like somebody was watching a different news source.
So Grok might look like you watch Fox News, but OpenAI might look like you watch MSNPC all day.
So when you pick your bot friend, you might have to pick the one that's got the best news nose, the same as you.
Anyway, according to AI News, the AI called Anthropic was tested to see if it could run a business, and it failed.
So it didn't make any money and had lots of bugs and didn't work out.
So how long do you think it would be before AI could legitimately run a startup?
Maybe never, right?
Maybe never.
But how long will it be before it can be your bot, girlfriend, or boyfriend?
Probably pretty soon.
If it's running a business, you can't let it hallucinate because that's a problem.
But if your bot, AI, boyfriend, or girlfriend hallucinates, that's going to feel like real life because real people hallucinate all the time.
They've got cognitive dissonance, they have fake memories.
So yeah, I'm pretty sure that the whole boyfriend, girlfriend, best friend thing is going to be huge.
But will AI be running a new startup for you?
I don't know.
Maybe.
Here's some fake news.
You remember the story that sounded fake to you, that Meta was going to offer $100 million signing bonus for AI professionals, like if they're really good?
And that was like a big news story.
And you probably looked at it and said, really?
$100 million, just a signing bonus.
It's not even what the salary is.
It's just a upfront signing bonus.
And you said to yourself, there's no way that's true.
Well, guess what?
It wasn't true.
It was fake news.
There are some people getting enormous pay packages, but it's not upfront.
So that was just never real.
So there are people who might make $100 million over a certain amount of time.
And there are some people who are definitely making over $20 million already per year.
So all it would be would be $25 million per year for four years, which is enormous and incredible.
And your brain can barely hold it.
But it's not $100 million upfront.
So that was fake news.
Speaking of fake news, Governor Newsom of California is suing Fox News for claiming that he had not talked to President Trump relative to the protests about ICE in California.
Now, Newsom said he had talked to Trump, but I think Trump himself may have said he didn't.
But in any event, at least Jesse Waters reported on Fox News what they believe to be true, which is that Newsom had lied.
So Newsom is suing because he says he didn't lie, and he probably can prove it.
And he's suing for $787 million.
Now, does that seem like a little bit too much?
Apparently, that's sort of similar to how much Fox News paid to one of the voting companies that sued him.
I forget which one.
So you may have picked that number just because it reminds you that Fox News once lost a lawsuit of that type.
But he would take a correction.
So if Fox News just goes out and says, whoops, we got that story wrong, he would take that.
So he's pretty good at getting attention, I gotta tell you.
Was it Dominion or was it the other one?
I forget.
Well, we got some Supreme Court verdicts yesterday, right after I was done with my podcast.
So everybody's talked about it but me.
Now, I'm the worst person to get any Supreme Court news about, or to get your news about the Supreme Court from.
I would listen to the lawyers because there's always these weird nuances.
You think you understand it if you're a non-lawyer, and then you realize you got everything wrong.
But here's what I think happened: I think the Supreme Court ruled that the lower court district judges can no longer do nationwide injunctions that would apply to the whole nation when they are meant to be judges for their own district.
And there were about 40 different injunctions against Trump executive orders, mostly, I guess.
But it wasn't from everywhere.
There were five states that were responsible for, I think, 35 of the 40 injunctions.
So the problem was that Democrats could just find whoever was the most liberal judge in a liberal state, and they could stop everything in the whole country.
But the Supreme Court just ruled, no, you can't.
You cannot overrule the entire country, but you can still do your rules for your own district.
Now, the big conversation is what happens if you had a Democrat president?
Would you, having now greatly empowered the office of the president relative to how much a court could stop him, will the next Democrat president have the same power?
Yes.
And would that be making Republicans very unhappy if it happens?
The answer is yes.
So the presidency got a lot more powerful, no matter who's in that job.
Trump says that later, later in the year, the Supreme Court might take on the question of birthright citizenship.
That's the one where you get to be a citizen if you're born in this country, even if your parents are not citizens.
Trump says that that was intended for the children of slaves, and therefore he thinks they have a good argument for the Supreme Court someday overturning it.
The people who know more about the Constitution are pretty much unanimous in saying that it won't get overturned because there's too much precedent in the clear wording of the Constitution, even if their intention was something else, I suppose.
But we'll see if that goes the president's way or not.
Anyway, so what could happen is the states could end up with different federal laws.
They'd all have the same law, but some states could get a liberal judge to do an injunction that only applied to their state.
So you might have, for example, a situation.
I saw some people talking about this on the news.
Potentially, and I don't know what the odds of this are, but potentially, you could have a situation where if your parents are not citizens, but they have you in New Jersey, you might be a citizen.
But if they had you in Pennsylvania, maybe you wouldn't be.
So it could get really confusing.
That's one possibility.
Now, one of the stories that, I guess there's still the option of doing a class action suit against whatever the president is up to.
But I feel like that's less efficient, might take longer, might be fewer of them.
But it's not like there's no recourse.
You still have a legal recourse to try to end a president's executive order through a class action suit, I guess.
So that's my best, not a lawyer, explanation of what happened.
But I'm enjoying watching people dump on Justice Katanji Brown Jackson.
And apparently she wrote an opinion that at least Jonathan Turley says looks more like an MSNBC legally enlisted hyperventilating.
So her written opinion was not well respected by either her colleagues or the experts watching it.
So there's a lot of talk about whether she's even qualified for the job.
I have to admit, I don't mind the fact that the way she's writing her opinion is casual.
So she's using some casual language, like at one point, she put in the sentence, she put, wait for it.
And then she revealed the big reveal at the end of the sentence.
I don't mind that.
I don't mind that she doesn't do the full legalese, but she's also being criticized for her actual opinion being tortured and basically stupid.
So it's not just that she's using casual language.
It's more like people are wondering how she ever got the job.
So that's not going so well for her.
Jeff Bezos has tied the knot, as they like to say, with his now wife, Lauren Sanchez.
They had this big star-studded wedding in, where was it, in Italy?
Yeah, in Venice, on some island.
And it was a star-studded event with some of the top celebrities.
And I immediately had the following question.
Why does Jeff Bezos know so many celebrities?
Like, how did that even happen?
And how well would you have to know a celebrity like Leonardo DiCaprio before he will fly to Italy and attend your wedding, which he did, apparently.
The Kardashians did as well.
Don't you wonder what is Jeff Bezos' world like?
Does he and his now wife do they sit around and say, hey, what do you want to do tonight?
I don't know.
Let's fly down and have dinner with Leonardo DiCaprio.
Well, we've never even met him.
Yeah, but just ask.
He'll say yes.
One of the things I learned as soon as I became a little bit famous is that if you're a little bit famous, other famous people will take your call.
And if you're very famous, everyone will take your call.
So he might live in a world where you could just call somebody who's super famous and just say, you want to have dinner?
And they'll say, oh, totally.
So maybe that's how he knows all those celebrities.
Or maybe they all party on his yacht.
I don't know.
The other Supreme Court decision is that parents can opt out for their kids if the school lesson is about LGBTQ content.
So I guess that makes a lot of conservatives happy.
So if you know that your public school is going to be, what would you say, training your kids on LGBTQ content, you can opt out for at least that lesson.
Axios is reporting that the so-called MAGA division has ended.
Do you remember the MAGA division?
That's when people did not agree about what to do about Iran and whether or not the U.S. should get involved.
And then the president gets involved.
And because the military is awesome, got a spectacular, what looks like a win.
And now everybody's getting back together.
Do you remember my prediction about the division in MAGA?
I believe I said in public, you can tell me if I'm imagining this, didn't I tell you that success would fix everything?
And that whatever happened, and I just certainly didn't know what was going to happen, I told you that as long as Trump gets a good result, MAGA will come back together, no matter what he does.
He just has to win.
So winning fixes almost everything.
And I also told you that, you know, once we got past this, the MAGA people, they're not going to turn into Democrats.
So of course they're going to come back together.
You know, there may be some personalities who don't want to go to the same dinner together anymore.
You know, some of it got pretty ugly, the accusations.
But no, people are going to be pretty solidly pro-Trump because he's winning.
And winning fixes everything.
Well, there's some more fake news that I gave you.
So I'll correct my own fake news.
You know the story about the parliamentarian?
So apparently Congress has a parliamentarian who judged the big beautiful bill and said, there's a bunch of stuff on here that you can't do according to the rules of the Senate.
And the parliamentarian knows the rules.
And I thought that might be forcing the Republicans to change the bill.
But apparently, and I don't understand how this works, but Politico says that they've been working with the parliamentarian and changing some of the language so the parliamentarian would accept it.
Now, does that make sense to you?
This isn't Politico.
How does it make sense that the only thing they're changing is the language?
Because she wasn't objecting to the language.
She was objecting to the fact that the bill was trying to change policy and you're not allowed to make big policy changes in this kind of a bill unless you get 60 people to vote for it instead of 50.
And they were trying to avoid that because they know they can't get 60.
So do they really fix it by rewarding it?
But I also learned that they could fire the parliamentarian or just ignore the parliamentarian.
Now, I think they would have to vote to ignore her.
But apparently it's not the end of the bill.
So I think I may have misled you into thinking that the parliamentarian could just sort of stop a bunch of stuff.
But it looks like there's just so many weasel ways to get around the parliamentarian that maybe the parliamentarian is in more trouble than the bill.
But we'll see.
So I have a question about how you can make it acceptable by changing the language.
If somebody knows how that works, let me know.
The Treasury has apparently issued some sanctions against three Mexican financial institutions.
I don't know.
I guess they're not banks per se.
But there are three big Mexican financial institutions that are being blamed for participating in the fentanyl trafficking business.
So they facilitated money transfer, allegedly, for the chemical precursors from China that would be used to make fentanyl in Mexico.
So that feels promising.
It does seem like if you cut off the money flow, they're going to get less fentanyl.
But still, I think it proves that China is not going to do anything to reduce the fentanyl flow.
So if you thought they were, good luck with that.
Apparently the whole fentanyl thing seems to be completely missing from the trade talks with China.
Surprise.
All right.
So you know our favorite socialist, probably new mayor of New York City.
His name is Mom Dani.
And can you believe that in the real world, he said in public, I don't know if he said it more than once, that in order to pay for some of the progressive socialist stuff he wants if he wins, and it looks like he will win, he thinks that white neighborhoods should pay higher property taxes.
White neighborhoods should pay higher property taxes in New York City.
Now, let me give you some advice.
If you live in a city where people can even have that conversation and not be immediately eliminated for running for office or fired, you should get out of there as fast as you can if you happen to be white.
Because I'm not even talking about whether they do it.
Just think about the fact that he can say this openly.
He can openly suggest taxing white people more in the area that he would be in control of as mayor.
If you can even have that conversation and keep your job, and if you're a white person living there, you should really think about leaving because that is way over the line.
Yeah, there's no way that's going to make you happy.
So run.
You know, one of the questions that I have that you're going to hate, because I know I brought this up before, and just makes all of you get really mad at me, which makes me even more determined to sell it.
And it goes like this.
I believe it never works if you try to overlay a whole bunch of, you know, too much, socialism on top of a capitalist system.
I don't think I've ever seen it work, have you?
So if you've got a capitalist system that's cooking along, and then you say, well, we'll add a little bit of socialism, a little bit, you could probably handle a little bit, which we do.
But if you keep piling it on, there's 100% chance you destroy the whole system and everybody starves to death and you become cannibals, right?
We pretty much all agree on that.
But here's a question that I have.
What if you designated some areas to be socialist only and you built them from the ground up to be socialist, but still with jobs?
So people would still be able to get a job at a market rate and earn their own money and stuff.
But that all the things that socialist leaders want would be there.
So if you want free transportation, yes.
If you want free childcare, yes.
If you want low rent, yes.
But you would have to design it to be the socialist only opt-in.
Opt-in, stop it.
If you're an NPC, you could say that you would never live there.
Don't do that because then you're an NPC.
Because I'm not suggesting you live there.
I'm not suggesting anybody be forced to live there.
What I'm suggesting is wouldn't it be good if there was one city or county somewhere in the country that was fully socialist from the ground up?
Now, how could you accomplish some of these free services?
By designing it right.
So suppose everybody has a job there, right?
So if you can work, you have a job.
And you still have to buy your food.
So you have to work.
It's not a socialist that nobody's working.
You have to work.
But imagine if they designed underground e-bike transportation.
You could bring the cost of public transportation down to almost nothing if you designed it from the bottom up to make transportation easy.
Right?
What about childcare?
If you designed the city properly, there would always be some grandmas who wanted to watch your kids, but they would be vetted and wouldn't be too far away and all that.
So you could probably get yourself almost free transportation, almost free childcare, almost free dog watching.
And you could build the rental Units in the cheapest possible way that is also very durable and livable.
So you could bring the rents way down.
So my question is this: even if you thought it would fail, wouldn't it be good to have one?
So that you wouldn't have to worry about people trying to overlay the socialism on your capitalist place.
You'd say, hey, look, if any of that shit worked, it would be working over in socialism town.
But look how they're all struggling and dying.
Why not?
It's only a problem when you try to combine two systems together that are not meant to be combined together.
But if you built it from scratch, would people go there?
Would they like it?
Would they be happy having a low income, but also very low expenses?
Maybe.
Probably the biggest thing you'd have to do is make sure that you didn't let everybody in.
You would have to make it impossible to move in if you had a criminal record or impossible to move in if you had bad credit.
So if you selected people who were good citizens and employable and they just liked the socialist system a little bit better, maybe, maybe you can make it work somewhere, but just don't lay it onto New York City or anywhere where the other system is already cooking along.
Um...
Trump is mad at Canada again because Canada wanted to impose a digital services tax on American tech companies.
Now, I don't think that there are too many companies from other countries that would even be qualified for having to pay a digital services tax.
But I think that's sort of aimed at our social media giants.
And it just looks like a way for Canada to pick our pockets.
So Trump is defending the big tech companies by telling Canada we're going to drop all of her negotiations.
So there just won't be any negotiations about trade.
And he's just going to send them the bill.
I do like this new approach where he says, if you don't want to have a new trade agreement, you don't need one.
We'll just send you the bill and tell you what your tariff is.
So he's going to try this in Canada first, I guess.
We're going to send you the bill.
Sorry, you are no longer appropriate as somebody that we want to negotiate with.
We're just going to send you the bill.
We'll see if that changes anything at all.
By the way, speaking of bills, the big, beautiful bill that Trump is trying to get passed before July 4th, it looks like it might be close.
I'm not going to, I won't predict it will get done because there's a lot of resistance, but it might.
They're pushing pretty hard to see if they can get it done before the 4th.
So maybe.
But at this point, is it fair to say that literally nobody knows what's in the bill?
Because you've got the House version that's so big that I don't know how many people even know all the things that are in it, that goes to the Senate and they tweak it like crazy.
And then the parliamentarian says you can't do that.
And then they have to change the language or, I don't know, maybe change the policies.
And by the time it's done, and then there's a negotiation within the Senate to, all right, we'll change this if we do this.
We'll change that if you'll vote for it.
So do you feel like you know what's in this thing?
I am very confused.
I mean, I think it still has, you know, the tax elements that we're expecting, but I don't know what else is in there.
All right.
So Iran, well, here's a story that I would not give high credibility to yet.
So I saw this in a post by Mario Noffel, and he's generally, generally I would say, credibility is good because he always shows his sources.
And you can look for yourself.
But the sources for this are entities, foreign entities that I've never heard of before.
So I would wait to see if any other news sources pick this up.
But the report, which I would give low credibility to, but maybe, is that Iran's UN ambassador said that Iran would be willing to transfer its most enriched uranium, which would suggest that they still have it, to another country in exchange for yellow cake.
Now, if I know my nuclear energy, yellow cake would be something you could use for domestic energy production, but you wouldn't be able to make a bomb out of it.
So do you really think that happened?
Do you really think that Iran is seriously offering to transfer all of their more enriched uranium to another country if they can get in return a non-weaponized material that they can use for energy?
I'm going to say that sounds a little too good to be true.
But if it is true, I'm going to say that that would suggest that the supreme leader is no longer in charge.
So I'm going to predict that one of two things is true.
Either that story is not true, and they're not proposing any kind of a yellow cake, anything.
So, it's either not true, or if that is true, and they really mean it, that would suggest that the supreme leader is not making the decisions right now.
There's some, maybe a military, you know, maybe there's some kind of military control.
So we'll see.
Harvard is trying to find a workaround for the fact that Trump is trying to block foreign students from attending Harvard.
And Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government, that's not the whole, not the whole Harvard, but the School of Government, is working on a deal with a Canadian university called Toronto's Monk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy.
And the idea is if these foreign students who are already Harvard students want to complete their education at Harvard, but they can't do it because they would be blocked by presidential order, well then they would say you could go to Canada and you could attend the University of Toronto's Monk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy.
And they would apparently share some professors with Harvard.
And then they would tell you that you got a Harvard degree, but you got it at the University of Toronto's Monk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy.
Now, let me suggest that there's something that Harvard might not understand about Harvard.
Well, why does anybody go to Harvard?
Well, mainly, you go to Harvard so that when you're done, you can say you went to Harvard.
Do you think that that will thrill foreigners who want to be able to say they graduated from Harvard?
You say, look, you can say you graduated from Harvard, even though really you got half of your degree from the University of Toronto's Monk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy.
So how about that?
Does that impress you, friends?
are your parents really proud of you oh i don't know about your child but mine went to the And the other thing is the casual contact and the networking of being on the Harvard campus.
So you would lose the networking of being in the Harvard campus.
You would get a little bit in this monk school.
It's Monk as an M-U-N-K, not M-O-N-K.
So it must be named after somebody named Monk.
Anyway, so that sounds pretty desperate.
It's not a done deal.
It depends if there's enough demand for it.
According to NPR, and it's weird that NPR would be reporting this, but Domenico Montanaro is writing for NPR that according to Pew Research, if everybody who did not vote in the 2024 election, because only about two-thirds of the registered people vote, but if all of them had voted, Trump would have won by even more.
This is on NPR.
So NPR is saying that the more people who voted, the bigger the lead that Trump would have had in the general election.
So did I mention that things are going Trump's way this summer?
What were the odds that NPR would be confirming his popularity in a feature story?
I don't know what the odds of that were, but I certainly didn't predict it.
But there it is.
Trump has apparently abandoned plans, according to the post-millennial Thomas Stevenson's reporting, that Trump was talking about lifting sanctions on Iran, but then the Ayatollah said that Iran won the war.
And now Trump is saying, if you're going to say that you won the war, when clearly you did not, then I'm not going to lift the sanctions.
What?
What are the odds that Iran is going to modify their message and tell their residents, okay, now really?
Remember when we said we totally slapped America in the face and beat them at war?
Well, okay, that was fake news.
We just made that up.
We totally lost the war and surrendered.
And then, if they admit that they lost the war and that Trump beat them, then and only then will Trump look into lifting the sanctions on Iran's economy.
So I don't know if any of that story is true, but maybe.
There is a Truth Social post in which Trump is saying directly, exactly that.
He's saying exactly what I told you, that it's because they're claiming victory that he's discontinuing any conversation about getting rid of sanctions.
So that part is true.
It's true that he said it.
I don't know how true it was that he was really looking to lifting the sanctions.
It could be that when he brought up lifting the sanctions, he got so much pushback that he knew it wasn't possible.
And then it would be easier to blame it on Iran and say, all right, I was totally going to lift these sanctions.
And it had nothing to do with how much blowback I got from Israel and God knows where else.
It has nothing to do with that.
It has everything to do with your poorly worded statements about how you won.
All right.
So apparently today, maybe this has already happened.
Post-millennial is reporting, Hannah Nightingale, that the Trump administration had brokered some kind of historic peace agreement between the Republic of Congo and Rwanda, who apparently were having a very major war that most of us were not paying attention to whatsoever.
But Marco Rubio's team apparently brokered a peace deal.
It's a big deal.
And I guess they're signing it today or have signed it.
Now, if you're keeping count, that would be two and a half wars that Trump has ended.
So let's give him credit for ending the Iran-Israel conflict.
We'll give him credit for the Congo-Rwanda thing.
Now, remember, this is all in one summer.
And there's a possibility, I'm not going to predict it will happen.
That would be too far.
But there's a possibility that because of Trump's victory and getting a ceasefire, that he might be able to browbeat Israel because there's some reporting about this, but it's low credibility reporting so far.
There's some reporting that Trump may have already worked out with Israel ahead of time that within two weeks of the ceasefire with Iran, that they would have to come up with some kind of a Gaza, I'll call it a peace deal.
So there's a pretty good chance that'll happen, because that would be what opens up the Abraham Accords for other countries, you know, the other Muslim countries that want to join the Accords, which would give them some, you know, certain economic advantages.
So there's a pretty good possibility that Trump will end three wars this summer.
He might, you know, if you give him that he ended Iran in Israel, if you give him that he did Congo and Rwanda, and if he gets, and I think he might, because Israel has to, you know, do something different.
They're going to have to, they're going to have to make some kind of, let's say, compensation to the rest of the area to get the Abraham Accords going again.
So I think he's got a shot this summer of ending Naza.
That would be three, right?
And then Putin is talking about the need to, you know, have a summit.
And he says he wouldn't do a summit with Zelensky unless they'd sort of agreed on the peace deal.
So the summit would come after they'd decided how to end things.
So Putin isn't really acting like he wants to end the war, but he's talking like it.
And everything does have to end eventually.
Zelensky is definitely talking like he wants to end the war.
There's a possibility, and I wouldn't predict it will happen, but there's a solid possibility because the war has to end sometime.
And it has to end for some reason.
It might happen this summer.
That would be four wars.
Trump has a legitimate chance of ending four wars in one summer.
And I'm not even counting giving him any credit for the Pakistan-India flare-up that I think India is saying that the military brought the ceasefire.
But I think was it Pakistan who was giving Trump a little bit of credit for that?
I don't remember if it was Pakistan or just Trump.
So Pakistan, India may or may not have been a Trump influence.
So that one's a little bit of a gray area.
So he has a chance.
I don't know what the odds are, but a chance of ending four and a half wars in half a year, depending how you score the Pakistan-India conflict.
Have you ever seen anything like this?
And then the stock market is fully recovered.
Interest rates will probably go down in 2026, you know, because you'll get a new head of the Federal Reserve.
And even economists who said that Trump was crazy and destroying the country with his tariffs, the tariff thing apparently worked.
Now, not perfectly, and maybe not as well as anybody wanted, but it looks like he's getting credit for being the only person who knew that the tariff thing could work with his advisors.
How big Is that that is so big, it's almost unimaginable.
Then you add on top of it all of his executive orders, then you add on top of it the Supreme Court victories that he seems to be rolling up left and right.
I've never, have you ever seen anything like this?
I don't remember in my lifetime, I don't remember any president who was anywhere near this level of effectiveness, not anywhere near it.
So will he get a Nobel Peace Prize?
So my question is this.
How many wars does one man need to stop before he gets a Nobel Peace Prize?
I feel like three won't be enough.
If he ended stopping, you know, Congo, Rwanda, Iran, and then Gaza, if he got all three of those, I don't think he'd win.
I think he would have to get at least the Ukraine-Russia thing to look like it was solved.
And then the Nobel Prize Committee would just freaking have to give it to him.
How many would agree that if he ends three wars in one summer, still not enough, just because it's Trump?
Still not enough.
But if he ends four, I think they just have to.
They would just have to give it to him at that point.
They'd probably give it to Zelensky or Putin, but it would be hard to resist giving it to him if he gets four wars in one summer.
Anyway.
Also, Fox News, Brooke Singman is reporting that Trump has a record-shattering $1.4 billion in his political war chests.
You know, I kept wondering why I kept getting all these fundraising requests from Trump.
And I would think to myself, he's not really running again.
Why does he need political donations?
And the answer is he would use them for the midterms.
So the Democrats are broke.
Their most famous members are literally socialists who Trump calls communists.
And Trump has got a gigantic war chest and some of the biggest victories that you've ever seen in a political context whatsoever.
Is that enough to win the midterms?
Not necessarily, because the midterms are weird animals.
And if Trump is not actually in the election, anything could happen.
And the history of the party that sat in power picking up seats, it's hard to go against that history.
But if anybody could, if it were possible, Trump would be the one to do it.
All right.
There's a University of Virginia president who is resigning because of the pressure over DEI.
So it looks like a white guy to me, James Ryan.
So he's quitting his job as a University of Virginia president because it's illegal to do DEI and he wants to really, really do some DEI.
So he's going to quit his post, according to the New York Post.
So good.
He will not be missed.
Unbelievable.
Let's talk about Governor Newsom again.
So believe it or not, and I don't know if I believe this story.
So there's something about this story that doesn't add up yet, but I'll tell you what it is.
Allegedly, Gavin Newsom has figured out how to essentially balance the impossible to balance California budget by, he had a $12 billion deficit.
Now, that's a gigantic number for a state.
And there was really, it looked like there was no way he could close it without massively raising taxes on whoever he could raise it on.
But allegedly, he has closed with his lawmakers, closed the $12 million deficit for the proposed upcoming budget.
And the way he did it was by denying health care to illegal immigrants.
The way he closed it was by denying all the progressive stuff that the state wanted to do that every Republican would have voted against.
So at least Gavin Newsom has figured out that you can't just give away everybody's money and expect to still have a future in politics.
So I don't even know what to say.
I mean, basically, the only things that work in California, the only things that work are when the Democrats throw up their hands and say, all right, we'll just do what a Republican would have done.
Everything else just looks ridiculous.
But as soon as he acts like a Republican would, because in his podcast, he said that he would be opposed to trans athletes competing in women's sports.
And nobody saw that coming.
So in order for him to get into the common sense era, he just had to sort of do what a Republican would do, which is exactly this.
So I don't know if he closed the budget deficit or if this is a done deal.
But the fact that the fact that it's even been reported that he closed this jacket deficit by not giving away our money.
That seems like a big deal.
Well, you'll be happy to know that the former Doge employee, whose nickname was Big Balls, who left Doge, and you said to yourself, oh no, wouldn't it be better if Big Balls was working for the country?
Well, he's back, but not on Doge.
He's going to be working for the Social Security Administration to modernize their computer network, to which I say, yes.
There we go.
Let's bring Big Bubbles back and put him, slot him in there, one of the most important and most difficult things you could ever do.
And let him continue serving the country.
I like him.
Alright, people.
That's all I've got for you.
Remember that Open Gregorian will be hosting a Spaces in just a few minutes.
So look for him on the X platform, and you'll see the link to Spaces.
It's an audio only.
So you can talk and other people can listen.
And that'll be happening in just mere, mere minutes.
But I'm going to say a few words to the people on locals, my beloved, beloved local subscribers.
The rest of you, you can run over and see if Owen has fired it up yet.
