God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Coffee Robot Experience, Greta Thunberg, Climate Change Predictions Disappointment, Climate Models Disappointment, University Patents, Democrat Party Collapse, Unattractive Politicians, MAHA Autism Causes, Rudy Giuliani Accident, Voter Rolls Cleanup, Tom Fitton, Brad Todd, 2020 Census Errors, Census Redo, Thomas Massie, Epstein Victims Testimony, Satire Parody Free Speech, UK Graham Linehan Arrest, Chicago's Violent Weekend, President Trump, DC Mayor Bowser, Trump's Largest Difference Technique, Pentagon Pizza Report, France Hospital War Prep, China's SCO Summit, Ukraine Robot War, AI Drone Swarms, Chinese Money Laundering, AFD Candidate Deaths, 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.
It's actually my favorite part of the day, usually.
Well, let's check your stocks.
All right, let's not.
We won't check your stocks.
Nope.
I didn't even bring it up.
I don't even know what you're talking about.
Forget your stocks.
Because we're about to have a good time.
Bom, bum, bum, bum, bum.
Go!
Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
You've never had a better time.
But if you'd like to take a chance, I'm elevating your experience to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains.
All you need for that is a copper mug or glass attacker shells to stein a canteen jug or flask or vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine, end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called, that's right, the simultaneous sip.
oh Well, I had a little scare today.
I'm preparing for the show and I'm looking at all these little suggestions that war is coming in all these small ways like, oh, we got the Navy surrounding Venezuela.
And probably there were three different news items that seemed like an invitation to war.
And all of a sudden, outside my window, which was pitch black because it was before sun up, I see a flash, sort of almost like lightning happened.
And then I hear boom, boom, boom.
I'm like, oh, shoot.
Are we being bombed?
And I'm thinking, are the bombs so big that it's really happening in San Francisco, which is an hour away?
But maybe I can see it.
Because I'll tell you one thing.
It couldn't be thunder and lightning because this is California, and it's September 2nd, and it would be a little bit unusual if there would be any rain.
But sure enough, there was a 17-minute rainstorm, which is the only one I remember all summer.
I don't remember it raining all summer, which is not unusual for where I live.
And it was actually kind of frightening.
when you put it in context of, you know, I'm a little bit worried that somebody might attack the homeland.
Anyway, the good news is., finally, you can buy a $100,000 coffee robot.
It's a robot that makes your coffee.
And that's all it does.
It's all it does.
And they say the payback would be two to three years.
It's yet again another single mission robot.
I don't know if I told you my coffee robot experience from my local mall.
They had a coffee robot kiosk set up so you could actually buy coffee from a robot.
And the first several times I saw it, there was a human attendant in case anything went wrong.
But by the time I decided to give it a try one day, there was no human attendant.
And, you know, I didn't want to try it when the human was there, because what's the point?
You want to test the robot, you know, without a human.
So I put in my order, and then the robot very slowly goes through the steps of making what I want.
But as soon as I pushed what I wanted, I realized it wasn't really what I wanted.
And indeed, it was so not what I wanted that I wouldn't have anything to do with it.
And I'd spend some ungodly amount for a cup of coffee and had to stand there just so I could take it and pour it out.
And that was my experience with a coffee robot.
So you see, if I'd been talking to a human barista, I would have said, even if they'd already started, I would have said, oh, darn, it's my fault.
I ordered the wrong thing.
Can I adjust?
And the human would have said to me, no problem, because they would rather have me as a repeat customer.
They would throw away what they started and start doing it the real way.
And I'm thinking, you know, there might be like a hundred different reasons that you just won't put up with a robot.
Like that's one that I wouldn't have imagined, that the length of time you had to wait for the cup of coffee that you didn't want is so long when you're watching a robot make it.
So anyway, beware of coffee robots taking over.
Well, this is...
This might be the funniest story of the day and it's a day of funny stories.
As you know, climate activist Greta Thunberg is trying to do her second flotilla to Gaza to protest Israel's actions there.
And according to Breitbart News, she had to turn back because the winds were too high.
So let me pull this all together for you if you're not already laughing.
When the weather bothers somebody else, it's climate change.
When the weather cancels her plans, it's weather.
Didn't she predict that there would be more severe storms?
I think she did.
She wasn't right about that.
There were not more severe storms.
But the fact that she tries to change causes from climate change, which is obviously not working out, I'll tell you more about that, and trying to become the Gaza champion.
And she gets stopped by the weather.
So she'll probably take another run at it when the weather gets better.
Well, speaking of climate change, you know that the experts were also saying that there's going to be more forest fires because of the warming, everything would be dried out.
And next thing you know, one match would burn up half the world because it's all dried out.
But the opposite is happening.
Bjorn Lomborg is reminding us, and I believe this has been a long-term trend.
that there are fewer fires and fire damages every year because we're getting better at managing it basically.
So apparently some new data came out that 2025 could become the lowest burn year in the 21st century.
So big news on Lisa Cook just received, Bill Poulty is saying.
Interesting.
So we'll talk about that.
So here are the things that climate change confidently told us was going to happen.
which would have been verification that they were onto something and that their understanding of the world was the right one.
And if you didn't believe that climate change was a problem, they were going to prove it to you in 12 years when everything went to hell.
So they told us the coral reefs were in trouble, but indeed they seem to have recovered and it seems to be just normal cyclical behavior.
They told us the oceans would rise.
I haven't seen any reports of any populated place that's having a problem with rising sea level, have you?
Is it maybe I just don't see it because the algorithm isn't feeding it to me?
But I don't think there we learn that that wasn't going the direction it looked like it should.
And what about the temperatures in the recent years?
Aren't they sort of out of model?
Now, they would say, well, you know, you could have periods where it's not warming up that much.
Then there'd be other periods where it is.
But I feel like coral reef, hurricanes, storms, fires, rising oceans, melting Arctic ice, and even the temperature.
has sort of paused.
Now, what's left?
Isn't that basically every variable that they told us was going to move in one direction did not?
Every one of them?
Is there anything left of the climate change predictions?
There might be.
I mean, you would think that they couldn't all move in the wrong direction.
There would be at least one variable, wouldn't you think?
There'd be at least one variable that would make it look like the climate change people got it right.
i'm not sure there is there might be no variables that match any of their predictions of doom.
Am I right about that?
I'll put that as a, I'm not 100% sure, but I think every single variable went the wrong way in recent years.
So we'll see.
And you know what I always say?
What do I always say at the end of a climate change story?
Wait till you find out about the climate models.
There's a 100% chance that in the future there will be exposes of how the climate models were fraudulent and that they knew they were.
Does anybody want to make a bet?
I say 100% that someday, the trouble is I can't put a deadline on it.
It might be 10 years from now, 20 years from now.
But I guarantee there's going to be an investigative journalism situation where they go, well, we got a whistleblower.
And guess what?
They always knew that the models did not predict.
That's what I predict.
Well, according to Newsweek, Secretary of Commerce Howard Ludwig is talking about how the U.S. government under Trump administration wants to own some of the patents for inventions that the universities come up with if those universities were taking government money as grants to do the science that created the patents to which I say it's another sign of fascism no it's not it
would be fascism if perhaps you believe that Trump was going to keep the money for himself it's not fascism if he's making you money he literally this would be your the taxpayer's money So if he could get some value out of the patents, and there probably would be over time, that wouldn't go to Trump.
He would be long retired.
It goes to us.
So no, don't worry about it being fascism.
They're literally just trying to give you a bonus.
That's it.
And I'm in favor of it.
It does make sense that if we taxpayers are funding the patents, does it make sense that if Harvard gets one, that Harvard gets to keep it?
It was our money.
Why wouldn't we ask for a piece of the action?
Totally makes sense to me.
Well, you will be very sad to learn that Representative Jerry Nadler is retiring.
He wants to make room for the younger generation.
So here's what I think.
You all know that the Democrat Party is collapsed and it's not very popular at the moment.
And what are the things that we don't talk about enough?
We talk about it in its pieces, but we don't put it all together.
So I'm going to put it all together.
Here are the pieces.
Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff, Swalwell, Jamie Raskin.
Now I could add a few people to that list, but what do they all have in common?
What's besides being noxious Democrats?
What do they have in common?
Well, let me tell you, they all have super unpleasant personas.
Now I'm curious if I'm operating entirely on bias when I say that.
Am I?
Because I know that there are Republicans who cause a turn off ick factor.
So maybe it just works both ways.
And the only one I can see is the direction that my bias is already tuned to.
If you were to turn on CNN or MSNBC and they add on a prominent Democrat leader, what are the odds that that prominent Democrat leader would be really hard to look at on video?
Let's say, uh, Schumer, Chuck Schumer.
When Chuck Schumer is on the screen, uh, I want to, I want to turn off the picture and go to audio.
And even then, yeah, man, man, I'm a penguin.
Even then, I don't want to watch him.
He just doesn't have any.
charisma.
Now, I don't say that about, let's say, AOC.
I don't say that about, uh, Omar, just to pick two people.
They have actual charisma.
Would you agree?
You might not like it.
I'm not saying I'm in favor of their policies.
Don't get me wrong.
I'm just saying that they legitimately have really, you know, first rate charisma.
Yeah, Jasmine Crockett, more to my point.
It seems to me that the Democrats, for reasons that I cannot understand, have promoted the opposite kind of people that Trump does.
You know, people make fun of Trump for saying, oh, that's a good political appointment because this person looks like a movie star.
And we all laugh.
It's like, oh, he's so shallow.
No, he's not.
It's called being right.
That's not shallow.
It's not shallow to understand that people are totally persuaded, very persuaded by things like personality and looks.
So Trump, you know, I don't even have to name names.
You know, you can start with the Secretary of Defense and you could go down right down the line.
has some good looking people in office.
Am I right?
Male and female.
So he doesn't discriminate by looks, by gender, which is interesting.
He likes handsome guys and attractive women.
And now compare that to Jerry Nadler, Schiff, Swalwell, Raskin, Schumer.
I'm not wrong, right?
The Democrats have picked the most unpleasant video personas.
The people just don't come across on video at all.
And Trump went the other way.
He personally is the most video-friendly personality of all time, certainly for his side.
And they was the opposite way.
So getting rid of Nadler, I wonder if they'll wise up and try to get more pleasant looking people to lead them.
Well, here's something I haven't developed a full opinion on.
It's the fact that remember the Maha Commission was going to deliver a report in 100 days.
and they came in with that 98 days they delivered the report on the root causes which wouldn't be confirmed but rather you know their best take what the root causes for autism would be.
And so now they've reported it.
And there are four bullet points of the things that they've identified, the Maha Commission, as causes of autism.
Are you ready?
Do you have your own guesses as to the causes of autism now that the experts have weighed in?
They are, and the four of them are, number one, ultra-processed foods.
Number two, environmental toxins.
Number three, chronic stress and inactivity.
And number four, over-medicalization of children.
Now, are you like I am completely underwhelmed by that conclusion?
Here's my problem.
So I have questions which you should not confuse.
This is a good time to make sure that people understand the right frame for this.
When I do this podcast, I never try to talk as an expert.
unless it's maybe something about persuasion, you know, if something that's in my line of expertise, which is narrow.
I try to present myself as you, which is I read the news and I go, there's something missing here.
Wait, what?
So I'm basically confirming your suspicions that something's missing.
And then I take my own guesses and speculations and predictions, but I'm doing it from a consumer of news perspective.
If it looks like or it feels like I'm coming from some kind of expert perspective about things like science or health or something, I'm not.
I'm coming at it from the consumer view, trying to match you, not the experts.
And when I look at these four things, ultra-processed foods, environmental toxins, chronic stress and inactivity, and over-medicalization of children, I say to myself, those are a little too general.
And I also say to myself, at what age is autism normally detected?
Do you know?
So I think the answer is under two years old.
you can get it from age two to four or something.
Do you believe that the children who are two years old have been unusually, let's say, unusually exposed to ultra-processed foods, environmental toxins, chronic stress and inactivity, and over-medicalization?
I could imagine that over-medicalization would apply to somebody under two years old.
Now, you can be diagnosed up into adulthood, right?
But the earliest would be like two.
So my question is, why would some people be so exposed to ultra-processed foods that they would get autism and other people would not?
Is it something like 10% of people have some sensitivity that others don't have?
So there's something about the timing of this, because it feels like if these were the triggers and you could get it if you were born without any propensity for autism it feels like there would be a like obvious examples where maybe the, I don't know, the Amish don't get it or something.
I just feel like maybe what happened here was they wanted to make sure they came in under 100 days.
And all they did is put their suspicions into bullet points.
I don't feel like we learned anything.
Do you?
But they said nothing about genetics.
And certainly there's some people who think genetics is behind it.
I don't know exactly how you know why would it be suddenly spiking that doesn't make sense anyway and then i saw a video i don't know what i don't know if it's really recent but probably not too long ago that rfk jr was talking to uh uh uh bill maher and uh rfk jr said um if you look at the studies he's talking about the the COVID vaccinations.
He said, if you look at the studies that were done of the Pfizer vaccine, the people who got the vaccine had a 23% higher death rate from all causes.
And Bill said, But could that be the disease itself?
And then RFK Jr. said, well, the vaccine doesn't work, does it?
Meaning that people were getting the disease even if they had the vaccination.
So there's 23% higher death rate from all causes.
And do you think that there's a counter argument to that?
If the only thing you knew was only what RFK Jr. said in that interview, would you feel that you were confident that you knew what was going on?
Is that enough variables for you that the people who got the vaccine had a 23% higher death rate from all causes.
Now you want to hear the counter argument to that?
Here's the counter argument.
There's no fucking study like that.
That doesn't exist.
It just doesn't exist.
So Mary from Neurorad Oncology on X. did a long explanation about the actual study he was referring to and apparently there was no statistical difference.
So the answer is not, oh, how do we explain the 23% and all that?
The answer is that didn't happen.
It's not in the study.
Now, is Mary right?
I don't know.
Mary seems very smart.
So is RFK Jr. right?
Did he leave out some variables?
How would I know?
I mean, I can't really check the work of either Mary or RFK Jr. but let me give you another reframe that will just break your brain.
You ready?
You've heard me say this before, but now I'm going to apply it to this situation.
And now it's going a mind blower.
Okay.
Now I've told you a million times that there's a problem with reproducibility of studies, meaning that over half of them, if you count the intentionally fraudulent ones and intentionally fraudulent publications and all that, probably over half turn out not to be true or not to be reproducible.
All right.
Now take that fact that usually, you know, by a slight amount, usually any report about science is going to turn out to be wrong.
So then you hear a fact like this from RFK Jr. about that there's a study.
It turns out, you know, maybe that doesn't exist or the study doesn't actually say that.
But there's a fact that he gives you.
What should be your default, if you haven't done any research, you've done no research, what should be your default opinion about that data?
Here would be the wrong way to look at it.
Well, that agrees with my preconceived notion.
That looks pretty good to me.
I think we've got a winner.
Oh, yeah.
Nope.
That's just what I thought would happen.
That, I mean, I told you I was smart.
I had that prediction.
And yeah, here it is.
So that would be the wrong way to do it.
Here would be the right way to do it.
It's probably not true.
And it wouldn't matter who said it if they're quoting.
So you've got two problems here.
One is, was this study even valid?
And the answer is probably not.
And that's only based on probability of all studies.
They're usually not true.
A little over 50%.
But on top of that, Mary explains that he interpreted the study wrong.
So you've got the risk that somebody interpreted it wrong or the risk that they left out a key part or a risk that you misunderstood what they said.
On top of that is the risk that the science was bullshit to begin with.
So that's the world we live in.
Your default assumption should be, I have learned nothing.
There's no information here.
I would like to know.
And maybe if there were lots of studies and time went by and the consensus moved in one direction or not, you might feel more confident but no if somebody just throws out some shocking number like that that doesn't agree with other experts probably not true could be can't rule it out but probably not probably not all right so thank you Mary for that very useful analysis if you want to see her full analysis look in my feed
on x um president Trump has announced that uh Rudy Giuliani is going to get the Medal of Freedom.
Now, I don't know if that was triggered by the fact that Rudy had that serious accident, vehicle accident that he's recovering from or it was going to happen anyway and you know just they're going to do it now to cheer him up i don't know how that worked but he's recovering and so he was in new hampshire and pulled over because some woman who had been the victim of domestic abuse flagged him down and
he must have parked this is me speculating based on what little we know of the situation.
I think he pulled over to help, and then he was going to stay there with her until the police got there because he helped her contact the police.
So the police showed up, and then he pulled into traffic and just got rammed from behind by a 19-year-old woman.
And they didn't say that she was on her phone, but when I hear a 19-year-old woman hits some other car so hard that it just obliterates it, and puts somebody in the hospital, I kind of automatically think might have been on the phone.
I mean, I don't want to start any rumors or anything, but it's the first thing I think, right?
Isn't that the first thing you think?
Because it's sort of hard, you know, even if you came around a blind turn.
Sort of hard to hit somebody that hard if you're even watching the road.
So anyway, I don't know if alcohol was involved or anything else.
We don't know, so we won't assume.
But I will assume that probably the place that he pulled over to help was not the safest place to pull over, meaning that when he pulled back into traffic, there probably was some lack of visibility.
from the oncoming traffic.
That's probably what happened.
Probably just a lack of visibility.
A place you would never have pulled over, unless you were helping some woman who was a victim of something.
So he did the right thing and took probably took a little extra physical risk to get it done.
Well, no, definitely because he got in between an abuser and the abuse.
So that's pretty baller actually.
You know, he's 100 years old and he still decided he was going to get involved in that.
And then he was going to wait with her.
which means that there was a risk that the abuser was going to show up any minute.
So that's pretty brave.
And he took some risks to help a person.
Sadly, it didn't work out.
So Medal of Freedom time.
Well, according to the Daily Mail, the Trump administration is thinking of a visa integrity fee.
So the people who travel to the U.S. and require or require to have a visa would have to pay an extra $250 above what they already pay.
So it'd be $442 just to be allowed to come in the United States to visit.
To which I say, Yeah, it's about time we had a cover fee.
And I also would recommend a two-drink minimum if you're coming in from a visa country.
I want 442 of your dollars and you've got to commit to a two-drink minimum.
That's how you become the hottest country.
You know, a year ago, the U.S. was dead.
It was a dead country.
Dead, I say.
But now it's the hottest country.
Oh, it's so hot.
Yeah, we can charge a car fee.
That's how hot we are.
You just listen to Mr. Trump, he'll tell you that.
Well, Tom Fenton of Judicial Watch has a success, another success.
I guess he sued Oregon to force them to clean up their voter roles.
And Oregon had the worst voter roles, meaning they had the most people eligible to vote according to the voter roles who were not really eligible to vote.
They were dead or they moved away or some other thing.
And he won in court.
So now Oregon is going to have to fix their voter roles.
He's also sued California and Illinois, same thing.
Now, do you think that'll make a difference?
Do you buy into the fact that maybe the worse the voter roles are, the worse it is for Republican candidates because it's the Democrats were abusing that system.
I don't know.
I would say that it's the sort of thing where there's a 100% chance that it's abused a little.
What I don't know is is it abused a lot, you know, enough to change an election.
That I don't know.
But we'll find out.
So maybe, you know, maybe it's a movement in the right direction.
But we'll find out.
And then there was CNN had an interview with Brad Todd, who's a political commentator, and he said that we know the 2020 census, the errors were almost always to the detriment of red states.
Did you know that?
Did you know that the 2020 census was considered flawed in some ways, but that the flaws were overwhelmingly in one direction?
Now, there were both flaws on blue and red states, but the red states had the majority of the flaws.
And CNN host said, do we know that?
And Todd said, we do know that.
the Census Bureau's own audit of its work has proven that.
Okay, if it's their own audit, I do believe that one.
So if they redo the census, which Trump is asking for, and especially now these deported number of non-citizens, this should be another electoral advantage for Trump, right?
So how many advantages are the Republicans stacking up at this point?
Let's see.
They have completely destroyed the entire organization architecture of the fake news traditional media.
How big a deal is that for their election chances?
really big and they've dominated the podcasting you know space so far really good that's really good and then tom fenton and maybe some others doing some things to clean up the voter roles how much difference will that make might make a lot we don't know might make a little might make none don't know yet but it's all everything that might be making a difference is all leaning in one direction at this point.
What about Trump wanting to get rid of being able to vote without voter ID?
Well, if it gets away with that and also bans voting by mail, except for the special cases, then those will be two things that at least Republicans believe would take away some Democrat advantage.
Then I saw in the comments, thank you, that the cuts in USAID and the other dismantling of the NGO dark money networks, the pressure that's being put on Act Blue, which is a big funder of Democrat stuff, but they're being accused of having some foreign influence and trying to repackage big money into little money, which would be illegal.
So their funding sources are gone.
Their fake news protection racket still exists, but is basically only looked at by people over 70.
I think the median age is 70 for traditional news.
And the median age for podcasting is something in the low 30s, I think.
So correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 100% of everything that's big enough to be in the news all heading in the same direction.
Oh, and then I forgot to even mention the redistricting.
So they got redistricting, cleaning up voter rolls.
Maybe they'll have movement on the mail and ballots and the ID.
They've got the maybe the census will be redone.
That's a lot, isn't it?
And you know, you could argue that the reason Trump won, And I don't have any evidence of this, but it's just one of those things that you could imagine might be true.
There was a really big movement to have observers, especially lawyers, at the election for 2020.
I think Lara Trump and company were behind that.
I wonder if that change made anybody back off from any shenanigans.
Now, again, I don't know that they planned any.
I don't know that there ever have been any shenanigans.
It just looks like it.
And then we see that Trump has got the military surrounding Venezuela.
Now, I do not believe that I have any confident data that says Venezuela was involved in any kind of, you know, rigging our election, but that's an accusation.
you hear.
I just don't think that that's a has evidence.
What would happen?
If the pressure that Trump is putting on militarily on Venezuela produced maybe not a war, because I don't want that, but maybe a negotiation.
And maybe Trump would say, I'll make you a deal.
I'll go a little bit easy on you.
If you reveal everything you know about what may or may not have been interference in our elections, we might find out because of the military pressure.
We might find out if Venezuela had anything to do with any of her past elections.
Again, I don't want to be sued, so I want to say clearly, I'm not aware of any evidence of that.
I just know that that's a speculation that's floating around.
Well, I guess tomorrow, Thomas Massey's organized an event.
Do you call it an event in Congress?
Press conference with 10 victims of Epstein's sex trafficking.
So that's tomorrow at 10.30, I assume Eastern time.
Now, what would you expect from 10 victims of Epstein's sex trafficking taking questions?
How many of you believe that they're going to name names you have never heard before?
I don't expect that.
It would be an amazing thing, good or bad.
It'd be amazing if it happened.
Here's what I suspect.
So, you know, dampening your enthusiasm for this.
What I would expect is that they'll all say that Epstein victimized them.
They might throw in, you know, Prince Andrew because it feels like he's already sullied, like it wouldn't be adding anything.
They just, oh, yeah, and we'll throw in a name that you've heard before.
So I've got a feeling it's not going to make as much news as you thought.
And one of the reasons might be that there was a god-awful amount of money set aside for settlements.
And if you were one of the victims, and you could prove it, and it seems like it'd be easy enough to prove, or at least easy enough to prove that you might be able to prove it if you went to court, they're probably a whole bunch of victims who got big paychecks to shut up.
So they might end up saying, you know, I can't talk about that because I've got some kind of agreement to settle.
And I wouldn't blame them for that, by the way.
I don't think that each of them individually has some larger responsibility to the public.
I don't think so.
He's dead.
you know, Ebstein's out of the picture.
I think they should take the money.
And if part of that was they had to agree to shut up about it, it's not a perfect solution.
But I wouldn't, I wouldn't fault them for taking the deal.
I'm pretty sure I would have.
So we'll watch that.
Gavin Newsom lost in court.
Again, Joel Pollock of Breitbart tells us, I'm always bad on the lawyer and court stories.
Let's see if I can get close to this.
The question was two bills and one of them required the large online platforms to block the posting of material deceptive content.
So another stuff.
basically anything that would matter that was that was deceptive related to elections and that And that did not, that was not affirmed by the court.
It also borrows material deceptive content.
So that would be deep fakes, I think.
And well, no, not necessarily deep fakes, but anything that's materially deceptive.
And Joel points out that that would have included something like Kamala Harris claiming that Trump once said that Nazis were very fine people.
So there's no way you could use that as standard because you'd be jelling everybody who opened their mouth in politics.
Because all the politicians are saying things that are not true, and they probably know they're not true on both sides.
So you couldn't really, in a practical way, have a law that said you're going to jail if you say something that's not true.
At least in this country.
I mean, maybe other countries.
then there was uh one of the uh what are they one of the proposed laws would require the online platforms to regulate deep fakes but that was rejected as well.
So basically, Newsom wanted California to have some control over the content online, and the court said, get out of here.
You're not going to have any more control than you already have, at least in regard to these specific things.
I think the judge said something about it would also kill the joke.
So that would be an awesome response if you're a judge.
Yeah, that wouldn't be funny if you had to admit it's a deep fake before somebody watched the the video so I think the judge said something along those lines, which is awesome.
All right, so satire and parody are now still protected.
This is one of those times when I'm happy to be an American because free speech is a mighty, mighty powerful thing in this country.
We will fight for it.
But in Britain, according to GB News, one of their comedians got arrested at gunpoint when he came into Heathrow, Graham Lineham.
So I guess he created something called Father Ted, which they would know in England, but we wouldn't know here.
And he did some posts in the past.
I don't know how long ago, but this is what they arrested him for.
And he called Trans Women.
trans women violent and he mocked a protest photo with trans people in it and he said I hate them and that was enough for him to be arrested at gunpoint entering the country now compare California and the United States where the judge said get out of here you'd ruin the joke Yeah, he's knocked it.
The trouble is if you try to ban anything along these lines, you get this.
So Great Britain is giving us the clearest lesson on why you shouldn't be that way.
I mean, this is the clearest, you know, it removes all doubt about which is the better system.
There's no ambiguity about this.
What a great marina science.
You might know that I've said some things that other people have interpreted as being over the line.
Now, I didn't actually ever say anything that was over the line, but I was widely canceled for other people's opinion of what my opinion was.
Is that fair?
Those of you who've been following my story, my characterizing that well, I didn't get canceled for my opinion.
In fact, I've never found anybody who disagreed with me yet.
Never.
Nobody.
Not even one person.
But I've had lots of people who believe I was saying or thinking something I wasn't saying and thinking.
And they were mad about that thing that they imagined I did.
And they were so unified in their belief that this thing that didn't happen did happen that I was canceled worldwide, lost my entire reputation and business.
Now, what would happen if I pull into Heathrow and they look at my history and then they believe what other people believed about it?
Would they say, aha, this horrible speech monster is coming into our country.
We're going to have to arrest him?
And would they have grounds?
This is not hypothetical.
This is like a genuine real world problem.
So what would I do?
What would be my smartest move if I don't know I would be arrested?
for someone else's opinion of what my opinion was that wasn't my opinion.
I could go to fucking jail for that.
It looks like.
Now, I would love it if somebody said, that's not true because of this reason or that reason, it wouldn't apply to you.
But I'll tell you, I would never go there.
As long as there's a comedian who got arrested for something he said on social media, I don't care what that was.
You know what I mean?
It doesn't really matter what that was.
That's enough for me to say, I'm never going near that place.
There must be something that somebody can misinterpret as being over the line.
I would never go into a system that was designed that way.
It's just not safe.
So that's the end of Great Britain or the UK or whatever they want to call themselves.
The whole England, UK, Great Britain thing.
It's way too complicated.
Could you make that easier?
Well, meanwhile, in Chicago, or you could call it Chicago, this weekend, 54 people were shot and seven killed.
Now, I will grant you it was a three-day weekend and I assume they're counting all three days 54 people 54 people were shot how many people were shot in Gaza how many I mean literally are there days when more people get shot in Chicago than in a hot war I'll bet there are you know individual days so
oh my god Chicago stay away from Chicago does anybody disagree?
No, nobody disagrees with that opinion that you should stay away from Chicago.
But I'd probably get arrested in the UK for saying stay away from Chicago.
Well, Trump has posted on Truth a complimentary, I guess, monologue on DC Mayor Bowser.
So you might know that DC Mayor Bowser started out by being positive about Trump helping with crime in her city.
And then for a while, she sort of tried to backtrack a little bit and be a little critical, but then in the end, she fully embraced him and said some good words in public and seems to be completely on board.
And what that caused was Trump to do a very complimentary piece on it.
He called her the very popular DC mayor.
And so New York Post is writing about this, by the way.
And he praised her, Mayor Muriel Bowser, for cooperating.
He said, wow, Mayor Muriel Bowser of DC has become very popular because she worked with me and my great people in bringing crime down to virtually nothing blah blah blah um he said her statements and actions were positive instead of others like and then he mentions prinser and uh westmore and pete and new scum he calls them uh etc.
Now here's your persuasion lesson for the day.
This is a lesson which I've given you before but every time you see an example of it it helps you internalize it right the persuasion lesson is this you want to create the largest gap between making you happy and making you unhappy that's what he's doing with the mural murial browser thing Trump went immediately from a critic to,
my God, the most popular mayor, you're great.
And that's what everybody's observing.
So the observers are saying to themselves, let me see.
If I go against him like Pritzker, he's going to insult me physically, you know, my look, my intelligence, my honesty.
He might actually just destroy me the way he has so many other people, such as Jet Bush.
So it looks like it's a really, really, really bad idea to go against Trump because he can primary you, he can insult you, and he can give you a nickname that will never go away.
He can really hurt you.
And that's even before he was president.
He just had the persuasive ability.
But if you take a chance of working with him to get something useful done, he's going to tell the whole world that that you worked with him and you're a genius and you're the best mayor that's ever been there.
So that's the largest difference between make you happy and make you unhappy.
And he broadcasts it.
So by his action, everybody sees that this is very certainly the case, right?
You can see that he does this intentionally.
It's very powerful.
Well, according to the Hill, Terra Souter is writing about, did you know, I'll bet most of you didn't even know this, that thousands of people were protesting on Monday, protesting against President Trump and billionaires.
Were you aware of the anti-Trump, anti-billionaire protests in, according to Mayday Strong, strong who organized it that there were a thousand protests around the country in more than 900 cities.
I guess some cities had more than one protest.
And the big push that's backed by the AFL CIO is dubbed Workers Over Billionaires.
Okay, did any of you even notice that there were a thousand protests on Monday?
anybody?
There was a protest in my little East Bay, California town.
Apparently there was quite a number of people who were dressed in Palestinian garb marching in even my town, which is surprising.
But I didn't see it.
So my take on it is that this is the most low energy, generic, artificial protest I've ever seen.
May I summarize the total effect of a thousand protests around the country against, oh, I Against Trump and billionaires.
Okay, that's just generic.
Guys, are you even trying?
Is this the best you've got on the anti-Trump side?
We'll do a thousand protests.
Some of them will be five people, low energy.
I don't even know if it was in the news, barely.
all right um the airbnb co-founder joe gabia who is one of the people who helped on um a doge, by the way, but he tells about his transition from being a lifelong Democrat to a Trump backer.
And he talks about how Trump's approach to the border was the main thing that sold him because he just thought it was insane that you would open the border.
Imagine being a billionaire, you know, founding Airbnb and knowing that it was just being destroyed by opening the border along with everything else.
So apparently that got him interested enough to sort of sort of look into the whole Trump phenomenon a little deeper.
And he liked that RFK Jr. was part of the package.
He liked that Elon Musk was going to get involved and put it all together and decided to work on Doge, etc.
But here's what I want to add to this story.
Do you believe that the Airbnb co-founder would have been able to publicly support Trump unless the fine people hoax had been debunked?
Could a CEO go public as pro-Trump?
while the fine people hoax was still raging.
I don't think so.
And I've told you before that the fine people hoax has been named by both Joe Rogan and Elon Musk as something that kind of turned him.
It made it, the reason that the Fine People Hoax was so important is that respected people could never back Trump as long as that was out there.
Everything else they could deal with if they didn't like a policy or something, you could deal with that, but you couldn't deal with the reputational destruction.
of saying you were going to back the guy who, according to the hoax, had complimented the neo-Nazis.
So I'll hearken back to the time I told you that I would help destroy that hoax with the good work of Steve Cortez and Joel Pollock and Greg Gutfeld and a number of people who we just hammered on that thing until eventually even Snopes said it was a hoax.
That's the current situation.
But to me, if you look at how RFK Jr. and Musk, their acceptance of Trump's policies made it easier for the Airbnb founder to move in that direction.
So he's confirming that that's the case.
So do you see the dominoes?
And I told you that the fine people hoax was what I called the tent pole hoax.
If you got rid of that, it would allow respected people to say, all right, let's take the good policies I like.
Because the respected people wanted to close the border.
They just couldn't say it out loud because it would sound pro-Trump.
Now they can.
So that's kind of cool.
Howard Stern has said he's not coming back to his show this Tuesday.
It's a little unclear what his future is because I guess Sirius said they wouldn't renew his contract.
Was his contract really $100 million a year for five years?
I think it was.
And over the course of his career, Stern's audience has been as high as 20 million people.
And at the moment, it's 125,000 daily listeners.
He went from 20 million to 125,000.
Now, some large percentage of that is just moving to serious, you know, FM exclusively.
That probably takes away most of it.
But boy, that's a big difference.
All right, you want to get scared?
Ooh, I'm going to scare you.
There's something called the Pentagon Pizza Report, which does report on the traffic in the Dominoes and the Papa John's that are closest to the Pentagon.
Now, why would you report on the volume of pizza being bought next to the Pentagon?
Well, I believe the idea is that if they're buying a lot of pizza, it's because they're working through dinner.
And that if you track the pizza, you can find out when the Pentagon is getting ready for some big action because they would all be you know working through the night and stuff so apparently there's above average traffic at the dominoes and the papa johns near the pentagon as if something's brewing on top of that trump has says he's making an announcement from the oval office today at 2 p.m. eastern time.
At the same time, we've got military in Venezuela.
We've got the president saying he's going after the cartels, and we've got the ever-present Ukraine-Russia war.
And who knows?
I don't think Taiwan's going to be invaded by China this week.
But there's a lot of war-ish stuff that's just sort of in the atmosphere.
Just enough to worry you.
But on top of that, France has apparently put out the order domestically for the hospitals to prepare for war.
Now, the way they're explaining it is that that would be more normal.
They should always be having a plan.
that if there were mass casualties from a war that they would know how to handle it just in case.
So it's more of a just in case thing.
But still, if France is preparing for a land war in Europe, and we've got, ships around Venezuela and the cartels are active and Russia and Ukraine are going on.
And the Pentagon's ordering more pizza and Trump's got an announcement today.
It makes you wonder if there's anything brewing.
I'm going to say probably not.
Probably not.
But it is weird that there are a number of signals in that direction.
So we'll see.
The Trump announcement could be anything, really.
He's so good at getting attention and teasing things.
It really could be anything.
Well, as you know, a number of leaders are in China and cozing up to President Xi.
But apparently Putin and India's Modi seem to be a little extra chummy in China.
People are wondering about that.
I guess India buys their military equipment and a lot of the oil from Russia.
And even their weapons industry in India is based on the Russian models.
So they need the Russian parts and help to even have a weapons industry.
So, but it looks like there are a whole bunch of countries that coincidentally are not pro-America that are trying to send the message that they're all good buddies.
I don't know if a coalition of dictators like that can really hang together because it seems like it'd be hard to trust any of them.
But Russia's biggest gas company, Gazprom, is signing a pipeline deal, put a pipeline.
through Siberia to Mongolia.
So I would say that the chessboard is moving quite a bit.
And I'm kind of impressed by the BRICS countries and even this meeting here.
It does seem like there is a hardening of the anti-American position.
And I would not ignore that because it's starting to look serious.
I wasn't too worried about BRICS until recently, the BRICS organization.
But I would be worried if India gets cleaved off and gets into more of Russia and China's, probably Russia, Russia's or..
That would worry me.
But I am impressed with Modi.
India's Modi.
He's a smart player and he knows when not to cause trouble and when to be friends.
And I feel like he could pull off being friends with everybody if he wants to.
It looks like he is.
In other news, there's a new AI product called Hunwan.
world voyager or something and it's an ai in which it creates i think infinite worlds um if i understand it correctly.
I saw a bunch of examples.
That's what it looks like.
So in other words, you could tell your AI to create you, I don't know, an early history, let's say, primitive dwellings or something, just like a video game.
And you could walk through the streets of whatever you told it to create forever.
And it would just create new streets or remember what the old ones were and you could go back to them.
Now, if you can create, an on-demand simulation where no matter where the characters go or wherever you go, it just creates new landscape.
and it remembers it so you can come back later.
What does that tell you is going to happen?
Well, let me predict.
If it becomes routine to be able to create entire infinite environments of all kinds of different kinds, it's guaranteed that somebody's going to populate them with avatars or characters.
You might call them agents, but they be AI.
run little characters.
Now some of them could be NPCs, meaning that they don't have an internal voice and But they wouldn't be main characters.
And there would be some main characters in there.
But you could program the main characters to act as though they believe that they are the base reality and that they do not understand that they are a simulation.
They think that's a real world.
And they would live their life.
you may be in a sped up time even but they could live their whole life believing that they have consciousness and free will and that they are the base reality now when that happens and i And I guarantee it's going to happen.
There's a 100% chance that's going to happen.
There's somebody who'll make little characters that believe they're real and act like they're real and everything else.
What will that tell you about our base reality?
It's going to get a little bit dicey believing that you're not a simulation because the evidence for us being a simulation is largely going to be based on whether we could make one.
that we knew was a simulation, but the people in it did not.
And there's now a 100% chance we'll be able to do that maybe in a year.
You know, I wouldn't bet on a year, but three years, five years?
You don't think in five years there will be simulated realities that we could use to, I don't know, learn something or explore something?
You know, I've told you that I have so many problems with water leaks that if I'm a simulation, I believe I was created by a plumbing company to figure out the best way to approach lots of different leaks
they're all unique and they're they're big ones and bad ones you know they're never easy and and and all you'd have to do is create the simulation and then introduce a whole bunch of different leak possibilities that match what the real world, their base reality would have, and then just let me try to solve them in a time period that I thought was years, but the simulation could complete in a second.
So they run the simulation, they make me live an entire life fixing problem after problem that's related to leaks, and then they check it later and see if the AI has learned something that it could not have learned from humans because it wasn't the right kind of training data.
You had to create a world.
to create training data.
Maybe.
So that's my theory.
Well, Putin is mocking the people who think that Russia's getting ready for some kind of big land war in Europe, and I like the fact that he's mocking it.
He shrugged it off as hysteria.
Do you believe there's any chance that Russia would want to move into either Germany or France?
They might try to pick off a Baltic company country or something, but I don't know.
So who knows?
Anything's possible.
Remember I kept telling you that the Ukraine war is going to turn into an all-robot war?
Well, apparently we're getting really close to that because unbeknownst to me, but now the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Ukraine is already using AI-driven drone swarms.
Now, if you could have an AI-driven drone swarm, the AI could decide whether to shoot somebody or blow up something or not.
It might get it wrong, but so do the people.
I don't know if it would get it wrong more than humans.
Maybe it would be less.
But they apparently have, they've been using probably over 100 drone attacks and they've been doing it for a while.
And the new software would allow them to send out, let's say, three drones.
And if one of them got disabled, the other two could pick up its mission.
And somehow the drones, by contacting each other, can figure out a lot more of what's going on and adjust.
But the software that they're currently using could go up to 25 drones.
So in theory, we're very close.
I don't know if we're there yet, but we're very close to being able to say, all right, this little area that's controlled entirely by German, I'm sorry, not German, entirely by Russian forces, go fly over there with your 25 drones, look for high value targets, and coordinate an attack, and then just let them go, and everything will start blowing up.
that looks like anything that's serious military stuff.
Would it accidentally kill some civilians?
Yes, exactly like now.
So it wouldn't be worse necessarily.
All right, China's developed a 6G chip that's capable of 100 gigabit per second speeds.
I saw Rohan Paul writing about that, to which I say, I've long suspected that our belief that China won't be able to catch up with us in chip making and technology because of some racist reason we always have.
You know, so we always have some racist reason.
Like, oh, the Chinese will never be able to innovate.
Well, I've never believed that.
I've always believed that China might be more secretive, and the entire time we're thinking, they'll never catch up with their microchip technology, that they've already caught up, and that they're just not revealing it yet.
Well, this 100 gigabit per second chip, so that would make your mobile devices way faster, et cetera.
That would suggest that they have very good chipmaking capabilities, maybe better than we assume.
So keep an eye on that.
And then some publication called the Brussels Signal, is reporting that one of China's big economic problems, and I'm not sure how much to believe this, is that the domestic people don't spend a lot of money.
So they don't have a domestic market, basically, big enough to support what they want to do.
So the Chinese citizens are very conservative with their money.
So they like to pack it away and save it instead of spending it.
But the economy requires spending to So China is trying to manipulate their public to be more spendy, but the public says, I'm not sure I trust the system enough that I want to draw down my savings because it's the only way I'll be able to retire.
So I don't know.
China is either on the brink of self-destruction or it's about to dominate the world.
And every day there's evidence of both.
According to just the news, Chinese networks are laundering billions of dollars through the U.S. in support of the cartels.
But the amount of money is just staggering.
So the Treasury has this financial crimes enforcement network, and they said that banks have flagged $312 billion.
in transactions from suspected Chinese money laundering networks.
Wow.
So the good news is that the Trump administration and probably Scott Besant and maybe others are getting real serious about tracing the evil money.
So that might have more to do with shutting down the cartels and anything else that happens.
It might be a money tracking the money problem.
Well, in Germany, there's a right-wing party that's gaining in popularity, the AFD party.
And apparently in their biggest, is it, what do they call it, state or province?
I don't know what it's called.
But there were four of their candidates that died suddenly and unexpectedly before a major state election.
Four members of the same party, and only one of them was even over 70, died unexpectedly and suddenly.
Does that feel like a coincidence to you?
It might be.
We're still waiting for information on that, but that didn't look, it makes me wonder if the story is real maybe the story's fake i don't know well i almost didn't believe this was real because it wasn't much of a big story that israel assassinated the prime minister uh of uh of yemen that's that really happened right that they took out the leader
of a country and i feel like I didn't really see much news about it.
I think it happened, right?
It's kind of weirdly, you know, black out of the news anyway.
Anyway, so I might be wrong about some detail of that.
Maybe it was just the Hootie leader and not the Yemen leader or something like that.
There's something about that that doesn't make sense.
But anyway.
And now the most important news of the day.
Everything else was sort of a preparation for this.
The most important news of the day is that my book, Loser Think, the second edition, is now available on Amazon.
It's only on Amazon.
And I'm still working on the audiobook, which will be a different audio expert, not me.
So it won't be my voice.
So if you're waiting for my voice, don't wait.
But you can get it in hardcover and softcover and Kindle.
And it's the same book as the first edition, but the first edition got canceled when I got canceled.
So it's just putting it back in play.
And that means that now the second editions of Win Bigley.
This is actually the first edition.
I couldn't find my copy of the second edition.
The one you want to buy, if you're looking for Win Bigley, is the one with the blue cover.
So this is the first edition.
And then Reframe Your Brain, if you haven't seen the reviews for this, it's unbelievable.
I did not expect that this would be my best reviewed book of all time, but it is and better reviewed than almost any book you'll ever see.
So this one's changing the world, changing people's lives quite a bit, actually.
Um, then my, uh, And my God's Debris, which I combined three, well, two books plus a short story into one larger book called God's Debris, the Complete Works, now available at Amazon.
So if you like fiction and a little bit of sci-fi and philosophy and religion, God's Debris is your book.
That one's just for fun.
If you want to change your career or you're stuck in a rut or you want to give advice to somebody who's stuck in a rut, then my book had a fill at almost everything and still went big.
would be the gift item you're looking for or for yourself.
Reframe your brain if you've got, if you just want to tune your brain to be more efficient and happy and that.
that you'll find probably some reframes, which is just a different way of thinking of something that makes it more productive.
Win Bigley, if you want to learn about persuasion, learn the tricks that Trump uses, as explained by me.
But again, not the one with the black cover, you want the one with the blue cover, the second edition.
And then loser think is about unproductive ways of thinking, which is what I give you on a lot of the podcasts.
So when I'm talking about why analogies are not thinking.
I know a lot of you disagree, but you want to read my argument about it before you make up your mind.
And other poor ways of thinking, this book will set you free so that you won't make those problems, but you also be able to identify them in other people.
All right.
So ladies and gentlemen, oh, also it's not available yet, but the 2026 Dilbert calendar will be available.
This time it will be on Amazon.
So if you've got Prime, you can get your free shipping.
That was when we did it with Amazon, people blocked at the shipping because you can't match free shipping.
But this year, and it's too early, it's not listed yet, but the work is done.
So we've designed it, we're getting ready to print it.
All right, it's all made in America too, America made.
And that is all I ask of you.
Just find one of those things that you think you'll like, and then we're both happy.
