God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorksFind my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.comContent:Politics, Ultra-Processed Food, AI Art, EU Massive Google Fine, Community College Corruption, NJ Homeschool DEI Requirement, Elon Musk, Anti-Lazy Advice, Rep. Mike Johnson, Citizenship Essay, Georgia 2020 Election, MTG, President Trump US Open, Democrat Word Thinking, Venezuela Drug Trade, Criminal Cartels, Scott Bessent, Russian Economy, Vivek Ramaswamy, Kamala Harris Security Detail, Nancy Pelosi Deep Fake Video, Epstein Files, Israel Hamas War, 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.
Coffee with Scott Adams featuring Gary the Cat, my producer.
That purring you here is not the washing machine.
That is the cat who's decided for the worst possible entry to make, timing-wise.
We were golfing this morning.
If you're not a member of locals, you wouldn't know what that means.
But I do go golfing with my cats.
All right, looks like the stock market's mostly a little bit up.
So that's good.
How about that?
Come on in, take a seat.
Yeah, there's plenty of room up front.
Get a nice, comfortable seat, grab a beverage in the back, and we will begin the experience that you've been looking forward to.
Wait a minute, I don't want that.
all right good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and you've never had a better time.
But if you'd like to take a chance on elevating your experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that is a copper mug or a glass of tanker chalicers, stein, a canteen, jugger flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
No, Gary, don't knock over the ring light.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the top being the other day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens right now.
Go.
Perfect.
And today only, I'm going to add a segment.
It's called the simultaneous pet.
All right.
Do you have a pet with you?
Go.
Simultaneous pet all over the world.
Wherever there are pets.
All right.
All right.
So I wonder if there's any science that's been done lately that really didn't need to be done.
Oh, here we go.
In SciPost, Vladimir Edward is writing that people interpret long eyelashes as a signal of openness to casual relationships.
Now, here's the question I ask.
Are they studying eyelashes because science took care of everything else?
Was there nothing left to study but eyelashes?
And can you imagine telling your proud parents, Mom, thanks for sending me to MIT.
I know it was a big sacrifice and expensive, but I'm part of an important study now.
Really?
Really?
What are you studying?
Eyelashes.
What?
Yeah, eyelashes.
It turns out that there is, this study found this, an ideal length of eyelashes for attracting people, I guess.
So would you have ever guessed that people think that if your eyelashes are too long, it doesn't look good?
No, really.
Yeah, really.
I know you never would have faked that out.
And also that if they're too short, they look less sexy.
But there's a zone in between too long and too short.
I know science found this for us.
How would you even know this?
But between those two extremes is something called just the right length for an eyelash.
And if you nail it, oh, whoa.
You're going to have quite a weekend.
That's all I'm going to say.
Anyway.
According to ZME Science, and I think you're going to be amazed that science also has a handle on this.
According to Tudor Tarita, ultra-processed foods made a healthy young man, young men, gain fat and lose sperm quality in just three weeks.
So they took some volunteers and they said, hey, you healthy young men, we're going to measure you before and after.
And for only three weeks, they ate the ultra-processed foods, pretty much mostly that.
And yeah, it made them less healthy immediately.
Now, who would have ever guessed that the fuel you're putting into your body would make a difference to your health?
A darn good thing they studied because I was starting to think you could just put anything in that big hole in your face.
Hey, here's some dirt.
That's probably just as good as food.
Why don't I put it in my mouth?
So yes, we're not surprised that the less healthy food produces a less healthy person.
We're not even surprised that it happens kind of quickly.
I mean, anybody who knows anything about blood sugar knows that that happens right away.
But also, apparently, it just makes your hormones go crazy.
So it is so unhealthy.
My God.
You know, I always amazed because if I said to you, I've got an idea.
Why don't I put some dirt in your lawnmower engine?
Let's say it was a gas engine.
How many of you would think, well, that should be fine?
I mean, if it's only a little bit and you only do it once, it should be fine.
Well, your body is not less sensitive than your lawnmower.
So yeah, don't put that stuff in there.
Well, here is another opportunity for me to tell you just how wonderful I am, if you don't mind.
In this case, it's a prediction.
I guess you could call it that.
Remember, I told you that people would not like AI art, and I gave the argument that art is really part of the mating instinct.
And what you're responding to is the fact that there was a human who could make that art.
And what you're impressed by is the human creator.
It's not even the art.
So more to that point, not exactly on that point, but supportive of it, Scientific America, American has a story.
It says that survey results show people prefer more human involvement in AI-driven art.
So people like human art more than AI art.
So that part tracks.
But, hey, cats.
I got multiple cats now.
I got a whole cat catastrophe happening here.
All right.
You guys don't knock over anything expensive during the show, okay?
But otherwise, go nuts.
You can have the cardboard.
Yeah, drew on the cardboard.
That's good.
Just do that.
All right.
So yes, people like human-made art.
So if they know that a human made it, they might like it.
just like I surmise.
It looks like the EU is fining Google $3.5 billion over what they called ad tech abuse.
So I guess Google was favoring their own ad tech, and that must be a no-no in the EU.
But the thing I wonder is, do you think Google even knew?
Do you think they were aware that they were violating a law to the tune of, oh, in terms of dollars, is $3.5 billion?
Yeah.
So how would you like to be the person in charge of that part of Google?
So how was the work today?
Well, found out that due to the fact that I did not understand the rules of the EU or how my own product works, I just cost us, well, a fine.
It was a fine.
Ooh, a fine.
How much was it?
Like, was it over a million dollars?
Yeah, yeah, it was over a million dollars.
Was it over 10?
Yeah, stop it.
It was 3.5 billion dollars.
I feel bad enough.
Yeah, that was somebody's day at work.
I just cost the company $3.5 billion.
Well, apparently there's something ruining community college that I had no idea was happening.
The Epoch Times is reporting about this.
Kimberly Hayek.
Apparently, there are all these fake college applicants that somehow if they enroll and they stay in school, they could get some kind of federal assistance.
So it's a big old scam.
But as many as 30% of new students are enrolling in community college classes, but doing them remotely.
But remotely, not really, because they're actually just bots and AI.
So AI has now destroyed community college because you try to get a class and all the good classes are already taken by the freaking robots that are scammers.
And not just a little bit, like 30%.
Have I mentioned to you that everything is corrupt?
Everything.
What is not corrupt?
Did you even imagine that, I guess at the low end, it'd be like 13%, but up to 30% of the people who are allegedly in college and being supported by your taxes are just bots and crooks.
And I'm just finding this out today.
I've never even heard of this.
Have you?
Have any of you heard of that?
Unbelievable.
Could I have guessed that community college is a giant fraudulent thing, even though they don't intend it to be, of course?
Well, yeah, because it appears that everything is.
Well, here's a story that's almost unbelievable.
PJ Media is reporting on this, Kevin Downey, that apparently New Jersey is floating some, they're considering anyway.
We don't know if it's going to happen yet, but they're considering a bill that would force homeschoolers, homeschoolers, to be taught the same kind of stuff that you go to homeschool to avoid exposing your children to.
Let me say it again.
Like one of the main reasons, if not, I guess it would be the main reason, that people don't want to send their kid to public schools and the reason that they homeschool is so they're not exposed to all the things that would be forced upon them, even as homeschoolers, if in New Jersey, if they pass that bill.
That is so messed up.
So messed up.
So in other words, it would force them into certain views on DEI and gender and climate studies, to name a few.
The very things that conservatives are running away from.
It's like, you know, don't give that stuff to my kid.
Wow.
Well, I did not see this coming, and I'm not sure we know the real story here, but Howard Stern is not retiring and seems to have a deal.
And he's just going back to work and acting like it was a big old prank because they did prank it up a little bit.
He pranked it toward the end.
It made it look like he was done, but he really was right there.
So my guess, probably the same as yours, that there was maybe a little bit of truth to it, as in they might have said, no way we're going to renew you at your high prices.
And then he probably said, I'd still be making a fortune at a fraction of what you used to pay me.
So why don't you pay me that?
And I'll still be earning a fortune.
And that's probably what happened.
Probably it was something like negotiations and something like bad rumors that nobody knew what was going on.
I think Elon Musk learned something from Trump.
Uh-oh.
Yeah, well, we're good.
Because he put a post on X today that was one of these mysterious, one of you know, sort of a Trump-like keep you curious kind of post.
And all it said was, you'll thank me later.
Now, what do you think that meant?
You'll thank me later.
The beauty of it is that he's on his way, depending on his pay package approval at Tesla, to becoming a trillionaire.
How many possible things might he be doing that we would thank him later for if he had a trillion dollars to apply to it, so to speak?
That's kind of uh kind of keeps me curious.
So the range of possibilities are just I mean, it could be anything.
He could have solved some major societal problem, but more likely it's just something like a joke or something.
But it makes me just as happy to anticipate it.
So that's that's the Trump part.
The Trump part is that the real game is the anticipation, it's not even the announcement.
So I woke up this morning to find out that Elon had reposted a video that somebody had clipped of me doing a whiteboard presentation of how to be less lazy.
And it already had six million views.
Isn't that amazing that by buying X, he wasn't just like investing in a company that he turned around and made it viable, but he found a way that just with one touch, because he's made himself such a character on X, that he's got the gigantic account, that he can boost anything.
And the effect is like immediate and just stunning.
So that was amazing.
My name was not mentioned on it, so maybe that made it easier too.
So here's another test of my BS detecting skills that you get to watch in real time.
It's a real-time test.
Do you remember when the news was that Mike Johnson, Speaker Johnson, had said that Trump was an FBI informant on the Epstein case?
And do you remember what I said about that story?
I said, that doesn't sound right.
I do not believe that Mike Johnson knows that Trump was an FBI informant for the Epstein situation.
And I mocked it by saying, are you telling me that we're just finding this out now?
That somehow it could have been casually known by Mike Johnson, who just casually mentions it in the hallway, you know, press gaggle or whatever it is, and that and that we're just finding out about it.
And you remember what I said?
You know, I basically said, just wait.
This is confused.
It's getting conflated with the other story that he was helpful to one of the lawyers.
And now he has clarified that he did not mean that Trump was ever an FBI informant.
That he had in fact, sounds like he had, in fact, conflated it with the real story that Trump was the most useful witness or forthcoming person to talk to one of the lawyers about what really was happening there.
So my BS detector worked on that story, if you're keeping score.
I was laughing quite a bit this morning at the story that allegedly the Trump administration might require would-be citizens to complete an essay so they'd have an essay portion to the U.S. citizenship test.
Now, is it just me, or does that seem funny that it would be an essay part of the citizenship test?
And what would you write on the essay?
And wouldn't it take about five minutes?
Because even the citizenship test has a study guide.
They would obviously have to give you a study guide or some notes about what they're looking for in the essay.
But wouldn't it be the same, I don't know, list of maybe 10 things?
It'd be like, all right, make sure you say that you want to be loyal.
Be sure you say that you respect everybody's different religions.
You know, it's going to be whatever it is.
It's going to be a list of things that every single person will mention in the essay.
Or, or is the real trick here to make sure they can write something In English, because I imagine the essay would have to be in English, right?
So, is it a clever way to have a language restriction?
Is that what's going on?
Anyway, so it does look like it's a way to block certain people that you might want to block, whoever that is.
So, there's a little bit of subjectivity to it, but I will copy what somebody said about having AI grade things.
Imagine if AI grades their essays, their citizenship essays.
Wouldn't that be so dismissive if it failed you on your essay?
And it was just AI and no human being was even involved, and you wouldn't know how to appeal it because everybody would appeal it if you could.
So, they probably will have AI grade them.
But I can also imagine how dumb would you have to be, assuming that you could read and write in English, how dumb would you have to be to not be able to pass the citizenship essay?
I mean, you kind of know what to write, right?
And it's not like they're looking for, you know, Mark Twain-level writing.
They're just looking for, are you going to like the country and be loyal to it and stuff?
Can't be that hard.
But I will say that requiring the essay to get into the U.S. has one advantage that is not obvious to you, but it will be once I tell you.
It's the first stage of brainwashing.
Because a healthy country does, in fact, brainwash all of its citizens to be on the same page and to say things like, whoa, I live in the best country and I would fight, I would give my life for the country.
That's all the basis of brainwashing.
You're not born with those feelings.
Those are given to you.
Those are assigned to you as a child, and they sort of never go away.
So, even though I call it brainwashing, I do not say it's a bad idea.
It might be the only way you can build a cohesive country that can defend itself with a whole bunch of well-intentioned brainwashing so everybody's on the same page.
But one of the best ways to brainwash somebody is to ask them to write an essay.
This is a real thing.
That's was it in the book Influence, Childini's book.
That's where I first thought that if you get somebody to write an essay on one point of view, and these essays on citizenship would have to be America is great, it's the best country, that's why I want to live here.
If you're forced to write it, even if you're just lying to get into the country, the fact that you wrote it down and signed your name to it will, in fact, cause you to start believing those things.
And that's a apparently well-demonstrated psychological effect that if you're forced to write it, even though you know you're pretending, it will turd you into it anyway.
Not every person, not completely.
It's one of those statistical things.
all right so i'm in favor of that um i saw i i saw a article by john forte blaze media the opinion piece he's talking about the importance of patriotic assimilation You know, basically brainwashing.
Would you imagine that those are the same?
That we require people to, quote, assimilate, but that means more than just learning the language, right?
And learning, you know, obeying the laws and learning language.
It's more than that.
It's like getting that whole American vibe thing.
But if you call it assimilation, then people think it's a good thing.
They're like, oh, I'd like to assimilate.
Good idea.
But it's not really that different than brainwashing.
It's just brainwashing with a good intention, with the intention of benefiting the greater good.
But if you want to call it assimilation, that's fine.
So Marjorie Taylor Greene is sent a, I guess, a formal request to DOJ and the FBI to investigate the 2020 election in Georgia.
Gateway pundits writing about this, Brian Lupo.
And do you believe that we would find at this late date some confirmed rigging of the Georgia state election in 2020?
How many of you believe that if they spend a little bit of time looking into it, they're going to find it?
I don't know, because I'm having this groundhog day situation.
If you like me, and some of you are, the algorithm has been giving you a steady diet of, well, here's another almost guaranteed proof that that Georgia election was rigged.
And then you think, well, if that's true, this will be this giant national story.
And then, you know, the legal system will operate.
And then you wait.
And it feels like nothing happens.
And you think, wait, what happened to that allegation?
Did that get debunked?
And usually it did.
So I am so used to a news story of, oh, this time we got him.
This time we got him.
We're so close.
We got the goods.
But it doesn't really ever seem like we got anybody.
And I don't know why.
I don't know if it's all the same phenomenon, which is that the claims were ridiculous and all we're doing is finding that out.
Or is there some other phenomenon happening?
But I wanted to just, I took from the article, the Gateway Pundit article, what some of these claims are.
And I was reminding myself a little bit.
So you remember that Biden won Georgia by, and I'm going to round off here just to make it simple.
He won Georgia by 12,000 votes.
All right, not quite, but round off to 12,000.
Did you know that there are 18,000 votes of, quote, unknown providence, which means no physical ballot was in evidence.
So there are 18,000 phantom votes.
That's what I'll call them, because they don't match any physical voting thing.
There are also, now these are the allegations, right?
I can't prove that these are true.
21,000 votes that were counted from unreported and unidentified tabulators.
What?
How could they have unidentified tabulators?
I mean, it could be just a typo somewhere.
Or, or, the 10 tabulators used for the 21,000 votes have no record of existing, according to the tabulators'tapes, which include serial numbers for the tabulators.
Okay.
And also, no poll closing tapes were provided.
No logic and accuracy test logs.
Again, I don't know how common any of this is.
It doesn't necessarily mean that all this missing, sketchy stuff is proof of a bad election.
It could be that even your cleanest elections have all these kind of minor problems and it doesn't mean what you think it means.
And if you looked into it, you'd be satisfied that it was fine.
Maybe.
Maybe.
But I don't hate the fact that Marjorie Taylor Green is going to make them look into it.
Because I feel like we need to know, whichever way it goes, don't you feel like you need to know?
To me, Georgia is just hanging out there as one of President Trump's possibly biggest fake news.
You know, the thing that the Democrats believe when he said, just find me X number of votes, they imagined that what that meant, the find me, is he's asking him to cheat in front of a bunch of witnesses.
Now, that's as dumb as imagining that January 6th was an insurrection and nobody brought a gun.
Yeah, he asked him to throw the election in front of what he knew were lots of people listening at the same time.
And of course, it's the president, so of course it's recorded somewhere.
No, that didn't happen.
What he was certainly saying was, you know, make sure that there are not any lost votes or sketchy things going.
And if you do that, it might find that I actually won.
So I'm all for it, the checking of it.
If you told me, Scott, I'm going to put a gun to your head and you're going to have to bet whether they're going to find that the election was stolen.
I wouldn't make the bet, but I definitely want to know more about that situation.
And, you know, I wouldn't rule out that it was rigged.
I would not rule that out.
I just don't personally have any evidence that pushes me over the line on that.
I could easily be pushed, but I'm not there yet.
I guess Trump attended the U.S. Open Finals.
And are you surprised that he would go to a big stadium, probably with a lot of elites, because the tickets are not cheap?
And that it was what I heard was pretty much all cheers.
I didn't hear booze.
And I asked myself, are we being totally gaslit that there's so much resistance to him?
Or is there resistance just on TV and resistance on social media?
But if you went into the real world, would 90% or more, we'll say 90%, would 90% say, oh, yay, look, it's the president, and have sort of a little bit of a fond feeling for what he's doing for the country.
It makes me wonder.
It does make me wonder.
Because it's not like a sporting event.
Now, the only other way you could explain it is that tennis, you know, tennis fans are usually tennis players.
They tend to be sort of a polite sporting group compared to other people.
Maybe it was just that.
Maybe they were just being polite.
But it kind of looked like he had broken the, you know, broken the TDS bubble.
I mean, I don't know how you get a whole stadium full of people to sound like they're all cheering.
You know, no doubt there was some mixed in booze or something, but sounded like pretty general support.
So it surprised me a little bit.
It also made me wonder because Trump actually goes to sporting events that he would have gone to anyway, you know, stuff that he literally enjoys, not just presidential stuff.
But he gets the best seats in the house.
And I thought to myself, one of the best things for him about being president is that he just gets great seats.
I'm also getting used to the Trump persona.
And I'm going to miss it so much, assuming he ever leaves office.
And what I mean by that is he's now able to get away with all kinds of behavior that used to drive the press crazy and give them stuff to talk about.
He's gone full Don Rickles.
So for those of you who know, no deceased, I believe, comedian Don Rickles, his entire act was insulting people in the audience and friends and stuff, just insulting them terribly.
But the reason he could get away with it is that that was his sort of persona.
And so you didn't take him seriously.
You knew that that was an act.
Well, Trump, I think, has finally, and it's not like there was a dividing line where it happened.
It happened gradually and then you notice it.
He's created his persona to the point where I feel like even his critics have given up on the fact that it's not an act, meaning that it's not like he's lying.
And it's not like he's a phony.
He's a genuine showman.
So the fact that he's putting on a show and that he's playing sort of an attenuated version of himself for the show, it doesn't make it fake because you know he's putting on a show and that the show is the Donald Trump show.
So somehow he's made this thing that never existed before, which is a president as showman.
You know, beyond just being good politically, like a Kennedy, he's putting on a show.
So, and it's sort of a reality show, but there'll be little moments such as he was asked by, I think it was Yamichi.
One of the reporters asked him as he was leaving to go somewhere, and they stop him as they do.
And the question was, Are you ready to go to war with Chicago?
Why use the Department of Defense?
So, Trump stops.
He leans into her.
He goes, Be quiet.
You don't listen.
That's why you're second rate.
We're not going to war.
We're going to clean our cities so they don't kill five people every weekend.
That's not war.
That's common sense.
That's why you're second rate.
Now, do you even imagine that there'll be any other president who would ever put on a show where you would expect it would be pretty normal behavior that he would say to a reporter in front of a bunch of other reporters, you're second rate?
The only reason he can get away with it is that he's trained us that he's Trump.
So, Trump just has the right to put on the show.
And once you realize that stuff like you're second rate is not an indication that he's out of control and that he must be 25th Amendment, all it means is you finally figured out what the show is.
This is the show.
We've been watching it for years, but for I think the rest of the country, mostly the Democrats, I feel like you finally came along.
Not everybody, but a lot more, and that you finally understand the show.
That was the show.
And here's some more of it.
Again, this is just examples of the show.
So, Trump can't let go of the Autopen thing, but listen to the way he words it.
Now, I've often said he's the best writer we've ever had as a president because it's just so you just feel everything he says, and he doesn't waste a lot of words.
And anyway, I'll say more about that another time.
But just listen to the beauty of the brief, powerful thing he says that just is part of the show.
He said, Quote, the Auto Pen was our president.
The Autopen was our president.
Now, isn't that the funny way to say that?
The Autopen was president.
So dismissive of Biden.
It's kind of perfect, and it uses no extra words.
No extra words.
The Autopen was our president.
It's just perfect.
And then he goes, Whoever operated the AutoPen was our president, just in case you didn't get it the first time.
He goes, It's not allowed.
It's not allowed.
Okay, that sums it up.
And they gave a pardon to what he calls the Unselect Committee, which were really the select committee, is what they call themselves.
After they realized the whole situation was a hoax and it was all their fault, including Nancy Pelosi.
So he throws in all the best of.
He throws in a Nancy Pelosi because he knows the crowd will appreciate a good Pelosi hit.
But there's another Pelosi reference coming up that you just have to wait.
You can't miss this.
So don't leave until I've given you that one.
And what do you say?
He goes, they burned everything.
It's all gone.
I guess that's the records.
That was based on the AutoPen.
They gave those members of Congress on the J6 Select Committee pardons.
I think it's a tremendous scandal.
Now, here's the thing I wonder: how many people watch enough news that they would have identified all of his references?
First of all, what percentage of the general population even knows what the Autopen scandal is?
What would you guess?
20%?
Because you get fooled by thinking that if you follow politics, that other people follow it.
Most people couldn't name the vice president of the United States.
You know that, right?
I don't know if it's most, but it could be a lot.
So how many even know what the AutoPen thing is?
How many know what he meant by the unselect committee, that it was the select committee, and how many would even know what the select committee did?
So they were the ones trying to impeach him, right?
And then he just throws in Nancy Pelosi with no direct reference.
That's funny.
And then they burned everything, it's all gone.
So again, you know how he speaks in visual language?
He doesn't say that they destroyed the records.
He says they burned them because you could just see the flame when he talks.
So you see the auto pen, you see the flame, you see Nancy Pelosi.
He's just so visual.
All right.
So I don't even think it matters that people don't know any of those issues.
Which, oh my God, I'm double-catted here.
So I'm not distracted at all if you're listening to this on audio only.
I have cats everywhere.
They're all over me.
All right.
So here's another Trump wins.
So Senator Corey Booker says it's outrageous, blah, blah, blah.
And he's talking about Trump using the post-9-11 laws to take out the drug smuggler boat in the Caribbean.
Is it Caribbean or Caribbean?
I try not to say that word in public.
But when you think about the fact that Trump authorized the taking out of the boats and that they got a nice video of it blowing up, is that the most perfect Trumpian visual image to actually get a nice, pretty nice video of the boat blowing up?
Not so nice that you can see any body parts or anything, because you don't want to be gross.
So you want to be sort of like video game quality, low-end video game quality, where you can see it blowing up, but you don't get any empathy for them because you don't see their faces.
You don't see any body parts and you don't see them screaming for help as they drown with limbs missing and stuff.
But seriously, Kevin.
But it could not be a more popular, nationalistic, patriotic, America's back kind of image, right?
Plus, it put the Democrats on the side of the cartels because they got to talk against it.
But just because the image was so popular, it's not, I mean, it's not at the level of, you know, fight, fight, fight after he got shot in a year.
Now, that was just perfection in terms of messaging.
But the blowing up of the smuggler's boat and the way they made it just right visually is really good work, you know, in the propaganda brainwashing world.
And again, when I say brainwashing, it doesn't mean it's bad.
I'm in favor of exactly this kind of winning imagery.
I think it's good for us.
Trump says, he's talking about Chicago and sending in the feds.
He said, we could solve Chicago very quickly, but we're going to make a decision as to where we go over the next day or two.
So again, Trump does the anticipation, the curiosity.
Is he going to do it?
Is he going to move him into Chicago, even though Chicago doesn't want him to?
Will he make Chicago argue even harder that Trump is the only one who thinks black lives matter?
And I'm surprised he hasn't used that yet, but I don't think he probably doesn't want that association at all.
But am I wrong to assume that in Chicago, all these many murders and shootings are disproportionately black victims?
Aren't they?
So is Trump not the only one who seems to be caring enough about the black victims in Chicago?
And I kind of appreciate, I guess I appreciate the fact that he doesn't bring that up because it just treats everybody as people, which is, you know, a superior high ground place for a president to be.
But kind of interesting.
The Democrats are really weak on that.
So, there is a senator named Tammy Duckworth, who I don't know if she's had work done, but I swear to God, when I look at her picture, she reminds me of a duck.
And I don't know that she always did.
I always thought she was a person whose name was Duck.
But now I look at her and I think, why do you look like a duck now?
You go look at her, the most modern picture you can find of her.
You tell me that you don't immediately think duck.
You do.
You do.
What's a duck worth?
Well, I don't know.
Depends on the market demand.
Well, she said that Trump has declared war on a major city in his own nation, and this is not normal.
Now, let me point out again what Democrats always get wrong, at least lately.
All they're doing is what I call word thinking.
They're trying to win debates by getting you to agree with the words they used.
They're not winning the debates because they have more common sense.
Trump owns common sense at the moment.
All they have is words.
So instead of saying, which you could have easily said, that Trump is looking to, instead of declare war on a major city, he's looking to rescue a major city.
Wouldn't it look the same?
He's sending in the National Guard to rescue them.
So if you said that what he's doing is rescuing them, you'd say that's a good thing.
But if you said what he's doing is declaring war on a major U.S. city, that would be a bad thing.
But what would be the difference of what you're both thinking about when one says it's declaring war and the other says it's rescuing?
Nothing.
You would both be imagining the same set of activities.
National Guard goes in, rate of crime goes down.
So you can't win the argument by making me use your words.
And look how often the Democrats do that.
Look how often they're trying to get you to use their words so that they can win the argument.
Now, both sides do it, but the beauty of Trump's common sense as a theme is that he almost always locks to common sense.
And so, you know, he's got that working for him.
But word, no good.
All right.
Here's an ominous foreshadowing kind of thing that Trump also said.
He made a lot of news this morning, just with his comments as he was going from one place to another.
He was asked if he's thinking about attacking the cartels inside of Venezuela.
And Trump said, and I quote, well, you're going to find out.
Well, you're going to find out only sounds like yes to me.
Do you get anything out of that besides yes?
And would he be saying yes, but maybe he hasn't decided yes?
Would he have said it that way if he hadn't already decided to go internal to Venezuela?
Well, it sounds very yes-like to me.
And I was trying to remember a time when Trump would say something so unambiguous and then it wouldn't happen.
He doesn't really do that, does he?
Does he say anything that's such an unambiguous threat and then it doesn't happen?
I feel it sure sounds like it's already planned and the order has been given.
I suppose anything's possible.
Maybe they've got the plans drawn up and he's inclined to go, but he might change his mind.
So maybe that's what he's saying.
But he certainly wants Venezuela to think it could happen any moment.
So, but he's not really negotiating, is he?
He's not really asking Venezuela for anything, is he?
Because I don't think he thinks that Venezuela even has the ability to stop the drug trade.
Not really.
You know, if they try, they'd get killed themselves.
So I don't think he's asking Venezuela for anything.
He's not asking them to surrender.
He's not trying to take their property directly.
But as smart people have pointed out, Venezuela has these enormous oil reserves and its location in the world next to us.
And it's near refineries, et cetera, near enough to refineries.
So it could be that Trump is making a big play to get a puppet there or literally take over the country.
Maybe.
And maybe the way he's doing it is, I don't know, could be anything.
Decapitation strike.
I believe he would have the, would he have the legal cover, because he's declared the whole country a terrorist place.
Would he have the legal cover to capture or take out Maduro?
I mean, I can't imagine he could get to him without just blowing up the whole block.
But I don't know.
Looks like things are going to heat up there.
And Tom Homan said, yeah, we're at war with the criminal cartels in our own cities and elsewhere.
But does it seem to you that Trump has started a whole bunch of what I'd call so far casualty-free wars?
And here I mean casualties only in the American side.
So we got this trade war with Russia.
We've got we're kind of in a hot war, except U.S. forces are not directly contributing.
So that's one war with no U.S. casualties yet.
We've got a trade war with China.
And, you know, I guess we have casualties, but they were ongoing with the fentanyl.
Those are reducing.
Whatever he's doing in Venezuela has not yet caused a casualty.
I don't know if that'll continue.
Whatever he's doing against the Mexican cartels is sort of law enforcement-like and doesn't seem to have any casualties.
And then, of course, he's going to take over Greenland any day now.
And so far, no casualties there.
Just getting Greenland.
That's how we joke.
But I do like the fact that Trump, he does seem like he's at least trying to be the most casualty-free, at least for Americans, president.
I kind of appreciate that.
Scott Besant is backing up something that I've been saying for a while that I've been wondering if the U.S. could collapse the Russian economy.
And now Scott Besant, head of the Treasury, says directly that we're going to try with the EU to use sanctions that are strong enough, especially the indirect ones where you sanction the people who are doing business with Russia, not just Russia.
And he thinks that collectively the EU and the U.S. could collapse the Russian economy.
I don't know that that's true.
I feel like we're always wrong when we estimate that somebody's just going to go out of business on their own.
And then when they're really going to go out of business on their own, we don't see it coming.
So I feel like we're always wrong about that stuff.
We'll see.
Well, you remember Vivek, Ramaswamy, he's running for Ohio governor.
And a bunch of good news there is funding is good and people are moving.
Some Democrats are moving his way.
And they seem to be responding to his ideas for prosperity and business, business success and all that.
So it made me think that the fact that he ran for president without holding an office probably made it, you know, because Trump is Trump.
He's one of a kind.
But it probably made it nearly impossible that he would win the presidency.
However, if you take a good run at the presidency and you miss, even if your polling is, you know, in single digits, everybody knows you ran for president.
So by the time you run for governor, people think, well, yeah.
I mean, obviously, I mean, if he got a few points for president, obviously he's a great governor.
So it might have turned out to be the smartest way anybody ever ran for governor.
You know, I'm sure he wanted to be president, but it had this backup benefit that if he didn't make it to president, you're probably not too many steps away from Ohio governor, if that's what you want to do.
And then he's then after that, remember, he's really young.
So after that, who knows?
Who knows what's left?
Well, Harris lost her security detail for the second time.
The first time Trump canceled it, which really just made it the same as other vice presidents, which is six months of being protected by the government's paychecks.
And then Gavin Newsom wanted to make his play, so he put police, I think he was the one who ordered it, ordered police in California to just replace the security and protect her.
And then apparently there was a big outcry from the people who thought that the crime was too high and we needed more police and they should not be wasting their time protecting Harris.
So they're getting pulled away.
No word yet if she's got private security, but I would assume, I would assume she'd get private security.
But maybe it would be better if nobody told stories about this at all.
It's too late now, so might as well talk about it now.
But I feel like it was like, oh, she lost her security.
So, you know, if you wanted to try anything.
Oh, well, hold on, hold on.
It looks like she got security back.
It happens to be the police.
Hold off, hold off.
Oh, looks like the security is going away again.
Oh, hold off, hold off.
Don't try anything.
Looks like she has private security.
But wouldn't it be better maybe if nobody had ever reported that at all from the beginning?
Well, Trump being operating in his persona, as I was saying earlier, where he can get away with anything because it's just part of the show.
It's not like real politics.
It's part of the show.
And more to that point, he said around a thing that was agreeing with Representative Luna.
She's trying to get some legislation to ban lawmakers from being able to trade stock because they have insider information, so it's not fair.
And Pelosi, of course, is the one who is most accused of abusing that insider trading, allegedly.
And there's now a deep fake of Pelosi, a deep fake Pelosi talking.
And she says stuff like that her trades collapsed after losing all of her insider information.
And she said, since I left Congress, my trades are shit.
But then there's this one line of the deep fake that made me laugh until I cry.
She goes, my husband is in love with a homeless hammer guy.
A homeless hammer guy he's in love with.
Oh my God.
And what's funnier about it is that Trump forwarded that.
He forwarded Nancy Pelosi being mocked for her husband being in love with a homeless hammer guy.
Now that's the president I want.
Oh, that's what I voted for.
Have you seen the meme of Homer Simpson, whose mouth is contorted as if he's about to say the letter F?
He's all like, I can't do the impression, but you see the picture and it looks obviously like he's about to say something that starts with F. And somebody put that around and they said, me about to form the words that I voted for this.
Oh, I definitely voted for, I definitely voted for Trump forwarding memes about Nancy Pelos's husband being in love with a homeless hammer guy.
Now, just to be clear, to the best of my knowledge, they are not in any relationship, nor have they been.
The homeless hammer guy, not Nancy and her husband.
All right.
Oh, that's funny.
And the Epstein files never going away.
So the latest is apparently we cannot see the files no matter what administration is in charge.
What does that mean?
What does it mean that we can't see the files?
And what we do see is a repeat and highly redacted, so it's nothing.
What does it mean that neither side will show you the files?
It's got to be somebody really important in there.
Do you think it's more than one person?
Or is there just one person that is the reason we can't see those files?
It could be anything.
Could be a foreign country that begging us, and we just don't want to, you know, could be, I don't know, Great Britain just to pick one foreign country may have asked us not to talk about it, maybe.
So I don't know what the real reason is, but Thomas Massey and Rokana are trying to get a law that just makes them show us everything.
Will there be some blowback from that?
And will there be some negative, I don't know, giving up some sources and methods or whatever their problem is?
Probably.
But at this point, it just seems to me we have to do it.
We have to get out of if it's possible.
You know, I suppose even if they release everything unredacted, people would say, but there's more.
I know there's more.
So I guess you could never get to the point where people would say, I guess we've seen everything.
All my questions have been answered.
So, but I think the public is now too worked up and too curious, and we've lost too much trust.
So I think I'd be in favor of releasing everything.
But if there are people who are absolutely innocent, but their names are in those files, we should do what we can to make sure that people know the difference between those who are accused and people who just knew them.
Well, Israel's Supreme Court, allegedly, according to the AP News, ruled that they can't starve prisoners.
But what they didn't, I didn't see is that they ruled that they are starving prisoners.
And remember what I tell you about a war zone?
You can't believe anything coming out of a war zone.
So you can't believe that people are being starved, but you also can't believe that they're not being starved.
It's a complicated situation.
My guess would be that there are certainly people not getting enough food in pockets, and probably that they're trying not to make it a starvation situation because that wouldn't be good for Israel.
It's not like they would be coming out ahead if people found out they were intentionally starving them.
So most likely they're doing the best they can, but there are some pockets where for a variety of good reasons they can't satisfy everybody all the time.
However, what we don't know, at least I don't know, was there ever any accusation that it was intentional?
Would it ever be militarily or geopolitically intentional that Israel would try to starve the population?
Now, obviously, they want them to relocate, but would they do that?
I don't know.
I don't know if they're even being accused of doing it intentionally.
But remember, it doesn't matter what we guess.
You just can't believe anything coming out of a war zone.
Just don't believe any of it.
And there was a terror attack in Jerusalem.
Four killed, 15 wounded in a bus.
I guess some terrorist Palestinian opened fire with a submachine gun.
Did you know that they make submachine guns in the West Bank?
I guess they must have little machine shops and they're making their own submachine guns.
I wonder how many they made.
That surprises me.
Is it that easy to make a machine gun?
All right.
And apparently, Israel, if they don't get their hostages back, they're going to go hard on Gaza City.
But I think that's going to happen anyway.
However, Trump says, today he said this, he said very confidently, I think we're going to have a deal on Gaza very soon.
I think what he means is a deal where we get the hostages back.
And he was talking.
I saw a little bit of him answering that question.
And the way he talked wasn't his I hope so kind of a talk.
You know, often he'll say things like, you know, I like our chances, you know, we hope so.
We're going to try.
You know, we'll eventually get something done.
But it doesn't sound like something's done and it's going to happen any moment.
But when he said, I think we're going to have a deal on Gaza very soon, he sort of repeated that a few times as if it's already agreed or that whatever's left is so trivial that it will be agreed.
So he's talking really, really confidently.
And I wonder what's behind that.
So will we be surprised if it doesn't happen?
I don't know.
I would be surprised if it did happen that we got all the remaining hostages back, plus the bodies, I guess.
And then Trump posted on True Social or wherever it was to Hamas, this is my last warning.
There will not be another one.
So something big is likely to happen in Gaza.
So it's either going to be getting the hostages back or Israel goes twice as hard as it's ever gone.
We will see.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, that's all I got for today.
Happy Monday.
I'm going to talk to the local subscribers, beloved local subscribers, privately, in 30 seconds.
The rest of you, thanks for joining.
I hope you got as much out of this as you wanted, which was a lot.