Hi to all the Charlie Kirk memorial attendees. We got your back.Politics, Charlie Kirk Memorial Event, Andrew Kolvet, TDS Mental Health Issue, Home Purchase Sharing, TikTok Purchase, Elon Musk, AI Simulated Microsoft, Autism Cause Speculation, Stephen A. Smith, Kamala Harris Career, Tom Homan, MSNBC Hit Piece, Abby Phillip, democrat Cancellation Policy, Jimmy Kimmel, FCC Fairness Doctrine, Kimmel's Ultra-Woke Wife, Gavin McInnes, AOC Presidential Campaign, Thomas Massie, Epstein Client List, Soros Funding Gatekeeper, Alex Soros, Gavin Newsom's Technique, Minnesota Massive Fraud, Local Government Fraud, Corruption Design Problem, Manilla Corruption Protests, UK Palestine State Recognition, UK MAGA, China Covid Whistleblower, Ukraine War, Drone Warfare, Cartel Del Sol, Venezuela Drug Boats, President Trump, Bagram Air Base, Soccer Brain Injuries, Baltimore School System, 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.
If you're attending the Charlie Kirk Memorial right now, and you said to yourself, I think I need something to do for the next few hours until it begins.
Well, here I am.
I'm here for you.
We're all here for you.
So if you're waiting in line in uh the uh state farm stadium in Glendale, this show is for you.
all right let me get my comments working so that we have a complete situation here do
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 this morning to levels that no one can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, well, to do that, all you need is a copper mugger, glass of tanker, chalcerstein, a canteen junk of flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called a simultaneous sip, and it happens.
That's right, it happens right now.
Mmm Mmm Well, as you know, as I mentioned, a hundred thousand people are expected to attend the Charlie Kirk Memorial at the State Farm Stadium in Glendale.
It begins at 11 a.m. the local time in uh in uh Arizona.
So correct connect correct your for your local time.
But people were showing up as early as three and four in the morning and walking long distances because the parking lot weren't even opened at the venue yet.
And uh the spirits are very high.
I mean, somber, of course, but something's happening.
I would like to read to you.
Um where is it?
Uh maybe I won't read to you that well, uh so uh one of my friends is there and gave me a little report to what's happening, and I asked her uh, you know, are you there in person?
Because that's not very close, and uh apparently she got inspired to go all the way there, um, and is feeling a renewal of faith, and uh wanted to be part of this thing.
Apparently, there are also two plane loads full of the White House people, and I guess Trump's gonna speak.
And whatever you thought about this phenomenon, can we call it a phenomenon?
Uh the tragedy seems to have um awakened something.
There's definitely a religious renewal that's happening right now, and it's because of Charlie Kirk, there's no doubt about it.
And uh so I'm expecting that this memorial, besides being tearful and sad, um, will be one of the more impactful things that happens maybe all year.
Um I mean, aside from the shooting itself, and uh I'm here for you, people.
If you're uh waiting for hours and you need something to do, well, maybe that's one thing we can do for you.
Give you uh maybe maybe an hour of the news without any commercial breaks, depending on what you're watching it on.
But uh best wishes to all of you people who are experiencing a probably almost everyone is feeling some kind of religious revival.
And if you were the Democrats and you were watching this.
We we've entered some new domain, but if you're a democrat, whatever this power is that's been unlocked.
Um, I don't know where it goes, but it looks like a powerful positive force, and it may not be what you had in mind if you're a Democrat.
So if you're a Democrat, today would be a day to just stay quiet.
That would be my advice.
Um, I'm not gonna say something rude, like, yo, hey, you guys just shut up.
Just today, the best thing you can do if you're a Democrat, unless you're being supportive and saying something positive.
The best thing you can do today, the smartest thing you can do, take the day off.
This this is not your day.
So uh there will be magic happening today, uh, maybe literally.
Well, there is a story related to the uh Charlie Kirk uh murder.
That I don't know what to say about this.
There's a sort of a magic bullet story.
Have you heard that yet?
So um Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew Colvet says this um in a post on X. I want to address some of the discussion about the lack of an exit wound with Charlie.
Wait, what?
There's a lack of an exit wound.
Now you know there's some people who say that the thing uh the wound that we saw was the exit wound, but that wouldn't assume that there's an entry wound on the other side, and apparently the surgeon who worked on them says that's not the case.
What?
So here's what we know.
All right, it's from uh Andrew Colvet.
Um I'm usually not interested in delving into most of this kind of online chatter uh talking about the exit wound, and I apologize.
This is somewhat graphic, but in this case, the fact that there wasn't an exit wound is probably another miracle, and I want people to know.
I just spoke with a surgeon who worked on Charlie in the hospital.
He said the bullet, quote, absolutely should have gone through, which is very normal for a high-powered rifle, high-powered high velocity round.
I've seen uh wounds from this caliber many times, and they always just go through everything.
This would have taken uh taken a moose or two down and elk, etc.
But it didn't go through Charlie's body.
Oh, Charlie's body stopped it.
His neck, his neck stopped the bullet from passing through it.
And uh, and Andrew goes on and goes, I mentioned to his doctor that there were uh dozens of staff students and special guests standing directly behind Charlie on the other side of the tent.
And he replied, quote, it was an absolute miracle that someone else didn't get killed.
His bone was so healthy and the density was so impressive that he's like the man of steel.
It should have just gone through and through.
It likely would have killed those standing behind him, too.
Uh in the end, the coroner did find the bullet just beneath the skin.
So even in death, Charlie managed to save the lives of those around him.
Well, those of you who are familiar with my content are expecting me to debunk that and say that's not how bullets act.
They don't sometimes go through soft tissue and bone, and sometimes not.
Um, but today is uh the Charlie Kirk Memorial.
Today, miracles are allowed.
So I'm gonna accept that one.
Um Trump says the gas prices are heading below two dollars a gallon.
It might be some of the best prices we've seen in a long, long time.
Fox News is reporting that.
I don't know if it's gonna get that low.
It's not gonna get that low in California because we have a we have a de facto state.
Um, no.
Nope, no ricochet, no second shooter, just a miracle.
Today the today's just a miracle.
That's that's the beginning and the end of the conversation.
But gas prices going down.
So Trump was at some event speaking yesterday, and he uh asked Dr. Oz while he while the president was speaking, he uh sort of tongue-in-cheek, but maybe not, asked Dr. Oz uh if uh Trump derangement syndrome should be added to the official mental disorders.
And Trump said it's a mental disorder, and they've got it, and levels not seen before.
Uh Dr. Oz, why don't we list that on a Wednesday?
I don't know.
I guess something's happening on Wednesday.
Um, I thought that TDS, Trump derangement syndrome, was actually already in the literature as a genuine um mental health issue.
Am I wrong about that?
I mean, I don't think it's in the most official DSM, whatever, six or whatever it is.
I don't think it's there yet, but I'm pretty sure that the literat literature recognizes it as a major problem in mental health.
It's not nothing.
So even though I'm pretty sure the president was being humorous and it worked, um, I do believe that it needs to be added to the the literature.
There's not the slightest chance that this isn't a genuine mental health gigantic problem.
One of the biggest.
I mean, it's probably the single most damaging mental health problem in the country.
Uh I'll bet if you added up the next three biggest, they probably wouldn't be this big if you really were honest about the the size of the uh the problem.
You know, I mean it's broken up families, it's people losing jobs, people yelling at strangers.
We don't have any mental problem, mental health problem that has one name that's anywhere near that big.
Not nowhere near.
I mean, it's it's in a class by itself.
It's it's uh affecting entire populations at the same time, and almost certainly it caused at least one murder, Charlie Kirk.
There's no way that that happens without Trump derangement syndrome.
There's no way that happens.
Anyway, you know, I've been re-yammering off and on about how the only way that uh the affordability thing will be fixed will be finding cheaper ways to live that are still really good ways to live.
You know, then you're not giving up much.
There's now a minor trend, maybe it'll get bigger, of co-buying a home.
So people who are not related or in a relationship, they will say, Do you want to buy a home?
I want to buy a home, and then they'll go in together and split the cost so they uh they both get half a home, basically, and then they they try to figure out some agreement for living there.
Now, as you might imagine, the part about living with a stranger and you know having some stranger have that much control over your real estate and you over them, it's not gonna be easy, but it does make me wonder if this will be a growing trend.
I think it will, because the alternatives are worse.
Uh, but my take is that you need to design the house from the ground up to be a more than one person house.
You know, there's probably ways to do that.
You definitely don't want to be waiting for the bathroom with the you know, while the person who helps you buy the house is in there.
Um apparently a survey says 70% of Gen Z would be willing to do this.
So if 70% would be willing to share a home purchase right there, the cost of housing went down 50%, you know, at least within the home ownership group.
Well, allegedly the news says that uh the TikTok purchase deal is done and that China agreed and we agreed, and maybe there's some paperwork to sign, but basically it's all agreed.
And uh the details were told, and this is still fog of war, because the details that I heard even yesterday are already wrong, so who knows if these are right?
But uh it would be majority American-owned uh when it was purchased.
Uh Oracle would be sort of the tech company in charge of privacy, so it'd be an American company in charge of that, and uh there'd be you know some other big investors, so it's not just Oracle here, and the algorithm um would not be maintained by China, which was the first thing we heard.
The first thing we heard is that China was going to own the algorithm and just sort of feed it to the American company.
There's no way that worked.
I mean, that was sort of defeating the the whole point.
Um, but according to Caroline Levitt, the algorithm will now be controlled by Americans, the American owners.
Do you believe this is gonna get signed?
There's something, there's a dog not barking in this story.
Isn't there something really really missing?
Well, I'll tell you, China reportedly, and somewhat obviously, was using the TikTok thing as leverage for you know other things that it wants out of the United States.
So the one thing you could know for sure is that there's no way in heck that uh that China would ever allow the sale of their big, you know, I mean incredibly successful asset to the US.
There's no way they do that unless unless they got something in return that was pretty big.
Have you heard any news about anything they're getting in return?
Do you believe that China went from, well, there's no way you're gonna take the jewel of our online assets unless you give us something pretty pretty good?
It might be tariffs, it might be something else, but you better give us something pretty good.
And then we did hear that the US was holding back some uh defense um allocations for Taiwan, and then it might be connected, but that was supposed to be temporary, you know, just while we're talking to them.
Is it temporary?
Don't you feel that there's no way this deal could have been done unless we promise them something, right?
There's no way.
I don't think so.
Now, do you think that maybe there's a secret deal, maybe a secret deal where they're gonna maybe not help Russia as much.
I don't think so.
I I don't think TikTok would be worth that.
So I'm uh concerned that we don't know exactly what the deal was for that, but maybe we'll never find out.
You might remember that not too long ago, Elon Musk was made the following observation about Microsoft's business.
He said, in principle, given that software companies like Microsoft do not themselves manufacture any physical hardware, it should be possible to simulate them entirely with AI.
He wants to simulate entirely the entire Microsoft um product line.
That we may we might approach the place we're not there yet, but I could easily imagine we'd reach a place where replacing all of Microsoft is anybody with AI sitting in a room and saying, um can you pretend to be every product that Microsoft makes?
And then if I need to put something on a spreadsheet or on a word processing, just just give me a user interface that essentially mocks mocks Microsoft and and just act like you're Microsoft, and I'll I'll just use you AI.
I feel like that it's within the realm of maybe.
So there's some possibility that the entire Microsoft Corporation could turn into one super prompt.
Hey, give me a suite of products exactly like Microsoft.
Maybe I don't know.
But uh we do know that uh uh Elon also kicked off an AI project in which he is trying to literally and directly knock off the Microsoft products with uh AI versions.
Do you think that Elon Musk and whoever he hires will have the capability to knock off Microsoft?
Well, the answer is maybe pretty good chance, because I don't see how Microsoft can last in the long run, not with their you know current suite of products.
The only way Microsoft lasts is as a different company.
Now the different company would also be AI, so they might be replacing their own their own products with AI before somebody else does it or something.
That's possible, but uh yeah, I guess Microsoft uh the CEO is uh staying up late at night because he's already seen that there's no way that the Microsoft model lasts forever, and we're definitely close enough to the end of it that you can kind of sense it coming, and it'll happen fast when it happens.
All right, um President Trump also announced, if you believe this, that on Monday there's gonna be a bombshell news release about the true cause of autism, and he called it one of the most important things that they'll ever do.
Do you believe that's a possible thing?
Do you believe that our government is gonna tell us the real cause of autism and that they didn't know before?
Nobody knew before, and they just found out this week or last few weeks.
Um I don't know if anybody's gonna believe it, would you?
Knowing as you do that all data is fake, because it is why would you believe whatever they say about autism?
Why would you believe what anybody says about anything if it if it's based on data?
It's never there just isn't any data that's accurate.
It's just whoever made up the data decided to show you this data instead of that data.
All right, well, we'll see.
What do you think it is?
Do you think it's gonna be vaccinations or Tylenol for pregnant people or food?
My guess is that they're gonna say there are three or four things that are very connected, and especially if they all happen at the same time, yeah, you might have an extra risk.
I don't know.
What I don't expect is for them to say we got solid data, nobody's gonna doubt it once they see it themselves, and here's the cause.
I don't think that's gonna happen, do you?
In the real messy world, that do things like that happen.
Might be food, but I kind of doubt it, because little babies are getting it, and the little babies are they don't babies all eat the same food, don't they just eat uh baby food?
So although I think our food is not especially safe and could be way, way better.
I'm gonna say that probably won't be the thing that they identify.
Might it's not it's not a zero chance, but I don't know.
I think I would go with more likely pharma, you know, some kind of pharmaceutical, more likely that.
But I don't know.
Stephen A. Smith uh decided that Kamala Harris has ended her political career with her new book.
Uh and he says it was the last straw.
He says, I think we've seen the last of her, meaning politically.
And uh he he says the based on the excerpts of the book, it's too little too late.
Now, I think what he's talking about specifically is that she admits she knew that Joe was not all there, but she didn't do anything about it.
And uh Stephen A. Smith says, that's the end of your career.
If you admit that you could see it, and you also admit that you decided not to make waves by doing something about it, then you were never the real vice president, were you?
Let me say it again.
If Kamala Harris knew that Joe had you know the cognitive problems that he did, if she knew and decided not to act on it for loyalty or whatever other reasons, she wasn't really the vice president, right?
Is there a more important job than being the one who identifies that the vice president's you know time has reached an end and he can't handle his job?
Probably nothing more important than that, right?
Except filling in if he were to pass away.
So I get why there was tremendous pressure on her to just ride it out.
You know, I we all understand there's no mystery there.
But if your only job is to be able to overcome exactly that problem, hey, people might not like it if you remove the president whose brain is dead.
Well, you kind of got to do it anyway.
Isn't that the job?
The job is to do it anyway.
The job is not to do it if it's easy.
The job is the job of vice president is not to you know act if it's convenient.
There's nothing like that in the job description.
By its nature, the reason we go through so much trouble to pick the right vice presidential candidate is that we look at them and we say that person could remove a president if they had to.
Well, she wasn't that person, apparently.
She couldn't do it.
So I don't know, it's it's hard to call uh an end to anybody's political career, but I'm gonna agree with Stephen A. Smith.
I don't see how she could hold a major office ever again.
Uh, but I also think she may have decided that she was done with politics.
I feel like she was already done.
Well, are you up to date with the latest uh drama involving uh uh Tom Holman, you know, head of is it ICE?
Is that his official job?
Head of ICE.
Um, but he apparently during the Biden administration, when Tom Holman was not in the government, but he was doing consulting, private consulting for companies in the border security business, I guess.
And he was uh the subject of an FBI sting operation in which they gave him $50,000, pretending to be some kind of uh vendors for things that he was, you know, would be in his domain.
And uh he took the $50,000, reportedly.
I don't know that any of this is really confirmed, but reportedly took the 50,000 and agreed to help the contractors win contracts in the second Trump administration if Trump won.
Now remember, this is before Trump won.
So there's no President Trump at the moment, and there's no borders are, yeah, if that's what you call.
Um we're just learning about this from an MSNBC uh investigation, but we're also told that the Biden administration um didn't find any crimes, and they just shut it down.
The Biden administration didn't find any crimes, even though they tried to set them up.
They tried to create a crime where there wasn't one by you know pretending to vote to bribe him.
But it turns out that if you're a consultant and you offer to help somebody do something that is normal legal business, and you're a consultant who who advises on that exact normal legal business, well, maybe taking money to do the thing you say is exactly what you're doing.
Maybe it's not illegal.
Now, so that means that would mean that you know he wasn't using his influence to you know give somebody a job who was incapable.
So I don't know exactly the details, but here's my question.
If it's true that the FBI came up with the $50,000 and paid it to him, but that there was no real work involved, it was only they were setting him up.
Does he get to keep the 50,000?
So I'm trying to figure out if the Biden administration figured out a way to give Tom Holman a $50,000 bonus before he started the job.
And so far, that's what it looks like.
It looks like the BI just found a way to pay him $50,000 and he had no legal risk whatsoever.
I just hope that's true.
I don't know if that's true.
I do believe that if they gave it to him, I feel like he could keep it, right?
Like there, it's not like there's uh if he doesn't get charged with anything, it's not like they can take the money back, can they?
How does that work?
If it's part of a sting operation, do you get to keep it if they don't sting you?
I hope so.
Anyway, uh CNN's uh Abby Phillip was saying that uh she was trying to get her panel on CNN to agree, the liberal panel, mostly liberal, uh, to admit that the Democrats uh censored and canceled too much,
and she thought the only way forward for Democrats is to say directly to the public we canceled and uh censored too much, and that would that's on us, that's a mistake, and now we're gonna move on.
What do you think?
Do you think Abby is right that if the Democrats simply admit that they had censored and canceled too many people and they're very sorry about it and they realize how bad it was, that that's what would allow them to get past it and then have a successful Democrat party?
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
Do you think do you think I would accept an apology?
I got canceled.
Do you think I would accept an apology?
No.
No, I'm not gonna accept an apology, not at all, not even a little bit.
Not an option.
Apology is not requested, not appreciated, not expected, and just stay stay away from me with your apologies, because it won't help me a bit.
But it does show that they're desperately flailing around trying to find something that would make them not look so bad.
All right.
Um apparently the New York Post did a little analysis and found that Jimmy Kilmell hosted only one right-leaning guest in the past three years, and it came with some kind of a condition.
I don't know who that was.
Um, but only one, and apparently he uh had 13 left-leaning guests this year.
That's not really very many, is it?
You know, since the beginning of the year, 13.
So it's not even that there was a a ton of political people in general.
I mean most of it's entertainment.
Um here's what else we found.
Uh let's see, that uh uh Kibble's jokes and gags.
This is from the New York Post.
Uh his jokes and gags targeted conservatives 88% of the time in 2023.
So in 2023, 88% of the jabs were at conservatives.
Um it went to 97% this year.
So 97% of all of his jabs were in one direction.
Now keep in mind that the FCC allows the airwaves to be used by ABC, CPSNBC only, only to the extent that they're a you know public good, you know, they're they're a benefit to the public.
But also on top of that, there's a specific requirement that they can't be politically one-sided, that if they have uh, you know, if they have a Democrat on, they probably ought to have a Republican on, and vice versa.
So they're supposed to make some attempt to balance out the time and the and the politics.
Does it look like they did that?
Does it look like Jimmy Kimmel's uh staff and and people, does it look like they were attempting to have anything like a balance that is required for them to fulfill their license?
Well, no, no.
It would appear that they grossly violated the FCC um regulations.
Now, as I've said before, uh the FCC's had a very long-standing, very clear standard that you can't just be on one side if you have one of their public airwaves.
You know, other people can.
If you're a cable, if you're Fox News, you could just be biased all day long.
There's nothing illegal, immoral, I mean, maybe suboptimal, but it's not immoral.
Uh, but if you got to one of those public airwaves, you better you better get an equal time, and they clearly didn't.
Um I saw uh most of you know who uh Gavin McKinnis is.
Uh he was one of the many people who got canceled during the great cancellations, but uh apparently he was um he knew Jimmy Kimmel pretty well, and he believes that uh Jimmy Kimmel's second wife is the ultra-woke person who ruined him.
I guess Jimmy Kemmel was a ordinary, an ordinary boy, and he got turned into some kind of a weird monster by his second wife.
That's uh Gavin's take on it.
I'm paraphrasing, of course.
Um, and uh I think he compared it to the Howard Stern situation where Howard was uh you know, guy's guy, and then he gets married the second time, and suddenly he's the wokest guy around, and everything's different.
So one of the things that doesn't does not match well with humor, if that's your job, if your job is a professional humorist or professional kind of shit stir, um, one thing that doesn't match with that at all is a wife, because uh a spouse is quite reasonably, you know, there's nothing wrong with this.
A spouse is going to be thinking about the the family unit as the thing that needs to be protected, the crazy performer person, you know, and I'm in that category.
Um, we're thinking about how to make the biggest impact, you know, what gets the biggest audience, you know, how do I get a special on Netflix or whatever I'm trying to do?
So it's very natural that the spouse would be in a more, you know, you don't want to do that.
Uh you better you better take the popular view on this one, you know.
So it's very incompatible.
The the best and funniest, well, let's take uh Bill Burr.
Does Bill Burr do I even need to finish that?
If any of you watch Bill Burr, do you think that his wife is an influence on you know what he can and cannot say?
I don't know, but it sure looks like it, and it looks like it degrades his uh his effectiveness.
The the funniest comedians I think are single people, you know, or somebody who's got a rare kind of a spouse who says some some version of you know go for it, but that's probably not the most common instinct.
And by the way, here I am not criticizing wives whatsoever.
If a wife is protecting her husband and protecting the family, you know, and and maybe at the cost of that extra million dollars, but you're already doing fine.
Is the wife wrong?
I would say no.
I would say that would be a perfectly correct and moral and ethical, legal, you know, thing to do to try to try to make sure the family stays, you know, as strong as it could be.
But it does hurt the humor.
Um I also heard from uh Gavin McGuinness that uh Jimmy Kimmel is a very good cartoonist.
Did you know that?
He he did some cartoons for I guess Vice back in the day.
What are the odds of that?
Now I have to I have to completely you know reshape my opinion.
Um I don't know if I've ever told you this before, but on top of a general professional courtesy that I feel toward Jimmy Kimmel and anybody in that business, because I'm sort of tangentially in the the public humor business.
Um if he's actually a skilled cartoonist who has actually been paid for his work, and apparently he has been, though then I have to default to my how do I treat other cartoonists?
And I generally go easy on other cartoonists, so I'm often asked, hey, do you think the guy who does Zinky has a good cartoon?
Uh which of course I don't because it was terrible, but you know, I'd I would try not to, depending on the cartoonists, I'd usually try to be kind to them.
So I'll be more kind.
And I uh are you guys watching how many people who are credible are kind of in favor of more the you know leaning toward the free speech angle on this and making sure that uh people like Kimmel don't lose their jobs over some kind of bad day of speaking, you know, a bad day.
Um so now, as I mentioned, you know, Ted Cruz thinks there's a free speech issue here, uh uh Ben Shapiro does.
And if if you know anything about those two people, could we agree that they're smarter than we are, most of us, uh on these topics?
And if the two of them are both in it looks like strong agreement that there's a free speech issue here, and it would be bad for us to ignore it.
Um I'm gonna I'm I'm on that, I'm on that side very strongly, very strongly, but I feel the way you feel, which is Kimmel, I I feel the same, but I just think from a constitutional perspective, we don't want to get over our skis too far.
Well, there's more talk that AOC is looking at running for president in 2028.
Um how many of you remember when she burst on the scene, and very early on, very early on, I said in public a number of times, um, you should watch out for this one because she has the game to become president.
Do you remember me saying that?
Now I don't know that she does.
Uh well, I don't know that she'll become president, so I'm not making a prediction.
It's not a prediction, because it depends who she runs against entirely.
Um, but could she win?
Yes, yes, she has the game.
Uh she she just has she has that thing, you know, the charisma, the the energy, probably the right kind of support, at least in a little bit of the Democratic Party, she would have to move toward the middle to have any chance of winning to get all the Democrats on her side, but that seems doable.
That's that's not impossible.
So I've been saying for a long time you should watch out for that one, and I will double down on watch out for that one.
If you think to yourself that she doesn't appeal to you and therefore she can't win, hmm, that's the Trump mistake.
No, you have to look at the skill level only.
Just skill.
If you only look at a skill, she's got a lot of it, and she's still young.
So she's probably picking up technique as she goes.
She's no, she's no Trump.
You know, if Trump is uh, let's say on a scale of one to a hundred, Trump is a hundred in terms of persuasion.
She's uh 65, which would be more than just about everybody, except Trump.
So, yeah, she's a threat.
She is not, in my opinion, smart enough.
So if I were running against her, I would try to establish that that she doesn't actually understand economics, she doesn't actually have plans that work in the real world.
Uh, so you would go after her impracticality, um and inability to reason through things.
That's what I'd go after.
Thomas Massey is saying uh an ex.
I told the director Cash Patel that the FBI has names of 20 men, 20 men to whom Jeffrey Epstein trafficked women and girls.
This basic fact seemed to surprise him.
Why?
That's a that's a pretty good question.
If it's true that Massey knows for sure that there are 20 names that are have been trafficked to.
Um, and then uh Massey says, is the FBI withholding those names to protect presidents, the president's rich and powerful friends release the Epstein files.
What the hell is going on here?
It doesn't seem likely to me that Thomas Massey would make this up, and it seems like he's smart enough that he wouldn't be simply wrong about it.
So is this true?
Is it true that Thomas Massey could write down the names of 20 people because he's seen the names?
Does he know where that list is?
I mean, did he was it in his skiff so he doesn't have a copy of it, but he remembers most of it?
What is going on here?
That you know, on one hand, uh, this would be just so terrible if this is true.
On the other hand, it's the only thing that would explain everything we've observed.
Am I right?
Everything we've observed would easily be explained if you said, yeah, there's 20 powerful people, and it's really all about protecting the 20.
Everything would be explained.
I would have no more questions.
I mean, I'd have questions who the 20 are, but beyond that, no, everything would be answered.
Oh, okay, got it.
Now, that would still leave, you know, some some uh blackmailing stuff and things like that, but it would certainly get a long go a long way toward explaining things.
Well, we'll see.
I would like to see uh Cash Patel be asked that question under oath and have the ask, do you have a list of 20 names that Epstein trafficked young people do?
Let's see.
According to the Daily Color News Foundation, there's some kind of uh exclusive explosive report uh showing that George Soros or his organization doled out 80 million dollars to leftist groups that are glorifying terrorism.
Now that means that somewhere in their communication, they said something about, well, you know, sometimes you have to go beyond nonviolence, yeah.
Basically things like that.
Um not super direct, as in pick up a gun and meet me on Tuesday, but suggesting very clearly that violence is on the table, that it's just one of the options, and his money is going to a number of those uh groups.
And my question is, and I've been saying This for years now.
The Soros organization.
Who exactly is even watching where the money's going?
Because I feel as though the Soros organization is being robbed every day.
Just like really robbed.
Because George Soros is clearly beyond the point where he's making the detailed decisions.
Uh his son honestly doesn't look smart enough or interested enough to you know to look into every organization the money goes to.
I'll bet that's not happening at the top.
And that would mean that there's somebody in the lower level who's a gatekeeper for this money, and is I'll just say it.
There's almost no chance that there isn't massive fraud.
A fraud against Soros.
So whatever you say about Soros being bad might be true.
But I'll bet you he's also a victim of massive uh corruption within his organization.
My guess is that Huma might have been put in there to help get that under control.
I don't think she's necessarily the one stealing money, although her connection to Hillary Clinton would suggest it's a possibility.
But uh I would I would give this uh caution to uh Alexander Soros.
Almost certainly you're being robbed in in the biggest possible way, because none of this looks organic.
It looks like somebody's somebody figured out a way to take money from the old man, and a lot of it.
That's what it looks like.
Um Gavin Newsom of California is uh pushing back against Trump and his ICE uh efforts to uh deport people, and he wants the ICE agents to unmask, so now there's some kind of uh I don't know, he's got some kind of uh state law or something that they're pushing to unmask the ICE people.
Now, as far as I know, there's no way he can get away with that, because the ICE agents are under federal control, and as the feds say you definitely can wear a mask, I don't think this the state can stop them.
So even if the state had their own little law, I don't think it would apply.
I think the feds would overrule it.
Um but we'll see.
Um, however, I will note that Gavin Newsom has learned a valuable lesson from trying to copy Trump.
I've been telling you for the last several days that one of the things that Trump does brilliantly, like I've never even seen it, is that he goes strong on every topic, and he must know that some number of them will be blocked,
or you know, he doesn't get away with it for one reason or another, and then he can just adjust, and he's already moved on to the next thing, but the next thing he goes strong, and maybe it works, maybe it doesn't, but the next thing after that goes really strong.
Now, if two or all three of those things that I'm mentioning hypothetically, if all of them didn't work out, what would you remember about Trump?
The strength.
You would forget about the individual topics pretty quickly, unless you had some special interest in them, but you would remember that he was the boldest, strongest, take no prisoners, I'm gonna get this done, kind of a president.
Well, it looks to me that Governor Newsom is taking that approach, meaning that I don't know if he thinks there's any chance he can unmask the ICE agents.
He knows that he won't that his people want him to ask.
They know that he they want him to go strong.
So if Newsom goes strong, say you gotta take those masks off, you you bastards, and then you know things things happen, and then it doesn't actually happen, no no masks come off.
What will you remember about that?
You'll remember that Newsom was the only effective person fighting Trump, even though he wasn't effective, but you'll remember him as strong.
So it does look like and this is we're so weirdly ironic that part of uh you know Newsom's uh technique is literally uh overtly obviously and for humorous effect copying Trump, like he's doing that as part of the act, but he tells you, I mean, he's broadcasting his parody, his satire, it worked pretty well.
The the parodies will work pretty well.
Good job on that politically.
Um, but it looks now he's also copying his strategies.
Trump's strategy is strong no matter what.
If it doesn't work, it's better that you went strong.
That's that's definitely what Gavin's doing.
Strong first, even if it turns out to be wrong.
I hate to say it, but it's an upgrade in his performance.
I hate to say it, but he really is.
He's finding a little bit of purchase, and you know, a lot of us said the same thing.
A lot of us said, you know, don't underestimate Gavin Newsom.
I don't think he can win, but I wouldn't underestimate him.
Well, maybe I just did, huh?
Yeah, he he's definitely got skills.
Um the uh state of Minnesota is having a problem.
They're quote, drowning in fraud.
Apparently, there was some taxpayer-funded housing stabilization service, and uh there was a lot of money involved in it, and uh allegedly over a hundred million per year is stolen from one state, and not the biggest state, Minnesota.
100 million dollars a year stolen, not once per year, and uh so it's like there are fraudulent healthcare companies being set up to collect money, fraudulent housing programs, uh rehab patient frauds, fake Medicare and Medicaid.
So there's just this whole network of fake companies that popped up to do fake claims to steal the money.
Now let me say it until it sinks in because I've been saying it for a while, but doesn't seem to be working.
All local governments are criminal organizations by design.
Now it's not intentional design.
I don't believe anybody sat down, you know, at the founding fathers and said, let's make a let's make us a government where it's guaranteed to be all corrupt.
Well, you know why it wasn't guaranteed to be corrupt back in the early days of the constitution, they didn't have much money.
They might have like you know, a handful of projects, and it would be stuff like, well, we need a street light on that one corner, and then you could sort of all pay attention to the few dollars it took to build the street light, and it wasn't nearly enough opportunity for fraud because it wasn't much money, and you could all just sort of watch it.
Probably had you know multiple witnesses and stuff like that.
Now, still probably there was a little, you know, a little bit of a little bit of bribery and stuff like that, but not nearly as much.
Um but then fast forward, and suddenly a city, which used to be a smallish enterprise, now has a billion dollar budget, a billion dollars.
What happens then?
Well, obviously, it's gonna attract all the people who want to figure out how to steal it, and there is no way to catch them all by design.
So if you're the mayor, and let's say you alone get to choose who wins some contract, you just make sure it's your friends, and then your friends have a whole bunch of extra money that they got.
Where do you think some of that goes?
Probably back to you, right?
So, as long as you have this situation that very easily and by design, everybody can rip the money out of the System, it's not gonna stop.
Here's where people get systems versus goals wrong.
It would be a goal to not have corruption in local government, right?
Everybody agree that would be your goal, my goal, their goal, the voters' goal.
Everybody'd have a goal.
But what is their system to prevent that from happening?
It's the opposite.
The system is designed for the opposite of the goal.
And as long as you have a system that's designed, on paper, there's no way it can operate any other way except illegally in the long run.
It's a design problem.
It's a system problem.
We need to develop some kind of a system and test it on some city to see if we can make at least one city operate fiscally responsibly and not steal your money.
Because we don't have that.
Maybe maybe smallest towns or something might get lucky.
But we got to change the system.
We can't just keep hoping that the next person we elect is the honest one.
That's just a goal.
Doesn't work.
All right, so reframe, reframe corruption as a design problem, not a moral failing of that one person who got caught.
Every time you say, well, moral failing of this one guy that got caught, but at least we put him in jail, so problem solved.
Nope.
Problem not solved.
Not even problem not even approached.
Problem not even addressed.
If you don't change the entire auditing, you know, transparency system, not a chance.
Maybe you put it on the black blockchain or something.
What about the Philippines?
Oh, guess what?
There's huge protests in Manila because $7 billion sort of went missing.
Now there's a lot of corruption over there, but when we say a lot of corruption, it really means that it's just more overt.
I don't know that we have less corruption here, honestly.
Um, so every government that has the same design about it has massive corruption.
It's all the same design.
The people in the government get to decide where billions of dollars go, so they steal some of it, like a lot of it, like 25% of it in this case.
So the whole country is falling apart because they got caught stealing too much, and in a way, what they did wrong was steal too much.
If they had stolen maybe 10%, there might not be any riots at all.
Meanwhile, over in Great Britain, uh, some of the Brits are allegedly, according to a telegraph poll, are rebelling against uh their prime minister Starmer's uh decision to what was it, grant uh recognize Palestine uh the Palestinian state.
That was not very popular at all, and 90% of Britons think that uh he jumped the gun by recognizing the Palestinian state.
Jump the gun might be the kindest way they could have said that.
I've got a feeling there's a whole bunch of Britons, yeah, the ones born there, who are more than just a little put out by what's happening over there.
So we'll see.
Well, here's interesting, according to newsmax, James Morley III is writing about this.
Uh, there's somebody named Liz Truss, who's a former UK prime minister.
Somehow I never heard of that name before.
How many of you knew that there was a UK prime minister named Liz Truss?
Why have I never even heard that name?
I usually don't pay attention to anything that's happening in Europe until I absolutely have to, you know, like there's a world war or something.
Uh but anyway, here's the good news.
This ex-UK prime minister Liz Truss, she's called for what she calls a MAGA moment in Britain.
Well, you were all well informed.
Good for you.
Oh, she was prime minister For less than two months.
Okay.
Well, okay, now that makes sense.
Show only briefly.
All right.
And she says that Britain needs sort of a Trump mega populist movement.
And she said that talking the newsweek.
Uh quote, I want Britain to have its MAGA moment and in 10 years to save the West.
Uh so she believes that the West needs to be saved, and that the model for doing that is Donald Trump.
Do you remember when Trump they said was going to be mocked and the United States would be the laughing stock because we had a clown as a president, whereas the rest of them had real leaders?
Do you remember that?
How'd that idea hold up over time?
Well, guess what, Europe?
You all wish you had our president now, don't you?
Don't you?
Yeah, you do.
But you can't have him.
I don't think.
Can he after he's done with his term here?
Can he go run another country?
I don't know.
Probably not.
Well, you may remember there was a COVID whistleblower in China, a Chinese citizen, who was sent to jail because you don't want to do too much uh whistleblowing in China.
That's not going to be good for you.
But I read for the first time what the charges were in 2020.
The charge was picking quarrels and provoking trouble.
That apparently you can go to jail for quote, picking quarrels and provoking trouble.
Um remind me never ever to go to China.
Because you know what I do on a regular basis about four times a day?
Picking quarrels and provoking trouble.
It's practically all I do.
It's almost my full-time job.
Picking quarrels and provoking trouble.
But the part that's really not funny, like one of the best and most messed up things I've ever seen, is that first of all, this uh whistleblower shouldn't be in jail at all.
But secondly, the term was over, and uh uh was it she?
I think it's a she.
Um male or female, I don't know.
What is Zhang?
Zhang a male name.
Um, so he, I think it's he, uh, was set to be released, and China just decided, nah.
That's how their prison system works at the end of the term, time to release him.
Nah.
We're just gonna keep him in jail.
So China is unsafe for business.
Do not physically go to China unless you happen to be the president of the United States and you're backed up by the entire US military if things go, you know, go pear-shaped.
Uh, the rest of us, if you're not bringing the entire U.S. military to to back you up and get you out of the country, don't go, because you don't know if you're ever coming back.
Did you see what I just did there?
Just now, what I just did.
That's called picking quarrels and provoking trouble.
Yeah, it's my middle name.
Well, once again, Russia has conducted a massive attack of drones on Ukraine, newsmax is reporting.
Uh, how many?
There were 580 drones that came out of Russia and 40 missiles.
580 drones on one night.
580.
Now, my question, as you know, is what's the upper limit?
If they're still fighting a year from now, is that number going to be 10,000?
How far are we from uh an every night attack of 10,000 drones?
Like, even if 5,000 of them got lasered out of the sky.
Could you just add another five the next day?
Because if both uh Russia and Ukraine are working as fast as they can on manufacturing of drones, and and they they both clearly understand that the way to win anything here, if you can win, I don't know if winning is an option, but the only way it could be an option is if one of the sides can reach you know 10,000 drones when the other one's only up to a thousand.
So if you were to guess how long will it take Russia to go from 580 drones at the same time to 10,000 and just blacking out the sky over Kiev?
Kiev, Kev, Kevin.
Um it's not a year, maybe I don't know, nine months or something.
So that's coming.
Marco Rubio said about Venezuela that uh Maduro, who allegedly is the president, uh Rubio said, said Maduro is not the president of Venezuela, he's ahead of the Cartel de la Souls, a narco terror organization that took over the country.
Does that sound like we're not going to attack their country?
If if the Secretary of State says you're not actually the leader of the country, you're ahead of a cartel.
Doesn't that really signal that we're going in?
Now I don't know if that means boots on the ground, but I would say there's now a hundred percent chance that the U.S. is preparing a military operation to decapitate the government.
I don't think they want to spend you know one minute fighting any Venezuelan soldiers, if they can avoid it.
I mean, it would be unavoidable.
But um, I'm pretty sure that the U.S. has decided that if we can't bring them down without a direct attack on the Capitol, I feel like we're gonna do a decapitation strike.
What do you think?
Because that Rubio is setting it up that if we were to let me put it this way.
If we assassinated the leader of another country, we would get all kinds of pushback, right?
Like even the countries that like us would say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, you can't go assassinating the leaders of the countries you don't like, because then they're gonna assassinate us.
And there's there's sort of this weird agreement among leaders, no matter how much they hate each other, that everything would be worse if we assassinate a leader of another country, like everything would be worse, and it's sort of everybody sort of understands that at a real base level.
Okay, you can't take out the leader of the other country, but what if what if the leader of the other country wasn't really the leader, according to us?
What if he was really just the head of a cartel who took over the country?
Well, you could assassinate the head of a cartel, right?
So it appears that we have just set up the uh press their the predicate, I guess.
Is that the right word?
Have we said established the predicate for a decapitation strike that takes out Maduro and his generals?
Yes, that's exactly what happened.
Now, whether or not we plan to literally do that, um, the pressure that it puts on Maduro is the right kind of pressure.
Because Maduro can never go to bed again without expecting uh a knock on the ceiling, if you know what I mean.
So we're clearly bringing up the turning up the uh temperature.
I guess the U.S. sunk a fourth suspected drug boat uh in the Caribbean, and hey.
Hello.
Um if you're listening but not watching, Gary the Cat has made his stop by you, those of you watching, uh always look for Gary.
Gary is the happiest, friendliest, most loving cat in the entire world.
His brother, his brother is just my roommate.
I've got one cat that basically just acts like a roommate, doesn't look at me with any loving eyes or anything like that.
It's just you know, he's there for the food and the shelter.
But Gary seems to be in love.
Uh Gary, Gary acts like he can't get enough of me.
I mean, oh my god, it's that guy again.
I cannot get enough of him.
I'm gonna rub every part of my body on every part of him.
Watch this.
So that's Gary the cat.
Anyway, what I was saying is we've sunk four of these uh drug boats now off of Venezuela, and my question is how many drug boats are there in one night?
If I told you that we sang four of them, let's say hypothetically, we sank them all the same night.
Would that be four and a four?
How many are there?
If you were you know on a boat in that part of the ocean, would you just see drug boat after drug boat go by?
And our military is doing the best they can, but you know, they can only get one every day or two.
Are there hundreds?
How many of them don't look exactly like drug boats?
Imagine if you're a smuggler and you're planning to you know take your drug boat that looks exactly like a drug boat and doesn't look like anything but a drug boat.
It's clearly obviously by its design and purpose and where it is and at what time it's operating.
Obviously, a drug boat.
Don't you think that by now they would have figured out how to make it not look like a drug boat?
Don't you think by now they would have made it look like uh a family of uh white people on vacation?
You know, hey, we just have a nice boat.
Hey, hey, hey, military, yeah, here's the kids.
And do you think they'll start putting innocent children on the drug boats?
How long is that gonna take?
Yeah.
Yeah.
So Hamas is over there in the news every day with their hostages.
You don't think that the cartels uh even one time have thought to themselves, you know, we do have all these little children that were trafficking.
We could put the children on the boat, traffic some children, make it look like you know, it's too dangerous to blow it up, and fill it with drugs at the same time.
So I don't know what the cartels are doing, but they're not doing much of a much of a defense there, unless the drug boats are a decoy or something.
Well, you know, when we left Afghanistan, we abandoned that uh the biggest best um US airbase, Magram.
And now Trump apparently has open talks with the Taliban, uh demanding that they give at least part of the base back to us that we would use again for uh military attacks against terrorists.
Now, what do you think the Taliban said?
What do you think the Taliban said when we said, I got an idea?
You won the war, uh, you know, you you got us to leave, and now you have the whole country.
But you know what would be great is if you gave us some of it back so we could put a big military presence right in the middle of your country again.
How about that?
Well, you might be surprised to learn that the Taliban's position is not one inch of their property is going anywhere.
And no, that's a hard no.
But uh Trump is already warned that uh there will be hell to pay if they don't cooperate and just give us.
I don't think he wants to pay for it.
Uh, just give us part of Bagram back.
Now, do you remember what I say about Trump that he does so well?
He goes strong, even if it doesn't work out.
This is just the perfect example.
Now, who who asked who asked for people to just give them land in the middle of their country for a purpose that they really really don't want you to do, which is to have a military base there.
Who does that?
Like, who even asks?
It wouldn't even occur to me that we would have a conversation with the Taliban about that.
Or that there's any chance at all that it might work out.
But Trump goes strong.
He has he has an argument for why it would be good for us.
I I understand the argument.
I definitely would like us to have a little background if it's gonna make it easier for the military to do what they're gonna do anyway.
So it's worth asking.
The worst that could happen, well, maybe it's not the worst, but you know, one of the things that happen is they say no.
Maybe we put enough pressure on them that they say, oh, damn it, we gotta say yes now.
Maybe so, but whether it works out or it doesn't work out, that is a strong play to go to the go to your, I'm not sure they're the enemy, but to go to them and say, why don't you just give us the base?
And if you don't, we're really gonna make your life miserable.
That is strong.
Might be wrong, might not work, but you're gonna remember how strong it was.
So it's right even if it's wrong.
I wonder if there's any science that uh didn't need to be done because people could have just asked me and save a lot of time.
Well, according to Science Alert, Carly Casella's writing that uh they've discovered in a large study that doing headers in soccer damages the brain even without concussions.
Uh let's see.
I wonder if I would have known the answer to this question.
Scott, if a surprisingly heavy and hard object called a soccer ball uh hits you in the head, is it likely to cause brain damage?
Well, how many times?
Uh 700.
Wait, what?
Yeah, it's a heavy, hard object.
It's gonna hit people's heads pretty hard in the context of a game.
Uh, will that cause brain problems?
Well, maybe not once.
But 700 times.
It it's heavy.
It's heavy in the sense that when it's traveling, that whoever whoever is saying heavy, like you're you're challenging whether whether a soccer ball is heavy.
Apparently, you've never been hit in the head with a fast-moving soccer ball.
Do you know how heavy that feels if you get hit at a high speed?
You know, soccer used to be one of my favorite games.
And do you know how I would handle headers?
I had a way of handling headers.
I would miss the ball.
Oops.
Yeah.
My entire life I said to myself, I love this game soccer, and I don't even mind if like I hurt my leg, you know, it'll we'll it'll get better, but I'm not gonna injure my head.
I'm not gonna injure my head for a game.
So for all of my soccer playing years, when I jumped up for a header, I just didn't get it.
I guess I guess I'm not that good ahead because the other team got it, and sometimes my team got it, but man, I I was in that middle of that play.
I jumped up and moved my head.
I just made sure that a fast moving uh way too heavy object never hit my head.
So did I know that having that heavy object hit my head over and over and over and over again would be bad for my brain, even if technically it wasn't a concussion.
Yeah, I knew that.
I absolutely knew that.
Why?
Because I feel what it feels like when it hits me.
There's no way that's good for my brain.
No way.
I would go further, and I think that uh headers in soccer should absolutely be banned at every level.
It doesn't make the game better.
Right?
Does it make the game worse that you have to wait for the ball to reach the ground or reach your legs?
No.
No.
You know, you know what is a really bad game is if all of your touches of the ball are with your legs, you'll you're like foot, foot, foot, foot, foot, foot, and then you run in front of the the goal, and then somebody kicks it in the air, and then you make the goal with your head.
It's like suddenly you change games.
It's not even the same game anymore.
It's like, well, you weren't using your head until now.
I mean, much.
Anyway, headers should be banned.
Uh so zero hedge is reporting that uh there's an educational crisis in the Baltimore high schools.
Uh apparently in four straight years, this isn't funny.
Stop laughing.
There's nothing funny about this.
In four years, the entire Baltimore high school system has failed to produce a single proficient math student in four years, not one.
I don't know.
Do you think that they all that all the administrators and teachers kept their jobs when they produced zero success in what is generally considered the simplest thing you could ever succeed at?
Getting at least one person to be able to add.
Nope, they couldn't pull that off.
So do you think there was a big house cleaning and they all got fired?
The teachers and the administrators.
Well, I don't know.
But I doubt it.
Didn't happen after the first year.
Apparently they've gone four years with zero zero students who can do math.
What percentage of the Baltimore schools are black?
What do you think?
What percentage of Baltimore high schools are black students?
What percent?
The answer is 73%.
And I think if you count all the other non-white uh ethnicities, I think it's over 90%.
Right.
Now, the obvious question is uh what's going on here?
Now, some people are gonna say, oh, uh, some people who are racist are gonna say, uh, what's wrong with black people?
And then other people are gonna say, uh, it's culture, something about culture, and then other people will say, you racists, you're saying it's about culture, and then you know, maybe people will offer to help, and that help will be turned down, unless it's money, because you know, if you if you offer to help with money, then somebody could steal it.
So if you offer money that people can steal, they'll say yes.
But there's nothing else anybody's gonna say yes.
And and I want to say this again.
Black Americans, you have to work this out.
This one's on you.
For sure, people like me can't help you.
And the thing is, I'd be willing to try.
You know, I don't know what the solution would be, but I know that it would not be welcome, and not just because it's me.
But I don't think any, I don't think any white people would be appreciated.
So, black America.
I do believe you are fully capable of solving this, you know, maybe maybe not turning Baltimore into the best school system in the world, but certainly getting at least one person to be able to add and subtract.
I mean, that'd be cool.
So you could definitely do that.
I mean, I'm exaggerating, of course.
It's higher math.
Um, but if it sounds like I'm not being helpful, because I just told you I can't help.
Like even if I wanted to, it wouldn't, it would go to nothing.
Um, I think it is helpful to say we're not gonna help.
The only way this gets better is if black America somehow, and I don't know how, I don't have I don't have the first idea how this could get fixed.
No, I do.
I I do have the first idea.
The first idea would be to send in a bunch of dads.
I think that worked in some school, where they they bring in some dads, so that there's some serious muscle there.
And then the kids have, you know, somebody they can trust to talk to, and they've got a father figure.
And maybe they can be coached into less anti-school behavior, I guess.
So I feel I feel like I've seen stories where that has worked in individual schools.
Now I guess I'd have to get confirmation of that.
But if you're not trying something like that, there's nothing else that's gonna work.
And what else are you gonna do?
Make the periods one minute longer.
What else do you have to work with?
You got nothing to work with.
There's no tools.
If the school system, a regular school that works for other people, doesn't work in any way at all in Baltimore, you're going to have to do something totally different.
And I am confident that Black America can solve this, and I'm also confident that it would be helpful to make it clear that it's up to you.
it's up to you guys you got to solve this and let us know how it turns out all right um that's all i've got from my prepared comments Do you notice that I went long today?
It's because I'm trying to uh entertain the people.
I get well, I guess the uh the Charlie Kirk Memorial is started now.
So you don't need me anymore.
All right, you don't need me anymore if you're at the Charlie Kirk thing, and those of you who want to go watch that now.
Go ahead.
Oh wait, no, this no, you're still waiting, because this is only the time that you were let into the venue.
Um the actual event will be in a few hours.
So I hope it was useful that I gave you a little extra long commercial free, I hope, um, content, because all those other lazy podcasters are taking the day off, or they're in church or something.
But today I knew that uh you might need a little extra.
All right.
Um I'm gonna talk privately to my beloved uh local subscribers.
The rest of you, have a great day.
Do the best you can and uh give a thought to Charlie.
