Trump escalates, Ukraine escalates, and Trump keeps winningPolitics, Brainwashed Liberals, Peter Strzok, Keith Olbermann's Apology, Brigitte Macron's Photo Proof, Ryan Routh, DHS Deportations Success, Tylenol, Marco Rubio, John Bolton's Classified Docs, Kamala Harris, YouTube Political Censorship, UN Anti-Trump Coincidences, President Trump UN Speech, Climate Change Grift, Jimmy Kimmel's Return, Chuck Schumer Government Shutdown, Unsurvivable US Deficit, Gavin Newsom's Soul, Democrat's Violence Permission Strategy, Indivisible NGO Color Revolution, Ukraine Drone Warfare, EU Required DEI ESG, Obama 2B Solar BirdFryer, 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.
Stock markets uh a little up, a little down, Tesla's up.
Wow, Tesla's really up 2.7.
Not bad.
Alright, come on in here while I get ready with my comments.
Mum bum bum bum bum.
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 uh copper mugger, glass attacker, chalice stein, a canteen jugger flask, a vessel limit.
Fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day.
The thing that makes everything better is called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now.
Oh.
Delicious.
Well, look at what I've got.
I've got a little cat friend to join me.
Well, can you believe it?
There's a study that says eating chocolate, my slow aging and help your heart.
That would be the millionth time that we've seen this study.
And uh my suggestion is that uh if you'd like to save a little money on these studies about chocolate next time, just ask me.
Yes, chocolate is good for you, but not that milk chocolate.
There's not enough chocolate in there.
You want the good flavonoids.
All right, there's another study.
Um that says that people feel happier when they're doing ordinary everyday things with other people.
That's right.
They did a study and showed that being lonely is not optimal.
Can you believe it?
I know science is surprising us every day.
Yeah, being lonely, not good.
Doesn't make you happy.
So do things with other people if you have a choice.
Can you believe?
According to PsyPost, Eric Dolan is writing that uh even light alcohol drinking raises your dementia risk.
Hmm.
I wonder if there's anybody they could have asked to save all that time.
Yes, they could have asked Scott because yeah, I knew that alcohol is bad for you, and I was pretty pretty sure that that included your brain, because your brain is part of your body.
Your body is your brain.
Well, here's a surprising uh surprising situation.
The publication called The Atlantic, which is the most uh anti-Trump you know, publication you could ever imagine.
Um believe it or not, has an article that says that left-wing violence is on the rise, and that it's uh there've been more terror attacks from left-wing idologs than right in recent years.
Now, you know how big a debate that was, right?
So all the people on the left said, no, no, it's obvious that the people on the right are doing all the terrorism, and the people on the right said, no, no, it's obvious the people on the left are doing more terrorism.
Uh well, the Atlantic, which is left, has now conclusively decided based on their own research that the left is a little bit more terrorist and murdery, and once again, you're right again.
By the way, there will be a minor theme to today's show, which is that all everybody who is a critic of Trump is having a bad time.
All of his critics are Having a bad week.
Different reasons, but it's kind of a weird coincidence.
According to the Washington Examiner, Paul Badard's writing about a Rasmussen poll that showed that over half of liberals call the Kirk assassination quote understandable.
understandable meaning that they believe that he spoke hate speech, and people who speak hate speech, I guess half of the people said, well, you've got to expect there's going to be some blowback for that.
And so that's what the liberals think.
Now, to me, this is a perfect example of the power of brainwashing.
Because you'd have to brainwash people to think that Charlie Kirk was speaking hate about anybody, even once, even once.
Never happened to even once about anybody.
But it is widely believed.
So how how powerful is brainwashing?
Well, it convinced half of the country that a good man is a bad man.
And it convinced half of that half that it probably is understandable that somebody would get violent with him.
All of that is complete brainwashing.
There's not one bit of that that comes from people looking at you know real stuff and coming up with their own opinion.
These are assigned opinions.
So do you do you have any more questions about how powerful brainwashing is?
This is the cleanest example you ever see.
Now, what makes it extra clean is that uh Charlie Kirk didn't always exist, meaning that he's a relatively newish phenomenon, you know, last 10 years, I guess he rose.
And so it's not like, well, Scott, you know, people have always thought this about that for for all through history.
Nope.
Nobody had any opinion about him at all until it was assigned to them, and uh pure brainwashing.
Well, in other news that Trump might enjoy, Peter Strzok.
Do you remember him from the old uh law fairing days trying to get Trump allegedly his messages suggested that he was part of a plot to overthrow the government?
Some say he's never been convicted for anything like that, but um he was suing over his firing because I guess he claimed that he had freedom of speech in his messages to his girlfriend, and uh, since he got fired for something he said in his personal speech, he thought that his uh his free speech had been violated, and he shouldn't have been fired.
Now, if you ask me, that's a pretty bad argument.
Uh, and he lost, so that case is over.
So Peter Strzok loses, that's sort of like Trump winning because he would like to know that Peter Strzok lost.
Remember, Trump says he hates his enemies, so he hates Stock.
Well, Keith Olbermann, as you know, he's my mascot.
Um, he apologized for threatening the other Scott, Scott Jennings.
There are only two of us, by the way.
Just me and Scott Jennings, no other Scots.
Um, and uh apparently there was an FBI referral.
I think Scott Jennings made or or somebody made a FBI referral, because what he said on social media, Olberman said of Scott Jennings, quote, you're next, mother effer, and then but keep mugging for the camera.
Well, in the context of the Charlie Kirk um tragedy, saying that somebody's next, uh when when we're still in that sort of you know, environment of still talking about and thinking about Charlie Kirk was taken as a physical threat.
But uh Keith Olderman, who's not as dumb as he acts, He couldn't be, it wouldn't be possible.
Um decided he better apologize and clarify that.
And he was like, no, no, it was not about hurting Scott Jennings, it was about his career.
His career would be next.
Do you believe that?
Do you believe that in the shadow of the Charlie Kirk situation?
When somebody says you're next, that obviously just means their job.
I don't know.
I can't read his mind.
So that happened.
So that's uh awkward for another anti-Trumper.
How about Hollywood?
How much does Hollywood like Trump?
Not so much.
Um, but Hollywood has uh well, they're really in trouble now, because the AI examples that we're seeing today, uh there were two different apps using AI that could substitute any celebrities' face and body for anything else.
So you could have you can make your own movie with yourself as the actor, um, or let's say yourself as the main actor, and then just replace it when you're done.
And it will be it'll look um it won't look like AI.
It'll look exactly like you know, Brad Pitt was in your actual movie.
So that's coming.
I don't see how Hollywood as an industry can survive, because it looks like that'll all turn into people who know how to use AI.
So Hollywood's got a tough time.
Trump might enjoy watching Hollywood go down.
Well, Bridget McCrone, who as you know is in a lawsuit with Candace Owens over the issue of whether or not she was uh born a man.
Now I I will say again, I do not believe Bridget McCrone was born a man.
However, if you've heard the the long the long argument from Candace uh with all the evidence that she believes proves that she is, it's very persuasive.
Now I'm not persuaded, but not because it's not persuasive.
I I just it's just hard for me to believe it.
So um so Bridget McCrone has the easiest job in the world, she simply has to prove that she was born a woman.
Could anything be easier than that?
So she submitted some what she called photographic evidence, but we have no details on what was photographed and how that proved the case, but apparently uh the the that's been challenged in court.
So whatever that photographic evidence was, uh didn't convince everybody.
And I'm wondering, how could you convince anybody with a photograph?
It's 2025.
I mean, I just got done telling you that you can make anybody look like Brad Pitt or Taylor Swift, and you can't tell the difference.
So in the age of AI, you don't think that a state actor, you know, the government of France, they couldn't put together a fake photograph that you thought was real.
I mean, I don't know how you'd ever believe a photograph.
And what would the and what would the photograph be of?
If they had a photograph of uh Bridget McCrone very young, um looking female, that wouldn't really be that wouldn't tell you, would it?
If they had a picture of her looking pregnant, would that convince you she was a woman?
Or would you say to yourself, wait a minute, that's when they were trying to sell the idea that she was a female, so she probably just put some rags under her dress to pretend to be pregnant, or something like that.
So my point is I don't know how photographic evidence could ever work.
Um you would need the other team's doctor to stand in the room and examine her, wouldn't you?
Seems to me.
So I don't know, we'll see where that goes.
Um apparently the uh the interest and turning point USA after uh Charlie Kirk's death has skyrocketed now.
The current number is there have been a hundred and twenty thousand requests for information on starting a chapter.
A hundred and twenty thousand requests.
Wow.
Uh that's a lot.
Breitbart News is reporting on that, Elizabeth Weibell.
Well, the one of the uh attempted Trump assassins that Ryan Routh, who was defending himself, he uh did not do a good job defending himself.
He was found guilty, and it looks like he'll I think he'll go away for life.
Um as soon as the Ferdinand was ready, he grabbed a pen and tried to murder himself uh by stabbing himself in the neck with a pen, but they stopped him before he could succeed.
Um, I have one thing to say about Ryan Roth.
He is not good at killing anything, not good at killing anything.
He tried to kill people in Ukraine.
I don't think he got that together.
Tried to kill Trump, didn't work, tried to kill himself, didn't work.
I think he should just take a hit.
Ryan, you're not good at killing anything.
Stop it, stop it.
Well, Department of Homeland Security is all happy they've reached the two million uh illegals leaving the country since January.
Two million.
Now, the vast majority of them were self-deporting because they didn't want to, you know, get deported the hard way.
Um but wow, two million in six months.
I I find that an impressive number, and I'm most impressed that they figured out a way to do it without having to you know ship every one of them.
Um, that the the ones leaving voluntarily turn out to be the big number.
So that's pretty impressive.
Well, as you might imagine, now that the Trump administration has said that uh Tylenol might be a bad idea if you're pregnant, but talk to your doctor, because there might be some cases where it's necessary or worth the risk.
But uh, this caused people on TikTok, people on the left, to uh uh pointedly take Tylenol while they're pregnant to show you how wrong Trump is about everything.
So here's the funny thing about this.
If if it's true, and I don't know that it is, but if it's true that taking Tylenol while you're pregnant can cause your child to be autistic, I'm wondering how many of the autistic kids end up being Trump supporters, or at least conservative, you know, by the time they're old enough.
Are are people on the spectrum um easily fooled by brainwashing?
Or are they a little less or are they more analytical in some cases?
I'm just wondering if they're taking Tylenol and turning turning their children into conservatives.
I don't know, maybe some of them.
Well, uh Stephanophilus is trying to push the idea that the cuts in USAID um are causing the mass deaths of people in other countries that would otherwise be saved by that spending.
But uh Rubio has a pretty good response to that.
Um so Stefanofa said to him on a show yesterday, you're you're saying no one's died because of the aid cuts.
Now, of course, people probably have died because there are things that we gave money to that we stopped giving money to when they were probably pretty important things.
Um, but Rubio has the right frame.
He says, No one has died because the U.S. has cut aid, people have died because gangs steal the aid, people have Died because other countries have now stepped up.
The U.S. has saved more lives than any other country in the world.
So probably he could do a little bit better on that answer, but the basic answer is why is it only US spending the one that's being measured for inadequacy?
Wouldn't it be true that every single country in the world could spend more to save more people in other countries?
Why are you only looking at us?
Why why does that even make sense?
There are a million things we could be doing that we're not.
Does that mean we're killing people by not doing it?
Well, in some you know, theoretical way, I suppose, but it's not a reasonable, it's not a reasonable attack.
The reasonable attack is uh the US can't do everything for everybody, and we're gonna do a little less.
Yeah, more people will die, but it there's nothing that would stop every other country in the world from stepping up and filling the gap.
So if nobody else in the world is willing to help, why why is why is all the uh pressure on the United States?
It's a good question.
Uh well, in uh John Bolton news, we're now learning that uh the FBI had found some uh secret or confidential or whatever classified documents in his office.
So we already knew that they went through his home.
We're not sure what they found, but in his office there were some classified materials, and so I went to Groc and I said, Did John Bolton ever mock Trump for his classified documents at Mar-a Lago?
And the answer is yes, he did.
So while while John Bolton had his own classified documents at both his office and I believe at his home, he was he was criticizing Trump for having classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
That takes a little bit of guts, doesn't it?
Remember my uh my theme for today?
That everybody who's uh anti-Trumper seems to be having a bad week.
Well, John Bolton's on that list, having a bad week.
Kabala Harris, I think she's having a bad week too.
So she went on the view yesterday.
She's selling her new book, 107 days.
Um, and you should hear her on the view.
And here's why you should listen to it.
Because she's not drunk.
If you wondered if she's drunk in those other appearances, listen to her on the view.
Now that's a morning show, so the odds of her being drunk were lower, you know, just in general.
But when you hear her obviously not drunk, she's still, you know, she still is bad at you know talking.
She's bad at talking, but she there's no indication of drunk.
Her speaking uh tone is you know perfect and normal and and all that.
So if you want to wonder, is she drunk in those other videos?
Just watch the view.
When you see her not drunk, you go, oh, oh, okay, that's what not drunk looks like.
Yeah, there's something going on there.
Anyway, uh YouTube has now admitted, you know, Google owns YouTube, so Google has admitted uh that YouTube was in fact censoring people during the COVID pandemic for uh and for political reasons.
And uh they've offered uh terminated creators the opportunity to rejoin the platform.
So does it feel uh to you as if everything you suspected was true several years ago was all true.
Like every single thing you thought.
Wait a minute, I think the platforms are discriminating against certain kinds of people.
Turns out they were.
Yep, it was exactly what you thought.
Wait a minute, I don't think these vaccines are tested as much as I would like.
Turns out you're right.
So just about everything you suspected is true.
Uh I suspected that the intelligence people were behind their Russia collusion hoax.
Well, looks like they were.
I suspected that climate change was um not going to pan out in terms of the predictions, and that someday we would realize it was a hoax.
Well, I don't know if we're totally there yet, but we're getting really close.
Everything you suspected.
You thought the news might have been intentionally fake.
It was intentionally fake.
Yeah, almost everything you suspected.
The one that we haven't um let's say that's not validated yet, is that the 2020 election was rigged.
Now, let me ask you this.
Look at all the things that you suspected, and how many of them turned out to be true?
Almost all of them.
Yeah, there might be some exceptions, but I think almost all of them.
Now, in that context, what are the odds that so many people suspect the 2020 election was rigged?
What are the odds that we will not someday find out it was rigged?
I I feel like everything is pointing in that direction.
Now, to be clear, I do not personally have any evidence of any rigging in 2020.
I don't.
But I'll tell you, the people who've been right about everything, right, right, right, right, they think it was rigged.
So are you going to ignore the people who are right about everything?
I don't know, at your peril.
Um, let's see.
Uh so Democrats won some special election in Arizona, which allegedly will give the uh Democrats enough votes.
Uh, I assume that means they get some Republican votes, of course, because Republicans still have the majority.
But uh, with this one extra vote, they will have enough votes to um force the uh the release, or at least have a vote.
They can only force a vote, they can't force the outcome, but they can force a vote on releasing all the Epstein files, which means everybody's gonna have to be on record as saying that they will or will not be in favor of releasing them.
And I think if you put everybody on record, doesn't that make it a little more likely that people won't resist because it looks too sketchy if they do?
So maybe we're inching closer to seeing some of that Epstein stuff.
I don't know.
Well, you probably already heard that uh Trump spoke at the UN and he had two technical difficulties.
One was the escalator stopped as soon as uh he and Melania uh got you know a few feet into it, and uh the UN has now investigated, and they say it was just a mistake, it was just an accident, and that some videographer uh may have triggered some kind of safety thing that made it stop.
Does that sound real to you?
Well, I would look at the context, which included reporting that said that uh UN staff had been joking before Trump got there that they should turn off the elevator and the escalator and claim they don't have enough money to run them.
So what are the odds that they were joking about doing this exact thing, and then by accident, by total accident, the thing that's never happened to any president at the UN ever by total accident, it just happened, it just happened.
So believe it, people believe it.
That's just a coincidence.
Sorry, but we're not really in the mood to accept that coincidence.
You know, The funny thing is it might be a coincidence.
It's not like it's impossible.
I mean, so you know how sometimes if you think too much about a thing happening, it happens.
Maybe a lot of people are thinking about it happening.
You know, I the that's how I think the simulation works, you know, with uh affirmation, etc.
If a lot of people are thinking a thing could happen, I just feel like it's more likely it's gonna happen.
However, that would be a lot of a coincidence to accept, a really, really big one.
So I don't think we're in the mood to accept that.
And then the uh and then the teleprompter doesn't work when Trump goes to give his speech.
So another coincidence, probably, just a coincidence.
I I guess you know that uh the UN got their funding cut.
Well, I guess the the guy who does uh all the technical stuff must be on vacation.
Yeah, yeah, or he got fired or something.
Anyway, so all that looks really sketchy, but Trump did a uh a Trumpian great job with his speech.
Um he said that uh let's see, what are some of the things he said?
He criticized globalism, he said climate change was a big old hoax.
He said open borders were a giant mistake, and the other countries were committing national suicide.
Um he says that the the entire globalist concept, this is what Trump said, the entire globalist concept of asking successful industrialized nations to inflict pain on themselves and radically disrupt their entire societies must be rejected completely and totally.
Yeah, yeah.
How about you stop telling countries like us to do all the worst things that we could do?
Yeah, how about that?
And then he really put the uh hammer down.
Trump did.
He said, any system that results in the mass trafficking of children is inherently evil.
Yet that is exactly what the globalist migration agenda has done.
Okay, well, yeah, I mean, I don't think they intentionally did that, but maybe some of them did.
You never know.
Um and then he accused uh China, India, and uh some NATO countries of uh funding Russia's war by buying all their oil when they don't have to.
And he said that uh U.S. is having a golden age and that everything's going great over here.
All right, okay.
Um I was I was trying to imagine what would it be like if you were one of the leaders who had been, you know, for or maybe still still are really pro-climate change is real, we gotta do something.
What would it feel like to have the most important leader in the world who's been right about a lot?
You know, we're not talking about an ordinary president, we're talking about the president who is famous for being right when things don't look like he might be.
He's famous for that.
This is probably his his greatest challenge to get people to believe that uh climate change was sort of exaggerated and overdone.
And but imagine sitting there in the UN and the most important leader of the, in my opinion, the most important country, uh, is saying that their biggest the biggest thing they've been working on for years is a complete hoax and a waste of time.
What would that feel like in theory?
It should trigger cognitive dissonance massively, because remember, cognitive dissonance gets triggered when you believe you're a certain kind of person, smart, educated, well informed about science, and then none of the predictions that you were buying into seem to be coming true.
And then Trump, who has been right about a lot, A lot comes in and says the whole thing was a hoax.
It was all BS.
Now, is it possible for any of the other brains in that room to say, huh?
Well, you know what?
I he does make a good case.
There were many predictions.
They seem to be off.
It does sort of look like maybe people were just chasing money and it was a big old grift.
Hmm.
Yes, I changed my mind.
So after years of saying it was the most important thing in the world, I'm going to change my mind to I was a fucking idiot and I got uh bamboozled into wasting my country's resources.
It's not possible that those particular people do not have the option of changing their mind.
It would be too much of a cognitive load.
It just can't be done.
Can't be done.
So the only way that uh you know things will change is if there's an entire new wave of younger, probably conservative leaders who didn't believe it from the start.
If that happens, then you can get governments not believing climate change, but you're not going to change the minds of the ones who put their entire reputation and self-image on the line.
You can't change that.
That's what that's how cognitive dissonance happens when when you have that uh contrast between what you did and what makes sense.
Well, Jimmy Kimmel was back on the air last night.
I'm sure his ratings were big because people wanted to see what he had to say.
Got standing ovations and he was tearful, and um he didn't apologize exactly, but he sort of had a few words around what he did.
He said, Quote, I understand that to some that felt uh uh that that what he said felt either ill-timed or unclear, or maybe both.
And for those who think I did point a finger, I get why you're upset.
So it's not an apology, he just says he understands why you're upset.
And they said some more, and then uh he said, I don't think the murderer who shot Charlie Kirk represents anyone, so he's not gonna say that's a MAGA person.
Um this is a sick person who believes violence is a solution, and it isn't.
And then he went for the kill shot.
Now I would hate to say that I may have suggested this.
I didn't I didn't suggest it to anybody on his on his team, but I said in public, my own opinion was that uh Charlie Kirk would have uh wanted him to go back on the air, because Charlie Kirk was very pro-free of speech, and it seemed to me he would have said, Well, okay, your joke didn't land if it was a joke, but I don't think you should be off the air.
That's my opinion of what I think Charlie Kirk would have been all about if he could be here to give his opinion.
Um, and Kimble did a version of that, but even a stronger version by referencing the um Erica, the wife of Charlie Kirk, who forgave the murderer.
She actually forgave him in public.
Now, that that was a very impactful thing.
Yeah, uh it would be hard not to feel that the impact of that.
It that was so strong.
And uh so Kimmel says uh she forgave him, talking about uh the shooter, she forgave him.
Uh, that is an example we should follow.
If you believe in the teachings of Jesus, as I do, he said, there it was.
That's it.
A selfless act of grace.
Okay.
All right.
He nailed it.
Yeah, I know you don't want him to, but he nailed it.
You know, if if you if you attach it to Erica's um, you know, incredible strength and her forgiveness and her grace.
I think grace is the right answer there, the right word.
Um maybe it's just time to let it go.
Maybe we can be, you know, as worthy in some small way as uh Erica.
And uh maybe we should have a little grace.
Now I understand that we're in a situation where it's sort of a war between the left and the right, and we should crush them uh as permanently as we can every opportunity we get.
Maybe.
But I do like free speech, and I do like grace, and I do like forgiveness when it's just about words.
Um I hate to say it, but this was best case scenario.
Best case scenario.
I don't want to see all the staff losing their jobs.
Um I do want him to recognize that you know there was a problem there and acknowledge it.
And I do want to live in a world where we can forgive things that people say, you know, if they're if there's really a question of what they meant and what their intention was.
We should be able to forgive that.
But uh it looks like that won't get him any of the trouble because uh two affiliate groups, the Sinclair group and Nextstar, who collectively have dozens and dozens of local stations, have said that they will not carry, they will not carry his return.
Now, I suspect they might change their mind, you know, maybe a little time has to go by.
I don't know.
But I do wonder if they'll keep him on the air without those uh locals.
Uh they got a lot to talk about.
So this is not done by any means.
And it could be that ABC and Disney have decided that it's easiest to keep him on until his contract runs out anyway, and then they can say, well, you know, it's not about what you said.
Now it's definitely about the fact that the affiliates are not running you.
We don't have a way to make money now.
Then they can do whatever they want.
Well, Chuck Schumer, who at one point didn't want to meet with uh President Trump about the budget they're trying to get settled.
Uh he's now saying he will meet with them anywhere he wants on the golf course, you name it.
So he says we're ready to work with the president, we're willing to sit down with him, we'll even go to the golf course wherever he wants to go.
So there might be some indication that the Democrats will be blamed if there's a government to shut down.
Now, I don't know how that works.
What what is the what is the logic of who gets blamed?
Is there any is there any way to predict that?
Is it the uh the party in charge?
Do they always get blamed if they have the power?
Or um is there some reason that the Democrats would get blamed this time?
I don't know.
But the argument is they want uh uh massively more spending for health care, but specifically, I think that would include paying for trans surgeries for kids and uh health care for illegal aliens and uh more than that, they would say, but uh, I don't know how much more than that.
So um, like I said, there's no chance that they're gonna agree on a budget, they will kick the can down the road and show that they cannot do the basic work of the people.
The most basic thing your government should do is allocate money.
They will not do that, they should all be fired, right?
If they can't allocate money, can't even take a shot at it.
I'm not even saying doing it right.
If they can't do it, if you can't do it, the main thing that you're supposed to do, you should all be fired.
Every one of them should be let go.
There should be some kind of law that says if you don't if you don't pass a budget, you don't get paid.
At the very least, it should be if you don't pass a budget, you don't get paid.
Because why do we pay them to pass a budget?
So is that fair?
You don't get paid if you don't pass the budget.
What if Trump did an executive order that says you don't get paid if you don't pass the budget?
Would it stick?
I mean, I don't see how it would, because then he'd be interfering in the other, you know, interfering in the other branch of government.
But something's got to change.
I mean, we literally can't survive having a Congress that can't make a budget.
That's not survivable.
We we'll just run the debt up to, I mean, maybe it's already now survivable.
But uh we have to stop asking acting like this is normal.
Or that, all right, well, okay, we tried, kick the can down the street a little bit, uh, we'll get it next time.
It's not normal.
What whatever we have to do to stop this, it has to be done right away.
Whatever it takes.
Speaking of hoaxes, Newsom was on uh Colbert show that's still on there for a little while.
Um, and he said that uh he believes Trump is trying to rig the midterms, and uh he said, quote, I really mean uh, and I fear that he will not have an election in 2028.
I really mean that in the core of my soul, unless we wake up to the code red of what's happening in the country.
So this is the most surprising thing that I've heard in a long time.
He says, I mean this in the core of my soul.
My God.
Does Gavin Newsom have a soul?
Am I just learning that he has a soul?
Because he's not doing anything that looks like you'd do if you had one, like starting a gigantic uh scare of my people, get them all worked up, cause them to violence.
If you actually said the guy in charge is going to cancel elections, that's permission to violence.
Would you disagree?
If a politician was telling you, I mean it in the core of my soul, he's gonna cancel elections.
That is an invitation to violence, isn't it?
Do you see it differently?
I mean, I don't think that the Democrats even understand what causes violence.
It's this, it's exactly this.
Because it wouldn't be violence if if you just thought you'd lose an election.
But if you think that there will never be one because the other team is turning dictator, that's permission for violence.
No, I'm not giving you permission, but it sounds like he is.
That's that's so bad.
Well, this hoax needs a name.
The hoax that uh elections will be canceled so that what what so Trump can stay in office?
Um, it's obviously a hoax, but given that there are two parts to it, there's a 2026 hoax, and then there's a 2028 hoax that's the same, you know, that there won't be an election.
So it's a little murky that way, but it needs a name.
I don't have one.
Um, Gavin Newsom has decided that California will make their own recommended vaccine schedule for kids.
Now, really to me that just seems unbelievable.
Um he wants to make sure that they have uh that they do a recommendation that's based on real science, you know, not that stuff that RFK Jr. is using.
What do they think RFK Jr.'s looking at?
They think he's looking at horoscopes.
I don't know.
So we'll see what that comes up with.
Um Mike Benz was talking on X about uh there's a recording of uh some kind of Zoom call between uh executives of a group called Indivisible, which is described as George Soros' main umbrella domestic street protest group, and they were talking about what color to to name their color revolution, which they're planning.
So a color revolution, which is how a government is overthrown.
That's that's where it is, a color revolution.
That's when the Intel people and another country get involved in organizing a country to overthrow its government.
So right out loud, this group is talking about a color revolution.
And uh they're leaning toward purple as their color, because it's neither red nor uh nor blue, they would say.
Um they're one of these groups as part of that George Soros funding and the NGO networks and stuff like that.
But my question is this: does a color revolution work when you have all the names and all the receipts?
Can you have a color revolution if the country you're trying to take over is completely aware that it's a color revolution?
That could be enough to stop it, right?
If everybody said, Oh, that's fake, that's George Saros' people.
Yeah, let them let them do their thing on the street, they're paid to do it, but nobody's really serious about it.
I don't know.
You you would think that making it public and letting everybody know what's happening.
You think that'd be enough to take you know all the energy out of it, but it looks like they're just gonna you know clump ahead, and maybe maybe it doesn't make any difference.
Uh so there's a ledged shooter at a Texas ice facility that I heard separately had already been taken down, so I think he's already dead.
I don't know the details of that just happened.
Well, uh, according to the gateway pundit, uh Argentina loosened up their supply of housing by reducing some ridiculous uh government uh regulations on housing.
Uh and it resulted in 88% growth in supply, and then the prices of housing um fall went down by as much as 29%.
So supply and demand works every time.
Would you agree?
How many of you would agree with that statement?
That over time, supply and demand, it works every time.
So all he did was change some regulations that increase the supply of housing.
Prices went down 29%, exactly the way that's supposed to work.
So we all agree, right?
Supply and demand works every time.
All right, you know I'm setting you up.
You know I am.
Next story, Brian Johnson, who you might uh know as the gentleman who's trying to live forever, figuring out how to maximize human human life, but he mentions in a post today that alcohol is the highest margin product that restaurants sell, according to his numbers.
He said food has a 28 to 35 percent margin, beer 75 to 80, wine 65 to 75, and cocktails and spirits have an 80 to 90 percent uh margin.
So that would mean that supply and demand doesn't work, right?
All right, I always I used to own a couple of restaurants, and it was a competitive restaurant environment, meaning that if you wanted something like you know, California cuisine, and you wanted to sit where there was table service, there were quite a few choices in a you know a five-mile radius.
You had all kinds of choices.
Do you think that the people who would went to my bar were unaware of what our prices were compared to the alternatives?
The answer is people who go to bars and sit in a bar, if the yeah, if they're doing it more than once, they absolutely know the cost of drinks at different bars.
How do I know?
Because they talked about it continuously.
They would talk about it all the time.
Well, uh, Scott, it seems that your drink is $8, but if I go across the street, it's $75.
And I don't know why I'd pay $8 for a drink I could get across the street for $7.55.
I'm just making that up.
But yeah, they were hyper aware of the cost of drinks and beer and wine and stuff.
So what do you think in that competitive environment?
What do you think was the margin differences between food and alcohol?
No real difference.
The margin for food, the margin for alcohols in my restaurants were about the same.
Because do you know why?
Supply and demand is real.
Supply and demand.
The only way you could charge uh like a 90% markup on well drinks like cocktails and spirits is if the people had no idea what your competition was charging for the same thing.
Because somebody would lower the price.
You have all that room.
You have all that room to lower your price.
Somebody would have done it for competitive reasons.
So one of the most basic things you've believed all your life is that you could charge a big margin on alcohol, and that's how you make the real money in a restaurant.
The only way that could work is if supply and demand doesn't work in this one place, but only this one place in all the world.
In all the world, it's the only place the supply and demand doesn't work.
I don't know.
I'm not sure what's going on, but um uh I do not believe the supply and demand stopped working in one place.
Uh and it didn't look like it to me.
All right, uh, there's new news on Ukraine.
Um, Trump says the Russian economy is in big trouble.
He said a lot about Ukraine uh yesterday.
Uh he thinks the Russian economy is in big trouble and that there are gas lines.
We don't know how big the gas lines are.
Um he says that Ukraine with our help is in a position to win the war outright.
So suddenly the tone from Trump has changed from you know, we're gonna hang in there as long as possible and try to make a peace deal.
Apparently that just makes you look weak and makes Putin say, oh, well, if the only thing you can do is hang in there and we can chew away at you, we'll just keep chewing away because it doesn't look like you have any offense.
Well, Trump is now saying that uh that Ukraine is uh nearing a position.
Now remember, this is Trump hyperbole, so you have to put it in context, nearing a point where they could take back the territory that uh Russia has already gained.
Nobody says that's possible.
Trump says it now.
What does Trump know that you and I don't know?
Where he would change from the most reasonable position, which is well, you know, the front line isn't really going to move.
He's gone all the way to it looks like they might be able to take back all that territory, but wait, because it's Trump, he went further than that, and maybe take some of Russia's land.
He went all the way to, and they might get a little extra.
You know, they might take more than they might take more than they lost while they're at it.
I mean, so of course that's the most provocative thing he can say.
But uh, he said, and then he said uh Russia's fighting three and a half years in a war that would have taken a quote real military power less than a week to win.
Ouch.
Is that helping?
Does it help to mock uh Russia's military prowess?
I don't know if that helps.
It might.
I mean, Trump has good instincts, so maybe it is the right play.
I don't know how, but maybe it is.
Um Zelensky is saying something uh positive.
He said uh that Trump possesses very important information regarding the situation at the front.
Trump possesses it.
What does Trump possess that the rest of us don't possess?
What does he know about the front?
Because the way he's talking suggests that Ukraine has some kind of military advantage we're not aware of.
Do you remember what I've been telling you that this will very rapidly turn into an all-robot war?
If you ask me, what could possibly be what Trump is referring to?
It could be that some massively well capable set of robots and drones is heading toward the front line, and some of it's already arrived.
So it could be that you're going to see a robot drone war really fast, and it's going to be massive, and it's going to be in the front lines.
So that's what I was expecting.
I didn't know when, but I can't imagine that there would be anything else that would change Trump's position because nobody's talking about sending boots on the ground.
Nobody's talking about uh Russia running out of military stuff, right?
The only thing that I can think of that's a variable that could change that much that fast would be how many drones and robots we can deliver to the front line.
And I've got a feeling there's a big batch of that coming.
So we'll see.
Um, and then uh Russian fuel exports are dropping.
And apparently 16 of Russia's 38 refineries have been hit since the start of August.
Now that doesn't mean that they're offline, but they're taking hits on the regular, including the biggest one.
And uh so strikes have disrupted more than a million barrels a day of Russia's refining capacity.
All right.
Again, I don't know what percentage that is.
Um this is something Zelensky said, quote, once the number of drones matches the Russians, they will feel the fuel shortage and losses.
Uh we already see this increasingly.
More drones are reaching the targets.
Okay.
So Zelensky is talking about the number of drones they have.
Maybe that's it.
It could be the world's biggest drone uh forces coming online in Ukraine.
And we might not hear about it until after they attack.
But I've got a feeling the size of the drone force would be bigger than anything we've ever seen.
Well, there are 22 Republicans, uh, attorney generals for 22 states.
Um they're calling on Trump to fight European Union's DEI and ESG regulations.
Uh Braid Bart News is reporting this, Olivia Rondo.
And uh I'm you know, I almost forgot that DEI and ESG are still a thing because it it dissipated so quickly in the United States.
You know, nobody wants to talk about it because it makes it puts a target on your back.
But the Europeans apparently are still requiring it, and uh yeah, the United States has to go hard at that.
Uh we have to do whatever it takes to disable that.
If if we're required to do DEI and ESG just to do business with Europe, we should stop doing business with Europe.
It's that that is a that's just a bar that we should not even try to cross.
You know, I mean, I don't know how easily we could disengage from Europe, but if they really really require us to do DEI, in other words, if they require us to be racist in order to do do business with them, I say no.
I say no, we're not gonna be racist just to do business with you fucking racists.
So pack it up, good luck.
Uh sorry about NATO, we're taking our funding away.
I would take NATO funding away before I would agree to this ESG and uh DEI stuff.
That's way too far.
Yeah.
Um, in other news, Obama, I guess in Obama's administration, they put 2.2 billion dollars into a solar plant.
Uh, But it wasn't the regular solar panel kind.
It was the kind that uses mirrors and reflects the light up to a super hot tower.
And so they superheat the tower and I think that heats some steam that causes some electricity.
But the problem is it causes essentially a super hot beam of light to go from the mirror that's on the ground to the tower in a bunch of different directions.
If a bird flies through that invisible I mean you can't see it it's just invisible flies through it it just fries immediately.
