Episode 2121 Scott Adams - I Can't Describe Today's Show. That Means It Will Be A Good One. Wink
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: ----------- I can't describe today's show without getting banned ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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.
Good morning everybody, and welcome to the highlight of your entire life and civilization itself. And believe me, if I could tell you what this show is about in advance without getting banned, I probably would have. You see, I'm just getting your interest up here. Oh well, I was laughing about som…
View segment →ame on, and maybe I'll tell you, maybe I won't. But if you'd like this experience to be optimal, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tankard, a chalice, a stein, a can, a thermos, a yoga flask. Got a vessel of any kind? Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for t…
View segment →Unless you wore a metal butt plug into the MRI, and then this won't help at all. It happens. Now go. All right. Well, I was just laughing uncontrollably a minute ago because I saw one of the memes on the Locals platform. Now, I don't know if the meme is based on a real story, but I'm going to choos…
View segment →u know, we'd like to see what parts of the brain light up under certain circumstances. Really? What specific circumstances are you studying? Well, here's where it gets a little complicated. I don't know. It was funny to me. But that's not why you're here. You're here for the news. Here's the news.…
View segment →you've noticed an article in the Bee or The Onion, they're a little formulaic, but it works anyway. You know, a lot of humor is very formulaic. So maybe AI can do better for humor than I thought. But I wouldn't say it's up to the level of the best human humor, but it surprised me how close it got.…
View segment →by a day. What do you do? You sell all your stocks or do you buy? All right, I'm not going to give you any financial advice. This is not financial advice. But historically, the very best time to buy stock is when all the stocks went down for a non-economic reason. Now, I consider the pandemic a rea…
View segment →l people. And also spies like to kill people without leaving a trace. You know, I was talking about that alleged CIA heart attack gun, you know, a gun that would give somebody a heart attack and then the poison would dissolve and then the dart would dissolve. And basically we know there's a market f…
View segment →it wasn't working. I would if I still lived in Danville. I would say that it might be premature but even if it didn't work I would call it a success. So you know we have a problem with too many people in jail. So if somebody tried something that sounds good on paper, was hard to execute, to get it…
View segment →ake an exception for violent crimes. Violent crimes maybe jail's the only solution. But for let's say robbery and vandalism and a lot of stuff, I just want to see him coming. If I see him coming I can make my own decisions how to stay safe. Impossible to monitor? I don't know. Imagine if you owned…
View segment →of stuff. That's always a problem. All right. Well I'll just throw that idea out there because the other ideas are not working. So YouTube, thanks for coming. See you in the morning.
View segment →Good morning everybody, and welcome to the highlight of your entire life and civilization itself. And believe me, if I could tell you what this show is about in advance without getting banned, I probably would have. You see, I'm just getting your interest up here.
Oh well, I was laughing about something before I came on, and maybe I'll tell you, maybe I won't. But if you'd like this experience to be optimal, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tankard, a chalice, a stein, a can, a thermos, a yoga flask. Got a vessel of any kind? Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day. The thing that makes everything better. Unless you wore a metal butt plug into the MRI, and then this won't help at all. It happens. Now go.
All right. Well, I was just laughing uncontrollably a minute ago because I saw one of the memes on the Locals platform. Now, I don't know if the meme is based on a real story, but I'm going to choose to believe it's real because it's funny.
The story was that some researchers were studying what women's brain scans look like while they were having orgasms. So they invited five women in to masturbate while they were in the MRI. Now that's not really the story, because they got a nice picture of the brain lighting up. The funny part of the story is how they sold this project. How did they get a grant for that?
A bob says, I've got a wild idea. What if we can get money for bringing women in to masturbate in front of us, and we'll just put their heads in an MRI and call it science? And the other guy says, you're never going to get away with that. Now watch this. And then they put it together and they get away with it. And then they have to play it off like it's serious the whole time. And they go home to their wives and, what? Well, here I'm being sexist. It could be that it's women who are the scientists, of course, so we can't rule out that possibility. But it's funnier to imagine as guys.
And they go home at night. So, honey, what are you working on? Oh, we're doing a little brain scanning stuff, you know. Really? Brain scanning for what? Well, you know, we'd like to see what parts of the brain light up under certain circumstances. Really? What specific circumstances are you studying? Well, here's where it gets a little complicated. I don't know. It was funny to me.
But that's not why you're here. You're here for the news. Here's the news.
Unfortunately, AI has now succeeded in writing parody. The Twitter account called The Prince of Deepfakes — I won't tell you who the Prince of Deepfakes is. Perhaps it's somebody you know, but the Prince of Deepfakes, not me, it's not me by the way. But the Prince of Deepfakes actually wrote a super prompt to create parody news articles. And I'm not going to say they're just as good as The Onion or the Babylon Bee, but they're in the neighborhood. And I did not think this could be done. I didn't think you could get this close.
But it could be that parody of news reports is something that's a little more rules-based. You know, if you've noticed an article in the Bee or The Onion, they're a little formulaic, but it works anyway. You know, a lot of humor is very formulaic. So maybe AI can do better for humor than I thought. But I wouldn't say it's up to the level of the best human humor, but it surprised me how close it got.
All right. I have a hypothesis. This is not a prediction. It's not a prediction. It's a hypothesis, meaning we'll test it without trying and we'll know whether it's true or not. It goes like this: The AI music will not replace human-made music for at least hit records. It will definitely replace human musicians for advertising and, you know, maybe the background music of a video game, you know, maybe some music in your elevator, stuff like that. So AI will definitely replace the low end of the music business.
But for the high end, where you're listening to it for pure enjoyment, here's my hypothesis. You ready? Now first of all, I do agree that AI could match or surpass the skill level of the best human musicians. So this will be the part that doesn't make sense for a second. So I do accept that AI will be better at knowing what people want to hear and then producing it better than the best human eventually. However, here's what my hypothesis speculates: You won't want to listen to it.
So here's the weird part. The AI music will absolutely be better on every level that you can determine that things are good. It'll be better than the human music. And you won't want to listen to it. Here's why: If you know it's made by AI, it won't trigger your reproductive instincts. Because my hypothesis is that music is showing off. That's what it is. And the best music of all is showing off the most. In other words, it's showing a genetic talent that you would want to mate with.
It's not an accident that people want to mate with Mick Jagger, right? Because when you watch Mick Jagger, even at his current age, you watch him do his thing on stage and you are completely certain that you couldn't do that. And you're pretty certain that nobody you've ever met could do that, what Mick Jagger does on stage. And so you say to yourself, he's got an extra gear. There's something genetically blessed about this person. And so you automatically want to mate with them. Guys want to compete with them, want to be them. And that music is really, really about activating your reproductive system, but you never are conscious of it.
All right. So here's the part you would have to accept to think that the hypothesis has any value: That you were never conscious of the fact that music is all about your reproductive instinct. That's it. Same with art.
Here's a thought experiment. Imagine if the works of Rembrandt had never been created. So let's say there had never been an actual Rembrandt human being. Nobody ever made Rembrandt's paintings. But then AI comes along and you say, hey AI, make me some great paintings. And somehow the AI produces the exact work of Rembrandt. But in this thought experiment, the real Rembrandt never existed. Just his work is reproduced by AI. Would it be valuable? The real Rembrandt's work is worth many millions of dollars. If the exact thing had been produced by AI but had never been produced by any human before, would it be worth millions? No. Its exact value would be zero. It would actually be zero.
That was my hypothesis. Sounded about when I started. You were completely rejecting it, weren't you? Like the first few sentences you're like, no, no, nope, nope, nope. AI music is going to be better than humans. It will be technically better. Technically it will be. But if you know that it's made by a computer, you will get bored with it quickly because its qualities are not anything that will stimulate you, because you can't reproduce with a computer.
What do you think? Your comments changed as I went, because I feel like some of you got a little bit persuaded. But like I said, it's not a prediction. Don't confuse it with a prediction. It's a hypothesis. In other words, we'll be able to test it pretty quickly. I would argue that I already tested it. When I asked you about the Rembrandt, that was the test. If you had said, my God yes, those Rembrandts are so amazing. If an AI produced them, I would like them just as much and pay just as much for them. No you wouldn't. Your value you put on the art is entirely tied up with the fact that a human made it. Take that away and it doesn't have any value at all.
So I think I've proven it just by that example, because you would all come to the same conclusion. I think you wouldn't pay for an AI Rembrandt. I know that.
Now I'm going to take it a little bit further into the real world. When I became a cartoonist, there was an insight that I had that I executed during my career. And the insight was that the audience can't separate the cartoonist from the cartoons. That was my insight. And that they needed to know who I was in order to fully enjoy the cartoon.
So when Dilbert was about the workplace, the reason it became famous is not because the jokes were good and the people liked the workplace. Do you know why Dilbert became famous? Because I was in the workplace. So the story wasn't, oh my God this is a good comic. You know, I like to think sometimes people laughed at it. But the story was that I was doing something dangerous by working for a big company while mocking a big company. And wasn't I going to get fired at any minute?
And do you know what that did? It triggered people's reproductive instincts. Because I was doing something you couldn't or wouldn't do. You couldn't or wouldn't make a comic that would get you in trouble. You'd be afraid. So I was taking a risk but I wasn't afraid. Indeed, I ended up being nearly fired and eventually fired. So it wasn't an imaginary risk. And people could sense it was a real risk. And people could sense that I was taking on the biggest powers in the world, because if I got banned from one company, I probably would have trouble getting a job at another one. It looked like a really dangerous thing to be doing. And I think that triggers people's reproductive instincts, male and female. Not that the men wanted to mate with me, but they were identifying with it like, oh that's brave.
When I got canceled, why did I get canceled? It's because the audience does not separate the artists from the art. That's a real clear example of that. So as soon as the artist said something they didn't like, they didn't like the art anymore. In fact, I heard this exact opinion. I heard somebody talk about somebody they knew who said they used to like my comic but when they found out about my political opinions they couldn't read my comic anymore.
See, that same phenomenon is going to come to art of all types. If you know who the artist is, or at least that it's a human, it makes you see the art different. As soon as you take the human out of it, the art has no real value except a pretty picture. Its economic value will be near zero.
All right. Didn't see that comment, did you? All right, here's another one maybe you didn't see coming.
I told you that in Finland briefly the price of electricity dropped below zero. Theoretically not actually below zero, but in theory it was free for a while. And that's because there was more supply than demand. And that was largely because they'd opened up a nuclear site recently and they had a lot of electricity. But apparently that effect is all of Europe right now. So at the moment, the price of electricity in much of Europe, or most of it actually, is zero. And it's because of nuclear energy, primarily nuclear energy.
So there you go. If you wondered, is there any way to get to this future where we got electric cars and no climate change? Yes, yes there is. It's a very clear path now.
All right. As you know, I have not been reporting on or talking about too much this debt ceiling issue where the Congress has to decide on a budget or else the country defaults on its debts and we all die. Now the reason is because I always thought it was fake. The dynamic of these negotiations is both sides are looking at the polls. And if the polls say you would benefit by holding up the process, then you do.
But I heard that the polls have reversed. And now the Republicans look like they would come out ahead if the government closes and we default on debt. So the Republicans don't have a reason to compromise because the poll is currently showing that they would gain. The Democrats, if they're looking at the same poll information, know that they would lose and they would be blamed for whatever happens if we don't reach a deal. So that pretty much guarantees it will be a deal because we're all operating in self-interest.
But the reason I don't report on it is it is all fake news until the last minute. The only thing that counted at all was the last minute. So if it's a month before the deadline and the news is telling you, oh here's a big story, it's not. That's not a story. There isn't any possibility they would have agreed a month in advance, because a month in advance the polls are not reliable. They have to make sure that just before they execute, at least one side, or actually both sides, know which way things are going to go if they don't make a deal. That's how you get a deal.
So it was never a real story until the last 60 seconds. And maybe that's not even real, because I had a feeling if you miss it by two days, the stock market takes a dump for two days and then comes right back. That's what I think. So I believe that this is an example of the news making something out of nothing. Not that there's no risk. There is. But if you were to rank that risk with all the other risks in the world, it wouldn't be a top 50 in my opinion. So that's sort of a semi-fake news to keep an eye on.
All right. What would you do if, let's say, we missed the deadline and stocks go down 19% — I'm just picking a number — stocks go down 19% because we missed a deadline by a day. What do you do? You sell all your stocks or do you buy? All right, I'm not going to give you any financial advice. This is not financial advice.
But historically, the very best time to buy stock is when all the stocks went down for a non-economic reason. Now, I consider the pandemic a reason, meaning that it was a near certainty that we would get through it and that stocks would go up. You know, we'd recover. Because even if it was bad and a lot of people died, the people dying were not the people producing economic activity. The people dying were the exact people who were expensive. I hate to say that because they're human beings. But in terms of just the cold hard cash of economics, it was obvious to me that if we didn't die from a supply chain problem, which I thought we could handle and we did, the things would go back. And sure enough they did.
So there aren't that many situations where you have a really obvious reason for the stocks being temporarily lower. But this would be one. This would be one in my opinion, since we wouldn't be unable to pay. We would simply be disorganized and miss a deadline. I'd be a buyer. But I don't recommend that you follow my advice on stocks because I do not have a Warren Buffett track record. If I had a Warren Buffett track record, you should definitely listen to me. I do not. So don't.
All right, let's talk about Target. So there was some murkiness on the question of whether Target had intentionally targeted youth with their tuck-friendly LGBTQ trans clothing line. And one report was, well it's not what you think. And I said this on the live stream. I said it's not what you think because they simply don't have children's sizes anymore. They just have small sizes and there are small adults. So they're not directly targeting children. But it is true that these are sizes children would wear.
So then I saw a video of a woman go into Target to actually point to the stuff. Oh boy, was I wrong. Oh man. Now, I like to take the position first of assuming innocence. So I was giving Target the benefit of the doubt. I assumed innocence. I assumed that maybe they just got caught in a situation where it looked exactly like they were targeting young people but maybe it was just a misimpression.
And then I saw the display of an actual Target store. Nope, nope. Those are targeted to the children. Yep, absolutely targeted children. No doubt about it.
And if you want a little background on it, a Twitter user Jewel Adora confirms that he has a lot of experience in the stores and that they have a planogram or something. So corporate offices tell you where all your displays are supposed to be relative to the other displays. So there's like a map of where you put everything. That doesn't come from the local store manager. That comes from headquarters.
So the way these things were displayed were adjacent to the children's sections. And they had children's sizes and the clothing looked like it was aimed at children. And there were some gingerbread things and some other kids things that are very much LGBTQ oriented.
Now, in case there are any people who are not regulars to my live stream, I'm very much pro-LGBTQ. So my ongoing belief of how things should be is that all adults should be able to do whatever they want as long as they're not bothering me. And LGBTQ is just more of that. I have no special feeling except that there are individuals doing what individuals can do. So good for them.
But when we're talking about minors, all those rules are gone. Do we agree? No disagreement, right? If you talk about minors, all of the adult rules don't apply. So as long as we agree with that, we're in good shape on agreement, right? Why don't they apply? I'm not even going to explain that. They have incomplete brains. This is, I mean, there's nothing else to explain. So if you're raising kids for the benefit of the children, you make the decisions for them until their brains are ready to do it on their own. That's the whole process.
So I think it's so simulation-like that the store that's being targeted is literally called Target. They're actually a target. I mean, it's a little too on the nose, isn't it? It's like the simulation is just screaming at you. I swear it's really a simulation. None of this is real. I feel like it's just screaming at me. I get it. I get it. The target is the Target store. I get it. All right, too on the nose.
All right. So it looks like Target's in trouble. I did notice that some of the southern stores decided to respond by moving the LGBTQ display to the back of the store so they could kind of hide it during Pride month. I'll just say that again so I don't have to explain the joke. They're actually going to hide the LGBTQ display during Pride month. Do I have to complete it? That's actually what's happening.
Now, I oppose that. I oppose that because that's just for the adults. Because I think Target has every right and I would say even responsibility to satisfy adults of all types. I feel like that's part of their mission. And there are certainly enough LGBTQ customers to merit their own section of clothes for adults.
But if you take the adult stuff and put it in the back of the shop during Pride month, you've got some explaining to do. You have a little explaining to do. This is the most hilarious corporate oops I've seen since Bud Light.
You know, I've noticed that there's an overall competence problem happening everywhere. Maybe it's confirmation bias, but it feels like something fundamental is happening everywhere from government to business. Have you tried to get tech support from any company lately? It's almost not a thing. It's almost non-existent. It's just like they put idiots in all those jobs and that didn't used to be the case. I used to be able to get, with a little work, you could get help from anybody. Now it's just, it feels like it's totally broken.
So the bigger story here is the massive incompetence of Anheuser-Busch and Target, almost independent of the fact that it's about LGBTQ. It's just it was horribly managed. It just feels like none of this was hard to do and they still got it wrong.
And now the LA Dodgers, they've got a problem too. So there's definitely a new force in the world, which is the, I think conservatives have figured out how much power they have or they've decided to use it. Maybe that's a better way. I guess they always knew, but Republicans have decided to actively use their power. And I don't think they had before. I think it was mostly just complaining. But now, if you do something that is deeply offensive to that part of the country, they're going to make you pay. And probably that's the only thing that can get things back to some kind of balance, because we're way out of balance at the moment.
All right. You had North Face. North Face has some issues.
All right. I saw Jordan Peterson was tweeting that the research is adding up that the people who are left-wing authoritarians — so authoritarians is important to the left-wing part. So we're not talking about just Democrats, right? So this is not about ordinary Democrats. It's about the left-wing authoritarian types, of which we know exist. But apparently the research is showing that these are not political people as thought about politics. They actually just want to break things because they're narcissists. They're just narcissists. They're actually just, it's a mental illness. So although narcissism I think they call a personality disorder, that's not a mental illness, but it really is. Yeah, so they're narcissists.
So I've been saying this for a while. There's some brand of politics on the far left as well as the far right. They should not be treated as politics. It's clearly mental illness in both directions. But it's just the little stripe at the end. The people in the middle are largely almost normal no matter what their opinion is.
All right. Apparently there's another issue with Target that Elon Musk has weighed in on. And Target is being accused of funding some group called GLSEN, which calls for gender ideology to be integrated into all classes, even math. Now this is a Fox News report. Now, do you believe that Target is funding a group who is promoting gender ideology in all classes including math? Well, Community Notes seems to think it's true. Apparently it is true. And Elon Musk tweeted this and said, is this true? Because it's almost too hard to believe, isn't it? It's almost too hard to believe. And so far it looks true. So Target's got some work to do.
All right. Here's the scariest thing you're going to hear today. And the reason I couldn't describe the content in my show today. We'll go out on a limb a little bit here, as you know I like to do.
How would you know if your country had already been taken over and you were no longer a democratic republic? How would you know? Because it's the same question with AI, right? What if AI has already taken over? Would you know?
So I would propose, let's forget about AI for a moment. How would you know if our country was no longer a democratic republic and really there was just a cabal of important people who were deciding everything? How would you know?
Well, I would suggest the following test. The test that people are in power and we're no longer run by the people, so to speak, is that the people in power could commit a crime in public and get away with it in public. You could all see it. Just everybody can see it and there would be no consequences.
And the second way, the second way is related. The second way is if the people they don't like, the people on the other side, can be observed not committing a crime and then be successfully convicted for it. They can be proven to not be doing a crime right in front of you. You can see it with your own eyes and your common sense. And yet they would be prosecuted.
We have both of those situations. So here's an example of obvious real crimes that somebody should go to jail for that we all know are crimes. It's been confirmed and nothing's going to happen. So there's Hunter's laptop, the Russia collusion. Now we know from the whistleblower the slow walking of the Hunter investigation, which clearly that's a crime to just ignore it. The entire Biden family crime enterprise of money from other countries. That's all confirmed stuff. You don't have to wonder. We know it now.
Black Lives Matter of course turned out to be a fake organization. Good point that we're making, but a fake organization. Antifa seems to be completely fake, you know, because they disappeared as soon as the politics no longer needed them. So these things are obvious to the public. It's obvious that these are manipulated by the people in charge. And they can primarily do it because they control the legacy media.
And as I've described, the legacy media's purpose is to prevent you from knowing what your government is doing. It's not the news. I don't know if they ever were. I really don't know if they ever were. But it's very clear at the moment. And we've seen example after example after example where the legacy news is in the business, primarily in the business, of preventing you from knowing what the government is doing.
Now I see exactly zero pushback on that reframing. That's exactly what you see, isn't it? There's nobody who disagrees. Their entire job is to prevent you from knowing the news and they do a good job. The other Rasmussen polls showed that very clearly. The Democrats are actually unaware of the biggest stories in politics. They're actually unaware. So they do a good job.
But what about, so those are crimes that one side is doing that are completely unpunished. But then you have the other side where people who clearly did not commit a crime are being punished or over-punished for small things. Yes, January 6.
Now, not to dismiss the fact that there were some real bad people who actually did have bad intentions. I don't care if they get prosecuted. But I think every reasonable person can see that most of the protesters were just exercising free speech and they're in jail. Would that have happened if the parties had been reversed? No, no that would not have happened if the parties had been reversed.
How about Tucker Carlson being kicked off of Fox News? Doesn't it look like you get punished for nothing? Am I wrong? Tucker Carlson got punished for exactly nothing. Exactly nothing. I don't even think there was anything really even alleged, at least nothing new. I mean everybody alleges that everybody's telling fake news.
How about Daniel Penny? Is it Penny, the guy who did the, who accidentally it looks like killed the Michael Jackson impersonator? Doesn't that look to you like it's obvious he's not guilty of everything? It's just obvious. But he will be punished in all likelihood. I mean I hope he's not.
How about Republicans being hunted just in general? Do you think Republicans are being hunted right in front of you and it's just obvious? Yes, looks pretty obvious to me.
All right. So but here's the one that I feel like was the canary in the coal mine. And I had to wait a while and get canceled before I could say this full-throatedly and out loud. And I'm going to come at it indirectly.
You know that there are a lot of people who are in the business of killing people like bad people, murderers, right? A lot of people want to kill people. And also spies like to kill people without leaving a trace. You know, I was talking about that alleged CIA heart attack gun, you know, a gun that would give somebody a heart attack and then the poison would dissolve and then the dart would dissolve. And basically we know there's a market for killing people without leaving a trace. Would you agree that there's a market for that? If it's only the CIA, it's a market, right? If it's only Putin, it's a market. Somebody wants that service.
Have you ever heard of anybody killing somebody without leaving a trace by holding them on their stomach and then having a five foot eight man who weighs 140 pounds use one knee on his back until he's dead? Because apparently, we're told by the legacy media, the legacy media has told us that you can kill, that a five foot eight man who weighs I don't know 150 pounds whatever he was can kill, how big was Floyd? Six foot four. He was a big guy, right? Do you know his actual height? I believe it was like six two or six four, not eight, but he was a big guy.
Now we're told from the coroner that there was no evidence on his neck of damage. I don't believe there was any evidence of a bruise on his back where the knee was. I don't believe his lungs showed any sign of compression. So am I wrong that it's the perfect murder? Is it the perfect murder? Because there would be no drugs in his body. There would be no external trauma. And even if you were like, I don't know, put a pillow over somebody's head, I think it would leave some kind of trace. But you could just hold somebody on the ground. It might take you three people to hold their arms and just lightly put your knee on them. You don't even need to use both knees apparently. You could have one knee on the ground and one knee sort of slightly pushing down and he'll die in nine minutes according to the legacy media.
How many of you believe that? I'll tell you what I saw. What my eyes told me I was seeing was no murder at all and obviously an overdose death. To me it was obvious. And so the legacy media managed to tell me that what I saw didn't happen. What I actually watched with my own eyes never really happened.
Now if the coroner report had come up with some physical damage such as the muscles of the neck were damaged, etc., then I would say, oh okay, well maybe the video is not as clear as it could be. Video can lie, we know that. So therefore maybe I'm wrong. But if the coroner comes up with no physical damage whatsoever and then you see something that looks like nobody killing anybody and just casually talking to the witnesses who are filming it. Do you think a cop killed somebody while people were filming it? Casually, just casually kill them while people were filming? No, that was never even slightly possible.
And we've been asked to believe this complete ridiculousness. At the very least it should have been a benefit of the doubt. Am I right? How they got 12 people to say, oh he definitely killed that guy. I don't know. I don't know how they got 12 people. It had to be peer pressure. It had to be people thinking they would be killed if they voted any other way.
So to me that was the signal that whoever is in charge can literally tell us anything because we won't believe our eyes and we won't even believe our common sense.
So then we get this election that everybody questions. We get an election that a lot of people question. And it was exactly like when Hillary won in 2016 and all the Democrats said, hey that election was rigged. And everybody said, yeah complain, complain. And life went on. But when the reverse happened, it became an insurrection and a revolution.
Now of course the Capitol was protested and there were some dangerous people there. So there was something they could work with, right? There was a factual basis that they could do some hyperbole on and extend it to the rest of the people. But we're in such a dark situation here. All the evidence suggests we're no longer governed by anything like we think. It just appears that the people who have some kind of power over the media are just making us believe anything they want.
All right. According to Rasmussen poll, 59% of people they polled say the media is truly the enemy of the people. 44% of Democrats agree that the media is the enemy of the people. However, if you're saying to yourself, wow they're agreeing with you because you think you're right, so now you're thinking, oh wow they agree with me. No they don't. No they don't. They think Fox News and Breitbart are the problem. They don't think their media is the problem. Do you think there's 44% of Democrats think that MSNBC is lying to them? No they don't. No they don't. They think the media is the enemy of the people but they're talking about Fox News exclusively.
Now I would imagine that when Republicans say it, they're mostly talking about legacy media and they have their complaints with Fox News but they're not really thinking Fox News is the problem, right? They're not thinking Breitbart is a problem. They're thinking it's the legacy media, so-called legacy media.
All right. And as others have pointed out, and I saw a tweet from somebody who calls himself Exit the Matrix. His tweet said, haven't seen anyone discussing this fact, but just imagine how emboldened they would be, the people we assume are in charge of things. Just imagine how emboldened they are now to cheat in the 2024 election after what they've done to the January 6 people, which was a warning. Do not complain when they win again.
Do you buy that? Do you buy that January 6 was a warning to tell Republicans you better not complain the next time we rig the election? Well I cannot confirm or deny because that would be sort of mind reading. I don't know what other people are thinking. But I do know that the effect of it is a chilling effect on the next potential protest. It does in fact create a situation where the Democrats could cheat right in front of you, get caught, and there would be no consequences. The election would not be reversed. And even if the Supreme Court ruled, I think they just ignore it. I think we've gotten to the point where they have so much control over the narrative and the levers of power that they can do anything they want right in front of you.
Consider Russia. Putin is allegedly killing his enemies in plain sight. Do you think the Russians are aware of that? Do you think they know he's killing his critics? Probably. But he can do it anyway. Do you know why he can do it anyway? Because he doesn't exist in a democratic republic. He can do any crime right in front of you and his public will say, I don't know, they told us this wasn't a crime and I still have a job so I'm happy.
Yeah, so there's something going on in the United States that's very Putin-like and very CCP-like, you know, Chinese government. For some reason we've gotten to the point where the Democrats can do massive crime right in front of the public and there's no repercussions. Only Putin and Xi can do that. I don't think even in America you could do that before. This feels new. So it does feel like there's something going on here that's pretty important.
All right. Vivek Ramaswamy is updating us on his situation where he got banned on LinkedIn for allegedly some fake information. But he asked them, can you give me an example of what I said that would be wrong or non-factual? And they backed up to, oh it was a mistake, just a human error. No, no, we never meant to ban you for that material that we first told you was fake. Just an error. Yeah, you're welcome to come right back on. And yeah, there's Microsoft owns that LinkedIn in case you wondered. So how much do you trust about that story? Nothing.
All right. Can you give me a fact check on this? So this is more to my theme that the Democrats can commit massive crimes right in front of you. I need a fact check on this. Has any high-ranking Republican with security clearance — because there are people with top security clearance in Congress — have any of them seen the documents that are allegedly these sensitive documents that came out of Mar-a-Lago? And if not, why not? Wouldn't it be a simple matter to put them in the SCIF? Can't you put them someplace and have the Republicans come in and look at them and then characterize them? Because we don't, you know, the public doesn't want to know the details but I'd like them characterized. I would like somebody to say, okay we looked at them and to be honest some of these are troubling. Wouldn't you like to know that? Wouldn't you like to know if Trump took something, kept it in a cardboard box at Mar-a-Lago and it was actually a problem? I would definitely like to know that.
And I believe — well I'm going to go out on a limb — there does seem to be a difference between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. And Republicans seem to, you know, they'll exaggerate a little bit and maybe sometimes they'll believe a conspiracy theory that they shouldn't. And yeah, there's a certain quality to how Republicans are wrong that's different than when Democrats are wrong. It appears that they're lying intentionally. It seems very different. Republicans can be wrong and or it can be weasels sometimes. But I feel like the Democrats would be like Schiff. They would walk in and look at something that was innocent and then walk out and tell you you saw something that was terrible. I don't think Republicans do that.
I believe if Republicans went in there, let's just pick any Republican, somebody with lots of security clearance. Rubio, does he still have top clearance? Does Rubio have top clearance? Right, so imagine Rubio goes in there. He sees the actual documents. Do you think that if some of them were actually really sensitive top secret, do you think he'd lie to you because he wants a Republican to win the presidency? I actually don't think he would. I actually don't think he would. I think he would say, you know honestly this is something the courts are going to have to handle because I was hoping they would all look innocent but I'm not sure. So sure they are. It isn't, you know, based on what I looked at I've got a problem with them. And you know I'm not the one to solve it. That might be the courts or whatever. But there is something here. I think Rubio would say that. And I'm not pro or anti Marco Rubio. I'm just saying that.
Yeah, Rand Paul. Rand Paul, does Rand Paul have top security clearance? Actually what I love, I'd love to pick our champion. That's what I'd like to do. I'd like to pick the champion, so to speak. The Republican that you would believe no matter what they say. If you're going to pick somebody that you knew would tell you the truth, Rand Paul would be a good choice. I would believe him. Thomas Massie. Do you believe there's any chance that Thomas Massie would lie to you after he went in the SCIF? I don't know if he has the clearance but do you think there's any chance he would lie to you about what he found? I think zero. Absolutely zero. He absolutely would not lie on that or anything else as far as I know. I mean yes he's got a really clean record of telling the truth.
Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz, same thing. We assume that Ted Cruz wants Trump or at least a Republican to win. Yeah he would tell the truth. Jim Jordan is a little bit more political. He wouldn't be my first. Mitt Romney. There you go. Mitt Romney. That's a very good choice because you know Mitt Romney is not going to be in the pocket for Trump but he's also not going to lie about this. He would not lie for Trump about this because this would be a lie that everybody would someday find out is true or not, right? You'd probably get caught for lying in that.
I think that the Republicans are in an interesting situation that you could pick several Republicans that no matter what they said you would actually believe them. And I don't know if there are any. Can you name a Democrat that if they saw something and said so you would believe them? They probably are. I bet there are. Yeah, Tom Cotton. Tulsi. Yeah, Robert Kennedy. Yes, RFK Jr. Yeah, RFK Jr. for sure. But he's not in the government. Manchin's a tough one because I do feel like he's influenced by the coal business. So you can feel the influence of industry on him, you know what I mean? Whereas if you look at something like Thomas Massie, you don't see any influence of industry. It looks like his own opinions.
All right. Moving on. Truly, Jonathan Turley has an interesting article I think was in The Hill on reparations. So California went first with the reparations committee and came up with some absurd number that will never happen. And then Governor Newsom said, well go back to the drawing board or we'll think about it or delay them somehow. But other states are doing the same thing. So this whole reparations thing, because it looked like it might actually happen in California, so it's starting to pop up in other states.
And Turley has I think exactly the same opinion on this as I do. They're never going to get reparations. The Democrats actually got the black American supporters all worked up for something that they can't possibly deliver. And I think the Republicans could totally take advantage of that. The fact that the Democrats lied to the black Americans about reparations. And you know it was a lie. Of course it was a lie. They never planned to do that.
All right. Well, DeSantis is running to the right of Trump. But here's how you need to understand that. DeSantis is running for the nomination and Trump is running to win the presidency. So that makes sense. So Trump's acting a little bit more middle of the road because he feels he's already got the nomination. He's already in the general election and that would be the right place to be because he doesn't want to later have to change his views. So Trump's finding a reasonable, not too extreme position. And DeSantis is trying to find a little bit of space to the right of him, which is sort of a hard job.
But one of the things DeSantis wants to do is get rid of that jail reform thing that Jared did where people could get out early if they learned a skill or they do something like that. He just wants to get rid of it and keep them in jail. Now I think that's too early. To me it seems you've got to let that experiment run a few years and see if the people who got out of jail recommitted crimes at a rate that would be alarming. So I'm not sure that that's, I don't think he's basing this on data. This one seems purely political to me just because it's different from what Trump did and it's a way to show that he's on the right.
And I'll go further and say that if he won the presidency I don't think he would change it because it would be too unpopular. So that looks like a primary kind of thing to say, not a general election kind of thing to say.
Is that conflating the criminals released? No he's not conflating the jail reform thing with the DA's releasing people. But has anybody heard any updates on whether that early release stuff that Jared and Trump did, is it working? Has anybody heard whether that's a disaster or are people getting out early and then recommitting crimes? Says it's not working but do we have an actual study or just some anecdotes? Actually it wouldn't take that many anecdotes to tell you it wasn't working.
I would if I still lived in Danville. I would say that it might be premature but even if it didn't work I would call it a success. So you know we have a problem with too many people in jail. So if somebody tried something that sounds good on paper, was hard to execute, to get it done, they tried it, they legitimately tried it and it didn't work, I would call that a smart move. I mean, yeah I don't live in Danville.
DeSantis voted for the First Step Act. Well I think that it would be perfectly consistent for Republicans to vote in the First Step Act, let it run a few years and then see if it worked. I mean you'd have to see that as an experiment, wouldn't you? Because we've never done it before. So if the experiment works you do more of it. If it doesn't work you stop doing it or you modify it. So there's nothing I don't like about that. Even if it failed, that's what I want to see. I want to see exactly that. More of that.
All right. What program have they ever stopped once it started? All right, that's a good question. COVID payments, special case.
All right, that's all I got for today YouTube. I'm going to say bye. I hope this was as provocative as you hoped it would be. Modern education predicted. Okay. Any other questions from you? Yeah, Neuralink. Neuralink. You know I've been noodling with the idea that for some types of criminals, the non-violent ones, that maybe instead of going to prison they should lose their privacy. What do you think of that?
Imagine if you were a repeat criminal and instead of putting you in jail forever they say, look we're just going to put a monitor on your ankle and we're going to let everybody know where you are and what crimes you've committed. Imagine if you would that your phone gives you an alert and you find out that somebody who's committed 700 crimes just walked into the store behind you. Get the out and just get out of that store right away, right?
So it might be that privacy and freedom are almost, the Venn diagrams overlap a lot. Because imagine having freedom with no privacy. Would that be freedom? Freedom with no privacy, it would be like not freedom, wouldn't it? And so we take their freedom away if they commit a crime. But maybe you can get to something like it by taking the privacy away. Right now only if they've committed a crime or they keep committing crimes. You know, a very specific case. You wouldn't want that for everybody. But there just might be some way to alert everybody around them all the time. Right, something like that. Yeah it'd be worth trying. And maybe only for a certain class of crimes.
Take for example somebody had been convicted of burglary 50 times. All right, they've burglarized a home 50 times. But you can tell where they are now all the time. And you look at them, beep beep beep, this criminal has just entered your home. You're not home but it just said he's in your home, right? So you could basically weaponize the public by making sure we always knew who the criminals were and specifically what crimes they'd committed. Because people like to do the same crimes over and over. Isn't it worth trying? I mean if you're not going to put them in jail. I suppose jail might be first choice for a lot of stuff. Yeah.
Now I would make an exception for violent crimes. Violent crimes maybe jail's the only solution. But for let's say robbery and vandalism and a lot of stuff, I just want to see him coming. If I see him coming I can make my own decisions how to stay safe.
Impossible to monitor? I don't know. Imagine if you owned a store and you knew that somebody came in had been convicted of shoplifting 15 times. You'd follow him around. You would just stand right next to him the whole time you're shopping. And it wouldn't, it shouldn't be illegal. It should definitely not be illegal to stand wherever you want in your own store and watch anybody you want in your own store. So you know you wouldn't watch them on the camera. You just follow him around the aisle. Say, hey I understand you've shoplifted 15 times so we're going to keep an eye on you but you're welcome to shop here.
Yeah I suppose you could get people falsely accused of stuff. That's always a problem.
All right. Well I'll just throw that idea out there because the other ideas are not working. So YouTube, thanks for coming. See you in the morning.
foreign good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of your entire life and civilization itself and believe me if I could tell you what this show is about in advance without getting banned I probably would have you see I'm just getting your interest up here oh well I was laughing about something before I came on and maybe I'll tell you maybe I won't but if you'd like this experience to be optimal all you need is a cup of mug or a glass a tanker chalices dying I can't team yoga flask got a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing makes everything better unless you wore a metal butt plug into the MRI and then this won't help at all it happens now go all right well I was just laughing uncontrollably a minute ago because I saw one of the memes on the locals platform now I don't know if the meme is based on a real story but I'm going to choose to believe it's real because it's funny and the story was that some researchers were studying what the brain scan of women look like while they were having orgasms so they invited five women into masturbate while they were in the MRI now that's not really the story because they got a nice picture of the brain lighting up the funny part of the story is how they sold this project how did they get a grant for that a bob I've got a wild idea what I think we can get money for bringing women into masturbate in front of us and we'll just put their heads in an MRI and call it science and the other other guy says you're never going to get away with that now watch this and then they put the they put it together and they get away with it and then they have to play it off like it's serious the whole time and they go home to their wives and and what well here I'm being sexist it could be that it's women who are the scientists of course so we can't rule out that possibility but it's funnier to imagine as guys and they go home at night so uh honey what are you working on oh we're doing a little some brain scanning stuff you know really they're brain scamming for what well you know we'd like to see what parts of the brain light up under certain circumstances really what uh what specific circumstances are you studying well here's where it gets a little complicated I don't know it was funny to me but that's not why you're here you're here for the news here's the news uh unfortunately AI has now succeeded in writing parity the uh the Twitter account called The Prince of deep fakes uh I won't tell you who is the prince of deep fakes perhaps it's somebody you know but the prince of deep fakes not me it's not me by the way but the prince of T fakes actually wrote a super prompt to create a parody news articles and I'm not going to say they're just as good as the onion or the Babylon bee but they're in the neighborhood and I did not think this this could be done I didn't think you could get this close but it could be that parody of news reports is something that's a little more rules based you know that if you've noticed a an article in the Bee or the youngin they're a little formulaic but it works anyway you know a lot of humor is very formulaic so maybe maybe AI can do better for humor than I thought but I wouldn't say it's up to the level of the the best human humor but it's surprised me how closely got all right I have a hypothesis this is not a prediction it's not a prediction it's a hypothesis meaning we'll test it without trying and we'll know whether it's true or not it goes like this the AI music will not replace human made music for for at least hit records it will definitely replace human musicians for advertising and you know maybe the background music of a video game you know maybe some music in your elevator stuff like that so so AI will definitely replace the low end of music business but for the high end where you're listening to it for Pure enjoyment here's my hypothesis you ready now first of all I do agree that AI could match or surpass the skill level of the best human musicians so this will be the part that doesn't make sense for a second so I do accept that AI will be better at knowing what people want to hear and then participate better than the best human eventually however here's what my hypothesis speculates you won't want to listen to it so here's Here's the the uh the weird part the AI music will absolutely be better on every level that you can determine that things are good you'll be better than the Human music and you won't want to listen to it here's why if you know it's made by AI it won't trigger your reproductive instincts because my hypothesis is that music is showing off that's what it is and the best music of his song is showing off the most in other words it's showing a genetic Talent that you would want to mate with it's not an accident that people want to mate with Mick Jagger right because when you watch Mick Jagger even at his current age you watch him do his thing on stage and you are completely certain that you couldn't do that and you're pretty certain that nobody you've ever met could do that what Mick Jagger does on stage and so you say to yourself he's got an extra gear there's something genetically blessed about this person and so you automatically want to mate with them guys want to compete with them want to be them and that music is really really about activating your reproductive system but you never are conscious of it all right so there so here's the part you would have to accept to think that the hypothesis has any any value that you were never conscious of the fact that music is all about your reproductive Instinct that's it same with Art here's a here's a mental experiment imagine if the works of Rembrandt had never been created so let's say there had never been an actual Rembrandt human being nobody ever made Rembrandt's paintings but then AI comes along and you say hey AI make me some great paintings and somehow the AI produces the exact work of Rembrandt but in this in this mind experiment the real Rembrandt never existed just his work is reproduced by AI would it be valuable right the real Rembrandt's work is worth you know many millions of dollars if the exact thing had been produced by AI but had never been produced by any human before would it be worth millions no its exact value would be zero it would actually be zero that was my hypothesis sound down about when I started you were completely rejecting it weren't you like the first few sentences you're like no no nope nope nope AI music is going to be better than humans it will be technically better technically it will be but if you know that it's made by a computer you will get bored with it quickly because its qualities are not anything that will stimulate you because you can't reproduce with a computer what do you think you you your comments changed as I went because I feel like some of you got a little bit persuaded but like I said it's not a prediction don't confuse us with a prediction it's a hypothesis in other words we'll be able to test it pretty quickly I would argue that I already tested it would I ask you about the Rembrandt that was the test if you had said my God yes those Rembrandts are so amazing uh if an AI produced them I would like them just as much and pay just as much for them no you wouldn't your your value you put on the art is entirely tied up with the fact that a human made it take that away and doesn't have any value at all so I think I've proven it just by that example because you would all come to the same conclusion I think you wouldn't pay for an AI Rembrandt I know that now I'm going to take it a little bit further into the real world when I became a cartoonist there was an Insight that I had that I executed during my career and the Insight was that the audience can't separate the cartoonist from the cartoons that was my insight and that they needed to know who I was in order to fully enjoy the cartoon so when Dilbert was about the workplace the reason it became famous is not because the jokes were good and the people liked the workplace do you know why Dilbert became famous because I was in the workplace so the story wasn't oh my God this is a good comic you know I like to think sometimes people laughed at it but the story was that I was doing something Dangerous by working for a big company while mocking a big company and wasn't I going to get fired at any minute and do you know what that did it triggered people's reproductive instincts because I was doing something you couldn't or wouldn't do you couldn't or wouldn't make a comic that would get you in trouble you'd be afraid so I I was taking a risk but I wasn't afraid indeed I ended up being nearly fired and eventually fired so it wasn't an imaginary risk and people could people could sense it was a real risk and people could sense that I was taking on the biggest powers in the world because if I got banned from one company I probably would have trouble getting a job at another one it looked like a really dangerous thing to be doing and I think that triggers people's reproductive instincts male and female not that the men wanted to mate with me but they were identifying with it like oh that's Brave when I got canceled why did I get canceled is because the audience does not separate the artists from the art that's a real clear example of that so as soon as the artist said something they didn't like they didn't like the art anymore in fact I heard this exact opinion I heard somebody talk about somebody they knew who said they used to like my comic but when they found out about my political opinions they couldn't read my comic anymore see that that same phenomenon is going to come to Art of all types if you know who the artist is or at least that it's a human it makes you see the art different as soon as you take the human out of it the art has no real value except a pretty picture it's it's economic value will be near zero all right um didn't see that comment did you all right here's another one maybe you didn't see coming I told you that in Finland briefly the price of electricity dropped below zero theoretically not actually below zero but in theory it was free for a while and that's because there was more Supply than demand uh and that was largely because they'd opened up a nuclear site recently and they had a lot of electricity but apparently that effect is all of Europe right now so at the moment the price of electricity in much of Europe or most of it actually is zero and it's because of nuclear energy primarily primarily nuclear energy so there you go if you wondered is there any way to you know get to this future where we got electric cars and no climate change yes yes there is it's a very clear path now all right as you know I have not been reporting on or talking about too much this debt ceiling issue where the Congress has to decide on a budget or else the country defaults on its debts and we all die now the reason is because I always thought it was fake the dynamic of these negotiations are both sides are looking at the polls and if the polls say uh you would benefit by holding up the process than you do but but I heard that the polls have reversed and now the Republicans look like they would come out ahead if the government closes and we default on debt so the Republicans don't have a reason to compromise because the poll is currently showing that they would gain the Democrats if they're looking at the same poll information or knowing that they would lose and they would be blamed for whatever happens if we don't reach a deal so that pretty much guarantees it will be a deal because we're all operating in self-interest but the reason I don't report on it is it is all fake News until the last minute the only thing that counted at all was the last minute so if it's a month before the deadline and the news is telling you oh here's a big story it's not that's not a story there isn't any possibility they would have agreed a month in advance because a month in advance the polls are not reliable they have to make sure that just before they execute at least one side you know or actually both sides know which way things are going to go if they don't make a deal that's how you get a deal so it was never a real story until the last 60 seconds and maybe that's not even real because because I had a feeling if you miss it by two days the stock market takes a dump for two days and then comes right back that's what I think uh so I believe that this is an example of the news making something out of nothing not that there's no risk there is but if you were to rank that risk with all the other risks in the world it wouldn't be a top 50.
in my opinion so uh that's sort of a semi fake news to keep an eye on all right um if stops what would you do if let's say we missed the deadline and stocks go down 19 I'm just picking a number stocks go down 19 because we missed a deadline by a day what do you do you sell all your stocks or do you buy like a all right I'm not going to give you any Financial advice this is not Financial advice but historically historically the very best time to buy stock is when all the stocks went down for a of reason now I consider the pandemic a reason meaning that it was a near certainty that we would get through it and that stocks would go up you know we'd we'd recover because even if it was bad and a lot of people died the people dying were not the people producing economic activity the people dying were the exact people who were expensive I hate to say that because they're human beings but in terms of just the gold hard cache of economics it was obvious to me that if we didn't die from a supply chain problem which I thought we could handle and we did the things would go back and sure enough they did so there aren't that many situations where you have a a really obvious reason for the for the stocks being temporarily lower but this would be one this would be one in my opinion since we wouldn't be unable to pay we would simply be disorganized and miss a deadline I'd be a buyer but I don't recommend that you follow my advice on stocks because I do not have a Warren Buffett track record if I had a Warren Buffett track record you should definitely listen to me I do not so don't all right let's talk about Target so there was some murkiness on the question of whether a Target had intentionally uh targeted youth with their tuck friendly lgbtq trans clothing line and one report was well it's not what you think and and I said this on the live stream I said it's not what you think because they simply don't have children's sizes anymore they just have small sizes and there are small adults so they're not directly targeting children but it is true that these are sizes children would wear so then I saw a video of a woman go into Target to actually point to the stuff oh boy was I wrong oh man now I I like to take the position first of assuming innocence so I was I was giving Target the benefit of a doubt I assumed innocence I assumed that maybe they just got caught in a situation where it looked exactly like they were targeting young people but maybe it was just a misimpression and then I saw the display of an actual Target store nope nope those are targeted to the children yep absolutely targeted children no doubt about it and um if you want a little background on it a Twitter user Jewel Adora confirms that he has a lot of experience in the stores and that they have a uh what's it called a planogram or something so Corporate Offices tell you where all your displays are supposed to be relative to the other displays so there's like a a map of where you put everything that doesn't come from the local store manager that comes from headquarters so the way these things were displayed were you know adjacent to the children's actions and they add children's sizes and the clothing looked like it was aimed at children and there were some gingerbread things and some other kids things that are you know very much lgbtq oriented now uh in case there are any people were not regulars to my live stream I'm very much Pro lgbtq so my my ongoing you know uh belief of how things should be is that all adults should be able to do whatever they want as long as they're not bothering me and lgbtq is just more of that I have no special feeling except that there are individuals doing what individuals can do so good for them but when we're talking about minors all all those rules are gone do we agree no disagreement right if you talk about minors all of the adult rules don't apply so as long as we agree with that we're in good shape on agreement right why don't they apply I'm not even going to explain that they have incomplete brains this is I mean there's nothing else to explain so if you're if you're raising kids for the benefit of the children you make the decisions for them until their brains are ready to do it on their own that's the whole process so um I think it's so simulation like that the store that's being targeted is literally called Target they're actually a Target I mean it's a little too on the nose isn't it it's like the simulation is just screaming at you I swear it's really a simulation none of this is real I feel like it's just screaming my I get I get it I get it the target is the Target store I get it all right two on the nose all right um so it looks like Target's in trouble I did notice that some of the southern stores decided to respond by moving the lgbtq display to the back of the store so they could kind of hide it during pride month I'll just say that again so I don't have to explain the joke they're actually going to hide the lgbtq display during pride month do I have to complete it that's actually what's happening now I oppose that I oppose that because that's just up because that's up to the adults because I think target has every every right and I would say even responsibility to you know satisfy adults of all types I feel like that's part of their mission and there are certainly enough lgbtq customers to Merit their own you know section of clothes for adults but if you take the adult stuff and put it in the back of the shop during pride month you got some explaining to do you have a little explaining to do that this is the most uh hilarious corporate up I've seen since Bud Light you know I've noticed that there's a overall competence problem happening everywhere maybe it's confirmation bias but it feels like something fundamental is happening everywhere from government to business have you tried to get uh tech support from any company lately it's almost not a thing it's almost non-existent it's just like they put idiots in all those jobs and that didn't used to be the case I used to be able to get you know with a little work you could get help from anybody now it's just it feels like it's totally broken so uh the bigger story here is the massive incompetence of Anheuser-Busch and Target almost independent of the fact that it's about lgbtq it's just it was horribly managed it just feels like none of this was hard to do and they still got her own and now the LA Dodgers they've got a problem too so there's definitely a new force in the world which is the um I think I think conservatives have figured out how much power they have or they've decided to use it maybe that's a better way I guess they always knew but Republicans have decided to actively use their power and I don't think they had before I think it was mostly just complaining but now but now if you do something that is deeply offensive to that part of the country they're going to make you pay and probably that's the only thing that can get things back to some kind of balance because we're way out of balance at the moment all right you had North Face North Face has some some issues all right I saw it uh um Jordan Peterson was tweeting that the research is adding up um that the people who are left-wing authoritarians so authoritarians is important to the left-wing part so we're not talking about just Democrats right so this is not about ordinary Democrats it's about the left-wing authoritarian types of which we know exist but apparently the research is showing that these are not political people has thought about politics they actually just want to break because they're narcissists they're just narcissists they're actually just it's a mental illness so although narcissism I think they call a personality something that's not a mental illness but it really is um yeah so they're narcissists so I've been saying this for a while there's some brand of Politics on the far left as well as the far right they should not be treated as politics it's clearly mental illness in both directions but it's just you know the little the little stripe at the end the people in the middle are largely almost normal no matter what their opinion is all right um let's see foreign apparently there's another issue with Target that Elon Musk is weighed in on and the target is being accused of funding some a group called glsen which calls for gender ideology to be integrated into all classes even math now this is a Fox news report now do you believe that Target is funding a group who is promoting gender ideology in all classes including math Well Community notes seems to think it's true apparently is true and Elon Musk tweeted this and said is this true because it's almost too hard to believe isn't it it's almost too hard to believe and so far it looks true so Target's got some work to do all right here's uh the scariest thing you're going to hear today and the reason I couldn't describe the content in my show today um we'll go out on a limb a little bit here as you know I like to do how would you know if your country had already been taken over and you were no longer a Democratic Republic how would you know because it's the same question with AI right what if AI has already taken over would you know so I would propose let's forget about AI for a moment um how would you know if our country was no longer a Democratic Republic and really there was just a cabal of important people who were deciding everything how would you know well I would suggest the following test the test that people are in power and we're no longer you know run by the people so to speak is that the people in power could commit a crime in public and get away with it in public you could all see it just everybody can see it and there would be no consequences and the second way the second way is related the second way is if the people they don't like the people on the other side can be observed not committing a crime and then be successfully convicted for it they can be proven to not be doing a crime right in front of you you can see it with your own eyes and your common sense and yet they would be prosecuted we have we have both of those situations so here's an example of obvious real crimes that somebody should go to jail for that we all know our crimes it's been confirmed and nothing's going to happen so there's a hunter's laptop the Russia collusion the now we know from The Whistleblower the slow walking of the hunter investigation which clearly that's a crime to just ignore it um the the entire Biden family crime Enterprise of you know money from other countries that's all confirmed stuff you don't have to wonder that's we know it now black lives matter of course turned out to be a fake organization good point that we're making but a fake organization antifa seems to be completely fake you know because they disappeared as soon as the politics no longer needed them so these things are obvious to the public it's obvious that these are you know manipulated by the people in charge and they can primarily do it because they control the Legacy Media and as I've described the Legacy media's purpose is to prevent you from knowing what your government is doing it's not the news I don't know if they ever were I really don't know if they ever were but it's very clear at the moment and we've seen an example after example after example where the Legacy news is in the business primarily in the business of preventing you from knowing what the government is doing that now I I see exactly zero pushback on that reframing that's exactly what you see isn't it there's nobody who disagrees their entire job is to prevent you from knowing the news and they do a good job the other Rasmus and polls showed that very clearly the Democrats are actually unaware of the biggest stories in politics they're actually unaware so they do a good job um but what about so those are crimes that one side is doing that is are completely unpunished but then you have the other side where people who clearly did not commit a crime are being punished or over punished for small things yes January 6.
now not to dismiss the fact that there were some real bad people who actually did have bad intentions I don't care if they get you know prosecuted but I think every reasonable person can see that most of the protesters were just exercising free speech and they're in jail would that have happened if the if the parties have been reversed no no that would not have happened if the parties had been reversed how about uh Tucker Carlson being kicked off of Fox News doesn't it look like you get punished for nothing am I wrong Tucker Carlson got punished for exactly nothing exactly nothing I don't even think there was anything really even alleged at least nothing new I mean everybody alleges that everybody's telling fake news how about Daniel penny is it Penny the guy who did the um who accidentally it looks like killed the Michael Jackson impersonator doesn't that look to you like it's obvious he's not guilty of everything it's just obvious but he will be punished in all likelihood I mean I hope he's not um how about Republicans being hunted just in general do you think Republicans are being haunted right in front of you and it's just obvious yes looks pretty obvious to me all right so but here's the one that I feel like was the canary in the coal mine and I had to wait a while and get canceled before I could say this full-throatedly and out loud and I'm going to come at it indirectly you know that there are a lot of people who are in the business of killing people like bad people murderers right A lot of people want to kill people and also Spies Like to kill people without leaving a trace you know I was talking about that alleged CIA heart attack gun you know a gun that would give somebody a heart attack and then the poison would you know dissolve and then the dirt would dissolve and basically we know there's a market for killing people without leaving a Trace would you agree that there's a market for that if it's only the CIA it's a market right if it's only Putin it's a market somebody wants that service have you ever heard of anybody killing somebody without leaving a Trace by holding them on their stomach and then having a five foot eight man who weighs 140 pounds use one knee on his back until he's dead because you apparently we're told by the Legacy Media the Legacy Media has told us that you can kill that a 508 man who weighs I don't know 150 pounds whatever he was can kill uh how big was Floyd six foot four he was a big guy right do you know his actual height I believe it was like six two or four not eight but he was a big guy um no it wasn't a six eight it couldn't have been six eight he was over six right she was a big guy now we're told from the the coroner that there was no evidence on his neck of you know damage I don't believe there was any evidence of uh like a bruise on his back where the knee was I don't believe his lungs showed any sign of compression so am I wrong that it's the perfect murder is it the perfect murder because there would be no drugs in his body there would there would be no external trauma and even if you were like I don't know put a pillow over somebody's head I think it would leave some kind of some kind of Trace but you could just hold somebody in the ground it might take you know three people to hold their arms and just lightly put your knee on them you don't even need to use both D's apparently you could have one knee on the ground and and one knee sort of slightly pushing down and he'll die in five minutes according to the Legacy Media how many of you believe that I'll tell you what I saw what my eyes told me I was seeing was no murder at all and obviously an overdose death to me it was obvious and so the Legacy Media managed to tell me that what I saw didn't happen what I actually watched with my own eyes never really happened now if the coroner report had come up with some physical damage such as you know the muscles of the neck were damaged Etc then I would say oh okay well maybe the the video is not as clear as it could be video can lie we know that so therefore you know maybe I'm wrong but if the corridor comes up with no physical damage whatsoever and then you see something that looks like nobody killing anybody and just casually talking to the witnesses who are filming it do you think a cop killed somebody while people were filming it casually just casually kill them while people were filming no that was never even slightly slightly possible and we've been asked to believe this complete ridiculousness at the very least it should have been a benefit of a doubt am I right how they've got 12 people to say oh he definitely killed that guy I don't know I don't know how they got 12 people it had to be peer pressure it had to be people thinking they would be killed if they voted any other way so to me that was the signal that whoever is in charge can literally tell us anything because we won't believe our eyes and we won't even believe our common sense so then we get this election that everybody questions we get an election that everybody questions not everybody but a lot of people question and it was exactly like the you know when Hillary won in 2016 and all the Democrats said hey that election was rigged and everybody said yeah complain complain and life went on but when the reverse happened it became an Insurrection and a revolution now of course the the capital was protested and there were some dangerous people there so there was something they could work with right there was a factual basis that they could do some hyperboleon and extend it to the rest of the people but we're in such a dark situation here all the evidence suggests we're no longer governed by anything like we think it it just appears that the people who have some kind of power over the media are just making us believe anything they want all right um according to Rasmussen poll 59 of people they pulled say the media is truly the enemy of the people 44 percent of Democrats agree that the media is the enemy of the people however if you're saying to yourself wow they're they're agreeing with you because you think you're right so now you're thinking oh wow they agree with me no they don't no they don't they think Fox News and Breitbart are the problem they don't think their media is the problem do you think there's 44 percent of Democrats think that MSNBC is lying to them no they don't no they don't they think the media is the enemy of the people but they're talking about Fox News exclusively now I would imagine that when Republicans say it they're mostly talking about Legacy Media and they have their complaints with Fox News but they're not really thinking Fox News is the problem right they're not thinking Breitbart is a problem they're thinking is the Legacy Media so-called Legacy Media all right and as others have pointed out and I saw a tweet from somebody who calls himself exit The Matrix as tweet said haven't seen any anyone discussing this fact but just imagine how emboldened they they be the people we assume are in charge of things uh just imagine how emboldened they are now to cheat in the 2024 election after what they've done to the January 6 people which was a warning do not complain when they win again do you buy that do you buy do you buy the January 6 was a warning to tell Republicans you better not complain the next time we rig the election well I cannot confirm or or deny because that would be sort of mind reading I don't know what other people are thinking but I do know that the effect of it is a chilling effect on the next potential protest it does in fact create a situation where where the Democrats could cheat right in front of you get caught and there would be no consequences the election would not be reversed and even if the Supreme Court ruled I think they just ignore it I think we've gotten to the point where they have so much control over the narrative and the the levers of power that they can do anything they want right in front of you consider Russia Putin is allegedly like killing his enemies in plain sight do you think the the Russians are aware of that do you think they know he's killing people is is critics probably but he can do it anyway do you know why he can do it anyway because he doesn't exist in a Democratic Republic he can do any crime right in front of you and his public will say uh I don't know they told us this wasn't a crime and I still have a job so I'm happy yeah so there's something going on in the United States that's very Putin like and very CCP like you know Chinese government for some reason we've gotten to the point where the Democrats can do massive crime right in front of the public and there's no repercussions only Putin and she can do that I don't think even America you could do that before this feels new so it does feel like there's something going on here that's pretty important all right uh Vivek ramaswamy is updating this on his situation where he got banned on Linked.
In for allegedly some fake in fake uh information but he asked them can you give me an example of what I said that would be wrong or non-factual and they backed up to oh it was a mistake just a human error no no we never meant to ban you for that material that we first told you was fake uh just an error yeah you're welcome to come right back on and yeah there's Microsoft owns that Linked.
In in case you wondered so how much do you trust about that story nothing all right um can you give me a fact check on this so this is more to my theme that the Democrats can commit massive crimes right in front of you I need a fact check on this has any high-ranking Republican with security clearance because there there are people with top security clearance in Congress have any of them seen the documents that are allegedly these sensitive documents that came out of Mar-A-Lago and if not why not wouldn't it be a simple matter to put them in the the chef not chef put them in a skiff can't you put them someplace and have the Republicans come in and look at them and then characterize them because we don't you know the public doesn't want to know the details but I'd like them characterized I would like somebody to say okay we looked at them and to be honest some of these are troubling wouldn't you like to know that wouldn't you like to know if Trump's took something kept it in a cardboard box at Mar-A-Lago and it was actually a problem I would definitely like to know that and I and I believe well I'm going to go out on a limb there does seem to be a difference between Democrats and Republicans in Congress and Republicans seem to be you know they'll exaggerate a little bit and maybe sometimes they'll believe a conspiracy theory that they shouldn't and yeah there's a certain quality to how Republicans are wrong that's different than when Democrats are wrong it appears that they're lying intentionally it seems very different Republicans can be wrong and or or it can be weasels sometimes but I feel like the the Democrats would be like Schiff they would walk in and look at something that was innocent and then walk out and tell you you saw something that was terrible I don't think Republicans do that I believe if Republicans went in there let's just pick any Republican somebody with lots of security they'll say Rubio does he still have top clearance does Rubio have top clearance right so imagine Rubio goes in there he sees the actual documents do you think that if the some of them were actually really sensitive top secret do you think he'd lie to you because he wants a republican to win the presidency I actually don't think he would I actually don't think he would I think he would say you know honestly this is something the courts are going to have to handle because I was hoping they would all look innocent but I'm not sure so sure they are it isn't you know based on what I looked at I've got a problem with them and you know I'm not the one to solve it that might be the courts or whatever but there is something here I think Rubio would say that and I'm not you know Pro or anti-marco Rubio I'm just saying that yeah Rand Paul Rand Paul does Rand Paul have top clearance top security clearance actually what I love I'd love to pick our champion that's what I'd like to do I'd like to pick the champion so to speak the Republican that you would believe no matter what they say if you're going to pick somebody that you knew would tell you the truth Rand Paul would be a good choice I would believe him uh yeah Thomas Massey do you believe there's any chance that Thomas Massey would lie to you after he went in this gift I don't know if he has the clearance but do you think there's any chance he would lie to you about what he found I think zero absolutely zero he absolutely would not lie on that or anything else as far as I know I mean yes he's got a really clean record of telling the truth Ted Cruz Ted Cruz same thing we assume that Ted Cruz wants Trump or at least a republican to win uh yeah he would tell the truth Jim Jordan is a little bit more political he wouldn't be my Mitt Romney there you go Mitt Romney that that's a very good choice because you know Mitt Romney is not going to be in the pocket for Trump but he's also not going to lie about this he would not lie to her Trump about this because this would be a lie that everybody would someday find out is true or not right you you'd probably get caught for line in that I I think that the Republicans are in an interesting situation that you could pick several Republicans that no matter what they said you would actually believe them and I don't know if there are any can you name a Democrat that was at that bill that if they saw something and said so you would believe them they probably are I bet there are yeah Tom Cotton oh Tulsi yeah Robert Kennedy yes RFK Jr yeah RFK Jr for sure but he's not in the government mansion you know mansion's a tough one because I do feel like he's influenced by the coal business so I you can feel the influence of Industry on him you know what I mean uh whereas if you look at something like Thomas Massey you don't see any any influence of Industry it looks like his own opinions all right um moving on uh truly Jonathan Turley has a interesting article I think was in the hill on reparations so California you know went first with the reparations committee and came up with some absurd number that will never happen and and then Governor Newsom said well go back to the drawing board or we'll think about it or delay them somehow but other states are doing the same thing so this whole reparations thing because it looked like it might actually happen in California so it's starting to pop up in other states and Charlie has I think exactly the same opinion on this as I do they're never going to get reparations the the Democrats actually got the the black American supporters all worked up for something that they can't possibly deliver and I think the Republicans could totally take advantage of that the fact that that the Democrats lied to the black Americans about reparations and you know it was a lie of course it was a lie they never planned to do that all right well De.
Santis is running to the right of trump but here's how you need to understand that um De.
Santis is running for the nomination and Trump is running to win the presidency so that makes sense so Trump's Trump's acting a little bit or middle of the road because he feels he's already got the nomination he's already in the general election and that would be the right place to be because he doesn't want to later have to change his views so Trump's finding you know kind of a reasonable not too extreme position and De.
Santis is trying to find like a little bit of space to the right of him which is sort of a hard job but one of the things De.
Santis wants to do is uh get rid of that jail reform thing that Jared did where people could get out early if they learned a skill or they do something like that um that he just wants to get rid of it and keep him in jail now I think that's too early to me it seems you got to let that experiment run a few years and see if the people who got out of jail you know recommitted crimes at a rate that would be alarming so I'm not sure that that's I don't think he's basing this on data that this one seems purely political to me just because it's different from what Trump did and it's a way to show that he's on the right and and I'll go further and say that if he won the presidency I don't think he would change it because it would be too unpopular so that looks like a primary kind of thing you say not a not a general election kind of thing to say um is that conflating the criminals released no he's not conflating the jail reform thing with the DA's releasing people um but has anybody heard any uh updates on whether that early release stuff that Jared and Trump did is it working has anybody heard whether that's a disaster or are people getting out early and then recommitting crimes says it's not working but do we have an actual study or just some anecdotes actually it wouldn't take that many anecdotes to tell you it wasn't working um I would if I still lived in Danville all right um I I would say that it might be premature but even if it didn't work I would call it a success so you know we know we know we have a pro a problem with too many people in jail so if somebody tried something that sounds good on paper you know was hard to execute to get it done they tried it they legitimately tried it and it didn't work I would call that a smart I mean the uh yeah I don't live at Danville um De.
Santis voted for the first step Act well I think that I think that it would be perfectly consistent for Republicans to vote in the first first step Act let it run a few years and then see if it worked I mean you'd have to see that as an experiment wouldn't you because we've never done it before so if the experiment works you do more of it if it doesn't work you you stop doing it or you modify it so there's nothing I don't like about that I even if it failed that's what I want to see I want to see exactly that more of that all right uh what program have they ever stopped once and started all right that's a good question uh coven payments special case all right that's all I got for today You.
Tube I'm going to say bye I hope this was uh as provocative as you hoped it would be modern education predicted okay um any other questions from you yeah neurolink narrowling you know I I've been noodling with the idea that for the for some types of criminals the non-violent ones that maybe instead of going to prison they should lose their privacy what do you think of that imagine if you were a a repeat Criminal and instead of putting you in jail forever they say look we're just going to put a monitor on your ankle and we're going to let everybody know where you are and what crimes you've committed imagine if you would that you're in your your phone gives you an alert and you find out that somebody who's committed 700 crimes just walked into the store behind you get the out and just just get out of that store right away right so it might be that privacy and freedom are almost the Venn diagrams overlap a lot because imagine having Freedom with no privacy would that be freedom Freedom with no privacy it would be like not freedom wouldn't it and so we take their freedom away if they commit a crime but maybe you can get to Something Like It by taking the Privacy away right now only if they've committed a crime or they keep committing crimes you know a very specific case you wouldn't want that for everybody but there just might be some way to alert everybody around them all the time right something like that yeah it'd be worth trying and maybe only for a certain class of crimes take for example somebody had been convicted of burglary 50 times all right they've burglarized a home 50 times but you can tell where they are now all the time and you look at them beep beep beep this criminal has just entered your home you're not home but it just said it's he's in your home right so you could basically weaponize the public by making sure we always knew who the criminals were and specifically what crimes they'd committed because people like to do the same crimes over and over isn't it worth trying I mean if you're not going to put them in jail I suppose jail might be first choice for a lot of stuff yeah uh now I would make an exception for you know violent crimes violent crimes maybe jl's the only solution but for let's say robbery and vandalism and a lot of stuff I just want to see him coming if I see him coming I can make my own decisions how to stay safe impossible to monitor I don't know imagine if you owned a store and you knew that somebody came in had been convicted of shoplifting 15 times you'd follow him around you would just stand right next to the whole time you're shopping and it wouldn't it shouldn't be illegal it should definitely not be illegal to stand wherever you want in your own store and watch anybody you want in your own store so you know you wouldn't watch them on the camera you just follow him around the aisle say hey I understand you've shoplifted 15 times so we're going to keep an eye on you but you're welcome to shop here yeah I suppose you could get people falsely accused of stuff that's always a problem all right well I'll just throw that idea out there because the other ideas are not working so You.
Tube thanks for coming see you in the morning
foreign
good morning everybody and welcome to
the highlight of your entire life and
civilization itself and believe me if I
could tell you what this show is about
in advance without getting banned I
probably would have
you see I'm just getting your interest
up here
oh well I was laughing about something
before I came on and maybe I'll tell you
maybe I won't but if you'd like this
experience to be
optimal all you need is a cup of mug or
a glass a tanker chalices dying I can't
team yoga flask got a vessel of any kind
fill it with your favorite liquid I like
coffee and join me now for the
unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit
of the day the thing makes everything
better unless you wore a metal butt plug
into the MRI and then this won't help at
all
it happens now go
all right well I was just laughing
uncontrollably a minute ago because I
saw one of the memes on the locals
platform
now I don't know if the meme is based on
a real story
but I'm going to choose to believe it's
real
because it's funny
and the story was that some researchers
were studying what the brain scan of
women look like while they were having
orgasms
so they invited five women into
masturbate while they were in the MRI
now that's not really the story because
they got a nice picture of the brain
lighting up
the funny part of the story is how they
sold this project
how did they get a grant for that
a bob I've got a wild idea
what
I think we can get money
for bringing women into masturbate in
front of us and we'll just put their
heads in an MRI and call it science
and the other other guy says you're
never going to get away with that now
watch this
and then they put the they put it
together and they get away with it and
then they have to play it off like it's
serious the whole time
and they go home to their wives and and
what well here I'm being sexist it could
be that it's women who are the
scientists of course so we can't rule
out that possibility but it's funnier to
imagine as guys
and they go home at night so uh honey
what are you working on oh we're doing a
little some brain scanning stuff you
know really they're brain scamming for
what well you know we'd like to see what
parts of the brain light up under
certain circumstances
really what uh what specific
circumstances are you studying well
here's where it gets a little
complicated
I don't know it was funny to me
but that's not why you're here you're
here for the news here's the news
uh unfortunately AI has now succeeded in
writing parity
the uh the Twitter account called The
Prince of deep fakes
uh I won't tell you who is the prince of
deep fakes perhaps it's somebody you
know
but the prince of deep fakes not me it's
not me by the way but the prince of T
fakes actually wrote a super
prompt to create a
parody news articles
and I'm not going to say they're just as
good as the onion or the Babylon bee
but they're in the neighborhood
and I did not think this this could be
done
I didn't think you could get this close
but it could be that parody of news
reports is something that's a little
more rules based you know that if you've
noticed a an article in the Bee or the
youngin
they're a little formulaic
but it works anyway you know a lot of
humor is very formulaic so maybe maybe
AI can do better for humor than I
thought
but I wouldn't say it's up to the level
of the the best human humor
but it's surprised me how closely got
all right I have a hypothesis this is
not a prediction
it's not a prediction it's a hypothesis
meaning we'll test it without trying and
we'll know whether it's true or not it
goes like this
the AI music will not replace human made
music
for for at least hit records
it will definitely replace human
musicians for advertising and you know
maybe the background music of a video
game you know maybe some music in your
elevator stuff like that so so AI will
definitely replace the low end of music
business
but for the high end where you're
listening to it for Pure enjoyment
here's my hypothesis you ready
now first of all I do agree
that AI could match or surpass the skill
level of the best human musicians
so this will be the part that doesn't
make sense for a second
so I do accept that AI will be better at
knowing what people want to hear and
then participate better than the best
human eventually
however here's what my hypothesis
speculates
you won't want to listen to it
so here's Here's the the uh the weird
part the AI music will absolutely be
better on every level that you can
determine that things are good you'll be
better than the Human music and you
won't want to listen to it here's why
if you know it's made by AI
it won't trigger your reproductive
instincts
because my hypothesis is that music is
showing off
that's what it is and the best music of
his song is showing off the most
in other words it's showing a genetic
Talent
that you would want to mate with it's
not an accident that people want to mate
with Mick Jagger
right because when you watch Mick Jagger
even at his current age you watch him do
his thing on stage and you are
completely certain that you couldn't do
that
and you're pretty certain that nobody
you've ever met
could do that
what Mick Jagger does on stage and so
you say to yourself he's got an extra
gear there's something genetically
blessed about this person
and so you automatically want to mate
with them guys want to compete with them
want to be them and that music is really
really about activating your
reproductive system
but you never are conscious of it
all right so there so here's the part
you would have to accept to think that
the hypothesis has any any value
that you were never conscious
of the fact that music is all about your
reproductive Instinct that's it same
with Art here's a here's a mental
experiment
imagine if the works of Rembrandt had
never been created so let's say there
had never been an actual Rembrandt human
being nobody ever made Rembrandt's
paintings
but then AI comes along and you say hey
AI make me some great paintings and
somehow the AI produces the exact work
of Rembrandt but in this in this mind
experiment the real Rembrandt never
existed just his work is reproduced by
AI
would it be valuable
right the real Rembrandt's work is worth
you know many millions of dollars if the
exact thing had been produced by AI but
had never been produced by any human
before would it be worth millions
no its exact value would be zero it
would actually be zero
that was my hypothesis sound down
about when I started you were completely
rejecting it weren't you like the first
few sentences you're like no no nope
nope nope AI music is going to be better
than humans
it will be technically better
technically it will be but if you know
that it's made by a computer you will
get bored with it quickly
because its qualities are not anything
that will stimulate you because you
can't reproduce with a computer
what do you think
you you your comments changed as I went
because I feel like some of you got a
little bit persuaded
but like I said it's not a prediction
don't confuse us with a prediction it's
a hypothesis
in other words we'll be able to test it
pretty quickly I would argue that I
already tested it
would I ask you about the Rembrandt that
was the test
if you had said my God yes those
Rembrandts are so amazing uh if an AI
produced them I would like them just as
much and pay just as much for them no
you wouldn't
your your value you put on the art is
entirely tied up with the fact that a
human made it
take that away and doesn't have any
value at all
so I think I've proven it
just by that example because you would
all come to the same conclusion I think
you wouldn't pay for an AI Rembrandt I
know that
now I'm going to take it a little bit
further
into the real world
when I became a cartoonist
there was an Insight that I had
that I executed during my career and the
Insight was that the audience can't
separate the cartoonist from the
cartoons
that was my insight and that they needed
to know who I was in order to fully
enjoy the cartoon
so when Dilbert was about the workplace
the reason it became famous is not
because the jokes were good and the
people liked the workplace do you know
why Dilbert became famous
because I was in the workplace
so the story wasn't oh my God this is a
good comic you know I like to think
sometimes people laughed at it but the
story was that I was doing something
Dangerous by working for a big company
while mocking a big company and wasn't I
going to get fired at any minute
and do you know what that did it
triggered people's reproductive
instincts
because I was doing something you
couldn't or wouldn't do
you couldn't or wouldn't
make a comic that would get you in
trouble
you'd be afraid
so I I was taking a risk but I wasn't
afraid indeed I ended up being nearly
fired and eventually fired so it wasn't
an imaginary risk and people could
people could sense it was a real risk
and people could sense that I was taking
on the biggest powers in the world
because if I got banned from one company
I probably would have trouble getting a
job at another one it looked like a
really dangerous thing to be doing and I
think that triggers people's
reproductive instincts male and female
not that the men wanted to mate with me
but they were identifying with it like
oh that's Brave
when I got canceled
why did I get canceled
is because the audience does not
separate the artists from the art
that's a real clear example of that so
as soon as the artist said something
they didn't like they didn't like the
art anymore in fact I heard this exact
opinion I heard somebody talk about
somebody they knew who said they used to
like my comic but when they found out
about my political opinions they
couldn't read my comic anymore
see
that that same phenomenon is going to
come to Art of all types
if you know who the artist is or at
least that it's a human
it makes you see the art different
as soon as you take the human out of it
the art has no real value except a
pretty picture
it's it's economic value will be near
zero
all right
um
didn't see that comment did you all
right here's another one maybe you
didn't see coming I told you that in
Finland briefly the price of electricity
dropped below zero
theoretically not actually below zero
but in theory it was free for a while
and that's because there was more Supply
than demand
uh and that was largely because they'd
opened up a nuclear site recently and
they had a lot of electricity but
apparently that effect is all of Europe
right now
so at the moment the price of
electricity in much of Europe or most of
it actually
is zero
and it's because of nuclear energy
primarily primarily nuclear energy
so
there you go
if you wondered is there any way to you
know get to this future where we got
electric cars and no climate change yes
yes there is it's a very clear path now
all right as you know I have not been
reporting on or talking about too much
this debt ceiling issue where the
Congress has to decide on a budget or
else the country defaults on its debts
and
we all die now the reason is because I
always thought it was fake
the dynamic of these negotiations are
both sides are looking at the polls
and if the polls say uh you would
benefit by holding up the process than
you do
but but I heard that the polls have
reversed and now the Republicans look
like they would come out ahead if the
government closes and we default on debt
so the Republicans don't have a reason
to compromise because the poll is
currently showing that they would gain
the Democrats if they're looking at the
same poll information or knowing that
they would lose and they would be blamed
for whatever happens if we don't reach a
deal
so that pretty much guarantees it will
be a deal
because we're all operating in
self-interest
but the reason I don't report on it is
it is all fake News until the last
minute
the only thing that counted at all was
the last minute so if it's a month
before the deadline and the news is
telling you oh here's a big story it's
not that's not a story there isn't any
possibility they would have agreed a
month in advance
because a month in advance the polls are
not reliable
they have to make sure that just before
they execute at least one side you know
or actually both sides know which way
things are going to go if they don't
make a deal that's how you get a deal so
it was never a real story until the last
60 seconds and maybe that's not even
real because because I had a feeling if
you miss it by two days the stock market
takes a dump for two days and then comes
right back
that's what I think
uh so I believe that this is an example
of the news making something out of
nothing
not that there's no risk there is
but if you were to rank that risk with
all the other risks in the world it
wouldn't be a top 50. in my opinion
so uh that's sort of a semi fake news to
keep an eye on
all right
um if stops what would you do if let's
say we missed the deadline and stocks go
down 19 I'm just picking a number
stocks go down 19 because we missed a
deadline by a day what do you do
you sell all your stocks
or do you buy like a
all right I'm not going to give you any
Financial advice this is not Financial
advice
but historically
historically the very best time to buy
stock is when all the stocks went down
for a of reason
now I consider the pandemic a
reason
meaning that it was a near certainty
that we would get through it and that
stocks would go up you know we'd we'd
recover because even if it was bad and a
lot of people died the people dying were
not the people producing economic
activity the people dying were the exact
people who were expensive
I hate to say that because they're human
beings but in terms of just the gold
hard cache of economics
it was obvious to me that if we didn't
die from a supply chain problem which I
thought we could handle and we did the
things would go back
and sure enough they did so there aren't
that many situations where you have a a
really obvious reason for the for the
stocks being temporarily lower but this
would be one
this would be one in my opinion since we
wouldn't be unable to pay we would
simply be disorganized and miss a
deadline
I'd be a buyer but I don't recommend
that you follow my advice on stocks
because I do not have a Warren Buffett
track record if I had a Warren Buffett
track record you should definitely
listen to me I do not so don't
all right let's talk about Target
so there was some murkiness on the
question of whether a Target had
intentionally
uh targeted youth with their tuck
friendly lgbtq trans clothing line
and
one report was well it's not what you
think and and I said this on the live
stream I said it's not what you think
because they simply don't have
children's sizes anymore
they just have small sizes and there are
small adults so they're not directly
targeting children but it is true that
these are sizes children would wear
so then I saw a video of a woman go into
Target to actually point to the stuff
oh boy was I wrong
oh man
now I I like to take the position first
of assuming innocence
so I was I was giving Target the benefit
of a doubt I assumed innocence I assumed
that maybe they just got caught in a
situation where it looked exactly like
they were targeting young people but
maybe it was just a misimpression
and then I saw the display of an actual
Target store nope
nope those are targeted to the children
yep absolutely targeted children no
doubt about it and
um if you want a little background on it
a Twitter user Jewel Adora
confirms that he has a lot of experience
in the stores and that they have a uh
what's it called a planogram or
something so Corporate Offices tell you
where all your displays are supposed to
be relative to the other displays so
there's like a a map of where you put
everything that doesn't come from the
local store manager
that comes from headquarters
so the way these things were displayed
were
you know adjacent to the children's
actions and they add children's sizes
and the clothing looked like it was
aimed at children
and there were some gingerbread
things and some other kids things that
are you know very much
lgbtq oriented
now
uh in case there are any people were not
regulars to my live stream I'm very much
Pro lgbtq
so my my ongoing you know uh belief of
how things should be is that all adults
should be able to do whatever they want
as long as they're not bothering me and
lgbtq is just more of that
I have no special feeling except that
there are individuals doing what
individuals can do so good for them
but when we're talking about minors
all all those rules are gone
do we agree no disagreement right if you
talk about minors all of the adult rules
don't apply
so as long as we agree with that we're
in good shape on agreement right
why don't they apply
I'm not even going to explain that
they have incomplete brains this is
I mean there's nothing else to explain
so if you're if you're raising kids for
the benefit of the children
you make the decisions for them
until their brains are ready to do it on
their own that's the whole process
so
um
I think it's so simulation like
that the store that's being targeted is
literally called Target
they're actually a Target
I mean it's a little too on the nose
isn't it it's like the simulation is
just screaming at you I swear it's
really a simulation none of this is real
I feel like it's just screaming my I get
I get it I get it the target is the
Target store I get it
all right two on the nose
all right
um
so it looks like Target's in trouble I
did notice that some of the southern
stores
decided to respond by moving the lgbtq
display to the back of the store so they
could kind of hide it during pride month
I'll just say that again so I don't have
to explain the joke
they're actually going to hide the lgbtq
display
during pride month
do I have to complete it
that's actually what's happening
now I oppose that I oppose that because
that's just up because that's
up to the adults because I think
target has every every right and I would
say even responsibility
to you know satisfy adults of all types
I feel like that's part of their mission
and there are certainly enough lgbtq
customers to Merit their own you know
section of clothes for adults
but if you take the adult stuff and put
it in the back of the shop during pride
month you got some explaining to do you
have a little explaining to do that this
is the most uh hilarious corporate
up I've seen since Bud Light
you know I've noticed that there's a
overall competence problem happening
everywhere
maybe it's confirmation bias
but it feels like something fundamental
is happening
everywhere from government to business
have you tried to get uh tech support
from any company lately
it's almost not a thing it's almost
non-existent it's just like they put
idiots in all those jobs and that didn't
used to be the case I used to be able to
get you know with a little work you
could get help from anybody now it's
just it feels like it's totally broken
so
uh the bigger story here is the massive
incompetence of
Anheuser-Busch and Target
almost independent of the fact that it's
about lgbtq it's just it was horribly
managed it just feels like none of this
was hard to do and they still got her
own and now the LA Dodgers they've got a
problem too
so there's definitely a new force in the
world which is the
um I think I think conservatives have
figured out how much power they have or
they've decided to use it maybe that's a
better way I guess they always knew but
Republicans have decided to actively use
their power
and I don't think they had before
I think it was mostly just complaining
but now but now if you do something that
is deeply offensive to that part of the
country they're going to make you pay
and probably that's the only thing that
can get things back to some kind of
balance because we're way out of balance
at the moment
all right you had North Face North Face
has some some issues
all right I saw it uh
um
Jordan Peterson was tweeting that the
research is adding up
um that the people who are left-wing
authoritarians
so authoritarians is important to the
left-wing part so we're not talking
about just Democrats right
so this is not about ordinary Democrats
it's about the left-wing authoritarian
types of which we know exist but
apparently the research is showing that
these are not political people
has thought about politics they actually
just want to break because they're
narcissists
they're just narcissists they're
actually just it's a mental illness
so although narcissism I think they call
a personality something that's not a
mental illness but it really is
um yeah
so they're narcissists
so I've been saying this for a while
there's some brand of Politics on the
far left as well as the far right they
should not be treated as politics it's
clearly mental illness
in both directions but it's just you
know the little the little stripe at the
end the people in the middle are largely
almost normal
no matter what their opinion is
all right
um let's see
foreign
apparently there's another issue with
Target that Elon Musk is weighed in on
and
the target is being accused of funding
some a group called glsen which calls
for gender ideology to be integrated
into all classes even math now this is a
Fox news report
now do you believe that Target is
funding a group
who is promoting gender ideology in all
classes including math
Well Community notes seems to think it's
true
apparently is true
and Elon Musk tweeted this and said is
this true
because it's almost too hard to believe
isn't it
it's almost too hard to believe
and so far it looks true
so Target's got some work to do
all right here's uh the scariest thing
you're going to hear today
and the reason I couldn't describe the
content in my show today
um
we'll go out on a limb a little bit here
as you know I like to do
how would you know
if your country had already been taken
over and you were no longer a
Democratic Republic how would you know
because it's the same question with AI
right what if AI has already taken over
would you know
so I would propose let's forget about AI
for a moment
um how would you know if our country was
no longer a Democratic Republic and
really there was just a cabal of
important people who were deciding
everything how would you know
well I would suggest the following test
the test that people are in power and
we're no longer you know run by the
people so to speak
is that the people in power
could commit a crime in public and get
away with it in public you could all see
it just everybody can see it and there
would be no consequences
and the second way the second way is
related
the second way is if the people they
don't like the people on the other side
can be observed not committing a crime
and then be successfully convicted for
it
they can be proven to not be doing a
crime right in front of you you can see
it with your own eyes and your common
sense and yet they would be prosecuted
we have we have both of those situations
so here's an example of
obvious real crimes
that somebody should go to jail for that
we all know our crimes it's been
confirmed and nothing's going to happen
so there's a hunter's laptop the Russia
collusion the now we know from The
Whistleblower the slow walking of the
hunter investigation which clearly
that's a crime to just ignore it
um
the the entire Biden family crime
Enterprise of you know money from other
countries that's all confirmed stuff you
don't have to wonder
that's we know it now
black lives matter of course turned out
to be a fake organization good point
that we're making but a fake
organization
antifa seems to be completely fake
you know because they disappeared as
soon as the politics no longer needed
them
so these things are obvious to the
public it's obvious that these are you
know manipulated by the people in charge
and they can primarily do it because
they control the Legacy Media
and as I've described the Legacy media's
purpose is to prevent you from knowing
what your government is doing
it's not the news
I don't know if they ever were I really
don't know if they ever were but it's
very clear at the moment and we've seen
an example after example after example
where the Legacy news is in the business
primarily in the business of preventing
you from knowing what the government is
doing
that now I I see exactly zero pushback
on that reframing
that's exactly what you see isn't it
there's nobody who disagrees their
entire job is to prevent you from
knowing the news
and they do a good job the other Rasmus
and polls showed that very clearly the
Democrats are actually unaware
of the biggest stories in politics
they're actually unaware
so they do a good job
um but what about so those are crimes
that one side is doing that is are
completely unpunished but then you have
the other side where people who clearly
did not commit a crime are being
punished or over punished for small
things yes January 6.
now not to dismiss the fact that there
were some real bad people who actually
did have bad intentions I don't care if
they get you know prosecuted but I think
every reasonable person can see
that most of the protesters were just
exercising free speech
and they're in jail
would that have happened if the if the
parties have been reversed
no no that would not have happened if
the parties had been reversed
how about uh
Tucker Carlson being kicked off of Fox
News
doesn't it look like you get punished
for nothing
am I wrong
Tucker Carlson got punished for exactly
nothing exactly nothing
I don't even think there was anything
really even alleged at least nothing new
I mean everybody alleges that
everybody's telling fake news
how about Daniel penny
is it Penny the guy who did the
um
who accidentally it looks like killed
the Michael Jackson impersonator
doesn't that look to you like it's
obvious he's not guilty of everything
it's just obvious
but he will be punished
in all likelihood I mean I hope he's not
um
how about Republicans being hunted
just in general do you think Republicans
are being haunted right in front of you
and it's just obvious
yes looks pretty obvious to me
all right
so
but here's the one that I feel like was
the canary in the coal mine and I had to
wait a while and get canceled before I
could say this
full-throatedly and out loud
and I'm going to come at it indirectly
you know that there are a lot of people
who are in the business of killing
people like bad people murderers right A
lot of people want to kill people and
also Spies Like to kill people without
leaving a trace you know I was talking
about that alleged CIA heart attack gun
you know a gun that would give somebody
a heart attack and then the poison would
you know dissolve and then the dirt
would dissolve and basically we know
there's a market
for killing people without leaving a
Trace
would you agree that there's a market
for that if it's only the CIA
it's a market right if it's only Putin
it's a market somebody wants that
service
have you ever heard of anybody killing
somebody
without leaving a Trace
by holding them on their stomach and
then having a five foot eight man who
weighs 140 pounds use one knee on his
back until he's dead
because you apparently we're told by the
Legacy Media
the Legacy Media has told us that you
can kill that a 508 man who weighs I
don't know 150 pounds whatever he was
can kill uh how big was Floyd six foot
four
he was a big guy right do you know his
actual height
I believe it was like six two or four
not eight but he was a big guy
um
no it wasn't a six eight it couldn't
have been six eight
he was over six right she was a big guy
now we're told from the the coroner that
there was no evidence on his neck
of you know damage
I don't believe there was any evidence
of uh like a bruise on his back where
the knee was
I don't believe his lungs showed any
sign of compression
so am I wrong that it's the perfect
murder
is it the perfect murder
because there would be no drugs in his
body
there would there would be no external
trauma
and even if you were like I don't know
put a pillow over somebody's head I
think it would leave some kind of
some kind of Trace
but you could just hold somebody in the
ground it might take you know three
people to hold their arms and just
lightly put your knee on them you don't
even need to use both D's apparently you
could have one knee on the ground and
and one knee sort of slightly pushing
down and he'll die in five minutes
according to the Legacy Media
how many of you believe that
I'll tell you what I saw
what my eyes told me I was seeing was no
murder at all and obviously an overdose
death
to me it was obvious
and so the Legacy Media managed to tell
me that what I saw didn't happen
what I actually watched with my own eyes
never really happened
now if the coroner report had come up
with some physical damage such as you
know the muscles of the neck were
damaged Etc then I would say oh okay
well maybe the the video is not as clear
as it could be video can lie we know
that so therefore you know maybe I'm
wrong
but if the corridor comes up with no
physical damage whatsoever and then you
see something that looks like nobody
killing anybody
and just casually talking to the
witnesses who are filming it do you
think a cop killed somebody while people
were filming it
casually
just casually kill them while people
were filming
no that was never even slightly slightly
possible
and we've been asked to believe this
complete ridiculousness
at the very least it should have been a
benefit of a doubt am I right
how they've got 12 people to say oh he
definitely killed that guy I don't know
I don't know how they got 12 people it
had to be peer pressure
it had to be people thinking they would
be killed if they voted any other way
so to me that was the signal that
whoever is in charge
can literally tell us anything
because we won't believe our eyes and we
won't even believe our common sense
so then we get this election that
everybody questions
we get an election that everybody
questions not everybody but a lot of
people question
and it was exactly like the you know
when Hillary won in 2016 and all the
Democrats said hey that election was
rigged and everybody said yeah complain
complain and life went on
but when the reverse happened
it became an Insurrection and a
revolution
now of course the the capital was
protested and there were some dangerous
people there so there was something they
could work with right there was a
factual basis that they could
do some hyperboleon and extend it to the
rest of the people
but we're in such a dark situation here
all the evidence suggests we're no
longer governed by anything
like we think
it it just appears that the people who
have some kind of power over the media
are just making us believe anything they
want
all right
um
according to Rasmussen poll 59 of people
they pulled say the media is truly the
enemy of the people
44 percent of Democrats agree that the
media is the enemy of the people however
if you're saying to yourself wow
they're they're agreeing with you
because you think you're right so now
you're thinking oh wow they agree with
me no they don't no they don't they
think Fox News and Breitbart are the
problem
they don't think their media is the
problem do you think there's 44 percent
of Democrats think that MSNBC is lying
to them no they don't
no they don't they think the media is
the enemy of the people but they're
talking about Fox News
exclusively
now I would imagine that when
Republicans say it they're mostly
talking about Legacy Media and they have
their complaints with Fox News
but they're not really thinking Fox News
is the problem
right they're not thinking Breitbart is
a problem they're thinking is
the Legacy Media
so-called Legacy Media
all right
and as others have pointed out and I saw
a tweet from somebody who calls himself
exit The Matrix
as tweet said haven't seen any anyone
discussing this fact but just imagine
how emboldened they they be the people
we assume are in charge of things uh
just imagine how emboldened they are now
to cheat in the 2024 election after what
they've done to the January 6 people
which was a warning
do not complain when they win again
do you buy that
do you buy do you buy the January 6 was
a warning to tell Republicans you better
not complain the next time we rig the
election
well I cannot confirm or or deny
because that would be sort of mind
reading I don't know what other people
are thinking
but I do know that the effect of it
is a chilling effect on the next
potential protest it does in fact create
a situation where where the Democrats
could cheat right in front of you get
caught
and there would be no consequences
the election would not be reversed
and even if the Supreme Court ruled I
think they just ignore it
I think we've gotten to the point where
they have so much control over the
narrative and the the levers of power
that they can do anything they want
right in front of you
consider Russia
Putin is allegedly like killing his
enemies
in plain sight
do you think the the Russians are aware
of that do you think they know he's
killing people is is critics
probably but he can do it anyway do you
know why he can do it anyway
because he doesn't exist in a Democratic
Republic
he can do any crime right in front of
you and his public will say uh I don't
know they told us this wasn't a crime
and I still have a job so I'm happy
yeah so there's something going on in
the United States that's very Putin like
and very
CCP like you know Chinese
government
for some reason we've gotten to the
point where the Democrats can do massive
crime right in front of the public and
there's no repercussions
only Putin and she can do that I don't
think even America you could do that
before this feels new
so it does feel like
there's something going on here that's
pretty important
all right uh
Vivek ramaswamy is updating this on his
situation where he got banned on
for allegedly some fake in fake uh
information
but he asked them can you give me an
example of what I said that would be
wrong
or non-factual
and they backed up to oh it was a
mistake
just a human error
no no we never meant to ban you for that
material that we first told you was fake
uh just an error yeah you're welcome to
come right back on
and yeah there's Microsoft owns that
LinkedIn in case you wondered
so how much do you trust about that
story nothing
all right
um can you give me a fact check on this
so this is more to my theme
that the Democrats can commit massive
crimes right in front of you
I need a fact check on this
has any high-ranking Republican with
security clearance because there there
are people with top security clearance
in Congress have any of them seen the
documents
that are allegedly these sensitive
documents that came out of Mar-A-Lago
and if not
why not
wouldn't it be a simple matter to put
them in the the chef
not chef
put them in a skiff
can't you put them someplace and have
the Republicans come in and look at them
and then characterize them
because we don't you know the public
doesn't want to know the details but I'd
like them characterized I would like
somebody to say okay we looked at them
and to be honest some of these are
troubling
wouldn't you like to know that wouldn't
you like to know if Trump's took
something kept it in a cardboard box at
Mar-A-Lago and it was actually a problem
I would definitely like to know that
and I and I believe
well I'm going to go out on a limb
there does seem to be a difference
between Democrats and Republicans in
Congress
and
Republicans seem to be you know they'll
exaggerate a little bit and maybe
sometimes they'll believe a conspiracy
theory that they shouldn't and yeah
there's a certain quality to how
Republicans are wrong
that's different
than when Democrats are wrong it appears
that they're lying intentionally
it seems very different
Republicans can be wrong
and or or it can be weasels sometimes
but I feel like the the Democrats would
be like Schiff they would walk in and
look at something that was innocent and
then walk out and tell you you saw
something that was terrible
I don't think Republicans do that
I believe if Republicans went in there
let's just pick any Republican somebody
with lots of security they'll say Rubio
does he still have top clearance
does Rubio have top clearance
right so imagine Rubio goes in there he
sees the actual documents
do you think that if the some of them
were actually really sensitive top
secret do you think he'd lie to you
because he wants a republican to win the
presidency
I actually don't think he would
I actually don't think he would
I think he would say you know honestly
this is something the courts are going
to have to handle because
I was hoping they would all look
innocent but I'm not sure so sure they
are it isn't you know based on what I
looked at I've got a problem with them
and you know I'm not the one to solve it
that might be the courts or whatever but
there is something here
I think Rubio would say that and I'm not
you know Pro or anti-marco Rubio I'm
just saying that yeah Rand Paul
Rand Paul does Rand Paul have top
clearance
top security clearance
actually what I love I'd love to pick
our champion that's what I'd like to do
I'd like to pick the champion so to
speak the Republican that you would
believe no matter what they say
if you're going to pick somebody that
you knew would tell you the truth
Rand Paul would be a good choice
I would believe him
uh yeah Thomas Massey
do you believe there's any chance that
Thomas Massey would lie to you
after he went in this gift I don't know
if he has the clearance but do you think
there's any chance he would lie to you
about what he found I think zero
absolutely zero
he absolutely would not lie
on that or anything else as far as I
know I mean yes he's got a really clean
record of telling the truth
Ted Cruz Ted Cruz same thing we assume
that Ted Cruz
wants Trump or at least a republican to
win
uh yeah he would tell the truth
Jim Jordan is a little bit more
political
he wouldn't be my Mitt Romney
there you go Mitt Romney
that that's a very good choice because
you know Mitt Romney is not going to be
in the pocket for Trump
but he's also not going to lie about
this
he would not lie to her Trump about this
because this would be a lie that
everybody would someday find out is true
or not right you you'd probably get
caught for line in that
I I think that the Republicans are in an
interesting situation
that you could pick several Republicans
that no matter what they said you would
actually believe them
and I don't know if there are any can
you name a Democrat that was at that
bill
that if they saw something and said so
you would believe them they probably are
I bet there are
yeah Tom Cotton
oh Tulsi yeah Robert Kennedy yes RFK Jr
yeah RFK Jr for sure but he's not in the
government
mansion
you know mansion's a tough one
because I do feel like he's influenced
by the coal business
so I you can feel the influence of
Industry on him
you know what I mean
uh whereas if you look at something like
Thomas Massey you don't see any any
influence of Industry it looks like his
own opinions
all right
um
moving on uh
truly Jonathan Turley has a interesting
article I think was in the hill on
reparations so California you know went
first with the reparations committee and
came up with some absurd number that
will never happen and and then Governor
Newsom said well go back to the drawing
board or we'll think about it or delay
them somehow but other states are doing
the same thing so this whole reparations
thing because it looked like it might
actually happen in California so it's
starting to pop up in other states
and Charlie has I think exactly the same
opinion on this as I do
they're never going to get reparations
the the
Democrats actually got the the black
American supporters all worked up for
something that they can't possibly
deliver
and I think the Republicans could
totally take advantage of that the fact
that that the Democrats lied to the
black Americans about reparations and
you know it was a lie of course it was a
lie they never planned to do that
all right well DeSantis is running to
the right of trump but here's how you
need to understand that
um DeSantis is running for the
nomination
and Trump is running to win the
presidency
so that makes sense so Trump's Trump's
acting a little bit or middle of the
road because he feels he's already got
the nomination he's already in the
general election
and that would be the right place to be
because he doesn't want to later have to
change his views
so Trump's finding you know kind of a
reasonable not too extreme position
and DeSantis is trying to find like a
little bit of space to the right of him
which is sort of a hard job
but one of the things DeSantis wants to
do is uh get rid of that
jail reform thing that Jared did where
people could get out early if they
learned a skill or they do something
like that
um that he just wants to get rid of it
and keep him in jail
now
I think that's too early
to me it seems you got to let that
experiment run a few years and see if
the people who got out of jail you know
recommitted crimes at a rate that would
be alarming
so
I'm not sure that that's I don't think
he's basing this on data
that this one seems purely political to
me just because it's different from what
Trump did and it's a way to show that
he's on the right and and I'll go
further and say that if he won the
presidency I don't think he would change
it
because it would be too unpopular so
that looks like a primary kind of thing
you say not a not a general election
kind of thing to say
um is that conflating the criminals
released no he's not conflating the jail
reform thing with the DA's releasing
people
um
but has anybody heard any uh updates on
whether that early release stuff that
Jared and Trump did
is it working
has anybody heard whether that's a
disaster or are people getting out early
and then recommitting crimes
says it's not working but do we have an
actual study or just some anecdotes
actually it wouldn't take that many
anecdotes to tell you it wasn't working
um I would if I still lived in Danville
all right
um
I I would say that it might be premature
but even if it didn't work I would call
it a success
so you know we know we know we have a
pro a problem with too many people in
jail
so if somebody tried something that
sounds good on paper
you know was hard to execute to get it
done they tried it they legitimately
tried it and it didn't work I would call
that a smart
I mean the
uh yeah I don't live at Danville
um
DeSantis voted for the first step Act
well I think that I think that it would
be perfectly consistent
for Republicans to vote in the first
first step Act
let it run a few years and then see if
it worked
I mean you'd have to see that as an
experiment wouldn't you because we've
never done it before so if the
experiment works you do more of it if it
doesn't work you you stop doing it or
you modify it so there's nothing I don't
like about that I even if it failed
that's what I want to see
I want to see exactly that more of that
all right
uh what program have they ever stopped
once and started
all right that's a good question uh
coven payments
special case
all right that's all I got for today
YouTube
I'm going to say bye
I hope this was uh as provocative as you
hoped it would be
modern education predicted okay
um
any other questions from you yeah
neurolink narrowling
you know I I've been noodling with the
idea
that for the for some types of criminals
the non-violent ones that maybe instead
of going to prison they should lose
their privacy
what do you think of that
imagine if you were a a repeat Criminal
and instead of putting you in jail
forever they say look we're just going
to put a monitor on your ankle
and we're going to let everybody know
where you are and what crimes you've
committed
imagine if you would
that you're in your your phone gives you
an alert and you find out that somebody
who's committed 700 crimes just walked
into the store behind you
get the out
and just just get out of that store
right away right so
it might be that privacy and freedom are
almost the Venn diagrams overlap a lot
because imagine having Freedom with no
privacy
would that be freedom
Freedom with no privacy it would be like
not freedom
wouldn't it and so we take their freedom
away if they commit a crime but maybe
you can get to Something Like It by
taking the Privacy away
right now only if they've committed a
crime or they keep committing crimes you
know a very specific case you wouldn't
want that for everybody
but there just might be some way to
alert everybody around them all the time
right
something like that yeah it'd be worth
trying and maybe only for a certain
class of crimes take for example
somebody had been convicted of burglary
50 times
all right they've burglarized a home 50
times
but you can tell where they are now all
the time and you look at them beep beep
beep this criminal has just entered your
home
you're not home
but it just said it's he's in your home
right so you could basically weaponize
the public
by making sure we always knew who the
criminals were and specifically what
crimes they'd committed because people
like to do the same crimes over and over
isn't it worth trying
I mean if you're not going to put them
in jail
I suppose jail might be first choice for
a lot of stuff
yeah uh now I would make an exception
for you know violent crimes violent
crimes maybe jl's the only solution but
for let's say robbery and vandalism and
a lot of stuff I just want to see him
coming
if I see him coming I can make my own
decisions how to stay safe
impossible to monitor I don't know
imagine if you owned a store
and you knew that somebody came in had
been convicted of shoplifting 15 times
you'd follow him around
you would just stand right next to the
whole time you're shopping and it
wouldn't it shouldn't be illegal
it should definitely not be illegal to
stand wherever you want in your own
store and watch anybody you want in your
own store
so you know you wouldn't watch them on
the camera you just follow him around
the aisle
say hey I understand you've shoplifted
15 times so we're going to keep an eye
on you but you're welcome to shop here
yeah I suppose you could get people
falsely accused of stuff that's always a
problem
all right well I'll just throw that idea
out there because the other ideas are
not working so YouTube thanks for coming
see you in the morning
