Episode 2567 CWSA 08/15/24

looking good looking good well let me find my comments here make sure the comments are working I know they will here we go it's time for a show good morning everybody and welcome to coffee with Scott Adams the highlight of human civilization if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can understand when their tiny shiny human brains all you need is a Couer mugger a glass a tankered chel a canteen jug or flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparallel pleasure it's the dop me head of the day that's the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous Sip and it happens now go well let's start with some fun science then we'll get to all the political Intrigue over in China they've got a restaurant that pretends to be a train so it's uh it's like you're inside a train car uh but the Windows look like they have video screens instead of Windows and they're coordinated so it looks like you're in a train car that's going through this beautiful countryside now how much do I want to eat in that train car that looks like it's going through the countryside a lot I think that would be really cool I don't know what else it has I don't know if it has vibration or some background you know noise or something like a train but I've long imagined that what travel will look like in the future is a drone with a 360 de degree camera that somebody either legally or illegally flies through every street and places that you would want to go so let's say you wanted to go to Santorini or uh you wanted to go to Paris you just sit in your room where the the windows of your room would be big windows but they would actually just be TV screens and they would show the exact video from the Drone that had already gone through the city or the destination imagine going to Stonehenge just sitting in a chair in a room and then you know you basically are it's like you're in the Drone and you're flying through all the rocks of Stonehenge of assuming any that's legal I would never need to go anywhere again I've had some experiences with with you know virtual reality where when I was done I said you know what if this were a real place in some cases they're not real uh I would not need to go there I would feel like I'd seen the pyramids it if you had a full virtual room experience where you were walking around the pyramids and even like going up to the top of one and inside one and all that would you feel a deep need to actually visit Egypt I literally wouldn't if you gave me a you know a rich enough virtual experience I wouldn't have any curiosity left I'd say well got a pretty good idea what it's going to look like I did that with the uh Coliseum so the the Rome Coliseum I did a virtual reality program where you got to stand there and look at it at least from the outside and I said to myself I feel like I've been there I I haven't actual memory of being there and I've never been there it's the weirdest thing anyway here's a cool thing uh there's now an implantable device that can automatically detect if you have an overdose of opioids and then if you do it administers a dose of nxone which is that drug that they give if you overdose on Fentanyl and other opioids and apparently it's been tested in a pig so I don't know how long it would take before it's in humans I also don't know if it's a great idea because if you said to a drug addict hey if you put this little implantable chip under your skin uh and you accidentally get some fentanyl you'll probably survive does the addict say oh that's good news I'll cancel my plan to get off drugs I'll canel I'll cancel my plan for Rehab because now I don't have a risk of dying so it could be one of those things where the it sounds great on paper but if you introduce it into the real world uh drug addicts don't act like other people so you could end up increasing the number of drug addicts or at least increasing the number who survived and uh I'm not sure that's exactly what they're shooting for but more life is better than less life I suppose meanwhile Columbia Columbia University president re signed after months of mounting pressure says Fox News so this is uh man shafik has resigned after all the repeated calls for uh for leaving following her response to the anti-israel protests and violence on campus so I feel like there is a uh Power and balance with these protests the anti-israel that seemed anti-semitic to many and that the there's really just a timing lag and that in the short term nobody was expecting all these massive protests kind of popped up quickly in the long term I would expect that the the pro Jewish American pro-jewish pro-israel group would collect you know they would organize they would figure out how to respond and that eventually there's going to be a pretty strong push back to the protests that seem to be anti-American in many ways so so look for uh look for that power imbalance to balance itself out over time all right here's a question is this real science or fake science so there's a study according to Sky News that uh people who feel older people who feel their life has purpose are less likely to get memory loss so if you're an older P person let's say you are retirement age your kids are out of the house if you had any and uh if you can find some other purpose your memory loss will be less does that sound like real real science to you does anybody have any questions about that science here's my question it's not an accusation it's just a question wouldn't it also be true true that the people with the healthiest brains would be the most likely to take on a new challenge at a at their senior years wouldn't it be likely that if you knew your brain had lost a step you would be less likely to say you know what I think I'll jump right in and make the world a better place with my degraded brain I've got a feeling this might be backward science I don't know that of course it's just when I hear something like this I go you know I feel like this could have worked either way people with suboptimal brains don't take on as many meaningful projects and if and if you're like me I'm a certain age but my brain unfortunately seems about the same as it always was so I feel like I I feel like not working at my current level of brain health would be just the wrong decision so I don't do I think think this this is my you know just personal impression of things but I feel like I do things that are designed to be good for the world and designed to be meaningful like like this the thing I'm doing right now uh because I'm not done my brain is still functioning in many ways it's better than it's ever been because I have extra experience and so that's why I take on things I take on things because I can if I couldn't I guess I wouldn't so I worry that the science is backwards but don't know don't know for sure they may have found a way to control for that but that's the question you should ask with that kind of a science well there's a story that hackers somehow got a hold of and leaked every American Social Security number oh everyone so do you remember well those of you who have been with me for a long time you know that I've been saying for I don't know 20 years that you can want to have privacy that's a perfectly reasonable thing to want but there's no way you can really get it because technology and the way people work is so so so biased against everybody having a reason to take a little bit of your privacy and then the technology will exist to steal the rest of it and then the government will say well if we can look at them wouldn't that stop a lot of crime if we could just sort of look at them and check out their Geo fencing and everything else so I don't think there's really any chance that we will have a future with something like privacy the way you used to know it I think there's no chance of that now you could it certainly makes sense to fight it but your mental you know your mental conditioning going into that fight should be that in the long run you lose because there isn't really any way to keep privacy in the long run the technology will just be too good so I'm not saying any of this is good just in case you want to misinterpret me I'm saying it's all bad that they're taking your privacy but uh nothing you can do about it and when I hear that every single social security number has been stolen I say is that why I keep getting phone calls that my subscribers uh well it's people who did not subscribe but found out that they're being charged by me so I'm getting more calls than I ever have well only a handful but that's more than I've ever had of people who say I did not sign up for your subscription service but you seem to be charging me and then I have to give them the bad news that their card has been stolen but first I say could you check with your spouse cuz sometimes your spouse signs up for a coffee with Scott Adams and doesn't mention it got put on the card so that's happened to but yeah I'm not even sure that credit cards will work in the future because the the theft is so massive at this point I mean how many times your credit cards been stolen in the past year how many of you have had a fake charge on at least one of your credit cards in the past year for me it's every year I I would say somebody steals one of my cards or uses my number for a fake transaction at least once a year I mean our our entire system doesn't really work it's heading in the wrong direction well the mayor of Palm Beach uh wants to shut down maral Lago and the argument would be because I guess security has increased after the assassination attempt on Trump so the Secret Service uh closed the road but really that means that they just check you when you're going in if you're a resident they're going to make sure they check you and uh so the mayor who some have described as a rhino I don't know if that's accurate but um is uh making noise that if the road is closed then you can't say that uh that that private club should be opened so it looks like I I feel like just everybody who has some way to go after Trump is doing it we got another drump all capsure here we got a serious drunk coming from Rumble all caps I love that the drunk people signal their drunkness with all caps it's so useful I used to be against all caps but now that I realize it's only being the the only people who use the L caps are the the drunks that actually is helpful because you could just oh all caps I'll skip that one all right so there's a Wall Street Journal Story the big story today I guess Wall Street Journal is breaking this story that the nordstream pipeline was not blown up by the United States it was not blown up by Ukraine the government the government so here's the story that I don't believe one bit of it it might be true but there there's nothing credible about this story whatsoever right so here's the new story that the the people who blew up the nordstream pipeline were ukrainians but they were private ukrainians operating without the government's approval now they they The Story Goes that they did tell zilinski they plan to do it and that when the CIA got wind of it the CIA said no no don't do that and told zalinsky no no no don't blow up that uh Pipeline and then zilinski said no no no you guys don't blow up that pipeline so that means that the CIA was innocent because they said don't do it that means zalinski was eventually innocent because he told the plotters to not do it but then those plotters oh those those dirty plotters they did it anyway so they they rented their own little uh yacht and they got their little team together with Prof.

I know professional private divers and they went down there and they blew up that pipe that uh pipeline how many people believe that's true does anybody believe that's true to to me it seems so ridiculously obviously not true uh that I just laugh at it I mean I don't I don't think any of that's true could it be true sure I suppose you know one one of the ways that you can tell truth from fake news is if fake news is perfect if you're going to make up a fake story you make sure it all hangs together it all makes sense the real world is is so weird that you can't even believe it's true if something is coming from Real World observation it always has well often if it's anything complicated it has the quality of really some somebody would act that way you know somebody actually made that mistake somebody's that incompetent so that's what real stories sound like so there is a little bit of real story about this and that it's so messy and there's so much Badness in it but it's a little bit too on the nose you know what I mean what what is it that our CIA would want the world or Russia to believe what would be the most on thenns thing that the CIA would want you to believe that it wasn't the CIA first of all but miraculously and unbelievably it wasn't Ukraine's government hey look at that it it wasn't us and it wasn't even the Ukraine government isn't that convenient and what about the timing of learning this huh it's right when everybody observing this is pretty sure that both sides are getting closer to negotiating an end to it you know it would be hard to make the negotiations work if you were planning to negotiate an end to the Ukraine conflict what would make it really hard is if Putin believed that you'd blown up his pipeline because he might say to you yes I will be willing to negotiate and end this war but you're going to have to pay for the pipeline would that be an unreasonable request if he said yes we we will uh wind down the war the only thing I ask is you got to pay for the pipeline and it's $10 billion I don't know this looks a little too perfect because if it wasn't the government of Ukraine that did it and it wasn't the CIA who are you going to build you going to build the six people on the boat they don't have 10 billion so to me it looks like a preparation for negotiation I would imagine that the Democrats would love to wind down the Ukraine war and take that as a win if they could spin it that way as a win before the election so every part of this looks a little too coincidental so I'm not buying any of it that's my take uh rasmason has an updated poll on Trump and Harris and uh still has Trump up 49 to 45 and if you throw in the third party people it doesn't change much um at least in terms of the percentage lead and um of course we're at a point where we don't know what to believe about polls but it is true that the rasmuson poll didn't change much by recent events other polls are showing wow big change K Harris is killing it everybody loves her the joy you can feel the joy um so someday we might know what uh what's true but at this point the the polls uh in general are not believable um I have more confidence in the rasmason pole CU traditionally they do well compared to other pollsters but also they don't really have a reason to lie about this they they're not so uh pro- Democrat that you would expect them to lie so the ones you don't expect to lie have a different result than the one you expect to lie I don't know is that a coincidence well inflation is a weirdly low which is just good enough to confuse the stupid people because the stupid people will say my my goodness inflation is now down to a reasonable number under 2% or something 2% now if that were real that'd be great but what what Republicans will say is well if you were compare current prices to 2019 they're up 30 50% insurance is through the roof and eggs and gas are way higher so it's probably good news that inflation isn't still going and it's really good news but it doesn't make anything affordable because things already went up now why did they go up so don't you have questions about what exactly is driving all of it I can tell you that in California the reason Insurance went through the roof is because there was fire risk uh that was crazy so the the state wasn't managing the fire risk but also the state uh insurance commission said you can't raise rates for a while they've changed that but uh and then the insurance companies just said we're out we're done if you can't raise rates enough to make money why be in business so yeah and some big fires that just whacked the insurance companies so we have enough information that uh Democrats can claim that inflation is low while Republicans claim that it's through through the roof and that the Baseline went up so so much that an ordinary person can't afford to live anymore both are true both are true so Harris is going to have some kind of meeting Friday I guess tomorrow and talk about her uh Financial economic proposals that'll be interesting but uh she wants to end price gouging she says end price gouging and especially for meat proc in conglomerates now the question I would ask is is there one Economist in the entire world democrat or republican could even be a communist I don't care is there one Economist anywhere who thinks that the government should cap prices for anything I believe the answer is there's no such thing as any Economist anywhere left or right who thinks this is a good idea so here's what you should look for look for MSNBC and CNN to have no Economist on on their show instead they'll have pundits do you know why there will be no economists because no Economist thinks that capping prices is a good idea none zero you can't find any now uh I might be wrong about that but if you see an economist come on and say you know what in a capitalist system if you want to have a good supply of things you cap the price nobody will say that so watch how fake the news becomes because you might see an economist come on Fox News to say well that's a terrible idea everybody knows it but CNN and MSNBC almost have to have no Economist on the news for the next few months none you watch yeah the the even the economists whose names you've heard of and are often on the news they will be so shut out they will have nothing to do with this and if you were just a Democrat voter and you were not an economist and you didn't know whether price caps were good or bad which would be reasonable I mean I think you'd have to have some pretty deep experience to know it's always a bad idea some people would think well maybe this case it is a good idea no it's not it's always a bad idea idea 100% of the time that's one of the few things you can depend on in economics is if you put artificial controls on things you'll get less of it guaranteed so meat processing conglomerates I don't know what the story is there I guess there were a bunch of mergers and so the government is claiming that the mergers allowed them to make obscene profits do you think that's true do you think that the reason meat prices are high is because the meat processing conglomerates uh consolidated and then there's less competition I'll bet that's not what's going on I'm no expert but here's what I would guess my guess is that the consolidations are because they couldn't make money in other words there was too much competition and the prices were too low to handle their overhead so my guess is if you looked at the return on investment of whatever meat process meat processing conglomerates exist I'll bet you'd find the ROI would be right in the middle of business in general meaning that there would be no indication of price gouging because it's not price gouging if the company is making just an ordinary profit price gouging would mean they're you know 100% more profit than they've ever made before and they could could easily lower the cost and still make lots of money where's that evidence do you think K Harris will say Here's the the meat processing conglomerates we're talking about before they Consolidated their Roi was a quite reasonable 10% a year after consolidation and you know several of them Consolidated now this one big company is has has an Roi of 53% yeah way more than the average companies so that's abusive do you think she'll make that argument I guarantee you she will not you will never hear about the profit Roi you know forget about profit number if she just gives you a number like and they made a billion dollars this year whatever whatever the number is that's fake you've got to you've got to know the return on the on the assets that they employed that would tell you if they're making money more than you would expect the company to make so look for no good information on economics coming out of any of this um meanwhile Trump uh his economic proposals include extending his 2017 tax cuts now somebody explained to me the other day because I went to the website where you can put in your your personal income and age and state and we'll tell you how much uh you'll save in taxes um or lose in taxes depending if this uh tax law expires so I said to myself oh my God if these Trump tax cuts expire how much more am I going to spend so I go to the site I put in my information and it tells me that if the tax cuts expire I will save money quite a bit and I looked at it and I think I told you oh the website doesn't work because it says if the taxes go down no it says if the tax go up that somehow I'm going to spend less on taxes and I thought it must be broken and that's why I said and then somebody said no Scott because part of the tax law was that it took away State deductions and I'm in California so we have you know wildly crazy taxes for California so I used to be able to write them off so that used to be a deduction but I lost lost my state deduction in return for a lower tax rate but it didn't compensate so it turns out that the Trump proposed uh taxes will raise my taxes so I'm not in favor of that I'm in favor of raising your taxes not mine like everybody else I just say it out loud yeah I would love to raise your taxes and lower mine is that wrong no it's not wrong cuz you want the same thing you want my taxes to go up and yours to go down let's be honest we all want everybody else's taxes to go up except maybe poor people uh we don't want their taxes to go up but but among the people who are you know able to pay their bills already we kind of want the other people's taxes to go up so I I can't support Trump's uh economic plan because it raises my expenses um there may be other parts of it I might support I mean obviously I think the how you treat the Border has to be part of your economic plan because the Border stuff is really an expense it's just a different kind of one so I'm not going to go all in on Trump's economic proposals you can make your own decisions if you do your calculations and it looks like it will lower your taxes then I would say you have a complete moral um cover to say you like that better it raises my taxes I think I'm not positive but it looks like it might if it raises my taxes I'm against it and I think you would you understand that right right somebody's going to win somebody's going to lose but nobody wants their own taxes to go higher all right and uh and Trump wants to do more increased drilling um even though I think we're at record levels but you could do a lot more I I think lowering energy costs I I think that's the magic lever and I think Trump has a much better story that he would increase production and lower lower energy costs so I think he's got that the better story then there's this whole question of tariffs so I guess the Biden Administration which was always anti- tariff decided not to remove uh most of or all of Trump's tariffs that he had on China is that true I need a fact check on that but I think that the Democrats were all anti- tariff until they inherited the government and then they said uh we better keep these tariffs because that's a lot of money coming in now some people say but Scott you fool don't you know that tariffs don't help at all because all they do is pass along the expense to consumers in this country to which I say I'm not sure you understand how this works so here's my big question if we're getting raw materials from China and we don't have those raw materials here I would not expect to see a tariff because why would you just increase the cost basically it just be a tax on Americans because we would need the raw materials for building whatever we need to build it would be just like ATT tax so why would you do that well probably don't here's a case where would make sense to put a tariff on let's say China decides it wants to take over one of our Industries and I'll just make one up let's say China wants to take over the refrigerator and Manufacturing industry now I'm making that up because they already took it over I think or South Korea did or somebody did I don't know we do we make any refrigerators does United States even make a refrigerator probably not but imagine the situation where America said our refriger ation manufacturing is vitally important we can't have some other country making all our refrigerators um so in that case a tariff would make sense because the Tariff is to discourage people from buying the Chinese refrigerator when they could buy an American one and everybody is a little bit better off that way now if China had artificially lowered the price of the refrigerators so that a Chinese refrigerator cost half as much and was just as good well it would put American refrigerator makers and a business but not because of competition it would be because the Chinese government had subsidized their refrigerators to make them so cheap that it would put us on a business so a tariff makes sense when you're protecting an industry from being attacked not by another competitor this is the important part the Tariff is not to protect you from a good competitor the tariff is to protect you from a government that is backing a competitor so much so that they can wipe out your entire industry so in those cases you want a tariff now would it raise the prices in some cases of Americans paying for things yes it would but it would also Drive the right Behavior which should compensate enough to make that a good tradeoff the right behavior is that we keep our refrigerator industry now when I talk about refrigerators it's ridiculous because I think we've already lost that industry but imagine if it's electric cars do you think we can not be the electric car maker we need that industry what if it's solar panels and and uh batteries for your house no we need that we we really really need that so there's some things that have such basic domestic value that you have to do whatever it takes to keep the com competitors out and a tariff is a good way to do that so just remember this simple rule about tariffs if it's something we need and we can't get it somewhere else that's a bad tariff that's just a tax if it's another government targeting an industry for Destruction you need to do whatever it takes to stop it and if it's a tariff even with a little pain that is the correct answer so tariffs are not so easy it's not tariffs are good or tariffs are bad Argentina elected an economist the uh argentinians had a problem with housing Supply how how do you think it went all right let's let's predict this so Argentina elects an economist and I told you economists don't believe in price GS none of them none of them so they elect an economist did he put price caps on nope he did the opposite uh he removed price caps rent control and what happened he's an economist he removed government caps on prices for housing immediately it caused a building boom and a a resupply of rental housing do you know why because it always does it it works every time this is not one of those things guessing about if you elect an economist you get this I I'd love to see if there's any Economist in you know something like a capitalist country that ever got a worse result I'll bet not I'll bet they all they all get a reasonably good economic result and I would argue that uh Trump is far closer to being an economist as in being compatible with an economist in terms of all of his views than K Harris so if you can't get an economist you want somebody whose views are completely compatible with economists and I think Trump is 100% compatible with General economic belief and KL Harris is I think 100% incompatible with every Economist now I'm making the largest claim so there may be you know some weird exceptions but I think that's true I think there's no such thing as any Economist who who believes in price gaps for example or or keeping the Border open the way we have it um also the Democrats are looking at attacks on unrealized gains now without getting too wonky about that uh let me tell you that 100% of economists think that's a terrible idea so what it would do to me is um it would be really bad for me most of most of my current money uh is from my investments almost all the money that I made just sort of daily you know my daily royalties for my career either spent gave away or invested in some kind of business that usually didn't go well so my entire wealth for the rest of my life is from investment gains cuz early in my career I made you know nice little pocket of money and I just put it all in an index fund and then I just sat on it for 30 years so that's my money but the the small amount that I put in relatively small amount that I put into the stock market is now a nice healthy amount if they tax me on the difference between what I put in and what it's worth now even though I haven't sold any of it I'm going to get killed I mean it would actually change my entire lifestyle depending on the percentage I guess so it's uh it's pretty Draconian and you know although I'd be fine I mean I could I'm not going to starve but uh you could imagine somebody who is in a similar situation where most of their net wealth is an unrealized gain and it's what they're relying on for their entire um retirement it it is just so wrong and unfair and I don't think any Economist is in favor of it now I might be wrong on this one I'm definitely not wrong on the price caps not being supported by any Economist on the left or the right I don't know about this one but I can't I can't believe there'd be anybody in favor of it it'd be hard to imagine so um but but of course you watch the news right so the news has fully vetted this what no no the this most important question you haven't seen the news tell you whether it's a good or bad idea to tax unrealized gains how about the one on tariffs do you remember the tariffs who explained to you what I just explained that there are some cases where tariff is is really a National Defense necessity do you remember the news covering that in detail for you probably not now I do believe the news has covered all of these things but they just sort of do a light touch and move on yeah they don't treat it like it's the most important thing and I don't know what's much more important than the economy all right here's an assassination attempt update um the the uh Rabbit Hole of the Trump attempted assassination just keeps getting bigger uh I'm not going to give you details but I would recommend to you a podcast in which Benny Johnson was talking to Mike Ben and Mike Ben does this incredible job of collecting connecting dots and explaining the architecture of our government and all of its parts and how everything fits together and what looks like a coincidence and what doesn't and it's really a master class every every time I see him on a podcast I think wow I just learned something I never knew before so if if you're not following Mike Ben B NZ you're Flying Blind you're just Flying Blind you you really wouldn't know what's going on anywhere because almost everything that's in the news is a fake version everything that's real is the layer below that and then even if you saw what's happening in the layer below it it would still be it wouldn't look like anything to you you have to go to the level below that where you know who the players are once you know the history and you know the players then the layer above that makes sense and that's something like reality the layer above that the fake layer is the fake news that's what we hear we don't really have access to anything unless you run into a Mike Benz who can tell you who the players are what the history is and how all those parts connect if you don't see that you actually know nothing and that's a real hard thing to get your to WRA your head around that your understanding of the world is at zero but it is it's actually a zero you you're not even close if you don't know who's who and the history of all that stuff especially the intelligence part of it but here are some things that Mike Ben points out uh I recommend again you see the larger uh the larger conversation with Benny Johnson but uh so the attempt on Trump came soon soon after the Supreme Court ruling that made it less likely Trump would go to jail huh that's sort of a coincidence isn't it that as soon as the risk of going to jail was substantially lessened it's not zero but substantially lessened then suddenly there was attempt on his actual life but that could be a coincidence interestingly that attempt came just was it a week or two before the uh RNC convention where they would have actually pick their candidate because what would have happened if the assassination attempt had been successful well it'd be too late to run a whole new primary wouldn't it so maybe somebody would get picked by the delegates and the Insiders and the money people and maybe it would be Nikki Hy maybe it would be Nikki Hy I mean she was one of the last ones in the race right yeah now is that a coincidence so the actual assassination attempt was sandwiched between two coincidences that look like really big ones one they knew he wouldn't go to jail or it was less likely two it was exactly the right timing where they could have slotted somebody else in without any kind of a process you know much the way they did with Harrison now is that is that or Harris is that a coin incidence that that attempt came exactly in that weird little window where if you were some shadowy organization that wanted to take him out it would have been the perfect timing could be a coincidence you have to watch out because once you form a narrative in your head you will notice that everything fits your narrative so could confirmation bias explain those two coincidences yes yes it could it could are there any more well we found out that this kid learned how to make pipe bombs which turns out to be a favored uh favored technique of our undercover people teaching people to become better terrorists and that feels like a big coincidence huh he also knew how to make pipe bombs that that's sort of suggestive that some American intelligence entity may have taught him but it's also possible he just learned it on the Internet or you know he was just clever and he figured it out could it be confirmation bias it could be it could be but that would be three coincidences and then there's also this question of we I guess there's a new video of the placement of the pipe bomb on January 6 now this is separate from the assassination attempt so January 6 we know there was a pipe bomb planted outside some DNC entity kamla Harris seemed to have walked past it without any Secret Service problems it wasn't especially hidden it was a pipe bomb there's Now video that makes it look like a cop might have placed it I don't know if that's true so the the whole story about the pipe bomb is being told in a confusing way where I looked into it and I was like I'm not even sure what you're saying and there's some new videos and I looked at them and I said I don't know what these are showing and the description of what's Happening isn't really telling me what's happening so the pipe bomb thing is getting confusing but it did happen at the same time that the uh people who uh are sometimes considered Insiders on the January 6 thing decided to make their push on the capital so was the pipe bomb part of a conspiracy to make it look like the protesters were more dangerous than they were I don't know so that whole story is just really confusing but all these coincidences start to layer together and their ven diagrams are overlapping and you know why why is this the only assassin in the world who doesn't have social media you know he didn't leave a note you know you just keep going and you know the um the Secret Service were unusually bad that day they were replaced by uh elements of the Department of Homeland Homeland uh Homeland Department of Homeland what's the s for so the uh there's just a whole lot of coincidences there so I don't know what to think about that but uh certainly it's dirty looking well Tim walace is getting the creepy guy treatment from a number of notable people I won't name names but you've probably noticed that on the critic side the non-d Democrat side A lot of people are having the same viseral reaction to him that I am now my visceral reaction is not based on any super knowledge I have of wrongdoing or anything illegal I have no no personal information about anything like that I just look at him and he's got that John Brennan face you know John Brennan used to be head of the CIA and whenever he would come on to talk about Trump and you know Russia collusion which was totally made up by people like John Brennan and when he came on he talked about the hunter laptop you know another case you would just look at his face and you'd say you look like somebody's lying all the time he's just got this biggest liar face John brenon does now maybe it's just natural it doesn't mean doesn't mean I'm peering into his soul I'm just saying he has a face that you would want to cast in a movie of somebody who was a bad guy and I see the same thing in Tim wals that he looks like somebody you would cast in a movie of somebody who pretended to be a good guy until you found out he wasn't it's just a vibe that I just can't shake now there are let's say a number of coincidences around his life that I won't get into but everything about this guy just screams there's something we need to know that we don't know anyway um here's another Mike Ben's thing I also saw on the Benny Johnson podcast no I think it was on another podcast it wasn't on that one but uh he called the uh the issue where the Harris campaign was modifying Google headlines to make it look like it was more positive for the Harris campaign so they were sponsored ads but if you did a Google search you wouldn't notice that maybe the first ones were paid ads even though they're they're indicated just with a little indicator but you'd see a whole bunch of positive things that looks like the news loves KLA Harris or or that the news is saying things things are very positive for KL Harris at least so they got busted for that and there were lots of examples of them doing it and they admit it uh but it's not illegal it's not illegal it's weasly but not illegal Google claims that there was a some kind of problem in their system that allowed Harris to get away with it and that they're they're acting like although it's not illegal they're acting like it wouldn't have happened under their process that they wish had been working I guess I don't know if you can believe that but here's what Ben said that I thought was uh hilarious um we know that the news in general is fake and we know that Google can gain what news you see so if you start with fake news but then how you see it and the way it's presented is also gamed that's like two levels or two layers of fakeness one is the news itself and two is deciding which of the fake news or real news you see that would be Google Now the Harris campaign managed to add a level of fake on top of the two existing levels of fake so it was fake news Google decides what you see and what you don't which is another form of brainwashing essentially and then the Harris campaign modified the real news into fake news so it was actually three layers of fakeness which Ben's called a fake news tiasu because tiasu is a layered dessert three layers of fakeness that's where we're at well there's a report that kim.com might get extradited to the United States from New Zealand I've always wondered what was happening with that case but if you don't follow Kim as I do you would not know that he is a a very vocal and out say productive critic of the American government and you know I think more so of the Democrats but I'm not positive about that um so to me it just sounds like they're trying to get their hands on a Critic who knows too much he would be in the category of people who seem to know what's happening behind the curtain now I don't know if he's always right but he's a dangerous critic to the United States and uh surprise now the United States has worked on a way to extradite him now it seems to me that he got really quiet on social media I used to see him every day and I haven't seen him for a while now I don't know if that's because the algorithm changed or something has life changed or it's this legal problem but uh this is a big red flag now I'm not I'm not supporting anything kim.com did in the legal sense I'm not aware of what the charges are but when you see somebody who's such a productive he actually makes a difference in his opinion uh publicly and then you see the United States has a reason to pick him up I'm just not comfortable with it it could be it's just ordinary Department of Justice stuff he did some things that are illegal we're going through normal process maybe you know may maybe there's some things he needs to answer for I don't know I I just don't live in a world where I can be comfortable that somebody who is also a really productive critic of the government coincidentally is getting picked up the coincidences just keep racking up all right now we get to my most provocative part of today's um presentation you know how we're all U mocking Harris for not doing press interviews and the Press is mocking her and the Press is pushing her and all the smart people are saying uh she's going to have to do this and you know she's she's avoiding it and blah blah blah well here's what I think what what is the point of talking to the Press there's no reason to to talk to the Press if if you're a well-known entity meaning the public you know has a basic idea who you are and what you're up to that would be true of both Trump and Harris we've been watching them both for a while talking to the Press how does that benefit either of them if they want to get a story out that's in in their favor they can do an event and then the Press covers the event but they don't get to ask any questions if either candidate agrees to an interview what's going to happen well you know in advance whether the interviewer is a friendly or an unfriendly right if it's a friendly it's useless because it's basically just the campaign stump speech as translated through a friendly interviewer so we don't need to see a friendly talk to a politician it's it's just basically a free campaign spending but what if they're uh not friendly and they're very clearly aligned with the other side what use is that you say to yourself but Scott that is useful because then they're going to ask the questions that are like the real probing deep questions is that what you observe well let me ask this have you ever seen any press Pro or anti anybody who's at the the high level of the Democrats either for Biden or Trump or Harris have you ever heard them say um what are you going to do about the deficit that's going to kill us now they let Trump say stuff like oh I'm going to grow my way out of it and then change the subject that's not an answer you can't grow your way out of it or uh I'm going to maybe we'll look at cutting some expenses but I can't be more specific no you can't cause spening enough to get out of the deficit it's not even possible so where where is the hard-hitting interview that's asking either the left or the right any question that's useful right let me give you another one there's a there's now some uh video uh Eric I think it's uh Eric abinanti is uh is posting this on X so a video of kamla Harris not too long ago saying that in California they needed to go to paper ballots because it's the only way you could be sure you had a secure election let me say that again KLA Harris not many years ago in California has said in public as clearly as possible that paper ballots are the only way you can be sure the election is clean just think about that now now ask now let me ask this question who has ever had a major uh presidential candidate for an interview and said can you explain why the government even uses electronic voting machines doesn't seem to be faster doesn't feel more credible to the public uh both Democrats and Republicans at various times have said it's got to be paper because we don't trust these other machines it can't be cheaper so if it's not cheaper faster or more reliable can you vice president Harris or can you uh candidate Trump explain to me why we have them because the public doesn't have any idea why we have electronic voting machines because as we observe we don't see evidence that it's faster more reliable or cheaper so just tell us why now those are what I call good questions have you ever heard a reporter ask those questions have you ever heard a reporter ask smart questions about tariffs here here's the reporter talking about tariffs well some people say tariffs will just raise prices on people what do you say Mr.

Trump well I collected $20 billion in tariffs nobody's ever collected that much I got so much in tariffs nobody's ever seen that much money let's change the subject nobody asks Trump about tariffs in a way that when you're done you the viewer would have any idea if it was a good idea or a bad idea Trump just you know throws his his persuasion in there and changes the subject because you can't you know spend the whole day in one question so we don't have a press on the left or the right that seems either willing or able to ask any question that a citizen would actually be interested in do you know what they ask if if you give a a really good interview to one of the campaign here's what they're going to ask what do you think about JD Vance a couch that that'll be what you get so given that the entire news industry has shown themselves to be completely useless clowns with a few exceptions right a few exceptions uh I mean you know I always think of the uh the time that uh bre Barts Joel poock um challenged uh Biden when he was when he was a candidate maybe he'd already been elected I can't remember but challenged him on the fine people hoax but of course since it wasn't a sit down he couldn't really get into you know Joel couldn't really get into the details and Biden just lied and said his lie and then changed the subject and went on so we do we do know that there are some people who are willing to ask the question that the public is interested in uh it's just there's no I mean do do you think Joel's going to get a sit down with Harris not a chance if if it's George stepping upas is he going to ask the right question about why did you run on a hoax no not a chance there's not a chance so here's what I think we need and by the way uh an couter added on to the in a sense sort of a related Point she said that political de are stupid if you I'm paraphrasing the political debates are stupid if the questions are asked by partisans and it doesn't really matter if the partisan is on the right or the left why do you have partisans at all and her her point is shouldn't the candidates ask each other questions and I thought you know what that's actually better I would love to see the candidates say you each have six questions you can't you know you can't do more than that but you're each going to come with six questions and you will ask your six questions but then you'll be able to respond and then respond to the response you know some kind of technique that makes sense so the question comes from somebody who's not a partisan but well they are ultimate partisan because they're running against them but it would be the far more penetrating question now I'm going to I'm going to try to top that I think that that's also not ideal because the the questions that a candidate would bring would be so biased that you know the question would be the kind of the answer itself here's what I'd love to see I would love to see some kind of an entity or website that can capture the Public's questions and somehow rank them because the public has questions that the the Press just doesn't ask so I want to know Joel's question right I want to know why are you running on a debunk HX and I want to spend some time on it I I want you to give your answer and then I want to I want somebody to say but you know that's not true I want a real discussion based on real questions I want somebody ask why do we have voting machines can you just explain it and again I'm open to the fact that there's some obvious reason to have them that's I'm not aware of I that could easily be the case but don't we need to know doesn't the public need to have a little bit of education on this question so yes we need some way for um citizens to be asking the questions and now I'm going to Triple down on my suggestion for Trump you you may have seen a video that went around where he was interacting with some voters somewhere in some kind of Commercial Business and he was signing hats and signing baseballs and patting people on the back and just making conversation with people and it was amazing it was amazing from the perspective of just watching his Persona and watching his Charisma now I'd like to take that to another level where instead of talking to his supporters all the time which doesn't give you any new information I'd love to see and this is the third time I think I've said it I'd love to see Trump go to lunch with four or five Democrats who are definitely not on his team and have them ask the hardest questions see how he does I have no interest in seeing him answer a question for the Press not really I'm mildly interested in watching the candidates answer questions they ask each other but I think the questions would be so gamed that it would turn useless pretty quickly but I would never never be tired of watching a real citizen ask the potential president of the United States what the is this all about and then and then just look him in the eye and say that doesn't even sound real to me that's the best you got now I think that nobody would really act that way to somebody who has been the president you know Trump's presence would be kind of suppressing The Worst Behavior but probably in a good way meaning that I think people would still because we're Americans right Americans are willing to push uh your typical Americans are going to still push him but they might do it politely but they just wouldn't let go they just wouldn't let go hey we're going to be here for lunch so you better tell me what you're going to do about the national debt well I'm going to do it with growth really because I don't think growth would get you there well how much of the debt do you think you're going to pay off with growth and if you got a 10% GDP it would drive inflation crazy so how do you get there you can't get there from here now you might need an economist sitting at the you might need like a fact Checker sitting at lunch so maybe I'll add a fact Checker to it somebody who could add a little Nuance you know so that if Trump tries to answer the question but it's an answer that the citizen wouldn't know is not a real answer that the fact Checker would say excuse me um I understand the question I understand the answer but the answer doesn't seem quite addressing the question and here's why I would love that all day long all day long I could watch that and it would be useful it would change the votes I think people would say oh that's me at that lunch I I have exactly those questions and I wish that was me but oh the person who is there asked my question so you would totally pull yourself into the lunch you would be one of the people at the table and that to me would be a whole new model of news so debates are uh stupid and press interviews are stupid the way things are organized um I will call your attention again to the uh the X account comma HQ lies all one word um which basically goes after every lie that Comm Harris's campaign tells and then debunks them um but I haven't seen There Yet the full ranked list of her worst lies that would be really useful I love the top 20 maybe there are 100 but they're at least a top 20 because we need to be able to you know forward that around whenever that claim that uh trumps the liar comes up again I think Harris stopped saying that as much they may be they may be modifying their approach because they've been caught lying so many times but uh yeah let's see a list of Harris lies all right what else is going on here uh the New York attorney general Leticia James um she's warning companies about uh misinformation in the coming elections and especially problem with the AI so she sent a letter to Google open AI X and meta to warn them about the the rise of AI disinformation now I think we're um we're in a weird period of history in which uh people can still be fooled by AI images now I think that's not going to last forever right because once every single person knows that every single photograph or video even video could be fake won't we learn to ignore it or will we learn that um you know the real ones have some kind of a I don't know Watermark or something on them somehow is there a way that we'll be able to tell the source oh maybe that's all you need you just need to know the source because if you trust the source then you'll think it's not AI if you don't know the source probably AI maybe that's all they need to do you know what rather than identifying AI wouldn't it make more sense for the social media companies to Simply identify the source and if there's no known source make sure people know that there's no identified source for this which would tell me that there's not some video of this in the wild that rather it must be AI unless it's the only person who has this video so I think if you simply forced people to to say the for the to say the source of wherever the art came from you being good shape now could that be done automatically or would you need people to do that it might be automatic because on Google for example you could search for an image right if you had an image you could search to find out if it matches an existing image so wouldn't Google know that if an AI image is being run on a social platform would know that that doesn't exist from any reliable source and therefore almost certainly fake anyway we'll see where that goes I saw that Glenn kersner who the hell is he um but he's somebody important and he's he's saying with h these big wide eyes that make him look crazy and well just crazy um he looks crazy I don't know if he is but he said U if Trump loses the election he quote will spend the rest of his miserable life in court being prosecuted and ultimately serving prison terms one after the other do you think that's true do you think that if Trump doesn't win that the the lawfare will just continue until he's in jail or lawf fared into submission it might but here's the thing I worry about out what would stop that because none of it looks real to me in in terms of regular person would not be prosecuted for this sort of stuff I feel like the Republicans need some kind of um mutually assured destruction and the mutually assured destruction should be in the some same domain you know meaning lawfare and I think what they need to do is say all right if you lawfare Trump here are the the three leaders in the Democrat Party that are going to have non-stop legal cases against them um through and ideally you should all be legal right I'm not talking about doing anything illegal in response but the same way it's legal for them to do infinite lawfare that would not be done for another candidate or another person another citizen um why can't Republicans do the same thing but hold it as a threat not necessarily is something that's executed on moment one but rather they should say if you're going to laware of trump out of office or if you're going to laware him after office we're going to put a billion dollars into destroying the lives of whoever is behind it because you can't do that and get away with it I don't think we can have a society where one can get a billionaire to fund their infinite lawsuits against one candidate they don't want to run for office I can't live in that country I need that billionaire to be lawed out of office or out of you out of the public life so there needs to be some massive really well-funded you know like a billion dollars that says we're not going to operate if everything's going fine you know we're not an attack dog we're we are simply NATO we're not an offensive operation we're we're like a legal NATO if if you if you laware one of our team we're going to put a billion dollars into burying you but but if it's just law fair I mean if somebody actually broke the law then the legal system needs to handle that but if it's clearly lawfare we're going to put a billion dollars into ruining you specifically for being behind it anything short of that and we lose everything because this whole laware thing is so out of control it seems to be the dominant way the government is being run by lawyers right and we don't trust the legal system because you know you just pick your Venue and you know what the answer is going to be so I'd say $1 billion of legal NATO like defensive Force for Republicans would be necessary for the health of the Republic but don't use it offensively that would be my recommendation well the American Society of plastic surgeons of which almost all plastic surgeons belong um they uh broke with a consensus and they're rejecting uh what is called gender affirming care for minors in other words doing surgery to change their physical bodies to match their preferred uh identity now I've you know I've large stayed down at this topic because it's getting enough attention and I just don't have anything special to add I mean the only thing I have to add is don't do stuff to kids if you have more to talk about I'm probably not interested don't do permanent changes to children and I'm done if you have something to say about that blah blah blah blah I'm not listening and if you don't like it blah blah blah I don't care adults do what you want to do you know follow your bliss children they can't make decisions you kind of got to wait now I will acknowledge that there must be people who transitioned as children and are really really happy about it that must exist and they would be disadvantaged but I think that seems like a reason reasonable tradeoff for the people who would be transitioned and maybe would have thought differently of it if they had been adults when they made the decision anyway so adults do what you want um there's a story about Ukraine turned a hydrogen powered car into a bomb that was really powerful so it's not a hydrogen bomb so to speak it's not like a you know nuclear hydrogen sort of bomb but uh I know hydrogen is not a nuclear bomb I get it but uh it was just a Toyota so they took a toyot Toyota and they rigged it to blow up some major Russian facility and it looks like they they may have driven it by remote control so what happens when you have self-driving cars and you can put enough explosives in the self-driving car that you can blow up anything in any metropolitan area anytime you want because if you put explosives in a something the size of a vehicle it's better if it's a truck you know SUV or something but if you have that much explosives and it's a self-driving car and you could just tell it to drive up to the ministry of defense and and just blow up that's a pretty big risk that's a pretty big risk I mean I don't know if it's a bigger risk than a person driving it but it's got to be easier to it's got to be easier to do a remote control attack than to find somebody who's willing to sit in the car when it blows up even though there are plenty of those people it's got to be easier to do it without them save them for something else all right ladies and gentlemen those are my comments for today thanks for joining I'm going to say bye to You.

Tube and Rumble and uh X and I'm going to talk to my beloved subscribers on locals and I'll see the rest of you tomorrow make sure you buy my book God's bre the complete works it's the ultimate summer reading and by the way I got more comment I'm going to tell you about soon bye for now all right locals I'm coming at you be e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e for

looking

good looking

good well let me find my comments here

make sure the comments are

working I know they

will here we

go it's time for a show

[Music]

[Music]

good morning everybody and welcome to

coffee with Scott Adams the highlight of

human civilization if you'd like to take

this experience up to levels that nobody

can understand when their tiny shiny

human brains all you need is a Couer

mugger a glass a tankered chel a canteen

jug or flask a vessel of any kind fill

it with your favorite liquid I like

coffee and join me now for the

unparallel pleasure it's the dop me head

of the day that's the thing that makes

everything better it's called the

simultaneous Sip and it happens now

go well let's start with some fun

science then we'll get to all the

political

Intrigue over in China they've got a

restaurant that pretends to be a train

so it's uh it's like you're inside a

train

car uh but the Windows look like they

have video screens instead of Windows

and they're coordinated so it looks like

you're in a train car that's going

through this beautiful countryside now

how much do I want to eat in that train

car that looks like it's going through

the countryside a

lot I think that would be really cool I

don't know what else it has I don't know

if it has vibration or some

background you know noise or something

like a train but I've long

imagined that what travel will look like

in the future is a drone with a 360 de

degree camera that somebody either

legally or illegally flies through every

street and places that you would want to

go so let's say you wanted to go to

Santorini or uh you wanted to go to

Paris you just sit in your room where

the the windows of your room would be

big windows but they would actually just

be TV screens and they would show the

exact video from the Drone that had

already gone through the city or the

destination imagine going to

Stonehenge just sitting in a chair in a

room and then you know you basically are

it's like you're in the Drone and you're

flying through all the rocks of

Stonehenge of assuming any that's

legal I would never need to go anywhere

again I've had some experiences with

with you know virtual reality where when

I was done I said you know what if this

were a real place in some cases they're

not real uh I would not need to go there

I would feel like I'd seen the pyramids

it if you had a full virtual room

experience where you were walking around

the pyramids and even like going up to

the top of one and inside one and all

that would you feel a deep need to

actually visit Egypt

I literally

wouldn't if you gave me a you know a

rich enough virtual experience I

wouldn't have any curiosity left I'd say

well got a pretty good idea what it's

going to look like I did that with the

uh

Coliseum so the the Rome Coliseum I did

a virtual reality program where you got

to stand there and look at it at least

from the outside and I said to myself I

feel like I've been there I I haven't

actual memory of being there and I've

never been there it's the weirdest thing

anyway here's a cool thing uh there's

now an

implantable device that can

automatically detect if you have an

overdose of opioids and then if you do

it administers a dose of nxone which is

that drug that they give if you overdose

on Fentanyl and other

opioids and apparently it's been tested

in a

pig so I don't know how long it would

take before it's in humans I also don't

know if it's a great

idea because if you said to a drug

addict hey if you put this little

implantable chip under your

skin uh and you accidentally get some

fentanyl you'll probably

survive does the addict say oh that's

good news I'll cancel my plan to get off

drugs I'll canel I'll cancel my plan for

Rehab because now I don't have a risk of

dying

so it could be one of those things where

the it sounds great on paper but if you

introduce it into the real world uh drug

addicts don't act like other people so

you could end up increasing the number

of drug addicts or at least increasing

the number who

survived and uh I'm not sure that's

exactly what they're shooting for but

more life is better than less life I

suppose meanwhile Columbia Columbia

University president re signed after

months of mounting pressure says Fox

News so this is uh man

shafik has resigned after all the

repeated calls for uh for leaving

following her response to the

anti-israel protests and violence on

campus so I feel like there is a uh

Power and balance with these protests

the anti-israel that seemed anti-semitic

to many

and that the there's really just a

timing

lag and that in the short term nobody

was expecting all these massive protests

kind of popped up quickly in the long

term I would expect that the the pro

Jewish American pro-jewish

pro-israel group would collect you know

they would organize they would figure

out how to respond and that eventually

there's going to be a pretty strong push

back to the protests that seem to be

anti-American in many ways

so so look for uh look for that power

imbalance to balance itself out over

time all right here's a question is this

real science or fake science so there's

a study according to Sky News that uh

people who feel older people who feel

their life has purpose are less likely

to get memory

loss so if you're an older P person

let's say you are retirement age your

kids are out of the house if you had any

and uh if you can find some other

purpose your memory loss will be

less does that sound like real real

science to

you does anybody have any questions

about that

science here's my question it's not an

accusation it's just a

question wouldn't it also be true true

that the people with the healthiest

brains would be the most likely to take

on a new challenge at a at their senior

years wouldn't it be likely that if you

knew your brain had lost a step you

would be less likely to say you know

what I think I'll jump right in and make

the world a better place with my

degraded

brain I've got a feeling this might be

backward science I don't know that of

course it's just when I hear something

like this I go you know I feel like this

could have worked either way people with

suboptimal brains don't take on as many

meaningful projects and if and if you're

like me I'm a certain age but my brain

unfortunately seems about the same as it

always was so I feel like I I feel like

not working at my current level of brain

health would be just the wrong decision

so I don't do I think think this this is

my you know just personal impression of

things but I feel like I do things that

are designed to be good for the world

and designed to be meaningful like like

this the thing I'm doing right now uh

because I'm not done my brain is still

functioning in many ways it's better

than it's ever been because I have extra

experience and so that's why I take on

things I take on things because I can if

I

couldn't I guess I wouldn't so I worry

that the science is backwards but don't

know don't know for sure they may have

found a way to control for that but

that's the question you should ask with

that kind of a

science well there's a story that

hackers somehow got a hold of and leaked

every American Social Security

number

oh

everyone

so do you remember

well those of you who have been with me

for a long time you know that I've been

saying for I don't know 20

years that you can want to have privacy

that's a perfectly reasonable thing to

want but there's no way you can really

get it because technology and the way

people work is so so so biased against

everybody having a reason to take a

little bit of your privacy and then the

technology will exist to steal the rest

of it and then the government will say

well if we can look at them wouldn't

that stop a lot of crime if we could

just sort of look at them and check out

their Geo fencing and everything else so

I don't think there's really any chance

that we will have a future with

something like privacy the way you used

to know it I think there's no chance of

that now you could it certainly makes

sense to fight it but your

mental you know your mental conditioning

going into that fight should be that in

the long run you lose because there

isn't really any way to keep privacy in

the long run the technology will just be

too

good so I'm not saying any of this is

good just in case you want to

misinterpret me I'm saying it's all bad

that they're taking your privacy but uh

nothing you can do about it and when I

hear that every single social security

number has been stolen I say is that why

I keep getting phone calls that my

subscribers uh well it's people who did

not

subscribe but found out that they're

being charged by

me so I'm getting more calls than I ever

have well only a handful but that's more

than I've ever had of people who say I

did not sign up for your subscription

service but you seem to be charging me

and then I have to give them the bad

news that their card has been stolen but

first I say could you check with your

spouse cuz sometimes your spouse signs

up for a coffee with Scott Adams and

doesn't mention it got put on the card

so that's happened to but yeah I'm not

even sure that credit cards will work in

the future because the the theft is so

massive at this point I

mean how many times your credit cards

been stolen in the past

year how many of you have had a fake

charge on at least one of your credit

cards in the past year for me it's every

year I I would say somebody steals one

of my cards or uses my number for a fake

transaction at least once a year I mean

our our entire system doesn't really

work it's heading in the wrong

direction well the mayor of Palm Beach

uh wants to shut down maral Lago and the

argument would be because I guess

security has increased after the

assassination attempt on Trump so the

Secret Service uh closed the road but

really that means that they just check

you when you're going in if you're a

resident they're going to make sure they

check you and uh so the mayor who some

have described as a rhino I don't know

if that's accurate but um is uh making

noise that if the road is closed then

you can't say that uh that that private

club should be

opened so it looks

like I I feel like just everybody who

has some way to go after Trump is doing

it we got another drump all capsure here

we got a serious drunk coming from

Rumble all caps I love that the drunk

people signal their drunkness with all

caps it's so useful I used to be against

all caps but now that I realize it's

only being the the only people who use

the L caps are the the

drunks that actually is helpful because

you could just oh all caps I'll skip

that

one all right so there's a Wall Street

Journal Story the big story today I

guess Wall Street Journal is breaking

this story that the nordstream pipeline

was not blown up by the United

States it was not blown up by

Ukraine the government the government so

here's the story that I don't believe

one bit of it

it might be true but there there's

nothing credible about this story

whatsoever right so here's the new story

that the the people who blew up the

nordstream pipeline were ukrainians but

they were private ukrainians operating

without the government's approval now

they they The Story Goes that they did

tell zilinski they plan to do it and

that when the CIA got wind of it the CIA

said no no don't do that and told

zalinsky no no no don't blow up that uh

Pipeline and then zilinski said no no no

you guys don't blow up that pipeline so

that means that the CIA was innocent

because they said don't do it that means

zalinski was eventually innocent because

he told the plotters to not do it but

then those plotters oh those those dirty

plotters they did it anyway so they they

rented their own little uh yacht

and they got their little team together

with Prof I know professional private

divers and they went down there and they

blew up that pipe that uh

pipeline how many people believe that's

true does anybody believe that's

true to to me it seems so ridiculously

obviously not

true uh that I just laugh at it I mean I

don't I don't think any of that's true

could it be true sure I suppose you know

one one of the ways that you can tell

truth from fake news is if fake news is

perfect if you're going to make up a

fake story you make sure it all hangs

together it all makes

sense the real world is is so weird that

you can't even believe it's

true if something is coming from Real

World observation it always has well

often if it's anything complicated

it has the quality of really some

somebody would act that way you know

somebody actually made that mistake

somebody's that incompetent so that's

what real stories sound like so there is

a little bit of real story about this

and that it's so messy and there's so

much Badness in it but it's a little bit

too on the nose you know what I mean

what what is it that our CIA would want

the world or Russia to believe what

would be the most on thenns thing that

the CIA would want you to believe that

it wasn't the CIA first of all but

miraculously and unbelievably it wasn't

Ukraine's

government hey look at that it it wasn't

us and it wasn't even the Ukraine

government isn't that convenient and

what about the timing of learning this

huh it's right when everybody observing

this is pretty sure that both sides are

getting closer to negotiating an end to

it you know it would be hard to make the

negotiations work if you were planning

to negotiate an end to the Ukraine

conflict what would make it really hard

is if Putin believed that you'd blown up

his pipeline because he might say to you

yes I will be willing to negotiate and

end this war

but you're going to have to pay for the

pipeline would that be an unreasonable

request if he said yes we we will uh

wind down the war the only thing I ask

is you got to pay for the

pipeline and it's $10

billion I don't know this looks a little

too perfect because if it wasn't the

government of Ukraine that did it and it

wasn't the

CIA who are you going to build you going

to build the six people on the boat they

don't have 10

billion so to me it looks like a

preparation for

negotiation I would imagine that the

Democrats would love to wind down the

Ukraine war and take that as a win if

they could spin it that way as a win

before the

election so every part of this looks a

little too coincidental so I'm not

buying any of

it that's my take uh rasmason has an

updated poll on Trump and Harris and uh

still has Trump up 49 to 45 and if you

throw in the third party people it

doesn't change much um at least in terms

of the percentage lead and

um of course we're at a point where we

don't know what to believe about polls

but it is true that the rasmuson poll

didn't change much by recent

events other polls are showing wow big

change K Harris is killing it everybody

loves her the joy you can feel the

joy um so someday we might know what uh

what's true but at this point the the

polls uh in general are not

believable um I have more confidence in

the rasmason pole CU traditionally they

do well compared to other pollsters but

also they don't really have a reason to

lie about

this they they're not so uh pro-

Democrat that you would expect them to

lie so the ones you don't expect to

lie have a different result than the one

you expect to

lie I don't know is that a

coincidence well inflation is a weirdly

low which is just good enough to confuse

the stupid people

because the stupid people will say my my

goodness inflation is now down to a

reasonable number under 2% or something

2% now if that were real that'd be

great but what what Republicans will say

is well if you were compare current

prices to 2019 they're up 30 50%

insurance is through the roof and eggs

and gas are way higher so it's probably

good news that inflation

isn't still going and it's really good

news but it doesn't make anything

affordable because things already went

up now why did they go

up so don't you have questions

about what exactly is driving all of it

I can tell you that in California the

reason Insurance went through the roof

is because there was fire

risk uh that was crazy so the the state

wasn't managing the fire risk

but also the state uh insurance

commission said you can't raise rates

for a while they've changed that but uh

and then the insurance companies just

said we're out we're done if you can't

raise rates enough to make money why be

in

business

so yeah and some big fires that just

whacked the insurance companies so we

have enough information that uh

Democrats can claim that inflation is

low while Republicans claim that it's

through through the roof and that the

Baseline went up so so much that an

ordinary person can't afford to live

anymore both are true both are

true so Harris is going to have some

kind of meeting Friday I guess tomorrow

and talk about her uh Financial economic

proposals that'll be interesting but uh

she wants to end price gouging she

says end price gouging and especially

for meat proc in

conglomerates now the question I would

ask

is is there one Economist in the entire

world democrat or republican could even

be a communist I don't care is there one

Economist anywhere who thinks that the

government should cap prices for

anything I believe the answer is there's

no such thing as any

Economist

anywhere left or right who thinks this

is a good idea so here's what you should

look for look for MSNBC and CNN to have

no Economist on on their show instead

they'll have pundits do you know why

there will be no

economists because no Economist thinks

that capping prices is a good idea none

zero you can't find

any now uh I might be wrong about that

but if you see an economist come on and

say you know what

in a capitalist system if you want to

have a good supply of things you cap the

price nobody will say that so watch how

fake the news becomes because you might

see an economist come on Fox News to say

well that's a terrible idea everybody

knows it but CNN and

MSNBC almost have to have no Economist

on the news for the next few months none

you watch

yeah the the even the economists whose

names you've heard of and are often on

the news they will be so shut out they

will have nothing to do with this and if

you were just a Democrat voter and you

were not an economist and you didn't

know whether price caps were good or bad

which would be reasonable I mean I think

you'd have to have some pretty deep

experience to know it's always a bad

idea some people would think well maybe

this case it is a good idea no it's not

it's always a bad idea idea 100% of the

time that's one of the few things you

can depend on in economics is if you put

artificial controls on things you'll get

less of it

guaranteed so meat processing

conglomerates I don't know what the

story is there I guess there were a

bunch of mergers and so the government

is claiming that the mergers allowed

them to make obscene profits do you

think that's true do you think that the

reason

meat prices are high is because the meat

processing

conglomerates uh consolidated and then

there's less

competition I'll bet that's not what's

going on I'm no expert but here's what I

would guess my guess is that the

consolidations are because they couldn't

make

money in other words there was too much

competition and the prices were too low

to handle their overhead so my guess is

if you looked at the return on

investment of whatever meat process meat

processing conglomerates exist I'll bet

you'd find the ROI would be right in the

middle of business in general meaning

that there would be no indication of

price

gouging because it's not price gouging

if the company is making just an

ordinary profit price gouging would mean

they're you know 100% more profit than

they've ever made before and they could

could easily lower the cost and still

make lots of

money where's that evidence do you think

K Harris will say Here's the the meat

processing conglomerates we're talking

about before they Consolidated their Roi

was a quite reasonable 10% a year after

consolidation and you know several of

them Consolidated now this one big

company is has has an Roi of

53% yeah way more than the average

companies so that's abusive do you think

she'll make that argument I guarantee

you she will not you will never hear

about the profit

Roi you know forget about profit number

if she just gives you a number like and

they made a billion dollars this year

whatever whatever the number is that's

fake you've got to you've got to know

the return on the on the assets that

they employed that would tell you if

they're making money more than you would

expect the company to make

so look for no good information on

economics coming out of any of

this um meanwhile Trump uh his economic

proposals

include extending his 2017 tax cuts now

somebody explained to me the other day

because I went to the website where you

can put in your your personal income and

age and state and we'll tell you how

much uh you'll save in

taxes um or lose in taxes depending if

this uh tax law

expires so I said to myself oh my God if

these Trump tax cuts expire how much

more am I going to spend so I go to the

site I put in my information and it

tells me that if the tax cuts expire I

will save money quite a bit and I looked

at it and I think I told you oh the

website doesn't work because it says if

the taxes go down no it says if the tax

go

up that somehow I'm going to spend less

on

taxes and I thought it must be

broken and that's why I said and then

somebody said no Scott because part of

the tax law was that it took away State

deductions and I'm in California so we

have you know wildly crazy taxes for

California so I used to be able to write

them off so that used to be a deduction

but I lost lost my state

deduction in return for a lower tax rate

but it didn't compensate so it turns out

that the Trump proposed uh taxes will

raise my

taxes so I'm not in favor of that I'm in

favor of raising your taxes not mine

like everybody else I just say it out

loud yeah I would love to raise your

taxes and lower mine is that wrong no

it's not wrong cuz you want the same

thing you want my taxes to go up and

yours to go down let's be honest we all

want everybody else's taxes to go up

except maybe poor people uh we don't

want their taxes to go up but but among

the people who are you know able to pay

their bills already we kind of want the

other people's taxes to go up so I I

can't support Trump's uh economic plan

because it raises my

expenses um there may be other parts of

it I might support I mean obviously I

think the how you treat the Border has

to be part of your economic plan because

the Border stuff is really an expense

it's just a different kind of one so I'm

not going to go all in on Trump's

economic proposals you can make your own

decisions if you do your calculations

and it looks like it will lower your

taxes then I would say you have a

complete

moral um cover to say you like that

better it raises my taxes I think I'm

not positive but it looks like it might

if it raises my taxes I'm against it and

I think you would you understand that

right right somebody's going to win

somebody's going to lose but nobody

wants their own taxes to go

higher all right and uh and Trump wants

to do more increased

drilling um even though I think we're at

record levels but you could do a lot

more I I think lowering energy costs I I

think that's the magic lever and I think

Trump has a much better

story that he would increase production

and lower lower energy costs so I think

he's got that the better story then

there's this whole question of tariffs

so I guess the Biden Administration

which was always anti- tariff decided

not to remove uh most of or all of

Trump's tariffs that he had on China is

that true I need a fact check on that

but I think that the Democrats were all

anti- tariff until they inherited the

government and then they said uh we

better keep these tariffs because that's

a lot of money coming in now some people

say but Scott you fool don't you know

that tariffs don't help at all because

all they do is pass along the expense to

consumers in this country to which I say

I'm not sure you understand how this

works

so here's my big

question if we're getting raw materials

from

China and we don't have those raw

materials here I would not expect to see

a

tariff because why would you just

increase the cost basically it just be a

tax on Americans because we would need

the raw materials for building whatever

we need to build it would be just like

ATT tax so why would you do that well

probably don't here's a case where would

make sense to put a tariff on let's say

China decides it wants to take over one

of our Industries and I'll just make one

up let's say China wants to take over

the refrigerator and Manufacturing

industry now I'm making that up because

they already took it over I think or

South Korea did or somebody did I don't

know we do we make any

refrigerators does United States even

make a refrigerator probably not but

imagine the situation where America said

our refriger ation manufacturing is

vitally important we can't have some

other country making all our

refrigerators um so in that case a

tariff would make sense because the

Tariff is to discourage people from

buying the Chinese refrigerator when

they could buy an American one and

everybody is a little bit better off

that way now if China had artificially

lowered the price of the refrigerators

so that a Chinese refrigerator cost half

as much

and was just as good well it would put

American refrigerator makers and a

business but not because of competition

it would be because the Chinese

government had subsidized their

refrigerators to make them so cheap that

it would put us on a business so a

tariff makes sense when you're

protecting an industry from being

attacked not by another competitor this

is the important part the Tariff is not

to protect you from a good competitor

the tariff is to protect you from a

government that is backing a competitor

so much so that they can wipe out your

entire

industry so in those cases you want a

tariff now would it raise the prices in

some cases of Americans paying for

things yes it

would but it would also Drive the right

Behavior which should compensate enough

to make that a good tradeoff the right

behavior is that we keep our

refrigerator industry now when I talk

about refrigerators it's ridiculous

because I think we've already lost that

industry but imagine if it's electric

cars do you think we can not be the

electric car

maker we need that industry what if it's

solar panels and and uh batteries for

your house no we need that we we really

really need that so there's some things

that have such basic domestic value that

you have to do whatever it takes to keep

the com competitors out and a tariff is

a good way to do that so just remember

this simple rule about

tariffs if it's something we need and we

can't get it somewhere else that's a bad

tariff that's just a tax if it's another

government targeting an industry for

Destruction you need to do whatever it

takes to stop it and if it's a tariff

even with a little pain that is the

correct answer so tariffs are not so

easy it's not tariffs are good or

tariffs are

bad Argentina elected an

economist the uh argentinians had a

problem with housing

Supply how how do you think it went all

right let's let's predict this so

Argentina elects an

economist and I told you economists

don't believe in price GS none of them

none of them so they elect an economist

did he put price caps on nope he did the

opposite uh he removed price caps rent

control and what happened he's an

economist he removed government caps on

prices for housing immediately it caused

a building boom and a a resupply of

rental

housing do you know why because it

always does it it works every time this

is not one of those things guessing

about if you elect an economist you get

this I I'd love to see if there's any

Economist in you know something like a

capitalist country that ever got a worse

result I'll bet not I'll bet they all

they all get a reasonably good economic

result and I would argue that uh Trump

is far closer to being an economist as

in being compatible with an economist in

terms of all of his views

than K Harris so if you can't get an

economist you want somebody whose views

are completely compatible with

economists and I think Trump is 100%

compatible with General economic belief

and KL Harris is I

think 100% incompatible with every

Economist now I'm making the largest

claim so there may be you know some

weird exceptions but I think that's true

I think there's no such thing as any

Economist who who believes in price gaps

for

example or or keeping the Border open

the way we have it um also the Democrats

are looking at attacks on unrealized

gains now without getting too wonky

about that uh let me tell you that 100%

of economists think that's a terrible

idea so what it would do to me is um

it would be really bad for me most of

most of my current

money uh is from my

investments almost all the money that I

made just sort of daily you know my

daily royalties for my career either

spent gave

away or invested in some kind of

business that usually didn't go well so

my entire wealth for the rest of my life

is from investment gains cuz early in my

career I made you know nice little

pocket of money and I just put it all in

an index fund and then I just sat on it

for 30 years so that's my money but the

the small amount that I put in

relatively small amount that I put into

the stock market is now a nice healthy

amount if they tax me on the difference

between what I put in and what it's

worth now even though I haven't sold any

of it

I'm going to get

killed I mean it would actually change

my entire lifestyle depending on the

percentage I

guess so it's uh it's pretty Draconian

and you know although I'd be fine I mean

I could I'm not going to starve but uh

you could imagine somebody who is in a

similar situation where most of their

net wealth is an unrealized gain and

it's what they're relying on for their

entire

um

retirement it it is just so wrong and

unfair and I don't think any Economist

is in favor of it now I might be wrong

on this one I'm definitely not wrong on

the price caps not being supported by

any Economist on the left or the right I

don't know about this one but I can't I

can't believe there'd be anybody in

favor of

it it'd be hard to imagine so um but but

of course you watch the news right so

the news has fully vetted

this what no no the this most important

question you haven't seen the news tell

you whether it's a good or bad idea to

tax unrealized

gains how about the one on tariffs do

you remember the tariffs who explained

to you what I just explained that there

are some cases where tariff is is really

a National Defense necessity do you

remember the news covering that in

detail for you

probably not now I do believe the news

has covered all of these things but they

just sort of do a light touch and move

on yeah they don't treat it like it's

the most important thing and I don't

know what's much more important than the

economy all right here's an

assassination attempt update um the the

uh Rabbit Hole of the Trump attempted

assassination just keeps getting bigger

uh I'm not going to give you details but

I would recommend to you a podcast in

which Benny Johnson was talking to Mike

Ben

and Mike Ben does this incredible job of

collecting connecting dots and

explaining the architecture of our

government and all of its parts and how

everything fits together and what looks

like a coincidence and what doesn't and

it's really a master class every every

time I see him on a podcast I think wow

I just learned something I never knew

before so if if you're not following

Mike Ben B

NZ you're Flying Blind you're just

Flying Blind you you really wouldn't

know what's going on anywhere because

almost everything that's in the news is

a fake

version everything that's real is the

layer below that and then even if you

saw what's happening in the layer below

it it would still be it wouldn't look

like anything to you you have to go to

the level below that where you know who

the players are

once you know the history and you know

the players then the layer above that

makes sense and that's something like

reality the layer above that the fake

layer is the fake news that's what we

hear we don't really have access to

anything unless you run into a Mike Benz

who can tell you who the players are

what the history is and how all those

parts connect if you don't see that you

actually know

nothing and that's a real hard thing to

get your to WRA your head around that

your understanding of the world is at

zero but it is it's actually a zero you

you're not even close if you don't know

who's who and the history of all that

stuff especially the intelligence part

of it

but here are some things that Mike Ben

points out uh I recommend again you see

the larger uh the larger conversation

with Benny Johnson but uh so the attempt

on Trump came soon soon after the

Supreme Court

ruling that made it less likely Trump

would go to jail huh that's sort of a

coincidence isn't it that as soon as the

risk of going to jail was substantially

lessened it's not zero but substantially

lessened then suddenly there was attempt

on his actual life but that could be a

coincidence

interestingly that attempt came just was

it a week or two before the uh RNC

convention where they would have

actually pick their

candidate because what would have

happened if the assassination attempt

had been

successful well it'd be too late to run

a whole new primary wouldn't it so maybe

somebody would get picked by the

delegates and the Insiders and the money

people and maybe it would be Nikki Hy

maybe it would be Nikki Hy I mean she

was one of the last ones in the race

right

yeah now is that a

coincidence so the actual assassination

attempt was sandwiched between two

coincidences that look like really big

ones one they knew he wouldn't go to

jail or it was less likely two it was

exactly the right timing where they

could have slotted somebody else in

without any kind of a process you know

much the way they did with

Harrison now is that is that or Harris

is that a coin incidence that that

attempt came exactly in that weird

little window where if you were some

shadowy organization that wanted to take

him out it would have been the perfect

timing could be a coincidence you have

to watch out because once you form a

narrative in your head you will notice

that everything fits your narrative so

could confirmation bias explain those

two

coincidences yes yes it could it could

are there any

more well we found out that this kid

learned how to make pipe

bombs which turns out to be a favored uh

favored technique of our undercover

people teaching people to become better

terrorists and that feels like a big

coincidence huh he also knew how to make

pipe

bombs that that's sort of

suggestive that some American

intelligence

entity may have taught him but it's also

possible he just learned it on the

Internet or you know he was just clever

and he figured it

out could it be confirmation bias it

could be it could be but that would be

three

coincidences and then there's also this

question of we I guess there's a new

video of the placement of the pipe bomb

on January 6 now this is separate from

the assassination attempt so January 6

we know there was a pipe bomb planted

outside some DNC entity kamla Harris

seemed to have walked past it without

any Secret Service problems it wasn't

especially hidden it was a pipe bomb

there's Now video that makes it look

like a cop might have placed it I don't

know if that's true so the the whole

story about the pipe bomb is being told

in a confusing way where I looked into

it and I was like I'm not even sure what

you're saying and there's some new

videos and I looked at them and I said I

don't know what these are showing and

the description of what's Happening

isn't really telling me what's happening

so the pipe bomb thing is getting

confusing but it did happen at the same

time that the uh people who uh are

sometimes considered Insiders on the

January 6 thing decided to make their

push on the capital

so was the pipe bomb part of a

conspiracy to make it look like the

protesters were more dangerous than they

were I don't know so that whole story is

just really confusing but all these

coincidences start to layer together and

their ven diagrams are overlapping and

you know why why is this the only

assassin in the world who doesn't have

social media you know he didn't leave a

note you know you just keep going and

you know the um the Secret Service were

unusually bad that day they were

replaced by uh elements of the

Department of

Homeland Homeland

uh Homeland Department of Homeland

what's the s

for so the uh there's just a whole lot

of coincidences there so I don't know

what to think about

that but uh certainly it's dirty looking

well Tim walace is getting the creepy

guy treatment from a number of notable

people I won't name names but you've

probably noticed that on the critic side

the non-d Democrat side A lot of people

are having the same viseral reaction to

him that I am now my visceral reaction

is not based on any super knowledge I

have of wrongdoing or anything illegal I

have no no personal information about

anything like that I just look at him

and he's got that John Brennan face you

know John Brennan used to be head of the

CIA and whenever he would come on to

talk about Trump and you know Russia

collusion which was totally made up by

people like John Brennan and when he

came on he talked about the hunter

laptop you know another case

you would just look at his face and

you'd say you look like somebody's lying

all the time he's just got this biggest

liar face John brenon does now maybe

it's just natural it doesn't mean

doesn't mean I'm peering into his soul

I'm just saying he has a face that you

would want to cast in a movie of

somebody who was a bad

guy

and I see the same thing in Tim

wals that he looks like somebody you

would cast in a movie of somebody who

pretended to be a good guy until you

found out he wasn't it's just a vibe

that I just can't shake now there are

let's say a number of coincidences

around his life that I won't get into

but everything about this guy just

screams there's something we need to

know that we don't

know

anyway um here's another Mike Ben's

thing I also saw on the Benny Johnson

podcast no I think it was on another

podcast it wasn't on that one but uh

he called the uh the issue where the

Harris campaign was modifying Google

headlines to make it look like it was

more positive for the Harris campaign so

they were sponsored ads but if you did a

Google search you wouldn't notice that

maybe the first ones were paid ads even

though they're they're indicated just

with a little indicator but you'd see a

whole bunch of positive things that

looks like the news loves KLA Harris or

or that the news is saying things things

are very positive for KL Harris at

least so they got busted for that and

there were lots of examples of them

doing it and they admit it uh but it's

not illegal it's not illegal it's weasly

but not illegal Google claims that there

was a some kind of problem in their

system that allowed Harris to get away

with it and that they're they're acting

like although it's not

illegal they're acting like it wouldn't

have happened under their process that

they wish had been working I guess I

don't know if you can believe that but

here's what Ben said that I thought was

uh

hilarious um we know that the news in

general is fake and we know that Google

can gain what news you see so if you

start with fake

news but then how you see it and the way

it's presented is also gamed that's like

two levels or two layers of fakeness

one is the news itself and two is

deciding which of the fake news or real

news you see that would be

Google Now the Harris campaign managed

to add a level of fake on top of the two

existing levels of fake so it was fake

news Google decides what you see and

what you don't which is another form of

brainwashing essentially and then the

Harris campaign modified the real news

into fake news so it was actually three

layers of

fakeness which Ben's called a fake news

tiasu because tiasu is a layered

dessert three layers of

fakeness that's where we're

at well there's a report that kim.com

might get extradited to the United

States from New Zealand I've always

wondered what was happening with that

case but if you don't follow Kim

as I do you would not know that he is a

a very vocal and out say productive

critic of the American government and

you know I think more so of the

Democrats but I'm not positive about

that

um so to me it just sounds like they're

trying to get their hands on a Critic

who knows too much he would be in the

category of people who seem to know

what's happening behind the curtain now

I don't know if he's always right but

he's a dangerous critic to the United

States and uh

surprise now the United States has

worked on a way to extradite him now it

seems to me that he got really quiet on

social media I used to see him every day

and I haven't seen him for a while now I

don't know if that's because the

algorithm changed or something has life

changed or it's this legal problem but

uh this is a big red flag now I'm not

I'm not supporting anything kim.com did

in the legal sense I'm not aware of what

the charges are but when you see

somebody who's such a

productive he actually makes a

difference in his opinion uh

publicly and then you see the United

States has a reason to pick him

up I'm just not comfortable with it it

could be it's just

ordinary Department of Justice stuff he

did some things that are illegal we're

going through normal process maybe you

know may maybe there's some things he

needs to answer for I don't know I I

just don't live in a world where I can

be comfortable that somebody who is also

a really productive critic of the

government coincidentally is getting

picked

up the coincidences just keep racking

up all right now we get to my most

provocative part of

today's um

presentation you know how we're all U

mocking Harris for not doing press

interviews and the Press is mocking her

and the Press is pushing her and all the

smart people are saying uh she's going

to have to do this and you know she's

she's avoiding it and blah blah

blah well here's what I

think what what is the point of talking

to the

[Music]

Press there's no reason to to talk to

the

Press if if you're a well-known entity

meaning the public you know has a basic

idea who you are and what you're up to

that would be true of both Trump and

Harris we've been watching them both for

a

while talking to the Press how does that

benefit either of

them if they want to get a story out

that's in in their favor they can do an

event and then the Press covers the

event but they don't get to ask any

questions if either candidate agrees to

an

interview what's going to

happen well you know in advance whether

the interviewer is a friendly or an

unfriendly right if it's a friendly it's

useless because it's basically just the

campaign stump speech as translated

through a friendly interviewer so we

don't need to see a friendly talk to a

politician it's it's just basically a

free campaign spending but what if

they're uh not friendly and they're very

clearly aligned with the other

side what use is

that you say to yourself but Scott that

is useful because then they're going to

ask the questions that are like the real

probing deep

questions is that what you

observe well let me ask this have you

ever seen any press Pro or anti anybody

who's at the the high level of the

Democrats either for Biden or Trump or

Harris have you ever heard them say um

what are you going to do about the

deficit that's going to kill us now they

let Trump say stuff like oh I'm going to

grow my way out of it and then change

the subject that's not an answer you

can't grow your way out of it or uh I'm

going to maybe we'll look at cutting

some expenses but I can't be more

specific no you can't cause spening

enough to get out of the deficit it's

not even possible

so where where is the hard-hitting

interview that's asking either the left

or the right any question that's

useful right let me give you another

one there's a there's now some uh video

uh Eric I think it's

uh Eric abinanti is uh is posting this

on X so a video of kamla Harris not too

long ago saying that in California they

needed to go to paper ballots because

it's the only way you could be sure you

had a secure

election let me say that again KLA

Harris not many years ago in California

has said in public as clearly as

possible that paper ballots are the only

way you can be sure the election is

clean just think about that now now ask

now let me ask this

question who has ever had a major uh

presidential candidate for an interview

and said can you explain why the

government even uses electronic voting

machines doesn't seem to be faster

doesn't feel more credible to the

public uh both Democrats and Republicans

at various times have said it's got to

be paper because we don't trust these

other machines it can't be cheaper so if

it's not cheaper faster or more

reliable can you vice president Harris

or can you uh candidate Trump explain to

me why we have them because the public

doesn't have any idea why we have

electronic voting machines because as we

observe we don't see evidence that it's

faster more reliable or

cheaper so just tell us why now those

are what I call good

questions have you ever heard a reporter

ask those

questions have you ever heard a reporter

ask smart questions about

tariffs here here's the reporter talking

about tariffs well some people say

tariffs will just raise prices on people

what do you say Mr Trump well I

collected $20 billion in tariffs

nobody's ever collected that much I got

so much in tariffs nobody's ever seen

that much money let's change the

subject nobody asks Trump about tariffs

in a way that when you're done you the

viewer would have any idea if it was a

good idea or a bad idea Trump just you

know throws his his persuasion in there

and changes the subject because you

can't you know spend the whole day in

one question so we don't have a press on

the left or the right that seems either

willing or able to ask any question that

a citizen would actually be interested

in do you know what they ask if if you

give a a really good

interview to one of the campaign here's

what they're going to ask what do you

think about JD Vance a couch

that that'll be what you get so given

that the entire news industry has shown

themselves to be completely useless

clowns with a few exceptions

right a few exceptions uh I mean you

know I always think of the uh the time

that uh bre Barts Joel poock um

challenged uh Biden when he was when he

was a candidate maybe he'd already been

elected I can't remember but challenged

him on the fine people

hoax but of course since it wasn't a sit

down he couldn't really get into you

know Joel couldn't really get into the

details and Biden just lied and said his

lie and then changed the subject and

went on so we do we do know that there

are some people who are willing to ask

the question that the public is

interested

in uh it's just there's no I mean do do

you think Joel's going to get a sit down

with Harris not a

chance if if it's George stepping upas

is he going to ask the right question

about why did you run on a

hoax no not a chance there's not a

chance so here's what I think we need

and by the way uh an couter added on to

the in a sense sort of a related Point

she said that political de are stupid if

you I'm paraphrasing the political

debates are stupid if the questions are

asked by

partisans and it doesn't really matter

if the partisan is on the right or the

left why do you have partisans at

all and her her point is shouldn't the

candidates ask each other

questions and I thought you know what

that's actually better I would love to

see the candidates say you each have six

questions you can't you know you can't

do more than that but you're each going

to come with six questions and you will

ask your six questions but then you'll

be able to respond and then respond to

the response you know some kind of

technique that makes sense so the

question comes from somebody who's not a

partisan but well they are ultimate

partisan because they're running against

them but it would be the far more

penetrating

question now I'm going to I'm going to

try to top that I think that that's also

not ideal because the the questions that

a candidate would bring would be so

biased that you know the question would

be the kind of the answer

itself here's what I'd love to see I

would love to see some kind of an entity

or

website that can capture the Public's

questions and somehow rank them because

the public has questions that the the

Press just doesn't ask so I want to know

Joel's question

right I want to know why are you running

on a debunk HX and I want to spend some

time on it I I want you to give your

answer and then I want to I want

somebody to say but you know that's not

true I want a real discussion based on

real questions I want somebody ask why

do we have voting machines can you just

explain

it and again I'm open to the fact that

there's some obvious reason to have them

that's I'm not aware of I that could

easily be the case

but don't we need to know doesn't the

public need to have a little bit of

education on this question so yes we

need some way for um citizens to be

asking the questions and now I'm going

to Triple down on my suggestion for

Trump you you may have seen a video that

went around where he was interacting

with some voters somewhere in some kind

of Commercial Business and he was

signing hats and signing baseballs and

patting people on the back and just

making conversation with people and it

was

amazing it was amazing from the

perspective of just watching his Persona

and watching his

Charisma now I'd like to take that to

another level where instead of talking

to his supporters all the time which

doesn't give you any new information I'd

love to see and this is the third time I

think I've said it I'd love to see Trump

go to

lunch with four or five Democrats who

are definitely not on his team and have

them ask the hardest

questions see how he does I have no

interest in seeing him answer a question

for the

Press not really I'm mildly interested

in watching the candidates answer

questions they ask each other but I

think the questions would be so gamed

that it would turn useless pretty

quickly but I would

never never be tired of watching a real

citizen ask the potential president of

the United States what the is this

all about and then and then just look

him in the eye and say that doesn't even

sound real to me that's the best you got

now I think that nobody would really act

that way to somebody who has been the

president you know

Trump's presence would be kind of

suppressing The Worst Behavior but

probably in a good way meaning that I

think people would still because we're

Americans right Americans are willing to

push uh your typical Americans are going

to still push him but they might do it

politely but they just wouldn't let go

they just wouldn't let go hey we're

going to be here for lunch so you better

tell me what you're going to do about

the national debt well I'm going to do

it with growth really because I don't

think growth would get you there well

how much of the debt do you think you're

going to pay off with growth and if you

got a 10%

GDP it would drive inflation crazy so

how do you get there you can't get there

from here now you might need an

economist sitting at the you might need

like a fact Checker sitting at lunch so

maybe I'll add a fact Checker to it

somebody who could add a little Nuance

you know so that if Trump tries to

answer the question but it's an answer

that the citizen wouldn't know is not a

real answer that the fact Checker would

say excuse

me um I understand the question I

understand the answer but the answer

doesn't seem quite addressing the

question and here's why I would love

that all day long all day long I could

watch that and it would be useful it

would change the votes I think people

would say oh that's me at that

lunch I I have exactly those questions

and I wish that was me but oh the person

who is there asked my question so you

would

totally pull yourself into the lunch you

would be one of the people at the table

and that to me would be a whole new

model of

news so debates are uh stupid and press

interviews are stupid the way things are

organized um I will call your attention

again to the uh the X account comma HQ

lies all one word um which basically

goes after every lie that Comm Harris's

campaign tells and then debunks them um

but I haven't seen There Yet the full

ranked list of her worst

lies that would be really useful I love

the top 20 maybe there are 100 but

they're at least a top 20 because we

need to be able

to you know forward that around whenever

that claim that uh trumps the

liar comes up again I think Harris

stopped saying that as much they may be

they may be modifying their approach

because they've been caught lying so

many

times but uh yeah let's see a list of

Harris

lies all right what else is going on

here uh the New York attorney general

Leticia

James um she's warning companies about

uh misinformation in the coming

elections and especially problem with

the AI so she sent a letter to Google

open AI X and meta to warn them about

the the rise of

AI

disinformation now I think we're um

we're in a weird period of

history in which uh people can still be

fooled by AI

images now I think that's not going to

last forever right because once every

single person knows that every single

photograph or video even video could be

fake won't we learn to ignore

it or will we learn that um you know the

real ones have some kind of a I don't

know Watermark or something on them

somehow is there a way that we'll be

able to tell the source oh maybe that's

all you need you just need to know the

source because if you trust the source

then you'll think it's not AI if you

don't know the

source probably

AI maybe that's all they need to

do you know what

rather than identifying

AI wouldn't it make more sense for the

social media companies to Simply

identify the source and if there's no

known source make sure people know that

there's no identified source for this

which would tell me that there's not

some video of this in the wild that

rather it must be AI unless it's the

only person who has this video so I

think if you simply forced people to to

say the for the to say the

source of wherever the art came from you

being good shape now could that be done

automatically or would you need people

to do that it might be automatic because

on Google for example you could search

for an image right if you had an image

you could search to find out if it

matches an existing image so wouldn't

Google know that if an AI image is being

run on a social platform would know that

that doesn't exist from any reliable

source and therefore almost certainly

fake anyway we'll see where that goes I

saw that Glenn

kersner who the hell is he um but he's

somebody important and he's he's saying

with h these big wide eyes that make him

look crazy and well just crazy um he

looks crazy I don't know if he is but he

said U if Trump loses the election he

quote will spend the rest of his

miserable life in court being prosecuted

and ultimately serving prison terms one

after the

other do you think that's true do you

think that if Trump doesn't win that the

the lawfare will just continue until

he's in jail or lawf fared into

submission it might but here's the thing

I worry about

out what would stop

that because none of it looks real to me

in in terms of regular person would not

be prosecuted for this sort of stuff I

feel like the Republicans need some kind

of um mutually assured

destruction and the mutually assured

destruction should be in the some same

domain you know meaning

lawfare and I think what they need to do

is say all right if you lawfare Trump

here are the the three leaders in the

Democrat Party that are going to have

non-stop legal cases against them um

through and ideally you should all be

legal right I'm not talking about doing

anything illegal in response but the

same way it's legal for them to do

infinite lawfare that would not be done

for another candidate or another person

another citizen um why can't Republicans

do the same thing but hold it as a

threat not necessarily is something

that's executed on moment one but rather

they should say if you're going to

laware of trump out of office or if

you're going to laware him after office

we're going to put a billion dollars

into destroying the lives of whoever is

behind it because you can't do that and

get away with

it I don't think we can have a society

where one can get a billionaire to fund

their infinite lawsuits against one

candidate they don't want to run for

office

I can't live in that country I need that

billionaire to be lawed out of office or

out of you out of the public life so

there needs to be some massive really

well-funded you know like a billion

dollars that says we're not going to

operate if everything's going fine you

know we're not an attack dog we're we

are simply NATO we're not an offensive

operation we're we're like a legal NATO

if if you if you laware one of our team

we're going to put a billion

dollars into burying

you but but if it's just law fair I mean

if somebody actually broke the law then

the legal system needs to handle that

but if it's clearly lawfare we're going

to put a billion dollars into ruining

you specifically for being behind it

anything short of that and we lose

everything because this whole laware

thing is so out of control it seems to

be the dominant way the government is

being run by

lawyers right and we don't trust the

legal system because you know you just

pick your Venue and you know what the

answer is going to be

so I'd say $1 billion of

legal NATO like defensive Force for

Republicans would be necessary for the

health of the Republic but don't use it

offensively that would be my

recommendation

well the American Society of plastic

surgeons of which almost all plastic

surgeons

belong um they uh broke with a consensus

and they're rejecting uh what is called

gender affirming care for minors in

other words doing surgery to change

their physical bodies to match their

preferred uh

identity now I've you know I've large

stayed down at this topic because it's

getting enough attention and I just

don't have anything special to add I

mean the only thing I have to add is

don't do stuff to

kids if you have more to talk about I'm

probably not

interested don't do permanent changes to

children and I'm done if you have

something to say about that blah blah

blah blah I'm not

listening and if you don't like it blah

blah blah I don't care

adults do what you want to do you know

follow your bliss children they can't

make

decisions you kind of got to wait now I

will

acknowledge that there must be people

who transitioned as children and are

really really happy about it that must

exist

and they would be

disadvantaged but I think that seems

like a reason reasonable tradeoff for

the people who would be transitioned and

maybe would have thought differently of

it if they had been adults when they

made the

decision anyway so adults do what you

want um there's a story

about Ukraine turned a hydrogen powered

car into a bomb that was really powerful

so it's not a hydrogen bomb so to speak

it's not like a you know nuclear

hydrogen sort of bomb but uh I know

hydrogen is not a nuclear bomb I get it

but uh it was just a

Toyota so they took a toyot Toyota and

they rigged it to blow up some major

Russian facility and it looks like they

they may have driven it by remote

control so what happens when you have

self-driving

cars and you can put enough explosives

in the self-driving car that you can

blow up anything in

any metropolitan area anytime you want

because if you put explosives in a

something the size of a vehicle it's

better if it's a truck you know SUV or

something but if you have that much

explosives and it's a self-driving car

and you could

just tell it to drive up to the ministry

of defense and and just blow

up that's a pretty big risk that's a

pretty big risk I mean I don't know if

it's a bigger risk than a person driving

it but it's got to be easier to it's got

to be easier to do a remote control

attack than to find somebody who's

willing to sit in the car when it blows

up even though there are plenty of those

people it's got to be easier to do it

without them save them for something

else all right ladies and gentlemen

those are my comments for today thanks

for joining I'm going to say bye to

YouTube and Rumble and uh X and I'm

going to talk to my beloved subscribers

on locals and I'll see the rest of you

tomorrow make sure you buy my book God's

bre the complete works it's the ultimate

summer reading and by the way I got more

comment I'm going to tell you about

soon bye for

now all right locals I'm coming at

you

be

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e for