Episode 2822 CWSA 04/27/25

It's Sunday.

Time for a show.

We'll get everything working here.

Good morning everyone and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and you've never had a better time.

But if you'd like to try taking your experience up to levels that nobody's even understanding with their tiny shiny human brains.

For that, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass of tank or shelter in a canteen jug or flask or vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

The dopamine of the day thing makes everything better.

It's called the simultaneous sip and happens now.

Go.

Ah, spectacular.

That's good stuff.

Well, I wonder if there's any science studies that didn't need to happen.

Oh, here's one.

According to Sai Post, Eric Dolan is writing, there's a new study in the British Journal of Psychology that says that uh uh that entertainment is a key to populist political success.

So if your candidate is very entertaining, they will do better in politics.

You know, you didn't really need to do that study.

You could have asked me or really anybody who's been alive for more than 10 minutes because yes, yes, an entertaining candidate like uh Ronald Reagan, for example, absolutely is going to do better.

Trump, of course.

Yes.

the more entertaining you are, the better you the better you draw people to you.

Um, and I don't think it's just the key to populist political success.

I think it might be the key to all kinds of political success.

Well, what else?

Let's see.

Uh, oh, here we here we go.

Uh, US companies are avoiding hiring white men uh as part of their diversity push according to the Telegraph.

Did you really need to study that?

That if companies are looking to increase diversity?

Did you really not know that that meant that they would be avoiding hiring white men?

Again, they didn't need to study it.

Just ask me, Scott, do you think diversity means hiring white men?

And I would say, no.

Sounds like avoiding hiding hiring white men.

Yeah, just ask.

Next time I'll save you a lot of time and money.

Well, according to uh the Daily Wire, the uh group that's behind the MCAT test, that's the test you take to see if you get into medical school.

Um they said they were going to get rid of DEI, but according to insiders, they were lying and all they were going to do is hide the fact that they were totally going to do DEI.

So, according to the Daily Wire, on the surface, the group uh that administers the MCAT looks like they left DEI behind because they sort of scrub the those words from their materials, but behind the scenes is working on plans to secretly push the ideology.

Turns out that as far as I can tell, every big company is just waiting for the Trump administration to be done.

So it looks like nobody's really getting rid of DEI.

Maybe Target, you know, maybe maybe you John Deere, but basically I would bet that 80 to 90% of the companies or organizations that say they're getting rid of DEI are lying.

Just lying.

and violating the law like crazy because DEI is racism and it's, you know, non-constitutional.

And uh I've got a I've got a fear that even though it looks like Trump got rid of DEI, I'm not so sure.

I think maybe he made a 10% dent in it and the moment he's gone, it will just come back, you know, stronger than ever.

That's what it looks like.

Well, ABC News has a cool story about 3D printed houses.

Now, you know that there have been 3D printed houses for a while, but the ones you've seen probably look like cement.

You know, some big big machine that's making cement walls.

Well, there's a new type that uses just uh waste wood.

So all the sawdust that's created from real wood and uh they take all that sawdust and they put it together with corn and resin and they make a 3D printer and they make a bio home.

I guess it takes a week to create a home and it's made of material that's stronger than concrete and is completely recyclable.

So, if you take the appliances out of the house, you can recycle the whole house and turn it back into a 3D printer material.

That's wild.

So, that's kind of cool.

At the same time, and uh there's another company that's got 3D printed houses, but the way they're doing it is they make uh the blocks.

They're interconnecting like Legos.

So instead of printing the whole house, they print the parts and you can snap it together yourself.

Now I would like to reiterate my idea for 3D printed houses.

Whichever kind of technology you use to get your cheap little house, the real secret would be how you organize the homes.

Um, this is something I learned in college.

I've used this example before.

In college, I had the worst physical room of my life, which was, you know, shared with another person.

It was just a little cinder block room with one window and the bathroom was down the hall.

But it was my probably best lifestyle because I was surrounded by people like me who had stuff to do, you know, sports and classes and it was a great experience.

Now, if you imagine you, let's take some federal land and you started building some of these 3D homes, the important part would be that you make little uh little units within a community where the people have a lot in common.

So, one would be people with kids.

So, you'd make one little one little neighborhood where everybody just has a kid.

Another neighborhood where everybody's single, another neighborhood where there's a lot of tech people, another one where there's some retired people.

Because if you put people together who have a lot in common, the physical surroundings become way less important.

Way less important.

So you can make an awesome lifestyle that's fairly inexpensive by just organizing who is where instead of just, you know, the materials you use in the house.

That's what I think.

Well, according to futurism, which is a publication, a website I guess um there was a recent experiment by researchers at Carnegie Melon where they tried to create a company uh that was entirely run by AI.

So there would be AI agents for each job.

So they would staff the uh the AI company with uh instead of humans they would give it an AI agent to be you know sales one to be engineering one to be whatever and so they created this thing and then they just let it run um without human interaction to see how all the AI agents would perform.

How do you think it went?

Do you think they became a unicorn cuz the AI is so smart and then they sold it for a billion dollars?

No.

Turns out it was a gigantic cluster and nothing worked and the AI started lying and absolutely none of it worked.

So even though they used various different AIs, uh none of the AI agents actually did anything useful.

So we're not quite ready to run a company with AI.

Well, I guess last night was the White House correspondence dinner and uh Trump and probably most of the Trump insiders did not go and I think it turned out to be the most low energy event of all time because it used to be, you know, the president would go, whoever the president is, then a comedian would make really edgy jokes and then the next day it would be everybody talking about all the edgy jokes.

It's like, "Oh, can you believe that that comedian said that right in front of the president?" But instead, they just gave themselves awards for uh somebody got an award for writing about Biden's mental decline.

Do you do you think anybody was writing about Biden's mental decline while he was in office?

I don't think so.

If you're giving somebody an award for writing about it after he's out of office, I don't know if you deserve that award, that would be like the opposite of what you should get.

You should get a kick in the ass, not an award.

And then I guess the uh the new leader of the White House correspondents um did a speech in which he wanted you to know that uh they are not the enemy of the people.

the press is not the enemy of the people.

To which I say, what's your criteria for that?

Because you certainly look like the enemy of the people to me.

So, how do you score that?

Is there some objective criteria by which you can say, "Oh, you're not the enemy of the people." Oh, I I see based on your performance.

But if you actually just looked at what the press has done over the last, I know several years, it certainly looks like enemy, you know, because my friends will tell me the truth and my enemies will lie to me.

What is the press done more of?

Telling me the truth or lying to me?

Lying to me.

So, how in the world do I declare that they're not my enemy if they're lying to me about the most important things in the world?

No, I would consider that an enemy.

Sorry.

Speaking of enemies, James Carville is complaining that Bernie Sanders and AOC are starting to define the Democrat party.

Fox News is reporting on this.

Now, I love the fact that Carville, as you know, as crazy old coup as he is, he's still probably, you know, one of the smartest ones in the Democrat party in terms of strategies.

And he's completely right that having uh Bernie and AOC define the party and chasing after oligarchs is a really bad idea.

But the other thing Carville says, he says that Democrats have candidates who are quote staggeringly more talented than Bernie and AOC.

Well, who would they be?

Maybe he should give us some names.

I think he's named them before.

But if they're staggeringly more talented, do they need a boost?

Or wouldn't we know their names already?

Wouldn't all their talent have allowed them to break away from the pack and be obvious?

And yet, I can't think of one.

Which uh which Democrat is staggeringly talented?

I don't know.

All right, let's look at the fake news.

Um, you may have seen that the uh President uh Trump and his wife went to the Pope's funeral and you probably saw a bunch of news coverage and social media saying that Trump wore a blue suit when the dress code was for black suits and so therefore he was being disrespectful to the Pope and the entire Catholic religion.

Well, of course, there were lots of people who didn't wear black for a variety of reasons.

There were other blue suits.

There were gray suits.

There were there were um there were Muslim traditional outfits.

Uh and the uh the dress code was for a dark suit.

There was no dress code for a black suit.

There was a dress code for a dark suit and he had a dark blue.

So, that is fake news.

He was not violating any norms.

He was just wearing a nice suit.

Yeah.

And if you see a uh a wide shot, you see there was a whole bunch of people in blue suits.

So, he wasn't the only one either.

Uh there's more fake news.

Let's see.

Uh Sunny Hosten tried to create this and MSNBC is trying to create this one.

Out of nothing.

So, when the Republicans started noodling about a $5,000 bonus to pay to uh people who have babies to encourage them to have more babies, the Democrats turned that into, "Oh, you mean you want more white babies, you racist?" To which every Republican said, "Huh?

Where'd that come from?" I I haven't heard a single person on social media or anywhere else say that the $5,000 baby bonus was somehow either intentionally or even unintentionally aimed at white babies.

Now, where does that even come from?

It's just that they've got some kind of, you know, terrible fever in their brains, TDS, that they just imagine out of nothing that the idea of having more American babies really meant having more white babies.

How in the world would you even restrict it?

Did Did they think that um the Trump administration was going to give no money to an Hispanic Hispanic family who had been living here for generations?

No, it's a baby bonus.

It's not a white baby bonus.

Literally, nobody's even suggested that except Democrats, of course.

So, dumb old Joy Reed, the dumbest person in media, uh she was back making a little video in which she uh she claimed the Roman Empire fell because they had a lack of diversity.

Now, I'm no historian, but even I know that Rome didn't fall because of a lack of diversity.

Can you imagine being so so boldly dumb that you would say that in public that the reason the Roman Empire fell was a lack of diversity?

So I saw a post by uh Paul Sispula uh and he went to history.com and asked it why the Roman Empire fell.

Here are the eight reasons.

Invasions by barbarians, economic troubles and overall reliance on slave labor, the rise of the Eastern Empire, overexpansion and military overspending.

A lot of this is just overspending.

government corruption and political instability, the arrival of the Huns and the migration of the barbarian tribes, Christianity and the loss of traditional values, weakening of the Roman legions.

So basically everything except diversity.

Uh you could argue that the diversity is what destroyed it because when the barbarians and the Huns uh and the slaves, you know, were were filling Rome, uh that was pretty diverse and it was also the end of Rome.

Now, I'm not saying that diversity is going to kill Rome.

I'm just saying it went down at the same time it had the most diversity, but not because of it.

It's because of this other stuff.

Well, the uh thief who stole Christy Gnome's purse when she was at a restaurant has been captured.

And uh just to make it fun, the thief is an illegal immigrant.

And it makes me wonder how did they catch the guy?

So, he had a mask on.

So, presumably there was no video that could catch his face.

And uh there were several theories I saw.

One was I think her phone was in her purse, right?

Did her phone get stolen?

Cuz if her phone was there, I guess they could track her phone and go right to him.

Um or did they look for his phone?

Maybe he had a phone and they just checked to see, you know, who was in the building that day that was sketchy and also had a phone.

Maybe.

or somebody else said maybe uh he tried to use her credit cards and that flagged something.

But my best guess is her phone was in the purse and that might have been enough.

But have you noticed that when a crime happens to somebody famous?

They always solve it.

But if a crime happens to you, the police will say, "Ah, yeah, could be anything.

Let us know if you find anything.

There's nothing we can do.

Air tag.

Maybe.

Maybe she had an Apple Air Tag in the purse.

We haven't heard of that, but maybe.

All right.

Let's do a little uh update on Trump becoming a dictator.

All right.

So, this would be based on the Democrat frame for things.

So, what are the Democrats looking at that suggests that Trump is becoming an authorit authoritarian Hitler dictator guy?

Um, he his administration has recently, well, the Department of Justice has arrested two judges for harboring illegal aliens.

Is that like a dictator or is that more like nobody's above the law?

because it does look like both judges quite obviously and somewhat publicly uh violated the law by harboring in one case having an illegal alien in their own home and the other case allegedly helping the illegal alien escape from ICE after a court case uh unsuccessfully.

So I would say hm if they broke the law and it's an important law and they're going to make an example out of them so that other people don't think they can just protect illegal aliens.

Um I would say that's not exactly too dictator-like because it's very narrowly aimed at people who broke actual laws.

And it wasn't long ago that the Democrats were trying to put a uh a candidate for president in jail, actually even a president in jail for all kinds of lawfare.

So all that lawfare against Trump apparently had nothing to do with dictator anything.

But the moment the Department of Justice under Trump arrests two judges who clearly broke the law, well, dictator.

dictator.

Uh then there's the case of the Maryland dad who was accused of being of MS-13 who was shipped to El Salvador without what they call due process.

Now, we could argue all day whether there was due process or not, but how many think that that one case of that one Maryland ad is an indication that Trump's a dictator?

To me, it's just he's a guy who said he would get rid of the criminals and and he meant it.

Apparently, he is.

Um then what about the negotiations with Ukraine and Russia?

I will admit that Trump apparently is negotiating in a way that would give Putin everything Putin wants.

I don't think there's anything that Putin wants, you know, unless you think he wants the rest of Ukraine, but he probably doesn't.

Um, because he got the good stuff.

It does look like Trump is negotiating on the side of the dictator.

Now, his purpose is not necessarily to help Putin.

His purpose is to end the war.

And I think it's just common sense that if you know Putin's not going to give back Crimea, he's not going to give back any of those occupied areas, why would you even waste your time negotiating something that's not going to happen?

But the weird thing is that Trump is simultaneously being accused of being a Neville Chamberlain, you know, the guy who is negotiating peace with with a Nazi but doesn't, you know, but trusts Hitler to keep his word.

And then he turns out to be the biggest dumb guy in all of history because who would have trusted, you know, Hitler to keep his word?

But at the same time that Trump is being accused of the guy who's letting Hitler get away with too much, he's actually being accused of being Hitler.

So he he's the first person in history who's ever been accused of being Neville Chamberlain and Hitler at the same time.

So I can't take any of that too seriously.

He did try to uh fire Jerome Powell from the Fed, which would be most people would say an overreach of his position, but he gave up on that.

So, you know, that that was sort of a shot across the bow, but nothing uh too dictatorial that happened.

And uh then there's a new story here from Axios that Attorney General Pam Bondi is going to resume the practice of seizing reporters phone records uh in the narrow situation that there's a leak and there's a leak to specific reporters and uh that would be a reversal of a Biden rule that said they wouldn't take you know they wouldn't investigate reporters.

I kind of like Biden's I like Biden's take on this.

I think you have to leave the reporters alone even if there's a leak.

But uh Pam Bondi, etc.

is uh saying it would be a very narrow search.

So if they took the phones or the devices of the reporters, uh they wouldn't look at everything.

they'd just be looking for something related to the leak that they were investigating, but that's not good enough.

So, to me, that's a little uh little little bit of an overreach.

I don't like him going after the press.

Um, so those are the dictatorial things.

Did I miss anything?

Did I miss any other dictator stuff?

you know, even the uh the part where Trump is trolling the world, saying that he wants to, I don't know, take over Canada and Greenland and, you know, he wants to uh run again in 2028.

I think the 2028 thing is mostly a troll and I I think he said so today.

But uh and then the other stuff just makes sense.

You know, having more military security with Greenland and uh can the candidate part I feel like is more troll than not.

Although he swears that he's serious about it, but that just makes it funnier.

I don't think he's serious about it, but he might be.

He might be serious about it.

Well, Jamie Rascin, a Democrat, he was on a Rachel Maddo show and uh he said that the Trump administration officials could be arrested for quote interfering with a legal proceeding or kidnapping.

I think that has to do with the judges that were arrested.

And uh I saw Joel Pollock commenting on it that uh Jamie Raskin just really wants to arrest people.

He he he's been after trying to arrest, you know, Republicans or Trump or anybody close to him for the longest time.

So he's uh he's arrest him.

Arrest him.

All right, let's look at the uh Trump's first 100 days.

So depending who you talk to, it's either the worst 100 days of any president ever or it went pretty well.

Now, um I'm going to make reference here to two bubble people.

Uh there's bubble boy Bill Maher who says that MAGA voters won't admit how disappointed they are in Trump's first 100 days.

Really?

that that doesn't look like any reality I'm aware of.

I do see Republicans say he didn't get enough done or this didn't work or I I'm disappointed with that.

But they say it they say it publicly.

They don't hold back a bit.

Um but more often I'll hear people say that they like what he did in the first 100 days.

And you know the the jury's out on some of it because it's too early.

Uh Rachel Maddo said that uh quote, "It's all bad for Trump.

I don't know that we have ever seen another first 100 days from any president this roundly rejected and hated by the American people." Really, what what bubble is that happening in?

Where's the bubble where where Trump's supporters are are rejecting everything he's done?

So I think if you ask people they would say something like if you asked Republicans they'd say that Trump did a great job on the border and continues to do a great job in the border and that was an existential threat.

The border problem was an end of America problem and he solved that.

That's a really big deal.

um he took a real strong swipe at DEI and maybe he got rid of it in the government.

Now, as I said before, I think every private organization is just pretending to get rid of it.

So, I don't think he had a big success there, but at least he he put down the G put down the flag.

I don't know what's the right analogy.

He uh he he kind of drew the line and said, "This is illegal.

If you do this, we will not fund you.

If you do this, you're breaking or at least you're violating the Constitution by being racist." That part I love.

I mean, you know, maybe you didn't get the big win and eliminated all at once, but it's certainly working in the right direction compared to where it was.

and Trump's negotiating with Iran for a better deal.

What if he gets it?

I I'm not going to predict it'll happen, but what if he does?

It's too early to know.

He's in negotiating with Ukraine and with Russia to end that war.

Doesn't look like it's necessarily going to work, but what if it does?

It's too It's too early to say it worked or it didn't work.

So the first 100 days is a sort of a sketchy, stupid way to judge anything.

Um, what about the tariffs?

How how many of you are sure that you can judge the the beginning and the end of the tariffs?

How many of you would say, "Oh, it's clear that the tariffs were a gigantic mistake.

It's way too early.

It's way too early.

He's using it as a negotiating tool and you've got I don't know 160 countries who said yes we do want to negotiate which almost certainly means better trade deals.

So what happens if he if he gets better trade deals?

So any sense that the first 100 days are telling you anything is it's a real propaganda gaslighting kind of situation.

You can't tell how he's doing in a 100 days.

And if you're looking at his popularity with the public, well, they're getting their cues from the media.

So if you turn on the TV, the media is pretty much saying that the tariffs are the biggest, dumbest thing anybody ever did.

Are they right?

What does the media know about any of this?

They don't know what's going to happen.

They don't know what China is going to do.

They don't know if the negotiations are really happening behind the scenes.

They don't know any of that.

So this whole 100 day thing is just stupid.

But the polls are looking uh not so great for Trump.

According to Just the News, there's a new poll from Economist Yuggov that uh Trump's approval is down to 41%.

And that would be a pretty big drop from the last time at 48%.

And then there's the I talked about this yesterday, but there's a Fox News poll that says that uh Democrats are favorite to win the midterm.

which is new and almost certainly because of the news coverage about Trump and a lot of it about the tariffs I would think.

Um but that's uh 2026 the midterms.

Now does that necessarily signal that he's failed if the midterms go to the Democrats?

I don't know because the the midterms almost always go to the party that's not in control.

I don't know how many times there's been an exception to that.

So, if it's the most common thing in the world that the midterms go to the other party, it's kind of hard to say that it's because of what Trump's doing.

But timing is really important.

So, here are just a few of the things that might happen.

I'm not going to predict they will happen, but they could happen before the midterms.

You might have a peace deal in Ukraine.

How would that look on his resume before the midterms?

Pretty damn good.

You know, of course there would be problems with the the peace deal holding and there'd be cheating and stuff, but if there was anything that looked like a peace deal and we didn't have to send them money and protect them anymore and maybe we had a mineral deal, too, well, it's going to look pretty good.

Could he get that done before the midterms?

Possibly.

What about a uh nuclear deal with Iran?

I think Iran is just dragging them along.

I don't I don't think that Iran is necessarily committed to making a deal, but they could.

I I would say it's not completely out of the question because the uh the alternative is Trump said very clearly that he wouldn't have to be dragged into a war with Iran if they if they don't make a deal.

He says he would very willingly be leading that war.

And that's pretty scary.

So maybe he's threatening Iran enough they could get an actual good deal.

Maybe before the midterms.

What What if he negotiates a better deal with China and our other major trading partners before the midterms?

It's not going to be worse than the current deals, right?

It it seems unlikely that he would negotiate worse trade deals.

So wouldn't it look like the tariffs worked if he let's say in I don't know 4 months or something we've got a little disruption we've got a you know some shortages over the summer but manageable you know we figure out a way around it and then when we're done we've got much better trade deals.

Isn't that going to look like the biggest win ever?

And all of this could happen could happen before midterms.

Now, as I said before, I think the Democrat strategy is completely just stalling.

They want to stall until the midterms and make sure that he doesn't have any successes that the public knows about so they can just keep the public from knowing about anything that he does that works.

And uh then once he they get control of the house, which is a good possibility, then they can just block every other thing he wants to do.

And then they could say he was a giant failure, but it would because they made him fail.

You know, the the press, you know, framed it that way and then, you know, that the house had some control and maybe they just start a bunch of investigations and just basically break everything.

There's a good chance that'll happen.

Well, according to Just the News, California um tried to pass a bill that would make it easier to get rid of squatters because right now in California, if somebody squats in your property, you really just can't get rid of them.

I mean, you can, but the process could take years and, you know, could be expensive, etc.

So, having a squatter is just the worst thing in the world in California.

So there was some new legislation to make it easier to get rid of it and uh of course it failed and it failed because they didn't want to increase more homeless.

So imagine being a homeowner in California.

First of all, you're not owning your home because you're paying the government or it will take it away from you.

So property taxes are basically rent you're paying to keep your house.

So, not only do you not really own your house because you got to pay the government just to keep it, but if somebody, you know, plays a clever trick and moves in and doesn't pay you rent anymore, you've got to keep them.

So, if you can't control um keeping your own house, you've got to pay rent to the government and the government can tell you that someone else can live in your house whether you like it or not.

Do you even own the house?

It's like you don't even own the house.

So, California is pretty close to full communist at this point.

Um or at least socialist.

Now, I happen to know somebody who was a squatter at one point.

Uh it was sort of a boyfriend situation.

You know, the boyfriend wanted to break up, but she she wanted to stay where she was.

And I'll tell you, being a squatter is no good idea because once you get on the the list of someone who has ever been a squatter, you can never rent a place or probably even buy a place ever again.

You you are absolutely locked out of all civilized behavior.

one once you show up on a list of somebody who has ever squatted, you can never rent.

Never rent again.

It's that's pretty severe.

Wouldn't it be better if it was easier to remove the squatters, but maybe the squatter penalty, you know, would maybe time out after five years or something because, you know, people change.

I think California is doing everything wrong on that topic.

All right.

Um, I've got a theory that the only lasting benefit from Doge, because I don't think they cut enough to make a difference to the budget.

I think the only lasting benefit is giving it a name, Doge, because now Pennsylvania is talking about they need their own Doge and some other states have talked about, oh, we need a Doge.

And some organizations have said we need a Doge.

and some other countries have said, "We need a Doge." The fact that it has a name allows everybody to say they're in favor of it.

But if you tried to do it without a name and you said, "You know what?

We really need some kind of smart auditors who would come in and they'd use a scalpel and they'd you decide what to cut." I don't know if you'd get a yes or a no because it wouldn't even have a name.

Once you give something a name and everybody knows that name of the thing, then it becomes a yes no.

Should we do a Doge?

Pretty good idea.

So, even if the main Doge doesn't produce the the cuts that we hoped and it's not looking like it will, um it might create the the idea.

It could be that the idea of Doge where you get a bunch of smart people to come in and look for the waste and cut your budget where the where it makes sense.

That might be really important.

So maybe the lasting benefit is just somebody gave it a name so we all know what it is so we can say yes or no to it in the future.

Nvidia, the company that makes those big AI boards and um mostly boards uh to in they're going to invest uh $500 billion in AI supercomputers in the US.

Now I think an AI supercomput means u a data center that acts as one unified supercomput.

But uh Mario Novel was writing about this on X and uh that's a pretty big move.

500 billion that's half a trillion dollars.

Now I didn't see what time frame that is but obviously it's not one year but that's some serious investment.

So uh again if the uh if we see the midterms coming and there are enough of these situations where big companies like Apple have said yep we're going to move our production to India get it out of China.

Um we're going to build a bunch of things in the United States.

You got a bunch of car companies saying yep we're going to move our production out of Mexico and put it back into Detroit or something.

Trump's going to look pretty good, but they're going to have to rack up a lot more of these.

So, right now, it's I don't know, maybe two handfuls of deals.

They're big ones.

I mean, they're many billions of dollars.

They're big ones, but I think maybe two handfuls of two handfuls of deals wouldn't be enough for him to win the midterms.

But what if he had 50?

What if there were 50 just legitimate obvious gigantic uh deals that were coming into the United States that wouldn't have happened otherwise?

Well, then he's going to be looking pretty good.

So, that could happen.

I was looking at a post by Insurrection Barbie on X.

Um, and insurrection party points out there have been more than 60 coordinated attacks on Tesla and $20 million in personal property damage and over 460 billion in market cap collapse in Tesla the company.

And she points out that one of the most radical groups behind this domestic terrorism is called the disruption project.

and the disruption project are funded 100% by another entity called the tides network.

And the tides network is funded primarily by David Rockefeller, George Soros, um the Pritskars and uh yeah, and the Pritskars.

So if we know who's funding it and we know it's domestic terrorism and we know that there are real economic costs, you know, $20 million of damage, etc.

Insurrection Barbie asks, um, why not a RICO case?

Now, I'm no lawyer, so I don't know that that's enough to make it RICO, but it's organized.

It's seemingly um criminal at least by outcome.

You know, maybe there's no smoking gun that says we we're going to try to get people to destroy property.

That probably doesn't exist.

But what if they were completely aware of the outcome?

Certainly after the first few instances, if they were completely aware that what they were funding was going to cause massive property damage, does that is that enough to make it a RICO case where it's an organized criminal activity?

I don't know.

I will leave that to the lawyers.

Well, according to Scott Pressler, uh there's a problem in Pennsylvania, as he says on X.

So, um apparently some Republican voters got their mailin ballots in Pennsylvania, and their mail-in ballots are dated for 2024, so last year.

In other words, they're not even legal.

Um at least the way they're dated.

And uh I guess Scott Presler has heard from several other Republicans who also received last year's ballot.

Now again, I don't know if it's really last year's ballot or if they just have a typo in the in the date, but either way, it would suppress your voting, wouldn't it?

Because you wouldn't know for sure if it's the right thing.

Maybe you'd try to get the right one, but you'd run out of time.

You'd be confused.

So, the open question is whether it only happened to Republicans.

So, if you want to go full conspiracy theory, uh, is it possible that all the fake ballots went to Republicans?

Now, I would guess it's more of a general problem, you know, maybe just a printer glitch or something, you know, a typo.

So, it probably affected everybody, but we'll get to the bottom of it.

We don't know yet.

According to the Washington Examiner, um I don't know how new this is because it sounds like something I talked about before.

China kind of quietly exempted some things from tariffs because it found it couldn't get them anywhere else.

So I guess when it comes to US-made semiconductors, chipmaking equipment, medical products, and aviation parts, um China took off the uh the tariff that they' put on it.

So, and they made the exemptions barely after realizing that they didn't really have a way to get that stuff any other way.

Now, they haven't uh I don't think they've publicly announced that, so they're kind of flying quiet.

But uh what do you think that the Trump administration is actually talking to Chinese officials about a deal?

Do you think that secretly there's a conversation going?

Cuz Trump is saying yes.

Oh yeah, we're getting close.

We're having conversations all the time and China is still hanging tight with nope.

Nope.

There's no negotiating.

It's not happening at all.

It doesn't feel like something that Trump would just completely make up.

So my guess is we're talking to somebody, but I don't know if that somebody has the authority of President Xi or not.

So maybe they're getting close to something and we'll be surprised.

According to the Jerusalem Post P post, uh Russia's made a deal with Iran that Russia would uh fund construction of a new nuclear plant in Iran.

They I guess they've funded one already and it's already built.

And uh and that Russia would supply Iran with 55 billion cubic meters of Russian gas per year.

So, it's starting to look like Russia has done a good job of pulling the the bad guys together onto one team.

You know, he's he's tight with China, he's tight with Iran, tight with some other smaller countries, but those are the ones that matter.

So, um, Russia's done a good job.

I I hate to say it, but Russia's done a hell of a good job of circumventing, you know, the United States interests and building their own little uh own little uh fortress.

Um, I told you before that uh Trump was asked by Time magazine um if he would be dragged into war with Iran if Israel wanted to, you know, happen and they couldn't make a deal.

And um Trump said uh no that he didn't say that he would get dragged in um but that he wouldn't have to be dragged because if they don't make a deal he would willingly want to go in and have a war.

Now that's the right thing to say.

I don't know if he would actually do it or if we would ever be done negotiating.

it would sort of make sense for him to just keep kicking the can down the road and saying, "I'm still negotiating, so don't go in militarily." Um, Trump is also saying out loud that he's worried that uh Vladimir Putin is maybe not so interested in peace and maybe stringing Trump along because uh as Trump points out, um Putin uh is bombing some civilian areas in Ukraine and there just doesn't seem to be a reason for it ex unless he's trying to kill the peace And so Trump is calling that out as it makes and he says quote on true social Trump said quote it makes me think that maybe he meaning Putin doesn't want to stop the war he's just tapping me along tapping me along and has to be dealt with differently through banking or secondary um sanctions.

So, it looks like Trump is thinking if you just keep with me, which Putin is doing, that he's just going to go heavy on sanctions, heavier than he already is.

Um, David Saxs was on the all-in pod.

Um and uh he was saying that uh Zalinski seems to clearly not be interested in peace because if he were he wouldn't be insisting on getting Crimea back because there's no practical way that's ever going to happen.

And uh Sax says made his bed, let him sleep in it.

And that's sort of where I'm at, you know, without being any any kind of an expert on Ukraine, which I'm not.

But if he's not willing to talk about Ukraine, which is very solidly under Russian control and it's not going to change, um, if he's not willing to accept that, he must want the war more than he wants the peace because it's the only path to peace.

And he's said no.

So, I do think there's a good chance that Trump might just say, "We're out.

You guys work it out." And, you know, maybe have them beg beg him to come back.

Or if they don't, maybe don't care.

Maybe don't care.

We'll see.

I saw a post by David uh Kiraenko that was detailing all of the drone building activity in uh Ukraine.

It turns out that although Ukraine is this big war zone, they've uh developed almost a Silicon Valley like really robust uh startup situation for drones.

And the claim, I don't know if the claim is true, is that they're so nimble, and of course they have a necessity for the drones that other people don't have, um, that they're they're developing newer and better ones faster than anybody else.

So, there just all kinds of startups now in Ukraine that are all drone related.

And uh Ukraine's defense sector uh was only a billion dollars of output in 2022, but it's up to 15 billion now.

And that doesn't count, you know, the American weapons.

That's just their own, you know, militaryindustrial base.

And and when I see how robust their militaryindustrial base is, mostly startups, it makes me wonder, does he have a problem with the military-industrial complex of his own country?

Is it possible that Ukraine's, you know, military benefiting people, every one of these startups would they would all go maybe bankrupt if there was a peace?

But as long as there's war, those startups are worth, you know, they're priceless.

Basically, you want more and more of them.

Um, so it does make me wonder what what's behind Zilinsk's idea.

It looks like Zalinski doesn't think he would survive peace.

Uh, but there are so many people who might want to get him.

I mean, Russia might want to take him out.

The US might want to take him out.

um the mil his own military-industrial complex might want to take him out.

Maybe some of the corrupt oligarchs in his country might want to take him out if if he's no longer feeding them uh through corruption or whatever.

So that's my best.

So I'm going to say my best guess is that Zenski does want peace, but he doesn't know how to get it without dying personally.

And so he's just not going to say yes.

That's what I think.

According to Newsmax, uh there's a poll that says the majority of Gen Z see college as a scam.

Gen Z, the maj, you know, 51%, but majority, they see college as a scam and a waste of money.

Boy, is that different from when I grew up.

I I was in the generation where uh at least my mother would say if you go to college everything will work out and so I went to college everything worked out.

It was absolutely a you know a big pathway to at least an you know good to average life.

So, what do you do if you're if you're Gen Z now?

You got robots coming.

You've you've got you don't want college debt.

If you don't go to college, what kind of job are you going to get?

If you do go to college, what kind of job are you going to get?

Especially with weird uh majors.

So, anyway, it's Sunday.

There's not that much news.

So, I'm going to say thanks for joining.

And uh we'll have a lot more news on Monday, so we'll go wild on Monday.

Yeah, trade school.

Trade school.

But um I don't know that trade school is a path to the same, you know, middle class, went to college kind of life um or not.

I mean, it's definitely better than not having a job.

And in many cases, it could be very lucrative.

All right.

Um, I'm going to talk to the locals people privately and uh the rest of you, thanks for joining and I'll see you on X and Rumble and You.

Tube tomorrow, same time, same place.

And locals, let's see if our technologies

It's Sunday. Time for a

show. We'll get everything working

[Music]

here. Good morning everyone and welcome

to the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and

you've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to try taking your experience

up to levels that nobody's even

understanding with their tiny shiny

human brains. For that, all you need is

a cup or a mug or a glass of tank or

shelter in a canteen jug or flask or

vessel of any kind. Fill it with your

favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join

me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

The dopamine of the day thing makes

everything better. It's called the

simultaneous sip and happens now. Go.

Ah,

spectacular. That's good

stuff. Well, I wonder if there's any

science studies that didn't need to

happen. Oh, here's

one. According to Sai Post, Eric Dolan

is writing, there's a new study in the

British Journal of

Psychology that says that uh uh that

entertainment is a key to populist

political

success. So if your candidate is very

entertaining, they will do better in

politics.

You know, you didn't really need to do

that

study. You could have asked me or really

anybody who's been alive for more than

10 minutes because yes, yes, an

entertaining candidate like uh Ronald

Reagan, for example, absolutely is going

to do better. Trump, of course. Yes. the

more entertaining you are, the better

you the better you draw people to you.

Um, and I don't think it's just the key

to populist political success. I think

it might be the key to all kinds of

political

success. Well, what else? Let's see. Uh,

oh, here we here we go. Uh, US companies

are avoiding hiring white men uh as part

of their diversity push according to the

Telegraph. Did you really need to study

that? That if companies are looking to

increase

diversity? Did you really not know that

that meant that they would be avoiding

hiring white

men? Again, they didn't need to study

it. Just ask me, Scott, do you think

diversity means hiring white men? And I

would say, no. Sounds like avoiding

hiding hiring white

men. Yeah, just ask. Next time I'll save

you a lot of time and

money. Well, according to uh the Daily

Wire, the uh group that's behind the

MCAT test, that's the test you take to

see if you get into medical school. Um

they said they were going to get rid of

DEI, but according to insiders, they

were lying and all they were going to do

is hide the fact that they were totally

going to do DEI.

So, according to the Daily Wire, on the

surface, the group uh that administers

the MCAT looks like they left DEI behind

because they sort of scrub the those

words from their materials, but behind

the scenes is working on plans to

secretly push the ideology.

Turns out that as far as I can tell,

every big

company is just waiting for the Trump

administration to be done. So it looks

like nobody's really getting rid of

DEI. Maybe Target, you know, maybe maybe

you John Deere, but basically I would

bet that 80 to 90% of the companies or

organizations that say they're getting

rid of DEI are lying. Just lying. and

violating the law like crazy because DEI

is racism and it's, you know,

non-constitutional. And

uh I've got a I've got a fear that even

though it looks like Trump got rid of

DEI, I'm not so sure. I think maybe he

made a 10% dent in it and the moment

he's

gone, it will just come back, you know,

stronger than ever. That's what it looks

like. Well, ABC News has a cool story

about 3D printed houses. Now, you know

that there have been 3D printed houses

for a while, but the ones you've seen

probably look like cement. You know,

some big big machine that's making

cement walls. Well, there's a new type

that uses just uh waste wood. So all the

sawdust that's created from real wood

and uh they take all that sawdust and

they put it together with corn and resin

and they make a 3D printer and they make

a bio home. I guess it takes a week to

create a home and it's made of material

that's stronger than concrete and is

completely recyclable.

So, if you take the appliances out of

the house, you can recycle the whole

house and turn it back into a 3D printer

material. That's

wild. So, that's kind of

cool. At the same time, and uh there's

another company that's got 3D printed

houses, but the way they're doing it is

they make uh the blocks. They're

interconnecting like Legos. So instead

of printing the whole house, they print

the parts and you can snap it together

yourself. Now I would like to

reiterate my idea for 3D printed houses.

Whichever kind of technology you use to

get your cheap little

house, the real secret would be how you

organize the

homes. Um, this is something I learned

in college. I've used this example

before. In college, I had the worst

physical room of my life, which was, you

know, shared with another person. It was

just a little cinder block room with one

window and the bathroom was down the

hall. But it was my probably best

lifestyle because I was surrounded by

people like me who had stuff to do, you

know, sports and classes and it was a

great experience. Now, if you imagine

you, let's take some federal land and

you started building some of these 3D

homes, the important part would be that

you make little uh little units within a

community where the people have a lot in

common. So, one would be people with

kids. So, you'd make one little one

little neighborhood where everybody just

has a kid. Another neighborhood where

everybody's single, another neighborhood

where there's a lot of tech people,

another one where there's some retired

people. Because if you put people

together who have a lot in common, the

physical surroundings become way less

important. Way less important. So you

can make an awesome lifestyle that's

fairly inexpensive by just organizing

who is where instead of just, you know,

the materials you use in the house.

That's what I think. Well, according to

futurism, which is a publication, a

website I guess um there was a recent

experiment by researchers at Carnegie

Melon where they tried to create a

company

uh that was entirely run by

AI. So there would be AI agents for each

job. So they would staff the uh the AI

company with uh instead of humans they

would give it an AI agent to be you know

sales one to be engineering one to be

whatever and so they created this thing

and then they just let it run um without

human interaction to see how all the AI

agents would perform. How do you think

it went?

Do you think they became a unicorn cuz

the AI is so smart and then they sold it

for a billion

dollars? No. Turns out it was a gigantic

cluster

and nothing worked and the AI

started lying and absolutely none of it

worked. So even though they used various

different AIs, uh none of the AI

agents actually did anything

useful. So we're not quite ready to run

a company with AI.

Well, I guess last night was the White

House correspondence dinner and uh Trump

and probably most of the Trump insiders

did not go and I think it turned out to

be the most low energy event of all time

because it used to be, you know, the

president would go, whoever the

president is, then a comedian would make

really edgy jokes and then the next day

it would be everybody talking about all

the edgy jokes. It's like, "Oh, can you

believe that that comedian said that

right in front of the president?" But

instead, they just gave themselves

awards for uh somebody got an award for

writing about Biden's mental

decline. Do you do you think anybody was

writing about Biden's mental decline

while he was in office? I don't think

so.

If you're giving somebody an award for

writing about it after he's out of

office, I don't know if you deserve that

award, that would be like the opposite

of what you should get. You should get a

kick in the ass, not an

award. And then I guess the uh the new

leader of the White House correspondents

um did a speech in which he wanted you

to know that uh they are not the enemy

of the people. the press is not the

enemy of the people. To which I

say, what's your criteria for that?

Because you certainly look like the

enemy of the people to me. So, how do

you score that? Is there some objective

criteria by which you can say, "Oh,

you're not the enemy of the people." Oh,

I I see based on your performance. But

if you actually just looked at what the

press has done over the last, I know

several years, it certainly looks like

enemy, you know, because my friends will

tell me the truth and my enemies will

lie to me. What is the press done more

of? Telling me the truth or lying to me?

Lying to me. So, how in the world do I

declare that they're not my enemy if

they're lying to me about the most

important things in the world?

No, I would consider that an enemy.

Sorry. Speaking of enemies, James

Carville is complaining that Bernie

Sanders and AOC are starting to define

the Democrat party. Fox News is

reporting on this.

Now, I love the fact that Carville, as

you know, as crazy old coup as he is,

he's still probably, you know, one of

the smartest ones in the Democrat party

in terms of strategies. And he's

completely right that having uh Bernie

and AOC define the party and chasing

after oligarchs is a really bad idea.

But the other thing Carville says, he

says that Democrats have candidates who

are quote staggeringly more talented

than Bernie and

AOC. Well, who would they be? Maybe he

should give us some names. I think he's

named them before. But if they're

staggeringly more

talented, do they need a boost? Or

wouldn't we know their names already?

Wouldn't all their talent have allowed

them to break away from the pack and be

obvious? And yet, I can't think of one.

Which uh which Democrat is staggeringly

talented? I don't know. All right, let's

look at the fake news. Um, you may have

seen that the uh President uh Trump and

his wife went to the Pope's funeral and

you probably saw a bunch of news

coverage and social media saying that

Trump wore a blue suit when the dress

code was for black suits and so

therefore he was being disrespectful to

the Pope and the entire Catholic

religion.

Well, of course, there were lots of

people who didn't wear black for a

variety of reasons. There were other

blue suits. There were gray suits. There

were there were um there were Muslim

traditional outfits. Uh and the uh the

dress code was for a dark suit. There

was no dress code for a black suit.

There was a dress code for a dark suit

and he had a dark blue. So, that is fake

news. He was not violating any norms. He

was just wearing a nice suit. Yeah. And

if you see a uh a wide shot, you see

there was a whole bunch of people in

blue suits. So, he wasn't the only one

either. Uh there's more fake news. Let's

see. Uh Sunny Hosten tried to create

this and MSNBC is trying to create this

one. Out of nothing. So, when the

Republicans started noodling about a

$5,000 bonus to pay to uh people who

have babies to encourage them to have

more babies, the Democrats turned that

into, "Oh, you mean you want more white

babies, you

racist?" To which every Republican said,

"Huh? Where'd that come from?"

I I haven't heard a single person on

social media or anywhere else say that

the $5,000 baby bonus was somehow either

intentionally or even

unintentionally aimed at white

babies. Now, where does that even come

from? It's just that they've got some

kind of, you know, terrible fever in

their brains, TDS, that they just

imagine out of

nothing that the idea of having more

American babies really meant having more

white babies. How in the world would you

even restrict it? Did Did they think

that um the Trump administration was

going to give no money to an Hispanic

Hispanic family who had been living here

for generations?

No, it's a baby bonus. It's not a white

baby

bonus. Literally, nobody's even

suggested that except Democrats, of

course. So, dumb old Joy Reed, the

dumbest person in media, uh she was back

making a little video in which she uh

she claimed the Roman Empire fell

because they had a lack of diversity.

Now, I'm no historian, but even I know

that Rome didn't fall because of a lack

of

diversity. Can you imagine being so so

boldly dumb that you would say that in

public that the reason the Roman Empire

fell was a lack of diversity?

So I saw a post by uh Paul

Sispula uh and he went to history.com

and asked it why the Roman Empire fell.

Here are the eight reasons. Invasions by

barbarians, economic troubles and

overall reliance on slave labor, the

rise of the Eastern Empire,

overexpansion and military overspending.

A lot of this is just overspending.

government corruption and political

instability, the arrival of the Huns and

the migration of the barbarian tribes,

Christianity and the loss of traditional

values, weakening of the Roman

legions. So basically everything except

diversity.

Uh you could argue that the diversity is

what destroyed it because when the

barbarians and the Huns uh and the

slaves, you know, were were filling

Rome,

uh that was pretty diverse and it was

also the end of Rome. Now, I'm not

saying that diversity is going to kill

Rome. I'm just

saying it went down at the same time it

had the most

diversity, but not because of it. It's

because of this other stuff. Well, the

uh thief who stole Christy Gnome's purse

when she was at a restaurant has been

captured. And uh just to make it fun,

the thief is an illegal

immigrant. And it makes me wonder how

did they catch the guy? So, he had a

mask on. So, presumably there was no

video that could catch his face. And uh

there were several theories I saw. One

was I think her phone was in her purse,

right? Did her phone get stolen? Cuz if

her phone was there, I guess they could

track her phone and go right to him. Um

or did they look for his phone? Maybe he

had a phone and they just checked to

see, you know, who was in the building

that day that was sketchy and also had a

phone. Maybe. or somebody else said

maybe uh he tried to use her credit

cards and that flagged something. But my

best guess is her phone was in the

purse and that might have been

enough. But have you noticed that when a

crime happens to somebody

famous? They always solve

it. But if a crime happens to you, the

police will say, "Ah, yeah, could be

anything. Let us know if you find

anything. There's nothing we can do. Air

tag. Maybe. Maybe she had an Apple Air

Tag in the purse. We haven't heard of

that, but

maybe. All right. Let's do a little uh

update on Trump becoming a

dictator. All right. So, this would be

based on the Democrat frame for things.

So, what are the Democrats looking at

that suggests that Trump is becoming an

authorit authoritarian Hitler dictator

guy? Um, he his administration has

recently, well, the Department of

Justice has arrested two judges for

harboring illegal

aliens. Is that like a

dictator or is that more like nobody's

above the law? because it does look like

both

judges quite obviously and somewhat

publicly uh violated the law by

harboring in one case having an illegal

alien in their own home and the other

case allegedly helping the illegal alien

escape from ICE after a court case uh

unsuccessfully. So I would say hm if

they broke the law and it's an important

law and they're going to make an example

out of them so that other people don't

think they can just protect illegal

aliens.

Um I would say that's not exactly too

dictator-like because it's very narrowly

aimed at people who broke actual

laws. And it wasn't long ago that the

Democrats were trying to put a uh a

candidate for president in jail,

actually even a president in jail for

all kinds of lawfare. So all that

lawfare against Trump apparently had

nothing to do with dictator anything.

But the moment the Department of Justice

under Trump arrests two judges who

clearly broke the law, well, dictator.

dictator. Uh then there's the case of

the Maryland dad who was accused of

being of MS-13 who was shipped to El

Salvador without what they call due

process. Now, we could argue all day

whether there was due process or not,

but how many think that that one case of

that one Maryland ad is an indication

that Trump's a dictator?

To me, it's just he's a guy who said he

would get rid of the criminals and and

he meant it. Apparently, he is. Um then

what about the negotiations with Ukraine

and Russia? I will admit that Trump

apparently is negotiating in a way that

would give Putin everything Putin wants.

I don't think there's anything that

Putin wants, you know, unless you think

he wants the rest of Ukraine, but he

probably doesn't. Um, because he got the

good

stuff. It does look like Trump is

negotiating on the side of the

dictator. Now, his

purpose is not necessarily to help

Putin. His purpose is to end the war.

And I think it's just common sense that

if you know Putin's not going to give

back

Crimea, he's not going to give back any

of those occupied

areas, why would you even waste your

time negotiating something that's not

going to happen? But the weird thing is

that Trump is

simultaneously being accused of being a

Neville Chamberlain, you know, the guy

who is negotiating peace with with a

Nazi but doesn't, you know, but trusts

Hitler to keep his word. And then he

turns out to be the biggest dumb guy in

all of history because who would have

trusted, you know, Hitler to keep his

word? But at the same time that Trump is

being accused of the guy who's letting

Hitler get away with too much, he's

actually being accused of being Hitler.

So he he's the first person in history

who's ever been accused of being Neville

Chamberlain and Hitler at the same time.

So I can't take any of that too

seriously. He did try to uh fire Jerome

Powell from the Fed, which would be most

people would say an overreach of his

position, but he gave up on that. So,

you know, that that was sort of a shot

across the bow, but nothing uh too

dictatorial that happened.

And uh then there's a new story here

from Axios that Attorney General Pam

Bondi is going to resume the practice of

seizing reporters phone records

uh in the narrow situation that there's

a leak and there's a leak to specific

reporters and

uh that would be a reversal of a Biden

rule that said they wouldn't take you

know they wouldn't investigate

reporters. I kind of like Biden's I like

Biden's take on this. I think you have

to leave the reporters alone even if

there's a leak. But uh Pam Bondi, etc.

is uh saying it would be a very narrow

search. So if they took the phones or

the devices of the reporters,

uh they wouldn't look at everything.

they'd just be looking for something

related to the leak that they were

investigating, but that's not good

enough. So, to me, that's a little uh

little little bit of an

overreach. I don't like him going after

the

press. Um, so those are the dictatorial

things. Did I miss anything? Did I miss

any other dictator stuff?

you know, even the uh the part where

Trump is trolling the world, saying that

he wants to, I don't know, take over

Canada and Greenland and, you know, he

wants to uh run again in

2028. I think the 2028 thing is mostly a

troll and I I think he said so

today. But uh and then the other stuff

just makes sense. You know, having more

military security with Greenland and uh

can the candidate part I feel like is

more troll than not. Although he swears

that he's serious about it, but that

just makes it funnier.

I don't think he's serious about it, but

he might be. He might be serious about

it. Well, Jamie

Rascin, a Democrat, he was on a Rachel

Maddo show and uh he said that the Trump

administration officials could be

arrested for quote interfering with a

legal proceeding or

kidnapping. I think that has to do with

the judges that were arrested. And uh I

saw Joel Pollock commenting on it that

uh Jamie Raskin just really wants to

arrest

people. He he he's been after trying to

arrest, you know, Republicans or Trump

or anybody close to him for the longest

time. So he's uh he's arrest him. Arrest

him. All right, let's look at the uh

Trump's first 100 days.

So depending who you talk to, it's

either the worst 100 days of any

president ever or it went pretty

well. Now, um I'm going to make

reference here to two bubble people. Uh

there's bubble boy Bill Maher who says

that MAGA voters won't admit how

disappointed they are in Trump's first

100

days. Really?

that that doesn't look like any reality

I'm aware of. I do see Republicans say

he didn't get enough done or this didn't

work or I I'm disappointed with that.

But they say it they say it publicly.

They don't hold back a bit. Um but more

often I'll hear people say that they

like what he did in the first 100 days.

And you know the the jury's out on some

of it because it's too early. Uh Rachel

Maddo said that uh quote, "It's all bad

for Trump. I don't know that we have

ever seen another first 100 days from

any president this roundly rejected and

hated by the American

people."

Really, what what bubble is that

happening

in? Where's the bubble where where

Trump's supporters are are rejecting

everything he's done?

So I think if you ask people they would

say something like if you asked

Republicans they'd say that Trump did a

great job on the border and continues to

do a great job in the border and that

was an existential threat. The border

problem was an end of America problem

and he solved that. That's a really big

deal.

um he took a real strong swipe at DEI

and maybe he got rid of it in the

government. Now, as I said before, I

think every private organization is just

pretending to get rid of it. So, I don't

think he had a big success there, but at

least he he put down the G put down the

flag. I don't know what's the right

analogy. He uh he he kind of drew the

line and said, "This is

illegal. If you do this, we will not

fund you. If you do this, you're

breaking or at least you're violating

the Constitution by being racist." That

part I love. I mean, you know, maybe you

didn't get the big win and eliminated

all at once, but it's certainly working

in the right direction compared to where

it was.

and Trump's negotiating with Iran for a

better deal. What if he gets it? I I'm

not going to predict it'll happen, but

what if he does? It's too early to know.

He's in negotiating with Ukraine and

with Russia to end that

war. Doesn't look like it's necessarily

going to work, but what if it does? It's

too It's too early to say it worked or

it didn't work. So the first 100 days is

a sort of a sketchy, stupid way to judge

anything. Um, what about the

tariffs? How how many of you are sure

that you can judge the the beginning and

the end of the

tariffs? How many of you would say, "Oh,

it's clear that the tariffs were a

gigantic

mistake. It's way too early. It's way

too early. He's using it as a

negotiating tool and you've got I don't

know 160 countries who said yes we do

want to negotiate which almost certainly

means better trade

deals. So what happens if

he if he gets better trade

deals?

So any sense that the first 100 days are

telling you anything is it's a real

propaganda gaslighting kind of

situation. You can't tell how he's doing

in a 100 days. And if you're looking at

his popularity with the public, well,

they're getting their cues from the

media.

So if you turn on the TV, the media is

pretty much saying that the tariffs are

the biggest, dumbest thing anybody ever

did. Are they right? What does the media

know about any of this? They don't know

what's going to happen. They don't know

what China is going to do. They don't

know if the negotiations are really

happening behind the scenes. They don't

know any of that. So this whole 100 day

thing is just stupid.

But the polls are looking uh not so

great for Trump. According to Just the

News, there's a new poll from Economist

Yuggov that uh Trump's approval is down

to

41%. And that would be a pretty big drop

from the last time at

48%. And then there's the I talked about

this yesterday, but there's a Fox News

poll that says that uh Democrats are

favorite to win the midterm.

which is new and almost certainly

because of the news coverage about Trump

and a lot of it about the tariffs I

would think.

Um but that's uh

2026 the midterms. Now does that

necessarily signal that he's failed if

the midterms go to the

Democrats? I don't know because the the

midterms almost always go to the party

that's not in control. I don't know how

many times there's been an exception to

that. So, if it's the most common thing

in the world that the midterms go to the

other

party, it's kind of hard to say that

it's because of what Trump's doing. But

timing is really important. So, here are

just a few of the things that might

happen. I'm not going to predict they

will happen, but they could happen

before the midterms. You might have a

peace deal in

Ukraine. How would that look on his

resume before the midterms? Pretty damn

good. You know, of course there would be

problems with the the peace deal holding

and there'd be cheating and stuff, but

if there was anything that looked like a

peace deal and we didn't have to send

them money and protect them anymore and

maybe we had a mineral deal, too, well,

it's going to look pretty good. Could he

get that done before the

midterms? Possibly. What about a uh

nuclear deal with Iran?

I think Iran is just dragging them

along. I don't I don't think that Iran

is necessarily committed to making a

deal, but they could. I I would say it's

not completely out of the question

because the uh the alternative is Trump

said very clearly that he wouldn't have

to be dragged into a war with Iran if

they if they don't make a deal. He says

he would very willingly be leading that

war. And that's pretty scary. So maybe

he's threatening Iran enough they could

get an actual good deal. Maybe before

the midterms. What What if he negotiates

a better deal with China and our other

major trading partners before the

midterms? It's not going to be worse

than the current deals, right? It it

seems unlikely that he would negotiate

worse trade deals. So wouldn't it look

like the tariffs worked if he let's say

in I don't know 4 months or something

we've got a little disruption we've got

a you know some shortages over the

summer but manageable you know we figure

out a way around it and then when we're

done we've got much better trade deals.

Isn't that going to look like the

biggest win ever? And all of this could

happen could happen before midterms.

Now, as I said before, I think the

Democrat strategy is completely just

stalling. They want to stall until the

midterms and make sure that he doesn't

have any successes that the public knows

about so they can just keep the public

from knowing about anything that he does

that

works. And uh then once he they get

control of the house, which is a good

possibility, then they can just block

every other thing he wants to do. And

then they could say he was a giant

failure, but it would because they made

him fail. You know, the the press, you

know, framed it that way and then, you

know, that the house had some control

and maybe they just start a bunch of

investigations and just basically break

everything. There's a good chance

that'll happen.

Well, according to Just the News,

California

um tried to pass a bill that would make

it easier to get rid of squatters

because right now in California, if

somebody squats in your property, you

really just can't get rid of them. I

mean, you can, but the process could

take years and, you know, could be

expensive, etc. So, having a squatter is

just the worst thing in the world in

California. So there was some new

legislation to make it easier to get rid

of it and uh of course it failed and it

failed because they didn't want to

increase more

homeless. So imagine being a homeowner

in

California. First of all, you're not

owning your home because you're paying

the government or it will take it away

from you. So property taxes are

basically rent you're paying to keep

your house. So, not only do you not

really own your house because you got to

pay the government just to keep it, but

if somebody, you know, plays a clever

trick and moves in and doesn't pay you

rent anymore, you've got to keep them.

So, if you can't control

um keeping your own house, you've got to

pay rent to the government and the

government can tell you that someone

else can live in your house whether you

like it or not. Do you even own the

house? It's like you don't even own the

house. So, California is pretty close to

full communist at this

point. Um or at least

socialist. Now, I happen to know

somebody who was a squatter at one

point. Uh it was sort of a boyfriend

situation. You know, the boyfriend

wanted to break up, but she she wanted

to stay where she was. And I'll tell

you, being a squatter is no good idea

because once you get on the the list of

someone who has ever been a

squatter, you can never rent a place or

probably even buy a place ever again.

You you are

absolutely locked out of all civilized

behavior. one once you show up on a list

of somebody who has ever squatted, you

can never rent. Never rent again. It's

that's pretty severe. Wouldn't it be

better if it was easier to remove the

squatters, but maybe the squatter

penalty, you know, would maybe time out

after five years or something because,

you know, people

change. I think California is doing

everything wrong on that

topic. All right. Um, I've got a theory

that the only lasting benefit from Doge,

because I don't think they cut enough to

make a difference to the budget. I think

the only lasting benefit is giving it a

name,

Doge, because now Pennsylvania is

talking about they need their own Doge

and some other states have talked about,

oh, we need a Doge. And some

organizations have said we need a Doge.

and some other countries have said, "We

need a

Doge." The fact that it has a name

allows everybody to say they're in favor

of it. But if you tried to do it without

a name and you said, "You know what? We

really need some kind of smart auditors

who would come in and they'd use a

scalpel and they'd you decide what to

cut." I don't know if you'd get a yes or

a no because it wouldn't even have a

name.

Once you give something a name and

everybody knows that name of the thing,

then it becomes a yes no. Should we do a

Doge? Pretty good idea. So, even if the

main Doge doesn't produce the the cuts

that we hoped and it's not looking like

it will, um it might create the the

idea. It could be that the idea of Doge

where you get a bunch of smart people to

come in and look for the waste and cut

your budget where the where it makes

sense. That might be really important.

So maybe the lasting benefit is just

somebody gave it a name so we all know

what it is so we can say yes or no to it

in the future.

Nvidia, the company that makes those big

AI boards and um mostly boards uh to in

they're going to invest uh $500 billion

in AI supercomputers in the US. Now I

think an AI supercomput means

u a data center that acts as one unified

supercomput. But uh Mario Novel was

writing about this on X and uh that's a

pretty big move. 500 billion that's half

a trillion dollars. Now I didn't see

what time frame that is but obviously

it's not one year but that's some

serious

investment. So

uh again if the uh if we see the

midterms coming and there are enough of

these situations where big companies

like Apple have said yep we're going to

move our production to India get it out

of China. Um we're going to build a

bunch of things in the United States.

You got a bunch of car companies saying

yep we're going to move our production

out of Mexico and put it back into

Detroit or something. Trump's going to

look pretty good, but they're going to

have to rack up a lot more of these. So,

right now, it's I don't know, maybe two

handfuls of deals. They're big ones. I

mean, they're many billions of dollars.

They're big ones, but I think maybe two

handfuls of two handfuls of deals

wouldn't be enough for him to win the

midterms. But what if he had

50? What if there were 50 just

legitimate

obvious gigantic uh deals that were

coming into the United States that

wouldn't have happened otherwise? Well,

then he's going to be looking pretty

good. So, that could

happen. I was looking at a post by

Insurrection Barbie on X. Um, and

insurrection party points out there have

been more than 60 coordinated attacks on

Tesla and $20 million in personal

property damage and over 460 billion in

market cap collapse in Tesla the

company. And she points out that one of

the most radical groups behind this

domestic terrorism is called the

disruption project. and the disruption

project are funded 100% by another

entity called the tides

network. And the tides network is funded

primarily by David Rockefeller, George

Soros,

um the

Pritskars and uh yeah, and the

Pritskars.

So if we know who's funding it and we

know it's domestic terrorism and we know

that there are real economic costs, you

know, $20 million of damage,

etc. Insurrection Barbie asks,

um, why not a RICO

case? Now, I'm no lawyer, so I don't

know that that's enough to make it RICO,

but it's organized.

It's seemingly

um criminal at least by outcome. You

know, maybe there's no smoking gun that

says we we're going to try to get people

to destroy property. That probably

doesn't exist. But what if they were

completely aware of the outcome?

Certainly after the first few instances,

if they were completely aware that what

they were funding was going to cause

massive property

damage, does that is that enough to make

it a RICO case where it's an organized

criminal activity? I don't know. I will

leave that to the lawyers.

Well, according to Scott

Pressler, uh there's a problem in

Pennsylvania, as he says on X. So, um

apparently some Republican voters got

their mailin ballots in Pennsylvania,

and their mail-in ballots are dated for

2024, so last year. In other words,

they're not even legal. Um at least the

way they're dated. And uh I guess Scott

Presler has heard from several other

Republicans who also received last

year's

ballot. Now again, I don't know if it's

really last year's ballot or if they

just have a typo in the in the date, but

either way, it would suppress your

voting, wouldn't it? Because you

wouldn't know for sure if it's the right

thing. Maybe you'd try to get the right

one, but you'd run out of time. You'd be

confused.

So, the open question is whether it only

happened to

Republicans. So, if you want to go full

conspiracy theory, uh, is it possible

that all the fake ballots went to

Republicans? Now, I would guess it's

more of a general problem, you know,

maybe just a printer glitch or

something, you know, a typo. So, it

probably affected

everybody, but we'll get to the bottom

of it. We don't know yet. According to

the Washington Examiner,

um I don't know how new this is because

it sounds like something I talked about

before. China kind of quietly exempted

some things from tariffs because it

found it couldn't get them anywhere

else. So I guess when it comes to

US-made semiconductors, chipmaking

equipment, medical products, and

aviation parts, um China took off the uh

the tariff that they' put on it. So, and

they made the exemptions barely after

realizing that they didn't really have a

way to get that stuff any other way.

Now, they haven't uh I don't think

they've publicly announced that, so

they're kind of flying

quiet. But uh what do you think that the

Trump administration is actually talking

to Chinese officials about a deal? Do

you think that secretly there's a

conversation going? Cuz Trump is saying

yes. Oh yeah, we're getting close. We're

having conversations all the time and

China is still hanging tight with nope.

Nope. There's no negotiating. It's not

happening at

all. It doesn't feel like something that

Trump would just completely make

up. So my guess is we're talking to

somebody, but I don't know if that

somebody has the authority of President

Xi or not. So maybe they're getting

close to something and we'll be

surprised. According to the Jerusalem

Post P post, uh Russia's made a deal

with Iran that Russia would uh fund

construction of a new nuclear plant in

Iran. They I guess they've funded one

already and it's already built. And uh

and that Russia would supply Iran with

55 billion cubic meters of Russian gas

per year.

So, it's starting to look like Russia

has done a good job of pulling the the

bad guys together onto one team. You

know, he's he's tight with China, he's

tight with Iran, tight with some other

smaller countries, but those are the

ones that

matter. So,

um, Russia's done a good job. I I hate

to say it, but Russia's done a hell of a

good job of circumventing, you know, the

United States interests and building

their own little uh own little uh

fortress.

Um, I told you before that uh Trump was

asked by Time magazine

um if he would be dragged into war with

Iran if Israel wanted to, you know,

happen and they couldn't make a deal.

And

um Trump said uh no that he didn't say

that he would get dragged in

um but that he wouldn't have to be

dragged because if they don't make a

deal he would willingly want to go in

and have a war. Now that's the right

thing to

say. I don't know if he would actually

do it or if we would ever be done

negotiating. it would sort of make sense

for him to just keep kicking the can

down the road and saying, "I'm still

negotiating, so don't go in militarily."

Um, Trump is also saying out loud that

he's worried that uh Vladimir Putin is

maybe not so interested in peace and

maybe stringing Trump along because uh

as Trump points out,

um

Putin uh is bombing some civilian areas

in Ukraine and there just doesn't seem

to be a reason for it ex unless he's

trying to kill the peace

And so Trump is calling that out as it

makes and he says quote on true social

Trump said quote it makes me think that

maybe he meaning Putin doesn't want to

stop the war he's just tapping me along

tapping me along and has to be dealt

with differently through banking or

secondary

um sanctions. So, it looks like Trump is

thinking if you just keep with

me, which Putin is doing, that he's just

going to go heavy on sanctions, heavier

than he already

is. Um, David Saxs was on the all-in

pod. Um and uh he was saying that uh

Zalinski seems to clearly not be

interested in peace because if he were

he wouldn't be insisting on getting

Crimea back because there's no practical

way that's ever going to happen. And uh

Sax says made his bed, let him sleep in

it.

And that's sort of where I'm at, you

know, without being any any kind of an

expert on Ukraine, which I'm not. But if

he's not willing to talk about

Ukraine, which is very solidly under

Russian control and it's not going to

change, um, if he's not willing to

accept that, he must want the war more

than he wants the peace because it's the

only path to peace. And he's said no.

So, I do think there's a good chance

that Trump might just say, "We're out.

You guys work it out." And, you know,

maybe have them beg beg him to come

back. Or if they don't, maybe don't

care. Maybe don't care. We'll see.

I saw a post by David uh

Kiraenko that was detailing all of the

drone building activity in uh Ukraine.

It turns out that although Ukraine is

this big war zone, they've uh developed

almost a Silicon Valley like really

robust uh startup situation for drones.

And the claim, I don't know if the claim

is true, is that they're so nimble, and

of course they have a necessity for the

drones that other people don't have, um,

that they're they're developing newer

and better ones faster than anybody

else. So, there just all kinds of

startups now in Ukraine that are all

drone related. And uh Ukraine's defense

sector uh was only a billion dollars of

output in 2022, but it's up to 15

billion now. And that doesn't count, you

know, the American

weapons. That's just their own, you

know,

militaryindustrial base. And and when I

see how robust their militaryindustrial

base is, mostly startups, it makes me

wonder, does he have a problem with the

military-industrial complex of his own

country? Is it possible that

Ukraine's, you know,

military benefiting people, every one of

these startups would they would all go

maybe bankrupt if there was a peace? But

as long as there's war, those startups

are worth, you know, they're priceless.

Basically, you want more and more of

them.

Um, so it does make me wonder what

what's behind Zilinsk's idea. It looks

like Zalinski doesn't think he would

survive

peace. Uh, but there are so many people

who might want to get him. I mean,

Russia might want to take him out. The

US might want to take him out.

um the mil his own military-industrial

complex might want to take him out.

Maybe some of the corrupt oligarchs in

his country might want to take him out

if if he's no longer feeding them uh

through corruption or whatever. So

that's my best. So I'm going to say my

best guess is that Zenski does want

peace, but he doesn't know how to get it

without dying personally. And so he's

just not going to say

yes. That's what I

think. According to

Newsmax, uh there's a poll that says the

majority of Gen Z see college as a

scam. Gen Z, the maj, you know, 51%, but

majority, they see college as a scam and

a waste of money. Boy, is that different

from when I grew up. I I was in the

generation where uh at least my mother

would say if you go to college

everything will work out and so I went

to college everything worked

out. It was

absolutely a you know a big pathway to

at least an you know good to average

life.

So, what do you do if you're if you're

Gen Z now? You got robots coming. You've

you've got you don't want college debt.

If you don't go to college, what kind of

job are you going to get? If you do go

to college, what kind of job are you

going to get? Especially with weird uh

majors. So, anyway, it's Sunday. There's

not that much news. So, I'm going to say

thanks for joining. And uh we'll have a

lot more news on Monday, so we'll go

wild on Monday. Yeah, trade school.

Trade school. But um I don't know that

trade school is a path to the

same, you know, middle class, went to

college kind of life

um or not. I mean, it's definitely

better than not having a

job. And in many cases, it could be very

lucrative. All right. Um, I'm going to

talk to the locals people

privately and uh the rest of you, thanks

for joining and I'll see you on X and

Rumble and YouTube tomorrow, same time,

same

place. And locals, let's see if our

technologies