Episode 2863 CWSA 06/09/25

stock market is kind of flat, so we don't have to worry about that yet.

Let's uh get our comments working and then we'll have a show.

Good morning.

Get rid of that.

There we go.

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

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

But if you'd like to take a chance on improving your attitude to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains.

Well, all you need for that is a copper mug or a glass, a tanker, shells or ste a canteen jugger flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day.

The thing that makes everything better.

It's called the simultaneous and it happens now.

Oh, I feel sorry for the resistors.

You know, I I hear that there are some people I tried to talk before I was done swallowing.

I'm a pig.

I hear that some people are trying to resist the simultaneous sip because you don't want to feel like you've been manipulated.

Well, you also miss the thrill of being connected to thousands of people around the world at the same time.

So, you know, I guess you can pick your fate.

All right.

So allegedly in science according to wonderful engineering uh scientists have created light from empty space by manipulating time and space or the other possibility is that is total and nobody created any light whatsoever.

I look at a story like that and I just think really really did they make light out of time and space?

Did that really happen?

I don't know.

It might have, but uh I'm going to say you're going to need a little bit more evidence before I say yes to that.

Meanwhile, in something way more fun, there's a company called Cuda Jet that makes an underwater jetpack.

It looks like it's obviously electric and you strap it to your back and you can just go like hell on, you know, underwater and at the surface.

And I said to myself, this looks really fun.

It looks really, really fun.

So, I could easily imagine myself uh seeing lots of people doing that.

I was going to say me doing it, but you know, it's not like I'm going to scuba either.

So, I don't think I'll be doing it.

But, it looks like fun.

It It can uh last 90 minutes, which is probably the hard part, having the battery last long enough.

and it can recharge in 75 minutes and you can feel like you're you're Aquaman and Superman at the same time.

Well, in uh important New York Post news, uh allegedly the average penis size has increased and OMPic could be to blame.

So anecdotally, but not scientifically yet.

Anecdotally, people are reporting that their penises are larger uh when they're on OMIC losing weight.

Now, may I uh may I address the NPCs directly?

NPCs, what you should say is the most obvious thing.

What's the most obvious thing you would say?

Oh, it's not any bigger.

It's just that you can see it now.

That's the most obvious thing you can say.

So, if you were if you were already typing that, sorry, you're an NPC.

You're not programmed for creativity.

You're programmed for the most obvious things.

So, sorry about that.

Uh when I see a story like this, I have to wonder, do you think the uh PR department at Ozembic could possibly be behind this story?

Now, not that they, you know, made up the story out of nothing.

It could be that uh you know, there were reports, actual reports, but they were anecdotal, so it didn't really mean anything.

But if you were the PR department and you had this potential story, do you think you would call up the New York Post and say, "How would you like an exclusive story about how penises get bigger when you take OMIC?" Now, if the PR department at Ozmpic did not do that, I think they all need to be fired because I can't think of a way to sell more OSMIC than that.

I mean, the weight loss is good, but doesn't really come close to the other thing.

Meanwhile, Apple uh is got a big event today and uh the general feeling is that we're all going to be disappointed and that uh whatever they say about AI for example is going to be underwhelming.

My understanding is, I didn't see it personally, but my understanding is that Apple has recently made some negative comments about AI in general, just AI in general, which would suggest that they don't think it's either good enough or ready enough to be in their products.

Now, my guess is that they tried really, really hard to build AI into their products, you know, as prototypes just to see what they could do.

And that they couldn't get past the uh hallucinations.

If you can't get past the hallucinations and you can't make it go get you information, there's not much you can do except it's really good at uh I'll tell you my my Apple phone uh the fact that it understands me when I talk to it, which it did not a year ago, is a really big deal.

I mean, because I do talk to it a lot, but just setting alarms and stuff.

Anyway, so we'll see if uh Apple excites us or disappoints us.

Here is the least surprising story of all time.

Uh, apparently there's new information that came out that uh, the CIA was behind starting the stories that Area 51 had some UFOs because it turns out they were just trying to have a cover story for the fact that there were some advanced uh, aircraft that they were working on and they didn't want people to think it was our stuff.

Now, how many of you assumed that was true?

Because I remember I was reading the story and I said to myself, doesn't everybody know that?

But then I realized that I didn't know that.

I just assumed because I start with the assumption there are no UFOs and then I had progressed to why would we think there are UFOs and who would ever have a you know any kind of benefit by saying they're UFOs and then I think oh well there there are other documents we've seen from the 80s maybe where the CIA did consciously say, "Let's start a UFO story to hide some things we're doing." Now, that was unrelated to this, but if it's a known strategy, um it makes you wonder about all those drones we were worrying about 6 months ago.

How long ago were we worrying about all the activity?

And and then people started saying it's it's UFOs.

It's UFOs.

you show me a uh claim of a UFO and I will automatically think that the CIA might be behind it, even if they're not.

I mean, it's just automatically where I go.

But here's a here's a question I ask.

Um, first of all, is it really possible to know for sure that this is true because it's the CIA?

So, what if the UFOs are real, but the CIA is covering up for the real UFOs by claiming that there were American aircraft?

So, you can't be so sure.

You don't know what's true.

Um, but I do wonder, is there anybody who has dedicated their adult life to learning about and pursuing the Area 51 UFOs, who when they read something like this and they see it was just all a big CIA plot, do they say to themselves, "Oh, wow.

I wasted my adult life worrying about this thing that was totally made up." And the answer is probably no one.

Because if you believed it was true before, you're going to do what I did just a minute ago and you're going to find a reason why it's still true despite all evidence to the contrary.

You'll say, "Nope, that's exactly how they cover these things up." That's what you'll say.

Well, apparently there's this uh news person, ABC news person called Terry Moran.

Uh not but Moran.

And uh he got I guess he got put on suspension because he got caught with some hatefilled rant about Trump.

Uh no, not about Trump, about Steven Miller.

So here's what he said about Steven Miller.

This is in an article in the postmillennial by Victor Davis Hansen and Moran wrote on uh on a post on X oh on Sunday he said quote the thing about Steven Miller Miller is not that he is the brains behind Trumpism yes he is one of the people who conceptualizes the impulses of the Trumpist movement which is a real good sentence by the way uh and translates slim into policy.

That's a really good sentence.

Um, but that's not what's interesting about Miller.

So, here comes the uh the bad part.

He says it's not brains, it's bile.

Miller is a man who is richly endowed with the capacity for hatred.

He's a worldclass hater.

You can see this just by looking at him because you can see that his hatreds are his spiritual nourishment.

He eats his hate.

Now imagine being ABC news executives and one of your news people just imagine that he look within the soul of a uh you know one of the key people in the administration and they can look deep into his soul which is a capability we don't have by the way uh and that he can see all this bile and the hatreds that are that there is spiritual nourishment.

He eats his hate.

Where does that even come from?

Now, I do understand that if you've been watching Stephen Miller for a while, he he's always the most hardcore on immigration, but that has a reason.

It's not like he's doing it for fun.

And it's also not exactly uh something that's, you know, gonna nourish you.

You know, if you're the one who takes the least popular opinion or at least the one, you know, is going to get you the most heat.

I don't know.

That that seems like somebody who's uh stepping into the brereech and doing the thing that you and I wish would get done, which is control the border.

But we don't want to take the heat for being the the lead person on that, but he takes the heat.

Um, I will say that he has one of these uh TV personas that suggests, you know, if you were going to cast him in a movie, the same thing I said about Rahm Emanuel, if you were going to cast a movie with a, let's say, a um, an evil super genius like Lex Luthther, you can kind of see Steven Miller, right?

you know, even if we like him, even if you like what he's doing, which I do, um, you can kind of see it, right?

And unfortunately, uh, we're such a visual creatures that if he looks one way, uh, but he talks another way, you're you're mostly going to be influenced by how he looks.

I have that same question about Corey Booker.

When Cy Booker talks, his eyes get so big that they're comical and he looks like I don't want to say he looks like an idiot, but his eyes are too big.

He just opens them too far and it it doesn't look like he's telling you the truth.

Now, I don't know if he is.

Sometimes he probably does, but he's a politician, so sometimes maybe not.

But how in the world did he ever get elected with that face?

Have you ever looked at anybody from, let's say, another state where, you know, you weren't directly involved and you see the representative and you say, "How did that representative get elected?" really with that look.

There are just some looks that you you think would be hard to win an election.

Anyway, the uh San Francisco Police Department arrested 60 people yesterday uh made a violent protest.

This is according to Just the News.

and uh dozens of police officers responded and it was this was also about the ICE and deportation stuff.

So the the big protests and the riots that are happening in LA and San Francisco and New York that I know of uh are about reducing the power of ICE to deport people.

Now, how many of you think that's organic?

That that people were sitting at home and they thought to themselves, you know what?

Of all the problems I have, the one I really need to spend some time on and the one that's the most dangerous because you know, you end up in jail, get a criminal record, is uh this issue of border control.

I want less border control.

I don't think anybody had that thought.

This thing is so obviously artificial that it's, you know, sort of funny.

When was it that uh do you remember the first time I told you that this summer there would be protests?

And I didn't know what the protests would be, but if it's summer, there will be protests.

And uh so anyway, San Francisco was the smaller part of it.

The bigger part of it was in LA.

According to Breitbart News, uh there will be some more specially trained border patrol uh agents deployed to Los Angeles.

To which my curiosity says to me, specially trained, you say?

Specially trained to do what?

to reduce tensions and riots or what?

So Randy Clark and Brebar News is writing about that.

So we don't know what that's all about, but uh Trump has ordered 2,000 National Guardmen to respond.

And he said that the uh I think I think Trump said that they'll be everywhere and they'll take care of it.

Um, according to a CBS News poll, 54% of those uh surveyed support President Trump's uh program uh for um deportation.

So, not just the border security, but 54% approve of his deportation program.

Um, and 42% think uh the program has made America safer, while 30% said it's made the country less safe.

How in the world is the country as a whole less safe because we deported 10,000 criminals?

What is even the point of having surveys if the answers that come back are so obviously stupid or biased or political that they're just meaningless?

There's nobody who thinks the country is is in more danger because the criminals were deported.

Now, I get that, you know, there's there's the risk during the uh ICE raid that someone might get hurt.

I get that.

But even if you include all of that, getting rid of 10,000 I'm just picking a number, but getting rid of 10,000 known repeat criminals, that's definitely going to make you safer.

Getting rid of a known South American gang.

Yeah, that's uh that's going to make you safer.

Yeah.

So, everybody who had the wrong answer.

All right.

So, what is the most important thing to know about the LA riots?

Well, other people will cover things like how many people were injured and, you know, what's the cost of it all and how many how many law enforcement people have been surged and did they do a good good job.

But uh I'm gonna cover the word play because somehow this is a sort of artificial event that's designed to create a lot of uh Democrat friendly word play.

So the first part is are they riots or protests?

Well, if you're the mainstream media, you get to call them protests.

If uh if they were talking about somebody they didn't like, would they call it a protest or would they call it a riot?

I don't know if they've uh has the mainstream yet turned it into riot or they still sticking with protest.

So that's the first word play thing to watch out for to see if they treat it like it's a protest.

The other thing that um I don't know if anybody else picked up on this, but suppose you were somebody who planned, let's say you were Soros or something and you planned to fund uh big riots in San in LA and San Francisco.

So let's say you your idea was that if you fund these riots, you'll get some kind of benefit, you know, could be any kind of benefit, but you've decided to fund them.

What would you know would be the natural outcome to Karen Bass, the mayor of uh LA, and Governor Nuome?

Is there any reasonable way that when this is done, people are going to say, "Wow, you two did a great job." Actually, none, because it's it's simply going to look like they're in charge when uh you can't get to where you want to get because the you know, the roads are closed and you're going to see endless loops of whatever violence the cameras can pick up.

I don't know how what it is as a percentage of activity, but uh doesn't it seem to you that maybe maybe whoever's in charge of funding this is trying to take Karen Bass and Newsome off the the off the table at the same time in an unrelated story or or is it unrelated?

Is this story related or unrelated?

Separately, there's a story that uh Kla Harris has remained unusually silent during the uh during the protests.

Now, if you wanted Kla Harris to either run for president or governor of California and you didn't care too much about Karen Ba Bass either because she wasn't helping you, it would be kind of clever to fund a bunch of riots that make Newsome and Bass look like they're completely, you know, unable to run anything while having Kla Harris just go quiet.

don't say anything about anything and then she'll be fresh and unspoiled whenever the uh whenever the dust settles.

So that's just my speculation.

There's no evidence that um so 2000 National Guard.

Does it seem to you that this is another one of those 8020 questions where uh Trump is very solidly on the 80?

When is the last time you met anybody in the real world who thought it was a bad idea to send the National Guard to have a little bit more force than it might make sense because if you threaten with enough force then you get what you want without the force.

How many of you like have you even talked to anybody who thinks that's a bad idea?

It's got to be at least 8020, right?

In favor of it.

So once again, the Democrats have figured out how to find uh the most unpopular thing you could imagine, which is, hey, suppose we make your traffic worse.

We damage your downtowns so that you you lose your retail business and uh we try to open up the border and keep as many criminals in the country as we can.

That doesn't even really sound like it could be happening in the real world.

It's so ridiculously stupid.

But it fits everything Democrats have been doing for the last five years, right?

Just unbelievably stupid.

But somehow they think they can get some word play out of it.

So here's some more word play.

Um chaotic.

Remember I told you that uh the Democrats were going to say that the the uh riots andor protests were sort of a natural, you know, free speech, but the chaos the chaos would be coming from the people who are trying to stop the violence and the protests.

I think they're trying to stop the violence, not the protests.

And sure enough, sure enough, you wake up and everybody's like, "It's chaotic." Uh, Trump, Trump is making everything chaotic.

So chaotic.

All right.

Word play.

The other thing we have to agree on is uh I think we need to have a uh constitutional convention.

That's the wrong thing, but just sounded funny.

uh to decide what the word most or mostly means.

Do you know how important that is?

Hey Scott, how much violence is there at the protest?

It's mostly mostly peaceful.

So what did you just learn from that?

Nothing.

most most uh protests, no ma no matter how violent they get, I would bet you that even in the worst situation, no more than 20% of the participants would be breaking things and setting them on fire and hurting people in the worst situation.

And we're not anywhere near that.

We're more in the, you know, 2% 5% situation.

But, uh, no, we should decide.

Does mostly mean more than 50%.

Does mostly mean, uh, less than 10% of the people are being violent.

We we can't even talk about these things without knowing what that word means.

So, Democrats word play.

That's all they got.

All right.

So, we got some uh Whimo cars are on fire.

Um, and here's another word that uh is sort of a Governor Nuomoe word play.

He said, uh, this is a serious moment and it requires serious leadership.

And where's your decency, Mr.

president, blah blah blah blah blah.

It's immoral.

Those are all words, aren't they?

Uh, do you think that Trump was unaware that this was a serious situation?

Do you think that Governor Nuomo was actually under the belief that Trump didn't understand that a major riot in in LA and other other cities was a major serious thing?

If Trump is not taking it seriously, what are those 2,000 National Guard people doing?

Are they just having fun playing beer pong and waiting for things to settle down?

No.

I think he's taking it pretty seriously.

But again, the Democrats don't have arguments.

They just have word play.

So, it's a chaotic situation and uh it's mostly peaceful and uh Trump isn't taking it seriously.

Which part of that told you anything?

None of it.

There's no information in any of that.

It's completely contentfree communication.

There's no argument.

There's no data.

There's nothing to agree with.

There's nothing to disagree with.

It's literally just word play.

Anyway, where's your decency, Mr.

President?

I'll say it again.

It's immoral.

All right, maybe you should say it more than once.

It's immoral.

What part of it is immoral?

Is it immoral to try to protect the innocent people whose storefronts might be destroyed by a mob?

Is that immoral?

Is it immoral to deport people who are at this point are criminal?

Is it immoral to have a border?

I think even the pope is in favor of a little bit of law and order, isn't he?

That would be a good question for the pope.

Pope, is this immoral?

Well, you know, six of one, half dozen the other.

So, uh, and by the way, how many of you thought that Governor Nuome was your moral compass?

Because when I want to know what's moral, I say to myself, well, what did Governor Nuome say?

I mean, I have my own opinions, but until I hear what the most moral person in the world says about it, I know it's up in here.

Anyway, so it looks like another Trump 8020 win and we'll see how that unfolds.

Uh, meanwhile, we've got a tough guy competition uh where Governor Nuome um is is saying that he's daring Tom Hman to arrest him.

He says, "Come after me.

Arrest me.

Let's just get it over with, tough guy." That's what uh that's what Newsome said and that's because uh Tomman said that if anybody interferes with the work of ICE that they might arrest him and then Newsome is like come after me big boy.

Yeah.

Come after me.

I I feel like uh nothing would make Newsome happier than getting arrested because it would take him off the field when there's nothing he can do on the field that's helping whatsoever.

But it would be this great visual you if you saw him like perwalked with the handcuffs on and you say to yourself, "My god, that Trump has overreached.

He's gone to full authoritarianism." So, I don't think Tom Hman needs any advice because he's been pretty awesome.

But let me give you some advice, Tom Hman.

Don't arrest that guy.

Arrest anybody else you want, but don't arrest the guy who wants to be arrested.

Yeah, you don't want that.

He He's a theater kid and uh he would enjoy it too much.

Well, Jonathan Turley has a uh article today that uh is very similar to something I've said recently, so therefore I like it extra, but he was writing I forgot where he was writing it, but it's a Jonathan Turley um article and he's saying that uh that uh executives around the country are getting to do things they wanted to do, but they didn't want to be seen as being in favor of it, such as getting rid of DEI.

But apparently, at least anecdotally, there are a bunch of executives who definitely wanted to get rid of DEI, but they couldn't do it until they could blame Trump.

So now it's well, you know, Trump made me do it.

I really didn't want to.

I wanted extra DEI, not not less of it.

But uh that damn Trump, he just made me get rid of it because otherwise our insurance would go up too much and well, we just couldn't afford it as much as we wanted it.

So I agree.

I think uh I think Trump made me do it.

It might be helping a lot of people that we don't know about.

Well, the new head of the Social Security Administration um says that they want to become a digital first department, meaning get everything digitized in a way that uh I think most of us assumed had already been done.

Didn't you kind of assume that the big government programs like Social Security were uh you know, first rate technology?

I I never really thought about it too hard, but if you would stop me and say, "How good do you think the technology is for social security?" And I always said, "Well, obviously if it's on a date, they would have fixed that a long time ago because it's such an important system, so my guess would be uh it's pretty advanced." Well, nothing like that's true.

Turns out that the social security system uh is aging and uh needs a total overhaul to be digital first.

And so the new head of social security is going to use uh some of the Doge staffers and the Doge process I think to get that done.

So that's actually kind of exciting because if they designed the system right, you don't have to go looking for all the fraud.

It would just prevent the fraud from happening in the first place.

So that'd be good.

All right, the funniest story of the day, I think it's the funniest story of the day, even funnier than the Yumping story, is that as you know, the DNC has uh co-chairs.

So, it's not one person who's the head of the DNC, it's two.

Uh, one of them is David Hog.

What's the name of the other one?

How many of you can name the co-chair who is not David Hog in the comments?

Go.

Well, while you're doing that, it'll take take a while for your comments to show up.

while you're doing that.

Uh the reporting is, if you want to believe the reporting, um according to Politico, they got a copy of the recording, uh that the uh the co-chair, his name is Ken Martin, he he was addressing Hog directly during a recent Zoom meeting, and he said, quote, "I'll be very honest with you.

For the first time in my 100 days on this job, the other night I said to myself for the first time, I don't know if I want to do this anymore, Martin said.

And then he said, no one knew.

No one knows who the hell I am.

Right.

No one knows who the hell I am.

Can you imagine being Ken Martin and you're trying to do the business of the DNC and you call somebody up and you say, "Hey, this is Ken Martin." And whoever answers his phone has no idea who you are.

But if David Hog called, they'd be like, "Oh, David Hog, co-chair of the DNC." So, in one way, you could look at this as a slight condemnation of uh Ken Martin because he hasn't done enough to distinguish himself.

But on the other hand, it's sort of a compliment to David Hog who sucked all the energy out of the room.

Now, you know, when Trump does it, when Trump sucks all the energy out of a room, I compliment him.

So, I'm going to be consistent.

You don't have to love what David Hog is doing.

You don't have to love his opinions or anything about him.

But when he go he goes into a situation and sucks all the energy out of the room, so you don't even know who his coach is, well, that does suggest a level of skill, which is not an accident.

So, I would keep an eye on him.

He's I I think his flaws are almost entirely based on being young and that is self-healing.

So I hate to tell you but as ineffective as David Hog seems today, his raw skill level and his just personality and charisma really do make him a threat for the future.

So if someday there's a president uh hog, don't be don't be shocked.

I don't think it'll happen for, you know, 30 years, but he's got plenty of time to mature and learn all the uh the smart ways to do stuff.

So remember, he's not dumb.

um some some of the uh Democrats that you you like to criticize are actually not very smart, but he's not one of those.

He's he's actually very smart.

He's just inexperienced and that, as I say, is self-healing.

So, watch out for him.

Um let's talk about Cash Patel and Epstein as we have a hundred times.

Uh so Cash Patel says that there are no videos of uh let's say famous people doing horrible things to victims on Epstein Island.

But my question would be how would we ever know if such things existed at one time and somebody just took them away?

That wouldn't be knowable, would it?

But wasn't there like a a room that Cash Patel recently found that had a whole bunch of documents in it that nobody even knew was a storage room for sensitive documents?

Well, what if they never found that room?

We would just assume that all the stuff in that room was non-existent because nobody could find it.

So, I don't think it means anything when Cash Patel says these, you know, there's no documents that exist that would show that uh Epstein was murdered or that uh any celebrities did any terrible crimes on the island.

The only thing we know for sure, well, we don't even know that for sure, but probably I would give him the benefit of a doubt.

The one thing we know for sure uh or mostly for sure is that he doesn't have it.

So I do believe him when he says I don't have any you know damning evidence of famous people but even that could be you know something that's a state secret.

Wouldn't it be a state secret if we had some other head of state doing bad things on the island?

Do you think that Cash Patel would have the authority uh or even would think it's a good idea to out some other head of state or a family member of a head of state?

That would be a terrible idea because we would create this whole uh this whole animosity with some other countries that we didn't really need to.

Now, would justice be served?

Nope.

But when you're dealing with international uh relations, you end up doing all these terrible tradeoffs.

You know, people die if they do this, but people die if they do the other thing.

So international relations is a contact sport.

So even though there might be a situation where uh justice would not be satisfied, you can imagine that that would be a state secret because it's a messy world.

So if it sounds like I'm in favor of that, then check yourself because I didn't say that.

I'm just saying that that might be the reality of it.

Anyway, um what else we got going on?

Oh, Cash Patel also said they found the missing Fouchy phone.

I guess one of his older phones they hadn't been able to find for years, but somehow magically they found it.

Do you think there's going to be anything on Fouch's phone by now?

that uh would cause trouble.

I don't know.

I'm I'm so cheated.

Even though this has nothing to do with the Epstein files, you know, the Fouchy phone and the Epstein files, no connection.

You know, if you imagined anything about one that affected the other would be analogy thinking, so it wouldn't even be good thinking.

But there's something about just what we've been observing for the last several years that makes me think that there will be nothing interesting on Fouch's phone because every time we think we've got something, it's like, ah, we got them.

We found the secret documents.

We've, you know, it just doesn't really work out that way, does it?

So, I'm going to say that there will be no major Fouchy revelations unless they're just sort of embarrassing or interesting or funny, but nothing that's going to make him go to jail.

All right.

Um, according to federal appeals court, uh, Trump will be allowed to ban the AP, the Associated Press, from the Oval Office.

a two to one ruling that uh blocked the lower courts uh block or something.

Um so what do you think of that?

Do you think it's uh do you think it's fair that Trump can block one part of the major media?

Well, here's a little uh persuasion lesson for you.

If he blocked all of the major media that said things that were untrue and maybe they even knew they were untrue, then there would be no media left for his press events.

If he blocked nobody, just nobody got any push back, then the the bad media would feel free to make up more lies about him and not worry about it.

But if you can take one of them, in this case the AP, and drive a stake through their heart and say this could be you.

You know, if if you do the same thing that they did, we'll drive a stake through your heart too because you don't have automatic access to the White House.

And so persuasionwise, uh, putting a stake through the heart of one major, you know, brand name media enterprise is the very smartest thing he could do because it's going to make all the rest of them say, uh, maybe we should look twice at the way we're wording this.

And that's what he would want.

So smart.

Um, meanwhile in uh news that is a little bit alarming, the Trump administration has allegedly, according to the New York Post, diverted 20,000 anti- drone missiles uh that were meant for Ukraine and they're being sent to US troops in the Middle East.

Now, why would US troops in the Middle East suddenly need 20,000 anti- drone missiles?

Do we need them more than we needed them a month ago?

Is it just a uh ordinary increase in capacity and uh a change in priorities where Trump says, "Okay, Ukraine is less important, US is more important, so we're going to move them." All right, you're way ahead of me in the comments.

You're way ahead of me.

Yeah, it kind of suggests that we're preparing for a war with Iran.

Now I always I always tell you this preparing for war does not mean war.

Preparing for war just means you have a military.

If your military has not prepared for every, you know, likely or even potential war, they're not really doing their job.

So would it make sense, even if we had no intention of starting a war, would it make sense for us to move a bunch of weapons into the US control away from Ukraine?

And the answer is probably probably makes sense to move those weapons.

Um, but it also makes a uh a good warning for Iran.

So, if Iran thinks we're preparing for a war, do you think they'll be a little more flexible?

They should.

You know, they're not super flexible right now, but um it's got to feel different if you're if the only thing happening is the boats are setting off the coast.

I mean, that's scary enough.

But if the boats are, you know, the ships, if they're sitting off the coast of your country and they're warships and you just heard that 20,000 anti- drone missiles just got delivered, then you're going to be a little bit more worried.

So, I always wonder if this sort of story is planted and that the real customer for it is Iran so that they can look at it and say, "Whoa, looks like they're changing their focus to us." So, but it could be unrelated.

Um, Russia is apparently increasing their offensive into Ukraine and they're going into the Dinopro region.

Now, if you're wondering how to pronounce that correctly, um, that's why you come to me.

It's called Denipro region and that's very important.

Um, and apparently the uh it's just above Crimea, somebody said.

So if you were walking, you know, toward the center of Ukraine, you'd start in Crimea and then you would have to pass through pro proet region and uh Russia really wants that apparently.

So it's making a major push um to try to get it.

So that sort of suggests that Putin is not planning for peace anytime soon.

Um I always tell you about all the uh you know I always well I one more thing about the um Russian incursion.

Do you think the Ukrainians are saying to themselves you know what we'd really we could use right now?

20,000 anti- drone missiles.

That would really help us right now.

Anyway, um I always tell you these stories about uh electric batteries that are, you know, new technology.

I don't tell you all of them because there's probably more than one of them every day.

And when I do tell you about them, I remind you it's not that this particular one is going to become the standard in the future.

But once you get a sense of how many battery related breakthroughs there are, like just major breakthroughs, um then you just add to that all you need is some big car company to want to use that technology and operationalize it.

But interesting engineering is talking about a uh new battery breakthrough um a Serbian company.

So they've they've got this battery that you can get an 80% charge in 12 minutes and it will last 310,000 miles.

Uh, I mean that's that's the lifespan of the battery and it can charge that 80% in just 12 minutes.

12 minutes.

That's pretty impressive.

Anyway, so the battery stuff is what um those breakthroughs are what make your ebikes work and your your electric cars and your your underwater uh jetpacks and very soon your aircraft.

So I'm pretty sure aircraft will alter electric at some point.

seems impossible because you know aircraft require a well not jets I don't think you'd be able to replace jets but you'd probably be be able to replace a lot of local you know short hall aircraft stuff well there's a story that says uh China and the US are meeting on Monday uh in London to talk about a rare earth deal.

Now, how does that fit with the news we were already told, which is that Trump said that he made a deal with she for rare earth minerals.

What was that about?

Cuz, you know, at the time I thought to myself, well, not really.

There there's not really any chance that the two of them hash down a mineral deal.

or was there some particular sticking point that Trump removed um that allowed them to have serious negotiations?

But what we don't have is any kind of a mineral deal with China.

And I don't really understand why there would be um unless they also felt like they could make deals on all the other stuff because the mineral deal, you know, the rare earth stuff that feels like where they've really got us.

by the gonads if you know what I mean like more so than anything else that they do.

So why would they give that up first?

In what world would you negotiate by giving up your main leverage before you even talked about your other stuff.

So there's something going on here with this story that I don't understand.

doesn't make sense with what I know about negotiations or people or Trump or President Xi or China.

It doesn't make sense.

So, if somebody can figure out what is it I don't understand about this story, which might be just everything, I don't know.

Uh let me know because I'm very curious because we under no circumstances does it make sense that China and the US would be negotiating the the highest leverage part of the trade deal unless China just went crazy and decided that they don't want their best leverage.

I don't know does make sense.

So ladies and gentlemen, that is what I want to tell you today and uh hope you enjoyed the show.

I'm going to say hi to the uh local subscribers privately and the rest of you have a wonderful Monday.

I think it's a perfect summer day and uh you'll enjoy it.

So locals, here I come in 30 seconds.

Everybody else, I'll see you tomorrow.

Same time, same place.

stock market is kind of

flat, so we don't have to worry about

that

yet. Let's uh get our comments working

and then we'll have a show. Good

morning.

Get rid of

that. There we go.

[Music]

Good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and

you've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to take a chance on improving

your attitude to levels that nobody can

even understand with their tiny shiny

human brains. Well, all you need for

that is a copper mug or a glass, a

tanker, shells or ste a canteen jugger

flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it

with your favorite liquid. I like

coffee. And join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine

hit of the day. The thing that makes

everything better. It's called the

simultaneous and it happens now.

Oh, I feel sorry for the

resistors. You know, I I hear that there

are some

people I tried to talk before I was done

swallowing. I'm a

pig. I hear that some people are trying

to

resist the simultaneous sip because you

don't want to feel like you've been

manipulated.

Well, you also miss the thrill of being

connected to thousands of people around

the world at the same time. So, you

know, I guess you can pick your

fate. All right. So

allegedly in science according to

wonderful engineering

uh scientists have created light from

empty space by manipulating time and

space or the other possibility is that

is total and nobody created any

light

whatsoever. I look at a story like that

and I just think really really did they

make light out of time and

space? Did that really

happen? I don't know. It might have, but

uh I'm going to say you're going to need

a little bit more evidence before I say

yes to that.

Meanwhile, in something way more fun,

there's a company called Cuda Jet that

makes an underwater jetpack. It looks

like it's obviously electric and you

strap it to your back and you can just

go like hell on, you know, underwater

and at the surface. And I said to

myself, this looks really fun.

It looks really, really fun. So, I could

easily imagine myself uh seeing lots of

people doing that. I was going to say me

doing it, but you know, it's not like

I'm going to scuba either. So, I don't

think I'll be doing it. But, it looks

like fun. It It can uh last 90 minutes,

which is probably the hard part, having

the battery last long enough. and it can

recharge in 75 minutes and you can feel

like you're you're Aquaman and Superman

at the same

time. Well, in uh important New York

Post news,

uh allegedly the average penis size has

increased and OMPic could be to

blame. So anecdotally, but not

scientifically yet.

Anecdotally, people are reporting that

their penises are larger

uh when they're on OMIC losing

weight. Now, may I

uh may I address the NPCs directly?

NPCs, what you should say is the most

obvious thing. What's the most obvious

thing you would say? Oh, it's not any

bigger. It's just that you can see it

now. That's the most obvious thing you

can say. So, if you were if you were

already typing

that, sorry, you're an NPC. You're not

programmed for creativity. You're

programmed for the most obvious

things. So, sorry about that.

Uh when I see a story like this, I have

to wonder, do you think the uh PR

department at Ozembic could possibly be

behind this story? Now, not that they,

you know, made up the story out of

nothing. It could be that uh you know,

there were reports, actual reports, but

they were anecdotal, so it didn't really

mean anything. But if you were the PR

department and you had this potential

story, do you think you would call up

the New York Post and say, "How would

you like an exclusive story about how

penises get bigger when you take OMIC?"

Now, if the PR department at Ozmpic did

not do

that, I think they all need to be fired

because I can't think of a way to sell

more OSMIC than that. I mean, the weight

loss is good, but doesn't really come

close to the other thing.

Meanwhile, Apple uh is got a big event

today and uh the general feeling is that

we're all going to be

disappointed and that uh whatever they

say about AI for example is going to be

underwhelming. My understanding is, I

didn't see it personally, but my

understanding is that Apple has recently

made some negative comments about AI in

general, just AI in general, which would

suggest that they don't think it's

either good enough or ready enough to be

in their products.

Now, my guess is that they tried really,

really hard to build AI into their

products, you know, as prototypes just

to see what they could do. And that they

couldn't get past the uh

hallucinations. If you can't get past

the hallucinations and you can't make it

go get you information, there's not much

you can do except it's really good

at uh I'll tell you my my Apple phone

uh the fact that it understands me when

I talk to it, which it did not a year

ago, is a really big deal. I mean,

because I do talk to it a lot, but just

setting alarms and stuff. Anyway, so

we'll see if uh

Apple excites us or disappoints us. Here

is the least surprising story of all

time.

Uh, apparently there's new information

that came out that uh, the CIA was

behind starting the stories that Area 51

had some

UFOs because it turns out they were just

trying to have a cover story for the

fact that there were some advanced uh,

aircraft that they were working on and

they didn't want people to think it was

our stuff.

Now, how many of

you assumed that was

true? Because I remember I was reading

the story and I said to myself, doesn't

everybody know that? But then I realized

that I didn't know that. I just

assumed because I start with the

assumption there are no

UFOs and then I had progressed to why

would we think there are

UFOs and who would ever have a you know

any kind of benefit by saying they're

UFOs and then I think oh well there

there are other documents we've seen

from the 80s maybe where the CIA did

consciously say, "Let's start a

UFO story to hide some things we're

doing." Now, that was unrelated to this,

but if it's a known strategy,

um it makes you wonder about all those

drones we were worrying about 6 months

ago. How long ago were we worrying about

all the

activity? And and then people started

saying it's it's UFOs. It's UFOs.

you show me a uh claim of a UFO and I

will automatically think that the CIA

might be behind it, even if they're not.

I mean, it's just automatically where I

go. But here's a here's a question I

ask. Um, first of all, is it really

possible to know for sure that this is

true because it's the CIA?

So, what if the UFOs are

real, but the CIA is covering up for the

real UFOs by claiming that there were

American

aircraft? So, you can't be so sure. You

don't know what's true. Um, but I do

wonder, is there anybody who has

dedicated their adult life to learning

about and pursuing the Area 51

UFOs, who when they read something like

this and they see it was just all a big

CIA plot, do they say to themselves,

"Oh, wow. I wasted my adult life

worrying about this thing that was

totally made up." And the answer is

probably no

one. Because if you believed it was true

before, you're going to do what I did

just a minute ago and you're going to

find a reason why it's still true

despite all evidence to the contrary.

You'll say, "Nope, that's exactly how

they cover these things

up." That's what you'll

say. Well, apparently there's this uh

news person, ABC news person called

Terry

Moran. Uh not but

Moran. And uh he got I guess he got put

on suspension because he got caught with

some hatefilled rant about Trump. Uh no,

not about Trump, about Steven

Miller. So here's what he said about

Steven Miller. This is in an article in

the

postmillennial by Victor Davis

Hansen

and Moran wrote on uh on a post on X oh

on Sunday he said quote the thing about

Steven Miller Miller is not that he is

the brains behind Trumpism yes he is one

of the people who conceptualizes the

impulses of the Trumpist movement which

is a real good sentence by the way uh

and translates slim into policy. That's

a really good sentence. Um, but that's

not what's interesting about Miller. So,

here comes the uh the bad part. He says

it's not brains, it's bile. Miller is a

man who is richly endowed with the

capacity for hatred. He's a worldclass

hater. You can see this just by looking

at him because you can see that his

hatreds are his spiritual nourishment.

He eats his hate.

Now imagine being ABC news executives

and one of your news people just imagine

that he look within the soul of a uh you

know one of the key people in the

administration and they can look deep

into his soul which is a capability we

don't have by the way uh and that he can

see all this bile and the hatreds that

are

that there is spiritual

nourishment. He eats his

hate. Where does that even come

from? Now, I do understand that if

you've been watching Stephen Miller for

a while, he he's always the most

hardcore on

immigration, but that has a reason. It's

not like he's doing it for fun. And it's

also not exactly uh something that's,

you know, gonna nourish you. You know,

if you're the one who takes the least

popular opinion or at least the one, you

know, is going to get you the most heat.

I don't know. That that seems like

somebody who's uh stepping into the

brereech and doing the thing that you

and I wish would get done, which is

control the border. But we don't want to

take the heat for being the the lead

person on that, but he takes the heat.

Um, I will say that he has one of these

uh TV

personas that suggests, you know, if you

were going to cast him in a movie, the

same thing I said about Rahm Emanuel, if

you were going to cast a movie with a,

let's say, a

um, an evil super genius like Lex

Luthther, you can kind of see Steven

Miller, right? you know, even if we like

him, even if you like what he's doing,

which I do, um, you can kind of see it,

right? And unfortunately,

uh, we're such a visual creatures that

if he looks one way, uh, but he talks

another way, you're you're mostly going

to be influenced by how he looks. I have

that same question about Corey Booker.

When Cy Booker talks, his eyes get so

big that they're comical and he looks

like I don't want to say he looks like

an idiot, but his eyes are too

big. He just opens them too far and it

it doesn't look like he's telling you

the truth. Now, I don't know if he is.

Sometimes he probably does, but he's a

politician, so sometimes maybe not. But

how in the world did he ever get

elected with that face? Have you ever

looked at anybody from, let's say,

another state where, you know, you

weren't directly involved and you see

the representative and you say, "How did

that representative get elected?" really

with that look. There are just some

looks that you you think would be hard

to win an election. Anyway, the uh San

Francisco Police Department arrested 60

people yesterday

uh made a violent protest. This is

according to Just the News. and uh

dozens of police officers responded and

it was this was also about the ICE and

deportation stuff. So the the big

protests and the riots that are

happening in LA and San Francisco and

New York that I know of

uh are about reducing the power of ICE

to deport people.

Now, how many of you think that's

organic? That that people were sitting

at home and they thought to themselves,

you know what? Of all the problems I

have, the one I really need to spend

some time on and the one that's the most

dangerous because you know, you end up

in jail, get a criminal record, is uh

this issue of border control. I want

less border control.

I don't think anybody had that thought.

This thing is so obviously artificial

that it's, you know, sort of

funny. When was it that uh do you

remember the first time I told you that

this summer there would be

protests? And I didn't know what the

protests would be, but if it's summer,

there will be protests.

And uh so anyway, San Francisco was the

smaller part of it. The bigger part of

it was in

LA. According to Breitbart News, uh

there will be some more specially

trained border patrol uh agents deployed

to Los

Angeles. To which my curiosity says to

me, specially trained, you say?

Specially trained to do what?

to reduce tensions and

riots or what? So Randy Clark and Brebar

News is writing about that. So we don't

know what that's all about, but uh Trump

has ordered 2,000 National Guardmen to

respond. And he said that the uh I think

I think Trump said that they'll be

everywhere and they'll take care of it.

Um, according to a CBS News

poll,

54% of those uh surveyed support

President Trump's uh program uh for um

deportation. So, not just the border

security, but 54% approve of his

deportation program.

Um, and

42% think uh the program has made

America safer, while 30% said it's made

the country less safe. How in the

world is the country as a whole less

safe because we deported 10,000

criminals?

What is even the point of having surveys

if the answers that come back are so

obviously stupid or biased or political

that they're just

meaningless? There's nobody who thinks

the country is is in more danger because

the criminals were

deported. Now, I get that, you know,

there's there's the risk during the uh

ICE raid that someone might get hurt. I

get that. But even if you include all of

that, getting rid of 10,000 I'm just

picking a number, but getting rid of

10,000 known repeat

criminals, that's definitely going to

make you safer. Getting rid of a known

South American

gang. Yeah, that's uh that's going to

make you safer. Yeah. So, everybody who

had the wrong

answer. All right. So, what is the most

important thing to know about the LA

riots? Well, other people will cover

things like how many people were injured

and, you know, what's the cost of it all

and how many how many law enforcement

people have been surged and did they do

a good good job. But uh I'm gonna cover

the word

play because somehow this is a sort of

artificial event that's designed to

create a lot of uh Democrat friendly

word play. So the first part is are they

riots or

protests? Well, if you're the mainstream

media, you get to call them protests.

If uh if they were talking about

somebody they didn't like, would they

call it a protest or would they call it

a

riot? I don't know if they've uh has the

mainstream yet turned it into riot or

they still sticking with

protest. So that's the first word play

thing to watch out for to see if they

treat it like it's a protest.

The other thing that um I don't know if

anybody else picked up on this, but

suppose you were somebody who planned,

let's say you were Soros or something

and you planned to fund

uh big riots in San in LA and San

Francisco. So let's say you your idea

was that if you fund these riots, you'll

get some kind of benefit, you know,

could be any kind of benefit, but you've

decided to fund them. What would you

know would be the natural outcome to

Karen Bass, the mayor of uh LA, and

Governor Nuome?

Is there any reasonable way that when

this is done, people are going to say,

"Wow, you two did a great

job." Actually,

none, because it's it's simply going to

look like they're in charge when uh you

can't get to where you want to get

because the you know, the roads are

closed and you're going to see endless

loops of whatever violence the cameras

can pick up. I don't know how what it is

as a percentage of

activity, but uh doesn't it seem to you

that

maybe maybe whoever's in charge of

funding this is trying to take Karen

Bass and Newsome off the the off the

table at the same time in an unrelated

story or or is it

unrelated? Is this story related or

unrelated? Separately, there's a story

that uh Kla Harris has remained

unusually silent during the uh during

the protests.

Now, if you wanted Kla Harris to either

run for president or governor of

California and you didn't care too much

about Karen Ba Bass either because she

wasn't helping

you, it would be kind of clever to fund

a bunch of riots that make Newsome and

Bass look like they're completely, you

know, unable to run anything while

having Kla Harris just go quiet. don't

say anything about anything and then

she'll be fresh and unspoiled whenever

the uh whenever

the dust

settles. So that's just my

speculation. There's no evidence that

um so 2000 National Guard.

Does it seem to you that this is another

one of those 8020

questions where uh Trump is very solidly

on the

80? When is the last time you met

anybody in the real world who thought it

was a bad idea to send the National

Guard to have a little bit more force

than it might make sense because if you

threaten with enough force then you get

what you want without the force.

How many of

you like have you even talked to anybody

who thinks that's a bad

idea? It's got to be at least 8020,

right? In favor of it. So once again,

the Democrats have figured out how to

find uh the most unpopular thing you

could imagine, which is, hey, suppose we

make your traffic

worse. We damage your downtowns so that

you you lose your retail

business and uh we try to open up the

border and keep as many criminals in the

country as we

can. That doesn't even really sound

like it could be happening in the real

world.

It's so

ridiculously

stupid. But it fits everything Democrats

have been doing for the last five years,

right? Just unbelievably

stupid. But somehow they think they can

get some word play out of it. So here's

some more word play.

Um chaotic. Remember I told you that uh

the Democrats were going to say that

the the uh riots andor protests were

sort of a natural, you know, free

speech, but the

chaos the chaos would be coming from the

people who are trying to stop the

violence and the

protests. I think they're trying to stop

the violence, not the protests.

And sure enough, sure enough, you wake

up and everybody's like, "It's chaotic."

Uh, Trump, Trump is making everything

chaotic. So chaotic. All right. Word

play. The other thing we have to agree

on is uh I think we need to have a uh

constitutional convention. That's the

wrong thing, but just sounded funny. uh

to decide what the word most or mostly

means. Do you know how important that

is? Hey Scott, how much violence is

there at the

protest? It's

mostly mostly

peaceful. So what did you just learn

from that? Nothing.

most most uh protests, no ma no matter

how violent they get, I would bet you

that even in the worst

situation, no more than 20% of the

participants would be breaking things

and setting them on fire and hurting

people in the worst situation. And we're

not anywhere near that. We're more in

the, you know, 2% 5% situation. But, uh,

no, we should decide. Does mostly mean

more than

50%. Does mostly mean,

uh, less than 10% of the people are

being

violent. We we can't even talk about

these things without knowing what that

word means. So, Democrats word play.

That's all they

got. All right. So, we got some uh Whimo

cars are on fire. Um, and here's another

word that uh is sort of a Governor

Nuomoe word play. He said, uh, this is a

serious

moment and it requires serious

leadership. And where's your decency,

Mr. president, blah blah blah blah blah.

It's

immoral. Those are all words, aren't

they? Uh, do you think that Trump was

unaware that this was a serious

situation? Do you think that Governor

Nuomo was actually under the belief that

Trump didn't understand that a major

riot in in LA and other other cities was

a major serious thing?

If Trump is not taking it seriously,

what are those 2,000 National Guard

people

doing? Are they just having fun playing

beer pong and waiting for things to

settle down? No. I think he's taking it

pretty seriously. But again, the

Democrats don't have

arguments. They just have word play. So,

it's a chaotic

situation and uh it's mostly peaceful

and uh Trump isn't taking it

seriously. Which part of that told you

anything? None of it. There's no

information in any of that. It's

completely

contentfree communication. There's no

argument. There's no data. There's

nothing to agree with. There's nothing

to disagree with.

It's literally just word

play. Anyway, where's your decency, Mr.

President? I'll say it again. It's

immoral. All right, maybe you should say

it more than once. It's

immoral. What part of it is

immoral? Is it immoral to try to protect

the innocent people whose storefronts

might be destroyed by a mob? Is that

immoral? Is it immoral to deport people

who are at this point are

criminal? Is it immoral to have a

border? I think even the pope is in

favor of a little bit of law and order,

isn't

he? That would be a good question for

the pope. Pope, is this immoral? Well,

you know, six of one, half dozen the

other. So, uh, and by the way, how many

of you thought that Governor Nuome was

your moral

compass? Because when I want to know

what's moral, I say to myself, well,

what did Governor Nuome say? I mean, I

have my own opinions, but until I hear

what the most moral person in the world

says about it, I know it's up in

here. Anyway, so it looks like another

Trump 8020

win and we'll see how that

unfolds. Uh, meanwhile, we've got a

tough guy competition

uh where Governor Nuome um is is saying

that he's daring Tom Hman to arrest him.

He says, "Come after me. Arrest me.

Let's just get it over with, tough guy."

That's what uh that's what Newsome said

and that's because uh Tomman said that

if anybody interferes with the work of

ICE that they might arrest him and then

Newsome is like come after me big boy.

Yeah. Come after me.

I I feel like

uh nothing would make Newsome happier

than getting

arrested because it would take him off

the field when there's nothing he can do

on the field that's helping whatsoever.

But it would be this great visual you if

you saw him like perwalked with the

handcuffs on and you say to yourself,

"My god, that Trump has overreached.

He's gone to full authoritarianism."

So, I don't think Tom Hman needs any

advice because he's been pretty awesome.

But let me give you some advice, Tom

Hman. Don't arrest that

guy. Arrest anybody else you want, but

don't arrest the guy who wants to be

arrested. Yeah, you don't want that. He

He's a theater kid and uh he would enjoy

it too much.

Well, Jonathan Turley has a uh article

today that uh is very similar to

something I've said recently, so

therefore I like it extra, but he was

writing I forgot where he was writing

it, but it's a Jonathan Turley um

article and he's saying that

uh that uh executives around the country

are getting to do things they wanted to

do, but they didn't want to be seen as

being in favor of it, such as getting

rid of

DEI. But

apparently, at least anecdotally, there

are a bunch of executives who definitely

wanted to get rid of

DEI, but they couldn't do it until they

could blame Trump. So now it's well, you

know, Trump made me do

it. I really didn't want to. I wanted

extra DEI, not not less of it. But uh

that damn Trump, he just made me get rid

of it because otherwise our insurance

would go up too much and well, we just

couldn't afford it as much as we wanted

it. So I agree. I think uh I think Trump

made me do it. It might be helping a lot

of people that we don't know

about. Well, the new head of the Social

Security Administration

um says that they want to become a

digital first department, meaning get

everything digitized in a way that uh I

think most of us assumed had already

been

done. Didn't you kind of assume that the

big government programs like Social

Security were uh you know, first rate

technology?

I I never really thought about it too

hard, but if you would stop me and say,

"How good do you think the technology is

for social security?" And I always said,

"Well, obviously if it's on a date, they

would have fixed that a long time ago

because it's such an important system,

so my guess would be uh it's pretty

advanced." Well, nothing like that's

true. Turns out that the social security

system uh is aging and uh needs a total

overhaul to be digital first. And so the

new head of social security is going to

use

uh some of the Doge staffers and the

Doge process I think to get that done.

So that's

actually kind of exciting because if

they designed the system right, you

don't have to go looking for all the

fraud. It would just prevent the fraud

from happening in the first place. So

that'd be good. All right, the funniest

story of the

day, I think it's the funniest story of

the day, even funnier than the Yumping

story, is that as you know, the DNC has

uh co-chairs. So, it's not one person

who's the head of the DNC, it's two. Uh,

one of them is David

Hog. What's the name of the other

one? How many of you can name the

co-chair who is not David Hog in the

comments?

Go. Well, while you're doing that, it'll

take take a while for your comments to

show up. while you're doing that. Uh the

reporting is, if you want to believe the

reporting, um according to

Politico, they got a copy of the

recording, uh that the uh the co-chair,

his name is Ken Martin, he he was

addressing Hog directly during a recent

Zoom meeting, and he said, quote, "I'll

be very honest with you. For the first

time in my 100 days on this job, the

other night I said to myself for the

first time, I don't know if I want to do

this anymore, Martin said. And then he

said, no one knew. No one knows who the

hell I am.

Right. No one knows who the hell I am.

Can you imagine being Ken Martin and

you're trying to do the business of the

DNC and you call somebody up and you

say, "Hey, this is Ken Martin." And

whoever answers his phone has no idea

who you

are. But if David Hog called, they'd be

like, "Oh, David Hog, co-chair of the

DNC."

So, in one way, you could look at this

as a slight condemnation of uh Ken

Martin because he hasn't done enough to

distinguish himself. But on the other

hand, it's sort of a compliment to David

Hog who sucked all the energy out of the

room. Now, you know, when Trump does it,

when Trump sucks all the energy out of a

room, I compliment him. So, I'm going to

be consistent. You don't have to love

what David Hog is doing. You don't have

to love his opinions or anything about

him. But when he go he goes into a

situation and sucks all the energy out

of the room, so you don't even know who

his coach is, well, that does suggest a

level of skill, which is not an

accident. So, I would keep an eye on

him. He's I I think his flaws are almost

entirely based on being

young and that is

self-healing. So I hate to tell you but

as ineffective as David Hog seems

today, his raw skill level and his just

personality and charisma really do make

him a threat for the future. So if

someday there's a president uh hog,

don't be don't be shocked. I don't think

it'll happen for, you know, 30 years,

but he's got plenty of time to mature

and learn all the uh the smart ways to

do stuff. So remember, he's not dumb.

um some some of the uh Democrats that

you you like to criticize are actually

not very

smart, but he's not one of those. He's

he's actually very smart. He's just

inexperienced and that, as I say, is

self-healing. So, watch out for him.

Um let's talk about Cash Patel and

Epstein as we have a hundred times.

Uh so Cash Patel says that there are no

videos of

uh let's say famous people doing

horrible things to victims on Epstein

Island. But my question would be how

would we ever know if such things

existed at one time and somebody just

took them away? That wouldn't be

knowable, would it?

But wasn't there like a a room that Cash

Patel recently found that had a whole

bunch of documents in it that nobody

even knew was a storage room for

sensitive

documents? Well, what if they never

found that room? We would just assume

that all the stuff in that room was

non-existent because nobody could find

it.

So, I don't think it means anything when

Cash Patel says these, you know, there's

no documents that exist that would show

that uh Epstein was murdered or that uh

any celebrities did any terrible crimes

on the island. The only thing we know

for sure, well, we don't even know that

for sure, but probably I would give him

the benefit of a doubt. The one thing we

know for sure

uh or mostly for sure is that he doesn't

have

it. So I do believe him when he says I

don't have any you know damning evidence

of famous people but even that could be

you know something that's a state

secret.

Wouldn't it be a state secret if we

had some other head of state doing bad

things on the

island? Do you think that Cash Patel

would have the authority

uh or even would think it's a good idea

to out some other head of state or a

family member of a head of

state? That would be a terrible idea

because we would create this whole uh

this whole animosity with some other

countries that we didn't really need to.

Now, would justice be served? Nope. But

when you're dealing with international

uh relations, you end up doing all these

terrible tradeoffs. You know, people die

if they do this, but people die if they

do the other thing. So international

relations is a contact

sport. So even though there might be a

situation where uh justice would not be

satisfied, you can imagine that that

would be a state

secret because it's a messy world. So if

it sounds like I'm in favor of that,

then check yourself because I didn't say

that. I'm just saying that that might be

the reality of

it. Anyway,

um what else we got going on? Oh, Cash

Patel also said they found the missing

Fouchy phone. I guess one of his older

phones they hadn't been able to find for

years, but somehow magically they found

it. Do you think there's going to be

anything on Fouch's phone by now?

that uh would cause

trouble. I don't know. I'm I'm so

cheated. Even though this has nothing to

do with the Epstein files, you know, the

Fouchy phone and the Epstein files, no

connection. You know, if you imagined

anything about one that affected the

other would be analogy thinking, so it

wouldn't even be good thinking.

But there's something about just what

we've been observing for the last

several years that makes me think that

there will be nothing interesting on

Fouch's phone because every time we

think we've got something, it's like,

ah, we got them. We found the secret

documents. We've, you know, it just

doesn't really work out that way, does

it?

So, I'm going to say that there will be

no major Fouchy

revelations unless they're just sort of

embarrassing or interesting or funny,

but nothing that's going to make him go

to

jail. All

right. Um, according

to federal appeals court,

uh, Trump will be allowed to ban the AP,

the Associated Press, from the Oval

Office. a two to one ruling that uh

blocked the lower courts uh block or

something.

[Music]

Um so what do you think of that? Do you

think it's uh do you think it's fair

that Trump can block one part of the

major

media? Well, here's a little uh

persuasion lesson for you. If he blocked

all of the major media that said things

that were

untrue and maybe they even knew they

were untrue, then there would be no

media left for his press

events. If he blocked nobody, just

nobody got any push back, then the the

bad media would feel free to make up

more lies about him and not worry about

it.

But if you can take one of them, in this

case the AP, and drive a stake through

their heart and

say this could be you. You know, if if

you do the same thing that they did,

we'll drive a stake through your heart

too because you don't have automatic

access to the White House.

And so persuasionwise,

uh, putting a stake through the heart of

one major, you know, brand name media

enterprise is the very smartest thing he

could do because it's going to make all

the rest of them say, uh, maybe we

should look twice at the way we're

wording this. And that's what he would

want. So

smart.

Um, meanwhile in uh news that is a

little bit

alarming, the Trump administration has

allegedly, according to the New York

Post, diverted 20,000 anti- drone

missiles

uh that were meant for Ukraine and

they're being sent to US troops in the

Middle

East. Now, why would US troops in the

Middle East suddenly need 20,000 anti-

drone

missiles? Do we need them more than we

needed them a month ago?

Is it just a uh ordinary increase in

capacity and uh a change in priorities

where Trump says, "Okay, Ukraine is less

important, US is more important, so

we're going to move them." All right,

you're way ahead of me in the comments.

You're way ahead of me. Yeah, it kind of

suggests that we're preparing for a war

with

Iran. Now I always I always tell you

this preparing for war does not mean

war. Preparing for war just means you

have a

military. If your military has not

prepared for every, you know, likely or

even potential war, they're not really

doing their job. So would it make sense,

even if we had no intention of starting

a war, would it make sense for us to

move a bunch of weapons into the US

control away from Ukraine? And the

answer

is probably probably makes sense to move

those weapons. Um, but it also makes a

uh a good warning for Iran. So, if Iran

thinks we're preparing for a war, do you

think they'll be a little more

flexible? They should. You know, they're

not super flexible right now, but um

it's got to feel

different if you're if the only thing

happening is the boats are setting off

the coast. I mean, that's scary enough.

But if the boats are, you know, the

ships, if they're sitting off the coast

of your country and they're warships and

you just heard that 20,000 anti- drone

missiles just got

delivered, then you're going to be a

little bit more worried.

So, I always wonder if this sort of

story is planted and that the real

customer for it is Iran so that they can

look at it and say, "Whoa, looks like

they're changing their focus to us." So,

but it could be unrelated.

Um, Russia is apparently increasing

their offensive into Ukraine and they're

going into the

Dinopro region. Now, if you're wondering

how to pronounce that correctly, um,

that's why you come to me. It's called

Denipro region and that's very

important. Um, and apparently the uh

it's just above Crimea, somebody said.

So if you were walking, you know, toward

the center of Ukraine, you'd start in

Crimea and then you would have to pass

through pro

proet region and uh Russia really wants

that apparently. So it's making a major

push

um to try to get it.

So that sort of suggests that Putin is

not planning for peace anytime

soon.

Um I always tell you about all the

uh you know I always well I one more

thing about the um Russian

incursion. Do you think the Ukrainians

are saying to themselves you know what

we'd really we could use right now?

20,000 anti- drone missiles. That would

really help us right now. Anyway,

um I always tell you these stories about

uh electric batteries that are, you

know, new technology. I don't tell you

all of them because there's probably

more than one of them every day. And

when I do tell you about them, I remind

you it's not that this particular one is

going to become the standard in the

future. But once you get a sense of how

many battery related breakthroughs there

are, like just major breakthroughs,

um then you just add to

that all you need is some big car

company to want to use that technology

and operationalize it. But interesting

engineering is talking about a uh new

battery breakthrough

um a Serbian

company. So they've they've got this

battery that you can get an 80% charge

in 12 minutes and it will last 310,000

miles. Uh, I mean that's that's the

lifespan of the battery

and it can charge that 80% in just 12

minutes. 12

minutes. That's pretty impressive.

Anyway, so the battery stuff is what um

those breakthroughs are what make your

ebikes work and your your electric cars

and your your underwater

uh

jetpacks and very soon your

aircraft. So I'm pretty sure aircraft

will alter electric at some point. seems

impossible

because you know aircraft require a well

not

jets I don't think you'd be able to

replace jets but you'd probably be be

able to replace a lot of local you know

short hall aircraft

stuff well there's a story that says uh

China and the US are meeting on Monday

uh in London to talk about a rare earth

deal. Now, how does that fit with the

news we were already told, which is that

Trump said that he made a deal with she

for rare earth

minerals. What was that about? Cuz, you

know, at the time I thought to myself,

well, not really. There there's not

really any chance that the two of them

hash down a mineral deal. or was there

some particular sticking point that

Trump removed

um that allowed them to have serious

negotiations? But what we don't have is

any kind of a mineral deal with China.

And I don't really understand why there

would be

um unless they also felt like they could

make deals on all the other stuff

because the mineral deal, you know, the

rare earth stuff that feels like where

they've really got us. by the gonads if

you know what I mean like more so than

anything else that they do. So why would

they give that up

first? In what world would you

negotiate by giving up your main

leverage before you even talked about

your other

stuff. So there's something going on

here with this story that I don't

understand. doesn't make sense with what

I know about negotiations or people or

Trump or President Xi or China. It

doesn't make sense. So, if somebody can

figure out what is it I don't understand

about this story, which might be just

everything, I don't know. Uh let me know

because I'm very curious because we

under no circumstances does it make

sense that China and the US would be

negotiating the the highest leverage

part of the trade

deal unless China just went crazy and

decided that they don't want their best

leverage. I don't know does make

sense. So ladies and gentlemen, that is

what I want to tell you

today and uh hope you enjoyed the show.

I'm going to say hi to the uh local

subscribers privately and the rest of

you have a wonderful Monday. I think

it's a perfect summer day and uh you'll

enjoy it. So locals, here I come in 30

seconds.

Everybody else, I'll see you tomorrow.

Same time, same place.