Episode 2958 CWSA 09/14/25

Hey, there you are.

Everybody, come on in.

It's time.

Find a seat.

Grab a beverage today and we're going to have a best morning that we can under the circumstances.

I know we're still a little knocked off our balance a little bit, but we'll fix that.

We will recover.

Soon as I have your comments working, we'll get going.

This is the annoying technology delay.

How long should you wait from the time you push a button to the point when the app does something?

30 seconds is way too long.

The most would be 3 seconds, I think.

Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization is called Coffee with Scott Adams and you've never had a better time.

But if you'd like to take a chance on elevating your experience today to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, all you need for that is a copper, a mug or a glass, a tanker, jealous, 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, the dopamine hit of the day.

The thing that makes everything better is called the simultaneous sip.

And it happens now.

Delightful.

Spectacular.

Wait, hold on.

I'm getting a message.

Every now and then I get psychic matched messages that come in from all over the world.

I'm receiving now one um I believe the location is South Africa.

South Africa.

It's uh a young man, a young man sending me a message.

He's only six years old and he calls me uncle and he is sometimes concerned that I use too many naughty words.

Well, I better stop using the naughty words because my virtual nephew, how's it going, virtual nephew?

Now, you probably didn't know that I could talk directly to you and I can hear you.

Yeah, I can.

I know.

It's weird, isn't it?

So, the next time you watch, remember, I can watch you and hear you, too.

All right, let's go on with the show.

Remember I told you that Apple had this uh great new feature for their their Air.

Pods and it would allow you to put them in and it would translate um several different mostly eur I guess European languages and it would do it sort of instantly.

Well, the only place you're not going to be allowed to do that would be in Europe where they speak English, French, German, Spanish, and Portuguese.

the very languages that are translated.

And it looks like according to Politico that it's Apple pushing back against the the uh the newish digital markets act in Europe that is sort of punishing for the big tech companies.

And Apple's decided that Europe can't have nice things.

I kind of like that.

It It's not like a a hard push back.

is just telling them, hey, we just spent like a hundred million dollars developing this feature that is primarily useful for Europe and Europeans and uh you can't have it.

It's just not available to you.

Now, I assume, but I don't know.

Yeah, I don't know.

But I would assume that if you were an American and you were traveling to Europe, you could get the app in America and it would work in Europe.

I don't know about that, but I'm guessing it might.

And uh I I like I like that little subtle, you know, you don't want to go too hard at governments because they can pay you back in a bad way, but you want to push back.

It's like, ah, well, you know, if you were in America and you had more reasonable digital laws, look what you could have.

But sorry.

Well, we've learned more about Tyler Robinson, the uh murderer of Charlie Kirk.

And uh I think we all had the same kind of experience yesterday.

When I saw the news that the uh that he lived with a trans partner, I said to myself, "Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, okay.

All right.

Got it." because and uh I don't know if I you can tell me if I told you this.

I don't think I said it live, but I thought it really hard.

As soon as the news broke about Charlie's murder, I uh I just leapt to the unfair, biased, totally, you know, bigoted first impression that, oh no, it was some radicalized trans who shot him.

Then I found out that it's Tyler Robinson who's not trans.

And I thought, oh, oh my god, I'm a terrible person.

I didn't realize how bad a person I was that I made this like crazy left field assumption.

You know, it was just sort of a I felt I picked up some kind of pattern in the universe.

I thought, "Oh, I am I'm a piece of garbage for assuming this about an entire, you know, demographic group, blaming them when there's no evidence whatsoever." No, the shooter was not trans.

It was only the boyfriend of a trans and as you know completely different.

Is it?

Well, we don't know if he was planning to be trans.

some people said, but I don't really understand how that would work because if his trans partner liked him the way he was, would the trans partner still like him if he turned into something like the trans partner?

I don't know how that works.

That doesn't seem like it would work.

So, I suspect he was not planning to transition, but I don't know.

Um, the reason I assumed it was trans is that I wasn't aware of anything else that was creating that level of hatred.

And then on top of that, there are I think half a dozen notable trans shooting uh public shootings about I think there about half a dozen now just in the past I don't know couple years.

That's what Mike Benton said.

He he listed them all out so you can you can check with him.

And uh Mike Benz was wondering, you know, is there something in the water?

What exactly is making this specific demographic um be a little bit more more murdery than you would expect for their small numbers?

And that's a really good question.

Some people are going to say it's um the the chemicals in their body.

um even though this guy wasn't trans, uh it's still an interesting question of why so many of them are involved in one way or the other.

The other possibility is that if you're the kind of person who can, you know, transition, you probably have a feeling about the rules of society, meaning that maybe you don't respect them as much because you think, you know what, society's rules says I have to be this, but I'm pretty sure I'm this other thing, so I'm going to transition.

So, it could be that what's happening is that the trans effect is becoming a filter for people who are already inclined not to follow all of society's rules.

And one of those rules might be don't shoot people.

So, that might be the only coordination.

So, it's either I'm guessing it's either something chemical that has to do with the transition or something um like SSRI or something like that.

But remember, trans doesn't apply to the shooter.

So, we're we're a little off topic talking about that.

It's related though.

So, I posted uh was it this morning?

Last night, I guess.

Um, I posted the following and it got as of this morning, I think it had 4 million views.

Now, on the size of my account, uh, a pretty good tweet or a pretty good post where people thought, "Yeah, I agree with that.

I might get 80,000 views." I got 4 million on this one.

So, that's sort of a big deal.

It It's a real indication of where people's minds are.

This was the post.

I said, "The Kirking has begun.

All that energy has to go somewhere.

The great machine is booting up." That's all I said.

And people were left to themselves to figure out what the great machine was.

Probably some people thought it was God.

Some people thought it was the MAGA.

Some people thought it was Republicans.

I don't know what they thought, but uh I'll tell you what it is in a moment.

But it did seem to me that Charlie uh Kirk was uh controlling and creating a tremendous amount of energy during his life.

And I think a lot of us were surprised how much it was.

Um if he weren't paying attention to that domain pretty closely, you wouldn't know that he might be the reason that Trump got elected.

And I feel like um there are lots of reasons, just not one reason.

But I don't think he could have been elected without Charlie Kirk.

Charlie Kirk also probably was advising people and doing things and you know the colleges are all moving to the right.

It's really hard to underestimate or overestimate um how big his impact was.

I was a little bit unaware, but I was catching on right before he went.

Now, believe it or not, I forget if I told you this.

Uh, prior to his assassination, I had been preparing um a segment for my show here in which I was going to tell you, you know, if you haven't noticed, this Charlie Kirk thing is way bigger than you think.

And I was going to talk about his talent stack because his talent stack, you know, his combination of specific talents was really well created by him.

So he didn't graduate college, but he is apparently fantastically well read, which I imagine he probably does on all those many, you know, plane flights, but he doesn't waste his time.

Apparently he didn't.

He he would read, you know, important historical, contextual, sometimes religious things.

So, he was really really able to do these debates.

So, he was super well informed.

That's the first talent.

He also had incredible communication skills and he had um he had the religious background on top of it and then he had all the networking skills.

I mean amazing networking skills.

On top of that, he had charisma.

I mean, these are a lot of talents.

Some of them natural and some of them he developed.

But it's not an accident that he had that much impact.

Um he he was a guy who put together his talents really smartly.

And that's what I was noticing.

I was just noticing it maybe two weeks ago and I thought, man, I'm going to do a whole thing where I tell you he's going to be your next president.

Do you know how many people were having that same thought at around the same time?

Not next president, but future president.

A lot of it turns out a lot of people are now admitting that they had recently had the same thought.

This guy's going to be president someday.

And so we felt it before he was assassinated.

You could feel his rise and you didn't know what the limit of that was.

It didn't look like it was limited at all.

And so I think that much energy has been released.

And uh when I talk about the great machine, this is what I'm talking about.

The mega/conservative machine.

You have probably noticed that the Democrats seem somewhat um spookily organized often in ways that we don't know because it's a hidden organizational structure.

You know, the billionaires funding things that go into these dark nos that some of it comes back to the politicians and you know, it's hard to it's hard to see the gears of the machine, but thanks to people like Mike Benz and and others, we're now seeing the gears.

So, we understand the Democrat machine and it is corrupt and vile and broken, but it had a good run.

Now, it run is probably reaching an end.

The MAGA/conservative Republican machine, which some would say those are three different things, although you can't put them in the same category.

Today you can.

Yeah, today you can because there is now a common mission and there are some things that we've all decided, not preferred, decided.

And watching the the gigantic mega Republican conservative machine come online, it was like it just booted up and it it was it had everything it needed except fuel.

and Charlie just fueled it up.

So, you're seeing this tremendous somewhat coordinated machine coming online and we don't know how powerful this is, but I'll say a few things.

I do think that the people on the right, let's collectively call the all those groups the people on the right, uh I believe they all had the same feeling when they saw the news about Charlie.

What can I do?

What can I do?

Many of them are going to church today.

Um, apparently a whole bunch of people said, you know, I haven't been to church in a long time.

I'm going.

That's big.

I mean, that's big.

Um, we're finding that people in other countries are weighing in.

I didn't realize that his reach was international.

How many of you knew that?

There are people in all kinds of countries saying that they were affected personally and deeply by it.

It's hard for me to imagine somebody being assassinated in another country that I would have like a personal feeling about.

But people are having this about Charlie and and people like me.

I've seen a whole bunch of people were I'll say in my category which is somebody who's involved in politics but didn't know him at all.

Had never met him.

We only know him from his public work.

We felt this personally.

I haven't quite had that experience before.

I mean, certainly, you know, there are deaths that make me unhappy and sad and maybe angry and stuff, but it never felt personal before.

A lot of people are taking this personally, and I think that's why that's activating.

And one of the things that people are doing is they're trying to figure out who to listen to.

Who do you listen to and who do you follow and who who is it taking leadership?

Well, the wonderful and beautiful thing about the political right is that it looks for leaders.

I don't know what the Democrats do, but on the right, people look for leaders when they need it.

And it might be a different leader, it might be a collection of leader, it might be a handful, it might be a thousand, but they look for the leaders.

Um, the reason my traffic on X is through the roof, you know, my normal 80,000 views is now a million, you know, 4 million.

Um, that's because a lot of you said, "Before I act, I'm going to see what some people I trust say about it first." And so you checked in with me.

That's why my views are through the roof.

People said, "All right, got to figure out what people are saying, not just me.

I mean, I'm not in charge of anything, but you know that they looked at probably 20 different people who they knew would have a take that might influence how they say things.

Maybe a reframe, maybe some inspiration, maybe something to make you feel better.

And you know that I know that you're going to be looking at me as, you know, one of the people, not the only person.

And so I have an automatic responsibility to lift my game and to fill that role.

So it's like leadership, but it's almost it's it's sort of not my it's not by doing it.

It's sort of like people put you in that position, then you go, "Oh, I I guess I'm in this position.

Let me try to be useful." You've seen that Elon gets more involved.

You've seen that uh some of your favorite uh persuaders, I always mentioned Cernovich for example, have have dedicated themselves to all right, we're going to do something about this.

This can't stand.

We're we got to fix a lot and we're we're no longer just talking.

We're past the talking stage.

I do not believe, in case you're worried, that we're anywhere near something like a civil war.

I I keep hearing people talk about it.

No, we're not.

No, we're not.

We're nowhere near it.

There, you know, there's always violence, but no, no, there's no civil war.

It's just not going to happen.

Uh we're we're nowhere close.

Did you know I I came up with this term Kirking because it's hard to capture all the things that are happening, but there's something about Kirk and the situation and his life and the way he he led it that is unleashing tremendous amount of energy which I'm hoping is positive.

It looks like it it looks like positive energy.

But did you know that kirking is Scottish for going to church and that kirk might actually be derived from the word church?

Did you know that?

Well, now you do.

Um, Wall Street Journal was writing about the international impact.

Um, so it galvanized a bunch of right-wing people in other countries.

So other countries are using him as a rallying cry.

Sorry, I got to put my thumb down.

I can turn that off somehow.

There's a there's a menu option I was told.

All right, I'll go look for that later.

Um, and apparently a day after Kirk was killed, uh, there was an event out of ENA, uh, uh, what the, the European Parliament erupted in shouts and death poundouting after Conservative members were denied a moment of silence to honor him.

So th this is global.

Um, I did not see that coming.

I saw an article by John Nolte in uh Breitbart uh that is so well written.

I wish you know I'd love to read you the whole piece but I'll just recommend it.

I'll just read a few passages and you'll get the idea.

Um it has to do with when I when I talk about the great machine coming online.

It's because I have a system view of things.

you know, I don't look at what the one person is doing or the one goal or the one objective.

Uh I look at the system.

I look at all the stuff and see if it's moving in one direction.

And uh that feels to me what uh Nol came up with.

So let me just read a few pieces from him.

He said uh he said uh about how people are reacting to it.

He said uh several points.

He said we understood what had changed forever and why we mobilized.

We've prepared for action.

We instinctively knew what uh that action would be.

So this is what I'm talking about.

The machine is self-organizing and coming online.

We knew we had the power to take that action.

Yes.

Um, we took that action and are doing so effectively.

Yes, we share an unprecedented resolve.

I've never seen this before.

Looks unprecedented to me.

And we're in it for the long term.

Forever if needed.

Feels like it.

That this doesn't feel like today's flavor.

That this feels like Charlie's with us forever.

He be he's becoming a part of us.

And this is more from Noli from Breart.

He goes, "And here's the healthiest part of what's happening.

No one is standing around helplessly complaining about how the regime media aren't fair." Right?

No one's crybabying about media bias.

No one's ringing their hands that the media aren't doing to the left what they always do to us.

Instead, based entirely on group instinct, we instantly understood that it was up to us to hold accountable those who celebrate Charlie Kirk's murder and those on the organized left, Democrats, media, academia, etc., who put on who put a fatwa on Charlie Kirk and the rest of us with their 247 Nazi and fascist and white supremacist talk.

I'm going to go on a little.

Now, this is not the whole piece.

I I just picked out the parts that I thought were best.

He said, "Uh, this has never happened on our side before." I agree.

The corporate media have lived in our heads forever, but the martyrdom of Charlie Kirk finally evicted those demons.

God, this is such good writing.

It's just really good writing.

Better still, instead of empowering the media with our complaints, instead of giving the media control of our emotions as we rage against their countless sins, we've transformed those sins into something useful.

fuel to make our arguments, bring in converts, and hold evil accountable.

All at once, we become impervious to the media's usual tricks with the dual revelation that number one, the media are irredeemable and not worth our time.

And two, through alternative and social media, we hold the power in our country.

Um there there's an old joke about a kid who um was born and he he never talked and he's about 8 years old and he's never talked and his parents are worried and everything.

And then one day, um, the one of the parents drops, I don't know, a potter pan on his foot and the kid suddenly yells, "Oh, oh, sorry, I've got a six-year-old nephew in South Africa who's listening, so I won't use the words that the joke uses." But he yells, "Oh, Gdit, my effing foot." And the mother says, "What?

you can talk.

He goes, "Yeah, I can talk." And she goes, "Why have you never talked until now?" And the kid says, "Didn't have anything to say." And that that's the joke.

And uh it feels that way on the political right.

They always had the power.

They always had the ability.

They just didn't have a big enough reason that we would all act in unison.

Now we have it.

and everybody sees it, everybody feels it and we are working as one.

Now it doesn't mean it's perfectly coordinated.

You know that the world's a messy place, but all the energy is moving in the right direction and people are looking for guidance to make sure they're moving in the right place.

They're checking in with people.

They're talking to people.

They're influencing people who need to be influenced.

And more important than any of that, I'm sorry, nephew from South Africa.

Can you close your ears for a minute?

All right.

Thanks.

Thanks.

We don't give a what people think about us right now.

And that is freedom.

Now, it's easier for me because I'm canceled.

And it's also one of the reasons why I have more responsibility in this than most of you.

I get to say what you're not allowed to say.

Now, I don't know what it is you'd want to say, but I guarantee there are things you want to say that are over the line, and you don't need that in your your life.

But I'll do it.

I'll do it.

In fact, by the end of today, I expect that I'm going to be in a lot of trouble because there's a topic coming up that I don't even know if I can survive.

But I can do it and it probably needs to be said, so I'm going to say it.

So, you might want to wait around for that.

That's toward the end.

Um, there is a massive movement toward cancelling the people who mocked the death of Charlie Kirk.

I did not see that coming.

I did not believe that the uh that the right would go after them.

And if they did, I didn't think that anybody would fire them.

I thought their employers would say, "Oh, it's free speech.

We don't do that." But they they didn't do that.

Apparently the political right and I'd say uh Robbie Starbucks is a big part of this.

Uh they now know that if they displease the political right that it is organized enough to bring down their stock price pretty much immediately and just leave it there.

And so big companies now say and this is maybe different um we'd better take this really seriously.

And are they?

Yes.

The scariest thing is how many of these people getting fired are teachers.

Have you noticed that there's for some reason there's a weirdly disproportionate number of teachers who are celebrating the death of a of an American who is just a good guy.

And most of them are getting fired, which is exactly the, you know, the satisfying thing for us because um I think I think the political left or at least some part of it had gotten to the point where they thought that killing people on the right was justified under a variety of reasons that were up to them subjectively.

And now they're learning if you with somebody on the right.

Sorry nephew.

Um there's going to be something to pay.

There's a price.

And we're going to make sure that you know there's a price.

So people getting cancelled like crazy.

There's one of my favorite stories was Office Depot uh denied somebody a printing of a Charlie Kirk poster.

The poster was not offensive.

It was just celebrating, you know, his power in life and his maybe his power after death.

Uh, but nothing, you know, nothing anti-trans or racist, nothing like that.

It was just a pro-ch Charlie Kirk poster.

And the weird looking monster creature, barely human thing that worked there said, "Oh, no.

We can't do that because it's propaganda." As if they wouldn't do it if it were left propaganda.

Of course they would.

So, Office Depot got the complaints because the person who got turned down for service took the video of the interaction and uh they fired the employee who uh made the decision and then do you know what happened next after Office Depot rapidly, very rapidly to their credit, I'll give them full credit for this.

rapidly.

They fired the person who looked like maybe the supervisor who was the one who said, "We can't do this." And then the conservative said, "Uh, there was another employee standing next to that one.

You need to fire that one, too." Because that employee was not arguing with the decision and that was enough.

And what did Office Depot do?

Did they say, "No, no, this employee was just standing in the general area.

um wasn't disagreeing, wasn't agreeing, but really, you know, their boss was the one making the decision and was standing right there.

So, it's not them.

Well, that's what they could have done, right?

Office Depot could have done that.

They fired the second person right away.

As soon as it soon as it became a trouble, boom, gone.

So, things are changing.

Um, and uh let's see what else.

How many other people are getting uh uh apparently Blue Sky, that's the uh sort of poor wannabe uh X platform, you know, the competitor to X that all the Democrats went to cuz they thought, "Oh, we must get off of X so that we can find this heavenlike situation on this other platform." Well, Blue Sky turned into a cesspool and apparently um there was a guest search feature, meaning you didn't have to be a member, but you could search for things on Blue Sky.

And uh conservatives were using it to search for people who could get fired for their uh terrible comments about Charlie Kirk.

And I guess they were finding quite a few because Blue Sky was just it just became a SAS school at some point people say.

And uh Blue Sky turned off their guest feature option.

They they were so concerned about how many of their uh their followers would get banned that they had to make it hard to find them.

Ow.

Um, and then I saw that uh this is a weird day for me because uh I think Elon reposted my content three times just this morning.

And one of them was my video about the hypnotized Hitlerians who were in a bubble.

And my observation that the the thing that you have to be most amazed at is that there were so many people who were sure that everyone who mattered agreed with them that they would go in public and act happy about the death of another human being, an American who is just trying to make things better.

And apparently thousands and thousands of people were in such a deep hypnotized what I call the Hitlerian bubble that they see they see Hitler everywhere and they can't get out of the bubble.

Um you realize how many there were.

There were a lot and um as I say they are victims because they are they're clearly brainwashed and they're under the influence of just horrible influences.

But that doesn't take away their responsibility.

So, you know, as I often say, I don't believe in free will.

Sometimes things just happen.

But you still have to punish people and reward people as if they had free will because otherwise the whole system falls apart.

And you could argue you don't have any choice but to reward them because you don't have free free will.

But that's another conversation.

Uh my point is there are a whole lot of people who believed that that was appropriate behavior because apparently they had never left their bubble.

Okay, try try to even imagine that.

Try to imagine that they were so insulated in their point of view that they thought enough people would share it that they couldn't get in trouble for their job because of something they said.

Now, um Wow.

All right.

Um, the LA mayor, Karen Bass, um, is, I think, the only mayor who has given orders, do not fly the LA flags at half mass.

Postmillennial is reporting on this.

Now, is there any way to interpret that other than the mayor of LA is a racist?

Do you think there's any chance that if the White House ordered flags to be a half mass for a black American, you think she wouldn't lower the flag?

You all know the answer.

Of course she would.

Of course she would.

This is racist.

Is pure racist.

And uh you never want to go full racist if you're a mayor.

what a horrible human being she is in so many ways.

Um, apparently the New York Times was writing about the current story and made one of the just horrible factual errors to uh malign him.

And I'm going to talk about those some more because a lot of people have this view that Charlie Kirk had said or did things that were super racist or sexist or otherwise objectionable.

And I've been asking online, can somebody give me an example that's in the full quote but also the full context?

So I asked that directly.

I want the quote, but I said directly it's got to be in the context.

What do you think happened?

I'll tell you what people sent me.

Not a single person gave me an example where the quote was shown and the context zero.

A lot of people tried.

They all played the game.

But the only way they could make him bad was to change what he said into their own words because his words were not any of those things.

And if they could find a quote that if you took it out of context, you know, you could make it look bad.

They did.

So they either removed the context or they changed the quote into their own paraphrasing which was, you know, wrong and that's it.

But even the New York Times was doing that.

So the New York Times had a claim that they just printed.

The Daily Color News Foundation is reporting about that.

So they issued a correction, but here's what they had falsely accused him of.

They had falsely accusing them of saying that uh Jewish communities are quote pushing the exact kind of hatred against whites that they blah blah blah.

Now, it turns out that the the real context, which the New York Times clearly should have known, was he was talking about somebody else's quote and he was disagreeing with it.

So, in other words, they took somebody else's quote that he was publicly disagreeing with and it's the only reason he mentioned it to publicly disagree with it.

And then they attributed it to Charlie and said, "Wow, look at that terrible guy." Can you even believe that?

Like that.

And that's like your paper of record, you know, your your most respected publication.

How many people saw the correction?

You know how this game goes, right?

Not many people would see the correction, but how many people saw the claim that he had said this this bad thing?

Millions?

Maybe millions.

Yeah.

So um then uh one of the questions I asked which was being also asked by a uh air ODM.

So before I saw his post today that I'll tell you about, I was saying to myself, how do Democrats explain the fact that Charlie Kirk had a number of uh really close black friends and colleagues?

How do you explain that?

Do do Democrats think that once you become a Republican, you can't identify racism or that you're okay with it even if it's against you?

and that all you have to do is be a Republican and you'll you'll hang out with Hiller and you'll be friends with him.

Hey, we're both on the same team.

Ah, maybe you say a few things I don't like, but h what is that what Democrats think?

That don't they understand that the people who are closest to him, spent the most time with him, they don't have the same opinion that is in, let's say, the New York Times.

there.

I don't believe there is a single uh black person who knew him well who has said, "Oh yeah, the things you say about him are true." Have you seen one?

I haven't.

I've not seen anybody who knew him well.

And that's gazillion people.

And a lot of them are black.

Not one of them is saying, "Well, you know, he did say this thing I didn't like." None of them.

because that thing he didn't like didn't happen.

It's all made up.

And I'll give you some more examples on that.

So, I asked uh on X, can somebody give me an example, as I said, that's in context and a direct quote, something that you think is horrible.

And uh one gentleman whose name is Oh, did I not put his name down?

All right.

Well, I forgot to take his name, but it was a anonymous account, but he gave me a list of uh let's see, seven, eight, nine, nine different offenses.

So, he really put some work into it.

They're they're all summarized.

Nine different offenses.

How many of the nine examples were a direct quote and also in context?

You know the answer.

None.

Zero for nine.

Let me give you an example.

Um, at some point, oh, Fury Trending X is the the person who had this Fury Trending X.

So, this is a claim I saw a few people make.

Um, that Charlie said about black pilots, quote, "I'm sorry.

If I see a black pilot, I'm going to be like, boy, I hope he's qualified." Is that in context?

So, they got the quote right, but remember, you have to get the quote right, but also in context.

Here, the quote is probably correct, but the context is wrong.

Was Charlie talking about anybody's genes?

No.

Had nothing to do with anybody's genes.

Was Charlie talking about anybody's culture?

No.

Had nothing to do with culture.

Had nothing to do with genes.

Indeed, it had nothing to do with being black.

The comment would have worked um because it was a comment about a system.

The system is DEI and the system the way it works in the real world, not the way it would ideally work, but the way it works in the real world is that the people in charge are going to make sure they hit that DEI target to have enough black pilots.

And they will because they're human beings.

The bosses, who might all be white, by the way, uh are going to pick people with maybe a little lower qualifications.

And this would be true if you're talking about black people, brown people, yellow people, any kind of people.

Doesn't matter what color they are.

So this is actually a comment which doesn't have anything to do with race ex except that uh except that the DEI focuses on a particular race.

So I explained that do you think they said oh no of course not.

Um, and then there are a bunch of others where you that uh I I won't go over them all, but they're all they're all things which are obviously in a context when the quote is right.

So So this is the trick.

You should look for this trick.

If the quote is in quotes and the right quote, the context will always be wrong.

if the context is right or or let's say it a different way.

If they don't use a direct quote and they paraphrase what he said, the paraphrasing is never right.

It never matches what he said.

So it turns out that the left has developed this whole mythology around Charlie Kirk in which they imagined he thought and said things they never thought or said.

Now, that's the only way I can explain why he's got black friends and black supporters who know him well and know very much what he said and what he thinks.

There's no other way to explain that.

You know, there there's not a certain set of black Americans who don't recognize racism or don't care about it.

That's that's not a thing.

So, um I was pointing out to a gentleman named Amir Odum who's a young black gay uh influencer online and he went online to let you know that none of those things were true from his personal experience.

And apparently Charlie Kirk mentored him.

That's right.

he mentored him and uh air says that he wouldn't be where he is as now he's he's made a made a go of it.

He's doing some good influencing online and he says that Charlie was the whole time mentoring and positive and stayed in touch with him the whole time.

So, did he know that he was gay?

Yeah, he's he's out.

He's open.

Did he know he was black?

Yeah, he did.

Did that stop Charlie Charlie from being his close friend and helping him helping him in business?

Didn't make any difference at all to Charlie.

Now I I had a little bit of the same experience in which I spent pretty good chunk of time over my life mentoring uh black people who asked for help and I would say, "Yeah, I got some advice." And I often stayed in touch with them.

There are people I've now known for years who you check in with me once in a while.

It's very common.

Did Did I Did I not give them advice because they were black?

No, it never even occurred to me.

Of course, I'm going to give them advice if I have the advice and they need it and it would help.

And uh did it did I enjoy my interactions?

Yes, every time.

Yeah, there the these are people who I consider my friends.

But the left, they they live in a sort of a bubble hoax world.

Anyway, Amir is, if you want to follow him on X, he's at Amir X Odum.

A M I R X O D O M.

And this is me uh giving Charlie a little boost because if he wanted air to do well, I'll I'll honor that.

So, I'd like him to do well, too.

So, I will tell you maybe you should follow him.

So, if you're on X, give him a follow.

All right.

So, I believe that uh there's something coming that's pretty big, which is there's going to be this gigantic Charlie Kirk cognitive dissonance experience for the left.

Um because they don't have a theory uh to explain what's going on right now.

So the only way they can explain it is to assume that half the globe are uh Hitlers themselves or they don't know what they know or so there's going to be a whole bunch of trying to understand the world that they're observing.

I don't feel like I have any confusion about the world I'm observing.

But the Democrats are going to have a big problem because they're going to have to figure out why everybody says this guy is an angel, but they've been acting like he's so such a bad person have to kill him.

At some point, this won't apply to everybody, but at some point there will be a healthy number of Democrats who realize that they were on the side of killing an innocent man.

meaning that they didn't act on it, but they were they were sort of happy it happened maybe.

And then they're going to find out that he was nothing like they thought.

And this will be one of the biggest mistakes of humanity.

It's one thing to kill somebody because you're going to get something out of it.

This was not that th this is killing somebody and getting the opposite of whatever it was you wanted because you're going to get a lot of that.

You're gonna get a lot and it's going to be the opposite of whatever you thought you wanted.

But it's because you killed the wrong guy.

I saw somebody say today, was it uh King John?

He goes by that King John online.

Um I believe it was he who said today that uh they killed they killed our son.

Boy, do I feel that.

You know what I mean?

Those of you who know my story know that that hits me hard.

Anyway, that's what they got wrong.

If you kill our stranger, we might be mad, but we'll probably not change our schedule over it.

If you kill our son, all of our son, we're we're going to change our schedule, right?

Tomorrow won't be the same as today because you killed our son.

And uh that has more I think that has more meaning in you know more than one way if you know what I mean.

Well, some are saying there's a little action on this online that uh the Smith Munt Act, that's where the government um used to the government used to make it illegal to intentionally lie on the news.

So, but then uh I believe it was Obama who changed the law so that it became legal to lie to the country and propagandize and and uh persuade mostly from our intelligence people.

But basically in general it became no longer illegal to intentionally lie about the news if you're a news entity.

intentionally.

It's legal.

And so there's a movement to go back to the way it was, to make it illegal because we think we'll be better.

And apparently Trump reposted a video that was calling for that.

So that would suggest if you know the the Trump way of acting that he's testing that.

He he's putting it out there with his name on it.

Just see what happens.

And if he finds that at least his base is solidly in favor of this change, I I think he'll act.

Um, yeah, but it only affects people who are intentionally lying.

So you could still say, "Oh, I didn't know.

I thought the Russia collusion was real.

Oh, I'm so surprised that it's not real." But if you found a bunch of documents that you know very clearly make it look like it was a ploy, well maybe you got some legal trouble in that case.

And then some people are suggesting that instead of calling it the Smith Munt Act, uh that it would be called the Charlie Kirk Act.

I don't know if that raises the chance that it would get implemented, but some people are thinking that.

All right.

Well, on uh international topics, looks like Trump is looking to fasttrack the uh immigration here of white South Africans because they're uh under the theory that some of them are being uh put in danger.

So, the AF Post is writing about this.

Um so, Trump administration launched a program.

They're fasttracking these immigrants because their perceived danger.

Um, let me tell you, that's going to be a hard one to sell in a diverse country.

I don't know if there's any I I hope there's some analoges to this as in there other cases where other ethnicities have been targeted for, you know, fast immigration.

Somebody somebody needs to tell me that.

Um, it would be awkward if the only time that happened was with white people.

Now, I'm still all for it, by the way.

It doesn't e even if the only time it happened was for white people, I'm all for it.

All for it.

But it might be a hard sell.

I guess London had one of the biggest nationalist rallies in modern history.

Just enormous.

um Tommy Robinson who I don't know a great deal about but he seems to be a uh previously jailed free speech guy and I think free speech was the purpose of it.

They had a surprise guest by video which was Elon Musk and he seems to be completely down with that movement and it's big and uh they had and this is uh in London and they held him in as silence to honor Charlie Kirk.

Now, it's hard for me to imagine that that there's anything that would happen in another country that the United States would have an enormous um event and have a minute of silence for that person from another country.

So, this is big and I don't know that we can even size it yet because we don't know if it's still growing.

We don't know how big it is and we don't know how how fast it's growing and we don't know where it's growing.

It's big.

So, I wouldn't underestimate it, overestimate it.

I always get those two confused.

Anyway, all right.

Here's where uh um I'll get myself assassinated.

The Washington Exam Examiner says uh that the Gaza conflict has driven some uh Apacbacked Democrats to stop taking money from uh Apac.

So Apac is the uh totally legal, totally transparent uh American entity that supports Israel and uh they work really hard with Congress.

you know, they pretty much every Congress person has what they call their Apac person and almost all of them get money from um from Apac.

So, uh some of them are mad about the way Ga Gaza is going, so they're just saying we're not taking any more of your money.

Um not many, just three House Democrats so far, but that's notable.

And uh here's my take.

I don't trust any politician who takes money from Apac.

So, let me let me say that as clearly as I possibly can.

When it comes to only about things about Israel or let's say the Middle East, uh I wouldn't distrust them necessarily on any other topic.

But if you're taking money from Apac, I don't believe anything you say and I'm not going to change that opinion because that's how money works.

The whole point of money is that it influences people.

They wouldn't be giving money if they didn't think it worked.

Do you think they'd be wasting all that money?

Hey, here's some money.

What do I need to do?

Nah, nothing.

Will you ever ask me for a favor?

Oh, God, no.

It's just free money.

No.

They give them money so that they can influence them.

So, if you want my trust on any decision that has to do with the Middle East, if you're taking money from Apac, shut the up.

I don't want to hear anything you have to say because I would consider you completely untrustworthy and not necessarily on America's team for just those decisions.

Is that clear enough?

All right.

Now, by the way, Apex's completely legal as long as it's legal.

Um I I will also observe at the same time I say that I will never trust anybody who takes Apac money on on an Israel question.

Um, at the same time, I can observe that Israel is really good at this.

They're really good at it.

And you, you know, I can hold both thoughts at the same time, right?

That their skill level for supporting their own national best interest.

Really good.

Really good.

Now, I'm going to double down.

You might have seen some video of Marco Rubio and Mike Huckabe uh with Netanyahu and they were wearing the little little beanie caps and they were you know touching the whailing wall with reverence.

I hate that.

Now I know you're going to disagree and you're going to say that you know you're religious so it's just a religious thing.

um the Judeo-Christian crossover is so strong that even though it's you know more of a Jewish thing that it's still enough of a Christian thing that as long as it's you know a sincere religious if it's a sincere religious um action then it's laudable you know you you would actually say I like that I I like that that our leaders are, you know, religious and taking that stuff seriously.

And I also like that the US is uh respecting Israel in that way.

All right, here's my problem.

If you look at this from a persuasion perspective, it is a plus.

A+.

If you can get somebody to do that on camera, put on the little the little Jewish hat and touch the wall and and act like it's magic, you know, as religion works.

Um, you have turned somebody into your because that is such powerful persuasion that you will not know it, but you will be bonded to the Israel experience in a way that is not illegal.

It's, you know, it's not even immoral or unethical.

It's perfectly allowed, but it's really powerful.

I object not because it's immoral, unethical, none of those reasons.

It's not illegal, nothing like that.

It just works too well.

And uh when I see Marco Rubio go over there and basically look like Netanyahu's I don't say to myself, "Oh, no.

This is just ceremonial." and it has nothing to do with the work, you know, he's he's just showing respect.

No, I I look at a guy who's been hypnotized essentially.

So, to allow yourself to go into that situation, um it's just a terrible look.

Terrible look.

But from Israel's point of view, brilliant.

It's it's good for their self-interest.

It's good for bonding with the United States.

It's genius really.

I mean, it's it's just really strong persuasion.

A+.

But for us, I would say if you're going to do it, don't do it on camera.

I That's probably impossible.

But I would have no problem if they did it privately.

But you put that on camera and it just looks like our people bowing to Netanyahu.

Not cool.

Absolutely not cool with me.

All right.

But all legal, all ethical, all moral, you know, not none of this standard complaints.

It's just better for Israel than it is for us.

So, from an American self-interest perspective, I hate it.

And I would encourage nobody to ever do that again.

All right.

Um, except privately.

Privately is fine.

You know, if it's something you wanted to do because it is, I mean, it's a historical site.

I can imagine a lot of people wanting to experience that, just don't put it on camera.

All right.

Russia's getting provocative and doing a bunch of war games near the border of the NATO countries.

They're testing drones and they're they might be testing some defenses.

And um I don't know if that's preparation for something to come or they're just um rattling their swords for for effect.

We'll see.

Um, apparently meanwhile Ukraine has continued to attack Russia's energy facilities.

So they uh what did they do?

They they just torched uh the Russian Kirishi refinery and they took out a chemical plant a thousand miles inside Russia and they got an oil supply line.

So, it does seem that Ukraine is going hard at taking out the energy infrastructure in Russia.

And it seems to me that the people trying to take something out usually have a big advantage over the people trying to protect them, especially since they're spread out all over the place and and the drone weapons are hard to stop in the first place.

Um, unless you, you know, you had serious, you would need national defense basically everywhere.

So, that would be hard to stop.

Um, so we'll see what happens there.

Meanwhile, the uh Sinaloa cartel worldwide operations news nation is uh acting like the US is taking a big step toward dismantling the entire Sinaloa cartel.

Now I told you that there was this major uh seven foreign region operation in which uh 617 Sinaloa cartel got arrested in various countries but apparently there are tens of thousands of them in 40 countries 617 people not even a drop in the bucket.

Um but and then there's some reporting by news nation that uh the US is working with Mexico to do this.

I don't believe that.

Do you believe that Mexico is cooperating against the cartels?

The only way it makes sense is if they're the government is in the pocket of a different cartel and the only thing they're doing is getting rid of the competition for the one that's their cartel.

That's the only way I can understand what's happening.

Otherwise, I would assume Mexico is not helping at all, and we're just pretending they are.

Um, and then, uh, apparently a bunch of stealth jets have been delivered now to Puerto Rico.

Uh, meaning that there are jets, but they're based in Puerto Rico.

And that would be getting ready to put some pressure on Venezuela in ways that we don't quite know.

But, uh, that's a lot of firepower for that part of the world.

So, I presume that's partly to scare Venezuela and partly because there's good chance they're going to use them and they're really good ones.

Well, Conor Mc.

Gregor is, as you know, running for president or wants to run for president in Ireland.

I don't think he'll actually get to be on the ballot because they've got a weird system that might keep him off.

Um, but he was saying some good things about uh Elon Musk.

Um, and he said, "Elon is an actual superhero for real.

He's a great man.

He gave me a lot of his time, pledged his support.

He even offered financial support, but I said, "I'm not after that." Now, that's the sort of thing that if somebody said, "He offered financial support, but I turned it down." You wouldn't necessarily believe that, would you?

But Elon responded on X and confirmed that he had offered to help fund his campaign, but he got turned down because he said, "I don't need that." Well, he doesn't need it yet cuz he's not on the ballot.

Maybe that will change.

I don't know.

Meanwhile, somebody called Penske Media.

So, I guess they own some uh um magazine- like content of some kind.

I don't know what they own, but they're suing Google over the AI summaries.

You might know if you do a Google search that the first thing that comes up now is Google's own AI that that gives you a summary, but it doesn't necessarily give you a link and the summary is usually all you need.

So if you had created some content, you know, let's say let's say you uh you know you were n's uh story on Breitbart, you write that thing and then somebody says, "Oh, I want to go look at that story because you know I saw it somewhere but I didn't read it so I want to go look for it." If they Googled it, it would come up with a summary and they might say, "My example is bad, but you'll get the idea." They might say, "Oh, the summary is all I needed." and then they'll never go to the content, which means that the people who spent all the money and had the business model to create content would in effect be giving it away for free to Google and it would just become Google's content because Google would take it, turn it into AI content and then say, "Well, now it's our content and they're being sued for that." So, that will be interesting.

Do you remember I keep complaining about uh all the so-called robots that are coming and how every time you see a demonstration or a claim about robots, oh the robots are coming, that the robot is only do ever doing one thing because only robots can only do one thing at a time.

You know, they they can't be general robots.

Nobody knows how to do that.

Well, here we go.

Uh yet another video of a laundry folding robot and the the post said, "Oh, here it comes.

You know, the age of robots is is here because we've got this robot that can fold laundry." Obviously, since that's one of the hardest things, it's suggesting that they can do all kinds of things if they can fold laundry.

But I'll remind you that the first time the first time I saw a video about a robot folding laundry and it was it was folding laundry was 30 years ago and just about once every year or two for 30 years.

Is this different?

Do you think that after 30 years of fake robots that really couldn't, you know, you can't commercialize them to fold your laundry for whatever reason?

Do you think it's real now?

I don't think you can have a robot that folds your laundry because why would you buy one that only does one thing?

You would wait until there's a general purpose robot that can do that and make your coffee as well.

But we're in my opinion nowhere near a general purpose robot in my opinion because if we were you would already see them.

You you would see at least the first draft and the only things you see still are one robot doing one thing.

Don't get excited about that.

Well, my terrible piece of crap state called California uh has advanced a bill.

Newsome hasn't signed it, but they've advanced a bill to give college admission priority to descendants of slaves.

Um according to just the news, um let let me say that again.

They want to give priority to descendants of slaves.

Um, are you actually telling me that they're not already doing that?

They've been doing that for 30.

All right, nephew.

Nephew, you got to you're going to have to put on the ear muffs.

My nephew in uh South Africa.

Um, no, they've been doing this for 30 years.

They've been favoring uh black applicants and you know and gay applicants and women and you know all the protected classes.

I don't even know if this would be new.

Like was there somebody who was going in and they were black and then somebody said, "Oh, you're black.

Okay, okay, that's good.

But are you a descendant of slaves?" Well, I don't know.

I'm black, but I'm I don't know if I'm a descendant of slaves.

Oh, well, I can't give you any special admissions because you're you're only black and American and you can't move your descendant of slaves, so you don't go to the front of the line.

But since you don't go to the front of the line, we'll put you second.

We're still putting the white guys last.

I mean, you're still way ahead of them, but you know, we'd give you a little extra bump if you were descended from slavery.

All right.

It's stupid.

It's insulting.

It's racist.

you.

you, California, for even trying that.

By the way, I should tell you that some years ago, I blogged that the way to do reparations would be with some preferential funding for uh black Americans who wanted to you spend one generation catching up educationally.

And I thought, okay, if you if you're going to do it at all, do it in a way that really fundamentally makes a difference.

Don't just give people a bunch of money that they don't know how to spend because poor people don't know how to handle money.

If you s give a poor person, I don't know, $100,000 for reparations, how's that going to work out?

I mean, they would like it, but it's not likely that they're going to turn it into a small business or something like that.

But if you said, "Here's the deal.

we do have this systemic racism and uh um everybody else seems to have better education on on average.

So if we can spend one generation then we'll put a time limit on it.

We'll say all right for this generation your ability to get into college and have it paid for by the by the government would be almost complete.

You would not have to worry about getting into college at all if you were black.

we'll just take care of that for one generation and then everybody's closer to even after that one generation.

You say, "All right, are we good now?" Because that would work for me, but but uh it's gone too far.

There there are too many uh there are too many ways that white people are just discriminated against in employment in the United States for me to be okay with any more of it.

So, I'm not okay with it.

All right.

Well, we'll see if I get assassinated today for my opinions.

Um, I know I should be more afraid, but I'm not.

Um, but I'm not.

And I would hope that you are not either.

Those of you who should be afraid, if you're a bigger account, etc., be careful.

you know, the the Tim Pools of the world.

Um, be careful.

Yeah, I don't think I'm in that risk level, but uh and plus I I never go out in public.

I don't I don't do public events.

I think I told you that I stopped doing public events uh early in the Trump experience because I considered it too dangerous.

So, ju just think about this.

I live in a country where it's not safe to go in public because of my opinions.

And my opinions are that I support somebody that the majority of voters supported, the majority.

And it's still not safe to go and I wouldn't go to Berkeley for sure.

No, I mean I wouldn't be worried about I wouldn't be worried about an airport or something, but I I definitely would not go somewhere where there's publicity and a set location and a set time because that's what gives the the planners enough time to do something bad.

So, I just won't do that and I haven't done that for years now.

All right, everybody.

That's all I got for you.

I'm going to say a few words privately to the local subscribers.

I will tell you um most of you know that I continued doing the Dilbert comic even after it got cancelled.

Never missed a day.

It it was always continuously published but I put it behind a payw wall.

So it's on the locals platform and also on X you can subscribe.

But the reason I'm telling you is because uh don't be drinking coffee when you finish today's Dilbert comic.

It it might be the funniest thing I've ever written.

So, don't be drinking coffee.

And of course, it's a joke I could not have done if I had not been cancelled.

You know, I I can take a little extra chances, and I definitely couldn't have done that joke in the family newspaper.

All right.

Um, the rest of you, thanks for joining.

I will see you tomorrow, I hope.

Same time, same place.

and locals.

I'll be private with you in 30 seconds.

Hey, there you are. Everybody, come on

in. It's time.

Find a seat. Grab a beverage

today and we're going to have a best

morning that we can under the

circumstances.

I know we're still a little knocked off

our balance a little bit, but we'll fix

that. We will recover.

[Music]

Soon as I have your comments working,

we'll get going.

This is the annoying technology delay.

How long should you wait from the time

you push a button to the point when the

app does something? 30 seconds is way

too long.

The most would be 3 seconds, I think.

Good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization is

called Coffee with Scott Adams and

you've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to take a chance on elevating

your experience today to levels that

nobody can even understand with their

tiny shiny human brains, all you need

for that

is a copper, a mug or a glass, a tanker,

jealous, 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,

the dopamine hit of the day. The thing

that makes everything better is called

the simultaneous sip. And it happens

now.

Delightful.

Spectacular.

Wait, hold on. I'm getting a message.

Every now and then I get psychic matched

messages that come in from all over the

world. I'm receiving now one um I

believe the location is South Africa.

South Africa. It's uh a young man, a

young man sending me a message. He's

only six years old and he calls me uncle

and he is sometimes concerned that I use

too many naughty words.

Well, I better stop using the naughty

words because my virtual nephew, how's

it going, virtual nephew?

Now, you probably didn't know that I

could talk directly to you and I can

hear you. Yeah, I can. I know. It's

weird, isn't it? So, the next time you

watch, remember, I can watch you and

hear you, too. All right, let's go on

with the show. Remember I told you that

Apple had this uh great new feature for

their their AirPods and it would allow

you to put them in and it would

translate um several different mostly

eur I guess European languages and it

would do it sort of instantly. Well, the

only place you're not going to be

allowed to do that would be in Europe

where they speak English, French,

German, Spanish, and Portuguese. the

very languages that are translated. And

it looks like according to Politico that

it's Apple pushing back against the the

uh the newish digital markets act in

Europe that is sort of punishing for the

big tech companies. And Apple's decided

that Europe can't have nice things. I

kind of like that. It It's not like a a

hard push back. is just telling them,

hey, we just spent like a hundred

million dollars developing this feature

that is primarily useful for Europe and

Europeans

and uh you can't have it. It's just not

available to you. Now, I assume, but I

don't know.

Yeah, I don't know. But I would assume

that if you were an American and you

were traveling to Europe, you could get

the app in America and it would work in

Europe. I don't know about that, but I'm

guessing it might. And uh I I like I

like that little subtle, you know, you

don't want to go too hard at governments

because they can pay you back in a bad

way, but you want to push back. It's

like, ah, well, you know, if you were in

America and you had more reasonable

digital laws, look what you could have.

But sorry.

Well, we've learned more about Tyler

Robinson, the uh murderer of Charlie

Kirk. And uh I think we all had the same

kind of experience yesterday.

When I saw the news that the uh that he

lived with a trans partner,

I said to myself, "Oh,

oh, oh, oh, oh, okay. All right. Got

it." because and uh I don't know if I

you can tell me if I told you this. I

don't think I said it live, but I

thought it really hard. As soon as the

news broke about Charlie's murder, I uh

I just leapt to the unfair, biased,

totally, you know, bigoted first

impression that, oh no, it was some

radicalized trans who shot him. Then I

found out that it's Tyler Robinson who's

not trans. And I thought, oh, oh my god,

I'm a terrible person. I didn't realize

how bad a person I was that I made this

like crazy left field assumption. You

know, it was just sort of a I felt I

picked up some kind of pattern in the

universe. I thought, "Oh, I am I'm a

piece of garbage for assuming this about

an entire, you know, demographic group,

blaming them when there's no evidence

whatsoever." No, the shooter was not

trans.

It was only the boyfriend of a trans and

as you know completely different.

Is it? Well, we don't know if he was

planning to be trans. some people said,

but I don't really understand how that

would work because if his trans partner

liked him the way he was, would the

trans partner still like him if he

turned into something like the trans

partner? I don't know how that works.

That doesn't seem like it would work.

So, I suspect he was not planning to

transition, but I don't know.

Um, the reason I assumed it was trans is

that I wasn't aware of anything else

that was creating that level of hatred.

And then on top of that, there are I

think half a dozen notable trans

shooting uh public shootings about I

think there about half a dozen now just

in the past I don't know couple years.

That's what Mike Benton said. He he

listed them all out so you can you can

check with him. And uh Mike Benz was

wondering, you know, is there something

in the water? What exactly is making

this specific demographic

um be a little bit more more murdery

than you would expect for their small

numbers?

And that's a really good question. Some

people are going to say it's um the the

chemicals in their body. um even though

this guy wasn't trans, uh it's still an

interesting question of why so many of

them are involved in one way or the

other. The other possibility is that if

you're the kind of person who can, you

know, transition,

you probably have a feeling about the

rules of society, meaning that maybe you

don't respect them as much because you

think, you know what, society's rules

says I have to be this, but I'm pretty

sure I'm this other thing, so I'm going

to transition. So, it could be that

what's happening is that the trans

effect is becoming a filter for people

who are already inclined not to follow

all of society's rules. And one of those

rules might be don't shoot people. So,

that might be the only coordination. So,

it's either I'm guessing it's either

something chemical that has to do with

the transition or something

um like SSRI or something like that. But

remember, trans doesn't apply to the

shooter. So, we're we're a little off

topic talking about that. It's related

though.

So, I posted uh was it this morning?

Last night, I guess. Um, I posted the

following and it got as of this morning,

I think it had 4 million views.

Now, on the size of my account, uh, a

pretty good tweet or a pretty good post

where people thought, "Yeah, I agree

with that. I might get 80,000 views."

I got 4 million on this one. So, that's

sort of a big deal. It It's a real

indication of where people's minds are.

This was the post. I said, "The Kirking

has begun. All that energy has to go

somewhere. The great machine is booting

up." That's all I said. And people were

left to themselves to figure out what

the great machine was. Probably some

people thought it was God. Some people

thought it was the MAGA. Some people

thought it was Republicans. I don't know

what they thought, but uh I'll tell you

what it is in a moment. But it did seem

to me that Charlie uh Kirk

was uh controlling and creating a

tremendous amount of energy during his

life. And I think a lot of us were

surprised

how much it was. Um if he weren't paying

attention to that domain pretty closely,

you wouldn't know that he might be the

reason that Trump got elected. And I

feel like um there are lots of reasons,

just not one reason. But I don't think

he could have been elected without

Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk also probably

was advising people and doing things and

you know the colleges are all moving to

the right. It's really hard to

underestimate or overestimate

um how big his impact was. I was a

little bit unaware, but I was catching

on right before he went. Now, believe it

or not, I forget if I told you this.

Uh, prior to his assassination, I had

been preparing um a segment for my show

here in which I was going to tell you,

you know, if you haven't noticed, this

Charlie Kirk thing is way bigger than

you think. And I was going to talk about

his talent stack because his talent

stack, you know, his combination of

specific talents was really well created

by him. So he didn't graduate college,

but he is apparently fantastically well

read, which I imagine he probably does

on all those many, you know, plane

flights, but he doesn't waste his time.

Apparently he didn't. He he would read,

you know, important historical,

contextual,

sometimes religious things. So, he was

really really able to do these debates.

So, he was super well informed. That's

the first talent. He also had incredible

communication skills and he had um he

had the religious background on top of

it and then he had all the networking

skills. I mean amazing networking

skills. On top of that, he had charisma.

I mean, these are a lot of talents.

Some of them natural and some of them he

developed. But it's not an accident that

he had that much impact. Um he he was a

guy who put together his talents really

smartly. And that's what I was noticing.

I was just noticing it maybe two weeks

ago and I thought, man, I'm going to do

a whole thing where I tell you he's

going to be your next president. Do you

know how many people were having that

same thought at around the same time?

Not next president, but future

president. A lot of it turns out a lot

of people are now admitting that they

had recently had the same thought. This

guy's going to be president someday.

And

so we felt it before he was

assassinated. You could feel his rise

and you didn't know what the limit of

that was. It didn't look like it was

limited at all. And so I think that much

energy

has been released.

And uh when I talk about the great

machine, this is what I'm talking about.

The mega/conservative

machine.

You have probably noticed that the

Democrats seem somewhat um spookily

organized often in ways that we don't

know because it's a hidden

organizational structure. You know, the

billionaires funding things that go into

these dark nos that some of it comes

back to the politicians and you know,

it's hard to it's hard to see the gears

of the machine, but thanks to people

like Mike Benz and and others, we're now

seeing the gears. So, we understand the

Democrat machine and it is corrupt and

vile and broken, but it had a good run.

Now, it run is probably reaching an end.

The MAGA/conservative

Republican machine, which some would say

those are three different things,

although you can't put them in the same

category. Today you can. Yeah, today you

can because there is now a common

mission and there are some things that

we've all decided, not preferred,

decided.

And watching the the gigantic

mega Republican conservative machine

come online, it was like it just booted

up and it it was it had everything it

needed except fuel.

and Charlie just fueled it up. So,

you're seeing this tremendous

somewhat coordinated machine coming

online and we don't know how powerful

this is, but I'll say a few things.

I do think that the people on the right,

let's collectively call the all those

groups the people on the right, uh I

believe they all had the same feeling

when they saw the news about Charlie.

What can I do? What can I do?

Many of them are going to church today.

Um, apparently a whole bunch of people

said, you know, I haven't been to church

in a long time. I'm going.

That's big. I mean, that's big. Um,

we're finding that people in other

countries are weighing in. I didn't

realize that his reach was

international. How many of you knew

that? There are people in all kinds of

countries saying that they were affected

personally and deeply by it. It's hard

for me to imagine somebody being

assassinated in another country that I

would have like a personal feeling

about. But people are having this about

Charlie and and people like me. I've

seen a whole bunch of people were I'll

say in my category which is somebody

who's involved in politics but didn't

know him at all. Had never met him. We

only know him from his public work. We

felt this personally.

I haven't quite had that experience

before. I mean, certainly, you know,

there are deaths that make me unhappy

and sad and maybe angry and stuff, but

it never felt personal before. A lot of

people are taking this personally, and I

think that's why that's activating. And

one of the things that people are doing

is they're trying to figure out who to

listen to. Who do you listen to and who

do you follow and who who is it taking

leadership? Well, the wonderful and

beautiful thing about the political

right is that it looks for leaders. I

don't know what the Democrats do, but on

the right, people look for leaders when

they need it. And it might be a

different leader, it might be a

collection of leader, it might be a

handful, it might be a thousand, but

they look for the leaders. Um, the

reason my traffic on X is through the

roof, you know, my normal 80,000 views

is now a million, you know, 4 million.

Um, that's because a lot of you said,

"Before I act, I'm going to see what

some people I trust say about it first."

And so you checked in with me. That's

why my views are through the roof.

People said, "All right, got to figure

out what people are saying, not just me.

I mean, I'm not in charge of anything,

but you know that they looked at

probably 20 different people who they

knew would have a take that might

influence how they say things. Maybe a

reframe, maybe some inspiration, maybe

something to make you feel better. And

you know that I know that you're going

to be looking at me as, you know, one of

the people, not the only person. And so

I have an automatic responsibility to

lift my game and to fill that role. So

it's like leadership, but it's almost

it's it's sort of not my it's not by

doing it. It's sort of like people put

you in that position, then you go, "Oh,

I I guess I'm in this position. Let me

try to be useful."

You've seen that Elon gets more

involved. You've seen that uh some of

your favorite uh persuaders, I always

mentioned Cernovich for example, have

have dedicated themselves to all right,

we're going to do something about this.

This can't stand. We're we got to fix a

lot and we're we're no longer just

talking. We're past the talking stage. I

do not believe, in case you're worried,

that we're anywhere near something like

a civil war. I I keep hearing people

talk about it. No, we're not. No, we're

not. We're nowhere near it. There, you

know, there's always violence, but no,

no, there's no civil war. It's just not

going to happen. Uh we're we're nowhere

close.

Did you know I I came up with this term

Kirking because it's hard to capture all

the things that are happening, but

there's something about Kirk

and the situation and his life and the

way he he led it that is unleashing

tremendous amount of energy which I'm

hoping is positive. It looks like it it

looks like positive energy. But did you

know that kirking is Scottish for going

to church

and that kirk might actually be derived

from the word church? Did you know that?

Well, now you do.

Um, Wall Street Journal was writing

about the international impact.

Um,

so it galvanized a bunch of right-wing

people in other countries. So other

countries are using him as a rallying

cry. Sorry, I got to put my thumb down.

I can turn that off somehow. There's a

there's a menu option I was told. All

right, I'll go look for that later.

Um,

and apparently a day after Kirk was

killed, uh, there was an event out of

ENA, uh, uh, what the, the European

Parliament erupted in shouts and death

poundouting after Conservative members

were denied a moment of silence to honor

him.

So

th this is global.

Um, I did not see that coming. I saw an

article by John Nolte in uh Breitbart

uh that is so well written. I wish you

know I'd love to read you the whole

piece but I'll just recommend it. I'll

just read a few passages and you'll get

the idea. Um it has to do with when I

when I talk about the great machine

coming online. It's because I have a

system view of things. you know, I don't

look at what the one person is doing or

the one goal or the one objective. Uh I

look at the system. I look at all the

stuff and see if it's moving in one

direction. And uh that feels to me what

uh Nol came up with. So let me just read

a few pieces from him.

He said uh

he said uh

about how people are reacting to it. He

said uh several points. He said we

understood what had changed forever and

why we mobilized. We've prepared for

action. We instinctively knew what uh

that action would be. So this is what

I'm talking about. The machine is

self-organizing and coming online. We

knew we had the power to take that

action. Yes.

Um, we took that action and are doing so

effectively. Yes, we share an

unprecedented resolve. I've never seen

this before. Looks unprecedented to me.

And we're in it for the long term.

Forever if needed. Feels like it.

That this doesn't feel like today's

flavor. That this feels like Charlie's

with us forever. He be he's becoming a

part of us.

And this is more from Noli from Breart.

He goes, "And here's the healthiest part

of what's happening. No one is standing

around helplessly complaining about how

the regime media aren't fair." Right? No

one's crybabying about media bias. No

one's ringing their hands that the media

aren't doing to the left what they

always do to us. Instead, based entirely

on group instinct, we instantly

understood that it was up to us to hold

accountable those who celebrate Charlie

Kirk's murder and those on the organized

left, Democrats, media, academia, etc.,

who put on who put a fatwa on Charlie

Kirk and the rest of us with their 247

Nazi and fascist and white supremacist

talk.

I'm going to go on a little. Now, this

is not the whole piece. I I just picked

out the parts that I thought were best.

He said, "Uh, this has never happened on

our side before." I agree. The corporate

media have lived in our heads forever,

but the martyrdom of Charlie Kirk

finally evicted those demons. God, this

is such good writing. It's just really

good writing. Better still, instead of

empowering the media with our

complaints, instead of giving the media

control of our emotions as we rage

against their countless sins, we've

transformed those sins into something

useful. fuel to make our arguments,

bring in converts, and hold evil

accountable.

All at once, we become impervious to the

media's usual tricks with the dual

revelation that number one, the media

are irredeemable and not worth our time.

And two, through alternative and social

media, we hold the power in our country.

Um there there's an old joke about a kid

who um was born and he he never talked

and he's about 8 years old and he's

never talked and his parents are worried

and everything. And then one day, um,

the one of the parents drops, I don't

know, a potter pan on his foot and the

kid suddenly yells, "Oh, oh, sorry, I've

got a six-year-old nephew in South

Africa who's listening, so I won't use

the words that the joke uses." But he

yells, "Oh,

Gdit, my effing foot."

And the mother says, "What? you can

talk. He goes, "Yeah, I can talk." And

she goes, "Why have you never talked

until now?" And the kid says, "Didn't

have anything to say."

And that that's the joke. And uh it

feels that way on the political right.

They always had the power. They always

had the ability. They just didn't have a

big enough reason that we would all act

in unison. Now we have it. and everybody

sees it, everybody feels it and we are

working as one. Now it doesn't mean it's

perfectly coordinated. You know that the

world's a messy place, but all the

energy is moving in the right direction

and people are looking for guidance to

make sure they're moving in the right

place. They're checking in with people.

They're talking to people. They're

influencing people who need to be

influenced. And more important than any

of that,

I'm sorry, nephew from South Africa.

Can you close your ears for a minute?

All right. Thanks. Thanks.

We don't give a what people think

about us right now.

And that is freedom. Now, it's easier

for me because I'm canceled. And it's

also one of the reasons why I have more

responsibility in this than most of you.

I get to say what you're not allowed to

say. Now, I don't know what it is you'd

want to say, but I guarantee there are

things you want to say that are over the

line, and you don't need that in your

your life. But I'll do it. I'll do it.

In fact, by the end of today, I expect

that I'm going to be in a lot of trouble

because there's a topic coming up that I

don't even know if I can survive. But I

can do it and it probably needs to be

said, so I'm going to say it. So, you

might want to wait around for that.

That's toward the end.

Um,

there is a massive movement toward

cancelling the people who mocked the

death of Charlie Kirk. I did not see

that coming. I did not believe that the

uh that the right would go after them.

And if they did, I didn't think that

anybody would fire them. I thought their

employers would say, "Oh, it's free

speech. We don't do that." But they they

didn't do that. Apparently the political

right and I'd say uh Robbie Starbucks is

a big part of this. Uh they now know

that if they displease the political

right that it is organized enough to

bring down their stock price pretty much

immediately and just leave it there. And

so big companies now say and this is

maybe different

um we'd better take this really

seriously. And are they? Yes. The

scariest thing is how many of these

people getting fired are teachers.

Have you noticed that there's for some

reason there's a weirdly

disproportionate number of teachers who

are celebrating the death of a of an

American who is just a good guy.

And most of them are getting fired,

which is exactly the, you know, the

satisfying thing for us because

um I think I think the political left or

at least some part of it had gotten to

the point where they thought that

killing people on the right was

justified under a variety of reasons

that were up to them subjectively.

And now they're learning if you

with somebody on the right. Sorry

nephew. Um there's going to be something

to pay. There's a price. And we're going

to make sure that you know there's a

price.

So people getting cancelled like crazy.

There's one of my favorite stories was

Office Depot uh denied somebody a

printing of a Charlie Kirk poster. The

poster was not offensive. It was just

celebrating, you know, his power in life

and his maybe his power after death. Uh,

but nothing, you know, nothing

anti-trans or racist, nothing like that.

It was just a pro-ch Charlie Kirk

poster. And the weird looking monster

creature, barely human thing that worked

there said, "Oh, no. We can't do that

because it's propaganda." As if they

wouldn't do it if it were left

propaganda.

Of course they would. So, Office Depot

got the complaints because the person

who got turned down for service took the

video of the interaction and uh they

fired the employee who uh made the

decision and then do you know what

happened next after Office Depot

rapidly, very rapidly to their credit,

I'll give them full credit for this.

rapidly. They fired the person who

looked like maybe the supervisor who was

the one who said, "We can't do this."

And then the conservative said, "Uh,

there was another employee standing next

to that one. You need to fire that one,

too." Because that employee was not

arguing with the decision and that was

enough. And what did Office Depot do?

Did they say, "No, no, this employee was

just standing in the general area. um

wasn't disagreeing, wasn't agreeing, but

really, you know, their boss was the one

making the decision and was standing

right there. So, it's not them. Well,

that's what they could have done, right?

Office Depot could have done that.

They fired the second person right away.

As soon as it soon as it became a

trouble, boom, gone.

So, things are changing. Um,

and uh let's see what else. How many

other people are getting uh

uh apparently Blue Sky, that's the uh

sort of poor wannabe uh X platform, you

know, the competitor to X that all the

Democrats went to cuz they thought, "Oh,

we must get off of X so that we can find

this heavenlike situation on this other

platform." Well, Blue Sky turned into a

cesspool and apparently um there was a

guest search feature, meaning you didn't

have to be a member, but you could

search for things on Blue Sky. And uh

conservatives were using it to search

for people who could get fired for their

uh terrible comments about Charlie Kirk.

And I guess they were finding quite a

few because Blue Sky was just it just

became a SAS school at some point people

say. And uh Blue Sky turned off their

guest feature option.

They they were so concerned about how

many of their uh their followers would

get banned that they had to make it hard

to find them.

Ow.

Um,

and then I saw that uh this is a weird

day for me because uh I think Elon

reposted my content three times just

this morning. And one of them was my

video about the hypnotized Hitlerians

who were in a bubble. And my observation

that the the thing that you have to be

most amazed at is that there were so

many people who were sure that everyone

who mattered agreed with them that they

would go in public and act happy about

the death of another human being, an

American who is just trying to make

things better. And apparently thousands

and thousands of people were in such a

deep hypnotized what I call the

Hitlerian bubble that they see they see

Hitler everywhere and they can't get out

of the bubble. Um you realize how many

there were. There were a lot and um as I

say they are victims because they are

they're clearly brainwashed and they're

under the influence of just horrible

influences.

But that doesn't take away their

responsibility.

So, you know, as I often say, I don't

believe in free will. Sometimes things

just happen.

But you still have to punish people and

reward people as if they had free will

because otherwise the whole system falls

apart. And you could argue you don't

have any choice but to reward them

because you don't have free free will.

But that's another conversation. Uh my

point is there are a whole lot of people

who believed that that was appropriate

behavior because apparently they had

never left their bubble. Okay, try try

to even imagine that.

Try to imagine

that they were so insulated in their

point of view that they thought enough

people would share it that they couldn't

get in trouble for their job because of

something they said.

Now, um

Wow.

All right. Um, the LA mayor, Karen Bass,

um, is, I think, the only mayor who has

given orders, do not fly the LA flags at

half mass. Postmillennial is reporting

on this. Now,

is there any way to interpret that other

than the mayor of LA is a racist? Do you

think there's any chance that if the

White House ordered flags to be a half

mass for a black American,

you think she wouldn't lower the flag?

You all know the answer. Of course she

would. Of course she would. This is

racist. Is pure racist. And uh

you never want to go full racist if

you're a mayor. what a horrible human

being she is in so many ways.

Um, apparently the New York Times

was writing about the current story and

made one of the just horrible

factual errors to uh malign him. And I'm

going to talk about those some more

because a lot of people have this view

that Charlie Kirk had said or did things

that were super racist or sexist or

otherwise objectionable.

And I've been asking online, can

somebody give me an example that's in

the full quote but also the full

context? So I asked that directly. I

want the quote, but I said directly it's

got to be in the context. What do you

think happened?

I'll tell you what people sent me. Not a

single person gave me an example where

the quote was shown and the context

zero. A lot of people tried. They all

played the game. But the only way they

could make him bad was to change what he

said into their own words because his

words were not any of those things. And

if they could find a quote that if you

took it out of context, you know, you

could make it look bad. They did. So

they either removed the context or they

changed the quote into their own

paraphrasing which was, you know, wrong

and that's it. But even the New York

Times was doing that. So the New York

Times had a claim that they just

printed. The Daily Color News Foundation

is reporting about that. So they issued

a correction, but here's what they had

falsely accused him of. They had falsely

accusing them of saying that uh Jewish

communities are quote pushing the exact

kind of hatred against whites that they

blah blah blah. Now, it turns out that

the the real context, which the New York

Times clearly should have known,

was he was talking about somebody else's

quote and he was disagreeing with it.

So, in other words, they took somebody

else's quote that he was publicly

disagreeing with and it's the only

reason he mentioned it to publicly

disagree with it. And then they

attributed it to Charlie and said, "Wow,

look at that terrible guy."

Can you even believe that? Like that.

And that's like your paper of record,

you know, your your most respected

publication. How many people saw the

correction? You know how this game goes,

right? Not many people would see the

correction, but how many people saw the

claim that he had said this this bad

thing? Millions? Maybe millions. Yeah.

So um

then uh one of the questions I asked

which was being also asked by

a uh air ODM.

So before I saw his post today that I'll

tell you about, I was saying to myself,

how do Democrats explain the fact that

Charlie Kirk had a number of uh really

close black friends and colleagues? How

do you explain that? Do do Democrats

think that once you become a Republican,

you can't identify racism or that you're

okay with it even if it's against you?

and that all you have to do is be a

Republican and you'll you'll hang out

with Hiller and you'll be friends with

him. Hey, we're both on the same team.

Ah, maybe you say a few things I don't

like, but h what is that what Democrats

think? That don't they understand that

the people who are closest to him, spent

the most time with him, they don't have

the same opinion that is in, let's say,

the New York Times.

there. I don't believe there is a single

uh black person who knew him well who

has said, "Oh yeah, the things you say

about him are true." Have you seen one?

I haven't. I've not seen anybody who

knew him well. And that's gazillion

people. And a lot of them are black. Not

one of them is saying, "Well, you know,

he did say this thing I didn't like."

None of them. because that thing he

didn't like didn't happen. It's all made

up. And I'll give you some more examples

on that.

So, I asked uh on X, can somebody give

me an example, as I said, that's in

context and a direct quote, something

that you think is horrible. And uh one

gentleman

whose name is Oh, did I not put his name

down? All right. Well, I forgot to take

his name, but it was a anonymous

account, but he gave me a list of uh

let's see, seven, eight, nine, nine

different offenses. So, he really put

some work into it. They're they're all

summarized.

Nine different offenses. How many of the

nine examples were a direct quote and

also in context?

You know the answer. None. Zero for

nine. Let me give you an example. Um, at

some point, oh, Fury Trending X is the

the person who had this Fury Trending X.

So, this is a claim I saw a few people

make. Um, that Charlie said about black

pilots, quote, "I'm sorry. If I see a

black pilot, I'm going to be like, boy,

I hope he's qualified."

Is that in context?

So, they got the quote right, but

remember, you have to get the quote

right, but also in context. Here, the

quote is probably correct, but the

context is wrong. Was Charlie talking

about anybody's genes? No. Had nothing

to do with anybody's genes. Was Charlie

talking about anybody's culture? No. Had

nothing to do with culture. Had nothing

to do with genes. Indeed, it had nothing

to do with being black.

The comment would have worked um because

it was a comment about a system. The

system is DEI and the system the way it

works in the real world, not the way it

would ideally work, but the way it works

in the real world is that the people in

charge are going to make sure they hit

that DEI target to have enough black

pilots. And they will because they're

human beings. The bosses, who might all

be white, by the way, uh are going to

pick people with maybe a little lower

qualifications.

And this would be true if you're talking

about black people, brown people, yellow

people, any kind of people. Doesn't

matter what color they are. So this is

actually a comment which doesn't have

anything to do with race

ex except that uh except that the DEI

focuses on a particular race. So I

explained that do you think they said oh

no of course not. Um,

and then there are a bunch of others

where you that uh I I won't go over them

all, but they're all they're all things

which are obviously in a context when

the quote is right. So So this is the

trick. You should look for this trick.

If the quote is in quotes and the right

quote, the context will always be wrong.

if the context is right

or or let's say it a different way. If

they don't use a direct quote and they

paraphrase what he said, the

paraphrasing is never right. It never

matches what he said. So it turns out

that the left has developed this whole

mythology around Charlie Kirk in which

they imagined he thought and said things

they never thought or said. Now, that's

the only way I can explain why he's got

black friends and black supporters who

know him well and know very much what he

said and what he thinks. There's no

other way to explain that. You know,

there there's not a certain set of black

Americans who don't recognize racism or

don't care about it. That's that's not a

thing.

So, um I was pointing out to a gentleman

named Amir Odum

who's a young black gay uh influencer

online and he went online to let you

know that none of those things were true

from his personal experience. And

apparently Charlie Kirk mentored him.

That's right. he mentored him and uh air

says that he wouldn't be where he is as

now he's he's made a made a go of it.

He's doing some good influencing online

and he says that Charlie was the whole

time mentoring and positive and stayed

in touch with him the whole time. So,

did he know that he was gay? Yeah, he's

he's out. He's open. Did he know he was

black? Yeah, he did.

Did that stop Charlie Charlie from being

his close friend and helping him helping

him in business?

Didn't make any difference at all to

Charlie. Now I I had a little bit of the

same experience in which I spent pretty

good chunk of time over my life

mentoring

uh black people who asked for help and I

would say, "Yeah, I got some advice."

And I often stayed in touch with them.

There are people I've now known for

years who you check in with me once in a

while. It's very common. Did Did I Did I

not give them advice because they were

black? No, it never even occurred to me.

Of course, I'm going to give them advice

if I have the advice and they need it

and it would help. And uh did it did I

enjoy my interactions? Yes, every time.

Yeah, there the these are people who I

consider my friends.

But the left, they they live in a sort

of a bubble hoax world. Anyway, Amir is,

if you want to follow him on X, he's at

Amir X Odum. A M I R X O D O M. And this

is me uh giving Charlie a little boost

because if he wanted air to do well,

I'll I'll honor that. So, I'd like him

to do well, too. So, I will tell you

maybe you should follow him. So, if

you're on X, give him a follow.

All right. So, I believe that uh there's

something coming that's pretty big,

which is there's going to be this

gigantic Charlie Kirk cognitive

dissonance experience for the left. Um

because they don't have a theory

uh to explain what's going on right now.

So the only way they can explain it is

to assume that half the globe are uh

Hitlers themselves or they don't know

what they know or so there's going to be

a whole bunch of trying to understand

the world that they're observing.

I don't feel like I have any confusion

about the world I'm observing. But the

Democrats are going to have a big

problem because they're going to have to

figure out why everybody says this guy

is an angel, but they've been acting

like he's so such a bad person have to

kill him. At some point, this won't

apply to everybody, but at some point

there will be a healthy number of

Democrats who realize that they were on

the side of killing an innocent man.

meaning that they didn't act on it, but

they were they were sort of happy it

happened maybe. And then they're going

to find out that he was nothing like

they thought. And this will be one of

the biggest mistakes of humanity. It's

one thing to kill somebody because

you're going to get something out of it.

This was not that th this is killing

somebody and getting the opposite of

whatever it was you wanted because

you're going to get a lot of that.

You're gonna get a lot and it's going to

be the opposite of whatever you thought

you wanted. But it's because you killed

the wrong guy. I saw somebody say today,

was it uh

King John? He goes by that King John

online. Um I believe it was he who said

today that uh they killed they killed

our son.

Boy, do I feel that. You know what I

mean? Those of you who know my story

know that that hits me hard.

Anyway, that's what they got wrong. If

you kill our stranger, we might be mad,

but we'll probably not change our

schedule over it. If you kill our son,

all of our son,

we're we're going to change our

schedule, right? Tomorrow won't be the

same as today because you killed our

son.

And uh that has more I think that has

more

meaning in you know more than one way if

you know what I mean.

Well, some are saying there's a little

action on this online that uh the Smith

Munt Act, that's where the government

um used to the government used to make

it illegal to intentionally lie on the

news.

So, but then uh I believe it was Obama

who changed the law so that it became

legal to lie to the country and

propagandize and and uh persuade mostly

from our intelligence people. But

basically in general it became no longer

illegal to intentionally

lie about the news if you're a news

entity.

intentionally. It's legal. And so

there's a movement to go back to the way

it was, to make it illegal because we

think we'll be better. And apparently

Trump reposted a video that was calling

for that. So that would suggest if you

know the the Trump way of acting that

he's testing that. He he's putting it

out there with his name on it. Just see

what happens. And if he finds that at

least his base is solidly in favor of

this change, I I think he'll act. Um,

yeah, but it only affects people who are

intentionally lying. So you could still

say, "Oh, I didn't know. I thought the

Russia collusion was real. Oh, I'm so

surprised that it's not real." But if

you found a bunch of documents that you

know very clearly make it look like it

was a ploy, well maybe you got some

legal trouble in that case. And then

some people are suggesting that instead

of calling it the Smith Munt Act, uh

that it would be called the Charlie Kirk

Act.

I don't know if that raises the chance

that it would get implemented, but some

people are thinking that.

All right. Well, on uh international

topics, looks like Trump is looking to

fasttrack the uh immigration here of

white South Africans because they're uh

under the theory that some of them are

being uh put in danger.

So, the AF Post is writing about this.

Um so, Trump administration launched a

program. They're fasttracking these

immigrants because their perceived

danger. Um, let me tell you, that's

going to be a hard one to sell

in a diverse country. I don't know if

there's any

I I hope there's some analoges to this

as in there other cases where other

ethnicities have been targeted for, you

know, fast immigration.

Somebody somebody needs to tell me that.

Um, it would be awkward if the only time

that happened was with white people.

Now, I'm still all for it, by the way.

It doesn't e even if the only time it

happened was for white people, I'm all

for it. All for it.

But it might be a hard sell.

I guess London had one of the biggest

nationalist rallies in modern history.

Just enormous. um Tommy Robinson who I

don't know a great deal about but he

seems to be a uh previously jailed free

speech guy and I think free speech was

the purpose of it. They had a surprise

guest by video which was Elon Musk and

he seems to be completely down with that

movement and it's big and uh they had

and this is uh in London and they held

him in as silence to honor Charlie Kirk.

Now,

it's hard for me to imagine that that

there's anything that would happen in

another country that the United States

would have an enormous um event and have

a minute of silence for that person from

another country. So, this is big and I

don't know that we can even size it yet

because we don't know if it's still

growing. We don't know how big it is and

we don't know how how fast it's growing

and we don't know where it's growing.

It's big. So, I wouldn't underestimate

it, overestimate it. I always get those

two confused.

Anyway, all right. Here's where uh um

I'll get myself assassinated. The

Washington Exam Examiner says

uh that the Gaza conflict has driven

some uh Apacbacked Democrats

to stop taking money from uh Apac. So

Apac is the uh totally legal, totally

transparent uh American entity that

supports Israel and uh they work really

hard with Congress. you know, they

pretty much every Congress person has

what they call their Apac person and

almost all of them get money from um

from Apac. So, uh some of them are mad

about the way Ga Gaza is going, so

they're just saying we're not taking any

more of your money. Um not many, just

three House Democrats so far, but that's

notable. And uh here's my take. I don't

trust any politician who takes money

from Apac. So, let me let me say that as

clearly as I possibly can. When it comes

to only about things about Israel or

let's say the Middle East, uh I wouldn't

distrust them necessarily on any other

topic. But if you're taking money from

Apac, I don't believe anything you say

and I'm not going to change that opinion

because that's how money works. The

whole point of money is that it

influences people. They wouldn't be

giving money if they didn't think it

worked. Do you think they'd be wasting

all that money? Hey, here's some money.

What do I need to do? Nah, nothing. Will

you ever ask me for a favor? Oh, God,

no. It's just free money. No. They give

them money so that they can influence

them. So, if you want my trust on any

decision that has to do with the Middle

East, if you're taking money from Apac,

shut the up. I don't want to hear

anything you have to say because I would

consider you completely untrustworthy

and not necessarily

on America's team for just those

decisions.

Is that clear enough? All right. Now, by

the way, Apex's completely legal as long

as it's legal. Um I I will also observe

at the same time I say that I will never

trust anybody who takes Apac money on on

an Israel question. Um, at the same

time, I can observe that Israel is

really good at this. They're really good

at it. And you, you know, I can hold

both thoughts at the same time, right?

That their skill level for supporting

their own national best interest. Really

good. Really good. Now, I'm going to

double down.

You might have seen some video of Marco

Rubio and Mike Huckabe uh with Netanyahu

and they were wearing the little little

beanie caps and they were you know

touching the whailing wall with

reverence. I hate that. Now I know

you're going to disagree and you're

going to say that you know you're

religious so it's just a religious

thing. um the Judeo-Christian crossover

is so strong that even though it's you

know more of a Jewish thing that it's

still enough of a Christian thing

that as long as it's you know a sincere

religious if it's a sincere religious um

action then it's laudable you know you

you would actually say I like that I I

like that that our leaders are, you

know, religious and taking that stuff

seriously. And I also like that the US

is uh respecting Israel in that way. All

right, here's my problem. If you look at

this from a persuasion perspective, it

is a plus.

A+. If you can get somebody to do that

on camera, put on the little the little

Jewish hat and touch the wall and and

act like it's magic, you know, as

religion works. Um, you have turned

somebody into your

because that is such powerful persuasion

that you will not know it, but you will

be bonded to the Israel experience in a

way that is not illegal. It's, you know,

it's not even immoral or unethical. It's

perfectly allowed, but it's really

powerful. I object not because it's

immoral, unethical,

none of those reasons. It's not illegal,

nothing like that. It just works too

well. And uh when I see Marco Rubio go

over there and basically look like

Netanyahu's

I don't say to myself, "Oh, no. This is

just ceremonial." and it has nothing to

do with the work, you know, he's he's

just showing respect. No, I I look at a

guy who's been hypnotized essentially.

So, to allow yourself to go into that

situation,

um it's just a terrible look. Terrible

look. But from Israel's point of view,

brilliant. It's it's good for their

self-interest. It's good for bonding

with the United States. It's genius

really. I mean, it's it's just really

strong persuasion. A+. But for us, I

would say if you're going to do it,

don't do it on camera.

I That's probably impossible. But I

would have no problem if they did it

privately. But you put that on camera

and it just looks like our people bowing

to Netanyahu. Not cool. Absolutely not

cool with me. All right. But all legal,

all ethical, all moral, you know, not

none of this standard complaints.

It's just better for Israel than it is

for us. So, from an American

self-interest perspective, I hate it.

And I would encourage nobody to ever do

that again.

All right. Um, except privately.

Privately is fine. You know, if it's

something you wanted to do because it

is, I mean, it's a historical site. I

can imagine a lot of people wanting to

experience that, just don't put it on

camera.

All right. Russia's getting provocative

and doing a bunch of war games near the

border of the NATO countries. They're

testing drones and they're they might be

testing some defenses. And um I don't

know if that's preparation for something

to come or they're just um rattling

their swords for for effect. We'll see.

Um, apparently meanwhile Ukraine has

continued to attack Russia's energy

facilities. So they uh what did they do?

They they just torched uh the Russian

Kirishi refinery and they took out a

chemical plant a thousand miles inside

Russia and they got an oil supply line.

So, it does seem that Ukraine is going

hard at taking out the energy

infrastructure in Russia. And it seems

to me that the people trying to take

something out usually have a big

advantage over the people trying to

protect them, especially since they're

spread out all over the place and and

the drone weapons are hard to stop in

the first place. Um, unless you, you

know, you had serious, you would need

national defense basically everywhere.

So, that would be hard to stop.

Um, so we'll see what happens there.

Meanwhile, the uh Sinaloa cartel

worldwide operations news nation is uh

acting like the US is

taking a big step toward dismantling the

entire Sinaloa cartel. Now I told you

that there was this major uh seven

foreign region operation in which uh 617

Sinaloa cartel got arrested in various

countries but apparently there are tens

of thousands of them in 40 countries

617 people

not even a drop in the bucket. Um but

and then there's some reporting by news

nation that uh the US is working with

Mexico to do this. I don't believe that.

Do you believe that Mexico is

cooperating against the cartels?

The only way it makes sense is if

they're the government is in the pocket

of a different cartel and the only thing

they're doing is getting rid of the

competition for the one that's their

cartel. That's the only way I can

understand what's happening. Otherwise,

I would assume Mexico is not helping at

all, and we're just pretending they are.

Um, and then, uh, apparently a bunch of

stealth jets have been delivered now to

Puerto Rico. Uh, meaning that there are

jets, but they're based in Puerto Rico.

And that would be getting ready to put

some pressure on Venezuela in ways that

we don't quite know. But, uh, that's a

lot of firepower for that part of the

world. So, I presume that's partly to

scare Venezuela and partly because

there's good chance they're going to use

them

and they're really good ones. Well,

Conor McGregor is, as you know, running

for president or wants to run for

president in Ireland. I don't think

he'll actually get to be on the ballot

because they've got a weird system that

might keep him off. Um, but he was

saying some good things about uh Elon

Musk. Um, and he said, "Elon is an

actual superhero for real. He's a great

man. He gave me a lot of his time,

pledged his support. He even offered

financial support, but I said, "I'm not

after that." Now, that's the sort of

thing that if somebody said, "He offered

financial support, but I turned it

down." You wouldn't necessarily believe

that, would you?

But Elon responded on X and confirmed

that he had offered to help fund his

campaign, but he got turned down because

he said, "I don't need that." Well, he

doesn't need it yet cuz he's not on the

ballot.

Maybe that will change. I don't know.

Meanwhile, somebody called Penske Media.

So, I guess they own some uh um

magazine- like content of some kind. I

don't know what they own, but they're

suing Google over the AI summaries. You

might know if you do a Google search

that the first thing that comes up now

is Google's own AI that that gives you a

summary, but it doesn't necessarily give

you a link and the summary is usually

all you need. So if you had created some

content, you know, let's say let's say

you uh you know you were n's uh story on

Breitbart, you write that thing and then

somebody says, "Oh, I want to go look at

that story because you know I saw it

somewhere but I didn't read it so I want

to go look for it." If they Googled it,

it would come up with a summary and they

might say, "My example is bad, but

you'll get the idea." They might say,

"Oh, the summary is all I needed." and

then they'll never go to the content,

which means that the people who spent

all the money and had the business model

to create content would in effect be

giving it away for free to Google and it

would just become Google's content

because Google would take it, turn it

into AI content and then say, "Well, now

it's our content and they're being sued

for that." So, that will be interesting.

Do you remember I keep complaining about

uh all the so-called robots that are

coming and how every time you see a

demonstration or a claim about robots,

oh the robots are coming, that the robot

is only do ever doing one thing because

only robots can only do one thing at a

time. You know, they they can't be

general robots. Nobody knows how to do

that. Well, here we go. Uh yet another

video of a laundry folding robot and the

the post said, "Oh, here it comes. You

know, the age of robots is is here

because we've got this robot that can

fold laundry." Obviously, since that's

one of the hardest things, it's

suggesting that they can do all kinds of

things if they can fold laundry.

But I'll remind you that the first time

the first time I saw a video about a

robot folding laundry and it was it was

folding laundry was 30 years ago

and just about once every year or two

for 30 years. Is this different? Do you

think that after 30 years of fake robots

that really couldn't, you know, you

can't commercialize them to fold your

laundry

for whatever reason? Do you think it's

real now?

I don't think you can have a robot that

folds your laundry because why would you

buy one that only does one thing? You

would wait until there's a general

purpose robot that can do that and make

your coffee as well. But we're in my

opinion nowhere near a general purpose

robot in my opinion because if we were

you would already see them. You you

would see at least the first draft and

the only things you see still are one

robot doing one thing.

Don't get excited about that.

Well, my terrible piece of crap state

called California uh has advanced a

bill. Newsome hasn't signed it, but

they've advanced a bill to give college

admission priority to descendants of

slaves.

Um according to just the news,

um let let me say that again. They want

to give priority to descendants of

slaves.

Um, are you actually telling me that

they're not already doing that? They've

been doing that for 30. All right,

nephew. Nephew, you got to you're going

to have to put on the ear muffs. My

nephew in uh South Africa. Um,

no, they've been doing this for 30

years. They've been favoring uh

black applicants and you know and gay

applicants and women and you know all

the protected classes.

I don't even know if this would be new.

Like was there somebody who was going in

and they were black and then somebody

said, "Oh, you're black. Okay, okay,

that's good. But are you a descendant of

slaves?"

Well, I don't know. I'm black, but I'm I

don't know if I'm a descendant of

slaves. Oh, well, I can't give you any

special admissions because you're you're

only black and American

and you can't move your descendant of

slaves, so you don't go to the front of

the line.

But since you don't go to the front of

the line, we'll put you second.

We're still putting the white guys last.

I mean, you're still way ahead of them,

but you know, we'd give you a little

extra bump if you were descended from

slavery. All right. It's stupid. It's

insulting. It's racist. you.

you, California, for even trying that.

By the way, I should tell you that some

years ago, I blogged that the way to do

reparations would be with some

preferential funding

for uh black Americans who wanted to you

spend one generation catching up

educationally.

And I thought, okay, if you if you're

going to do it at all, do it in a way

that really fundamentally makes a

difference. Don't just give people a

bunch of money that they don't know how

to spend because poor people don't know

how to handle money. If you s give a

poor person, I don't know, $100,000 for

reparations, how's that going to work

out? I mean, they would like it, but

it's not likely that they're going to

turn it into a small business or

something like that. But if you said,

"Here's the deal. we do have this

systemic racism and uh um everybody else

seems to have better education on on

average. So if we can spend one

generation then we'll put a time limit

on it. We'll say all right for this

generation your ability to get into

college and have it paid for by the by

the government would be almost complete.

You would not have to worry about

getting into college at all if you were

black. we'll just take care of that for

one generation and then everybody's

closer to even after that one

generation. You say, "All right, are we

good now?"

Because that would work for me, but but

uh it's gone too far.

There there are too many uh there are

too many ways that white people are just

discriminated against in employment in

the United States for me to be okay with

any more of it.

So, I'm not okay with it. All right.

Well, we'll see if I get assassinated

today for my opinions.

Um, I know I should be more afraid,

but I'm not.

Um,

but I'm not.

And I would hope that you are not

either. Those of you who should be

afraid, if you're a bigger account,

etc., be careful. you know, the the Tim

Pools of the world. Um, be careful.

Yeah, I don't think I'm in that risk

level, but uh and plus I I never go out

in public. I don't I don't do public

events. I think I told you that I

stopped doing public events uh early in

the Trump experience because I

considered it too dangerous. So, ju just

think about this. I live in a country

where it's not safe to go in public

because of my opinions. And my opinions

are that I support somebody that the

majority of voters supported, the

majority. And it's still not safe to go

and I wouldn't go to Berkeley for sure.

No, I mean I wouldn't be worried about I

wouldn't be worried about an airport or

something, but I I definitely would not

go somewhere where there's publicity and

a set location and a set time because

that's what gives the the planners

enough time to do something bad. So, I

just won't do that and I haven't done

that for years now.

All right, everybody. That's all I got

for you. I'm going to say a few words

privately to the local subscribers. I

will tell you um most of you know that I

continued doing the Dilbert comic even

after it got cancelled. Never missed a

day. It it was always continuously

published but I put it behind a payw

wall. So it's on the locals platform and

also on X you can subscribe. But the

reason I'm telling you is because uh

don't be drinking coffee when you finish

today's Dilbert comic.

It it might be the funniest thing I've

ever written. So, don't be drinking

coffee. And of course, it's a joke I

could not have done if I had not been

cancelled. You know, I I can take a

little extra chances, and I definitely

couldn't have done that joke in the

family newspaper.

All right. Um,

the rest of you, thanks for joining. I

will see you tomorrow, I hope. Same

time, same place. and locals. I'll be

private with you in 30 seconds.