Episode 2965 CWSA 09/21/25

Come on in.

Come on in, everybody.

If you're attending the Charlie Kirk Memorial right now and you said to yourself, I think I need something to do for the next few hours until it begins.

Well, here I am.

I'm here for you.

We're all here for you.

So, if you're waiting in line in uh the State Farm Stadium in Glendale, this show is for you.

All right, let me get my comments working so that we have a complete situation here.

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

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

But if you'd like to take a chance on elevating your experience this morning to levels that no one can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains.

Well, to do that, all you need is a cuper, a mug or a glass of tankered shells or sty 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.

It's called a simultaneous sip.

And it happens.

That's right.

It happens right now.

Go.

H well as you know as I mentioned 100,000 people are expected to attend the Charlie Kirk Memorial at the State Farm Stadium in Glendale.

It begins at 11:00 a.m.

the local time in in u in uh Arizona.

So correct connect correct your for your local time.

But people were showing up as early as 3:00 and 4:00 in the morning and walking long distances because the parking lots weren't even opened at the venue yet.

And uh the spirits are very high.

I mean somber of course, but something's happening.

I would like to read to you um where is it?

Uh maybe I won't read to you that.

All right.

Well, uh so uh one of my friends is there and gave me a little report to what's happening and I asked her uh you know, are you there in person?

Cuz that's not very close.

And apparently she got inspired to go all the way there.

Um and is feeling a renewal of faith.

and uh wanted to be part of this thing.

Apparently, there are also two plane loads full of the White House people and I guess Trump's going to speak.

And whatever you thought about this phenomenon, can we call it a phenomenon?

Uh the tragedy seems to have um awakened something.

There there's definitely a religious renewal that's happening right now and it's because of Charlie Kirk.

There's no doubt about it.

And uh so I'm expecting that this memorial besides being tearful and sad um will be one of the more impactful things that happens maybe all year.

Um I mean aside from the shooting itself.

And uh I'm here for you people if you're uh waiting for hours and you need something to do.

Well, maybe that's one thing we can do for you.

Give you uh maybe maybe an hour of the news without any commercial breaks depending on what you're watching it on.

But uh best wishes to all of you people who are experiencing a probably almost every you everyone is feeling some kind of religious revival.

And if you were the Democrats and you were watching this um forget about the the politics of it there there's something that's beyond politics now.

We we've entered some new domain.

But if you're a Democrat, whatever this power is that's been unlocked, um I don't know where it goes, but it looks like a powerful positive force and it may not be what you had in mind if you're Democrats.

So, um if you're a Democrat, today would be a day to just stay quiet.

That would be my advice.

Um I'm not going to say something rude like, "Yo, hey, you guys just shut up." Just today, the best thing you can do if you're a Democrat, unless you're being supportive and saying something positive, the best thing you can do today, the smartest thing you can do, take the day off.

This this is not your day.

So, um there will be magic happening today.

Uh maybe literally.

Well, there is a story related to the uh Charlie Kirk uh murder that I don't know what to say about this.

There there's a sort of a magic bullet story.

Have you heard that yet?

So, um Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew Kulvet says this um in a post X.

I want to address some of the discussion about the lack of an exit wound with Charlie.

Wait, what?

there's a lack of an exit wound.

Now, you know, there's some people who say that the thing uh the wound that we saw was the exit wound, but that would in assume that there's an entry wound on the other side.

And apparently the surgeon who worked on him says that's not the case.

What?

So, here's what we know.

All right.

It's from uh Andrew Kulit.

Um, I'm usually not interested in delving into most of this kind of online chatter talking about the exit wound.

And I apologize this is somewhat graphic.

But in this case, the fact that there wasn't an exit wound is probably another miracle and I want people to know I just spoke with a surgeon who worked on Charlie in the hospital.

He said the bullet quote absolutely should have gone through which is very normal for a high-powered rifle, high-owered, high velocity round.

I've seen uh wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything.

This would have taken uh taken a moose or two down and elk, etc.

But it didn't go through Charlie's body.

Charlie's body stopped it.

His neck.

his neck stop the bullet from passing through it.

And uh and Andrew goes on and goes, "I I mentioned to his doctor that there were dozens of staff, students, and special guests standing directly behind Charlie on the other side of the tent." And he replied, quote, "It was an absolute miracle that someone else didn't get killed.

His bone was so healthy and the density was so impressive that he's like the man of steel.

It should have just gone through and through.

It likely would have killed those standing behind him, too.

Uh, in the end, the coroner did find the bullet just beneath the skin.

So, even in death, Charlie managed to save the lives of those around him.

Well, those of you who are familiar with my content are expecting me to debunk that and say that's not how bullets act.

They don't sometimes go through soft tissue and bone and sometimes not.

Um, but today is uh the Charlie Kirk Memorial.

Today, miracles are allowed.

So, I'm going to accept that one.

Um, Trump says the gas prices are heading below $2 a gallon.

It might be some of the best prices we've seen in a long, long time.

Fox News is reporting that.

I don't know if it's going to get that low.

It's not going to get that low in California because we have a we have a defective estate.

Um, no, no, no.

No ricochet, no second shooter, just a miracle today.

That today is just a miracle.

That's that's the beginning and the end of the conversation.

But gas prices going down.

So Trump was at some event speaking yesterday and he he uh asked Dr.

Oz while he while the president was speaking he uh sort of tongue and cheek but maybe not asked Dr.

Oz uh if Trump derangement syndrome should be added to the official mental disorders and Trump said it's a mental disorder and they've got it in levels not seen before.

Uh Dr.

Oz why don't we list that on Wednesday?

I know I guess something's happening on Wednesday.

Um, now I thought that TDS, Trump derangement syndrome, was actually already in the literature as a genuine um, mental health issue.

Am I wrong about that?

I mean, I don't think it's in the most official DSM, whatever six or whatever it is.

I don't think it's there yet, but I'm pretty sure that the lit literature recognizes it as a major problem in mental health.

It's not nothing.

So, um even though I'm pretty sure the president was being humorous and it worked, um I do believe that it needs to be added to the the literature.

There's not the slightest chance that this isn't a genuine mental health gigantic problem.

One of the biggest.

I mean, it's probably the single most damaging mental health problem in the country.

I'll bet if you added up the next three biggest, they probably wouldn't be this big.

if you really were honest about the the size of the uh the problem.

Yeah.

I mean, it's broken up families, it's people losing jobs, people yelling at strangers.

We don't have any mental problem, mental health problem that has one name that's anywhere near that big.

Not nowhere near.

I mean, it's it's in a class by itself.

It's it's affecting entire populations at the same time.

And almost certainly it caused at least one murder, Charlie Kirk.

There there's no way that that happens without Trump derangement syndrome.

There's no way that happens.

Anyway, you know, I've been yammering off and on about how the only way that uh the affordability thing will be fixed will be finding cheaper ways to live that are still really good ways to live.

you know, then you're not giving up much.

And apparently the young are um according to News Nation, there's now a minor trend, maybe it'll get bigger, of co- buying a home.

So people who are not related or in a relationship, they will say, "Do you want to buy a home?

I want to buy a home." And then they'll go in together and split the cost.

So they they both get half a home, basically.

And then they they try to figure out some agreement for living there.

Now, as you might imagine, the part about living with a stranger and, you know, having some stranger have that much control over your real estate and you over them.

It's not going to be easy, but it does make me wonder if this will be a growing trend.

I think it will because the alternatives are worse.

Uh, but my take is that you need to design the house from the ground up to be a more than one person house.

you know, there's probably ways to do that.

You definitely don't want to be waiting for the bathroom with the, you know, while the person who helped you buy the house is in there.

Um, and apparently a survey says 70% of Gen Z would be willing to do this.

So, if 70% would be willing to share a home purchase, right there, the cost of housing went down 50%.

you know, at least within the home ownership group.

Well, allegedly the news says that the tick tock purchase deal is done and that China agreed and we agreed and maybe there's some paperwork to sign, but basically it's all agreed and uh the details were told and this is still fog of war because the details that I heard even yesterday are already wrong.

So, who knows if these are right, but uh it would be majority American-owned uh when it was purchased.

Uh Oracle would be sort of the tech company in charge of privacy.

So, it'd be an American company in charge of that.

And, uh there'd be, you know, some other big investors.

So, it's not just Oracle here.

and the algorithm um would not be maintained by China, which was the first thing we heard.

The first thing we heard is that China was going to own the algorithm and just sort of feed it to the American company.

There's no way that worked.

I mean, that was sort of defeating the the whole point.

Um, but according to Caroline Levit, the algorithm will now be controlled by Americans, the American owners.

Do you believe this is going to get signed?

There's something there's a dog not barking in this story.

Isn't there something really, really missing?

Well, I'll tell you.

China reportedly and somewhat obviously was using the Tik Tok thing as leverage for, you know, other things that it wants out of the United States.

So, the one thing you could know for sure is that there's no way in heck that uh that China would ever allow the sale of their big, you know, I mean, incredibly successful asset to the US.

There's no way they do that unless unless they got something in return that was pretty big.

Have you heard any news about anything they're getting in return?

Do you believe that China went from well there's no way you're going to take the jewel of our online uh you know assets unless you give us something pretty pretty good.

It might be tariffs.

It might be something else, but you better give us something pretty good.

And then we did hear that the US was holding back some uh defense um allocations for Taiwan and that it might be connected, but that was supposed to be temporary, you know, just while we're talking to him.

Is it temporary?

Don't you feel that there's no way this deal could have been done unless we promised them something right?

There's no way.

I don't think so.

Now, do you think that maybe there's a secret deal, maybe a secret deal where they're going to maybe not help Russia as much?

I don't think so.

I I don't think Tik Tok would be worth that.

So, I'm uh concerned that we don't know exactly what the deal was for that, but maybe we'll never find out.

You might remember that not too long ago, Elon Musk was made the following observation about Microsoft's business.

He said in principle given that software companies like Microsoft do not themselves manufacture any physical hardware it should be possible to simulate them entirely with AI.

He wants to simulate entirely the entire Microsoft um product line.

I do believe that we may we might approach the place.

We're not there yet, but I could easily imagine we'd reach a a place where replacing all of Microsoft is anybody with AI sitting in a room and saying, um, can you pretend to be every product that Microsoft makes?

And then if I need to put something on a spreadsheet or on a word processing, just just give me a user interface that essentially mocks mocks Microsoft and and just act like you're Microsoft and I'll I'll just use you AI.

I feel like that it's within the realm of maybe.

So, there's some possibility that the entire Microsoft corporation could turn into one super prompt.

Hey, give me a suite of products exactly like Microsoft maybe.

I don't know.

But we do know that Elon also kicked off an AI project in which he is trying to literally and directly knock off the Microsoft products with AI versions.

Do you think that Elon Musk and whoever he hires will have the capability to knock off Microsoft?

Well, the answer is maybe.

pretty good chance because I don't see how Microsoft can last in the long run, not with their, you know, current suite of products.

The only way Microsoft lasts is as a different company.

Now, the different company would also be AI.

So, they might be replacing their own their own products with AI before somebody else does it or something.

That's possible.

But uh yeah, I guess Microsoft uh the CEO is uh staying up late at night because he's already seen that there's no way that the Microsoft model lasts forever.

And we're definitely close enough to the end of it that you can kind of sense it coming and it'll happen fast when it happens.

All right.

Um, President Trump also announced, if you believe this, that on Monday there's going to be a bombshell news release about the true cause of autism.

And he called it one of the most important things that they'll ever do.

Do you believe that's a possible thing?

Do you believe that our government is going to tell us the real cause of autism and that they didn't know before?

Nobody knew before and they just found out this week or last few weeks.

Um I don't know if anybody's going to believe it.

Would you knowing as you do that all data is fake?

because it is.

Why would you believe whatever they say about autism?

Why would you believe what anybody says about anything if it if it's based on data?

It's never there just isn't any data that's accurate.

It's just whoever made up the data decided to show you this data instead of that data.

All right.

Well, we'll see.

What do you think it is?

Do you think it's going to be vaccinations or Tylenol for pregnant people or food?

My my guess is that they're going to say there are three or four things that are very connected and especially if they all happened at the same time, you know, you might have an extra risk.

I don't know.

What I don't expect is for them to say, "We got solid data.

Nobody's going to doubt it once they see it themselves, and here's the cause." I don't think that's going to happen.

Do you in the real messy world to do things like that happen?

Might be food, but I kind of doubt it because little babies are getting it.

And the little babies are are they don't babies all eat the same food?

Don't they just eat baby food?

So although I think our food is not especially safe and could be way way better, I'm going to say that probably won't be the thing that they identify.

Might it's not it's not a zero chance, but I don't know.

I think I would go with more likely pharma, you know, some kind of pharmaceutical.

More likely that, but I don't know.

Stephen A.

Smith uh decided that Kamla Harris has ended her political career with her new book.

Uh and he says it was the last straw.

He says, "I think we've seen the last of her," meaning politically.

and uh he he says that based on the excerpts of the book, it's too little too late.

Now, I think what he's talking about specifically is that she admits she knew that Joe was not all there, but she didn't do anything about it.

And Stephen A.

Smith says that's the end of your career.

If you admit that you could see it and you also admit that you decided not to make waves by doing something about it, then you were never the real vice president, were you?

Let me say it again.

If Kla Harris knew that Joe had, you know, the cognitive problems that he did, if she knew and decided not to act on it for loyalty or whatever other reasons, she wasn't really the vice president, right?

Is there a more important job than being the one who identifies that the vice president's, you know, time has reached an end and he can't handle his job?

probably nothing more important than that, right?

Except filling in if he were to pass away.

So, I get why there was tremendous pressure on her to just ride it out.

Yeah, we all understand.

There's no mystery there.

But if your only job is to be able to overcome exactly that problem, hey, people might not like it if you remove the president whose brain is dead.

Well, you kind of got to do it anyway.

Isn't that the job?

The job is to do it anyway.

The job is not to do it if it's easy.

The job is the job of vice president is not to, you know, act if it's convenient.

There's nothing like that in the job description.

By its nature, the reason we go through so much trouble to pick the right vice presidential candidate is that we look at them and we say, "That person could remove a president if they had to." Well, she wasn't that person.

Apparently, she couldn't do it.

So, I don't know.

It's It's hard to call an end to anybody's political career, but I'm going to agree with Stephen A.

Smith.

I don't see how she could hold a major office ever again.

Uh, but I also think she may have decided that she was done with politics.

I feel like she was already done.

Well, are you up to date with the latest uh drama involving uh Tom Holman?

You know, head of is it ICE?

Is that his official job?

Head of ICE.

Um but he apparently during the Biden administration when Tom Holman was not in the government but he was doing consulting, private consulting for companies in the border security business I guess and he was the subject of an FBI sting operation in which they gave him $50,000 pretending to be some kind of uh vendors for things that he would you know would be in his domain.

and uh he took the $50,000 reportedly.

I don't know that any of this is really confirmed, but reportedly he took the $50,000 and agreed to help the contractors win contracts uh in the second Trump administration if Trump won.

Now remember, this is before Trump won.

So there's no President Trump at the moment and there's no borders are Yeah, if that's what you call them.

Um, but uh we're just learning about this from an MSNBC uh investigation, but we're also told that the Biden administration um didn't find any crimes and they just shut it down.

The Biden administration didn't find any crimes e even though they tried to set them up.

They tried to create a crime where there wasn't one by, you know, pretending to vi to bribe him.

Uh but it turns out that if you're a consultant and you offer to help somebody do something that is normal legal business and you're a consultant who who advises on that exact normal legal business, well, maybe taking money to do the thing you say is exactly what you're doing, maybe it's not illegal.

Now, so that mean that would mean that, you know, he wasn't using his influence to, you know, give somebody a job who was incapable.

So, I don't know exactly the details, but here's my question.

If it's true that the FBI came up with the $50,000 and paid it to him, but that there was no real work involved, it was only they were setting him up, they he thought there was work involved, but there wasn't.

Does he get to keep the 50,000?

So, I'm trying to figure out if the Biden administration figured out a way to give Tom Holman a $50,000 bonus before he started the job.

And so far, that's what it looks like.

It looks like the FBI just found a way to pay him $50,000 and he had no no legal risk whatsoever.

I just hope that's true.

I don't know if that's true.

I do believe that if they gave it to him, I feel like he could keep it, right?

Like there it's not like there's uh if he doesn't get charged with anything, it's not like they can take the money back, can they?

How does that work?

If it's part of a sting operation, do you get to keep it if they don't sting you?

I hope so.

Anyway, CNN's uh Abby Phillip was saying that uh she was trying to get her panel on CNN to agree, the liberal panel, mostly liberal, uh to admit that the Democrats uh censored and cancelled too much.

and she thought the only way forward for Democrats is to say directly to the public, we cancelled and uh censored too much and that that was on us.

That's a mistake and now we're going to move on.

What do you think?

Do you think Abby is right that if the Democrats simply admit that they had censored and cancelled too many people and they're very sorry about it and they realize how bad it was that that's what would allow them to get past it and then have a successful Democrat party?

I don't think so.

I don't think so.

Do you think Do you think I would accept an apology?

I got cancelled.

Do you think I would accept an apology?

No.

No, I'm not going to accept an apology.

Not at all.

Not even a little bit.

Not an option.

Apology is not requested, not appreciated, not expected.

And just stay stay away from me with your apologies because it won't help me a bit.

But it does show that they're desperately flailing around trying to find something that would make them not look so bad.

All right.

Um, apparently the New York Post did a little analysis and found that Jimmy Kilmel hosted only one right leaning guest in the past three years and it came with some kind of a condition.

I don't know who that was.

um but only one and apparently he uh had 13 leftle leaning guests this year.

That's not really very many, is it?

You know, since the beginning of the year, 13.

So, it's not even that there was a a ton of political people in general.

I mean, most of it's entertainment.

Um but here's what else we found.

Uh let's see that uh uh Kibble's jokes and gags, this is from the New York Post, uh his jokes and gags targeted conservatives 88% of the time in 2023.

So in 2023, 88% of the jabs were at conservatives.

Um and it went to 97% this year.

So 97% of all of his jabs were in one direction.

Now keep in mind that the FCC allows the airwaves to be used by ABC, CBS, NBC only only to the extent that they're a, you know, public good.

You know, they're they're a benefit to the public.

But also on top of that, there's a specific requirement that they can't be politically one-sided.

that if they have a, you know, if they have a Democrat on, they probably ought to have a Republican on and vice versa.

So, they're supposed to make some attempt to balance out the time and the and the politics.

Does it look like they did that?

Does it look like Jimmy Kimmel's uh staff and and people, does it look like they were attempting to have anything like a balance that is required for them to fulfill their license?

Well, no.

No.

It would appear that they grossly violated the FCC um regulations.

Now, as I've said before, uh the FCC's had a very longstanding, very clear standard that you can't just be on one side if you have one of their public airwaves.

You other people can.

If you're a cable, if you're Fox News, you could just be biased all day long.

There's nothing illegal, immoral.

I mean, it may be suboptimal, but it's not immoral.

Uh, but if you got to one of those public airwaves, you better you better get of equal time.

And they clearly didn't.

Um, I saw most of you know who Gavin Mc.

Kinnus is.

Uh he he was one of the many people who got cancelled during the CA great cancellations, but uh apparently he was um he knew Jimmy Kimmel pretty well.

And he believes that Jimmy Kimmel's second wife is the ultra woke person who ruined him.

I guess Jimmy Kimmel was a ordinary an ordinary boy and he got turned into some kind of a weird monster by his second wife.

That's Gavin's take on it.

I'm paraphrasing, of course.

Um, and uh, I think he compared it to the Howard Stern situation where Howard was a, you know, guy's guy and then he gets married the second time and suddenly he's the wokest guy around and everything's different.

So, one of the things that does does not match well with humor, if that's your job, if your job is a professional humorist or a professional kind of sher.

Um, one thing that doesn't match with that at all is a wife because a spouse is quite reasonably, you know, there's nothing wrong with this.

the spouse is going to be thinking about the the family unit as the thing that needs to be protected.

The crazy performer person, you know, and I'm in that category.

Um, we're thinking about how to make the biggest impact, you know, what gets the biggest audience, you know, how do I get a special on Netflix or whatever I'm trying to do.

So, it's very natural that the spouse would be in a more, you know, you don't want to do that.

You better you better take the popular view on this one, you know.

So, it's very incompatible.

The the best and funniest Well, let's take Bill Burr.

Does Bill Burr do I even need to finish that?

If any of you watch Bilbur, do you think that his wife is an influence on, you know, what he can and cannot say?

I don't know, but it sure looks like it.

And it looks like it degrades his uh his effectiveness.

The the funniest comedians, I think, are single people, you or somebody who's got a rare kind of a spouse who says some some version of, you know, go for it.

But that's probably not the most common instinct.

And by the way, here I am not criticizing wives whatsoever.

If a wife is protecting her husband and protecting the family, you know, and and maybe at the cost of that extra million dollars, but you're already doing fine, is the wife wrong?

I would say no.

I would say that would be a perfectly, you know, correct and moral and ethical legal, you know, thing to do to try to try to make sure the family stays, you know, as strong as it could be.

But it does hurt the humor.

Um, I also heard from uh Gavin Mc.

Kinnus that uh Jimmy Kimmel is a very good cartoonist.

Did you know that he he did some cartoons for I guess Vice back in the day?

What are the odds of that?

Now I have to I have to completely, you know, reshape my my opinion.

Um, I don't know if I've ever told you this before, but on top of a general professional courtesy that I feel toward Jimmy Kimmel and anybody in that business, because I'm sort of tangentially in the the the public humor business, um, if he's actually a skilled cartoonist who has actually been paid for his work, and apparently he has been, then I have to default to my how do I treat other cartoonists And I generally go easy on other cartoonists.

So I'm often asked, "Hey, do you think the guy who does Ziggy uh you has a good cartoon?" Uh which of course I don't because it was terrible.

But you know, I would try not to, depending on the cartoonist, I'd usually try to be kind to them.

So, I'll be more kind and and I are you guys watching how many people who are credible are kind of in favor of more the you know leaning toward the free speech angle on this and making sure that uh people like Kimmel don't lose their jobs over some kind of bad day of speaking you know a bad day.

Um, so now, as I mentioned, you know, Ted Cruz thinks there's a free speech issue here.

Uh, uh, Ben, um, Shapiro does.

And if if you know anything about those two people, could we agree that they're smarter than we are, most of us, uh, on these topics?

If the two of them are both in it looks like strong agreement that there's a free speech issue here and it would be bad for us to ignore it.

Um I'm I'm I'm on that I'm on that side very strongly very strongly.

But I feel the way you feel, which is Kimmel, I I feel the same.

But I just think from a constitutional perspective, we don't want to get over our skis too far.

Well, there's more talk that AOC is looking at running for president in 2028.

Um, how many of you remember when she burst on the scene and very early on, very early on, I said in public a number of times, um, you should watch out for this one because she has the game to become president.

Do you remember me saying that?

Now, I don't know that she does.

Well, I don't know that she'll become president.

So, I'm not making a prediction.

It's not a prediction because it depends who she runs against entirely.

Um, but could she win?

Yes.

Yes, she has the game.

Uh, she she just has she has that thing, you know, the charisma, the the energy, probably the right kind of support, at least in a little bit of the Democratic party.

She would have to move toward the middle to have any chance of winning to get all the Democrats on her side.

But that seems doable.

That that's not impossible.

So, I've been saying for a long time, you should watch out for that one.

And I will double down on watch out for that one.

If you think to yourself that she doesn't appeal to you and therefore she can't win, that's the Trump mistake.

Now, you have to look at the skill level only.

Just just skill.

If you only look at her skill, she's got a lot of it and she's still young, so she's probably picking up technique as she goes.

She's no She's no Trump.

You know, if Trump is uh let's say on a scale of 1 to 100, Trump is 100 in terms of persuasion.

She's uh 65, which would be more than just about everybody except Trump.

So yeah, she's a threat.

She is not, in my opinion, smart enough.

So if I were running against her, I would try to establish that that she doesn't actually understand economics.

She doesn't actually have plans that work in the real world.

Uh so you would go after impracticality um and inability to reason through things.

That's what I'd go after.

Thomas Massie is saying an ex.

I told Director Cash Patel that the FBI has names of 20 men 20 men to whom Jeffrey Epstein traffked women and girls.

This basic fact seemed to surprise him.

Why?

That's a that's a pretty good question.

if it's true that Massie knows for sure that there are 20 names that are have been trafficked to um and then uh Massie says is the FBI withholding those names to protect presidents the president's rich and powerful friends release the Epstein files.

What the hell is going on here?

It it doesn't seem likely to me that Thomas Massie would make this up.

And it seems like he's smart enough that he wouldn't be simply wrong about it.

So, is this true?

Is it true that Thomas Massie could write down the names of 20 people because he's seen the names?

Does he know where that list is?

I mean, did he was it in his skiff?

So, he doesn't have a copy of it, but he remembers most of it.

what is going on here that you know on one hand uh this would be just so terrible if this is true on the other hand it's the only thing that would explain everything we've observed am I right everything we've observed would easily be explained if you said yeah there's 20 powerful people and it's really all about protecting the 20 Everything would be explained.

We I would have no more questions.

I mean, I'd have questions who the 20 are, but beyond that, no.

Everything would be answered.

Oh, okay.

Got it.

Now, that would still leave, you know, some some blackmailing stuff and things like that, but it would certainly get along go a long way toward explaining things.

Well, we'll see.

I would like to see uh Cash Patel be ask that question under oath and have them ask, "Do you have a list of 20 names that Epstein traffked young people do?" Let's see.

According to the Daily Caller News Foundation, there's some kind of a exclusive explosive report uh showing that George Soros or his organization doled down $80 million to leftist groups that are glorifying terrorism.

Now, that means that somewhere in their communication, they said something about, well, you know, sometimes you have to go beyond nonviolence, you know, basically things like that.

um not not super direct as in pick up a gun and meet me on Tuesday, but suggesting very clearly that violence is on the table, that it's just one of the options and his money is going to a number of those uh groups.

And my question is, and I've been saying this for years now, the Soros organization, who exactly is even watching where the money's going?

Because I feel as though the Soros organization is being robbed every day.

Just like really robbed because George Soros is clearly beyond the point where he's making the detailed decisions.

Uh his son honestly doesn't look smart enough or interested enough to, you know, to look into every organization the money goes to.

I'll bet that's not happening at the top.

And that would mean that there's somebody in a lower level who's a gatekeeper for this money and is I'll just say it.

There's almost no chance that there isn't massive fraud.

A fraud against Soros.

So whatever you say about Soros being bad might be true, but I'll bet you he's also a victim of massive uh corruption within his organization.

My guess is that Huma might have been put in there to help get that under control.

I don't think she's necessarily the one stealing money, although her connection to Hillary Clinton would suggest it's a possibility.

But uh I would I would give this question to uh Alexander Soros.

almost certainly you're being robbed in in the biggest possible way because none of this looks organic.

It looks like somebody's somebody figured out a way to take money from the old man and a lot of it.

That's what it looks like.

Um, Gavin Gavin Newsome of California is uh pushing back against Trump and his ICE efforts to deport people.

And he wants the ICE agents to unmask.

So now there's some kind of uh I don't know, he's got some kind of uh state law or something that they're pushing to unmask the ICE people.

Now, as far as I know, there's no way you can get away with that because the ICE agents are under federal control and as the feds say you definitely can't wear a mask.

I don't think this the state can stop them.

So, even if the state had their own little law, I don't think it would apply.

I think the feds would overrule it.

Um, but we'll see.

Um, however, I will note that Gavin Newsome has learned a valuable lesson from trying to copy Trump.

I've been telling you for the last several days that one of the things that Trump does brilliantly like I've never even seen it is that he goes strong on every topic and he must know that some number of them will be blocked or you know he doesn't get away with it for one reason or another and then he can just adjust and he's already moved on to the next thing but the next thing he goes strong and maybe it works maybe it doesn't but the next after that goes really strong.

Now, if two or all three of those things that I'm mentioning hypothetically, if all of them didn't work out, what would you remember about Trump, the strength, you would forget about the individual topics pretty quickly, unless you had some special interest in them, but you would remember that he was the boldest, strongest, take no prisoners, I'm going to get this done kind of a president.

Well, it looks to me that Governor Nuome is taking that approach.

Meaning that I don't know if he thinks there's any chance he can unmask the ICE agents.

He knows that he want that his people want him to ask.

They know that they want him to go strong.

So, if Nuome goes strong, say you got to take those masks off, you you bastards.

And then, you know, things things happen and it doesn't actually happen.

No masks come off.

What will you remember about that?

You'll remember that Nuome was the only effective person fighting Trump even though he wasn't effective but you'll remember him as strong.

So it does look like and this is so weirdly ironic that part of uh you know Nome's technique is literally uh overtly obviously and for humorous effect copying Trump like he's doing that as part of the act but he tells you I mean he's broadcasting his parody his satire it worked pretty well the the parodies worked pretty well good job on that politically Um, but it looks now he's also copying his strategies.

Trump's strategy is strong no matter what.

If it doesn't work, it's better that you went strong.

That's that's definitely what Gavin's doing.

Strong first, even if it it turns out to be wrong.

I hate to say it, but it's an upgrade in his performance.

I hate to say it, but he really is.

he's finding a little bit of purchase.

And you know, a lot of us said the same thing.

A lot of us said, you know, don't underestimate Gavin Newsome.

I don't think he can win, but I wouldn't underestimate him.

Well, maybe I just did, huh?

Yeah, he he's definitely got skills.

Um, apparently the uh state of Minnesota is having a problem.

They're quote drowning in fraud.

Apparently, there was some taxpayer funded housing stabilization service and uh there's a lot of money involved in it and allegedly over a hundred million per year is stolen from one state and not the biggest state, Minnesota.

$100 million a year stolen, not once, per year.

And uh so it's like there are fraudulent health care companies being set up to collect money, fraudulent housing programs, rehab patient frauds, fake Medicare and Medicaid.

So there's just this whole network of fake companies that popped up to do fake claims to to steal the money.

Now, let me say it until it sinks in because I've been saying it for a while, but doesn't seem to be working.

All local governments are criminal organizations by design.

Now, it's not intentional design.

I don't believe anybody sat down, you know, the founding fathers and said, "Let's make a let's make us a government where it's guaranteed to be all corrupt." Well, you know why it wasn't guaranteed to be corrupt back in the early days of the Constitution?

They didn't have much money.

They might have like, you know, a handful of projects and it would be stuff like, well, we need a street light on that one corner.

And then you could sort of all pay attention to the few dollars it took to build the street light.

And it wasn't nearly enough opportunity for fraud because it wasn't much money.

And you could all just sort of watch it.

probably had, you know, multiple witnesses and stuff like that.

Now, still probably there was a little, you know, a little bit of a little bit of bribery and stuff like that, but not nearly as much.

Um, but then fast forward and suddenly a city which used to be a smallalish enterprise now has a billion dollar budget.

A billion dollars.

What happens then?

Well, obviously it's going to attract all the people who want to figure out how to steal it.

And there is no way to catch them all um by design.

So, if you're the mayor and let's say you alone get to choose who wins some contract, you just make sure it's your friends.

And then your friends have a whole bunch of extra money that they got.

Where do you think some of that goes?

probably back to you, right?

So, as long as you have this situation that very easily and by design everybody can rip the money out of the the system, it's not going to stop.

Here's where people get systems versus goals wrong.

It would be a goal to not have corruption in local government, right?

Everybody agree that would be your goal, my goal, their goal, the voters's goal.

Everybody would have a goal.

But what is their system to prevent that from happening?

It's the opposite.

The system is designed for the opposite of the goal.

And as long as you have a system that's designed on paper, there's no way it can operate any other way except illegally in the long run.

It's a it's a design problem.

It's a system problem.

We need to develop some kind of a system and test it on some city to see if we can make at least one city operate fiscally responsibly and not steal your money cuz we don't have that.

You know, maybe maybe smallish towns or something might get lucky, but we got to change the system.

We can't just keep hoping that the next person we elect is the the honest one.

That's just a goal.

Doesn't work.

All right.

So, reframe reframe corruption as a design problem, not a moral failing of that one person who got caught.

Every time you say, "Well, moral failing of this one guy that got caught, but at least we put him in jail, so problem solved." Nope.

Problem not solved.

not even problem not even approached problem not even addressed if you don't change the entire auditing you know transparency system not a chance maybe put on the black blockchain or something what about the Philippines oh guess what there's huge protests in Manila because $7 billion sort of went missing now there's a lot of corruption over there but when we say a lot of corruption it really means that it's just more overt.

I don't know that we have less corruption here, honestly.

Um, so every government that has the same design about it has massive corruption.

It's all the same design.

The people in the government get to decide where billions of dollars go.

So, they steal some of it, like a lot of it, like 25% of it in this case.

So the whole country is falling apart because they got caught stealing too much.

And in a way what they did wrong was steal too much.

If they had stolen maybe 10% there might not be any riots at all.

Meanwhile, over in Great Britain, uh some of the Brits are allegedly, according to a Telegraph poll, are rebelling against their Prime Minister Starmer's uh decision to what was it?

Grant uh recognize Palestinian state.

That was not very popular at all.

And 90% of Britain's think that he jumped the gun by recognizing a Palestinian state.

Jump the gun might be the kindest way they could have said that.

I've got a feeling there's a whole bunch of Britons, you know, the ones born there, who are more than just a little put out um by what's happening over there.

So, we'll see.

Well, here's interesting.

According to news, James Mley is writing about this.

Uh, there's somebody named Liz Truss who's a former UK prime minister.

Somehow I never heard of that name before.

How many of you knew that there was a UK prime minister named Liz Truss?

Why have I never even heard that name?

I usually don't pay attention to anything that's happening in Europe until I absolutely have to.

you know, like there's a world war or something.

Uh, but anyway, here's the good news.

This ex UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, she's called for what she calls a mega moment in Britain.

Well, you were all well informed.

Good for you.

Oh, she was prime minister for less than two months.

Okay.

Well, okay, now that makes sense.

So, only briefly.

All right.

and she says that Britain needs sort of a Trump mega populist movement and she said that talking to Newsweek quote I want Britain to have its mega moment and in 10 years to save the west.

Uh so she believes that the west needs to be saved and that the model for doing that is Donald Trump.

Do you remember when Trump they said was going to be mocked and the United States would be the laughingstock because we had a clown as a president whereas the rest of them had real leaders.

Do you remember that?

How' that idea hold up over time?

Well, guess what Europe?

You all wish you had our president now, don't you?

Don't you?

Yeah, you do.

But you can't have him, I don't think.

Can he after he's done with his term here, can he go run another country?

I don't know.

Probably not.

Well, you may remember there was a COVID whistleblower in China, Chinese citizen, who was sent to jail because you don't want to do too much whistleblowing in China.

That's not going to be good for you.

But I read for the first time what the charges were in 2020.

The charge was picking quarrels and provoking trouble.

That apparently you can go to jail for quote picking quarrels and provoking trouble.

Um, remind me never ever to go to China cuz you know what I do on a regular basis about four times a day?

Picking quarrels and provoking trouble.

It's practically all I do.

It's almost my full-time job.

Picking quarrels and provoking trouble.

But the part that's really not funny, like one of the best most messed up things I've ever seen, is that first of all, this whistleblower shouldn't be in jail at all.

But secondly, the term was over and uh uh was it she?

I think it's a she.

Um male or female, I don't know.

What is Jang?

Jiang a male name.

Um, so he I think it's he uh was was set to be released and China just decided nah.

That that's how their prison system works.

At the end of the term, time to release him.

Nah, we're just going to keep him in jail.

So, China is unsafe for business.

do not physically go to China unless you happen to be the president of the United States and you're backed up by the entire US military if things go, you know, go parach.

Uh the rest of us, if you're not bringing the entire US military to to back you up and get you out of country, don't go because you don't know if you're ever coming back.

Did you see what I just did there just now?

what I just did.

That's called picking quarrels and provoking trouble.

Yeah, it's my middle name.

Well, once again, Russia's conducted a massive attack of drones on Ukraine.

Newsmax is reporting.

Uh, how many?

There were 580 drones that came out of Russia and 40 missiles.

580 drones on one night.

580.

Now, my question, as you know, is what's the upper limit?

If they're still fighting a year from now, is that number going to be 10,000?

How far are we from uh an every night attack of 10,000 drones?

like even if 5,000 of them got lasered out of the sky, could you just add another five the next day?

Because if both uh Russia and Ukraine are working as fast as they can on manufacturing of drones and and they they both clearly understand that the way to win anything here, if you can win, I don't know if winning is an option, but the only way it could be an option is if one of the sides can reach, you know, 10,000 drones when the other one's only up to a thousand.

So, if you were to guess how long will it take Russia to go from 580 drones at the same time to 10,000 and just blacking out the sky over Kev Kev Kev Ke Kevin.

Um, it's not a year, maybe I nine months or something.

So, that's coming.

Marco Rubio said about Venezuela that Maduro, who allegedly is the president, uh Rubio said said Maduro is not the president of Venezuela.

He's the head of the cartel deos souls, a narco terror organization that took over the country.

Does that sound like we're not going to attack their country?

If if the Secretary of State says you're not actually the leader of the country, you're head of a cartel, doesn't that really signal that we're going in?

Now, I don't know if that means boots on the ground, but I would say there's now a 100% chance that the US is preparing a military operation to decapitate the government.

I don't think they want to spend, you know, one minute fighting any Venezuelan soldiers if they can avoid it.

I mean, it would be unavoidable.

But, um, I'm pretty sure that the US has decided that if we can't bring them down without a direct attack on the capital, I feel like we're going to do a decapitation strike.

What do you think?

Because that he Rubio is setting it up that if we were to let me put it this way, if we assassinated the leader of another country, we would get all kinds of push back, right?

Like even the countries that like us would say, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

You can't go assassinating the leaders of the countries you don't like because then they're going to assassinate us." And there's there's sort of this weird agreement among leaders, no matter how much they hate each other, that everything would be worse if we assassinate a leader of another country.

Like everything would be worse.

And it it sort of everybody sort of understands that at a real base level.

Okay, you can't take out the leader of the other country.

But what if what if the leader of the other country wasn't really the leader according to us?

What if he was really just the head of a cartel who took over the country?

Well, you could assassinate the head of a cartel, right?

So, it appears that we have just set up the uh pres the the predicate, I guess.

Is that the right word?

Have we established the predicate for a decapitation strike that takes out Maduro and his generals?

Yes, that's exactly what happened.

Now, whether or not we plan to literally do that, um the pressure that it puts on Maduro is the right kind of pressure because Maduro can never go to bed again without expecting a a knock on the ceiling, if you know what I mean.

So, we're clearly bringing up the turning up the uh temperature.

I guess the US sunk a fourth suspected drug boat uh in the Caribbean.

And hey, hello.

Um if you're listening but not watching, Gary the Cat has made his stop by you.

Those of you watching, uh, always look for Gary.

Gary is the happiest, friendliest, most loving cat in the entire world.

His brother, his brother is just my roommate.

I've got one cat that basically just acts like a roommate.

Doesn't look at me with any loving eyes or anything like that.

It's just, you know, he's there for the food and the shelter.

But Gary seems to be in love.

Uh Gary Gary acts like he can't get enough of me.

I mean, oh my god, it's that guy again.

I cannot get enough of him.

I'm going to rub every part of my body on every part of him.

Watch this.

So, that's Gary the cat.

Anyway, what I was saying is we've sunk four of these drug boats now off of Venezuela.

And my question is, how many drug boats are there in one night?

If if I told you that we sang four of them, let's say hypothetically we sank them all the same night, would that be four and a four?

How many are there?

If you were, you know, on a boat in that part of the ocean, would you just see drug boat after drug bug go by?

And our military is doing the best they can, but you know, they can only get one every day or two.

Are there hundreds?

How many of them don't look exactly like drug boats?

Imagine if you're a smuggler and you're planning to, you know, take your drug boat that looks exactly like a drug boat and doesn't look like anything but a drug boat.

It's clearly obviously by its design and purpose and where it is and what time it's operating, obviously a drug boat.

Don't you think that by now they would have figured out how to make it not look like a drug boat?

Don't you think by now they would have made it look like uh a family of uh white people on vacation?

You know, hey, we just have a nice boat.

Hey, hey, hey, military.

Yeah, here's the kids.

And do you think they'll start putting innocent children on the drug boats?

How long is that going to take?

Yeah.

Yeah.

So, Hamas is over there in the news every day with their hostages.

You don't think that the cartels at even one time have thought to themselves, you know, we do have all these little children we're trafficking.

We could put the children on the boat, traffic some children, make it look like, you know, it's too dangerous to blow it up and fill it with drugs at the same time.

So, I don't know what the cartels are doing, but they're not doing much of a much of a defense there, unless unless the drug boats are a decoy or something.

Well, you know, when we left Afghanistan, we abandoned that uh the biggest best um US air base.

And now Trump apparently has opened talks with the Taliban uh demanding that they give at least part of the base back to us that we would use again for military attacks against terrorists.

Now, what do you think the Taliban said?

What do you think the Taliban said when we said, "I got an idea.

You won the war.

uh you know, you you got us to leave and now you have the whole country.

But you know what would be great is if you gave us some of it back so we could put a big military presence right in the middle of your country again.

How about that?

Well, you might be surprised to learn that the Taliban's position is not one inch of their property is going anywhere.

And no, that's a hard no.

But uh Trump has already warned that uh there will be hell to pay if they don't cooperate and just give us I don't think he wants to pay for it.

Uh just give us part of Bagram back.

Now do you remember what I say about Trump that he does so well?

He goes strong even if it doesn't work out.

This is just the perfect example.

Now, who who asked who asked for people to just give them land in the middle of their country for a purpose that they really really don't want you to do, which is to have a military base there.

Who does that?

Like, who even asks?

It wouldn't even occur to me that we would have a conversation with the Taliban about that or that there's any chance at all that it might work out.

But Trump goes strong.

He has he has an argument for why it'd be good for us.

I I understand the argument.

I definitely would like us to have a little, you know, back room if it's going to make it easier for the military to do what they're going to do anyway.

So, so it's worth asking the worst that could happen.

Well, maybe it's not the worst, but you know, one of the things that happen is they say no.

Maybe we put enough pressure on them that they say, "Oh, damn it.

We got to say yes now maybe.

So, but whether it works out or it doesn't work out, that is a strong play to go to the go to your I'm not sure they're the enemy, but to go to them and say, "Why don't you just give us the base and if you don't, we're really going to make your life miserable." That is strong.

Might be wrong, might not work, but you're going to remember how strong it was.

So, it's right even if it's wrong.

I wonder if there's any science that uh didn't need to be done because people could have just asked me and saved a lot of time.

Well, according to science alert, Carly Cassell is writing that uh they've discovered in a large study that doing a headers in soccer damages the brain even without concussions.

Uh let's see.

I wonder if I would have known the answer to this question.

Scott, if a surprisingly heavy and hard object called a soccer ball uh hits you in the head, is it likely to cause brain damage?

Well, how many times?

Uh 700.

Wait, what?

Yeah, it's a heavy hard object.

It's going to hit people's heads pretty hard in the context of a game.

Uh, will that cause brain problems?

Well, maybe not once, but 700 times.

It It's heavy.

It's heavy in the sense that when it's traveling, whoever whoever is saying heavy, like you're you're challenging whether whether a soccer ball is heavy.

Apparently, you've never been hit in the head with a fastmoving soccer ball.

Do you know how heavy that feels if you get hit at a high speed?

You know, soccer used to be one of my favorite games.

And do you know how I would handle headers?

I had a way of handling headers.

I would miss the ball.

Oops.

Yeah.

That my entire life I said to myself, I love this game soccer and I don't even mind if like I hurt my leg.

You know, it'll it'll get better, but I'm not going to injure my head.

I'm not going to injure my head for a game.

So, for all of my soccer playing years, when I jumped up for a header, I I just didn't get it.

I guess I guess I'm not that good at headers cuz the other team got it and sometimes my team got it.

But, man, I I was in that middle of that play.

I jumped up and moved my head.

I just made sure that that a fastmoving uh way too heavy object never hit my head.

So, did I know that having that heavy object hit my head over and over and over and over again would be bad for my brain even if technically it wasn't a concussion.

Yeah, I knew that.

I absolutely knew that.

Why?

Because I feel what it feels like when it hits me.

There's no way that's good for my brain.

No way.

I would go further and I think that uh headers in soccer should absolutely be banned at every level.

It doesn't make the game better, right?

Does it make the game worse that you have to wait for the ball to reach the ground or reach your legs?

No.

No.

You know, you know what is a really bad game is if all of your touches of the ball are with your legs, you know, you're like foot foot and then you run in front of the the goal and then somebody kicks it in the air and then you make the goal with your head.

It's like suddenly you change games.

It's not even the same game anymore.

It's like, well, you weren't using your head until now.

I mean much.

Anyway, headers should be banned.

Uh, so Zero Hedge is reporting that uh there's an educational crisis in the Baltimore high schools.

Uh, apparently uh in four straight years, this isn't funny.

Stop laughing.

There's nothing funny about this.

In four years, the entire Baltimore high school system has failed to produce a single proficient math student in four years.

Not one.

Do you think that they all that all the administrators and teachers kept their jobs when they produced zero success in what is generally considered the simplest thing you could ever succeed at getting at least one person to be able to add?

Nope.

They couldn't pull that off.

So, do you think there was a a big house cleaning and they all got fired, the teachers and administrators?

Well, I don't know, but I doubt it.

Didn't happen after the first year.

Apparently, they've gone four years with zero zero students who could do math.

What percentage of the Baltimore schools are black?

What what do you think?

What percentage of Baltimore high schools are black students?

What percent?

The answer is 73%.

And I think if you count all the other non-white uh ethnicities, I think it's over 90%.

Right now, the obvious question is uh what's going on here?

Now, some people are going to say, "Oh, uh, some people who are racist are going to say, uh, what's wrong with black people?" And then other people are going to say, "Uh, it's culture, something about culture." And then other people will say, "You racist, you're saying it's about culture." And then, you know, maybe people will offer to help and that help will be turned down unless it's money because, you know, if if you offer to help with money, then somebody could steal it.

So if you offer money that people can steal, they'll say yes.

But there's nothing else anybody's going to say yes.

And and I want to say this again, black Americans, you have to work this out.

This one's on you.

For sure.

People like me can't help you.

And the thing is, I'd be willing to try.

I'd be willing to try.

You know, I don't know what the solution would be, but I know that it would not be welcome.

And not not just because it's me, but I don't think any I don't think any white people would be appreciated.

So, black America, I do believe you are fully capable of solving this.

You know, maybe maybe not turning Baltimore into the best school system in the world, but certainly getting at least one person to be able to add and subtract.

I mean, that'd be cool.

So, you could definitely do that.

I mean, I'm exaggerating, of course.

It's higher math.

Um, but if it sounds like I'm not being helpful because I just told you I can't help.

Like even if I wanted to, it wouldn't it would go to nothing.

Um, I think it is helpful to say we're not going to help.

The only way this gets better is if black America somehow, and I don't know how.

I don't have I don't have the first idea how this could get fixed.

No, I do.

I I do have the first idea.

The first idea would be to send in a bunch of dads.

I think that worked in some school where they they bring in some dads so that there's some serious muscle there and then the kids have, you know, somebody they can trust to talk to and they've got a father figure and um you know, maybe they can be coached into uh less anti school behavior, I guess.

So, I feel I feel like I've seen stories where that has worked in individual schools.

Now, I guess I'd have to get confirmation of that.

But if you're not trying something like that, there's nothing else that's going to work.

And what else are you going to do?

Make make the periods one minute longer?

You know, what else do you have to work with?

You got nothing to work with.

There's no tools.

If if the school system, a regular school that works for other people, doesn't work in any way at all in Baltimore, you're going to have to do something totally different.

And I am confident that black America can solve this.

And I'm also confident that it would be helpful to make it clear that, you know, it's up to you.

It's up to you guys.

You got to solve this and let us know how it turns out.

All right.

Um, that's all I've got from my prepared comments.

Do you notice that I went long today?

It's because I'm trying to uh entertain the people.

I guess Well, I guess the uh the Charlie Kirk memorial has started now.

So, you don't need me anymore.

All right.

You don't need me anymore if you're at at the Charlie Kirk thing.

And those of you who want to go watch that now, go ahead.

Oh, wait.

No, this No, you're still waiting because this is only the time that you were led into the venue.

Um, the actual event will be in a few hours.

So, I hope it was useful that I gave you a little extra long commercial free, I hope, um, content because all those other lazy podcasters are taking the day off or they're in church or something.

But today, I knew that uh you might need a little extra.

All right.

Um I'm gonna talk privately to my beloved uh local subscribers.

The rest of you, have a great day.

Do the best you can and uh give a thought to Charlie.

All right, 30 seconds.

Come on in. Come on in, everybody.

If you're attending the Charlie Kirk

Memorial right now and you said to

yourself, I think I need something to do

for the next few hours until it begins.

Well, here I am. I'm here for you. We're

all here for you. So, if you're waiting

in line in uh the State Farm Stadium in

Glendale, this show is for you.

All right, let me get my comments

working so that we have a complete

situation here.

[Music]

[Music]

Good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and

you've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to take a chance on elevating

your experience this morning to levels

that no one can even understand with

their tiny shiny human brains. Well, to

do that, all you need is a cuper, a mug

or a glass of tankered shells or sty

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. It's called a

simultaneous sip. And it happens. That's

right. It happens right now. Go.

H

well as you know as I mentioned 100,000

people are expected to attend the

Charlie Kirk Memorial at the State Farm

Stadium in Glendale. It begins at 11:00

a.m. the local time in in u in uh

Arizona. So correct connect

correct your for your local time.

But people were showing up as early as

3:00 and 4:00 in the morning and walking

long distances because the parking lots

weren't even opened at the venue yet.

And uh the spirits are very high. I mean

somber of course, but something's

happening. I would like to read to you

um

where is it?

Uh maybe I won't read to you that. All

right. Well, uh so uh one of my friends

is there and gave me a little report to

what's happening and I asked her uh you

know, are you there in person? Cuz

that's not very close. And apparently

she got inspired to go all the way

there. Um and is feeling a renewal of

faith.

and uh wanted to be part of this thing.

Apparently, there are also two plane

loads full of the White House people and

I guess Trump's going to speak. And

whatever you thought about this

phenomenon,

can we call it a phenomenon?

Uh the tragedy seems to have

um awakened something. There there's

definitely a religious renewal that's

happening right now and it's because of

Charlie Kirk. There's no doubt about it.

And uh so I'm expecting that this

memorial besides being tearful and sad

um will be one of the more impactful

things that happens maybe all year. Um I

mean aside from the shooting itself. And

uh I'm here for you people if you're uh

waiting for hours and you need something

to do. Well, maybe that's one thing we

can do for you.

Give you uh maybe maybe an hour of the

news

without any commercial breaks depending

on what you're watching it on.

But uh best wishes to all of you people

who are experiencing a probably almost

every you everyone is feeling some kind

of religious revival. And if you were

the Democrats and you were watching this

um forget about the the politics of it

there there's something that's beyond

politics now. We we've entered some new

domain. But if you're a Democrat,

whatever this power is that's been

unlocked,

um I don't know where it goes, but it

looks like a powerful positive force and

it may not be what you had in mind if

you're Democrats. So, um if you're a

Democrat, today would be a day to just

stay quiet. That would be my advice. Um

I'm not going to say something rude

like, "Yo, hey, you guys just shut up."

Just today, the best thing you can do if

you're a Democrat, unless you're being

supportive and saying something

positive, the best thing you can do

today, the smartest thing you can do,

take the day off. This this is not your

day. So, um there will be magic

happening today. Uh maybe literally.

Well, there is a story related to the uh

Charlie Kirk uh murder that

I don't know what to say about this.

There there's a sort of a magic bullet

story. Have you heard that yet? So, um

Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew

Kulvet says this um in a post X. I want

to address some of the discussion about

the lack of an exit wound with Charlie.

Wait, what? there's a lack of an exit

wound. Now, you know, there's some

people who say that the thing uh the

wound that we saw was the exit wound,

but that would in assume that there's an

entry wound on the other side. And

apparently the surgeon who worked on him

says that's not the case.

What? So, here's what we know. All

right. It's from uh Andrew Kulit. Um,

I'm usually not interested in delving

into most of this kind of online chatter

talking about the exit wound. And I

apologize this is somewhat graphic. But

in this case, the fact that there wasn't

an exit wound is probably another

miracle and I want people to know I just

spoke with a surgeon who worked on

Charlie in the hospital. He said the

bullet quote absolutely should have gone

through which is very normal for a

high-powered rifle, high-owered, high

velocity round. I've seen uh wounds from

this caliber many times and they always

just go through everything. This would

have taken uh taken a moose or two down

and elk, etc. But it didn't go through

Charlie's body. Charlie's body stopped

it. His neck. his neck stop the bullet

from passing through it. And uh

and Andrew goes on and goes, "I I

mentioned to his doctor that there were

dozens of staff, students, and special

guests standing directly behind Charlie

on the other side of the tent." And he

replied, quote, "It was an absolute

miracle that someone else didn't get

killed. His bone was so healthy and the

density was so impressive

that he's like the man of steel. It

should have just gone through and

through. It likely would have killed

those standing behind him, too. Uh, in

the end, the coroner did find the bullet

just beneath the skin.

So, even in death, Charlie managed to

save the lives of those around him.

Well, those of you who are familiar with

my content are expecting me to debunk

that and say that's not how bullets act.

They don't sometimes go through soft

tissue and bone and sometimes not.

Um, but today is uh the Charlie Kirk

Memorial. Today, miracles are allowed.

So, I'm going to accept that one. Um,

Trump says the gas prices are heading

below $2 a gallon. It might be some of

the best prices we've seen in a long,

long time. Fox News is reporting that. I

don't know if it's going to get that

low. It's not going to get that low in

California because we have a we have a

defective estate. Um, no, no, no. No

ricochet,

no second shooter,

just a miracle

today. That today is just a miracle.

That's that's the beginning and the end

of the conversation.

But gas prices going down.

So Trump was at some event speaking

yesterday and he he uh asked Dr. Oz

while he while the president was

speaking he uh sort of tongue and cheek

but maybe not asked Dr. Oz uh if Trump

derangement syndrome should be added to

the official mental disorders and Trump

said it's a mental disorder and they've

got it in levels not seen before. Uh Dr.

Oz why don't we list that on Wednesday?

I know I guess something's happening on

Wednesday. Um, now I thought that TDS,

Trump derangement syndrome, was actually

already in the literature as a genuine

um, mental health issue. Am I wrong

about that? I mean, I don't think it's

in the most official DSM, whatever six

or whatever it is. I don't think it's

there yet, but I'm pretty sure that the

lit literature recognizes it as a major

problem in mental health. It's not

nothing. So, um even though I'm pretty

sure the president was being humorous

and it worked, um I do believe that it

needs to be added to the the literature.

There's not the slightest chance that

this isn't a genuine mental health

gigantic problem.

One of the biggest. I mean, it's

probably the single most

damaging mental health problem in the

country.

I'll bet if you added up the next three

biggest, they probably wouldn't be this

big. if you really were honest about the

the size of the uh the problem. Yeah. I

mean, it's broken up families, it's

people losing jobs, people yelling at

strangers. We don't have any mental

problem, mental health problem that has

one name that's anywhere near that big.

Not nowhere near. I mean, it's it's in a

class by itself. It's it's affecting

entire populations at the same time. And

almost certainly it caused at least one

murder, Charlie Kirk. There there's no

way that that happens without Trump

derangement syndrome. There's no way

that happens.

Anyway,

you know, I've been yammering

off and on about how the only way that

uh the affordability thing will be fixed

will be finding cheaper ways to live

that are still really good ways to live.

you know, then you're not giving up

much. And apparently the young are um

according to News Nation, there's now a

minor trend, maybe it'll get bigger, of

co- buying a home. So people who are not

related or in a relationship, they will

say, "Do you want to buy a home? I want

to buy a home." And then they'll go in

together and split the cost. So they

they both get half a home, basically.

And then they they try to figure out

some agreement for living there. Now, as

you might imagine, the part about living

with a stranger and, you know, having

some stranger have that much control

over your real estate and you over them.

It's not going to be easy, but it does

make me wonder if this will be a growing

trend. I think it will because the

alternatives are worse. Uh, but my take

is that you need to design the house

from the ground up to be a more than one

person house. you know, there's probably

ways to do that. You definitely don't

want to be waiting for the bathroom with

the, you know, while the person who

helped you buy the house is in there.

Um,

and apparently a survey says 70% of Gen

Z would be willing to do this. So, if

70% would be willing to share a home

purchase,

right there, the cost of housing went

down 50%. you know, at least within the

home ownership group. Well, allegedly

the news says that the tick tock

purchase deal is done and that China

agreed and we agreed and maybe there's

some paperwork to sign, but basically

it's all agreed and uh the details were

told and this is still fog of war

because the details that I heard even

yesterday are already wrong. So, who

knows if these are right, but uh it

would be majority American-owned

uh when it was purchased. Uh Oracle

would be sort of the tech company in

charge of privacy. So, it'd be an

American company in charge of that. And,

uh there'd be, you know, some other big

investors. So, it's not just Oracle

here. and the algorithm

um would not be maintained by China,

which was the first thing we heard. The

first thing we heard is that China was

going to own the algorithm

and just sort of feed it to the American

company.

There's no way that worked. I mean, that

was sort of defeating the the whole

point. Um, but according to Caroline

Levit, the algorithm will now be

controlled by Americans, the American

owners.

Do you believe this is going to get

signed?

There's something there's a dog not

barking in this story. Isn't there

something really, really missing? Well,

I'll tell you. China reportedly and

somewhat obviously was using the Tik Tok

thing as leverage for, you know, other

things that it wants out of the United

States. So, the one thing you could know

for sure is that there's no way in heck

that uh that China would ever allow the

sale of their big, you know, I mean,

incredibly successful asset to the US.

There's no way they do that unless

unless they got something in return that

was pretty big. Have you heard any news

about

anything they're getting in return? Do

you believe that China went from well

there's no way you're going to take the

jewel of our online uh you know assets

unless you give us something pretty

pretty good. It might be tariffs. It

might be something else, but you better

give us something pretty good. And then

we did hear that the US was holding back

some uh defense

um allocations for Taiwan

and that it might be connected, but that

was supposed to be temporary, you know,

just while we're talking to him. Is it

temporary?

Don't you feel that there's no way this

deal could have been done unless we

promised them something right? There's

no way. I don't think so. Now, do you

think that maybe there's a secret deal,

maybe a secret deal where they're going

to maybe not help Russia as much? I

don't think so. I I don't think Tik Tok

would be worth that.

So, I'm uh concerned that we don't know

exactly what the deal was for that, but

maybe we'll never find out.

You might remember that not too long

ago, Elon Musk was made the following

observation about Microsoft's business.

He said in principle given that software

companies like Microsoft do not

themselves manufacture any physical

hardware it should be possible to

simulate them entirely with AI.

He wants to simulate entirely the entire

Microsoft

um product line.

I do believe

that we may we might approach the place.

We're not there yet, but I could easily

imagine we'd reach a a place where

replacing all of Microsoft is anybody

with AI sitting in a room and saying,

um, can you pretend to be every product

that Microsoft makes? And then if I need

to put something on a spreadsheet or on

a word processing, just just give me a

user interface that essentially mocks

mocks Microsoft and and just act like

you're Microsoft and I'll I'll just use

you AI. I feel like that it's within the

realm of maybe.

So, there's some possibility that the

entire Microsoft corporation

could turn into one super prompt. Hey,

give me a suite of products exactly like

Microsoft

maybe. I don't know. But we do know that

Elon also kicked off an AI project in

which he is trying to literally and

directly knock off the Microsoft

products with AI versions. Do you think

that Elon Musk and whoever he hires will

have the capability

to knock off Microsoft?

Well, the answer is

maybe.

pretty good chance because I don't see

how Microsoft can last in the long run,

not with their, you know, current suite

of products. The only way Microsoft

lasts

is as a different company. Now, the

different company would also be AI. So,

they might be replacing their own their

own products with AI before somebody

else does it or something. That's

possible. But uh yeah, I guess Microsoft

uh the CEO is uh staying up late at

night because he's already seen

that there's no way that the Microsoft

model lasts forever. And we're

definitely close enough to the end of it

that you can kind of sense it coming and

it'll happen fast when it happens.

All right. Um,

President Trump also announced,

if you believe this, that on Monday

there's going to be a bombshell news

release about the true cause of autism.

And he called it one of the most

important things that they'll ever do.

Do you believe that's a possible thing?

Do you believe that our government is

going to tell us the real cause of

autism

and that they didn't know before?

Nobody knew before and they just found

out this week or last few weeks.

Um

I don't know if anybody's going to

believe it. Would you knowing as you do

that all data is fake?

because it is.

Why would you believe whatever they say

about autism? Why would you believe what

anybody says about anything if it if

it's based on data? It's never there

just isn't any data that's accurate.

It's just whoever made up the data

decided to show you this data instead of

that data.

All right. Well, we'll see. What do you

think it is? Do you think it's going to

be vaccinations or Tylenol for pregnant

people or

food?

My my guess is that they're going to say

there are three or four things that are

very connected and especially if they

all happened at the same time, you know,

you might have an extra risk. I don't

know. What I don't expect

is for them to say, "We got solid data.

Nobody's going to doubt it once they see

it themselves, and here's the cause." I

don't think that's going to happen. Do

you in the real messy world to do things

like that happen? Might be food,

but I kind of doubt it because little

babies are getting it. And the little

babies are are they don't babies all eat

the same food? Don't they just eat baby

food? So although I think our food is

not especially safe and could be way way

better, I'm going to say that probably

won't be the thing that they identify.

Might it's not it's not a zero chance,

but

I don't know. I think I would go with

more likely pharma, you know, some kind

of pharmaceutical. More likely that, but

I don't know.

Stephen A. Smith

uh decided that Kamla Harris has ended

her political career with her new book.

Uh and he says it was the last straw. He

says, "I think we've seen the last of

her," meaning politically.

and uh he he says that based on the

excerpts of the book, it's too little

too late. Now, I think what he's talking

about specifically is that she admits

she knew that Joe was not all there, but

she didn't do anything about it.

And Stephen A. Smith says that's the end

of your career. If you admit that you

could see it and you also admit that you

decided not to make waves by doing

something about it, then you were never

the real vice president, were you? Let

me say it again.

If Kla Harris knew that Joe had, you

know, the cognitive problems that he

did, if she knew and decided not to act

on it for loyalty or whatever other

reasons, she wasn't really the vice

president,

right?

Is there a more important job than being

the one who identifies that the vice

president's, you know, time has reached

an end and he can't handle his job?

probably nothing more important than

that,

right? Except filling in if he were to

pass away. So, I get why there was

tremendous pressure on her to just ride

it out. Yeah, we all understand. There's

no mystery there. But if your only job

is to be able to overcome exactly that

problem, hey, people might not like it

if you remove the president whose brain

is dead. Well, you kind of got to do it

anyway. Isn't that the job? The job is

to do it anyway. The job is not to do it

if it's easy. The job is the job of vice

president is not to, you know, act if

it's convenient.

There's nothing like that in the job

description. By its nature, the reason

we go through so much trouble to pick

the right vice presidential candidate is

that we look at them and we say, "That

person could remove a president if they

had to."

Well, she wasn't that person.

Apparently, she couldn't do it. So,

I don't know. It's It's hard to call an

end to anybody's political career, but

I'm going to agree with Stephen A.

Smith. I don't see how she could hold a

major office ever again. Uh, but I also

think she may have decided that she was

done with politics. I feel like she was

already done.

Well, are you up to date with the latest

uh drama involving uh Tom Holman? You

know, head of is it ICE? Is that his

official job? Head of ICE. Um but he

apparently during the Biden

administration when Tom Holman was not

in the government but he was doing

consulting, private consulting for

companies in the border security

business I guess and he was the subject

of an FBI sting operation in which they

gave him $50,000 pretending to be some

kind of uh vendors for things that he

would you know would be in his domain.

and uh he took the $50,000 reportedly. I

don't know that any of this is really

confirmed, but reportedly he took the

$50,000

and agreed to help the contractors

win contracts

uh in the second Trump administration if

Trump won. Now remember, this is before

Trump won. So there's no President Trump

at the moment and there's no borders are

Yeah, if that's what you call them. Um,

but uh we're just learning about this

from an MSNBC

uh investigation,

but we're also told that the Biden

administration um didn't find any crimes

and they just shut it down.

The Biden administration didn't find any

crimes

e even though they tried to set them up.

They tried to create a crime where there

wasn't one by, you know, pretending to

vi to bribe him. Uh but it turns out

that if you're a consultant and you

offer to help somebody do something that

is normal legal business and you're a

consultant who who advises on that exact

normal legal business, well, maybe

taking money to do the thing you say is

exactly what you're doing,

maybe it's not illegal. Now, so that

mean that would mean that, you know, he

wasn't using his influence to, you know,

give somebody a job who was incapable.

So, I don't know exactly the details,

but here's my question. If it's true

that the FBI came up with the $50,000

and paid it to him, but that there was

no real work involved, it was only they

were setting him up, they he thought

there was work involved, but there

wasn't.

Does he get to keep the 50,000?

So, I'm trying to figure out if the

Biden administration figured out a way

to give Tom Holman a $50,000 bonus

before he started the job.

And so far, that's what it looks like.

It looks like the FBI just found a way

to pay him $50,000

and he had no no legal risk whatsoever.

I just hope that's true. I don't know if

that's true. I do believe that if they

gave it to him, I feel like he could

keep it, right? Like there it's not like

there's uh if he doesn't get charged

with anything, it's not like they can

take the money back, can they? How does

that work? If it's part of a sting

operation, do you get to keep it if they

don't sting you?

I hope so.

Anyway, CNN's uh Abby Phillip

was saying that uh she was trying to get

her panel on CNN to agree, the liberal

panel, mostly liberal, uh to admit that

the Democrats

uh censored and cancelled too much. and

she thought the only way forward for

Democrats is to say directly to the

public,

we cancelled and uh censored too much

and that that was on us. That's a

mistake and now we're going to move on.

What do you think? Do you think Abby is

right that if the Democrats simply admit

that they had censored and cancelled too

many people and they're very sorry about

it and they realize how bad it was that

that's what would allow them to get past

it and then have a successful Democrat

party?

I don't think so.

I don't think so.

Do you think Do you think I would accept

an apology?

I got cancelled.

Do you think I would accept an apology?

No.

No, I'm not going to accept an apology.

Not at all. Not even a little bit.

Not an option.

Apology is not requested, not

appreciated, not expected.

And just stay stay away from me with

your apologies because it won't help me

a bit.

But it does show that they're

desperately flailing around trying to

find something that would make them not

look so bad.

All right. Um,

apparently the New York Post did a

little analysis and found that Jimmy

Kilmel hosted only one right leaning

guest in the past three years and it

came with some kind of a condition. I

don't know who that was.

um but only one and apparently he uh had

13 leftle leaning guests this year.

That's not really very many, is it? You

know, since the beginning of the year,

13. So, it's not even that there was a a

ton of political people in general. I

mean, most of it's entertainment.

Um

but here's what else we found. Uh let's

see that uh

uh Kibble's jokes and gags, this is from

the New York Post, uh his jokes and gags

targeted conservatives

88% of the time in 2023.

So in 2023, 88% of the jabs were at

conservatives. Um

and it went to 97% this year.

So 97% of all of his jabs were in one

direction. Now keep in mind that the FCC

allows the airwaves to be used by ABC,

CBS, NBC only only to the extent that

they're a, you know, public good. You

know, they're they're a benefit to the

public. But also on top of that, there's

a specific requirement that they can't

be politically one-sided. that if they

have a, you know, if they have a

Democrat on, they probably ought to have

a Republican on and vice versa. So,

they're supposed to make some attempt to

balance out the time and the and the

politics. Does it look like they did

that? Does it look like Jimmy Kimmel's

uh staff and and people, does it look

like they were attempting to have

anything like a balance that is required

for them to fulfill their license?

Well, no. No. It would appear that they

grossly violated the FCC

um regulations. Now, as I've said

before,

uh the FCC's had a very longstanding,

very clear standard that you can't just

be on one side if you have one of their

public airwaves. You other people can.

If you're a cable, if you're Fox News,

you could just be biased all day long.

There's nothing illegal, immoral. I

mean, it may be suboptimal, but it's not

immoral.

Uh, but if you got to one of those

public airwaves, you better you better

get of equal time. And they clearly

didn't.

Um,

I saw

most of you know who Gavin McKinnus is.

Uh he he was one of the many people who

got cancelled during the CA great

cancellations, but uh apparently he was

um he knew Jimmy Kimmel pretty well. And

he believes that Jimmy Kimmel's second

wife is the ultra woke person who ruined

him. I guess Jimmy Kimmel was a ordinary

an ordinary boy and he got turned into

some kind of a weird monster by his

second wife. That's Gavin's take on it.

I'm paraphrasing, of course. Um, and uh,

I think he compared it to the Howard

Stern situation where Howard was a, you

know, guy's guy and then he gets married

the second time and suddenly he's the

wokest guy around and everything's

different. So,

one of the things that does does not

match well with humor, if that's your

job, if your job is a professional

humorist or a professional kind of sher.

Um, one thing that doesn't match with

that at all is a wife

because a spouse is

quite reasonably, you know, there's

nothing wrong with this. the spouse is

going to be thinking about the the

family unit as the thing that needs to

be protected.

The crazy performer person, you know,

and I'm in that category. Um, we're

thinking about how to make the biggest

impact, you know, what gets the biggest

audience, you know, how do I get a

special on Netflix or whatever I'm

trying to do. So,

it's very natural that the spouse would

be in a more, you know, you don't want

to do that. You better you better take

the popular view on this one, you know.

So, it's very incompatible. The the best

and funniest

Well, let's take Bill Burr. Does Bill

Burr

do I even need to finish that? If any of

you watch Bilbur, do you think that his

wife is an influence on, you know, what

he can and cannot say?

I don't know, but it sure looks like it.

And it looks like it degrades his uh his

effectiveness. The the funniest

comedians, I think, are single people,

you or somebody who's got a rare kind of

a spouse who says some some version of,

you know, go for it. But that's probably

not the most common instinct. And by the

way, here I am not criticizing wives

whatsoever.

If a wife is protecting her husband and

protecting the family, you know, and and

maybe at the cost of that extra million

dollars, but you're already doing fine,

is the wife wrong?

I would say no. I would say that would

be a perfectly,

you know, correct and moral and ethical

legal, you know, thing to do to try to

try to make sure the family stays, you

know, as strong as it could be.

But it does hurt the humor. Um,

I also heard from uh Gavin McKinnus that

uh Jimmy Kimmel is a very good

cartoonist.

Did you know that he he did some

cartoons for I guess Vice back in the

day? What are the odds of that? Now I

have to I have to completely, you know,

reshape my my opinion. Um, I don't know

if I've ever told you this before, but

on top of a general professional

courtesy that I feel toward Jimmy Kimmel

and anybody in that business, because

I'm sort of tangentially in the the the

public humor business,

um, if he's actually a skilled

cartoonist who has actually been paid

for his work, and apparently he has

been, then I have to default to my how

do I treat other cartoonists

And I generally go easy on other

cartoonists. So I'm often asked, "Hey,

do you think the guy who does Ziggy uh

you has a good cartoon?" Uh which of

course I don't because it was terrible.

But you know, I would try not to,

depending on the cartoonist, I'd usually

try to be kind to them. So, I'll be more

kind and and I are you guys watching how

many people who are credible are kind of

in favor of more the you know leaning

toward the free speech angle on this and

making sure that uh people like Kimmel

don't lose their jobs over some kind of

bad day of speaking you know a bad day.

Um,

so now, as I mentioned, you know, Ted

Cruz thinks there's a free speech issue

here. Uh, uh, Ben, um, Shapiro does. And

if if you know anything about those two

people,

could we agree that they're smarter than

we are, most of us, uh, on these topics?

If the two of them are both in it looks

like strong agreement that there's a

free speech issue here and it would be

bad for us to ignore it. Um I'm I'm I'm

on that I'm on that side very strongly

very strongly. But I feel the way you

feel, which is Kimmel,

[Music]

I I feel the same. But I just think from

a constitutional perspective, we don't

want to get over our skis too far.

Well, there's more talk that AOC is

looking at running for president in

2028.

Um, how many of you remember when she

burst on the scene and very early on,

very early on, I said in public a number

of times, um, you should watch out for

this one because she has the game to

become president. Do you remember me

saying that? Now, I don't know that she

does. Well, I don't know that she'll

become president. So, I'm not making a

prediction. It's not a prediction

because it depends who she runs against

entirely.

Um, but could she win? Yes.

Yes, she has the game. Uh, she she just

has she has that thing, you know, the

charisma, the the energy, probably the

right kind of support, at least in a

little bit of the Democratic party. She

would have to move toward the middle to

have any chance of winning to get all

the Democrats on her side. But that

seems doable. That that's not

impossible.

So, I've been saying for a long time,

you should watch out for that one. And I

will double down on watch out for that

one. If you think to yourself that she

doesn't appeal to you and therefore she

can't win,

that's the Trump mistake. Now, you have

to look at the skill level only. Just

just skill. If you only look at her

skill,

she's got a lot of it and she's still

young, so she's probably picking up

technique as she goes. She's no She's no

Trump. You know, if Trump is uh let's

say on a scale of 1 to 100, Trump is 100

in terms of persuasion. She's uh

65,

which would be more than just about

everybody except Trump.

So yeah, she's a threat. She is not, in

my opinion, smart enough. So if I were

running against her, I would try to

establish that that she doesn't actually

understand economics. She doesn't

actually have plans that work in the

real world. Uh so you would go after

impracticality

um and inability to reason through

things. That's what I'd go after.

Thomas Massie

is saying an ex. I told Director Cash

Patel that the FBI has names of 20 men

20 men to whom Jeffrey Epstein traffked

women and girls. This basic fact seemed

to surprise him. Why?

That's a that's a pretty good question.

if it's true that Massie knows for sure

that there are 20 names that are have

been trafficked to

um and then uh Massie says is the FBI

withholding those names to protect

presidents the president's rich and

powerful friends release the Epstein

files.

What the hell is going on here?

It it doesn't seem likely to me that

Thomas Massie would make this up. And it

seems like he's smart enough that he

wouldn't be simply wrong about it.

So, is this true? Is it true that Thomas

Massie could write down the names of 20

people because he's seen the names? Does

he know where that list is? I mean, did

he was it in his skiff? So, he doesn't

have a copy of it, but he remembers most

of it.

what is going on here

that you know on one hand

uh this would be just so terrible if

this is true on the other hand it's the

only thing that would explain everything

we've observed am I right

everything we've observed would easily

be explained if you said yeah there's 20

powerful people and it's really all

about protecting the 20

Everything would be explained. We I

would have no more questions. I mean,

I'd have questions who the 20 are, but

beyond that, no. Everything would be

answered. Oh, okay. Got it. Now, that

would still leave, you know, some

some blackmailing stuff and things like

that, but it would certainly get along

go a long way toward explaining things.

Well, we'll see. I would like to see uh

Cash Patel be ask that question under

oath and have them ask, "Do you have a

list of 20 names that Epstein traffked

young people do?"

Let's see.

According to the Daily Caller News

Foundation, there's some kind of a

exclusive explosive report uh showing

that George Soros or his organization

doled down $80 million to leftist groups

that are glorifying terrorism.

Now, that means that somewhere in their

communication, they said something

about, well, you know, sometimes you

have to go beyond nonviolence, you know,

basically things like that. um not not

super direct as in pick up a gun and

meet me on Tuesday, but suggesting very

clearly that violence is on the table,

that it's just one of the options and

his money is going to a number of those

uh groups.

And my question is, and I've been saying

this for years now, the Soros

organization,

who exactly is even watching where the

money's going?

Because I feel as though the Soros

organization is being robbed

every day. Just like really robbed

because George Soros is clearly beyond

the point where he's making the detailed

decisions. Uh his son honestly doesn't

look smart enough or interested enough

to, you know, to look into every

organization the money goes to. I'll bet

that's not happening at the top. And

that would mean that there's somebody in

a lower level who's a gatekeeper for

this money and is

I'll just say it. There's almost no

chance that there isn't massive fraud.

A fraud against Soros.

So whatever you say about Soros being

bad might be true, but I'll bet you he's

also a victim of massive

uh corruption within his organization.

My guess is that Huma

might have been put in there to help get

that under control.

I don't think she's necessarily the one

stealing money,

although her connection to Hillary

Clinton would suggest it's a

possibility.

But uh I would I would give this

question to uh Alexander Soros.

almost certainly you're being robbed in

in the biggest possible way because none

of this looks organic. It looks like

somebody's somebody figured out a way to

take money from the old man and a lot of

it.

That's what it looks like.

Um,

Gavin Gavin Newsome of California is uh

pushing back against Trump and his ICE

efforts to deport people. And he wants

the ICE agents to unmask. So now there's

some kind of uh I don't know, he's got

some kind of uh state law or something

that they're pushing to unmask the ICE

people. Now, as far as I know, there's

no way you can get away with that

because the ICE agents are under federal

control and as the feds say you

definitely can't wear a mask. I don't

think this the state can stop them. So,

even if the state had their own little

law, I don't think it would apply. I

think the feds would overrule it. Um,

but we'll see. Um, however, I will note

that Gavin Newsome has learned a

valuable lesson from trying to copy

Trump. I've been telling you for the

last several days that one of the things

that Trump does brilliantly like I've

never even seen it is that he goes

strong on every topic and he must know

that some number of them will be blocked

or you know he doesn't get away with it

for one reason or another and then he

can just adjust and he's already moved

on to the next thing but the next thing

he goes strong

and maybe it works maybe it doesn't but

the next after that goes really strong.

Now, if two or all three of those things

that I'm mentioning hypothetically, if

all of them didn't work out, what would

you remember about Trump, the strength,

you would forget about the individual

topics pretty quickly, unless you had

some special interest in them, but you

would remember that he was the boldest,

strongest, take no prisoners, I'm going

to get this done kind of a president.

Well, it looks to me that Governor Nuome

is taking that approach. Meaning that I

don't know if he thinks there's any

chance he can unmask the ICE agents. He

knows that he want that his people want

him to ask. They know that they want him

to go strong. So, if Nuome goes strong,

say you got to take those masks off, you

you bastards. And then, you know, things

things happen and it doesn't actually

happen. No masks come off. What will you

remember about that? You'll remember

that Nuome was the only effective person

fighting Trump even though he wasn't

effective

but you'll remember him as strong. So it

does look like and this is so weirdly

ironic that part of uh you know Nome's

technique is literally

uh overtly obviously and for humorous

effect copying Trump

like he's doing that as part of the act

but he tells you I mean he's

broadcasting his parody his satire it

worked pretty well the the parodies

worked pretty well good job on that

politically

Um, but it looks now he's also copying

his strategies.

Trump's strategy is strong no matter

what. If it doesn't work, it's better

that you went strong. That's that's

definitely what Gavin's doing. Strong

first, even if it it turns out to be

wrong.

I hate to say it, but it's an upgrade in

his performance. I hate to say it, but

he really is. he's finding a little bit

of purchase. And you know, a lot of us

said the same thing. A lot of us said,

you know, don't underestimate Gavin

Newsome. I don't think he can win,

but I wouldn't underestimate him. Well,

maybe I just did, huh? Yeah, he he's

definitely got skills.

Um,

apparently the uh state of Minnesota is

having a problem. They're quote drowning

in fraud.

Apparently, there was some taxpayer

funded housing stabilization service and

uh there's a lot of money involved in it

and allegedly over a hundred million per

year is stolen

from one state and not the biggest

state, Minnesota.

$100 million a year stolen,

not once, per year.

And uh so it's like there are fraudulent

health care companies being set up to

collect money, fraudulent housing

programs, rehab patient frauds, fake

Medicare and Medicaid.

So there's just this whole network of

fake companies that popped up to do fake

claims to to steal the money.

Now,

let me say it until it sinks in because

I've been saying it for a while, but

doesn't seem to be working.

All local governments are criminal

organizations

by design.

Now, it's not intentional design. I

don't believe anybody sat down, you

know, the founding fathers and said,

"Let's make a let's make us a government

where it's guaranteed to be all

corrupt." Well, you know why it wasn't

guaranteed to be corrupt back in the

early days of the Constitution? They

didn't have much money.

They might have like, you know, a

handful of projects and it would be

stuff like, well, we need a street light

on that one corner.

And then you could sort of all pay

attention to the few dollars it took to

build the street light. And it wasn't

nearly enough opportunity for fraud

because it wasn't much money. And you

could all just sort of watch it.

probably had, you know, multiple

witnesses and stuff like that. Now,

still probably there was a little, you

know, a little bit of a little bit of

bribery and stuff like that, but not

nearly as much.

Um,

but then fast forward and suddenly a

city which used to be a smallalish

enterprise now has a billion dollar

budget. A billion dollars. What happens

then? Well, obviously it's going to

attract all the people who want to

figure out how to steal it. And there is

no way to catch them all um by design.

So, if you're the mayor and let's say

you alone get to choose who wins some

contract, you just make sure it's your

friends. And then your friends have a

whole bunch of extra money that they

got. Where do you think some of that

goes? probably back to you, right? So,

as long as you have this situation that

very easily and by design everybody can

rip the money out of the the system,

it's not going to stop.

Here's where people get systems versus

goals wrong. It would be a goal to not

have corruption in local government,

right? Everybody agree that would be

your goal, my goal, their goal, the

voters's goal. Everybody would have a

goal. But what is their system to

prevent that from happening? It's the

opposite. The system is designed

for the opposite of the goal.

And as long as you have a system that's

designed

on paper, there's no way it can operate

any other way except illegally in the

long run.

It's a it's a design problem. It's a

system problem. We need to develop some

kind of a system and test it on some

city to see if we can make at least one

city operate fiscally responsibly and

not steal your money cuz we don't have

that. You know, maybe maybe smallish

towns or something might get lucky, but

we got to change the system. We can't

just keep hoping that the next person we

elect is the the honest one. That's just

a goal.

Doesn't work.

All right. So, reframe reframe

corruption as a design problem, not a

moral failing of that one person who got

caught. Every time you say, "Well, moral

failing of this one guy that got caught,

but at least we put him in jail, so

problem solved." Nope. Problem not

solved. not even problem not even

approached problem not even addressed if

you don't change the entire auditing you

know transparency system not a chance

maybe put on the black blockchain or

something

what about the Philippines oh guess what

there's huge protests in Manila because

$7 billion sort of went missing now

there's a lot of corruption over there

but when we say a lot of corruption it

really means

that it's just more overt. I don't know

that we have less corruption here,

honestly. Um, so every government

that has the same design about it has

massive corruption. It's all the same

design. The people in the government get

to decide where billions of dollars go.

So, they steal some of it, like a lot of

it, like 25% of it in this case. So the

whole country is falling apart because

they got caught stealing too much. And

in a way what they did wrong was steal

too much. If they had stolen maybe 10%

there might not be any riots at all.

Meanwhile, over in Great Britain, uh

some of the Brits are allegedly,

according to a Telegraph poll, are

rebelling against their Prime Minister

Starmer's uh decision to what was it?

Grant uh recognize Palestinian

state. That was not very popular at all.

And 90% of Britain's think that he

jumped the gun by recognizing a

Palestinian state. Jump the gun might be

the kindest way they could have said

that. I've got a feeling there's a whole

bunch of Britons, you know, the ones

born there, who are more than just a

little put out

um by what's happening over there. So,

we'll see.

Well, here's interesting. According to

news, James Mley is writing about this.

Uh, there's somebody named Liz Truss

who's a former UK prime minister.

Somehow I never heard of that name

before. How many of you knew that there

was a UK prime minister named Liz Truss?

Why have I never even heard that name?

I usually don't pay attention to

anything that's happening in Europe

until I absolutely have to. you know,

like there's a world war or something.

Uh, but anyway, here's the good news.

This ex UK Prime Minister Liz Truss,

she's called for what she calls a mega

moment in Britain.

Well, you were all well informed. Good

for you. Oh, she was prime minister for

less than two months. Okay. Well, okay,

now that makes sense. So, only briefly.

All right. and she says that Britain

needs sort of a Trump mega populist

movement and she said that talking to

Newsweek quote I want Britain to have

its mega moment and in 10 years to save

the west. Uh

so she believes that the west needs to

be saved and that the model for doing

that is Donald Trump.

Do you remember

when Trump they said was going to be

mocked and the United States would be

the laughingstock

because we had a clown as a president

whereas the rest of them had real

leaders. Do you remember that?

How' that idea hold up over time?

Well, guess what Europe?

You all wish you had our president now,

don't you? Don't you? Yeah, you do.

But you can't have him,

I don't think. Can he after he's done

with his term here, can he go run

another country? I don't know. Probably

not. Well, you may remember there was a

COVID whistleblower in China, Chinese

citizen, who was sent to jail because

you don't want to do too much

whistleblowing in China. That's not

going to be good for you. But I read for

the first time what the charges were in

2020.

The charge was picking quarrels and

provoking trouble.

That apparently you can go to jail for

quote picking quarrels and provoking

trouble.

Um, remind me never ever to go to China

cuz you know what I do on a regular

basis about four times a day? Picking

quarrels and provoking trouble.

It's practically all I do.

It's almost my full-time job. Picking

quarrels and provoking trouble.

But the part that's really not funny,

like one of the best most messed up

things I've ever seen, is that first of

all, this whistleblower shouldn't be in

jail at all.

But secondly, the term was over and uh

uh was it she? I think it's a she.

Um

male or female, I don't know. What is

Jang? Jiang a male name. Um, so he I

think it's he

uh was was set to be released

and China just decided

nah.

That that's how their prison system

works. At the end of the term, time to

release him.

Nah, we're just going to keep him in

jail.

So, China is unsafe for business. do not

physically go to China unless you happen

to be the president of the United States

and you're backed up by the entire US

military if things go, you know, go

parach. Uh the rest of us, if you're not

bringing the entire US military to to

back you up and get you out of country,

don't go because you don't know if

you're ever coming back.

Did you see what I just did there

just now? what I just did. That's called

picking quarrels and provoking trouble.

Yeah, it's my middle name.

Well, once again, Russia's conducted a

massive attack of drones on Ukraine.

Newsmax is reporting. Uh, how many?

There were 580 drones that came out of

Russia and 40 missiles. 580 drones on

one night.

580.

Now, my question, as you know, is what's

the upper limit?

If they're still fighting a year from

now, is that number going to be 10,000?

How far are we from

uh an every night attack of 10,000

drones? like even if 5,000 of them got

lasered out of the sky, could you just

add another five the next day? Because

if both uh Russia and Ukraine are

working as fast as they can on

manufacturing of drones and and they

they both clearly understand that the

way to win anything here, if you can

win, I don't know if winning is an

option, but the only way it could be an

option is if one of the sides can reach,

you know, 10,000 drones when the other

one's only up to a thousand.

So, if you were to guess how long will

it take Russia to go from 580 drones at

the same time to 10,000 and just

blacking out the sky over Kev

Kev Kev Ke Kevin. Um, it's not a year,

maybe I nine months or something.

So, that's coming. Marco Rubio said

about Venezuela that Maduro, who

allegedly is the president, uh Rubio

said said Maduro is not the president of

Venezuela. He's the head of the cartel

deos souls, a narco terror organization

that took over the country.

Does that sound like we're not going to

attack their country?

If if the Secretary of State says you're

not actually the leader of the country,

you're head of a cartel,

doesn't that really signal that we're

going in?

Now, I don't know if that means boots on

the ground, but I would say there's now

a 100% chance that the US is preparing a

military operation to decapitate the

government. I don't think they want to

spend, you know, one minute fighting any

Venezuelan soldiers if they can avoid

it. I mean, it would be unavoidable.

But, um, I'm pretty sure that the US has

decided that if we can't bring them down

without a direct attack on the capital,

I feel like we're going to do a

decapitation strike. What do you think?

Because that he Rubio is setting it up

that if we were to let me put it this

way,

if we assassinated the leader of another

country,

we would get all kinds of push back,

right? Like even the countries that like

us would say, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

You can't go assassinating the leaders

of the countries you don't like because

then they're going to assassinate us."

And there's there's sort of this weird

agreement among leaders, no matter how

much they hate each other, that

everything would be worse if we

assassinate a leader of another country.

Like everything would be worse. And it

it sort of everybody sort of understands

that at a real base level. Okay, you

can't take out the leader of the other

country. But what if

what if the leader of the other country

wasn't really the leader according to

us? What if he was really just the head

of a cartel who took over the country?

Well, you could assassinate the head of

a cartel, right? So, it appears that we

have just set up the uh pres the the

predicate, I guess. Is that the right

word? Have we established the predicate

for a decapitation strike that takes out

Maduro and his generals?

Yes, that's exactly what happened. Now,

whether or not we plan to literally do

that,

um the pressure that it puts on Maduro

is the right kind of pressure because

Maduro can never go to bed again without

expecting a a knock on the ceiling, if

you know what I mean.

So,

we're clearly bringing up the turning up

the uh temperature. I guess the US sunk

a fourth suspected drug boat uh in the

Caribbean.

And

hey,

hello. Um if you're listening but not

watching, Gary the Cat has made his stop

by you. Those of you watching, uh,

always look for Gary. Gary is the

happiest, friendliest, most loving cat

in the entire world. His brother, his

brother is just my roommate.

I've got one cat that basically just

acts like a roommate. Doesn't look at me

with any loving eyes or anything like

that. It's just, you know, he's there

for the food and the shelter. But Gary

seems to be in love.

Uh Gary Gary acts like he can't get

enough of me. I mean, oh my god, it's

that guy again. I cannot get enough of

him. I'm going to rub every part of my

body on every part of him. Watch this.

So, that's Gary the cat.

Anyway, what I was saying is we've sunk

four of these drug boats now off of

Venezuela. And my question is, how many

drug boats are there in one night?

If if I told you that we sang four of

them, let's say hypothetically we sank

them all the same night, would that be

four and a four?

How many are there?

If you were, you know, on a boat in that

part of the ocean, would you just see

drug boat after drug bug go by? And our

military is doing the best they can, but

you know, they can only get one every

day or two. Are there hundreds?

How many of them don't look exactly like

drug boats?

Imagine if you're a smuggler and you're

planning to, you know, take your drug

boat that looks exactly like a drug boat

and doesn't look like anything but a

drug boat. It's clearly obviously by its

design and purpose and where it is and

what time it's operating, obviously a

drug boat.

Don't you think that by now they would

have figured out how to make it not look

like a drug boat?

Don't you think by now they would have

made it look like uh a family of uh

white people on vacation? You know, hey,

we just have a nice boat. Hey, hey, hey,

military. Yeah, here's the kids. And do

you think they'll start putting innocent

children on the drug boats?

How long is that going to take?

Yeah. Yeah. So, Hamas is over there in

the news every day with their hostages.

You don't think that the cartels at even

one time have thought to themselves, you

know, we do have all these little

children we're trafficking. We could put

the children on the boat, traffic some

children, make it look like, you know,

it's too dangerous to blow it up and

fill it with drugs at the same time. So,

I don't know what the cartels are doing,

but they're not doing much of a much of

a defense there, unless unless the drug

boats are a decoy or something.

Well, you know, when we left

Afghanistan, we abandoned that uh the

biggest best um US air base.

And now Trump apparently has opened

talks with the Taliban

uh demanding that they give at least

part of the base back to us that we

would use again for military attacks

against terrorists.

Now, what do you think the Taliban said?

What do you think the Taliban said when

we said, "I got an idea.

You won the war. uh you know, you you

got us to leave and now you have the

whole country. But you know what would

be great is if you gave us some of it

back so we could put a big military

presence right in the middle of your

country again. How about that?

Well, you might be surprised to learn

that the Taliban's position is not one

inch of their property

is going anywhere. And no, that's a hard

no. But uh Trump has already warned

that uh there will be hell to pay if

they don't cooperate and just give us I

don't think he wants to pay for it. Uh

just give us part of Bagram back.

Now

do you remember what I say about Trump

that he does so well? He goes strong

even if it doesn't work out. This is

just the perfect example. Now, who who

asked who asked for people to just give

them land in the middle of their country

for a purpose that they really really

don't want you to do, which is to have a

military base there. Who does that?

Like, who even asks? It wouldn't even

occur to me that we would have a

conversation with the Taliban about that

or that there's any chance at all that

it might work out.

But Trump goes strong. He has he has an

argument for why it'd be good for us. I

I understand the argument. I definitely

would like us to have a little, you

know, back room if it's going to make it

easier for the military to do what

they're going to do anyway. So,

so it's worth asking

the worst that could happen. Well, maybe

it's not the worst, but you know, one of

the things that happen is they say no.

Maybe we put enough pressure on them

that they say, "Oh, damn it. We got to

say yes now maybe. So, but whether it

works out or it doesn't work out, that

is a strong play to go to the go to your

I'm not sure they're the enemy, but to

go to them and say, "Why don't you just

give us the base and if you don't, we're

really going to make your life

miserable." That is strong. Might be

wrong, might not work, but you're going

to remember how strong it was.

So, it's right even if it's wrong.

I wonder if there's any science that uh

didn't need to be done because people

could have just asked me and saved a lot

of time. Well, according to science

alert, Carly Cassell is writing that uh

they've discovered in a large study that

doing a headers in soccer damages the

brain even without concussions.

Uh

let's see. I wonder if I would have

known the answer to this question.

Scott, if a surprisingly heavy and hard

object called a soccer ball uh hits you

in the head, is it likely to cause brain

damage? Well, how many times? Uh

700.

Wait, what? Yeah, it's a heavy hard

object. It's going to hit people's heads

pretty hard in the context of a game.

Uh, will that cause brain problems?

Well, maybe not once,

but 700 times. It It's heavy. It's heavy

in the sense that when it's traveling,

whoever whoever is saying heavy, like

you're you're challenging whether

whether a soccer ball is heavy.

Apparently, you've never been hit in the

head with a fastmoving soccer ball. Do

you know how heavy that feels if you get

hit at a high speed? You know, soccer

used to be one of my favorite games. And

do you know how I would handle headers?

I had a way of handling headers.

I would miss the ball.

Oops.

Yeah. That my entire life I said to

myself, I love this game soccer and I

don't even mind if like I hurt my leg.

You know, it'll it'll get better, but

I'm not going to injure my head. I'm not

going to injure my head for a game.

So, for all of my soccer playing years,

when I jumped up for a header,

I I just didn't get it. I guess I guess

I'm not that good at headers

cuz the other team got it and sometimes

my team got it. But, man, I I was in

that middle of that play. I jumped up

and moved my head. I just made sure that

that a fastmoving uh way too heavy

object never hit my head.

So,

did I know that having that heavy object

hit my head over and over and over and

over again would be bad for my brain

even if technically it wasn't a

concussion. Yeah, I knew that. I

absolutely knew that. Why? Because I

feel what it feels like when it hits me.

There's no way that's good for my brain.

No way.

I would go further and I think that uh

headers in soccer should absolutely be

banned at every level. It doesn't make

the game better,

right? Does it make the game worse that

you have to wait for the ball to reach

the ground or reach your legs? No. No.

You know, you know what is a really bad

game is if all of your touches of the

ball are with your legs, you know,

you're like foot foot and then you run

in front of the the goal and then

somebody kicks it in the air and then

you make the goal with your head.

It's like suddenly you change games.

It's not even the same game anymore.

It's like, well, you weren't using your

head until now. I mean much.

Anyway, headers should be banned.

Uh, so Zero Hedge is reporting that uh

there's an educational crisis in the

Baltimore high schools. Uh, apparently

uh in four straight years,

this isn't funny. Stop laughing. There's

nothing funny about this. In four years,

the entire Baltimore high school system

has failed to produce

a single proficient math student

in four years. Not one.

Do you think that they all that all the

administrators and teachers kept their

jobs when they produced zero success

in what is generally considered the

simplest thing you could ever succeed at

getting at least one person to be able

to add?

Nope. They couldn't pull that off. So,

do you think there was a a big house

cleaning and they all got fired, the

teachers and administrators? Well, I

don't know,

but I doubt it. Didn't happen after the

first year. Apparently, they've gone

four years with

zero

zero students who could do math. What

percentage of the Baltimore schools

are black?

What what do you think? What percentage

of Baltimore high schools are black

students? What percent?

The answer is 73%.

And I think if you count all the other

non-white uh ethnicities, I think it's

over 90%.

Right

now, the obvious question is uh what's

going on here? Now, some people are

going to say, "Oh, uh, some people who

are racist are going to say, uh, what's

wrong with black people?" And then other

people are going to say, "Uh, it's

culture, something about culture." And

then other people will say, "You racist,

you're saying it's about culture." And

then, you know, maybe people will offer

to help and that help will be turned

down unless it's money because, you

know, if if you offer to help with

money, then somebody could steal it. So

if you offer money that people can

steal, they'll say yes. But there's

nothing else anybody's going to say yes.

And and I want to say this again,

black Americans, you have to work this

out. This one's on you.

For sure. People like me can't help you.

And the thing is, I'd be willing to try.

I'd be willing to try. You know, I don't

know what the solution would be, but I

know that it would not be welcome. And

not not just because it's me, but I

don't think any I don't think any white

people would be appreciated.

So, black America,

I do believe you are fully capable of

solving this. You know, maybe maybe not

turning Baltimore into the best school

system in the world, but certainly

getting at least one person to be able

to add and subtract. I mean, that'd be

cool. So, you could definitely do that.

I mean, I'm exaggerating, of course.

It's higher math. Um,

but if it sounds like I'm not being

helpful because I just told you I can't

help. Like even if I wanted to, it

wouldn't it would go to nothing. Um, I

think it is helpful to say we're not

going to help. The only way this gets

better is if black America somehow, and

I don't know how. I don't have I don't

have the first idea how this could get

fixed. No, I do. I I do have the first

idea. The first idea would be to send in

a bunch of dads. I think that worked in

some school where they they bring in

some dads so that there's some serious

muscle there and then the kids have, you

know, somebody they can trust to talk to

and they've got a father figure and um

you know, maybe they can be coached into

uh less anti school behavior, I guess.

So, I feel I feel like I've seen stories

where that has worked in individual

schools. Now, I guess I'd have to get

confirmation of that. But if you're not

trying something like that,

there's nothing else that's going to

work. And what else are you going to do?

Make make the periods one minute longer?

You know, what else do you have to work

with? You got nothing to work with.

There's no tools. If if the school

system, a regular school that works for

other people, doesn't work in any way at

all in Baltimore,

you're going to have to do something

totally different.

And I am confident that black America

can solve this. And I'm also confident

that it would be helpful

to make it clear that,

you know, it's up to you. It's up to you

guys. You got to solve this and let us

know how it turns out.

All right. Um, that's all I've got from

my prepared comments. Do you notice that

I went long today? It's because I'm

trying to uh entertain the people. I

guess Well, I guess the uh the Charlie

Kirk memorial has started now. So, you

don't need me anymore. All right. You

don't need me anymore if you're at at

the Charlie Kirk thing. And those of you

who want to go watch that now,

go ahead. Oh, wait. No, this No, you're

still waiting because this is only the

time that you were led into the venue.

Um, the actual event will be in a few

hours. So, I hope it was useful that I

gave you a little extra long commercial

free, I hope, um, content because all

those other lazy podcasters are taking

the day off or they're in church or

something. But today, I knew

that uh you might need a little extra.

All right.

Um I'm gonna talk privately to my

beloved

uh local subscribers. The rest of you,

have a great day. Do the best you can

and uh give a thought to Charlie.

All right, 30 seconds.