Episode 2969 CWSA 09/25/25

Uh, I would check your stocks, but doesn't look like good news on the stock market.

So, we'll just ignore that and instead have the best live stream you've ever seen.

Yeah.

Boom boom boom.

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 up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains.

All you need for that is a cup or a mug or a glass of tanker shell or st a canteen jugger flask of a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparallel pleasure.

The dopamine hit of the day.

The thing that makes everything better.

It's called, that's right, the simultaneous step.

And it happens now.

Septastic.

Incredible.

Well, I have a movie review for you.

The movie Fantastic 4 is now on streaming.

So, I watched oh, maybe half of it or a third of it last night.

Um, the reason I didn't watch the whole movie is don't bother.

It's so bad.

So, apparently Hollywood has come up with a new technique for casting for at least for superhero movies.

Instead of attractive, charismatic actors, they they put in homely actors you don't even want to look at for a second.

I don't know where they came up with these.

I mean, one of one of them is famous, but he's he's better if he's wearing a full costume, so you can't see his face.

I hate to say it, but uh yeah, the Fantastic Four is uh poor effects.

Um terrible casting and absolutely unwatchable completely.

Yeah, it looked like they it looked like they made it in a basement or something.

It looked terrible.

Well, I'd like to give you a little warning about owning a cat.

Uh, I've already told my subscribers on locals this, but you know, one of the things about having a licensed character is you get to keep some of the cool things like this little um squishy thing.

You know, you can squeeze in stuff.

So, I've got most of the main characters in squeezies, but I only have one set, you know.

I don't I don't have two of these.

I just have one of them.

And so if anything happened to one of these, well, I wouldn't be very happy about that.

And then I had a cat.

Uh, this is what's left of the Alice character.

Uh, I found her head in my shoe, which I believe was not a random act.

I believe it was a planned terrorist act.

That's right.

My cat is a terrorist.

And uh if this if that's not a warning, I don't know what is.

You know what this warning says?

Don't bring a woman into this house to compete with us.

We are the stars of the house.

Message received.

All right.

Well, there's a new study that didn't need to be done uh in which they found that rising gun violence in movies uh might be increasing youth firearm homicides.

According to Scypost, Eric Nolan is writing about this.

Now, how many of you would have already known that the more firearms that there are in movies and games, the more likely young people are going to use firearms for bad purposes?

Is there anybody who didn't know that?

That's obvious.

Now, I'm not in favor of, you know, censoring that stuff.

But where do you think people get the idea to use a gun?

If they'd never heard of a gun, like literally never heard of one, do you think that they would go buy one?

No.

You have to at least know they exist.

You have to know kind of what it looks like to use one.

And then you have to have that idea just pounded into your head day after day after day after day.

until you get mad at something or somebody and what's the first thing you think of?

Oh, gun.

So, it it's not uh you know, it's not one to one.

If you watch a movie about guns, you're going to go shoot something.

It's not that.

But if you have enough people and you just fill them with gun content, yes, absolutely, 100%.

No doubt about it.

speaking as a hypnotist, uh the repetition alone will cause some percentage of people to shoot somebody that they would have not have shot otherwise.

So that's a real thing.

And by the way, it's not that different from what I'll talk about in a bit, which is the political rhetoric causing people to do things that they wouldn't have done without the rhetoric.

Doesn't mean you have to give up free speech.

It doesn't mean you have to give up your guns.

It does mean you should be aware of the price of these freedoms.

It's not all good.

Well, here's something I sort of have been hinting at for a long time.

Apparently, uh according to an article in futurism, Frank Landymore is writing that uh AI has not been boosting the productivity of or the profitability of companies.

So they did a study and looked at what companies are using AI for and found that 95% of companies that gambled on integrating AI into their process saw no meaningful growth in revenue.

Well, you know, you would think that what they're trying to do is uh reduce their expenses.

I wouldn't think it would necessarily be expected to grow revenue.

um you know maybe return on investment but not revenue.

I don't you know there there aren't too many ways to use AI that would increase revenue that I'm aware of.

Um they you know they still can't sell as well as a human and etc.

Well that's one that you could have just asked me.

Um, and apparently a lot of them are looking to hire back people that they got rid of.

And um, so that's pretty much what I warned you would happen.

And even the people using AI for writing code, um, there's some indication it might be slowing them down instead of making them better.

But I think that's a mixed bag.

I think in some cases it definitely speeds things up.

Well, in uh California, according to the uh Daily Mail, there's been a a wave of squirrel attacks.

So, squirrels are attacking humans, uh jumping right up on their faces and trying to tear them to death.

Um, and at least two people have been sent to the emergency room from squirrel attack.

Uh, and they're happening near me in San Rafale.

That's not super dear, but driving distance.

Um, so these squirrels are go becoming dangerous.

Um, my only comment about the squirrels turning dangerous are I didn't even know squirrels could be Democrats.

I'll let that sit there for a moment while you savor it.

Um, but uh my advice is you know what I'm going to say.

You already know what I'm going to say.

There's a dad joke coming.

Guard your nuts.

All right.

Well, somebody had to say it.

If I hadn't said it, you would have said it, right?

It's not like you weren't ready.

I'm going to say it.

I'm going to say something about watch your nuts.

Watch.

Nobody will think of this.

Ha.

I got there first.

Uh well uh Secretary Kennedy is uh happy that Maha has another win.

Apparently the UTS brands UTZ I guess that's a big food brand.

Um they're going to fully transition away from synthetic dyes by the end of 2027.

So, Maha gets another win and uh and Kennedy is urging other companies to follow suit.

So, so far I'm liking what I'm seeing because you're seeing a lot of voluntary action and that's the best.

I mean, if you can get them to do things voluntarily.

All right, in other news, the former French president just got sentenced to five years in prison for I guess back in I don't know 2007 or something.

Um it was a while ago.

He uh allegedly and now he's convicted of uh accepting money for his campaign from Libyan leader Moar Gaddafi.

So New York Times is writing about this.

So that was surprised of you that a leader of a major country, one of our allies, was I hate to say a crook, but what would you call it if somebody takes money from a Libyan dictator to uh run for president?

I don't know.

It's crooked head, but I don't I don't know exactly what the word for that would be, but uh there he goes.

Now, my question would be this.

How many ex leaders of major countries, and I'm talking about, you know, NATO countries, not not small little countries, but how many of them do you think you could find an actual crime at least as bad as this one, which is accepting uh campaign funds from a dictator?

Don't you feel like it's nearly all of them?

I I feel like the only thing that's different about Sarosi is that maybe he got caught.

Don't you think they've all done a little little something something?

Is it just me?

I feel like, you know, if you tried, you could put every one of them in jail.

So, I don't know what the real story is there.

maybe had more to do with somebody wanting him in jail than what it was he did.

Well, Scott Bent out of the Treasury um says that if Zoren Mumani gets elected mayor in New York City, as you know, he's a kami mum dummy.

Um and uh Scott Besson says that if New York City asks for a bailout because they have money problems from the if they ask for a bailout from the federal government, um they will not get it and they will be told to drop dead.

So that's another reason to not vote for the communist.

Um because there would be no reason throwing good money after bad.

So the feds would say, "Well, you voted for him.

You work it out." So it feels like a reasonable position.

We'll see if they change their mind.

Well, as you know, um, nearly all schools are left-leaning and, uh, Oklahoma just came up with a, uh, sort of a stop gap way to address the fact that the teachers unions and the schools are pretty much thoroughly left-leaning.

And what they're going to do is establish Turning Point USA chapters in all state high schools according to the the Epoch Times.

Joseph Lord is writing about this.

So what do you think of that idea?

The So Oklahoma is going to force I mean they don't have to force it too hard because people want to do it.

Uh turning points in every single state high school.

I like that.

I like that better than trying to erase the left-leaning influence.

Um, just put another influence in there.

And uh, now if we do Thailand all Americans are autistic when they do something dumb.

Eric Ericson is saying that high school boys are calling each other Tylenol Americans instead of autists.

Uh, they're cruel.

They're cruel.

It's funny though.

Anyway, so Oklahoma, good experiment.

We don't know if it'll work, but definitely worth a shot.

Uh, let's see.

There's a the college fix is writing about there's a large study of uh syllabi in colleges.

you know the syllabi that would be plural of syllabus.

Yeah, the syllabi.

Uh so they looked at the syllabi which is you know the the list of what they're going to teach in the classes and uh they found out that the uh college professors predominantly present left-wing perspective on all the u all the you know controversial stuff.

So if it's anything from uh you know the Palestinian situation, abortion, etc., racial bias, all those things, you get only the left-wing view.

So do you think colleges need their own turning points USA?

Yes, they do.

Yes, they do.

Well, the first lady of Florida, Casey Dantis, um she's getting involved in looking into cancer studies and she's looking into generic drugs or drugs that already exist.

And is going to find out if any of them have a purpose or a use in cancer.

And she mentioned Ivormectin as the the one that's sort of at the top of the interest list.

Now, you know what I'm going to say, right?

Well, as luck would have it, I have cancer, so I know a little bit more about this topic than those who don't have cancer, probably.

Unless you're a doctor.

Well, what do you think I'm going to say about ivormectin being a cure for cancer?

You you've heard me before.

All right.

I'm a little surprised that this is still a question and that well-meaning, intelligent, you know, educated people are still believing that there's a real good chance that Ivormectin cures cancer.

Here is what you would need, and I've said this before.

This is what you would need to convince me that there's something to it.

Now obviously a you know randomized controlled you know gold standard study would be great but short of that I would I would settle for anybody who had an incurable cancer who cured it with ivormectin.

Now I know what you're going to say but but but Scott I heard about that guy.

No you didn't.

No you didn't.

You did not hear about a guy who got cured of cancer with ivormectin.

you believe he did and there's a there's a real person named with a real name and has a real life and if he asked him he'd say oh yeah this ivormectton cured my cancer but what you would need to convince me and ideally it's what what it would take to convince you as well is you would need the patient with a story you'd need the oncologist not any other doctor you not not some random doctor but the actual oncologist who treated them.

You would have to see their medical records and you would have to see in the medical records that they used no other treatment, nothing else.

And then you can say, well, this was incurable.

The doctor can confirm that this is the only thing that they did.

You can look at the record.

You see that they used to have terrible cancer.

And look at this updated medical record.

It's all clear now.

Well, you're never going to see that.

Do you know why?

If it were true that Ivormectton worked, obviously the oncologists would know about it by now.

Not everyone, but clearly there would be an oncologist who had a patient who said, "Oh my god, we've we may have discovered something amazing, so let's let's at least share it with the world and see, you know, maybe somebody else is noticing this, too." But there's not one, not one, not one oncologist with a patient with, and this is very important, you can't leave this out, with the medical record before and after.

How hard would that be?

Now, um, I think a year and a half ago, I told you I was working on a very big project.

Uh, didn't work out.

The big project was I tried Ivormectin and if it had cured my cancer or even reduced it a little bit.

I would have told everybody.

I would have forced my oncologist to go public and say, "Look, you're coming with me." Well, I don't do that kind of thing.

Yes, you do.

Yeah, you're coming with me.

You're going to be on this.

You're going to you're going to tell the world uh you're going to show them my medical record and you're going to confirm with me that this cured my cancer that was unccurable.

Well, nothing like that happened, but I did get on testosterone blockers which um had a huge just a gigantic impact on reducing my symptoms, etc.

It's not a cure.

But my guess is that the people who have claims that the ivormectton worked, they're either lying or they might have been on something else such as testosterone blockers and they're just not talking about it.

So, there's something going on.

But I will give you a 100% odds that you can't just take nothing but iroken and cure your cancer.

I I will give a 100% certainty of that.

You would definitely know about it by now because every oncologist would want to go public with that if they'd even seen it once.

Right now, you will see some doctors say, "Um, yes, it cured all kinds of people.

All of my patients, oh, so many of my patients are cured of it." They're all making money by selling you that advice.

find somebody who was going to make the same amount of money whether you got cured or not.

That would be my oncologist.

It's just a Kaiser oncologist.

So, he gets paid the same.

If you can give somebody who gets paid the same, no matter whether it works or not, and they say it works, well, I would listen to that.

But don't listen to somebody who's made a career out of it.

that uh you know that that's just not credible by by its nature.

All right.

Uh let me tell you what will happen as soon as I get back on X.

There will be somebody who said, "Scott, you idiot.

I know of the one guy who cured." No.

Listen to me.

If all you know is the name of one guy, you don't have anything.

But Scott, I know this doctor who says he or she is cured.

No, doesn't count.

Just the doctor doesn't count.

Worth nothing.

But Scott, I saw the medical record.

No, you didn't.

No, you didn't.

You need the patient.

You need the doctor who treated him, the oncologist, not some random doctor.

And you need the medical records before and after.

Anything short of that is All right, that's my final word on that.

Uh Trump is talking about Kla Harris and has referred to her as quote dumb as a rock and he's complaining because Kla keeps saying on her book tour that uh she saying on her book tour that uh she lost the election but it was the closest presidential election, you know, in in a lifetime or something.

This is not even close to true.

It's just totally made up out of nothing.

And does she really think that we didn't pay attention to the presidential election?

Is there anything that got more publicity than the presidential election?

Who who in the world thinks it was close, as in closer than anything's ever been?

Well, it was not.

Um, but it does make you wonder if she believes it.

So, Trump said it wasn't close.

She's dumb as a rock and uh California's election was rigged.

So there's that.

Now I would compare the rhetoric from the right to the rhetoric from the left.

So here's some, you know, hard rhetoric from the right.

If uh you heard that Trump called Kamla dumb as a rock, would you buy a gun and climb on a roof and try to hurt her?

Because after all, she's dumb as a rock.

No.

No, you would not because you don't shoot people because somebody said their brain isn't good.

That doesn't happen.

But what would happen if you said, "Oh, it's a dictator trying to steal your democracy.

He's a Nazi and he's trying to be another Hitler." Well, you might.

If you believe that were is literally true, there's nothing you wouldn't do.

But no, dumb as I rock that does not motivate people to violence.

Um, so Trump is calling for an immediate investigation about the UN events.

He, so there were three systems of failed that all impacted Trump directly.

So the escalator failed the moment that he and uh Melania got on it so that they had to walk up the steps, you know, kind of kind of uh inelegant and uh certainly bothered him.

But the UN said, "Oh, we looked into it and it was just a weird coincidental mistake maybe." But then the teleprompter didn't work for the first 15 minutes.

And does that I mean that happens sometimes, right?

But luckily Trump is one of the most uh maybe the most gifted public speaker we've ever seen in America.

And so he didn't need the teleprompter.

He could just do his thing until it worked and then he then he got back on it.

U then also I didn't realize this that the sound system in the room didn't work.

So the only way you could have heard him is if you had the um the interpreter uh headphones in.

I think it it wasn't projecting just you know to the room in general.

So those are three things which if you told me that all three of them happened by coincidence and to the same leader I would say to you no one of those things maybe one maybe three the the three things that are most directly related to him being able to do his thing.

No that's uh I could be wrong.

Right.

We live in a world where, you know, strange things do happen.

But if you're gonna ask me to believe that was completely a coincidence, no.

Uh I've seen I saw at least one person say, "Was it uh somebody right?" Um that it was a a message being sent to Trump.

A message.

I don't even know.

I wouldn't even go that far.

more likely just somebody who thought they could mess with him.

I doubt it was a message message from anybody important.

Well, Gavin Newsome continues his uh uh dangerous rhetoric.

Um he ordered what he called a code red and ordered his base to quote push back against the quote Gestapo.

So, if you tell your your base that you have a code red, does that sound like an exaggeration?

It doesn't.

It sounds like you're really warning them of an actual physical immediate danger.

That's that's how I hear it.

Do you hear that differently?

What why would a leader say there's a code red about something that important?

I mean, if it were something unimportant like, "Oh, there are too many traffic tickets.

It's a code red." Well, you wouldn't take that seriously.

But if you're talking about the government of the country and you say it's a code red cuz the Gestapo is taking over, that sounds like you mean it.

Now, most people are going to know it's not exactly literal.

But if you've got tens of millions of people hearing the same message, some unfortunately too many will think that that is literally what's happening because that's what they heard.

I heard that's happening.

So, in the backdrop of Newsome with this super dangerous rhetoric, an ice facility got shot up just hours after he said that, Jesse Waters talking about it on Fox News.

And uh and also Tom Holman apparently uh I didn't know this, but Jesse Waters said it.

Um he's been forced out of his home because the threats are too high.

And uh Newsome wants the ICE agents to be unmasked.

Um so some some uh young man, 29 years old Joshua John, he shot uh several bullets into a Dallas ICE facility, which uh had the unfortunate effect of uh killing one detainee, one uh non-citizen, and critically wounding two others that were in a transport van.

And then I guess John killed himself.

And the shell casings apparently are engraved with the message anti-ICE.

Now, Heraldo Rivero, um I think fairly I think it's fair that he said uh that he's entirely unconvinced that it was an ICE that it was somebody who was against ICE because who they killed were only the people ICE picked up.

And maybe, you know, maybe there was some way for the shooter to know that he was shooting the people he presumably would have wanted to protect.

So, there's something about the story that doesn't make sense unless the shooter was shooting randomly or didn't know exactly where he was shooting or was, you know, literally insane in more than just a shooter way to be insane.

So, there is a little bit of fog of war here.

But um the conservatives who say uh anti-ICE on the bullet, we're kind of done here.

There there's no additional investigation needed.

He wrote it on the bullets.

Now, that's a pretty good argument, but it also doesn't explain why he shot who he shot.

you know, even from a distance, from a roof, wouldn't you know that the van would be full of uh full of the people you're trying to protect instead of the people you're trying to kill?

Wouldn't wouldn't anybody know that?

That the van is not going to be full of employees, is it?

At a ICE facility.

So, I do think that there's cause for a little bit a little bit of wait and see, but just a little bit.

So, I'm going to give Heraldo a Heraldo is a advocate for uh non-legal citizens in a number of domains.

And uh I don't know, I'm going to give him a little bit of uh grace on that point.

I don't think it's going to come down that way.

I think it'll be exactly what it looks like.

And the guy wasn't, you know, just shot the wrong place.

That that seems to be believable.

But I'll wait.

I I do assume that it's exactly what it looks like, but it might not be.

Could be could be fooled.

Well, JD Vance had some strong words to say about Gavin Newsome and other people with this strong rhetoric.

and he said, "You can go straight to hell and you have no place in the political conversation in the United States." Um, so he he said more.

He said, "Because here's what happens when Democrats like Gavin Newsome say these people are quote part of an authoritarian government.

When they lie about who they're arresting, uh, what they're doing is encouraging crazy people to go and commit violence.

You don't have to agree with our policies, but if your political rhetoric encourages violence against our law enforcement, you can go straight to hell.

Now, it seems like everybody is doing this.

Um, I have to use some curse words to look like a strong leader.

I feel like it's already overdone.

Are you having that feeling that it's overdone?

I I mean, I think uh JD used it in an appropriate way and go go straight to hell is not the worst thing that anybody said.

It's not, you know, it's not things that Newsome is saying at the moment.

So, I mean, it's a little bit controlled and it is on point and it does make, you know, show the depth of his feeling about it.

So, I would say it's well chosen, but I'm just seeing so much of it now that it feels like they've leaders are running out of ideas.

It's like, you don't really need to do that, do you?

Now, I don't mind it.

I mean, I'm not against cursing.

It's just if you do too much of it and it becomes gratuitous, it loses its uh its power.

However, I don't think JD lost power on this one.

So, this is more reminding me that there's too much of it.

I don't I don't think he overused it in this particular case.

Um but JD also said and I think this is important.

Um he said I think in particular my Democratic colleagues need to ask some very hard questions about why it is that folks from their side of the political aisle seem to be engaged in these politically motivated attacks.

And I think it's important for them to look in the mirror and say, uh, you know, can we actually take some steps, blah, blah, but he also says, can we actually take some steps to police some of the violent rhetoric on our own side?

Now, that's what I want to see.

That's exactly what I want to see.

I want to see some acknowledgement that it's not a perfectly clean situation on either side, but maybe one is a little worse than the other.

But if you say it's only happening on one side, it only takes one example to prove you wrong.

And you know, surely there will be one example.

So I like I like JD saying we have to police ourselves.

You know, the right has to police itself.

don't use this violent rhetoric if you want a chance of getting the left to do the same.

And I think that's true.

See, this is not one of those cases where you want to go, "Oh, they went hard and they used rhetoric to kill some of our people, so we should go hard and use rhetoric that might cause somebody to kill some of their people." No.

No.

That's too far.

And in the long run, it's not going to help you.

it's going to be worse for the country in a big way.

Like in a really big way.

So JD, I think um hit all of the notes kind of perfectly.

Kind of perfectly.

I'm impressed.

All right, I'm going to get back to that in a minute.

But uh this story uh is really interesting because I'm going to tie together a few things here.

So it'll look like this has changed in the topic, but watch how I cleverly tie it all together.

So ABC News has a new documentary and the important part of this story is that it's ABC News.

Now, you know, ABC News, we believe, is sort of uh a left-leaning news entity, and you would not expect them to do anything that was clearly and unamiguously bad for a leading Democrat, right?

You wouldn't expect that.

But the ABC's News documentary is about a Pennsylvania woman, Ellen Greenberg, who was stabbed 20 times.

This was some years ago in 2011 and it was ruled a suicide by the then attorney general Josh Shapiro.

So Josh Shapiro is often mentioned as the strongest or one of the strongest candidates for maybe future president.

Huh?

So, why in the world would ABC News dredge up a story from 2011 to try to destroy Josh Shapiro?

Because it looks like that's the only purpose.

Why would the left destroy one of their leading names from the left?

Well, here's my belief.

All right, this is speculation, but I believe that the the the real criminal elements in the Democrat party, I mean, the super criminals, I'm talking about the the Clintons, super criminals, as far as I can tell.

Um, they they are reinstituting their what do you call it?

The uh Clinton Global Initiative, which we all believe was a money laundering operation.

And in order for that to work again, they would need not just a Democrat in office, but they would need one that they could say, "Hey, other countries, uh, this president whose office, it's not us.

I It's not the Clintons, but it's somebody who's so tight with us that we can get them to do some favors if you give us a huge amount of money that we can launder into our own pockets, right?

So, if the Clinton Global Initiative is starting up again or trying to, that must mean that they've picked somebody they know they can work with if that person becomes president.

And here's my speculation.

They don't think they can work with Josh Shapiro.

They do think they can make a lot of money with Gavin Newsome.

So, what I'm going to be looking for is to see if the most criminal people, the ones you just know are criminals, um are all backing Nuome because if they do, that would suggest they know that he can be um he he can be their Biden or their their Obama or whatever they need him to be.

So, I don't think it's a coincidence that ABC News is is strangling one of their own.

The only reason to do that is if one of their own could beat Nuome in a primary and Josh Shapiro could beat Nuome in a primary.

He does he does have the the ability.

So that's what I think.

So I think that the the power people in the Democrat party have already picked Nuome.

It probably won't matter what the public thinks because they will tell the public what to think.

That's how it works.

they'll just tell him he he's the guy.

He's the only one that can beat him.

And in the meantime, uh Hillary Clinton says, I think it was yesterday, uh we have to stop demonizing each other.

And then she demonized the Republicans.

It's it's almost it looks like a joke.

I mean, it looks like Saturday Night Live or something where she says we have to stop demonizing them.

And without taking a breath, she didn't even pause before she demonized them.

Uh, incredible.

All right, let me give you my strongest opinion on all this rhetoric stuff.

And uh as J D said uh JD Vance um I also believe that there are people on the right who say things that go too far and might but hasn't happened yet might potentially you know cause somebody to act in a in a violent way and we don't want that.

So I'm against that.

However, there does seem to be a difference in the ric rhetoric on the two sides.

You know, as I said, calling somebody dumb as a rock doesn't make you want to do anything violent.

Saying somebody is Gestapo and they're taking power and they're going to take your democracy definitely makes you think of violence.

So, I'm going to say that the Democrat leaders are 100% to blame for recent violence against Republicans.

Now, let me be clear.

The way our legal system works is that the people who push, you know, pulled the trigger are the only ones who can be blamed.

But that's because that's the only practical way to run a legal system.

You couldn't say, well, yeah, he murdered somebody, but in fourth grade, uh, he had some bad influences or really, you know, have fourth grade inputs.

That doesn't work.

The only way you can organize a society is that the person who does the act gets punished.

But whoever talked them into it or influenced them or brainwash them, unless it's really direct and really immediate, doesn't count.

They get a pass.

Well, as a trained hypnotist who studies um persuasion a lot, let me tell you with 100% certainty, it is the Democrat leaders that are causing the violence.

There's not even the slightest chance that it's any other way because do you know what causes action?

Ideas and at least uh complex actions.

simple actions like a reflex, there's not much thinking involved.

But a complex action like I'm going to do a plan, I'm going to be in a place, I'll have these assets, I'll do this thing.

If it's a complex plan, that only can happen because you have an idea.

Let's say the idea is that Hitler has taken over the country.

It doesn't have to be a correct idea.

It just has to be a full idea in order to get a complex action.

Now, there's no exception to that.

Can can we agree on that?

That for a human being to do a complex action, they have to have an idea in their head that matches the complex action.

Would you agree?

There's no question about that.

Now, what causes an idea to be in a head?

How many people would have thought, "Hey, I think I'll climb on a roof and start shooting people if they if their entire influence in life had been sitting in a darkened room by themselves.

If they had no if they had no input from anything, do you think they would say, "Huh, of all the things I could be doing, I feel like I'll get a gun and climb on a roof and start shooting people." No.

No.

There's there is no way that that complex idea gets in your head without being put there.

It has to be put there.

You don't go looking for it.

It has to be put there.

That's the way it all works.

It's the way it works on both sides.

It's not just a Democrat thing.

All of our complex ideas about politics on the right and the left were put there.

You don't have an original idea in your head, nor do I.

All of our ideas were put there.

And so if somebody climbs on a roof and starts shooting, it is a reasonable question, what put that there?

Now, they might also be crazy, but even crazy people have a wide range of things they could have been doing that day.

Why' they pick that one thing?

It's because somebody put it there.

They put the And the way you put an idea in people's heads is what?

How do you put an idea in somebody's head?

Well, sometimes you can show an image, you know, meme, but mostly in politics with words.

And those words are Nazi, Hitler, Gestapo, stealing your democracy, autocrat, oligarch.

Oligarch doesn't get you killed.

I I will give Bernie credit if I may.

Bernie Sanders is sort he's always been a mixed bag.

He'll he'll do 10 things I hate and then one thing where I'll go, "Oh, okay.

That's actually quite reasonable." One of the things that Bernie Sanders does is he doesn't do this Hitler does he?

I don't believe he does.

Uh, now it also makes his rhetoric kind of, you know, empty.

They're an oligarch.

Do do you do you climb on a roof to choose somebody who's an oligarch?

Not really.

Oligarch would be in the category of dumb as a rock.

That they both are just insults.

Typical.

But you don't go kill somebody for being dumb as a rock.

You don't kill somebody for being an oligarch.

You just you just don't.

But that other stuff, oh yeah, you start making a plan if you hear those other words.

So words create ideas, ideas create action.

There's no other way it happens.

You know, pictures can augment the words, but even the pictures wouldn't do the trick without the words.

So the words are the the key part there.

So, um, I and I'm going to say it again, the Democrat leaders are not slightly, maybe a little bit guilty.

They are 100% There is no other thing.

There is no other thing at work.

It is only that 100% guilty for causing the violence.

And you could guarantee that there'd be more.

there's not, you know, if they continue talking the way they're talking, we haven't seen the end of it, it's guaranteed to be more.

So, I would ask uh as JD Vance has noted that uh Republicans start watching their own their own camp.

All right.

You've got a responsibility to make sure your side is saying dumb as a rock and not Nazi.

Now, we all use it.

I've done it myself, but I've always been conscious that nobody would act on it.

You know, I'm sometimes just using it rhetorically or whatever.

But never I'm never trying to sell it like it's actually Hiller.

Never.

But the Democrats are selling it like it's actually Hiller.

That gives them 100% guilt, not legally.

Because remember, our system only punishes the person who does the act.

So they're, you know, they can always say, well, you know, a person has free will.

Uh, I was just making a point.

Oh, it's not me.

No, it is you.

You Gavin Newsome.

You are a piece of Now, does that make you want to climb on a building and do something bad?

No.

No.

He's a piece of Doesn't inspire violence.

So, it's a well-chosen phrase.

But boy, he is he is garbage.

I mean, that man is absolute piece of because he knows he's doing it.

He he's by far smart enough to know that he is the primary driver of things right now.

And uh to imagine that he's okay with it.

Oh my god.

Oh my god.

He is a truly broken man.

Now, if I said he's truly evil and he wants you to die, then you would think, hm, maybe violence is the right answer.

But if I say he's broken, it gives you a different feel, right?

You're like, "Oh, okay.

I I need to fix this.

I need to make sure he doesn't get elected, but I don't need to do any crazy violent stuff.

He's just broken." So, that man is broken.

And uh so here's what I think.

Generally speaking in this political realm, whenever the Democrats do something to uh Republicans, say lawfare, the Republicans say, "Yeah, we don't like lawfare, but they did it to us, and the only way to stop it in the future is we do it to them." That does not apply to violence.

You you all know that, right?

If if the Republicans decided or any individual Republicans decided on violence, that's not helping.

That that doesn't move us forward.

So, don't do it.

You will not be you will not be treated as a hero by Republicans.

If you do violence, you will not be treated as a hero.

You will be treated as scum.

And uh you know, you have to live with that.

Um, but more importantly, I believe the Democrat party is in full collapse mode.

And you don't have to do anything violent, even if you were tempted.

You You just don't have to because things are moving very much in the right direction if you're on the right.

So, I think you could wait this one out.

And, uh, All right.

Um, apparently James Comey, the rumor is he'll be indicted for lying to Congress.

So, he lied about five years ago.

Allegedly.

Allegedly, he lied to Congress.

We're pretty sure that he did.

And, uh, I guess they have until the end of September, which is any moment now, um, to get in before that statute of limitations runs out.

So, are you in favor of going after Trump's enemies?

Does it feel like Trump has an enemy list or that um Cash Patel has an enemies list?

Allegedly, he had a list of people in his book or something.

Well, um I don't know if Comey is the biggest criminal in this bunch, but uh this is one of those cases where they did jail they did jail uh Republicans for behavior that's in this category.

You got to do it.

You have to do it.

Now, of course, um I only want this to happen if it's a a real crime, really made a difference, and the court system, you know, operates the way it should and they come to that conclusion.

I don't want him railroaded.

You know, I don't want to purely lawfare him, but uh there does need to be some lawfare balance and uh he he's going to have some trouble coming.

Um JD Vance when he's talking about the potential for uh legal action against all these various Democrats, he said, quote, "A lot of people broke the law in the last administration.

They've got to face real justice, not just words, not just getting hauled before a committee on Capitol Hill.

If people broke the law, they have to actually be prosecuted." Uh he says, "I think the only thing the far left really responds to is power.

If they get off scotfree, they're never investigated.

They're going to be prosecuted when they violate the law.

Blah blah blah.

Now, here's what I think.

I I think the left has demonstrated that they'll use every tool at their disposal, no matter what the right does.

So, I don't think it makes any difference.

I I think if the right punish them back the same way and put a bunch of them in jail, it wouldn't make any difference.

They're still going to use every tool that they could use, especially if it once worked or almost worked, such as lawfaring Trump almost worked.

You know, in some ways it worked, but not the way they wanted it to.

So, I would disagree with JD that what the right does to the left makes a difference to what the left will do.

The left will use every tool that they have.

They're not they're not going to say, "Oh, oh, you know what?

It worked the last time we tried it, but uh we've noticed that the Republicans did not, you know, give it back to us as much as we gave it.

So, I I guess we won't do it again." No.

No.

They're going to use every tool every time.

So, I'm in favor of the uh Republicans giving as good as they get, but not because it changes the behavior of the other team.

It's because, you know, you got to use the toolbox.

If if they give you a tool by, you know, justifying it as something that can happen in politics, once they've justified it something that can happen in politics, then I think the Republicans are just taking players off the table.

and they have every right to do that.

It it would not be immoral or unethical to use their tool against them just to remove players.

So, Comey is a player.

Not much of a player now, but a little bit.

And uh I think he's just a warm-up act.

I think Comey might be the easy one because they can just say, "All right, here's a video of him lying.

Here's the proof that he lied.

Here's the law that applies.

Boom.

So, it could be that the uh the Trump administration wants to make sure that they get an easy win and then then they can ramp up to get to Brennan and Clapper and maybe even Obama.

We'll see.

Well, apparently there's the first ever Antifa domestic terrorist arrest.

It's never happened before.

U the Postmillennial is writing about this.

Um there several Antifa members were arrested in Eugene, Oregon.

Um I guess they were terrorizing employees at some ICE facility.

So they got arrested as domestic terrorists.

Well, we'll see if that works out.

I'm sure there'll be all kinds of legal challenges to that, but we'll see.

I thought somebody said that there's no such thing as a domestic terrorism law.

I I heard that the other day on social media, but is that true?

Do you get any extra penalty for being a domestic terrorist versus just bothering people where you shouldn't be?

I don't know.

I don't know about that.

I'll have to find out about it.

Well, the budget debacle is beginning again.

Uh, Republicans want a 7-week extension.

Do you know why?

Because they're completely incompetent and unable to work with Democrats.

Do you know why they can't work with the Democrats to get something done on time?

Because the Democrats are completely incompetent and can't work with the Republicans.

So, Congress is just completely broken um on the most important thing they do, which is allocating money.

They just can't do it.

And it doesn't look like there's anything that will ever change that.

I I think you could change the personnel.

Wouldn't make any difference there.

There's nothing you can do.

We're we're basically running headlong into financial certainly disaster and nobody has even an idea what you would do differently.

So, we're going to kick this stupid can down the road.

I'm gonna hate the members of Congress with a white hot fire that I've, you know, is at a level that you've never seen before.

Uh, meanwhile, the Democrats are pushing for hundreds of billions of dollars of extra spending for health care and some other things.

But uh the these are things which Congress intentionally looked at and decided not to do, at least the majority did.

And um but apparently there's a new wrinkle.

So uh Russ Vot um is saying that there might be massive layoffs if there's a shutdown of the government.

So if there's a government shutdown, the Trump administration is going to use that as an excuse to fire massive numbers of people that maybe wouldn't have been fired otherwise.

So do you think that the Democrats will cave because they'll say, "Oh, no, no, we have to save those thousands of Democrat jobs." They might.

I've never seen anybody um offer to make this play before.

the all right well you can you can delay the budget but if there's no budget I'm going to have to fire all the people who are unfunded well not all of them some are some are necessary but all you Democrats doing things that Democrats like not funded so you're all fired and if you ever fund it great but there's nobody working there so you you'd be funding you know a whole um it feels like a good play.

I don't know how this will turn out yet.

I won't make a prediction, but it feels like a strong play by by the Trump people.

Um, it's a brand new variable.

That's what Trump does so well.

If there's a situation that nobody could ever negotiate before, he'll add a new variable.

And it's a new variable that changes the balance of everything.

So, it's a new variable.

Um, at least in in concept, it's very well played by adding a a new variable.

That's a strong one.

Well, there's I I may have the name wrong here, but it looked like there's a some You.

Tube channel by uh Cam Higgby, maybe some other people.

It looks like they're trying to duplicate the um Charlie Kirk College debates.

So they went to TSU and they tried to do the thing where anybody could come up and debate them and uh it formed and they said there was an anti-white riot that erupted because they were so hated for just being uh white Christians with a you know MAGA hat that it just caused a riot basically an anti-white riot.

they called it.

But I uh was amused because I' I've seen Charlie Kirk do the same thing.

So they were doing the debate before I guess before the trouble started and there was a young black man, a student who was pointing out um the discrimination and the inequality for uh black Americans.

And so I don't know if it was Cam or maybe he's just the one who does the videos.

Um, so the young white guy who was taking the questions and the debate, he said, "Can you give me an example of, let's say, a law that uh would prevent you from doing something but allow me to do something?" Uh, no.

No.

I can't think of any examples.

All right.

Well, is there any non-legal thing that I can do that you can't do in America?

Uh well all all the things you know the the the you know the the the the things all the things.

So amazingly black Americans don't know that they have superior rights in this country and have for a long time.

They have superior rights.

Meaning that uh if I wanted a job and I got to got a choice to be black or white just for the purpose of looking for a job, what do you think I would pick?

I mean, seriously, I would pick black every time.

And so would all of you.

That's why that's why literally nobody uh nobody claims to be white if they can also claim to be black.

Even Obama um downplayed his whiteness, you know, half white because being black was his advantage and he knew it.

So, how do you fix that?

Because I don't think this model fixes it because they they hate the white guys and the red hats.

So, anything those guys say is not going to stick.

But I I keep thinking if I could mentor, you know, a uh an 18-year-old black kid, the first thing I'd say is, "All right, you know that you have a huge advantage in employment, right?

And a huge advantage in getting scholarships and a huge advantage in complaining.

Just you have an advantage in almost everything.

And if you find a place where you don't have an advantage, let's say a small business or something that's discriminating, cuz that would still exist, don't go there.

I would say, oh yeah, yeah, there are companies that might discriminate against you.

But not big ones, not a Fortune 500.

They're not going to discriminate.

They're going to discriminate in your favor every time.

So go there.

Just don't go where you think there might be some discrimination.

I'll tell you where to go and you'll get a job every time.

How about if you were a young black professional and you wanted to get some mentoring, but you look around and you know there's there are no other black faces and senior management.

Do you think you'd have trouble getting a white um a white let's say uh executive of your company to agree to mentor you?

No, you would not have a trouble getting that.

They would say yes before you finished the sentence.

Uh, hi Mr.

So and so.

Uh, you know, I would I wondered if you could men Yes.

No, you're going to get a yes before you finish the sentence.

You're going to get a yes for mentoring, a yes for financing, a yes for hiring, a yes for college applications, a yes for medical school, a yes for law school.

How do you not know that if you're an 18-year-old black guy?

How do you not know that all the advantages, the racist advantages are in your direction?

I don't know.

So, but the college debates are not going to change anybody's mind about that.

You need some entirely different process.

Well, you probably heard that Jezebel, which is a disreputable um lying piece of organization that I'm surprised is still in business, but it's a bunch of uh I feminists and horrible people.

Not that feminists are horrible people, but they're feminists and horrible people.

Uh they happen to be both.

And apparently they paid some witches that they found on Etsy to curse Charlie Kirk two days before he was assassinated.

And they actually published that.

They pub I think they published it after he was assassinated.

And they published it that they got witches to try to kill him and he got killed.

So apparently Erica Kirk, a widow of Charlie Kirk, was quote genuinely rattled by it.

Now I'm not a believer in witchcraft, so I would not have been too worried about the the witchiness of it, but I'll tell you what I do believe in affirmations.

And I worry, I don't have proof of this, so this is, you know, a little bit of woo woo on my my part, but doesn't it seem that the things that happen in life are the things we're thinking about the most?

In my personal life, the way my life has turned out is very much similar to whatever I thought about and wanted the most to to the point where it looks like, how could that even be a coincidence that the things I thought about the most actually happened?

Good and bad.

Good and bad.

My cancer I've been thinking about since my 20s.

This specific cancer, not just cancer.

Um, prostate cancer.

I've been worried about it and obsessed about it since I was in my 20s.

I started researching it in my 20s in anticipation of getting it.

Now, is that coincidence?

Well, it's, you know, it's the most popular or common cancer for an adult man.

So on one hand it's just a coincidence but not even a big one.

Uh but I do worry that when people focus too much on one outcome there's a weird bias toward that thing happening that I've noticed all my life and it could be just my imagination.

Yeah, maybe there's nothing to it.

But, uh, when I hear that a bunch of witches and some writers at Jezebel all started to think about a bad thing happening to one person at the same time and and on the same day.

I wonder, you know, I don't believe in witchcraft, but I do wonder if we live in a simulation where you can cause it to collapse on a certain set of realities based on what you're thinking about.

I wonder.

Um, so the Trump administration wants Congress to end what is called anti-racist teacher training grants to universities.

The College Fix is writing about this as well.

Now, you you might say to yourself, wait a minute, why would you want to end anti-racist?

Wouldn't that be like agreeing with racists?

No, the anti-racist stuff was the racist stuff.

The anti-racist stuff is basically saying that white people suck and white men suck more than the rest of white people.

So, no.

Yes, the anti-racist stuff is racist.

Just overtly obviously, no question about it, way over the top racist.

And uh yeah, I want that halted.

Um, according to the New York Post, uh, Trump is stopping, uh, I guess there had been a regular report on food insecurity, but like everything else, it turned out to be, uh, fake data and, uh, the food insecurity would include anybody who wasn't sure if they could get food in the future.

So, it's not people who are hungry or don't have food.

It's people who just feel insecure about being able to have it in the future.

And I'm not sure that's telling you what you need to know.

So, probably was a waste of money.

Um, they stopped that.

Well, over in Denmark, there's some drones that have been plaguing them over airports and whatnot.

So, multiple drones last few days.

And the assumption was in the beginning that it was Russia and they were just, you know, messing with a NATO country.

Do you believe that Russia decided to, you know, skip over other countries and plague Denmark in particular?

Does that make sense that they wouldn't be doing it to, you know, France and Germany and, you know, Great Britain, but they decided to to pick on Denmark of all places and then to put a bunch of, you know, drones in the sky.

Now, some people are saying, "But wait, we don't know that these are Russian drones.

We don't.

Maybe they're UFOs.

Maybe this is the same problem that the USA had." Right?

Um, so but here's my takeaway from this.

Are you telling me that Denmark can't shoot down a drone?

Like any drones?

They don't have any way to shoot down a drone.

Seriously, Denmark, a NATO country, can't shoot down a drone that's loitering.

It's not like the drones even like snuck in and attacked something and blew up before you could get them.

They're just hanging around.

Are you telling me that drones, multiple drones just hanging around for days and Denmark doesn't have the ability to shoot one down and NATO doesn't have the ability to shoot one down?

What's going on here?

So, I'm going to say there's something about the story that's either seriously missing or maybe what, you know, I I'm even trying to imagine what Russia would get out of this if it were them.

One thing they might get out of it is proving that there's no air defense.

They have no air defense.

You know, I I don't understand why the US didn't shoot down our drones.

the the story was that they were actually our own drones.

So now I guess I understand why you don't shoot down your own drones, but Denmark doesn't seem to think it's theirs.

They can shoot those down.

They're not manned.

Why in the world wouldn't you shoot it down?

I don't know.

There's something missing in that story.

Well, according to N strike 1231, uh Trump is launching nuclear exercises in Europe.

So, they're doing some long range bomber flights and stuff.

And the thinking is this is to just rattle uh Putin's cage because we don't have really much going on there that's going to threaten him.

So at least you know acting like we have a dangerous nuclear potential which we do.

Um so Rubio talking about Ukraine says that the Russian military losses are what he calls staggering.

The casualties in a single month exceed total US death deaths in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Now, I don't know if that's a good comparison because we had unusually low casualties in both Afghanistan and Iraq for, you know, the context of a war.

The other side had massive casualties, but it wasn't a normal war because it was so one-sided.

Um, but do you think that Russia has enough uh military losses that it will change anything?

I don't know.

We do know that uh uh Trump said unambiguously with no hesitation that any Russian military planes that fly over NATO territory uh they could just shoot him down cuz you can't have the Russians just, you know, testing all the defenses and going home with no no response.

So, I don't know if that's going to happen, but there might be a Russian plane that gets shot down, and we'll see if that makes any difference to anything.

Uh, Trump is saying that Ukraine, if they had the right weapons um that US and others could provide, that they would actually be able to win back the territory they've lost.

Now, I don't know anybody who believes that, that they could win back the territory.

I don't know anybody who thinks that's going to happen.

But he goes further and saying maybe they could get a little extra too take some of Russia.

So I don't see how that could possibly happen with the current variables in play.

But Trump and the administration are still pushing the other countries to stop buying Russian oil and gas.

And if he succeeded, if Trump succeeded in getting these other countries to stop buying, mostly China and India and some some European um that would collapse the uh Russian economy and might might bring them to the table.

But as others have pointed out, uh Russia still has the ability to turn off Europe's energy in the winter.

So are we seriously three and a half years into a war?

Are we seriously letting Europe's uh stupidity with energy affect us?

I mean, it's one thing when, you know, the situation first comes up, but it's been three and a half years.

If if Europe is still depending on Russia for their energy and therefore cannot mount, you know, a vigorous enough defense, uh I'm not sure how much we should protect them.

I mean, you need to do something for yourself, as in work harder to get another source of uh energy.

Um, Zilinski has warned Putin that he and Putin's officials need to find the nearest bomb shelter, uh, the nearest one to the Kremlin because he says the Kremlin's going to come under direct attack.

Now, I I think they've sent a drone or two over there before, but sounds like Zalinski plans a more major attack on the Kremlin.

Now, I don't know how Russia could fail to escalate if that happened.

I mean, the escalation is getting higher, but do you think it's possible that Zilinski could dismantle the entire um Kremlin like one drone at a time?

You know, if you just send dozens of them every day and maybe one gets through every now and then, couldn't you make the Kremlin unusable in, let's say, a month?

Could you?

And if you did something like that, what would Russia do to respond?

Maybe they're doing everything they can do short of going nuclear.

I don't know.

So, I have lots of questions about what Russia would do if we if we increase the pressure in any other way.

Apparently, there's some Mexican drug cartel members, according to publication, The European Conservative, that joined the Ukrainian military so they could learn drone warfare.

So, believe it or not, there are Spanish-speaking troops fighting for Ukraine, but apparently they're doing it more for their own training, and they are Colombian and Mexican, and that they're cartel members and they're terrorists, and they're going to take this learning back.

Great.

Terrific.

Well, you know, Greta Tunberg's got her freedom flotilla, she calls it, trying to go over there and fix everything in Gaza.

Um, and apparently it's being uh I'll say attacked um by jammers.

They're jamming their radios and playing ABBA on their radios on repeat.

Uh and they so if they keep their radios on, all they're going to get is ABBA on repeat.

And uh apparently there some other um some other kinds of attacks, non-lethal attacks are happening, but mostly to make it really unpleasant to be on that flotillaa.

Uh so the group said that Israeli military drones targeted five of their vessels.

There's quite a few vessels actually involved.

And uh damaged mass and communication equipment.

And it's the third assault on the aid bearing ships, they say.

So they got 51 boats in that operation.

That's pretty big.

They sailed from Barcelona at the end of August.

They're going to try to break that siege on Gaza.

Do you think they'll break the siege on Gaza or will they just hear a lot more ABBA than they wanted to?

Yeah, it might be Waterlue.

Exactly.

Waterlue.

Um, all right.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, that's all I have for you.

Sorry I went long.

Uh, I'm going to talk to the local subscribers, my beloved local subscribers.

I love them more every day.

The rest of you, thanks for joining.

I hope you got something out of this.

And I will see you again tomorrow.

I hope.

Same time, same place.

Uh, I would check your stocks, but

doesn't look like good news on the stock

market.

So, we'll just ignore that

and instead have the best live stream

you've ever seen. Yeah.

[Music]

Boom boom boom.

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 up to levels that nobody

can even understand with their tiny

shiny human brains. All you need for

that is

a cup or a mug or a glass of tanker

shell or st a canteen jugger flask of a

vessel of any kind. Fill it with your

favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join

me now for the unparallel pleasure. The

dopamine hit of the day. The thing that

makes everything better. It's called,

that's right, the simultaneous step. And

it happens now.

Septastic. Incredible.

Well, I have a movie review for you. The

movie Fantastic 4 is now on streaming.

So, I watched oh, maybe half of it or a

third of it last night. Um, the reason I

didn't watch the whole movie is

don't bother.

It's so bad. So, apparently Hollywood

has come up with a new technique for

casting for at least for superhero

movies. Instead of attractive,

charismatic actors, they they put in

homely

actors you don't even want to look at

for a second.

I don't know where they came up with

these. I mean, one of one of them is

famous, but he's

he's better if he's wearing a full

costume, so you can't see his face. I

hate to say it, but uh yeah, the

Fantastic Four is uh poor effects.

Um terrible casting

and absolutely unwatchable completely.

Yeah, it looked like they it looked like

they made it in a basement or something.

It looked terrible.

Well, I'd like to give you a little

warning about owning a cat. Uh, I've

already told my subscribers on locals

this, but you know, one of the things

about having a licensed character is you

get to keep some of the cool things like

this little um squishy thing. You know,

you can squeeze in stuff. So, I've got

most of the main characters in

squeezies, but I only have one set, you

know. I don't I don't have two of these.

I just have one of them.

And so if anything happened to one of

these, well, I wouldn't be very happy

about that. And then I had a cat.

Uh, this is what's left of the Alice

character.

Uh, I found her head in my shoe,

which I believe was not a random act. I

believe it was a planned terrorist act.

That's right. My cat is a terrorist.

And uh if this if that's not a warning,

I don't know what is. You know what this

warning says? Don't bring a woman into

this house to compete with us. We are

the stars of the house.

Message received. All right.

Well, there's a new study that didn't

need to be done uh in which they found

that rising gun violence in movies uh

might be increasing youth firearm

homicides. According to Scypost, Eric

Nolan is writing about this. Now, how

many of you would have already known

that the more firearms that there are in

movies and games, the more likely young

people are going to use firearms for bad

purposes? Is there anybody who didn't

know that? That's obvious. Now, I'm not

in favor of, you know, censoring that

stuff. But where do you think people get

the idea to use a gun? If they'd never

heard of a gun, like literally never

heard of one, do you think that they

would go buy one? No. You have to at

least know they exist. You have to know

kind of what it looks like to use one.

And then you have to have that idea just

pounded into your head day after day

after day after day. until you get mad

at something or somebody and what's the

first thing you think of? Oh, gun.

So, it it's not uh you know, it's not

one to one. If you watch a movie about

guns, you're going to go shoot

something. It's not that. But if you

have enough people

and you just fill them with gun content,

yes, absolutely, 100%. No doubt about

it. speaking as a hypnotist, uh the

repetition alone will cause some

percentage of people to shoot somebody

that they would have not have shot

otherwise.

So that's a real thing.

And by the way, it's not that different

from what I'll talk about in a bit,

which is the political rhetoric causing

people to do things that they wouldn't

have done without the rhetoric.

Doesn't mean you have to give up free

speech. It doesn't mean you have to give

up your guns. It does mean you should be

aware of the price of these freedoms.

It's not all good.

Well, here's something I sort of have

been hinting at for a long time.

Apparently, uh according to an article

in futurism, Frank Landymore is writing

that uh AI has not been boosting the

productivity of or the profitability of

companies. So they did a study and

looked at what companies are using AI

for and found that 95% of companies that

gambled on integrating AI into their

process saw no meaningful growth in

revenue. Well, you know, you would think

that what they're trying to do is uh

reduce their expenses.

I wouldn't think it would necessarily be

expected to grow revenue.

um you know maybe return on investment

but not revenue.

I don't you know there there aren't too

many ways to use AI that would increase

revenue that I'm aware of. Um they you

know they still can't sell as well as a

human and etc.

Well that's one that you could have just

asked me. Um, and apparently a lot of

them are looking to hire back people

that they got rid of. And um, so that's

pretty much what I warned you would

happen. And even the people using AI for

writing code,

um, there's some indication it might be

slowing them down instead of making them

better. But I think that's a mixed bag.

I think in some cases it definitely

speeds things up.

Well, in uh California, according to the

uh Daily Mail, there's been a a wave of

squirrel attacks.

So, squirrels are attacking humans, uh

jumping right up on their faces and

trying to tear them to death. Um, and at

least two people have been sent to the

emergency room from squirrel attack.

Uh, and they're happening near me in San

Rafale. That's not super dear, but

driving distance. Um, so these squirrels

are go becoming dangerous.

Um,

my only comment about the squirrels

turning dangerous are I didn't even know

squirrels could be Democrats.

I'll let that sit there for a moment

while you savor it. Um, but uh my advice

is you know what I'm going to say. You

already know what I'm going to say.

There's a dad joke coming.

Guard your nuts.

All right. Well, somebody had to say it.

If I hadn't said it, you would have said

it, right? It's not like you weren't

ready. I'm going to say it. I'm going to

say something about watch your nuts.

Watch. Nobody will think of this. Ha. I

got there first.

Uh well uh Secretary Kennedy is uh happy

that Maha has another win. Apparently

the UTS brands UTZ I guess that's a big

food brand. Um they're going to fully

transition away from synthetic dyes by

the end of 2027.

So, Maha gets another win and uh and

Kennedy is urging other companies to

follow suit. So, so far I'm liking what

I'm seeing because you're seeing a lot

of voluntary action and that's the best.

I mean, if you can get them to do things

voluntarily.

All right, in other news, the former

French president just got sentenced to

five years in prison for I guess back in

I don't know 2007 or something. Um it

was a while ago. He uh allegedly and now

he's convicted of uh accepting money for

his campaign from Libyan leader Moar

Gaddafi. So New York Times is writing

about this. So that was surprised of you

that a leader of a major country, one of

our allies, was

I hate to say a crook,

but what would you call it if somebody

takes money from a Libyan dictator to uh

run for president? I don't know. It's

crooked head, but I don't I don't know

exactly what the word for that would be,

but uh there he goes. Now, my question

would be this.

How many ex leaders of major countries,

and I'm talking about, you know, NATO

countries, not not small little

countries, but how many of them do you

think you could find an actual crime at

least as bad as this one, which is

accepting uh campaign funds from a

dictator? Don't you feel like it's

nearly all of them?

I I feel like the only thing that's

different about Sarosi is that maybe he

got caught. Don't you think they've all

done a little little something

something?

Is it just me?

I feel like, you know, if you tried, you

could put every one of them in jail. So,

I don't know what the real story is

there. maybe had more to do with

somebody wanting him in jail than what

it was he did.

Well, Scott Bent out of the Treasury

um says that if Zoren Mumani gets

elected mayor in New York City, as you

know, he's a kami mum dummy. Um and uh

Scott Besson says that if New York City

asks for a bailout because they have

money problems from the if they ask for

a bailout from the federal government,

um they will not get it and they will be

told to drop dead.

So that's another reason to not vote for

the communist. Um because there would be

no reason throwing good money after bad.

So the feds would say, "Well, you voted

for him. You work it out." So

it feels like a reasonable position.

We'll see if they change their mind.

Well, as you know, um, nearly all

schools are left-leaning and, uh,

Oklahoma just came up with a, uh, sort

of a stop gap way to address the fact

that the teachers unions and the schools

are pretty much thoroughly left-leaning.

And what they're going to do is

establish Turning Point USA chapters in

all state high schools according to the

the Epoch Times. Joseph Lord is writing

about this. So what do you think of that

idea? The So Oklahoma is going to force

I mean they don't have to force it too

hard because people want to do it. Uh

turning points in every single state

high school. I like that.

I like that better than trying to erase

the left-leaning influence. Um, just put

another influence in there. And

uh, now if we do Thailand all Americans

are autistic when they do something

dumb.

Eric Ericson is saying that high school

boys are calling each other Tylenol

Americans instead of autists.

Uh, they're cruel. They're cruel. It's

funny though.

Anyway, so Oklahoma, good experiment. We

don't know if it'll work, but definitely

worth a shot.

Uh, let's see.

There's a the college fix is writing

about there's a large study of uh

syllabi in colleges. you know the

syllabi

that would be plural of syllabus.

Yeah, the syllabi. Uh so they looked at

the syllabi which is you know the the

list of what they're going to teach in

the classes and uh they found out that

the uh college professors predominantly

present left-wing perspective on all the

u all the you know controversial stuff.

So if it's anything from uh you know the

Palestinian situation, abortion,

etc., racial bias, all those things, you

get only the left-wing

view.

So do you think colleges need their own

turning points USA?

Yes, they do. Yes, they do.

Well, the first lady of Florida, Casey

Dantis, um she's getting involved in

looking into cancer studies and she's

looking into generic drugs or drugs that

already exist. And is going to find out

if any of them have a purpose or a use

in cancer. And she mentioned Ivormectin

as the the one that's sort of at the top

of the interest list. Now, you know what

I'm going to say, right?

Well, as luck would have it, I have

cancer, so I know a little bit more

about this topic than those who don't

have cancer, probably. Unless you're a

doctor.

Well, what do you think I'm going to say

about ivormectin being a cure for

cancer? You you've heard me before. All

right. I'm a little surprised that this

is still a question and that

well-meaning, intelligent, you know,

educated people are still believing that

there's a real good chance that

Ivormectin cures cancer. Here is what

you would need, and I've said this

before. This is what you would need to

convince me that there's something to

it. Now obviously a you know randomized

controlled you know gold standard study

would be great but short of that I would

I would settle for anybody who had an

incurable cancer who cured it with

ivormectin.

Now I know what you're going to say but

but but Scott I heard about that guy. No

you didn't. No you didn't. You did not

hear about a guy who got cured of cancer

with ivormectin. you believe he did and

there's a there's a real person named

with a real name and has a real life and

if he asked him he'd say oh yeah this

ivormectton cured my cancer but what you

would need to convince me and ideally

it's what what it would take to convince

you as well is you would need the

patient with a story you'd need the

oncologist not any other doctor you not

not some random doctor but the actual

oncologist who treated them. You would

have to see their medical records and

you would have to see in the medical

records that they used no other

treatment, nothing else. And then you

can say, well, this was incurable. The

doctor can confirm that this is the only

thing that they did. You can look at the

record. You see that they used to have

terrible cancer. And look at this

updated medical record. It's all clear

now.

Well, you're never going to see that. Do

you know why? If it were true

that Ivormectton worked, obviously the

oncologists would know about it by now.

Not everyone, but clearly there would be

an oncologist who had a patient who

said, "Oh my god, we've we may have

discovered something amazing, so let's

let's at least share it with the world

and see, you know, maybe somebody else

is noticing this, too." But there's not

one, not one, not one oncologist with a

patient with, and this is very

important, you can't leave this out,

with the medical record before and

after.

How hard would that be? Now, um, I think

a year and a half ago, I told you I was

working on a very big project. Uh,

didn't work out.

The big project was I tried Ivormectin

and if it had cured my cancer or even

reduced it a little bit. I would have

told everybody. I would have forced my

oncologist to go public and say, "Look,

you're coming with me." Well, I don't do

that kind of thing. Yes, you do. Yeah,

you're coming with me. You're going to

be on this. You're going to you're going

to tell the world

uh you're going to show them my medical

record and you're going to confirm with

me that this cured my cancer that was

unccurable.

Well, nothing like that happened, but I

did get on testosterone blockers which

um had a huge just a gigantic impact on

reducing my symptoms, etc. It's not a

cure. But my guess is that the people

who have claims that the ivormectton

worked, they're either lying or they

might have been on something else such

as testosterone blockers and they're

just not talking about it. So, there's

something going on. But I will give you

a 100% odds that you can't just take

nothing but iroken and cure your cancer.

I I will give a 100% certainty of that.

You would definitely know about it by

now because every oncologist would want

to go public with that if they'd even

seen it once. Right now, you will see

some doctors say, "Um, yes, it cured all

kinds of people. All of my patients, oh,

so many of my patients are cured of it."

They're all making money by selling you

that advice.

find somebody who was going to make the

same amount of money whether you got

cured or not. That would be my

oncologist. It's just a Kaiser

oncologist. So, he gets paid the same.

If you can give somebody who gets paid

the same, no matter whether it works or

not, and they say it works, well, I

would listen to that. But don't listen

to somebody who's made a career out of

it. that uh you know that that's just

not credible by by its nature. All

right. Uh let me tell you what will

happen as soon as I get back on X. There

will be somebody who said, "Scott, you

idiot. I know of the one guy who

cured." No. Listen to me. If all you

know is the name of one guy, you don't

have anything. But Scott, I know this

doctor who says he or she is cured. No,

doesn't count. Just the doctor doesn't

count. Worth nothing. But Scott, I saw

the medical record. No, you didn't. No,

you didn't. You need the patient. You

need the doctor who treated him, the

oncologist, not some random doctor. And

you need the medical records before and

after. Anything short of that is

All right, that's my final word on that.

Uh Trump is talking about Kla Harris and

has referred to her as quote dumb as a

rock

and he's complaining because Kla keeps

saying on her book tour that uh she

saying on her book tour that uh she lost

the election but it was the closest

presidential election, you know, in in a

lifetime or something. This is not even

close to true. It's just totally made up

out of nothing. And does she really

think that we didn't pay attention to

the presidential election? Is there

anything that got more publicity than

the presidential election? Who who in

the world thinks it was close, as in

closer than anything's ever been? Well,

it was not. Um, but it does make you

wonder if she believes it.

So, Trump said it wasn't close. She's

dumb as a rock and uh California's

election was rigged.

So there's that. Now I would compare the

rhetoric from the right to the rhetoric

from the left. So here's some, you know,

hard rhetoric from the right. If uh you

heard that Trump called Kamla dumb as a

rock, would you buy a gun and climb on a

roof and try to hurt her? Because after

all, she's dumb as a rock.

No. No, you would not because you don't

shoot people because somebody said their

brain isn't good. That doesn't happen.

But what would happen if you said, "Oh,

it's a dictator trying to steal your

democracy. He's a Nazi and he's trying

to be another Hitler." Well, you might.

If you believe that were is literally

true, there's nothing you wouldn't do.

But no, dumb as I rock that does not

motivate people to violence.

Um, so Trump is calling for an immediate

investigation

about the UN events. He, so there were

three systems of failed that all

impacted Trump directly. So the

escalator failed the moment that he and

uh Melania got on it so that they had to

walk up the steps, you know, kind of

kind of uh inelegant and uh certainly

bothered him. But the UN said, "Oh, we

looked into it and it was just a weird

coincidental mistake

maybe." But then the teleprompter didn't

work for the first 15 minutes.

And does that I mean that happens

sometimes, right? But luckily Trump is

one of the most uh maybe the most gifted

public speaker we've ever seen in

America. And so he didn't need the

teleprompter. He could just do his thing

until it worked and then he then he got

back on it. U then also I didn't realize

this that the sound system in the room

didn't work. So the only way you could

have heard him is if you had the um the

interpreter uh headphones in. I think it

it wasn't projecting just you know to

the room in general. So those are three

things which if you told me that all

three of them happened by coincidence

and to the same leader I would say to

you

no

one of those things maybe one maybe

three the the three things that are most

directly related to him being able to do

his thing. No that's uh I could be

wrong. Right. We live in a world where,

you know, strange things do happen. But

if you're gonna ask me to believe that

was completely a coincidence, no. Uh

I've seen I saw at least one person say,

"Was it uh somebody

right?" Um

that it was a a message being sent to

Trump. A message. I don't even know. I

wouldn't even go that far. more likely

just somebody who thought they could

mess with him. I doubt it was a message

message from anybody important.

Well, Gavin Newsome

continues his uh uh dangerous rhetoric.

Um he ordered what he called a code red

and ordered his base to quote push back

against the quote Gestapo.

So, if you tell your your base that you

have a code red, does that sound like an

exaggeration?

It doesn't. It sounds like you're really

warning them of an actual physical

immediate danger. That's that's how I

hear it. Do you hear that differently?

What why would a leader say there's a

code red

about something that important?

I mean, if it were something unimportant

like, "Oh, there are too many traffic

tickets. It's a code red." Well, you

wouldn't take that seriously. But if

you're talking about the government of

the country and you say it's a code red

cuz the Gestapo is taking over, that

sounds like you mean it. Now, most

people are going to know it's not

exactly literal.

But if you've got tens of millions of

people hearing the same message, some

unfortunately too many will think that

that is literally what's happening

because that's what they heard. I heard

that's happening.

So, in the backdrop of Newsome with this

super dangerous rhetoric, an ice

facility got shot up just hours after he

said that, Jesse Waters talking about it

on Fox News. And uh

and also Tom Holman apparently uh I

didn't know this, but Jesse Waters said

it. Um he's been forced out of his home

because the threats are too high. And uh

Newsome wants the ICE agents to be

unmasked.

Um so some some uh young man, 29 years

old Joshua John, he shot uh several

bullets into a Dallas ICE facility,

which uh had the unfortunate effect of

uh killing one detainee, one uh

non-citizen, and critically wounding two

others that were in a transport van. And

then I guess John killed himself.

And the shell casings apparently are

engraved with the message anti-ICE.

Now, Heraldo Rivero, um I think fairly I

think it's fair that he said uh that

he's entirely unconvinced that it was an

ICE that it was somebody who was against

ICE because who they killed were only

the people ICE picked up. And maybe, you

know, maybe there was some way for the

shooter to know that he was shooting the

people he presumably would have wanted

to protect. So, there's something about

the story that doesn't make sense unless

the shooter was shooting randomly or

didn't know exactly where he was

shooting or was, you know, literally

insane in more than just a shooter way

to be insane. So, there is a little bit

of fog of war here.

But um the conservatives who say uh

anti-ICE on the bullet, we're kind of

done here. There there's no additional

investigation needed. He wrote it on the

bullets. Now, that's a pretty good

argument,

but it also doesn't explain why he shot

who he shot. you know, even from a

distance, from a roof, wouldn't you know

that the van would be full of uh full of

the people you're trying to protect

instead of the people you're trying to

kill? Wouldn't wouldn't anybody know

that? That the van is not going to be

full of employees, is it? At a ICE

facility.

So, I do think that there's cause for a

little bit a little bit of wait and see,

but just a little bit. So, I'm going to

give Heraldo a Heraldo is a advocate for

uh non-legal citizens in a number of

domains. And uh I don't know, I'm going

to give him a little bit

of uh grace on that point. I don't think

it's going to come down that way. I

think it'll be exactly what it looks

like. And the guy wasn't,

you know, just shot the wrong place.

That that seems to be believable. But

I'll wait.

I I do assume that it's exactly what it

looks like, but it might not be. Could

be could be fooled.

Well, JD Vance had some strong words to

say about Gavin Newsome and other people

with this strong rhetoric. and he said,

"You can go straight to hell and you

have no place in the political

conversation in the United States." Um,

so he he said more. He said, "Because

here's what happens when Democrats like

Gavin Newsome say these people are quote

part of an authoritarian government.

When they lie about who they're

arresting, uh, what they're doing is

encouraging crazy people to go and

commit violence. You don't have to agree

with our policies, but if your political

rhetoric encourages violence against our

law enforcement, you can go straight to

hell.

Now, it seems like everybody is doing

this. Um, I have to use some curse words

to look like a strong leader. I feel

like it's already overdone. Are you

having that feeling that it's overdone?

I I mean, I think uh JD used it in an

appropriate

way and go go straight to hell is not

the worst thing that anybody said. It's

not, you know, it's not things that

Newsome is saying at the moment. So, I

mean, it's a little bit controlled and

it is on point and it does make, you

know, show the depth of his feeling

about it. So, I would say it's well

chosen,

but I'm just seeing so much of it now

that it feels like they've leaders are

running out of ideas. It's like, you

don't really need to do that, do you?

Now, I don't mind it. I mean, I'm not

against cursing. It's just if you do too

much of it and it becomes gratuitous,

it loses its uh its power. However, I

don't think JD lost power on this one.

So, this is more reminding me that

there's too much of it. I don't I don't

think he overused it in this particular

case.

Um but JD also said and I think this is

important. Um he said I think in

particular my Democratic colleagues need

to ask some very hard questions about

why it is that folks from their side of

the political aisle seem to be engaged

in these politically motivated attacks.

And I think it's important for them to

look in the mirror and say, uh, you

know, can we actually take some steps,

blah, blah, but he also says, can we

actually take some steps to police some

of the violent rhetoric on our own side?

Now, that's what I want to see. That's

exactly what I want to see. I want to

see some acknowledgement that it's not a

perfectly clean situation on either

side,

but maybe one is a little worse than the

other. But if you say it's only

happening on one side, it only takes one

example to prove you wrong. And you

know, surely there will be one example.

So I like I like JD saying we have to

police ourselves.

You know, the right has to police

itself. don't use this violent rhetoric

if you want a chance of getting the left

to do the same. And I think that's true.

See, this is not one of those cases

where you want to go, "Oh, they went

hard and they used rhetoric to kill some

of our people, so we should go hard and

use rhetoric that might cause somebody

to kill some of their people." No.

No. That's too far. And in the long run,

it's not going to help you. it's going

to be worse for the country in a big

way. Like in a really big way. So JD, I

think um hit all of the notes kind of

perfectly. Kind of perfectly. I'm

impressed.

All right, I'm going to get back to that

in a minute. But uh this story uh is

really interesting because I'm going to

tie together a few things here. So it'll

look like this has changed in the topic,

but watch how I cleverly tie it all

together. So ABC News has a new

documentary and the important part of

this story is that it's ABC News.

Now, you know, ABC News, we believe, is

sort of uh a left-leaning news entity,

and you would not expect them to do

anything that was clearly and

unamiguously bad for a leading Democrat,

right? You wouldn't expect that. But the

ABC's News documentary is about a

Pennsylvania woman, Ellen Greenberg, who

was stabbed 20 times. This was some

years ago in 2011 and it was ruled a

suicide

by the then attorney general Josh

Shapiro.

So Josh Shapiro is often mentioned as

the strongest or one of the strongest

candidates for maybe future president.

Huh? So, why in the world would ABC News

dredge up a story from 2011

to try to destroy Josh Shapiro? Because

it looks like that's the only purpose.

Why would the left destroy one of their

leading names from the left?

Well,

here's my belief. All right, this is

speculation, but I believe that the the

the real criminal elements in the

Democrat party, I mean, the super

criminals, I'm talking about the the

Clintons, super criminals, as far as I

can tell. Um, they they are

reinstituting their what do you call it?

The uh Clinton Global Initiative,

which we all believe was a money

laundering operation.

And in order for that to work again,

they would need not just a Democrat in

office, but they would need one that

they could say, "Hey, other countries,

uh, this president whose office, it's

not us. I It's not the Clintons, but

it's somebody who's so tight with us

that we can get them to do some favors

if you give us a huge amount of money

that we can launder into our own

pockets,

right?

So, if the Clinton Global Initiative is

starting up again or trying to, that

must mean that they've picked somebody

they know they can work with if that

person becomes president. And here's my

speculation.

They don't think they can work with Josh

Shapiro.

They do think they can make a lot of

money with Gavin Newsome. So, what I'm

going to be looking for is to see if the

most criminal people, the ones you just

know are criminals, um are all backing

Nuome because if they do, that would

suggest they know that he can be um

he he can be their Biden or their their

Obama or whatever they need him to be.

So, I don't think it's a coincidence

that ABC News is is strangling one of

their own. The only reason to do that is

if one of their own could beat Nuome in

a primary and Josh Shapiro could beat

Nuome in a primary. He does he does have

the the ability.

So that's what I think. So I think that

the the power people in the Democrat

party have already picked Nuome. It

probably won't matter what the public

thinks because they will tell the public

what to think. That's how it works.

they'll just tell him he he's the guy.

He's the only one that can beat him. And

in the meantime,

uh Hillary Clinton says,

I think it was yesterday, uh we have to

stop demonizing each other. And then she

demonized the Republicans.

It's it's almost it looks like a joke. I

mean, it looks like Saturday Night Live

or something where she says we have to

stop demonizing them. And without taking

a breath, she didn't even pause before

she demonized them.

Uh, incredible.

All right, let me give you my strongest

opinion on all this rhetoric stuff. And

uh as J D said uh JD Vance um I also

believe that there are people on the

right who say things that go too far and

might but hasn't happened yet

might potentially you know cause

somebody to act in a in a violent way

and we don't want that. So I'm against

that. However, there does seem to be a

difference in the ric rhetoric on the

two sides. You know, as I said, calling

somebody dumb as a rock doesn't make you

want to do anything violent. Saying

somebody is Gestapo and they're taking

power and they're going to take your

democracy definitely makes you think of

violence.

So, I'm going to say that the Democrat

leaders are 100% to blame for recent

violence against Republicans. Now, let

me be clear. The way our legal system

works is that the people who push, you

know, pulled the trigger are the only

ones who can be blamed. But that's

because that's the only practical way to

run a legal system. You couldn't say,

well, yeah, he murdered somebody, but in

fourth grade, uh, he had some bad

influences or really, you know, have

fourth grade inputs. That doesn't work.

The only way you can organize a society

is that the person who does the act gets

punished. But whoever talked them into

it or influenced them or brainwash them,

unless it's really direct and really

immediate, doesn't count. They get a

pass. Well, as a trained hypnotist who

studies um persuasion a lot, let me tell

you with 100% certainty, it is the

Democrat leaders that are causing the

violence. There's not even the slightest

chance that it's any other way because

do you know what causes action?

Ideas

and at least uh complex actions. simple

actions like a reflex, there's not much

thinking involved. But a complex action

like I'm going to do a plan, I'm going

to be in a place, I'll have these

assets, I'll do this thing. If it's a

complex plan, that only can happen

because you have an idea.

Let's say the idea is that Hitler has

taken over the country. It doesn't have

to be a correct idea. It just has to be

a full idea in order to get a complex

action. Now, there's no exception to

that. Can can we agree on that? That for

a human being to do a complex action,

they have to have an idea in their head

that matches the complex action. Would

you agree? There's no question about

that. Now, what causes an idea to be in

a head? How many people would have

thought, "Hey, I think I'll climb on a

roof and start shooting people if they

if their entire influence in life had

been sitting in a darkened room by

themselves.

If they had no if they had no input from

anything, do you think they would say,

"Huh, of all the things I could be

doing, I feel like I'll get a gun and

climb on a roof and start shooting

people." No. No. There's there is no way

that that complex idea gets in your head

without being put there. It has to be

put there. You don't go looking for it.

It has to be put there. That's the way

it all works. It's the way it works on

both sides. It's not just a Democrat

thing. All of our complex ideas about

politics on the right and the left were

put there.

You don't have an original idea in your

head, nor do I. All of our ideas were

put there.

And so if somebody climbs on a roof and

starts shooting, it is a reasonable

question, what put that there? Now, they

might also be crazy, but even crazy

people have a wide range of things they

could have been doing that day. Why'

they pick that one thing? It's because

somebody put it there. They put the And

the way you put an idea in people's

heads is what? How do you put an idea in

somebody's head? Well, sometimes you can

show an image, you know, meme, but

mostly in politics with words. And those

words are Nazi, Hitler, Gestapo,

stealing your democracy,

autocrat, oligarch. Oligarch doesn't get

you killed. I I will give Bernie credit

if I may.

Bernie Sanders is sort he's always been

a mixed bag. He'll he'll do 10 things I

hate and then one thing where I'll go,

"Oh, okay.

That's actually quite reasonable." One

of the things that Bernie Sanders does

is he doesn't do this Hitler

does he? I don't believe he does. Uh,

now it also makes his rhetoric kind of,

you know, empty. They're an oligarch. Do

do you do you climb on a roof to choose

somebody who's an oligarch?

Not really.

Oligarch would be in the category of

dumb as a rock. That they both are just

insults. Typical.

But you don't go kill somebody for being

dumb as a rock. You don't kill somebody

for being an oligarch. You just you just

don't. But that other stuff, oh yeah,

you start making a plan if you hear

those other words. So words create

ideas, ideas create action. There's no

other way it happens.

You know, pictures can augment the

words, but even the pictures wouldn't do

the trick without the words. So the

words are the the key part there. So,

um, I and I'm going to say it again, the

Democrat leaders are not slightly, maybe

a little bit guilty. They are 100%

There is no other thing. There is no

other thing at work. It is only that

100% guilty for causing the violence.

And you could guarantee that there'd be

more. there's not, you know, if they

continue talking the way they're

talking,

we haven't seen the end of it, it's

guaranteed to be more. So,

I would ask

uh as JD Vance has noted that uh

Republicans start watching their own

their own camp. All right. You've got a

responsibility to make sure your side is

saying dumb as a rock

and not Nazi.

Now, we all use it. I've done it myself,

but I've always been conscious that

nobody would act on it. You know, I'm

sometimes just using it rhetorically or

whatever. But never I'm never trying to

sell it like it's actually Hiller.

Never. But the Democrats are selling it

like it's actually Hiller.

That gives them 100% guilt, not legally.

Because remember, our system only

punishes the person who does the act. So

they're, you know, they can always say,

well, you know, a person has free will.

Uh, I was just making a point. Oh, it's

not me. No, it is you. You

Gavin Newsome. You are a piece of

Now, does that make you want to climb on

a building and do something bad? No. No.

He's a piece of

Doesn't inspire violence. So, it's a

well-chosen phrase. But boy, he is he is

garbage. I mean, that man is absolute

piece of because he knows he's

doing it. He he's by far smart enough to

know that he is the primary driver of

things right now. And uh to imagine that

he's okay with it. Oh my god.

Oh my god. He is a truly

broken man.

Now, if I said he's truly evil and he

wants you to die,

then you would think, hm, maybe violence

is the right answer. But if I say he's

broken,

it gives you a different feel, right?

You're like, "Oh, okay. I I need to fix

this. I need to make sure he doesn't get

elected, but I don't need to do any

crazy violent stuff. He's just broken."

So, that man is broken.

And uh

so here's what I think.

Generally speaking in this political

realm, whenever the Democrats do

something to uh Republicans, say

lawfare, the Republicans say, "Yeah, we

don't like lawfare, but they did it to

us, and the only way to stop it in the

future is we do it to them." That does

not apply to violence.

You you all know that, right? If if the

Republicans decided or any individual

Republicans decided on violence, that's

not helping. That that doesn't move us

forward. So, don't do it. You will not

be you will not be treated as a hero

by Republicans. If you do violence, you

will not be treated as a hero. You will

be treated as scum.

And uh you know, you have to live with

that.

Um, but more importantly, I believe the

Democrat party is in full collapse mode.

And you don't have to do anything

violent, even if you were tempted. You

You just don't have to because things

are moving very much in the right

direction if you're on the right. So, I

think you could wait this one out.

And, uh,

All right.

Um, apparently James Comey, the rumor is

he'll be indicted for lying to Congress.

So, he lied about five years ago.

Allegedly. Allegedly, he lied to

Congress. We're pretty sure that he did.

And, uh, I guess they have until the end

of September, which is any moment now,

um, to get in before that statute of

limitations runs out. So, are you in

favor of going after Trump's enemies?

Does it feel like Trump has an enemy

list or that um Cash Patel has an

enemies list? Allegedly, he had a list

of people in his book or something.

Well,

um I don't know if Comey is the biggest

criminal in this bunch, but uh this is

one of those cases where they did jail

they did jail uh Republicans

for behavior that's in this category.

You got to do it. You have to do it.

Now, of course, um I only want this to

happen if it's a a real crime, really

made a difference, and the court system,

you know, operates the way it should and

they come to that conclusion. I don't

want him railroaded.

You know, I don't want to purely lawfare

him, but uh there does need to be some

lawfare balance and uh he he's going to

have some trouble coming.

Um JD Vance when he's talking about the

potential for uh legal action against

all these various Democrats, he said,

quote, "A lot of people broke the law in

the last administration. They've got to

face real justice, not just words, not

just getting hauled before a committee

on Capitol Hill. If people broke the

law, they have to actually be

prosecuted."

Uh he says, "I think the only thing the

far left really responds to is power. If

they get off scotfree, they're never

investigated. They're going to be

prosecuted when they violate the law.

Blah blah blah. Now, here's what I

think.

I I think the left has demonstrated that

they'll use every tool at their

disposal,

no matter what the right does.

So, I don't think it makes any

difference. I I think if the right

punish them back the same way and put a

bunch of them in jail, it wouldn't make

any difference. They're still going to

use every tool that they could use,

especially if it once worked or almost

worked, such as lawfaring Trump almost

worked. You know, in some ways it

worked, but not the way they wanted it

to. So, I would disagree with JD that

what the right does to the left makes a

difference to what the left will do. The

left will use every tool that they have.

They're not they're not going to say,

"Oh, oh, you know what? It worked the

last time we tried it, but uh we've

noticed that the Republicans did not,

you know, give it back to us as much as

we gave it. So, I I guess we won't do it

again." No. No. They're going to use

every tool every time. So, I'm in favor

of the uh Republicans giving as good as

they get, but not because it changes the

behavior of the other team. It's

because,

you know, you got to use the toolbox. If

if they give you a tool by, you know,

justifying it as something that can

happen in politics, once they've

justified it something that can happen

in politics, then I think the

Republicans are just taking players off

the table.

and they have every right to do that. It

it would not be immoral or unethical to

use their tool against them just to

remove players. So, Comey is a player.

Not much of a player now, but a little

bit. And uh I think he's just a warm-up

act. I think Comey might be the easy one

because they can just say, "All right,

here's a video of him lying. Here's the

proof that he lied. Here's the law that

applies.

Boom. So, it could be that the uh the

Trump administration wants to make sure

that they get an easy win and then then

they can ramp up to get to Brennan and

Clapper and maybe even Obama.

We'll see.

Well, apparently there's the first ever

Antifa domestic terrorist arrest.

It's never happened before. U the

Postmillennial is writing about this. Um

there several Antifa members were

arrested in Eugene, Oregon. Um I guess

they were terrorizing employees at some

ICE facility.

So they got arrested as domestic

terrorists.

Well, we'll see if that works out. I'm

sure there'll be all kinds of legal

challenges to that, but we'll see.

I thought somebody said that there's no

such thing as a domestic terrorism law.

I I heard that the other day on social

media, but is that true?

Do you get any extra penalty for being a

domestic terrorist versus just bothering

people where you shouldn't be? I don't

know. I don't know about that. I'll have

to find out about it. Well, the budget

debacle is beginning again. Uh,

Republicans want a 7-week extension. Do

you know why? Because they're completely

incompetent and unable to work with

Democrats. Do you know why they can't

work with the Democrats to get something

done on time? Because the Democrats are

completely incompetent and can't work

with the Republicans. So, Congress is

just completely broken um on the most

important thing they do, which is

allocating money. They just can't do it.

And it doesn't look like there's

anything that will ever change that. I I

think you could change the personnel.

Wouldn't make any difference

there. There's nothing you can do. We're

we're basically running headlong into

financial certainly disaster and nobody

has even an idea what you would do

differently. So, we're going to kick

this stupid can down the road. I'm gonna

hate the members of Congress with a

white hot fire that I've, you know, is

at a level that you've never seen

before.

Uh, meanwhile, the Democrats are pushing

for hundreds of billions of dollars of

extra spending for health care

and some other things. But uh the these

are things which Congress intentionally

looked at and decided not to do, at

least the majority did.

And um but apparently there's a new

wrinkle. So uh Russ Vot

um is saying that there might be massive

layoffs if there's a shutdown of the

government. So if there's a government

shutdown, the Trump administration is

going to use that as an excuse to fire

massive numbers of people that maybe

wouldn't have been fired otherwise. So

do you think that the Democrats will

cave because they'll say, "Oh, no, no,

we have to save those thousands of

Democrat jobs."

They might. I've never seen anybody

um offer to make this play before. the

all right well you can you can delay the

budget but if there's no budget I'm

going to have to fire all the people who

are unfunded well not all of them some

are some are necessary but all you

Democrats doing things that Democrats

like not funded so you're all fired and

if you ever fund it great but there's

nobody working there so you you'd be

funding you know a whole

um it feels like a good play. I don't

know how this will turn out yet. I won't

make a prediction, but it feels like a

strong play by by the Trump people.

Um, it's a brand new variable. That's

what Trump does so well. If there's a

situation that nobody could ever

negotiate before, he'll add a new

variable. And it's a new variable that

changes the balance of everything. So,

it's a new variable. Um, at least in in

concept,

it's very well played by adding a a new

variable. That's a strong one.

Well, there's I I may have the name

wrong here, but it looked like there's a

some YouTube channel by uh Cam Higgby,

maybe some other people. It looks like

they're trying to duplicate the um

Charlie Kirk College debates. So they

went to TSU and they tried to do the

thing where anybody could come up and

debate them and uh it formed

and they said there was an anti-white

riot that erupted

because they were so hated for just

being uh white Christians with a you

know MAGA hat that it just caused a riot

basically

an anti-white riot. they called it. But

I uh was amused because I' I've seen

Charlie Kirk do the same thing. So they

were doing the debate before I guess

before the trouble started and there was

a young black man, a student who was

pointing out um the discrimination and

the inequality for uh black Americans.

And so I don't know if it was Cam or

maybe he's just the one who does the

videos. Um, so the young white guy who

was taking the questions and the debate,

he said, "Can you give me an example of,

let's say, a law that uh would prevent

you from doing something but allow me to

do something?" Uh, no. No. I can't think

of any examples. All right. Well, is

there any non-legal thing that I can do

that you can't do in America? Uh well

all all the things you know the the the

you know the the the the things all the

things.

So amazingly black Americans don't know

that they have superior rights in this

country and have for a long time.

They have superior rights.

Meaning that uh if I wanted a job and I

got to got a choice to be black or white

just for the purpose of looking for a

job, what do you think I would pick? I

mean, seriously, I would pick black

every time.

And so would all of you. That's why

that's why literally nobody uh nobody

claims to be white if they can also

claim to be black. Even Obama

um downplayed his whiteness, you know,

half white because being black was his

advantage and he knew it. So,

how do you fix that? Because I don't

think this model fixes it because they

they hate the white guys and the red

hats. So, anything those guys say is not

going to stick. But

I I keep thinking if I could mentor, you

know, a uh an 18-year-old black kid, the

first thing I'd say is, "All right, you

know that you have a huge advantage in

employment, right? And a huge advantage

in getting scholarships and a huge

advantage in complaining.

Just you have an advantage in almost

everything. And if you find a place

where you don't have an advantage, let's

say a small business or something that's

discriminating, cuz that would still

exist, don't go there. I would say, oh

yeah, yeah, there are companies that

might discriminate against you. But not

big ones, not a Fortune 500. They're not

going to discriminate. They're going to

discriminate in your favor every time.

So go there. Just don't go where you

think there might be some

discrimination. I'll tell you where to

go and you'll get a job every time. How

about if you were a young black

professional and you wanted to get some

mentoring, but you look around and you

know there's there are no other black

faces and senior management. Do you

think you'd have trouble getting a white

um a white let's say uh executive of

your company to agree to mentor you? No,

you would not have a trouble getting

that. They would say yes before you

finished the sentence.

Uh, hi Mr. So and so. Uh, you know, I

would I wondered if you could men Yes.

No, you're going to get a yes before you

finish the sentence. You're going to get

a yes for mentoring, a yes for

financing, a yes for hiring, a yes for

college applications, a yes for medical

school, a yes for law school. How do you

not know that

if you're an 18-year-old black guy? How

do you not know that all the advantages,

the racist advantages are in your

direction?

I don't know.

So, but the college debates are not

going to change anybody's mind about

that. You need some entirely different

process.

Well, you probably heard that Jezebel,

which is a disreputable

um lying piece of organization that

I'm surprised is still in business, but

it's a bunch of uh I feminists and

horrible people. Not that feminists are

horrible people, but they're feminists

and horrible people.

Uh they happen to be both. And

apparently they paid some witches that

they found on Etsy to curse Charlie Kirk

two days before he was assassinated. And

they actually published that. They pub I

think they published it after he was

assassinated. And they published it that

they got witches to try to kill him and

he got killed.

So apparently Erica Kirk, a widow of

Charlie Kirk, was quote genuinely

rattled by it. Now I'm not a believer in

witchcraft, so I would not have been too

worried about the the witchiness of it,

but I'll tell you what I do believe in

affirmations.

And I worry,

I don't have proof of this, so this is,

you know, a little bit of woo woo on my

my part, but doesn't it seem that the

things that happen in life are the

things we're thinking about the most? In

my personal life, the way my life has

turned out is very much similar to

whatever I thought about and wanted the

most to to the point where it looks

like, how could that even be a

coincidence that the things I thought

about the most actually happened? Good

and bad. Good and bad. My cancer I've

been thinking about since my 20s. This

specific cancer, not just cancer.

Um, prostate cancer. I've been worried

about it and obsessed about it since I

was in my 20s. I started researching it

in my 20s in anticipation of getting it.

Now, is that coincidence? Well, it's,

you know, it's the most popular or

common cancer for an adult man. So on

one hand it's just a coincidence but not

even a big one.

Uh but I do worry that when people focus

too much on one outcome there's a weird

bias toward that thing happening that

I've noticed all my life and it could be

just my imagination.

Yeah, maybe there's nothing to it. But,

uh, when I hear that a bunch of witches

and some writers at Jezebel all started

to think about a bad thing happening to

one person at the same time and and on

the same day.

I wonder, you know, I don't believe in

witchcraft,

but I do wonder if we live in a

simulation where you can cause it to

collapse on a certain set of realities

based on what you're thinking about. I

wonder.

Um,

so the Trump administration wants

Congress to end what is called

anti-racist teacher training grants to

universities. The College Fix is writing

about this as well. Now, you you might

say to yourself, wait a minute, why

would you want to end anti-racist?

Wouldn't that be like agreeing with

racists?

No, the anti-racist stuff was the racist

stuff. The anti-racist stuff is

basically saying that white people suck

and white men suck more than the rest of

white people. So, no. Yes, the

anti-racist stuff is racist.

Just overtly obviously, no question

about it, way over the top racist. And

uh yeah, I want that halted.

Um, according to the New York Post,

uh, Trump is stopping, uh, I guess there

had been a regular report on food

insecurity,

but like everything else, it turned out

to be, uh, fake data and, uh, the food

insecurity

would include anybody who wasn't sure if

they could get food in the future. So,

it's not people who are hungry or don't

have food. It's people who just feel

insecure about being able to have it in

the future.

And I'm not sure that's telling you what

you need to know. So, probably was a

waste of money. Um, they stopped that.

Well, over in Denmark, there's some

drones that have been plaguing them over

airports and whatnot. So, multiple

drones last few days. And the assumption

was in the beginning that it was Russia

and they were just, you know, messing

with a NATO country. Do you believe that

Russia decided to, you know, skip over

other countries and plague Denmark in

particular? Does that make sense that

they wouldn't be doing it to, you know,

France and Germany and, you know, Great

Britain, but they decided to to pick on

Denmark of all places and then to put a

bunch of, you know, drones in the sky.

Now, some people are saying, "But wait,

we don't know that these are Russian

drones. We don't. Maybe they're UFOs.

Maybe this is the same problem that the

USA had."

Right? Um,

so but here's my takeaway from this. Are

you telling me that Denmark can't shoot

down a drone? Like any drones? They

don't have any way to shoot down a

drone.

Seriously,

Denmark, a NATO country, can't shoot

down a drone that's loitering. It's not

like the drones even like snuck in and

attacked something and blew up before

you could get them. They're just hanging

around.

Are you telling me that drones, multiple

drones just hanging around for days

and Denmark doesn't have the ability to

shoot one down and NATO doesn't have the

ability to shoot one down?

What's going on here? So, I'm going to

say there's something about the story

that's either seriously missing or

maybe what, you know, I I'm even trying

to imagine what Russia would get out of

this if it were them.

One thing they might get out of it is

proving that there's no air defense.

They have no air defense.

You know,

I I don't understand why the US didn't

shoot down our drones. the the story was

that they were actually our own drones.

So now I guess I understand why you

don't shoot down your own drones, but

Denmark doesn't seem to think it's

theirs. They can shoot those down.

They're not manned. Why in the world

wouldn't you shoot it down? I don't

know. There's something missing in that

story.

Well, according to N strike 1231,

uh Trump is launching nuclear exercises

in Europe. So, they're doing some long

range bomber flights and stuff. And the

thinking is this is to just rattle uh

Putin's cage because we don't have

really much going on there that's going

to threaten him. So at least you know

acting like we have a dangerous nuclear

potential which we do. Um so Rubio

talking about Ukraine says that the

Russian military losses are what he

calls staggering. The casualties in a

single month exceed total US death

deaths in Afghanistan or Iraq. Now, I

don't know if that's a good comparison

because we had unusually low casualties

in both Afghanistan and Iraq for, you

know, the context of a war. The other

side had massive casualties, but it

wasn't a normal war because it was so

one-sided. Um,

but do you think that Russia has enough

uh military losses that it will change

anything? I don't know. We do know that

uh uh Trump said unambiguously with no

hesitation that any Russian military

planes that fly over NATO territory uh

they could just shoot him down

cuz you can't have the Russians just,

you know, testing all the defenses and

going home with no no response. So, I

don't know if that's going to happen,

but

there might be a Russian plane that gets

shot down, and we'll see if that makes

any difference to anything. Uh, Trump is

saying that Ukraine, if they had the

right weapons um that US and others

could provide, that they would actually

be able to win back the territory

they've lost. Now, I don't know anybody

who believes that, that they could win

back the territory. I don't know anybody

who thinks that's going to happen. But

he goes further and saying maybe they

could get a little extra too take some

of Russia. So I don't see how that could

possibly happen with the current

variables in play. But

Trump and the administration are still

pushing the other countries to stop

buying Russian oil and gas. And if he

succeeded, if Trump succeeded in getting

these other countries to stop buying,

mostly China and India and some some

European um that would collapse the uh

Russian economy and might might bring

them to the table. But as others have

pointed out, uh Russia still has the

ability to turn off Europe's energy in

the winter. So are we seriously three

and a half years into a war? Are we

seriously letting Europe's uh stupidity

with energy affect us?

I mean, it's one thing when, you know,

the situation first comes up, but it's

been three and a half years. If if

Europe is still depending on Russia for

their energy and therefore cannot mount,

you know, a vigorous enough defense,

uh

I'm not sure how much we should protect

them. I mean, you need to do something

for yourself, as in work harder to get

another source of uh energy.

Um,

Zilinski has warned Putin that he and

Putin's officials need to find the

nearest bomb shelter, uh, the nearest

one to the Kremlin because he says the

Kremlin's going to come under direct

attack. Now, I I think they've sent a

drone or two over there before, but

sounds like Zalinski plans a more major

attack on the Kremlin. Now, I don't know

how Russia could fail to escalate if

that happened. I mean, the escalation is

getting higher, but do you think it's

possible that Zilinski could dismantle

the entire um Kremlin like one drone at

a time? You know, if you just send

dozens of them every day and maybe one

gets through every now and then,

couldn't you make the Kremlin unusable

in, let's say, a month?

Could you? And if you did something like

that, what would Russia do to respond?

Maybe they're doing everything they can

do short of going nuclear. I don't know.

So, I have lots of questions about what

Russia would do if we if we increase the

pressure in any other way. Apparently,

there's some Mexican drug cartel

members, according to publication, The

European Conservative, that joined the

Ukrainian military so they could learn

drone warfare.

So, believe it or not, there are

Spanish-speaking troops fighting for

Ukraine, but apparently they're doing it

more for their own training, and they

are Colombian and Mexican, and that

they're cartel members and they're

terrorists, and they're going to take

this learning back. Great. Terrific.

Well, you know, Greta Tunberg's got her

freedom flotilla, she calls it, trying

to go over there and fix everything in

Gaza. Um, and apparently it's being uh

I'll say attacked

um by jammers. They're jamming their

radios and playing ABBA on their radios

on repeat. Uh and they so if they keep

their radios on, all they're going to

get is ABBA on repeat. And uh apparently

there some other

um some other kinds of attacks,

non-lethal attacks are happening, but

mostly to make it really unpleasant to

be on that flotillaa.

Uh

so the group said that Israeli military

drones targeted five of their vessels.

There's quite a few vessels actually

involved. And uh damaged mass and

communication equipment.

And it's the third assault on the aid

bearing ships, they say. So they got 51

boats in that operation. That's pretty

big. They sailed from Barcelona at the

end of August. They're going to try to

break that siege on Gaza. Do you think

they'll break the siege on Gaza or will

they just hear a lot more ABBA than they

wanted to?

Yeah, it might be Waterlue. Exactly.

Waterlue.

Um,

all right.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, that's

all I have for you. Sorry I went long.

Uh, I'm going to talk to the local

subscribers, my beloved local

subscribers. I love them more every day.

The rest of you, thanks for joining. I

hope you got something out of this. And

I will see you again tomorrow. I hope.

Same time, same place.