Episode 2970 CWSA 09/26/25

Hey, there you are.

Good morning.

Take a seat.

There are plenty of chairs ready for you.

And let me check your stocks just to see how the days are going to go.

S&P is up a little bit.

Tesla's up a little bit.

Nvidia's down a little bit.

Not bad.

Could be worse.

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 of elevating your experience up to levels that nobody can even understand with their tiny shiny human brains, all you need for that is a copper mug or a glass of tanker shell, a canteen, jugger, flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

The dopamine at the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

It's called the simultaneous sit.

Go.

Delicious.

Well, in uh news, China allegedly found a million-year-old skull.

A million-year-old skull.

Oh, I'm getting an update.

Uh, it wasn't a million-year-old skull.

It was Joe Biden.

Uh, no, I'm just kidding.

It wasn't Joe Biden.

It was a million-year-old skull.

Um, but since the oldest known human skull was half a million years old, this uh doubles the potential time that maybe humans have been around in their current form.

But they got to do genetic tests and then they'll find out for sure if it rewrites the entire history of humankind.

Have you ever believed uh the anthropologists?

I find that I've never believed them.

You know, where they find, oh, we found this this little fingernail and this fingernail tells us there's a whole new branch of humanoids.

I I always think of that stuff just made up.

I don't believe any of it.

So, it just went from, well, the oldest human was about 300,000 years old.

Well, no.

Well, found one is no.

500,000.

500,000.

Oh, no.

Nope.

Double that.

1 million.

We don't have any idea what was happening back then.

Pure guess.

Well, Ben Carson, Dr.

Ben Carson has been added to the Maha mix and he'll be working on improving the nutrition standards.

Um, which I love.

I love that.

Uh, I'm sure he's the right person and uh I'm sure that this is one of the most important things we should be doing.

But I will give this one um this one bit of caution.

There's no real nutrition science.

I don't know if you know that, but all that uh you know, how many vitamins you need and all that, that's all just made up.

Back when I was uh years ago when I tried to make the product called the dill burrito, a frozen burrito that I tried to put all of the vitamins and minerals you would need for one day.

So, you might get extra, but you wouldn't be short that day.

And what I learned in the process of trying to make a food that had all the vitamins and minerals you need is that the science of which vitamins and minerals and how much you need was changing as fast as we could print the box.

And at some point I said, "Wait a minute.

This isn't science.

We have no idea what's good for you.

We're It looks like we're just guessing." So that was about when I decided to stop trying to make that product.

Well, believe it or not, according to uh one of the AI observers, uh Asha Shrivastava, I think that's his name.

Maybe it's two words.

Ashava.

Anyway, that's as close as I can get.

But anyway, he says that uh Google's deep mind AI is uh now has a version that is ready for general robotics.

You know how I've been telling you for a long time now that I don't believe that the current versions of AI, the large language models, I don't believe they can ever be adopted to just be a robot brain because they hallucinate too much and and other problems.

Um, but allegedly Google's deep mind has some version that would be already ready to act as a highle reasoning brain for robots that could do complicated things they had never done before.

So in theory, you could say, "Hey, could you wash these grapes?" And if it never washed a grape, it could figure out, "Okay, I need a sink.

I need to, you know, I need to faucet it.

I need cold water, not hot water.

So, that's the idea.

I'm going to go full skeptic on this.

And I'm going to say that there is no such thing as a general purpose AI that will work in a robot.

I don't care what they say.

I don't believe it.

You know why I don't believe it?

If it could actually operate a robot in a general purpose way, you would see so much video of that, it would be all over social media.

Look, our general purpose robot uh just learned to do a thing.

Look, it just learned to do another thing and all I did was tell it what I wanted.

If it could do any of that, it would be all the news.

So, no, I do not believe that Google Deep Mind has a general purpose AI that can run a robot.

Maybe someday, but I guarantee if it worked really well right now, you would see the robot that it wouldn't be a text story about a robot, right?

I'm not the only one who sees it that way, right?

If it really worked, you would see the video of the robot, you know, doing full robot things.

There was a video of one robot arm that acted like it was recognizing different objects.

Not impressed.

Not impressed.

Well, according to MIT Technology Review, James O'Donnell's writing about this that uh there is a company that makes um uh drones that can chase the shoplifterss.

So, if you buy this product, if you're a store and somebody robs your store, you can push a button and the drone will take off.

And then I guess you have to maybe a human has to spot the bad guy running away.

But then once the drone has spotted the bad guy or the bad guy's car, it can it can follow it.

So I don't know what happens when they follow it because I doubt the police are going to get involved anyway.

So, I don't know what good the you know I I don't think the police really chase too many um too many shoplifterss and it's probably going to be like a bunch of people.

You know, that most of the shoplifting seems to be this, you know, gang of 30 people hit it all at the same time.

And one drone's not going to do much for that.

But I kind of like the idea.

I I would feel safer even if I had one at my house.

You know, if somebody tried to do something at your house and then the uh drone could get some photographs and take a license plate and make sure it got a picture of the pers, that would be pretty useful.

Um, it's called flock flock safety.

And uh I don't know what their tagline is for flock safety, but if it were me, I'd say if you steal from me, flock you.

That that's how I would do the marketing.

All right.

Um well, the uh second quarter GDP got revised as they always do, but higher.

So all the way up to 3.8.

Now, if you're not a economics nerd, 3.8 eight GDP if it were, you know, an honest number would be really, really good.

As in better than we have a right to expect it to be, like really really good.

3.8.

But don't get excited.

It's probably just because the the tariffs cause people to buy more and get ready.

and you know once all the tariff stuff settles down um we'll get an idea what the real number is.

So do not believe that 3.8 is any kind of a sustainable long-term number.

If it is amazing I mean it would be beyond my highest expectations but it won't be.

Don't expect that.

But it's better than not being 3.8 that's for sure.

There's a new European startup.

Okay.

Did you know that Europe had startups?

If you heard that there's a European startup that was getting ready to solve some big problem, what would be your first thought?

My first thought was, "Nah, no, they won't." Nah, no.

No.

There's a reason that there aren't many European startups or or there's no you know I don't think there are any unicorns you know the ones that are worth more than a billion and it has to do with their stoaltifying um what would you call it regulations and stuff so basically you get smothered and tax to death if you're a startup but this uh startup called Uklid according to Dr.

for singularity on X.

Uh they're building this massive chip system, he says, that would allow lesser powered chips.

Um I think they're lesser powered.

Um but what it does is use way less power.

So So what what they're doing is building a infrastructure for AI that would be way more power efficient.

Um, now what I've been predicting for a while is that the the money involved in running the energy needed for AI is so big, you know, we're talking trillions of dollars that uh for sure there will be startups trying to reduce the energy drain for AI and for sure there will be at least incremental improvements, but probably probably somebody's going to come up with you know more than an incremental improvement.

So my my bet is that uh the big companies will spend a trillion dollars on building out power and some small company will say you know you can do it for 1 billion now we solved the energy problem.

So, I feel like the most successful AI company might be somebody who hasn't started yet because the big ones are going to run through a, you know, trillions of dollars.

But what happens if the ones that are fast followers just don't need that much energy?

Suddenly, you're you're a peer competitor to chat GPT at uh one millionth of the cost.

So, I think that's what's going to happen.

Well, you may have heard of this in the news.

Uh, apparently there are reports that seem credible that there's now a major spike in women being admitted to the ERS because they took too much Tylenol while pregnant to show that Trump doesn't know what he's talking about.

And at least one woman is essentially brain dead from doing that and has a baby inside her.

So, her husband has some tough choices about whether to try to deliver the baby or or or what.

Um I assume that they they'll try to deliver the baby cuz why wouldn't you?

All right.

So, um that's terrible.

You know that that's the sort of thing we joked about.

Remember how we would always joke?

It was it was an ongoing joke that if you wanted to kill all Just joking, right?

Not not seriously.

Um, if you wanted to, let's say, do harm to all Democrats, all you'd have to do is say, uh, you know, um, Trump really loves breathing oxygen, and Trump says you should all breathe oxygen.

And they would all hold their breath until they passed out and died.

Now, that was the joke.

But literally, people are taking the Tylenol and dying.

It's not funny, but if you wonder how strong is brainwashing, there you go.

You know, I when I talk about uh brainwashing and persuasion and hypnosis and stuff, there's a tendency for people not to really understand how strong it is.

Now, it's not strong with every person in every situation.

So, that's why it's confusing.

But for some people it is a complete takeover of their mind.

And I would say that the these uh Tylenol victims um probably they're victims of not only Tik Tok or some social media because they tend to do it, you know, publicly.

But uh yeah, they they've got CDS plus they've got social social media poisoning.

Well, according to Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who uh apparently is in a position to seal all the good secrets before we do, um she says that NBC is withholding a neverbeforeseen video of Lee Harvey Oswald near President uh Kennedy's limo at the moment of the assassination, which would mean that he was not involved in any way in shooting the president.

if that's true.

Now, question number one, why would NBC be holding it as opposed to let's say our government and some entity?

Why would NBC have the most important video that could ever be and they're just sitting on it and now they just decided to release it?

Really?

Really?

Um, I I wonder if it'll be a grainy image.

I haven't seen it yet, but you want to make a bet.

Uh, I'm going to make a bet that it looks approximately like this.

Oh, look.

Oh, look.

It's That's totally That's totally Lee Harvey Oswald.

Do you see him?

Do you see him?

Yeah.

Something tells me it's going to look like that.

Do you believe that when you see the picture, you're going to say, "Oh my god, that is Lee Harvey Oswald." Or could it be like those pictures of the 50s?

You know, the old videos you see of people walking in the city and they all look the same in 1963, right?

That's what happened.

In 1963, every guy approximately that age was the same size.

None of them were fat.

They all looked exactly like Lee Harvey Oswald.

They had the same haircut.

They were white guys.

They dressed the same.

They had the same body.

All skinny.

Everybody looked like him.

I looked like him.

If if I had been around then.

Yeah.

A picture of me would look just like him.

At least at some point in my life.

All right.

So, I'm going to say I don't believe anything about that.

What do you think?

I don't believe any of that.

Uh, but it gets better.

According to Representative Inopolina Luna, another story, she says she's getting horrifying reports that in Haiti, uh, organ traffickers are killing people who were found dead on the street with missing organs.

So, do you believe that?

Do you believe that people are being found with missing organs dead on the street because they're selling the organs?

Again, again, I'm going to go with no because that's like one of the most that's that's one of the most famous fake stories of all time.

And the people were found in the bathtub with a note and their and their kidneys were missing.

Okay.

No, I don't believe that anybody has been found.

I mean there might have been somebody found they had you know some damage to their body and then somebody else said it looks like they took his kidney and then you know then everybody believes it.

No, I do not believe that the Haitians are are taking organs.

I don't believe you could just carve it out with a butcher knife and sell it on the open market.

I think it's a little harder than that.

Well, you all want to talk about James Comey's indictment.

So, the indictments have come down.

There are two of them.

Uh, let's say one of them is that he lied to Congress uh about having a third person leak to the media when indeed Andy Mc.

Cabe has already said, "Oh, yeah, he authorized me to leak." So, we've got his number two from the FBI.

uh who interestingly is also sort of on Trump's enemies list, if you will, virtual enemies list, not an actual one, but uh Mc.

Cabe probably will be the witness because he's already said this.

Probably the witness that takes down Comey.

Now, I kind of like that that that it'll be Mc.

Cabe who takes him down.

Um but then the second indictment is that uh he lied to Congress about um that uh have you ever author?

No.

The other one was uh lying about something.

One is one is uh one is obstructing justice and the other is lying.

But I think that they're both based on the same set of acts maybe.

Anyway, so the background is, you know, that the prosecutor who was in charge got canned for not doing enough.

He seemed like he wasn't sort of on board.

Might have been more of a Democrat lover than uh what Trump needed at the point.

The statute of limitations was about to run out.

That's why there was some urgency and uh at least from the Trump side some urgency.

Now, of course, as you expect, the the Democrats are going on TV, the talking heads, and they're saying that uh it's lawfare against Trump's enemies, and that that's that's a bad thing and should never be done, and it's setting a precedent.

uh really really is setting a precedent.

So going after somebody with lawfare just to end their political career looking for the crime as opposed to responding to a crime.

Are you saying that that's suddenly that's uh that's wrong and as if it's never happened to anybody named Trump?

I mean it's the most it's the most obvious thing that's happened in the last several years.

But the Democrats have no shame and they also know that their Democrat base won't really be able to follow this story.

They're only going to get the top line.

So if the Democrats go on MSNBC and say, "Well, nothing like this has ever happened before." I mean, we've never seen anything like this going after a political person with a bunch of trumped up charges or even real charges that normally would be ignored.

What?

So that's funny, but it's working.

You know, on one hand, I'm criticizing the Democrats for such obvious lies.

So they're lying about their liar.

So Comey is being indicted for lying, you know, under oath.

And uh the response to his supporters is to lie about it.

So they're literally lying about the liar.

Have Have I ever mentioned that that's all they have?

The Democrats only have hoaxes and lies.

They did have lawfare, but not anymore because they're not in charge.

All right.

Um, and uh, a lot of people are saying that Trump is just after his enemies and it's only about revenge.

To which I say, if it's revenge against people who did this to you, absolutely fair.

I'm all for revenge.

If it's specific revenge, I would not like him to be lawfairing somebody who had nothing to do with anything.

Uh but uh lawfairing somebody who was trying to remove him from office and was not a was not a legitimate um player in my opinion.

Totally fair.

Absolutely fair.

And I I think Trump has a free punch um all the way up to and including jail, you know, but it has to pass, you know, obviously through some Democrat judge and some Democrat people on a jury and all that.

So, it would take a lot.

It would take a lot to get a conviction.

Um some people say, "Oh, yeah, the facts are clear.

This is an obvious conviction." Uh, Democrats say, "Oh, no.

It's murky.

It's murky.

I'm not sure.

I'm not sure there's anything there." But other people say it's the process that is the punishment.

So, making Comey go through this expensive, embarrassing um thing.

You know, might be the real the real play.

Roger Stone, as you know, he was uh once the subject of the FBI uh what would you say, raiding his house at 6:00 a.m.

and giving him no warning.

And uh and then apparently the judge in his case gave him a gag order, so he couldn't even talk about his situation.

And uh Roger Stone asked the perfectly reasonable question, wait, why isn't Comey being gagged by the federal judge in his case like I was?

In fact, why is he being allowed to turn himself in?

Why isn't he subjected to his 6 a.m.

raid at his home by 29 heavily armed FBI agents?

Well, that's a perfectly good question, Roger Stone.

So, as long as we see this difference in treatment, it really does give the Republicans a free hand because what has happened to them and Trump in particular, but also his supporters over the last several years is, in my opinion, so bad that I can't even imagine any amount of lawfare against that group of people that I wouldn't be in favor of.

But in general, I would not be in favor of any lawfairing against anybody.

But this group, oh yeah.

Yeah, they've got it coming.

I'm all on board with that.

Uh Paul Sperry is reporting on X that uh uh Brennan might be next.

Uh he's hearing that uh they're getting ready to uh do something with Brennan.

Um that might happen soon.

And Mike Benz had an interesting summary of the whole situation.

He said, uh, arresting all your political opponents for non-existent crimes, then committing a bunch of real crimes, then losing the next election to those opponents is just a really bad combination.

Yeah, that that's a good advice.

If you're gonna lawfare people over nothing at the same time that you're doing something that's actually super illegal, like super illegal, you don't want to lose the next election so that the people you were you were uh trying to punish are in charge.

But that's what happened.

So So here's a question for you.

If uh if the next president is a Democrat and let's say the I don't know somehow the Congress went Democrat too in 2028.

Do you believe that Trump would be lawfared again?

Yes, he would.

Right.

They would lawfare him again just out of pure revenge.

They they wouldn't be stopping him from doing anything.

It would just be pure revenge.

Would they do it?

Yes, they would.

What would you do if you were Trump and you knew that simply, you know, running out your term and leaving, you know, peaceful transfer of power, if you knew that that would be your death or that you would be locked up forever by bad actors, what would you do?

Would you leave the job?

Would be kind of dangerous, wouldn't it?

They've created a situation, which is the only situation I can imagine, where Trump has a overwhelming incentive to never leave the job.

Now, I don't believe that he has that intention whatsoever.

I believe that he intends to serve his term, do the best job he can, go down in history as one of the great presidents, and that, you know, he's on track to do that.

Um, but if they start making noise like the minute you're out of office, you know, we're going to, you know, we're going to put you in jail and you know it's going to be trumped up charges.

What would you do if you were Trump?

Would you say, "Well, I'll just I'll just fight it in the courts." Well, the courts are going to be, you know, Obama appointed judges and, you know, you have no reason to believe he would get a fair hearing in the court.

What would you do?

You might be tempted to stay in office and stay alive, keep your family alive.

Remember, the family is probably in jeopardy, too.

You know, they would go after Don Jr., you know, or anybody else they could.

So, the Democrats are creating the situation very much like they created the situation demonizing ICE and demonizing Trump.

They created a situation where an assassin was almost guaranteed.

They created that they are now if they were to get elected they would be creating a situation where it wouldn't make sense for Trump to leave the office if he had any way to stay.

I don't know that that's even possible in our system.

You know, the military would have to be on board and I doubt they would be.

So why are they creating the situation that they fear the most?

I do do think, however, that if JD Vance, you know, is looking good and he wins the election, um, Trump just retires, no problem at all, because JD Vance is not going to go after him.

But, uh, it's going to be pretty important.

I I think if JD Vance um doesn't win, I don't know what's going to happen.

Yeah.

All bets are off at that point because you can you expect people to try to stay alive and to do whatever they can to stay in the jail.

If you put Trump in that situation, don't expect him to roll over.

He He should fight as hard as he can.

I hate to say it.

Um, well, okay.

Um, so there's that.

So, uh, Cass Patello is telling us that, uh, the people who are doing the research on Comey, the investigation, are FBI agents and intel analysts and staff, uh, who are career people.

So they're not some political people.

He's saying that they're, you know, the dependable career people who are doing it.

Now, that's so you don't think it's just a political hit.

But honestly, I can't tell if Cash Patel is just mocking the Democrats by saying that because it's sort of just a thing you say.

Is he serious?

Oh, don't worry.

This is legitimate because these are career professionals.

Wasn't something like that what they said about Trump when they had all the fake the fake lawfare and the fake uh Russia collusion thing wasn't any part of the defense.

Well, yeah, it's these are career FBI people.

I mean, they're not political.

They're career people.

So, Cash is saying the same thing.

And it makes me wonder if it's the same reason that they say nobody's above the law.

They don't say nobody's above the law because it's the first thing that comes to mind.

They say it because the other side said it.

It's sort of mocking, but you can't tell.

So, is this more of that?

Is this more mocking, but you can't tell?

Because it might be serious.

I can't tell.

I honestly can't tell.

But it looks like trolling.

Um, yeah.

Ken Delaneian of NBC, who is often identified allegedly as a CIA asset, who, you know, whose job it is to make sure the NBC News does whatever the CIA wants.

That's what they allege about Kendallian.

But um he's saying that uh that Trump's actions against his uh critics and enemies is uh what do you call it?

Uh never never happened before.

He's he's ended the tradition of not doing that.

That tradition is so ended.

The the Democrats completely removed all the guard rails and now they have to live with it.

They're they're living in the world they created, but yeah, don't expect them to love it.

All right.

So Trump yesterday signed a memorandum uh directing the federal agencies to go against uh to look for the people funding the domestic terrorists and uh going after them you know Antifa etc.

And uh he said that would include going after some wealthy people including he named George Soros and Reed Hoffman as possible targets of investigation.

Now, they would be targets specifically because some of their money might have made it into the hands of some of the domestic terrorists, Antifa types, but we don't know that for sure that that would be alleged at this point.

But the New York Times confirms, PJ Media is writing about this, that uh the DOJ is investigating George Soros.

So, what do you think they're going to find when they investigate Soros?

Are they going to find just a ton of um things that look dirty that are actually illegal?

I don't know.

But here's what I'd expect.

They might have the goods and they might say, "All right, we got you.

You did this and that and that.

We're going to put you in court." And then magically uh as if on schedule, George Soros senior would have a let's say a bad health outcome and he would be way too out of it to actually be in trial.

You want to make a bet?

I'm going to make the bet that they do find the goods on Soros, but that they can't really hold a trial because he's just going to be like, "Oh, I'm so old." He's going to do the Biden defense.

Okay, if we took you to court, we probably would convict you, but you're only going to be alive six months anyway, and you couldn't really defend yourself because you'd just be like, "Wh I'm so old." blah.

So, I don't think there's any chance that Soros senior will, you know, go to jail.

I don't think there's any chance of that.

He's too old.

But maybe Alexander would be uh you know, his son may be in a little bit of trouble.

I don't know.

We'll find out.

Well, uh, so yesterday there was a little clip of Hillary Clinton being a terrible person and, um, I reposted it with just one comment.

I said, "Worst human being in the world." Now, if you're on X, do you feel like that would be like a a big post, you know, lot lots of attention?

All I said was worst human being in the world.

Like, it's not really clever.

It's not new.

It's not breaking news.

It's not a meme.

It's just an opinion.

Worst human being in the world.

It got a million views.

A million views.

That's how many people immediately uh immediately embrace the idea that she's the worst human being in the world.

Can you imagine that somebody says you're the worst human being in the world and a million people immediately say, "Oh, yeah.

Yep.

Yep.

You're not second.

You're you're the worst worst in the world.

So, here's a question that I do ask every now and then, but this is another time to ask it.

Is it my imagination and my tremendous bias that Republicans look like ordinary people and the top Democrats, the ones you see the most on TV, I usually call them the designated liars, they look evil.

Am I wrong?

If you if you watch the video of Hillary, she doesn't seem like just somebody who disagrees.

Take a take Hillary.

Take a Kamla.

In my opinion, uh Kamla, you know, may be incompetent or whatever, but I don't think she's evil per se.

Like, she doesn't project evil, but Hillary does.

I mean, I just see evil when I look at her.

And again, it's not a it's not a woman thing or even a Democrat thing.

I don't see evil when I see um you know, any other uh like Nancy Pelosi.

I don't I don't see evil.

I I think she's a liar and she's a you know, partisan, etc., but she's just sort of doing her job.

But with Hillary, she actually she just seems actually evil, you know, like if they were if demons were real.

I don't know.

But then look at the others.

Rascin.

You telling me Rascin doesn't look evil or Schiff or uh Comey.

I I think Comey doesn't look as evil.

Comey looks more like a weasel, you know, like you can not like what he does, but he doesn't look evil.

He's he obviously looks like somebody who lied, but that's not that unusual.

Um, I wouldn't say evil.

But how about Brennan?

Brennan comes off as evil.

You can't possibly look at that guy and say, "Oh, there's there's somebody who plays between the lines.

He just looks like a demon." What about uh Blumenthal?

Evil.

What about Hakee Jeff?

Hakee Jeff is the most evil looking face I've ever seen in my life.

Now, the things he says are more ordinary Democrat things, but oh my god, if you were going to cast a a demon or a uh you know, a bad guy in a movie, you would cast him pretty quickly.

Uh what about Clapper?

There's something with Clapper.

I don't know what it is.

Right.

And what about several of the Democrat lawyers?

I won't name names, but you know which ones I'm talking about.

They've got several TV lawyers.

Not all of them.

Uh Eli Heneg is a perfectly reasonable guy, but they've got a there's several lawyers that just come off as evil.

They they don't even come off as just biased, just evil.

And I'm trying to think.

So yeah, you know what I'm talking about.

Uh, so here's what I'm trying to decide.

You know, you always have to check yourself for bias.

Are there prominent Republicans who are always in the news who have a persona that comes off as like a demon?

And I couldn't think of one.

And I think of the people in the news, obviously Trump.

You know, Trump is just Trump.

He doesn't have any, you know, demon vibes.

Um, what about, uh, you know, Thun?

Thun just looks like a regular guy.

What about Tom Cotton?

Regular guy.

I mean, I could go down the list, but I'm not wrong, right?

it just just the demeanor, the face, the way they act.

You know, the there are liars everywhere and there are biased people everywhere, but the amount of people that are Democrat leaders who are actually evil is weird.

I I saw somebody say John Mc.

Cain.

I I might have given you John Mc.

Cain if if he were still around.

I might have said somebody saying Steve Miller.

Stephen Miller is a little bit of a hybrid.

There was a time when I would have said, "Okay, you got me.

Stephen Miller is a scary persona, but at the moment, he's projecting extreme competence and doing exactly what most of the base wants him to do." So, um I I believe he's I believe he's managed his brand from wow, you're kind of scary to you're still kind of scary, but you're doing what we want you to do.

You're you're doing this scariness that we demand of you.

So, I I would say that I have a different impression of him than maybe five years ago.

Anyway, um speaking of Hakee Jeff, he was just at a Black Caucus uh conference and he said that uh Republicans are pushing white supremacy, invoking Jim Crow, the KKK, and lynching.

Now, you're a real piece of if that's your message to black America.

I mean, what can you say about Hakeem Jeff, but pure piece of especially in the context of the rhetoric being too too extreme and cause violence?

What what would cause I mean, this is just so damaging that this is beyond um you know, just a mistake.

This is evil.

This is just pure unadulterated evil.

How does he get away with that?

Anyway, there's big news in the so-called Tina Peters case.

I guess she's in uh in court because she did some things with some voting machines trying to uh trying to determine if there were some irregularities in the 2020 election uh and did something that got her in trouble.

But the new news is that uh they have I guess on her side uh Emerald Robinson is uh posting on this that apparently they have a uh a witness who claims and the witness is from Venezuela.

Remember the Kraken when Sydney Powell said, uh, there's a general in Venezuela and they can they can, uh, manipulate the voting machines, blah, blah, blah.

And then that turned out not it got debunked.

I don't know if it was untrue, but it got debunked.

Well, now the there's a Venezuelan witness.

We don't know much about him because he's afraid for his life.

So, he is operating uh anonymously from us.

and he alleges that uh the voting machines um I'll give you the question and the answer the question was sir do you have personal knowledge personal knowledge right so it's got to be personal knowledge whether the election systems in the US the voting systems can be manipulated by foreign agents the answer was the electoral systems of the United States can be manipulated by foreign agents or third parties Uh, do you think that do you think that uh testimony is going to hold?

I'm going to say no.

I'm going to say no.

I I would vote against this holding up as a fact.

It could be that this is just another Kraken, you know, another another intentionally fake story to make it even harder to know what really is true.

So, um, while I don't trust voting machines as a general statement, and I don't believe that they should be part of our system because we we can't trust them.

There's no way you could know.

Um, but is this one witness telling the truth?

And and does this person know the truth?

I'd bet against it.

Yeah, I'd bet against it.

But maybe I could be, you know, I would love to be wrong about that, but I'd bet against it.

And the bet against it is only based on the fact that there have been about a a billion election claims and they they they always turn stale.

They they never really pan out.

So if this is the real one, well, I I just don't want to do the Charlie Brown football thing where I keep going, hey, hey, I think this was real.

Finally.

Finally, we got a real one.

Maybe, but I'm not going to I'm not going to embrace that.

I would need more.

John Solomon of Just News is reporting that uh we've just learned that the FBI had 274 agents at the Capitol on January 6.

And allegedly they were plain closed.

They didn't have a way to identify themselves even to each other.

And I I guess they thought they were illprepared and uh ill um ill-managed in what they were supposed to do when they were there.

But uh 274 and that would just be the FBI.

How many other entities would have had undercover people there?

What do you think?

And would 274 agents, would that be enough to cause the crowd to go a certain direction that maybe it wouldn't have?

The answer is yes.

That is enough people that if if those people wanted to make sure there was trouble they could very easily with that number of people I mean even much less um it would probably only take a dozen people to you know initiate something like knocking on a window or something like that uh but 274 it becomes easy.

You could absolutely manage the entire you know nature of the crowd with 274 people.

You would just have to make sure that those people were the, you know, loudest, most aggressive and then other people would sort of follow.

It wouldn't take that much.

Now, I don't know if that makes a difference.

Uh, knowing that there were 274, I don't know.

Does that really change how you think about the whole thing?

Because I don't think you even needed the agents to create the riot.

I think that some people were going to be bad and they were.

Most people were there to protest, not to form an insurrection.

Um, but the the bad guys, the Democrats called it an insurrection because they could, but I'm not sure that the number of agents really makes a difference in the narrative.

It's good to know, but it might not make a difference.

Uh, let's see.

Apparently, some some element of Antifa issued an anti- anti-ICE threat before the shooting.

Um, and uh, so that's scary.

But since Antifa is not really a fully organized entity, I don't think it means much that uh, you know, one Antifa person said something that is sort of what Antifa says.

Jesse Waters was reporting that uh Gavin Newsome had ordered just before the shooting, not long before, just hours be before I think, ordered a what he called a code red and ordered his base to quote push back against the what he called the Gestapo, meaning ICE.

So you got Nuome calling ICE Gustapo and saying you should push back.

How do you push back against the Gestapo?

Is it by talking really cleverly?

Hey, we've got to defeat the Gestapo.

Huh?

Let's let's come up with some good arguments.

No.

Hey, we got to beat the Gestapo.

Uh, we better organize people to sign up to vote.

No.

No.

The one and only way you stop the Gestapo is with violence.

And for Nuome to imagine that he could use that kind of word um and that it wouldn't trigger somebody to pull a trigger.

I don't know.

He's either stupid or evil.

And by the way, Nuome does not give me the evil vibe of the other Democrats.

uh which makes him more dangerous because I think he could actually get elected under some set of circumstances.

Um I think he's a weasel.

I don't think he's capable.

I think he's not well he's capable of getting elected but I don't think he's competent.

Um but uh we'll see.

Well, meanwhile over in Denmark, you know, there have been these uh drones that have been over the airports and they don't know what that's about.

Well, the prime minister in Denmark just addressed the nation and admitted that they don't know what those are.

So, apparently it's not Denmark's.

And they apparently haven't ruled down anything.

Haven't ruled down China or non-human intelligence or anything else.

Uh-huh.

And apparently um Yeah.

So, what do you think they are?

What do you think all these drones are?

Well, I'll tell you the one thing.

If you thought that the modern industrial countries all had good uh good control over their own skies, apparently not.

Apparently not.

Apparently, you can you can just fly a big old drone because these are not that small.

You know, these would be the biggest, you know, larger size drones.

You can fly a drone over their country as long as you want.

Uh you can fly over anything you want, no matter how, you know, proprietary or anything else.

And then you can leave whenever you feel like it and nobody nobody will even know where you went back to.

Um that does not give me any feeling of safety about anything.

Anyway, um so we don't know what that's about, but I will tell you it's very unlikely that it's a alien and uh it's, you know, it's some human being's drone and we don't know why they're doing it.

Um well, in the scariest news I've ever seen in my life besides the pandemic, um the first days of the pandemic when we didn't know what it was.

Um, so apparently P Exathth in the Department of War is uh ordering all the top generals and admirals to meet at Quantico, Virginia uh today, but sometime around now and we don't know why.

Now, does that scare you that all the top military people are being brought to a secure location to get new instructions?

Does that sound like we're about to go to war with a major country?

Maybe.

But there are some other possibilities.

One possibility is it's just part of the saber rattling with Russia.

So, you know, um Putin and Trump are in this, you know, this war of words, but they back up the words with a little saber rattling.

It's like, "Hey, we got a big navy sitting right outside your doorstep.

Hey, we've got a nuclear triad.

Look at us testing some new missiles." So, it could be that it's uh entirely to send a message to Russia that if you want war, we're ready.

Maybe.

Yeah.

So, you know, so maybe it's just part of the negotiations.

Maybe.

I mean, it wouldn't be the worst move in the world to make Russia think, uh, why are all those generals meeting?

Have we gone too far?

because it looks like our plan is to push Russia into economic disaster if we can.

And uh what would they do in return?

Uh would they bomb our homeland to take out some of our energy production?

Well, that would be war.

So, it could be that we know that we've got Russia in a corner and the only thing they can do to respond before we destroy their their energy economy.

And when I say we, I mean Ukraine with our weapons.

Um, it could be that we just want to make sure that Russia knows they don't have that option of going military to respond to that.

Maybe.

Or maybe they're prepping to attack Venezuela.

But would you need to pull in every top leader if you were going after Venezuela?

I I feel like you wouldn't want too many people to know what was going on if they were, you know, let's say you were the general assigned to some far part of the world.

Would you really need to know if Venezuela was going to be targeted?

Probably didn't don't need to know.

It'd be better if you didn't so the the news doesn't get out.

Uh but I would say probably so I would say probably not about Venezuela because you wouldn't get everybody.

You would get every person if it was about Russia.

You would get every person if it was about China, you know, say taiwan for example.

Um it could be I' I saw it uh suggested that it might be to tell people that they either have to be with the program you let's let's say it's the HGsath/Trump program of what they want the military to be.

You either have to be on board with that completely or we're going to fire you today.

So, it could be sort of a loyalty test to just say, "Look, if you do this set of things, we're going to fire your ass.

We have no tolerance for it anymore.

You can't be woke.

You can't be leaking things.

You know, you're you're just gone.

You're more gone than gone if you do anything that we find disloyal or not on board." So it might be that which would make sense to have everybody there.

Um but what other reasons would they not tell us?

So it has to be in the category of things that they don't think the um what five minutes left if Scott does what.

Oh, five minutes before the top of the hour.

All right.

So, we'll find out what that is.

I have to say that the 800 generals is uh scary, but one of the possibilities is that Earth is being attacked by aliens.

They're already in Denmark uh flying around and the US needs to do a full, you know, full military push to defend against the alien armada that's coming our way.

Maybe, maybe.

I wouldn't bet on that one.

I'm not going to bet on the aliens.

Uh, of all these possibilities, I would say it's either sending a message to Russia, um, or something about modernizing or changing the the nature of the entire military.

So, they're either going to reorganize, fire the disloyal, or or send a message to Russia.

That those would be my best guesses.

Um, now that there's seemingly undeniable evidence that the political left is the ones that are dangerous in terms of violence, uh, because this latest shooter, the, uh, the ICE shooter.

Um, no.

Adam Kinzinger is on CNN.

He goes, "The thing we need to be looking at is not is this right or is this left?" So, suddenly it's not important if it's coming from mostly from the left or mostly from the right.

And it became not important the minute it became obvious it was more coming from the left.

Now, my take is I really don't care too much because I think that there's plenty of violence coming from everywhere and for every damn reason.

Sometimes crazy, sometimes political, sometimes trying to impress Jodie Foster.

I mean, you know, it it's coming from everywhere all the time.

So, to me, that's not the most interesting thing to talk about.

But what is interesting is is the way we talk about things inspiring a certain set of people but not a certain other set.

I don't see anything that the Republicans are saying that would stimulate somebody to kill.

But I see plenty of things like every single day from the left that should by all logic and everything you know about the world and everything you know about people and everything you know about influence and persuasion.

It should create a bunch of killers.

And that's what we observe.

You know what?

Four so far.

Two assassins, one one Charlie Kirk, one on ICE.

I mean, that's four that were almost certainly inspired by the way uh Democrats talk.

So, that's important.

Um, also uh also coming from representative Luna had a picture on X of a bot farm.

Now, a bot farm is a bunch of smartphones that are sort of tacked on shelves, and there's, you know, hundreds and hundreds of smartphones.

And the smartphones, I I guess, are programmed to to act independently like bots to move the conversation online, to make it look like something is more popular than something else.

But I have a question.

How do you know it's a bot?

It seems to me that it wouldn't be that hard to spot.

And I've accused a number of people in on my timeline of being bots.

You know, I just say obvious paid troll or obvious bot or something like that.

And surprisingly, uh, a lot of them don't push back.

Sometimes they do.

They go, "Uh, no, I'm real.

You know, I this this is who I am." sometimes.

Sometimes you don't hear from them again, which suggests maybe they were bots, but I would love to see some examples of some known bot messages because I believe it'd be like AI.

You know how easy it is to spot AI?

I believe you could spot a bot once once you've seen the pattern.

So, if there's anybody who could do that, it would be really useful.

Is there anybody who has any kind of, you know, data of known bot messages on any topic?

Because I'm sure they operate similarly.

So, I'd like to know more about those bots.

Uh Trump said that uh quote, "I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank." Nope.

I will not allow it.

It's not going to happen.

There's been enough.

It's time to stop now.

Okay.

Now, does that answer the question of who's in charge?

Do do you believe that Trump means it and that he has the ability to stop Israel from annexing the West Bank?

I don't know if they want to annex it, but if they did, could Trump stop it?

See, this is why I I think it's not so much Israel is just, you know, wagging the dog and running the United States.

It seems like that sometimes depends on the question.

But don't you think it works both ways?

You know, I I've said it before.

It seems more like a sibling situation where you can both influence each other and it kind of depends who cares the most about it.

Right?

So Trump is saying he cares a lot about this, you know, about the possibility of annexing and doesn't want it to happen.

And uh that probably is enough to stop it from happening.

But likewise, there are probably things that Israel says privately to Trump, look, we're just we just have to do this.

You know, you you can disagree with us, but we're going to do it anyway because this is just it's too important.

We just have to do this.

So I feel like it's more like an ongoing conversation where both sides are trying to make the point of what's more important and what matters to them the most and then it's just sort of negotiated a little bit.

So I don't believe that Israel calls all the shots.

They definitely have way more influence than most of us are comfortable with.

I would say that.

But it's still it's always a negotiation, I think.

Well, Iran and Russia signed a $25 billion deal for building nuclear power plants in Iran.

So, you know, makes me wonder how that partnership is working out because Israel and Iran get along pretty well.

Uh Russia, I'm sorry, Russia and Iran get along pretty well.

Uh, Russia is really good at getting along with the the worst dictators.

Maybe we should learn something from them.

All right.

Zilinski in Ukraine says, uh, there's no way to have an election unless they have a ceasefire.

And, uh, do you think he wants a ceasefire?

So, he says, I don't want to lead the country in peace time.

He actually said that doesn't want to be the leader in peace time.

really.

Uh I think it's a problem when the the person who is in charge of a ceasefire believes that they would get fired from their job if they did what the country wants them to do because he sort of would get fired.

I mean, he probably wouldn't win an election anyway.

So why would we ever expect Zalinski to to operate in good faith?

That's a lot to ask.

It's a lot to ask anybody.

Well, in other news that was sort of predictable, China has banned Nvidia chips um to be purchased in China.

Now, wouldn't you think that that's what they would want more than anything is Nvidia chips?

Apparently, they couldn't get the top best ones, but they could get the ones just below that.

And if they put them together, they could get some stuff done.

But apparently, according to Andrew Ing, um, China has now figured out how to use their own chips in a configuration where the system level design of the chips can get them the same output as the Nvidia or at least in the ballpark and they don't need Nvidia to do everything that we do with Nvidia.

So once again, if you thought Nvidia would rule the roost forever, well, maybe it's already over.

You know, if China if China doesn't need Nvidia to be as competitive as they think they need to be.

I don't know.

I think the competition for Nvidia is going to be pretty intense.

Meanwhile, in the stupidest state in the world, California, there's a law that the governor hasn't signed yet, but he might.

Uh, limiting free speech in California.

So, if you say something on social media that somebody calls violence, intimidation, or coercion, um, you can be arrested.

Now, that's if if uh Newsome signs it.

if he signs it, that will be one more thing working against him for running for president.

So, I feel like I'm gonna guess that he won't sign it because I think he has to go for free speech if he's going to run for president.

So, but um I might have to move out of California if this becomes a real thing because um I got cancelled for complaining about people not liking me.

But that turned into I don't like other people, which was never part of the conversation.

I've never even offered an opinion other than I like black Americans.

I love them.

You know, I've only had good, you know, good experiences personally on a personal level.

So if somebody like me can say, "Oh, I'm worried about other people not liking me." And that can turn into you hate a certain demographic group.

Is that uh violence, intimidation, or coercion?

Because remember, words are violence, right?

Can I be arrested just for doing what I do every day?

I don't know.

Um, and then Kelsey Piper who was writing on X, uh, that California only 28% of black students in California can read at basic level uh, or above the fourth grade level.

But in Mississippi, where you would think, oh, that Mississippi is a backward state, how are they doing?

I mean, if California only has 28% of black students reading, uh, must be really bad in Mississippi, right?

Nope.

Mississippi is 52%.

About twice as good.

Why?

Because Mississippi and apparently several southern states have completely changed how they do education and they've I think I don't know the details, but I think they just moved back to more of a traditional model, one that you know works and it works.

So if you were if you were a black family, you would probably thrive in Mississippi better than California if what if what you cared about was your kids' education.

Isn't that is that wild that things could be so opposite of what you imagine?

Anyway, um the European Union is going to put some uh tariffs on steel in China, really high tariffs, which reminds me of Trump.

So, I had this uh thought that I posted today and it goes like this.

First you laugh at Trump, then you fight him, then you become him.

First you laugh at him, then you fight him, then you become him.

Now, that's a little bit borrowed from another saying that you'll recognize, but isn't that what's happening?

Nuome is literally pretending to be Trump.

First you laugh, then you fight, then you become him.

That's the ultimate victory, having people become you.

Anyway, that story is boring.

Um, the US apparently according to interesting engineer engineering is going to convert a retired coal mine into a nuclear fusion power plant.

I said fusion.

Fusion isn't even a real technology yet, is it?

And they're they're actually building the plant.

Money is going into it.

Well, turns out that there are a couple of uh uh ways to do fusion.

And one of them works and is stable and it's stable enough and it works well enough that it's really just an engineering question.

And uh so we're we're building a fusion reactor in our lifetime be done by 2030.

They wanted to but um it's called uh stellarator fusion technology.

So if you want to act like the smartest person at the party, Stellarator is the good stuff.

But there's also uh other fusion projects are getting funded big in a big way.

And the other one is uh let's see, Commonwealth Fusion Systems got another customer.

So they have customers, but they don't have a technology that is proven to work, but they're really close.

So people are putting billions into it.

in the hope that it can be commercialized.

So that's where we're at.

Um yeah, it's boring.

Um according to the Federalist, uh a number of corporations and academic offices, uh you know, they have DEI offices and DEI employees.

Well, apparently in a number of these cases, the DEI people were H-1B visa workers.

In other words, they were non-Americans who were telling Americans uh whether they could have, you know, what they could do and what they couldn't do based on their race.

Now, it's obnoxious enough when an American tells me what I can and cannot do based on my race and my gender.

But do you really want somebody from another country telling what you can and cannot do in your own country?

No, thank you.

No thank you.

And in case you're wondering, JD Vance, according to a Rasmusen poll, uh 51% of US voters have a favorable opinion of him, which is pretty darn good.

51%.

So JD coming on strong.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, I went a little bit long, but not too bad.

And uh I'm going to say some words privately to my beloved members of locals, subscribers, and the rest of you.

Thanks for joining and uh hope to see you tomorrow.

Same time, same place.

We'll have some more fun.

You'll get smarter every time you do this.

All right.

Hey, there you are. Good morning.

Take a seat. There are plenty of chairs

ready for you.

And let me check your stocks just to see

how the days are going to go.

S&P is up a little bit. Tesla's up a

little bit. Nvidia's down a little bit.

Not bad. Could be worse.

[Music]

Good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization.

It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and

you've never had a better time. But if

you'd like to take a chance of elevating

your experience up to levels that nobody

can even understand with their tiny

shiny human brains,

all you need for that is a copper mug or

a glass of tanker shell, a canteen,

jugger, flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid. I

like coffee.

And join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure. The dopamine at the end of the

day, the thing that makes everything

better. It's called the simultaneous

sit. Go.

Delicious.

Well, in uh news, China allegedly found

a million-year-old skull.

A million-year-old skull. Oh, I'm

getting an update. Uh, it wasn't a

million-year-old skull. It was Joe

Biden. Uh, no, I'm just kidding. It

wasn't Joe Biden. It was a

million-year-old skull. Um, but since

the oldest known human skull was half a

million years old, this uh doubles the

potential time that maybe humans have

been around in their current form. But

they got to do genetic tests and then

they'll find out for sure if it rewrites

the entire history of humankind.

Have you ever believed uh the

anthropologists?

I find that I've never believed them.

You know, where they find, oh, we found

this this little fingernail and this

fingernail tells us there's a whole new

branch of humanoids. I I always think of

that stuff just made up.

I don't believe any of it. So, it just

went from, well, the oldest human was

about 300,000 years old. Well, no. Well,

found one is no. 500,000. 500,000. Oh,

no. Nope. Double that. 1 million. We

don't have any idea what was happening

back then. Pure guess.

Well, Ben Carson, Dr. Ben Carson has

been added to the Maha mix and he'll be

working on improving the nutrition

standards.

Um, which I love. I love that. Uh, I'm

sure he's the right person and uh I'm

sure that this is one of the most

important things we should be doing. But

I will give this one um this one bit of

caution. There's no real nutrition

science.

I don't know if you know that, but all

that uh you know, how many vitamins you

need and all that, that's all just made

up. Back when I was uh years ago when I

tried to make the product called the

dill burrito, a frozen burrito that I

tried to put all of the vitamins and

minerals you would need for one day. So,

you might get extra, but you wouldn't be

short that day.

And what I learned in the process of

trying to make a food that had all the

vitamins and minerals you need is that

the science of which vitamins and

minerals and how much you need was

changing as fast as we could print the

box.

And at some point I said, "Wait a

minute. This isn't science.

We have no idea what's good for you.

We're It looks like we're just

guessing." So that was about when I

decided to stop trying to make that

product.

Well, believe it or not, according to uh

one of the AI observers, uh Asha

Shrivastava,

I think that's his name. Maybe it's two

words. Ashava.

Anyway, that's as close as I can get.

But anyway, he says that uh Google's

deep mind AI is uh now has a version

that is ready for general robotics.

You know how I've been telling you for a

long time now that I don't believe that

the current versions of AI, the large

language models, I don't believe they

can ever be adopted to just be a robot

brain because they hallucinate too much

and and other problems. Um, but

allegedly Google's deep mind has some

version that would be already ready to

act as a highle reasoning brain for

robots that could do complicated things

they had never done before. So in

theory, you could say, "Hey, could you

wash these grapes?" And if it never

washed a grape, it could figure out,

"Okay, I need a sink. I need to, you

know, I need to faucet it. I need cold

water, not hot water. So, that's the

idea. I'm going to go full skeptic on

this.

And I'm going to say that there is no

such thing as a general purpose AI that

will work in a robot. I don't care what

they say. I don't believe it. You know

why I don't believe it? If it could

actually operate a robot in a general

purpose way, you would see so much video

of that, it would be all over social

media. Look, our general purpose robot

uh just learned to do a thing. Look, it

just learned to do another thing and all

I did was tell it what I wanted. If it

could do any of that,

it would be all the news. So, no, I do

not believe that Google Deep Mind has a

general purpose AI that can run a robot.

Maybe someday,

but I guarantee if it worked really well

right now, you would see the robot that

it wouldn't be a text story about a

robot,

right? I'm not the only one who sees it

that way, right? If it really worked,

you would see the video of the robot,

you know, doing full robot things. There

was a video of one robot arm that acted

like it was recognizing different

objects. Not impressed. Not impressed.

Well, according to MIT Technology

Review, James O'Donnell's writing about

this that uh there is a company that

makes um uh drones that can chase the

shoplifterss.

So, if you buy this product, if you're a

store and somebody robs your store, you

can push a button and the drone will

take off. And then I guess you have to

maybe a human has to spot the bad guy

running away. But then once the drone

has spotted the bad guy or the bad guy's

car, it can it can follow it.

So I don't know what happens when they

follow it because I doubt the police are

going to get involved anyway. So, I

don't know what good the you know I I

don't think the police really chase too

many um too many shoplifterss and it's

probably going to be like a bunch of

people. You know, that most of the

shoplifting seems to be this, you know,

gang of 30 people hit it all at the same

time. And one drone's not going to do

much for that. But I kind of like the

idea. I I would feel safer even if I had

one at my house. You know, if somebody

tried to do something at your house and

then the uh drone could get some

photographs and take a license plate and

make sure it got a picture of the pers,

that would be pretty useful.

Um, it's called flock

flock safety.

And uh I don't know what their tagline

is for flock safety, but if it were me,

I'd say if you steal from me, flock you.

That that's how I would do the

marketing. All right. Um well, the uh

second quarter GDP got revised as they

always do, but higher. So all the way up

to 3.8. Now, if you're not a economics

nerd, 3.8 eight GDP if it were, you

know, an honest number would be really,

really good.

As in better than we have a right to

expect it to be, like really really

good. 3.8. But don't get excited. It's

probably just because the the tariffs

cause people to buy more and get ready.

and you know once all the tariff stuff

settles down um we'll get an idea what

the real number is. So do not believe

that 3.8 is any kind of a sustainable

long-term number. If it is amazing I

mean it would be beyond my highest

expectations but it won't be. Don't

expect that.

But it's better than not being 3.8

that's for sure.

There's a new European startup.

Okay. Did you know that Europe had

startups?

If you heard that there's a European

startup that was getting ready to solve

some big problem, what would be your

first thought?

My first thought was, "Nah, no, they

won't."

Nah, no. No. There's a reason that there

aren't many European startups or or

there's no you know I don't think there

are any unicorns you know the ones that

are worth more than a billion and it has

to do with their stoaltifying

um

what would you call it regulations and

stuff so basically you get smothered and

tax to death if you're a startup but

this uh startup called Uklid according

to Dr. for singularity on X. Uh they're

building this massive chip system, he

says, that would allow lesser powered

chips.

Um I think they're lesser powered.

Um but what it does is use way less

power.

So So what what they're doing is

building a infrastructure for AI that

would be way more power efficient.

Um,

now what I've been predicting for a

while is that the the money involved in

running the energy needed for AI is so

big, you know, we're talking trillions

of dollars that uh for sure there will

be startups trying to reduce the energy

drain for AI and for sure there will be

at least incremental improvements, but

probably probably somebody's going to

come up with you know more than an

incremental improvement. So my my bet is

that uh the big companies will spend a

trillion dollars on building out power

and some small company will say you know

you can do it for 1 billion now we

solved the energy problem. So, I feel

like the most successful AI company

might be somebody who hasn't started yet

because the big ones are going to run

through a, you know, trillions of

dollars. But what happens if the ones

that are fast followers just don't need

that much energy?

Suddenly, you're you're a peer

competitor to chat GPT at uh one

millionth of the cost.

So, I think that's what's going to

happen.

Well, you may have heard of this in the

news. Uh, apparently there are reports

that seem credible that there's now a

major spike in women being admitted to

the ERS because they took too much

Tylenol while pregnant to show that

Trump doesn't know what he's talking

about. And at least one woman is

essentially brain dead from doing that

and has a baby inside her. So, her

husband has some tough choices about

whether to try to deliver the baby or or

or what. Um I assume that they they'll

try to deliver the baby cuz why wouldn't

you?

All right. So, um

that's terrible. You know that that's

the sort of thing we joked about.

Remember how we would always joke? It

was it was an ongoing joke that if you

wanted to kill all

Just joking, right? Not not seriously.

Um, if you wanted to, let's say, do harm

to all Democrats, all you'd have to do

is say, uh, you know,

um, Trump really loves breathing oxygen,

and Trump says you should all breathe

oxygen. And they would all hold their

breath until they passed out and died.

Now, that was the joke.

But literally, people are taking the

Tylenol and dying.

It's not funny,

but if you wonder how strong is

brainwashing,

there you go. You know, I when I talk

about uh

brainwashing and persuasion and hypnosis

and stuff, there's a tendency for people

not to really understand how strong it

is. Now, it's not strong with every

person in every situation. So, that's

why it's confusing. But for some people

it is a complete takeover of their mind.

And I would say that the these uh

Tylenol victims

um

probably they're victims of not only Tik

Tok or some social media because they

tend to do it, you know, publicly. But

uh yeah, they they've got CDS plus

they've got social

social media poisoning.

Well, according to Representative Anna

Paulina Luna, who uh apparently is in a

position to seal all the good secrets

before we do, um she says that NBC is

withholding a neverbeforeseen video of

Lee Harvey Oswald near President uh

Kennedy's limo at the moment of the

assassination,

which would mean that he was not

involved in any way in shooting the

president. if that's true. Now, question

number one, why would NBC be holding it

as opposed to let's say our government

and some entity? Why would NBC have the

most important video

that could ever be

and they're just sitting on it and now

they just decided to release it?

Really? Really? Um, I I wonder if it'll

be a grainy image.

I haven't seen it yet, but you want to

make a bet. Uh, I'm going to make a bet

that it looks approximately like this.

Oh, look. Oh, look. It's That's totally

That's totally Lee Harvey Oswald. Do you

see him? Do you see him? Yeah. Something

tells me it's going to look like that.

Do you believe that when you see the

picture, you're going to say, "Oh my

god, that is Lee Harvey Oswald." Or

could it be like those pictures of the

50s? You know, the old videos you see of

people walking in the city and they all

look the same

in 1963,

right? That's what happened. In 1963,

every guy approximately that age was the

same size. None of them were fat. They

all looked exactly like Lee Harvey

Oswald. They had the same haircut. They

were white guys. They dressed the same.

They had the same body. All skinny.

Everybody looked like him.

I looked like him. If if I had been

around then.

Yeah. A picture of me would look just

like him. At least at some point in my

life.

All right. So, I'm going to say I don't

believe anything about that.

What do you think? I don't believe any

of that.

Uh, but it gets better. According to

Representative Inopolina Luna, another

story, she says she's getting horrifying

reports that in Haiti, uh, organ

traffickers are killing people who were

found dead on the street with missing

organs.

So, do you believe that?

Do you believe that people are being

found with missing organs dead on the

street because they're selling the

organs? Again, again, I'm going to go

with no because that's like one of the

most that's that's one of the most

famous

fake stories of all time. And the people

were found in the bathtub with a note

and their and their kidneys were

missing. Okay. No, I don't believe that

anybody has been found. I mean there

might have been somebody found they had

you know some damage to their body and

then somebody else said it looks like

they took his kidney and then you know

then everybody believes it. No, I do not

believe

that the Haitians are

are taking organs. I don't believe you

could just carve it out with a butcher

knife and sell it on the open market. I

think it's a little harder than that.

Well, you all want to talk about James

Comey's indictment. So, the indictments

have come down. There are two of them.

Uh, let's say one of them is that he

lied to Congress uh about having a third

person leak to the media when indeed

Andy McCabe has already said, "Oh, yeah,

he authorized me to leak." So, we've got

his number two from the FBI.

uh who interestingly is also sort of on

Trump's enemies list, if you will,

virtual enemies list, not an actual one,

but uh McCabe probably will be the

witness because he's already said this.

Probably the witness that takes down

Comey. Now, I kind of like that that

that it'll be McCabe who takes him down.

Um but then the second indictment

is that uh he lied to Congress about

um

that uh

have you ever author? No.

The other one was uh lying about

something. One is one is uh

one is obstructing justice and the other

is lying. But I think that they're both

based on the same set of acts

maybe. Anyway, so the background is, you

know, that the prosecutor who was in

charge got canned for not doing enough.

He seemed like he wasn't sort of on

board. Might have been more of a

Democrat lover than uh what Trump needed

at the point.

The statute of limitations was about to

run out. That's why there was some

urgency and uh at least from the Trump

side some urgency. Now, of course,

as you expect, the the Democrats are

going on TV, the talking heads, and

they're saying that uh it's lawfare

against Trump's enemies, and that that's

that's a bad thing and should never be

done, and it's setting a precedent.

uh really really is setting a precedent.

So going after somebody with lawfare

just to end their political career

looking for the crime as opposed to

responding to a crime. Are you saying

that that's suddenly that's uh that's

wrong and as if it's never happened to

anybody named Trump? I mean it's the

most it's the most obvious thing that's

happened in the last several years. But

the Democrats have no shame and they

also know that their Democrat base won't

really be able to follow this story.

They're only going to get the top line.

So if the Democrats go on MSNBC and say,

"Well, nothing like this has ever

happened before."

I mean, we've never seen anything like

this going after a political person with

a bunch of trumped up charges or even

real charges that normally would be

ignored. What? So that's funny, but it's

working.

You know, on one hand, I'm criticizing

the Democrats for such obvious lies. So

they're lying about their liar.

So Comey is being indicted for lying,

you know, under oath. And uh the

response to his supporters is to lie

about it. So they're literally lying

about the liar. Have Have I ever

mentioned that that's all they have? The

Democrats only have hoaxes and lies.

They did have lawfare,

but not anymore because they're not in

charge.

All right. Um, and uh, a lot of people

are saying that Trump is just after his

enemies and it's only about revenge. To

which I say, if it's revenge against

people who did this to you, absolutely

fair. I'm all for revenge. If it's

specific revenge, I would not like him

to be lawfairing somebody who had

nothing to do with anything. Uh but uh

lawfairing somebody who was trying to

remove him from office and was not a was

not a legitimate um player in my

opinion. Totally

fair. Absolutely fair. And I I think

Trump has a free punch um all the way up

to and including jail, you know, but it

has to pass, you know, obviously through

some Democrat judge and some Democrat

people on a jury and all that. So, it

would take a lot. It would take a lot to

get a conviction. Um some people say,

"Oh, yeah, the facts are clear. This is

an obvious conviction." Uh, Democrats

say, "Oh, no. It's murky. It's murky.

I'm not sure. I'm not sure there's

anything there."

But other people say it's the process

that is the punishment. So, making Comey

go through this expensive, embarrassing

um thing.

You know, might be the real the real

play. Roger Stone, as you know, he was

uh once the subject of the FBI uh what

would you say, raiding his house at 6:00

a.m. and giving him no warning. And uh

and then apparently the judge in his

case gave him a gag order, so he

couldn't even talk about his situation.

And uh Roger Stone asked the perfectly

reasonable question, wait, why isn't

Comey being gagged by the federal judge

in his case like I was? In fact, why is

he being allowed to turn himself in? Why

isn't he subjected to his 6 a.m. raid at

his home by 29 heavily armed FBI agents?

Well, that's a perfectly good question,

Roger Stone. So, as long as we see this

difference in treatment,

it really does give the Republicans a

free hand because what has happened to

them and Trump in particular, but also

his supporters over the last several

years is, in my opinion, so bad that I

can't even imagine any amount of lawfare

against that group of people that I

wouldn't be in favor of. But in general,

I would not be in favor of any

lawfairing against anybody. But this

group, oh yeah. Yeah, they've got it

coming. I'm all on board with that. Uh

Paul Sperry is reporting on X that uh uh

Brennan might be next. Uh he's hearing

that uh they're getting ready to uh do

something with Brennan.

Um that might happen soon.

And Mike Benz had an interesting summary

of the whole situation. He said, uh,

arresting all your political opponents

for non-existent crimes, then committing

a bunch of real crimes, then losing the

next election to those opponents is just

a really bad combination.

Yeah, that that's a good advice. If

you're gonna lawfare people over nothing

at the same time that you're doing

something that's actually super illegal,

like super illegal, you don't want to

lose the next election so that the

people you were you were uh trying to

punish are in charge. But that's what

happened. So

So here's a question for you. If uh if

the next president is a Democrat and

let's say the I don't know somehow the

Congress went Democrat too in 2028.

Do you believe that Trump would be

lawfared again?

Yes, he would. Right. They would lawfare

him again just out of pure revenge. They

they wouldn't be stopping him from doing

anything. It would just be pure revenge.

Would they do it? Yes, they would. What

would you do if you were Trump and you

knew that simply,

you know, running out your term and

leaving, you know, peaceful transfer of

power, if you knew that that would be

your death or that you would be locked

up forever by bad actors, what would you

do? Would you leave the job?

Would be kind of dangerous, wouldn't it?

They've created a situation, which is

the only situation I can imagine, where

Trump has a overwhelming incentive to

never leave the job. Now, I don't

believe that he has that intention

whatsoever. I believe that he intends to

serve his term, do the best job he can,

go down in history as one of the great

presidents, and that, you know, he's on

track to do that.

Um, but if they start making noise like

the minute you're out of office, you

know, we're going to, you know, we're

going to put you in jail and you know

it's going to be trumped up charges.

What would you do if you were Trump?

Would you say, "Well, I'll just I'll

just fight it in the courts." Well, the

courts are going to be, you know, Obama

appointed judges and, you know, you have

no reason to believe he would get a fair

hearing in the court. What would you do?

You might be tempted to stay in office

and stay alive, keep your family alive.

Remember, the family is probably in

jeopardy, too. You know, they would go

after Don Jr., you know, or anybody else

they could. So, the Democrats are

creating the situation very much like

they created the situation demonizing

ICE and demonizing Trump. They created a

situation where an assassin was almost

guaranteed. They created that they are

now if they were to get elected

they would be creating a situation where

it wouldn't make sense for Trump to

leave the office if he had any way to

stay. I don't know that that's even

possible in our system. You know, the

military would have to be on board and I

doubt they would be. So

why are they creating the situation that

they fear the most?

I do do think, however, that if JD

Vance, you know, is looking good and he

wins the election, um, Trump just

retires, no problem at all, because JD

Vance is not going to go after him. But,

uh, it's going to be pretty important. I

I think if JD Vance um doesn't win,

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

Yeah. All bets are off at that point

because you can you expect people to try

to stay alive and to do whatever they

can to stay in the jail. If you put

Trump in that situation, don't expect

him to roll over.

He He should fight as hard as he can. I

hate to say it.

Um,

well, okay. Um,

so there's that.

So, uh, Cass Patello is telling us that,

uh, the people who are doing the

research on Comey, the investigation,

are FBI agents and intel analysts and

staff, uh, who are career people. So

they're not some political people. He's

saying that they're, you know, the

dependable career people who are doing

it. Now, that's so you don't think it's

just a political hit. But honestly, I

can't tell if Cash Patel is just mocking

the Democrats by saying that because

it's sort of just a thing you say. Is he

serious? Oh, don't worry. This is

legitimate because these are career

professionals. Wasn't something like

that what they said about Trump when

they had all the fake the fake lawfare

and the fake uh Russia collusion thing

wasn't any part of the defense. Well,

yeah, it's these are career FBI people.

I mean, they're not political. They're

career people. So, Cash is saying the

same thing. And it makes me wonder if

it's the same reason that they say

nobody's above the law. They don't say

nobody's above the law because it's the

first thing that comes to mind. They say

it because the other side said it. It's

sort of mocking, but you can't tell.

So, is this more of that? Is this more

mocking, but you can't tell? Because it

might be serious. I can't tell. I

honestly can't tell. But it looks like

trolling.

Um,

yeah. Ken Delaneian of NBC, who is often

identified allegedly as a CIA asset,

who, you know, whose job it is to make

sure the NBC News does whatever the CIA

wants. That's what they allege about

Kendallian.

But um he's saying that uh that Trump's

actions against his uh critics and

enemies is uh what do you call it? Uh

never never happened before.

He's he's ended the tradition of not

doing that. That tradition is so ended.

The the Democrats completely removed all

the guard rails and now they have to

live with it. They're they're living in

the world they created, but yeah, don't

expect them to love it.

All right.

So Trump yesterday signed a memorandum

uh directing the federal agencies to go

against uh to look for the people

funding the domestic terrorists and uh

going after them you know Antifa etc.

And uh he said that would include going

after some wealthy people including he

named George Soros and Reed Hoffman as

possible targets of investigation. Now,

they would be targets specifically

because some of their money might have

made it into the hands of some of the

domestic terrorists, Antifa types, but

we don't know that for sure that that

would be alleged at this point.

But the New York Times

confirms, PJ Media is writing about

this, that uh the DOJ is investigating

George Soros.

So, what do you think they're going to

find when they investigate Soros?

Are they going to find just a ton of um

things that look dirty that are actually

illegal? I don't know. But here's what

I'd expect. They might have the goods

and they might say, "All right, we got

you. You did this and that and that.

We're going to put you in court." And

then magically

uh as if on schedule, George Soros

senior would have a let's say a bad

health outcome and he would be way too

out of it to actually be in trial. You

want to make a bet? I'm going to make

the bet that they do find the goods on

Soros, but that they can't really hold a

trial because he's just going to be

like, "Oh, I'm so old." He's going to do

the Biden defense. Okay, if we took you

to court, we probably would convict you,

but you're only going to be alive six

months anyway, and you couldn't really

defend yourself because you'd just be

like, "Wh I'm so old." blah. So, I don't

think there's any chance that Soros

senior will, you know, go to jail. I

don't think there's any chance of that.

He's too old.

But maybe Alexander would be uh you

know, his son may be in a little bit of

trouble. I don't know. We'll find out.

Well, uh, so yesterday there was a

little clip of Hillary Clinton being a

terrible person and, um, I reposted it

with just one comment. I said, "Worst

human being in the world." Now, if

you're on X, do you feel like that would

be like a a big post, you know, lot lots

of attention? All I said was worst human

being in the world. Like, it's not

really clever. It's not new. It's not

breaking news. It's not a meme. It's

just an opinion. Worst human being in

the world. It got a million views.

A million views. That's how many people

immediately

uh immediately embrace the idea that

she's the worst human being in the

world. Can you imagine that somebody

says you're the worst human being in the

world and a million people immediately

say, "Oh, yeah. Yep. Yep. You're not

second. You're you're the worst worst in

the world.

So, here's a question that I do ask

every now and then, but this is another

time to ask it. Is it my imagination and

my tremendous bias that Republicans look

like ordinary people

and the top Democrats, the ones you see

the most on TV, I usually call them the

designated liars, they look evil. Am I

wrong? If you if you watch the video of

Hillary, she doesn't seem like just

somebody who disagrees.

Take a take Hillary. Take a Kamla.

In my opinion,

uh Kamla, you know, may be incompetent

or whatever, but I don't think she's

evil per se. Like, she doesn't project

evil, but Hillary does. I mean, I just

see evil when I look at her. And again,

it's not a it's not a woman thing or

even a Democrat thing. I don't see evil

when I see um you know, any other uh

like Nancy Pelosi. I don't I don't see

evil. I I think she's a liar and she's a

you know, partisan, etc., but she's just

sort of doing her job. But with Hillary,

she actually she just seems actually

evil, you know, like if they were if

demons were real.

I don't know. But then look at the

others. Rascin.

You telling me Rascin doesn't look evil

or Schiff or uh Comey. I I think Comey

doesn't look as evil. Comey looks more

like a weasel, you know, like you can

not like what he does, but he doesn't

look evil. He's he obviously looks like

somebody who lied, but that's not that

unusual.

Um, I wouldn't say evil. But how about

Brennan?

Brennan comes off as evil. You can't

possibly look at that guy and say, "Oh,

there's there's somebody who plays

between the lines. He just looks like a

demon."

What about uh Blumenthal?

Evil. What about Hakee Jeff? Hakee Jeff

is the most evil looking face I've ever

seen in my life. Now, the things he says

are more ordinary Democrat things, but

oh my god, if you were going to cast a a

demon or a uh you know, a bad guy in a

movie, you would cast him pretty

quickly. Uh what about Clapper? There's

something with Clapper. I don't know

what it is. Right. And what about

several of the Democrat lawyers? I won't

name names, but you know which ones I'm

talking about. They've got several TV

lawyers. Not all of them. Uh Eli Heneg

is a perfectly reasonable guy, but

they've got a there's several lawyers

that just come off as evil. They they

don't even come off as just biased, just

evil.

And I'm trying to think. So yeah, you

know what I'm talking about. Uh, so

here's what I'm trying to decide. You

know, you always have to check yourself

for bias. Are there prominent

Republicans who are always in the news

who have a persona that comes off as

like a demon? And I couldn't think of

one.

And I think of the people in the news,

obviously Trump. You know, Trump is just

Trump. He doesn't have any, you know,

demon vibes. Um,

what about, uh, you know, Thun? Thun

just looks like a regular guy. What

about Tom Cotton? Regular guy. I mean, I

could go down the list, but I'm not

wrong, right? it just just the demeanor,

the face, the way they act. You know,

the there are liars everywhere and there

are biased people everywhere, but the

amount of people that are Democrat

leaders

who are actually evil is weird. I I saw

somebody say John McCain. I I might have

given you John McCain if if he were

still around. I might have said somebody

saying Steve Miller. Stephen Miller is a

little bit of a hybrid. There was a time

when I would have said, "Okay, you got

me. Stephen Miller is a scary persona,

but at the moment, he's projecting

extreme competence and doing exactly

what most of the base wants him to do."

So, um I I believe he's I believe he's

managed his brand from wow, you're kind

of scary to you're still kind of scary,

but you're doing what we want you to do.

You're you're doing this scariness that

we demand of you.

So, I I would say that I have a

different impression of him than maybe

five years ago.

Anyway, um

speaking of Hakee Jeff, he was just at a

Black Caucus uh conference and he said

that uh Republicans are pushing white

supremacy, invoking Jim Crow, the KKK,

and lynching.

Now,

you're a real piece of if that's

your message to black America. I mean,

what can you say about Hakeem Jeff, but

pure piece of especially in the

context of the rhetoric being too too

extreme and cause violence? What what

would cause I mean, this is just so

damaging that this is

beyond

um you know, just a mistake.

This is evil. This is just pure

unadulterated

evil.

How does he get away with that? Anyway,

there's big news in the so-called Tina

Peters case. I guess she's in uh in

court because she did some things with

some voting machines trying to uh trying

to determine if there were some

irregularities in the 2020 election uh

and did something that got her in

trouble. But the new news

is that uh they have I guess on her side

uh Emerald Robinson is uh posting on

this that apparently they have a uh a

witness who claims and the witness is

from Venezuela. Remember the Kraken

when Sydney Powell said, uh, there's a

general in Venezuela and they can they

can, uh, manipulate the voting machines,

blah, blah, blah. And then that turned

out not it got debunked. I don't know if

it was untrue, but it got debunked.

Well, now the there's a Venezuelan

witness. We don't know much about him

because he's afraid for his life. So, he

is operating uh anonymously from us. and

he alleges that uh the voting machines

um I'll give you the question and the

answer the question was sir do you have

personal knowledge personal knowledge

right so it's got to be personal

knowledge whether the election systems

in the US the voting systems can be

manipulated by foreign agents

the answer was the electoral systems of

the United States can be manipulated by

foreign agents or third parties

Uh,

do you think that do you think that uh

testimony is going to hold? I'm going to

say no. I'm going to say no. I I would

vote against this holding up as a fact.

It could be that this is just another

Kraken, you know, another another

intentionally

fake story to make it even harder to

know what really is true. So,

um, while I don't trust voting machines

as a general statement, and I don't

believe that they should be part of our

system because we we can't trust them.

There's no way you could know. Um, but

is this one witness telling the truth?

And and does this person know the truth?

I'd bet against it. Yeah, I'd bet

against it. But maybe I could be, you

know, I would love to be wrong about

that, but I'd bet against it.

And the bet against it is only based on

the fact that there have been about a a

billion election claims and they they

they always turn stale. They they never

really pan out. So if this is the real

one, well, I I just don't want to do the

Charlie Brown football thing where I

keep going, hey, hey, I think this was

real. Finally. Finally, we got a real

one. Maybe, but I'm not going to I'm not

going to embrace that. I would need

more.

John Solomon of Just News is reporting

that uh we've just learned that the FBI

had 274 agents at the Capitol on January

6. And allegedly they were plain closed.

They didn't have a way to identify

themselves even to each other. And I I

guess they thought they were illprepared

and uh ill um ill-managed in what they

were supposed to do when they were

there. But uh 274

and that would just be the FBI. How many

other entities would have had undercover

people there?

What do you think?

And would 274 agents, would that be

enough to cause the crowd to go a

certain direction that maybe it wouldn't

have? The answer is yes. That is enough

people that if if those people wanted to

make sure there was trouble they could

very easily with that number of people I

mean even much less um it would probably

only take a dozen people to you know

initiate something like knocking on a

window or something like that uh but 274

it becomes easy. You could absolutely

manage the entire you know nature of the

crowd with 274 people. You would just

have to make sure that those people were

the, you know, loudest, most aggressive

and then other people would sort of

follow. It wouldn't take that much. Now,

I don't know

if that makes a difference.

Uh, knowing that there were 274,

I don't know. Does that really change

how you think about the whole thing?

Because I don't think you even needed

the agents to create the riot. I think

that some people were going to be bad

and they were. Most people were there to

protest, not to form an insurrection.

Um, but the the bad guys, the Democrats

called it an insurrection because they

could, but I'm not sure that the number

of agents really makes a difference in

the narrative.

It's good to know, but it might not make

a difference.

Uh, let's see. Apparently, some some

element of Antifa issued an anti-

anti-ICE threat before the shooting. Um,

and uh, so that's scary. But since

Antifa is not really a fully organized

entity, I don't think it means much that

uh, you know, one Antifa person said

something that is sort of what Antifa

says. Jesse Waters was reporting that uh

Gavin Newsome had ordered just before

the shooting, not long before, just

hours be before I think, ordered a what

he called a code red and ordered his

base to quote push back against the what

he called the Gestapo, meaning ICE. So

you got Nuome

calling ICE Gustapo

and saying you should push back. How do

you push back against the Gestapo?

Is it by talking really cleverly? Hey,

we've got to defeat the Gestapo. Huh?

Let's let's come up with some good

arguments.

No. Hey, we got to beat the Gestapo. Uh,

we better organize people to sign up to

vote.

No. No. The one and only way you stop

the Gestapo is with violence. And for

Nuome to imagine that he could use that

kind of word

um and that it wouldn't trigger somebody

to pull a trigger.

I don't know. He's either stupid or

evil.

And by the way, Nuome does not give me

the evil vibe of the other Democrats. uh

which makes him more dangerous because I

think he could actually get elected

under some set of circumstances.

Um I think he's a weasel.

I don't think he's capable. I think he's

not well he's capable of getting elected

but I don't think he's competent.

Um

but uh we'll see. Well, meanwhile over

in Denmark, you know, there have been

these uh drones that have been over the

airports and they don't know what that's

about. Well, the prime minister in

Denmark just addressed the nation and

admitted that they don't know what those

are. So, apparently it's not Denmark's.

And they apparently haven't ruled down

anything. Haven't ruled down China or

non-human intelligence or anything else.

Uh-huh.

And apparently

um Yeah.

So, what do you think they are? What do

you think all these drones are? Well,

I'll tell you the one thing. If you

thought that the modern industrial

countries all had good uh good control

over their own skies, apparently not.

Apparently not. Apparently, you can you

can just fly a big old drone because

these are not that small. You know,

these would be the biggest, you know,

larger size drones. You can fly a drone

over their country as long as you want.

Uh you can fly over anything you want,

no matter how, you know, proprietary or

anything else. And then you can leave

whenever you feel like it and nobody

nobody will even know where you went

back to. Um that does not give me any

feeling of safety about anything.

Anyway, um so we don't know what that's

about, but I will tell you it's very

unlikely that it's a alien

and uh it's, you know, it's some human

being's drone and we don't know why

they're doing it. Um well, in the

scariest news I've ever seen in my life

besides the pandemic,

um the first days of the pandemic when

we didn't know what it was. Um, so

apparently P Exathth in the Department

of War is uh ordering all the top

generals and admirals to meet at

Quantico, Virginia

uh today, but sometime around now and we

don't know why.

Now, does that scare you that all the

top military people are being brought to

a secure location to get new

instructions?

Does that sound like we're about to go

to war with a major country?

Maybe.

But there are some other possibilities.

One possibility is it's just part of the

saber rattling with Russia. So, you

know, um Putin and Trump are in this,

you know, this war of words, but they

back up the words with a little saber

rattling. It's like, "Hey, we got a big

navy sitting right outside your

doorstep. Hey, we've got a nuclear

triad. Look at us testing some new

missiles."

So, it could be

that it's uh entirely to send a message

to Russia that if you want war, we're

ready.

Maybe. Yeah. So, you know, so maybe it's

just part of the negotiations. Maybe. I

mean, it wouldn't be the worst move in

the world to make Russia think, uh, why

are all those generals meeting? Have we

gone too far? because it looks like our

plan is to push Russia into economic

disaster if we can. And uh what would

they do in return?

Uh would they bomb our homeland to take

out some of our energy production? Well,

that would be war. So, it could be that

we know that we've got Russia in a

corner and the only thing they can do to

respond before we destroy their their

energy economy.

And when I say we, I mean Ukraine with

our weapons. Um, it could be that we

just want to make sure that Russia knows

they don't have that option of going

military to respond to that. Maybe. Or

maybe they're prepping to attack

Venezuela.

But would you need to pull in every top

leader if you were going after

Venezuela?

I I feel like you wouldn't want too many

people to know what was going on if they

were, you know, let's say you were the

general

assigned to some far part of the world.

Would you really need to know if

Venezuela was going to be targeted?

Probably didn't don't need to know. It'd

be better if you didn't so the the news

doesn't get out. Uh but I would say

probably so I would say probably not

about Venezuela because you wouldn't get

everybody. You would get every person if

it was about Russia. You would get every

person if it was about China, you know,

say taiwan for example. Um it could be

I' I saw it uh suggested that it might

be to tell people that they either have

to be with the program you let's let's

say it's the HGsath/Trump

program of what they want the military

to be. You either have to be on board

with that completely or we're going to

fire you today. So, it could be sort of

a loyalty test to just say, "Look, if

you do this set of things, we're going

to fire your ass. We have no tolerance

for it anymore. You can't be woke. You

can't be leaking things. You know,

you're you're just gone. You're more

gone than gone if you do anything that

we find disloyal or not on board." So it

might be that which would make sense to

have everybody there.

Um

but what other reasons would they not

tell us? So it has to be in the category

of things that they don't think the um

what

five minutes left if Scott does what.

Oh, five minutes before the top of the

hour.

All right.

So, we'll find out what that is. I have

to say that the 800 generals is uh

scary, but one of the possibilities is

that Earth is being attacked by aliens.

They're already in Denmark uh flying

around and the US needs to do a full,

you know, full military push to defend

against the alien armada that's coming

our way.

Maybe, maybe. I wouldn't bet on that

one. I'm not going to bet on the aliens.

Uh, of all these possibilities, I would

say it's either sending a message to

Russia,

um, or something about modernizing or

changing the the nature of the entire

military. So, they're either going to

reorganize,

fire the disloyal,

or or send a message to Russia. That

those would be my best guesses.

Um, now that there's seemingly

undeniable evidence that the political

left is the ones that are dangerous in

terms of violence, uh, because this

latest shooter, the, uh, the ICE

shooter. Um, no. Adam Kinzinger is on

CNN. He goes, "The thing we need to be

looking at is not is this right or is

this left?" So, suddenly it's not

important if it's coming from mostly

from the left or mostly from the right.

And it became not important the minute

it became obvious it was more coming

from the left.

Now, my take is I really don't care too

much because I think that there's plenty

of violence coming from everywhere and

for every damn reason. Sometimes crazy,

sometimes political, sometimes trying to

impress Jodie Foster. I mean, you know,

it it's coming from everywhere all the

time. So, to me, that's not the most

interesting thing to talk about. But

what is interesting is is the way we

talk about things inspiring a certain

set of people but not a certain other

set. I don't see anything that the

Republicans are saying that would

stimulate somebody to kill.

But I see plenty of things like every

single day from the left that should by

all logic and everything you know about

the world and everything you know about

people and everything you know about

influence and persuasion. It should

create a bunch of killers. And that's

what we observe. You know what? Four so

far. Two assassins, one one Charlie

Kirk, one on ICE. I mean, that's four

that were almost certainly inspired by

the way uh Democrats talk.

So, that's important.

Um,

also uh also coming from representative

Luna had a picture on X of a bot farm.

Now, a bot farm is a bunch of

smartphones that are sort of tacked on

shelves, and there's, you know, hundreds

and hundreds of smartphones. And the

smartphones,

I I guess, are programmed to to act

independently like bots to move the

conversation online, to make it look

like something is more popular than

something else. But I have a question.

How do you know it's a bot?

It seems to me that it wouldn't be that

hard to spot. And I've accused a number

of people in on my timeline of being

bots. You know, I just say obvious paid

troll or obvious bot or something like

that. And surprisingly,

uh, a lot of them don't push back.

Sometimes they do. They go, "Uh, no, I'm

real. You know, I this this is who I

am." sometimes. Sometimes you don't hear

from them again, which suggests

maybe they were bots, but I would love

to see some examples of some known bot

messages because I believe it'd be like

AI. You know how easy it is to spot AI?

I believe you could spot a bot once once

you've seen the pattern. So, if there's

anybody who could do that, it would be

really useful. Is there anybody who has

any kind of, you know, data of known bot

messages on any topic? Because I'm sure

they operate similarly.

So, I'd like to know more about those

bots.

Uh Trump said that uh quote, "I will not

allow Israel to annex the West Bank."

Nope. I will not allow it. It's not

going to happen. There's been enough.

It's time to stop now. Okay.

Now, does that answer the question of

who's in charge?

Do do you believe that Trump means it

and that he has the ability to stop

Israel from annexing the West Bank? I

don't know if they want to annex it, but

if they did, could Trump stop it? See,

this is why I I think it's not so much

Israel is just, you know, wagging the

dog and running the United States. It

seems like that sometimes depends on the

question. But don't you think it works

both ways? You know, I I've said it

before. It seems more like a sibling

situation where you can both influence

each other and it kind of depends who

cares the most about it. Right? So Trump

is saying he cares a lot about this, you

know, about the possibility of annexing

and doesn't want it to happen. And uh

that probably is enough to stop it from

happening. But likewise, there are

probably things that Israel says

privately to Trump, look, we're just we

just have to do this. You know, you you

can disagree with us, but we're going to

do it anyway because this is just it's

too important. We just have to do this.

So I feel like it's more like an ongoing

conversation where both sides are trying

to make the point of what's more

important and what matters to them the

most and then it's just sort of

negotiated a little bit. So I don't

believe

that Israel calls all the shots. They

definitely have way more influence than

most of us are comfortable with. I would

say that. But it's still it's always a

negotiation, I think.

Well, Iran and Russia signed a $25

billion deal for building nuclear power

plants in Iran.

So, you know, makes me wonder how that

partnership is working out because

Israel and Iran get along pretty well.

Uh Russia, I'm sorry, Russia and Iran

get along pretty well. Uh, Russia is

really good at getting along with the

the worst dictators.

Maybe we should learn something from

them. All right. Zilinski in Ukraine

says, uh, there's no way to have an

election unless they have a ceasefire.

And, uh, do you think he wants a

ceasefire?

So, he says, I don't want to lead the

country in peace time. He actually said

that doesn't want to be the leader in

peace time.

really. Uh I think it's a problem when

the the person who is in charge of a

ceasefire believes that they would get

fired from their job if they did what

the country wants them to do because he

sort of would get fired. I mean, he

probably wouldn't win an election

anyway. So why would we ever expect

Zalinski to to operate in good faith?

That's a lot to ask. It's a lot to ask

anybody.

Well, in other news that was sort of

predictable, China has banned Nvidia

chips um to be purchased in China. Now,

wouldn't you think that that's what they

would want more than anything is Nvidia

chips? Apparently, they couldn't get the

top best ones, but they could get the

ones just below that. And if they put

them together, they could get some stuff

done. But apparently, according to

Andrew Ing,

um, China has now figured out how to use

their own chips in a configuration where

the system level design of the chips can

get them the same output as the Nvidia

or at least in the ballpark and they

don't need Nvidia to do everything that

we do with Nvidia.

So once again, if you thought Nvidia

would rule the roost forever, well,

maybe it's already over. You know, if

China if China doesn't need Nvidia to be

as competitive as they think they need

to be.

I don't know. I think the competition

for Nvidia is going to be pretty

intense.

Meanwhile, in the stupidest state in the

world, California, there's a law that

the governor hasn't signed yet, but he

might. Uh, limiting free speech in

California. So, if you say something on

social media that somebody calls

violence, intimidation, or coercion,

um, you can be arrested.

Now, that's if if uh Newsome signs it.

if he signs it, that will be one more

thing working against him for running

for president. So, I feel like I'm gonna

guess that he won't sign it because I

think he has to go for free speech if

he's going to run for president.

So, but um I might have to move out of

California if this becomes a real thing

because

um I got cancelled for complaining about

people not liking me. But that turned

into I don't like other people, which

was never part of the conversation. I've

never even offered an opinion other than

I like black Americans. I love them. You

know, I've only had good, you know, good

experiences personally on a personal

level.

So if somebody like me can say, "Oh, I'm

worried about other people not liking

me." And that can turn into you hate a

certain demographic group.

Is that uh violence, intimidation, or

coercion? Because remember, words are

violence, right? Can I be arrested just

for doing what I do every day?

I don't know.

Um, and then Kelsey Piper who was

writing on X, uh, that California only

28% of black students in California can

read at basic level uh, or above the

fourth grade level. But in Mississippi,

where you would think, oh, that

Mississippi is a backward state, how are

they doing? I mean, if California only

has 28% of black students reading, uh,

must be really bad in Mississippi,

right?

Nope. Mississippi is 52%.

About twice as good. Why? Because

Mississippi and apparently several

southern states have completely changed

how they do education and they've I

think I don't know the details, but I

think they just moved back to more of a

traditional model, one that you know

works and it works.

So if you were if you were a black

family, you would probably thrive in

Mississippi better than California

if what if what you cared about was your

kids' education. Isn't that is that wild

that things could be so opposite of what

you imagine?

Anyway, um the European Union is going

to put some uh tariffs on steel in

China, really high tariffs, which

reminds me of Trump.

So,

I had this uh thought that I posted

today and it goes like this. First you

laugh at Trump, then you fight him, then

you become him.

First you laugh at him, then you fight

him, then you become him. Now, that's a

little bit borrowed from another saying

that you'll recognize, but isn't that

what's happening? Nuome is literally

pretending to be Trump.

First you laugh, then you fight, then

you become him. That's the ultimate

victory, having people become you.

Anyway, that story is boring.

Um, the US apparently according to

interesting engineer engineering is

going to convert a retired coal mine

into a nuclear fusion power plant. I

said fusion.

Fusion isn't even a real technology yet,

is it? And they're they're actually

building the plant. Money is going into

it. Well, turns out that there are a

couple of uh uh ways to do fusion. And

one of them works

and is stable and it's stable enough and

it works well enough that it's really

just an engineering question. And uh

so we're we're building a fusion reactor

in our lifetime be done by 2030. They

wanted to but um it's called uh

stellarator fusion technology. So if you

want to act like the smartest person at

the party, Stellarator

is the good stuff. But there's also

uh other fusion projects are getting

funded big in a big way. And the other

one is uh let's see, Commonwealth Fusion

Systems got another customer. So they

have customers, but they don't have a

technology that is proven to work, but

they're really close. So people are

putting billions into it.

in the hope that it can be

commercialized. So that's where we're

at.

Um

yeah, it's boring.

Um according to the Federalist, uh a

number of corporations and academic

offices, uh you know, they have DEI

offices and DEI employees. Well,

apparently in a number of these cases,

the DEI people were H-1B visa workers.

In other words, they were non-Americans

who were telling Americans uh whether

they could have, you know, what they

could do and what they couldn't do based

on their race. Now, it's obnoxious

enough when an American tells me what I

can and cannot do based on my race and

my gender. But do you really want

somebody from another country telling

what you can and cannot do in your own

country? No, thank you. No thank you.

And in case you're wondering, JD Vance,

according to a Rasmusen poll, uh 51% of

US voters have a favorable opinion of

him, which is pretty darn good. 51%. So

JD coming on strong. All right, ladies

and gentlemen,

I went a little bit long, but not too

bad. And uh I'm going to say some words

privately to my beloved members of

locals, subscribers, and the rest of

you. Thanks for joining and uh hope to

see you tomorrow. Same time, same place.

We'll have some more fun. You'll get

smarter every time you do this. All

right.