Episode 3053 CWSA 12/25/25

Merry Christmas everybody.

Come on in.

Come on in.

We're going to hang out a little bit.

Just in case your Christmas needed a little extra.

Or in case you were hanging out by yourself.

You don't have to.

You can hang out with us.

Let me make sure I can see your local comments.

do.

Yes, I can.

Excellent.

Excellent.

Come on in.

We will do the special Christmas simultaneous sip just as soon.

Oops.

Quiet.

>> Just as soon as enough of you get in here.

>> Yep.

It's going to be epic.

How many of you assumed I would be wearing a Christmas hat?

A little bit unpredictable.

The wise men have come.

Send them in my house.

I need some wise men.

Very wise.

A good morning.

Good morning.

All right.

Are you ready for the simultaneous sip?

All you need is a copper mugra glass, tanker chalice or sign, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid.

I like coffee.

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

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

It happens now.

Could you Could you smell the simultaneity?

I could.

So, what do you want to do this morning?

Do you want to hear about some interesting stories?

Do you want to open your packages and act like I'm the relative that came late for Christmas and I'm just sort of sitting in the corner?

Maybe I'll say some things that make it seem like I'm in the room.

You ready for this?

I'm going to do some fake fake acting.

Well, I guess acting is fake.

I'm going to do some acting so it seems like I'm just in a room with you.

Okay.

Oh, wow.

Was that yours?

Did you just open that up?

That's a That's a really thoughtful gift.

Who gave you that?

Uh, no wonder.

Yep.

That That's a good giftgiver.

And why don't you give back?

I'm sorry.

I'll shut up.

Hey, what time do we eat?

Does anybody know what time we eat?

Oh god.

Oh no.

I was hoping that relative wouldn't come.

Oh, who invited that one?

Oh my goodness.

Oh, everything looked good until that one relative started coming up the driveway.

But sh we we'll just pretend that we don't know who drank all the eggnog.

Yeah.

Hey people, where's all the eggn dog?

All right.

How was that?

Did that feel like I was in your living room just bugging you when you're opening your packages?

All right.

Well, let me give a special shout out today to one of our members who makes clips of my show and does a really really good job of it.

So good that President Trump yesterday reposted it on Truth.

So my uh I'm talking about Jay Plemens.

If you're now following him, you should on X because he does these most excellent um clips.

He's really good at figuring out what is a good clip and also, you know, adding the text and the other features to make it a to make it a really good clip.

So, apparently he did so well that the president of the United States said, "Huh, I think I'll repost that." So, congratulations, Jay Plemens.

That must be an excellent uh Christmas gift, doesn't it?

That that must have made you so excited.

I I hope you were telling all your family, but you earned it.

Excellent work.

Well, gosh, I'm not even sure I feel like talking about the uh the news.

I've got notes, but it might be like that boring uncle who doesn't have doesn't have any conversation skills, so they just talk about what's in the news.

That would be me.

But did you know, this is an old story, but I'm going to tie it into something.

Did you know that the census uh was errorprone?

And those errors tended, not completely, but they tended to lean in one direction, which is to underount conservatives and overcount Democrats.

And the result is that Democrats got more seats in the House because the census said there are more people uh than there were.

Now, here's why I brought it up.

The reason that we know this is because the Census Bureau did an audit of their own process.

So, it's not an accusation.

It's what the audit people say themselves.

They they say that it changed the uh representative sample, not a sample, but it changed who's representing who and that it went in one direction on average.

But what I caught here is the word audit.

You know, I posted the other day that audit would be the word of 2025.

And boy, is it.

If you start noticing how often the word audit is going to pop up in all the stories because there's so many stories about fraud and the only way you're going to catch them is with an audit.

Well, it's not the only way, but be the main way you do it.

So I predict that the public is going to learn the importance of audits in a way that they had not before quite appreciated.

And if the public starts asking for audits and demanding them, then the politicians will have to, you know, they'll have to fold to that.

So probably the single most important thing we could do for our fiscal health is to make sure there's always an audit in place like a real one uh for everything that has a lot of money involved.

Could it be that the the attention that we're putting in that word and by the way if it wasn't obvious um you know when I turned on my persuasion skills which I don't always do it's because there's some big gain you know I don't do it just to see if I can do it um I use my persuasion when I think there's some gigantic thing we could get out of it and one of the things I'm going to persuade more and for over the next year is the importance of audits.

I know, boring, right?

But if we don't get that right, everything falls apart.

So, did you watch a any of the Joe Rogan interview recently with Brett Weinstein?

Weinstein.

Brett Weinstein.

and they were talking about aliens and UAPs and ancient civilizations.

Well, it sounded like Joe Rogan is on the similar path that I've been on, which is there was one time in my past I thought, you know, maybe maybe there's some UFOs, you know, maybe there's some aliens that are visiting.

But more recently, I had ruled that out in favor of the hypothesis that if anything is happening at all, you know, in other words, if these sightings are at all real, that the uh the source of them would be our own past.

So, it might be ancient ancient uh aliens who live beneath the ocean.

It might be some kind of ripple across time.

from a time when there were aliens with an advanced civilization on Earth.

But Satellite Joe, and I'm not so sure about Brett, but Satellite Joe has gone from these might be space aliens to the odds of because Rogan always has these experts on ancient civilizations.

To me, it now seems obvious, I would say 100% obvious, that there were advanced civilizations that we don't know much about.

And that it can't be a coincidence that we've got these giant megalithic structures, not in one place, but basically in a variety of places around the world, and we don't know how to make them.

Well, maybe we could with modern equipment, but the fact that none of those cultures retain the ability to make those structures, it kind of suggests they found them, doesn't it?

So, I'm now of the of the working hypothesis that I think matches Joe Rogan's.

I'm not positive, but uh I do believe that these are shadows from the past.

And I think somebody smarter said, maybe it was Joe that uh no, somebody else.

Somebody said that the reason that these sightings seem to defy uh physics is that they're not part of our reality.

That they might be some kind of a a ripple or a bleed through or a temporal distortion.

I don't know what I have no idea what I'm talking about.

but that that they're literally not part of our reality.

It's just something we can temporarily see.

And there's the reason is there was something from the past.

Now, here's where it gets interesting.

Oh, uh, Palmer Lucky, who's the head of Ender, was asked about aliens, and I believe he had a very similar take.

So if your take ever matches Palmer Lies, you're lucky because he's one of the smartest people in the world.

So remember Elon Musk has said if there were space aliens, he would probably know about it, but he doesn't know about it.

And now another genius, Palmer Lucky, is also fairly sure that we could rule out space aliens, but it might be something from the past.

some advanced civilization.

And it could be that there wasn't just one.

It could be that there were dozens of advanced civilizations that didn't make it, which is a little bit scary if you happen to be an advanced civilization.

So, I don't know about dozens, but I'll bet you if there's one, I'll bet you there's multiple.

What do you think?

and that maybe it's just buried so deep in the sediment that we'll never know.

But I'm pretty sure there were some advanced civilizations.

And then I'd never heard this before, but this is also on Gorgan show.

Did you know that in Peru they found these little creatures with three three fingers and three toes that look like they really were aliens, but probably not aliens from space.

again, more more likely some advanced civilization that was here.

I'm not sure I believe in the aliens yet or or just the creatures.

I I'm not sure I believe the creatures are real, but it's fascinating.

So, here's where I'm going to tie this into something now.

So, you know, Elon is building an Encyclopedia Galactica, which at the moment is named Graipopedia, but he said he'll change the name to uh Encyclopedia Galactic, I think.

And his plan is to create a repository of everything we know and to not only have that available to everyone on Earth for free, I guess, but he would put some copies in space.

So there there would be a library in space forever.

Maybe a library in the moon forever.

Maybe one that just floats around the Earth in orbit or wherever he can put it.

So his plan would be if if humans got wiped out that some future civilization which might be the you know the remaining remnants of of uh of humans they would somehow be able to recover the lost knowledge.

Now that's a heck of a good idea but it raises this possibility.

What if the earlier civilizations did the same thing?

What if they found a way to protect everything they knew, but they didn't find a way to protect themselves?

Because it would be easier to launch something into space than it would be to, you know, put a shield around the whole Earth, assuming some comet was heading this way or something.

So, is it possible that we will someday discover not just that there used to be a advanced civilization, but that they saved all of their knowledge and we could unlock it.

What do you think?

I I think that's entirely possible because if Elon thought the idea of preserving knowledge, what are the odd what are the odds that an entire prior civilization didn't have anybody who had that idea, right?

And if it's doable, it's not yet been done, but you pretty close.

If it's doable, what are the odds it was doable before?

Think about see now now that's a good that's a good Christmas conversation isn't it?

Uh even Palmer Lucky backed me up backed me up and what?

I do not know.

All right.

Um, speaking of Musk and AI, he says that the uh the AI that he runs, this is his prediction, will have more AI compute than everyone else combined in less than five years.

Do you believe that?

that the Elon Musk AI called XAI will have more compute than all the other sources combined in five years.

Wow.

And then I say, um, so we're also right at the verge of the self-driving cars being completely self-driving.

What would it take?

I asked this morning, what would it take to turn your self-driving car into a classroom?

So suppose you had to commute, you know, an hour each way, but you didn't have to do the driving.

Could you have a 45minute class, you know, assuming there's nobody else in the in the vehicle that just teaches you some kind of skill and every day you get in it and says, "Oh, hi Scott.

would you like to continue your physics lesson?

Now, I saw somebody push back on that and say, "Scott, Scott, u people are not going to want to learn from machines.

You need a human being to teach people otherwise they just they're not going to be feeling it." To which I say, it's going to look like a human being.

You know, your screen is going to be somebody who is a deep fake who looks exactly like a human.

It looks and acts.

So you might have like Professor Fineman teaching you physics and you would absolutely not know the difference.

You just wouldn't be able to tell.

And they would be able to customize your lesson uh completely.

So I think um at the moment we might be in a place where the AI is not as good as the best teacher.

How long is that going to last?

You know, once it looks like a human and once it's way better at learning how to teach and once it's more customized to you specifically, which might be the big part, it would be way better and you would probably enjoy it.

So I think uh then I said that and then somebody pointed me to a link.

Did you know that El Salvador has announced a partnership with XAI to build a public education program around AI?

So they're going to use Grock as a personalized digital tutor.

Remember this is El Salvador.

So, Al El Salvador is weirdly forward thinking.

you know, they're they're well managed and that they're going to gradually roll down over two years and it will just be, you know, fully accredited and uh and their their leader Betelli said that using XAI for their education will be a way to quote leapfrog traditional education so that El Salvador can have the best education system in the world in just a couple years.

All they have to do is go first and they're going first.

So B Kelly very smart.

So if you want a good free education, go to El Salvador.

So that made me wonder how many things are going to go to to the price of free.

So in the United States, we still got this accreditation fetish which apparently has been solved for El Salvador.

But um don't you think we're very close to an advanced education, the very best advanced education costing you literally nothing?

So instead of paying7 $70,000 a year for an elite college, you could pay zero um do it at your own pace and it would be not just as good but way way better than a traditional education.

So, so as I'm watching with interest, uh Elon Musk's idea that eventually everything will be free, um there are definitely things that are going to go first.

And if we can get rid of the uh let's say the roadblocks in the United States, which would be teachers unions and accreditation and inertia.

So if we could get to where you know El Salvador is, education would be free.

But the best part about it is if you've ever had kids in the public school system, how many of you have had kids recently in the public school system and you know what a nightmare it is, right?

It seems to me that if you put your nice kid in an environmental where everybody can go, you know, it's a public place, they will be bullied uh beyond repair.

So the damage that's done by going to a public school is really pretty high.

So there's damage to the family unit because they over they over homework.

there's a damage to their mental health.

You can make all of that go away and make you free.

And we're we basically have the technology to do it already.

So people don't realize the horror and the torture that they put kids through in public school.

If if you haven't if you haven't observed it personally, you would never believe how bad it is.

So education could go zero quickly.

But I've also said that car insurance could go to zero because once once your self-driving car has basically no accidents, there's always going to be stop.

Then the then the car maker can just add insurance forever to the purchase price of the car.

So, for an extra $1,000 purchase price, the car maker will cover all your insurance in case you have an accident for the rest of the life of the car.

So, that won't be free, but if you compare onetime thousand cost over the ownership of the car is close to free.

Then somebody mentioned that uh Optimus the you know Optimus yeah the the robot will soon be able to do child care.

And I thought to myself, all right, if you compared a human to a robot today for child care, you would probably pick the human, right?

But because the humans who do child care are not maybe not as trustworthy as they could be.

Maybe you couldn't watch what they're doing as easily as you could if a robot was working for you and you could just ask the robot what's going on.

I feel like child care is going to go to the robots really quickly, which would make the cost of it, you know, drop dramatically.

For example, if you already had a robot to clean your house or do ordinary things, you could say, "All right, robot, for these work hours, you're going to be doing child care." Because the robot doesn't need to rest.

So, as long as you have a robot, it can do child care.

Now, imagine if somebody broke into your home and tried to, you know, do something bad to you or your home.

Who would you rather defend it?

A traditional child care person or a badass robot?

I think it would be better security.

It would be less likely to molest your child and it's just going to be better in every way very very quickly and it could do multiple people.

So your neighbors kids could come over and one robot takes care of you and so your kid is not lonely.

But you'd have to choose carefully.

Then what about security?

We're very close to the point where the robots could give you security better than humans.

Partly because you couldn't afford a human, partly because you need three humans a day just to cover the 24 hours.

And partly because the robot probably would be stronger and have, you know, better decision making, etc.

So that's at least four things that could almost immediately drop to no cost at all.

So I'm not sold entirely on the idea that that money will be worthless, but there sure will be a lot of times when that money is not going to look like uh like it used to.

See what else is happening.

So here's a wild uh prediction speaking of Elon Musk.

So I actually he predicted this that there will be doubledigit growth meaning the GDP within 12 to 18 months double digit.

Now why that's ridiculous but might be right is that we were all cheering that the GDP went from 35 to 45 roughly.

So we got all excited because it was over 4%.

Elon says it's going to be you know over 10% within a year maybe a year and a half.

Do you believe that?

His reasoning is this.

He says if applied intelligence and that would be AI and robots, you know, used intelligently is a proxy for economic growth, which it should be.

He says triple digit is possible in less than five years.

Triple digit.

So now he's going from 10% a year to over 100% a year.

If you could do that, does money become worthless?

I don't know.

I'm I'm having a little bit of trouble intellectually following the argument, but it's a fun one.

Now, the caution is this.

I believe I think Musk actually said this, but I'm not sure.

Uh I believe he is intentionally moving toward a optimistic take on everything because you know he's he's so well watched that if he has optimism his optimism will spread and become a positive thing.

And this could be just some of that.

It could be that he's just being so optimistic that he knows that's a good idea for society.

It's better to be over optimistic in this at least in this domain than it would be to be a pessimist.

So I don't know how 100% accurate this is to his opinion, but it certainly would uh it would meet the target of being optimistic.

So, just to be a uh just to put a wet blanket on this, uh Mark Cuban today was posting that uh he said, "I agree.

We're talking about robot tax." Uh not not we, but on X.

And Mark Cuban posted, "I agree.

We need we need to start discussing now what a robot tax would look like a straight amount per hour of use per robot or cobot doesn't matter what the shape or form is and start coming up with responses to the inevitable quote we won't be able to compete economically with other countries robots.

So of course people will say hey you can't put a tax on my robot China will get ahead.

Um he says every country will face the prospect of national instability if the economics get out of whack which is far more expensive than what you were paying in taxes on your robots.

Now I reposted this but that doesn't mean I agree with it.

So I would say I'm early in the process of thinking about it.

On one hand, if Musk is right that money will become worthless very quickly, then talk of taxing doesn't make sense.

Just why tax of money doesn't isn't worth anything.

But there should be some interim period in which money is worth something and we need more of it.

So it does seem to me that it would be unavoidable for the government to put some kind of tax on it.

And the theory would be, hey, if you're really increasing your productivity by triple digits, are you telling me that doesn't create any extra money for paying down our debt?

And with a little bit of tax, because the domain would be enormous, so you wouldn't have to tax at 50% per robot.

Maybe I'm I'm just going to take a swing.

Maybe 5% tax per the value of each robot, something like that.

Uh would that be enough to pay down the debt or at least get us out of an emergency situation with the debt while we wait for the day when money is worthless?

So there's there's the the interim transitionary part that's a little vague how that's going to work if it works at all.

But I do agree with him that there's going to be a conversation.

I hate using that term, but but we do need to get serious about thinking uh will robots be taxed?

I I tend to agree with him that if we taxed our robots a little bit, it wouldn't put us behind compared to say China if we overt tax them.

Yeah.

Then of course, right?

So there's probably some number that doesn't hurt you at all in in the same way that the tariffs didn't hurt us like we thought they would.

economics is so unpredictable that it's really hard to know uh if and when a tax on robots makes sense.

You know, your common sense might not be up to the task.

I feel that's my case.

I feel like my common sense, which usually works pretty well, you know, not that there is common sense, but I don't know.

do not know.

All right.

In other news, I think we're ready for a sip.

Boop.

All right.

I'm just going to rest and uh look at your comments for a minute.

If you want less of something, tax it.

Yeah.

Yep.

So, I guess Trump wants the uh the vaccine schedule for childhood to be totally changed from 72 doses when the kids born basically all the way down to 11.

So, that would be similar to Denmark.

What do you think of that?

Is that a good idea?

I don't know.

I'm no doctor, but people are definitely worried about loading up little babies with too much vaccinations in the beginning.

So, it seems like there's at least a good argument for stretching them out.

And if we can look to Denmark as our model of what works and what doesn't, well, maybe that's a little bit safer.

So, I don't have an opinion on this.

Um, I will default to people who are much smarter.

Uh, I'll just note that it's happening.

Well, the company called Gro with a Q on the end instead of the K on the end, which I believe is one of Chimamath's companies, uh, from the Alen Pod.

I think he was key investor in that.

Um, apparently they've got some kind of deal.

Uh, I heard yesterday that they sold the company, but maybe it's just a working deal.

So, they've got some kind of AI inference technology that uh, OpenAI was interested in.

So, it looks like a big win for Chimath.

Chimath, congratulations.

That's a very big win.

Somebody said something like$4 billion dollars.

I I don't know what the real numbers are, but they're big numbers.

So, he's been busting his butt on this startup and uh wow.

Wow.

That's very impressive.

Good work, Jimoth.

Um I saw a quote today from a writer from Blaze Media that I really liked.

So JT Young writing from Blaze Media um said, "Democrats caused the affordability crisis with their progressive policies and now pretend to be shocked by it." But here's the fun part.

Uh uh Democrats are now left with a single strategy, campaigning on the consequences of their own incompetence and hoping voters forget who caused them.

That is such a good reframe.

So that the Democrats are only the only thing they have is affordability and they're the ones who caused the problem and it's unlikely they have a solution.

That's pretty funny.

Did you know that the DNC itself, that's the Democrat organization, is also in debt?

Unlike the Republicans, the DNC is $16 million in debt.

Does it seem to you that Democrats overspend in every category, including their own organization?

And it just doesn't seem like Republicans are doing that.

So, Republicans have a nice little war chest.

Well, Ran Paul came out with his festivist report for 2025.

He found 1.6 trillion in waste and fraud.

1.6 trillion in waste and fraud.

Now, people will debate how much of that is waste of fraud, but I always say the first trillion is the easiest to spot.

And once you get that first trillion, do you believe that there's 1.6 trillion in waste and fraud that he could find?

I do.

You know, I've said this now a number of times.

I could not understand the world, you know, the political world, unless the fraud numbers were over a trillion dollars a year.

And apparently they are.

They're over a trillion dollars a year.

And apparently it's also identifiable.

That's the weird part.

It's totally identifiable.

All right.

Here's a funny story.

You you've heard that some North Koreans had figured out how to get jobs at Amazon and they just acted like they were remote workers.

And apparently Amazon has blocked 1,800 job apps from these suspected North Korean agents who when they get a job, they just do the job and then they get paid and they give the money to presumably the regime.

Now, the first time I heard this story, I assumed that the reason that the North Koreans were doing this was to get access to our technology and maybe to, you know, do some mischief.

But it looks like maybe their their primary motive, maybe not the only motive, but their primary motive is just to get a job and to and to put the money into the regime, which would suggest that their incentive is to do the very best job they could because not only could they get fired, but they could get executed.

So, it could turn out that they've always been the best employees Amazon's ever had.

Because you'd have to be really smart to pull off the deception, but if you didn't pull it off right, what does the dear leader in North Korea do to you?

Does he execute you?

I mean, it's a dangerous place.

So, the ironic and funny thing is that, you know, obviously they have to stop it.

you know, they have to plug that hole, which they've done.

But is it possible that they've always been their best employees and that they would have continued to be their best employees because what they really wanted was a job.

Anyway, I think that's funny.

Well, did you hear there's another uh million Epstein records that they didn't know about?

So suddenly they found another million records.

So if you thought that the release of the Epstein file was already too slow, what do you think by the fact that it's moving backwards?

that there are more unreleased files today than there were a month ago and that every day that goes by instead of fewer unreleased documents that there actually more of them.

Well, this would suggest that the trickle theory I've talked about might be in play that if they can add another million that don't have any real value, then they can say, "Well, here's another 10,000.

Well, here's another 10,000.

And they would never have to get to the bottom of the barrel.

So that they could always argue, we're working as hard as we can.

We're doing our best, but we keep finding all these files and you want to know about them, right?

So, it's suspicious as hell.

And how do you lose a million documents in the first place?

But I went to Grock this morning to try to see if I could do any kind of a good job of summarizing the Mike Ben's theory about Epstein.

Would you like to hear my best take using Grock?

So it's not my take, it's Mike Ben's who I asked Grock to summarize.

Would you like to hear my best take on how the Epstein thing makes sense that we don't know as much as we should know?

I don't know if that's still interesting because it'll be a little bit of a repeat.

I'm just looking at your answers right now.

You'll never see the files.

All right.

So, I will try to use my skills for summarizing on top of Grock's skills for summarizing on top of the key research done by Mike Benz who's great at summarizing, but he starts with a very large body of of work.

All right, let's see how I can do this.

So, again, credit to Mike Benz.

Um, so back in 1976, Epstein joined the company Bear Sterns where he was not exactly qualified.

Um, and he handled accounts for a bank called BCCI that I guess was some kind of subsidiary of Beer Sterns.

And BCCI is well known as being we know this now uh the the bank for the CIA.

So it was specifically used by um not only Great Britain and Saudi Arabia but the United States to launder money through the for their intelligence agencies.

All right.

So the first the first hint that Epstein was CIA is that he worked for the CIA bank.

Obviously he knew what he was doing.

All right.

So you got that going on.

He definitely 100% chance Epstein knew he was working for intelligence agencies and it was one of the biggest ones of the time completely confirmed.

You don't have to guess if they were part of the CIA.

That's all proven.

You know, nobody debates it.

All right.

But how in the world did he get that job?

Well, uh, he began his career, Epstein did, as a math and physics teacher at this elite Dalton school in New York City.

Now the weird part is he did not have the credentials to be a teacher of those topics or any topics.

Um so how did he get that job?

Well the the person running that school was Donald Bar who coincidentally or not was the father of Bill Bar.

Now, Donald Bar was known, again, these are confirmed facts.

He was known to be an employee of the OSS, which was a precursor of the CIA.

So, now we have confirmed that Epstein was part of this big bank that was the CIA.

We have confirmed that he got a job that he probably wasn't qualified for thanks to somebody who was literally on the payroll of the CIA and his precursor.

Now, what you might not know is that Donald Bar was also associated with coverups and cleanups.

So, he would be known as somebody who, you know, hid things so that the public did not find out about them.

and Epstein worked for him.

Now, his son, Bill Barr, also was on the payroll of the CIA while he was going to law school.

So, both the father and the son are confirmed to have been on a CIA or precia payroll.

Bill Barr, the younger one, you know, as the attorney general in the first Trump administration and also the attorney general in the second.

Do you remember who told you that uh that Epstein committed suicide?

Well, the person who was sort of in charge of determining that was Bill Barr, and he literally is from a family of CIA coverup people.

This is all true.

It's it's amazing.

All right.

So, Ben argues that Epstein's rapid rise within Bear Sterns, remember Bear Sterns was the entity uh that's working with that crooked bank uh despite a questionable resume says Grock um was that he was he was doing these CIA transactions.

So, he he had a rapid career rise.

So he worked on trades connected to BCCI which were clearing billions of dollars for intel agencies like the CIA and MI6 and Saudi le Saudiled Safari Club whatever that is.

All right.

So now we know Epstein was definitely CIA.

There's no doubt about it.

And we know that his connections were with a senior bar who was a coverup guy and also junior bar who was a CIA coverup guy.

So he has a strong connection to two CIA coverup guys.

Um going further, there's this gentleman named Stan Pollinger who I'd never heard of until Ben.

So Stan Pottinger was a I guess he's well known today as a CIA mop-up man.

In other words, he was a coverup guy for the CIA.

So you got two bars, senior and junior, who were both on the payroll, and they were both coverup guys.

But this Stan Pottinger was the ultimate coverup guy.

And uh he covered for let's see the MLK assassination when people were asking if the CIA was involved, the civil rights movement in a number of ways, Watergate, uh Operation Condor.

And uh Ben says that Pottinger appeared in quote every CIA scandal of the 60s and 70s.

So that if anything needed to be covered up, you would always find Pottinger.

But what does Pottinger have to do with anybody?

Well, uh Pottinger was Epste's roommate during the early 80s.

Pottinger was his roommate.

So, the three most famous CIA coverup guys had a confirmed and definite close relationship with Epstein.

Epstein was so deeply embedded with the CIA that he's the guy who signed off on moving the CIA's airline, which they used for, you know, moving uh I think they use it for Iran Contra and some other stuff.

So CIA had its own plane that they used for sketchy stuff and somehow Epstein got to sign off on moving that to be the private plane of the limited which is remember that uh I believe that was the company for Victoria Secrets.

Remember his his his billionaire friend owned uh his billionaire friend owned Victoria Secrets.

>> >> So, how in the world, Ben asks, would Epstein be able to move a CIA plane from one ownership to the other?

Unless Unless he was deeply embedded with the CIA or they wanted him to do it.

All right.

So, did that summary work?

Once you realize that his closest associations Yeah.

Wexler was the head of the limit once you realize that his closest associations were CIA coverup guys.

Are you surprised that we're not seeing all the files?

You should not be surprised there.

There's really no way we're going to see all the files.

Now, I would imagine that the good stuff has already been deleted from the files a long time ago.

I assume.

But even if it hadn't been, you're never gonna see it.

You will never see it.

So, how many for how many of you did that answer your questions?

This is a little bit confusing, but once you know the players, and that's what Mike Ben does so well, he figures out who the players are and how they're connected.

Every bit of this, by the way, is from public records.

So, I don't think there's anything I said that's not publicly documented beyond any question.

Yeah, Mike Bert, it's old news for you.

I I think it's old news for a number of people, but it's still hard to hold it all in your head, isn't it?

That that's the problem I was having.

It's like, okay, Pottinger, Bar Senior, Junior, BCCI, uh what's the name of that bank?

Bear Sterns.

But but once you realize uh I guess there's maybe half a dozen names.

Once you realize how those half a dozen names fit together, right?

And then then you look at uh his his friend there uh Gain Maxwell.

Wasn't her father intel?

So, here's the question.

Borrow was Clinton's coverup guy for the drug running.

Yeah.

So, so also um Bill Barr was hired as attorney general under George Bush senior who had been the head of the CIA.

So that's yet another confirmed CIA connection.

And uh yeah, and he he had a connection to Koshogi, who was this big arms dealer for uh at least until he got bones.

So anyway, that answered all my questions about Epstein.

Well, the Mc.

Donald's, there's a Mc.

Donald's in uh in Minneapolis that you can't get in unless somebody unlocks the door for you because there's too much mischief and crime.

I remember a time when you could just go to Mc.

Donald's and walk in and order something and that was so dangerous even to be in public in Minnesota that they've got the door locked and they check you out before they let you in to get a hamburger.

Oh no, you're not getting near our hamburgers unless we feel safe.

Here's a weird one.

So apparently the Trump administration did an EO to force Indiana to keep open some power plants, some coal power plants that they were going to close.

And it made me wonder, how can the federal government tell a state to keep a coal plant open?

What what authority would allow you to do that?

It's not exactly national defense.

So, seems to me that Indiana might challenge that and win because I don't see an executive order having that kind of power over a state.

But I could be surprised.

Um, you heard that the military was going to use Grock, the AI.

Apparently, they also are going to use Gemini, which would be a competing AI.

So, I don't know if they've thought this through.

Is it a good idea to have two major AIs in the military or should they have put all their all their chips in Grock because it will be better?

You know, Grock will be better than Gemini.

But is it a mistake that the military might have two different major AIs?

I don't know.

Maybe one keeps the other one from being too adventurous.

I don't know.

There might be an argument for it.

Meanwhile, Russia wants to put a nuclear power plant on the moon within a decade.

Do you believe that Russia has the technical capability to put a nuclear power plant on the moon within a decade?

And how would they get there?

Would they rent space on SpaceX?

Would uh would they build the power plant here and then pay Elon Musk to take it to the moon or do they have that capability?

I don't know.

I'm not so sure they can pull that off, but maybe AI will let him pull it off.

All right.

Uh, I saw a clip of Palmer Lucky.

Speaking of Palmer Lucky, and he's the CEO of founder of Anderil, who's making high-tech weapons for the US.

Now, apparently he's figured out how to make a a missile that you could produce in something like a car manufacturing line.

Now, why that's a big deal is that you could take a $100,000 missile and make it a $1,000 missile.

It would be just as good if you could manufacture it more efficiently and you could quickly change over your domestic manufacturing from whatever it was already doing to uh to make missiles.

He he claims this pretty good argument that uh China would have to think twice about attacking because if China thought haha we can make missiles faster than they can.

will just wait till they run out of missiles, then maybe they would get adventurous.

But if they knew we could make missiles for $1,000 a piece and we could in, let's say, two weeks convert a car assembly line into a missile maker, then they would have to worry that we could make cheaper, better, smarter, faster missiles than they do because we did better with manufacturing.

I don't know if you beat China in manufacturing, but it's interesting argument.

So, I've noticed that um Elon Musk and Palmer Lucky have one thing in common besides being geniuses.

Um that they they put a high value in the ability to quickly manufacture.

Um, and if you take the quickly manufacture part seriously, then everything changes.

So, militarily it's a big deal, but profit-wise, it's an even bigger deal.

I think I told you yesterday that Musk thinks they can get the production of the auto cab.

That would be the one that has no steering wheel, be self-driving.

He thinks he can get that down to 5 seconds per unit.

So that from beginning to end, I think that's what that means.

Or maybe it just means that Yeah, it would have to be from beginning to end.

That it would be so efficient that it would just go and 5 seconds you would have an a new vehicle.

That that's his goal.

5 seconds.

So good luck China beating 5 seconds.

So, I think that might be that's all I want to talk about today.

Bo, there's somebody named Bo who's being a problem.

They have a long view of history.

All right, let me look at your comments and hang out with you for a while.

Uh, you used to being ahead of everybody?

Sure.

We could always whip the weagers off.

Yeah.

Cold dust on the fiddle.

It's funny.

Yeah.

It's not building.

Yeah.

Okay.

I think you're right.

It's one coming off the assembly line every five minutes.

That's different.

Existing plants are once every minute.

Is that true?

Huh?

Interesting.

I would not have known the answer to that question, but a minute feels about right for Yeah.

A nice dog pictures.

Hey, look at me.

Well, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Barbara Ly's sister is married to Matt Gates.

True.

Small world.

Um, yeah.

And the girls were a party favor probably.

So, it makes you wonder what other bad behavior people linked to the CIA get away with.

If Epstein was getting away with this stuff because he was valuable to the CIA, how many other people fall in that category?

How many indeed?

He's got a boat.

What am I having for breakfast?

You know, I'm not going to tell you.

Happy birthday, Denim.

What?

Oh, you liked it.

So, did my summary of the Mike Benz thing add to what you knew or did to pull it together?

I I hate to step on his good work, especially if I'm making it worse, but I just feel like we had to we just had to get that summary down a little bit.

It's really hard to summarize.

Uh, you want a steering wheel in the back seat?

Well, yeah.

Obviously, I credited him as much as possible.

I'm very impressed with his work.

You know, I've said this before, but when I think of him, I always think of the Marvel universe, and there's a famous line in the Marvel movies where whoever says it, I don't know.

Somebody says, "We have a Hulk." Who says that?

Is it Tony Stark?

Who's the person in the uh in the superhero movies who says we have a Hulk?

Well, whoever says it, it makes me think of Benz because we have a Benz.

They don't really have one of those.

And without him, we would not have been able to penetrate the NGO stuff or the Epstein stuff.

Two of the, you know, by far the biggest things going.

So, and we have a Victor David Hansen and we have a we have a me.

We we have I don't want to say we have a Joe Rogan because I prefer to think of him as an independent, but uh he's definitely not anti-Trump and we have an Elon Musk.

But think about it.

Yeah, we have we have a Cernovich Yeah, I I could go down the line, come up with another 10 names, but we seem to have people who are just way better at stuff.

Uh things you didn't even know needed to happen.

But uh yeah, we have a data Republican.

They don't have that.

But but really if if you watch any of the left-leaning content, which I've started to do as much as possible, like the bull work, etc., it's mostly just gossipers.

Like what makes you famous or successful on the left is that you're good at insulting Republicans.

You're good at the gossip.

So that seems to me what they they value.

Oh, you did a really good job of insulting Trump.

So, we'll watch your show.

But on the right, there's some kind of competence thing that people are valuing.

The people on the right can tell the difference between what is really useful and what is just a bunch of insults.

Now, I would I would uh suggest that I've trained an entire Republican party about persuasion and also reframing So if you take just those two contributions that just I did, persuasion and reframing, who did that on their side?

Who who taught the Democrats how to do that?

Nobody.

They they don't have a me.

So they don't have a Mike Bentons.

They don't have a me.

They don't have an Elon Musk.

Um, they always complain that they don't have a Joe Rogan, but again, he's he's I call him an independent, but he's super useful.

Yeah, they they have a Rob Reiner.

Their best guy was Rob Reiner and Stephen King, the Avengers.

Yes, thank you.

Yep.

Uh, again, I hate to say that we have an Elon Musk because I also think of him as an independent, but I get it.

I know why you're saying it.

And when you look at their historians, their historians are basically just insultters that they just use history to insult Trump.

Well, obviously he's a fascist, but you go to Victor Davis Hansen and he's giving you this incredible context that really puts everything, you know, in order.

Completely different.

Completely different.

Yeah, we have one of them.

They don't.

We have a Dennis Miller.

I don't hear much from him.

Yep.

They have a James Carville and Joy Reed.

You're right.

Some some of their some of their most notable people are just idiots.

So what it takes to be notable on the left is to be wildly lying like the designated liars and to be good at insulting or if you're Rachel Matto to be good at faceless while you insult.

Have you ever watched her face while she thinks she has something?

I'm so happy because I've got something bad to say about a Republican, about Trump.

Oh my god, I can't get this smile, this this smug smile off my face.

Whoa.

Whoa.

And oh my god, it's so cringe.

Yeah, her her face screams mental illness.

And I mean that seriously, not as an insult.

It screams mental illness.

Yeah, they they have a Tib Wall.

Oh my god.

They have a They have a Governor Nuomo.

Are you kidding me?

We We have a Ronda Santis and they have a Tim Walsh.

Come on.

Come on.

Are you going to put them in the same bag?

No.

No.

We We have a Trump and they had a Kla Harris.

Right.

Right.

We had a Trump and they had a Kla Harris.

These are not competitive, you know, because the way the system is set up, she can still come within striking distance, but there's no way that they have any kind of equal talent set.

You know, Trump's talent stack is extraordinary, and she didn't have any.

She had no tells at all.

They have an Eric Swallwell and we've got something.

I'm running out of names.

Yeah, they have a Jasmine Crockett.

So, but so even if you Let me pick another name.

Even if you didn't like Ted Cruz, you're smarter than most of them, right?

We've got a Ted Cruz and they've got a they've got some lying weasels.

They have most of the fraud.

Now, I will give them Mark Cuban because I think he has, you know, like a real brain.

Um, but he doesn't he's not really utilized in a in a strong way politically.

Uh, and maybe he shouldn't be because he's, you know, it would be interfere with his businesses.

They have a Dan Goldberg.

Oh my god.

Yeah, we've got a Thomas Massie.

Not everybody likes that.

I happen to like it.

What about uh Michael Shelonburgger?

Who do they have that matches Matt Taibbe and Michael Shelonburgger?

Nobody.

Nobody.

Uh they used to have the CEO of Starbucks.

He wasn't that involved.

Yeah, we have Rand Paul.

They have Bernie.

Good one.

Yeah, they have Bernie and we have Rand Paul.

Again, these are not equivalents even.

Well, Glennon Greenwald, I would still call him an independent, but he has certainly uh been useful to the right.

Uh we have Guffeld.

They have Kimmel.

Perfect.

Perfect.

So we have the number one guy for late night uh political stuff.

Greg Guffeld.

And they've got three people who are really weak.

Probably won't even be in business in a little while.

Yep.

Now, am I am I just being biased or is it super obvious that the talent on the right exceeds the talent on the left?

Do do you agree with the hypothesis?

First of all, would you say that's true or am I just imagining it because I want it to be true?

I might be.

Yeah, we have Megan Kelly.

Who?

Who is the Megan Kelly?

Joy Reid.

They don't have anything that Yeah.

I don't think the Democrats have anything that would equal in Bacon Kelly, do they?

I can't think of anybody.

We have meritocracy and they don't.

Well, Maddo.

Okay.

Well, I will give you that Maddo gets a big audience and she can make a dent, but she's so insane.

She only works one day a week.

I don't know.

You could argue that the right has a Fentes problem.

Um, and I would argue that's true.

Has to be well managed.

Jig Tapper.

Laura Lubber.

Yeah, Laura Lubber is in her own category.

Um, you could have whatever opinion you want about her, but she's she kind of stands alone.

There's there are not two Laura Lumors.

We have Mark Levin.

I don't I don't know if Mark Levin fits into this model or not.

He's kind of his own guy.

I mean, obviously he's right leading, but I wouldn't put him in the same conversation as the others.

They do have John Stewart, but he can't make a dent.

Oh, we have Scott Jennings, right?

We have Scott Jennings and they have Jasmine Crockett.

again.

Not close.

Those are not close.

They have Rosie O'Donnell and Lincoln keeper.

All right, that's enough of this.

Has everybody opened their presence yet?

Are you opening your presents?

Yeah, we have a Caroline Levit and they had that weird one again.

Not even close.

Oh, we have Nicki Minaj, I guess.

I wouldn't wouldn't count that one.

All right, who else is having a delicious meal soon?

I'm just hanging out with you now.

Yeah, we have Roseanne and they have I don't know what they have Adam Schiff.

Adam Schiff.

Yeah, we have Adam Corolla and they have Adam Schiff again.

Not even close.

I'll take Adam Corolla every time.

So, we have Dr.

Drew and they have everybody who lied to us about the pandemic.

>> I wouldn't say we have Dr.

Jukas.

I also think he would be considered an independent.

But you know what I mean.

You do have me.

You totally have me.

They used to have RFK Jr.

Now we have RFK Jr.

again.

RFK Jr.

is not a creature of the right.

He just happens to be smart enough to to know how to work productively with the right, which is a superpower.

Yep.

We have got fel.

They don't.

Absolutely.

Speaking of Greg, merry Christmas, Greg, if you're listening.

All right, I'm tempted to sign off, but on the other hand, I'm tempted to just hang out.

So, I'll tell you what I'll do.

I'll hang out for another five minutes.

Okay?

So, that it doesn't seem abrupt.

Another five minutes and then get back to what you were doing.

Oh, yeah.

We have Tulsi.

They don't All right, people.

I think we're winding down a little bit.

Got family stuff to do.

You won't miss anything if you leave now.

We did all the good stuff already.

We have Scott Bessens.

Good one.

And they have We don't know.

They have that too late guy.

Yep.

We have Scott Bessins.

All right, people.

I'm gonna make take my leave.

I feel sad.

I feel sad to be signing you off because I already miss you.

That's actually literally true.

As soon as I sign off, I'm going to feel like I miss you.

Yeah, we have Scott Besson and they have Paul Krugman.

Perfect.

Perfect way to end.

All right, everybody.

Stay dry.

Stay cool.

See you tomorrow.

Oh no, it is not ending.

Looks like I'm going to have to close it and reopen it just to end it.

Merry Christmas everybody. Come on in.

Come on in. We're going to hang out a

little bit.

Just in case your Christmas needed a

little extra.

Or in case you were hanging out by

yourself.

You don't have to.

You can hang out with us.

Let me make sure I can see your local

comments.

do.

Yes, I can.

Excellent.

Excellent. Come on in.

We will do the special Christmas

simultaneous sip

just as soon. Oops. Quiet.

>> Just as soon as enough of you get in

here.

>> Yep. It's going to be epic.

How many of you assumed I would be

wearing a Christmas hat?

A little bit unpredictable.

The wise men have come.

Send them in my house. I need some wise

men.

Very wise.

A

good morning. Good morning. All right.

Are you ready for the simultaneous sip?

All you need is a copper mugra glass,

tanker chalice or sign, a canteen jug or

flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it

with your favorite liquid. I like

coffee. And join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine

hit of the day. The thing that makes

everything better is called the

simultaneous sip. It happens now.

[sighs and gasps] Could

you Could you smell the simultaneity?

I could.

So, what do you want to do this morning?

Do you want to hear about some

interesting stories?

Do you want to open your packages and

act like I'm the relative that came late

for Christmas and I'm just sort of

sitting in the corner?

Maybe I'll say some things that make it

seem like I'm in the room. You ready for

this? I'm going to do some fake

fake acting. Well, I guess acting is

fake. I'm going to do some acting so it

seems like I'm just in a room with you.

Okay.

Oh, wow. Was that yours? Did you just

open that up? That's a That's a really

thoughtful gift. Who gave you that? Uh,

no wonder. Yep. That That's a good

giftgiver.

And why don't you give back?

I'm sorry. I'll shut up. Hey, what time

do we eat? Does anybody know what time

we eat? Oh god. Oh no. I was hoping that

relative wouldn't come. Oh, who invited

that one?

Oh my goodness.

Oh, everything looked good until that

one relative started coming up the

driveway. But sh we we'll just pretend

that we don't know

who drank all the eggnog.

Yeah. Hey people, where's all the eggn

dog?

All right. How was that? Did that feel

like I was in your living room just

bugging you when you're opening your

packages?

All right. Well, let me give a special

shout out today to one of our members

who makes clips of my show and does a

really really good job of it. So good

that President Trump yesterday reposted

it on Truth. So my uh I'm talking about

Jay Plemens. If you're now following

him, you should on X because he does

these most excellent

um clips. He's really good at figuring

out what is a good clip and also, you

know, adding the text and the other

features to make it a to make it a

really good clip. So, apparently he did

so well that the president of the United

States said, "Huh, I think I'll repost

that." So, congratulations, Jay Plemens.

That must be an excellent uh Christmas

gift, doesn't it? That that must have

made you so excited.

I I hope you were telling all your

family, [snorts] but you earned it.

Excellent work.

Well,

gosh,

I'm not even sure I feel like talking

about the uh the news. I've got notes,

but it might be like that boring uncle

who doesn't have doesn't have any

conversation skills, so they just talk

about what's in the news.

That would be me.

But did you know, this is an old story,

but I'm going to tie it into something.

Did you know that the census

uh was errorprone?

And those errors tended, not completely,

but they tended to lean in one

direction, which is to underount

conservatives and overcount Democrats.

And the result is that Democrats got

more seats in the House because the

census said there are more people uh

than there were.

Now, here's why I brought it up. The

reason that we know this is because the

Census Bureau did an audit of their own

process. So, it's not an accusation.

It's what the audit people say

themselves. They they say that it

changed the uh representative

sample, not a sample, but it changed

who's representing who and that it went

in one direction on average. But what I

caught here is the word audit.

You know, I posted the other day that

audit would be the word of 2025.

And boy, is it. If you start noticing

how often the word audit is going to pop

up in all the stories because there's so

many stories about fraud

and the only way you're going to catch

them is with an audit. Well, it's not

the only way, but be the main way you do

it. So I predict

that the public is going to learn the

importance of audits

in a way that they had not before quite

appreciated.

And if the public

starts asking for audits and demanding

them, then the politicians will have to,

you know, they'll have to fold to that.

So probably the single most important

thing we could do for our fiscal health

is to make sure there's always an audit

in place like a real one uh for

everything that has a lot of money

involved. Could it be

that the the attention that we're

putting in that word and by the way if

it wasn't obvious

um you know when I turned on my

persuasion skills which I don't always

do it's because there's some big gain

you know I don't do it just to see if I

can do it um I use my persuasion when I

think there's some gigantic thing we

could get out of it and one of the

things I'm going to persuade more and

for over the next year is the importance

of audits.

I know, boring, right? But if we don't

get that right, everything falls apart.

So,

did you watch a any of the Joe Rogan

interview recently with Brett Weinstein?

Weinstein. Brett Weinstein.

and they were talking about aliens and

UAPs and ancient civilizations.

Well, it sounded like Joe Rogan is on

the similar path that I've been on,

which is there was one time in my past I

thought, you know, maybe maybe there's

some UFOs, you know, maybe there's some

aliens that are visiting.

But more recently, I had ruled that out

in favor of the hypothesis that if

anything is happening at all, you know,

in other words, if these sightings are

at all real, that the uh the source of

them would be our own past. So, it might

be ancient ancient uh aliens who live

beneath the ocean. It might be some kind

of ripple across time. from a time when

there were aliens with an advanced

civilization on Earth. But Satellite

Joe,

and I'm not so sure about Brett, but

Satellite Joe has gone from these might

be space aliens to the odds of because

Rogan always has these experts on

ancient civilizations.

To me, it now seems obvious, I would say

100% obvious, that there were advanced

civilizations

that we don't know much about.

And that it can't be a coincidence

that we've got these giant megalithic

structures, not in one place, but

basically in a variety of places around

the world, and we don't know how to make

them. Well, maybe we could with modern

equipment, but the fact that none of

those cultures

retain the ability to make those

structures,

it kind of suggests they found them,

doesn't it? So, I'm now of the of the

working hypothesis

that I think matches Joe Rogan's. I'm

not positive, but uh I do believe that

these are shadows from the past. And I

think somebody smarter said, maybe it

was Joe that uh no, somebody else.

Somebody said that the reason that these

sightings seem to defy

uh physics is that they're not part of

our reality. That they might be some

kind of a a ripple or a bleed through or

a temporal distortion. I don't know what

I have no idea what I'm talking about.

but that that they're literally not part

of our reality. It's just something we

can temporarily see. And there's the

reason is there was something from the

past. Now, here's where it gets

interesting.

Oh, uh, Palmer Lucky, who's the head of

Ender, was asked about aliens, and I

believe he had a very similar take.

So if your take ever matches Palmer

Lies, you're lucky because he's one of

the smartest people in the world. So

remember Elon Musk has said if there

were space aliens, he would probably

know about it, but he doesn't know about

it. And now another genius, Palmer

Lucky, is also fairly sure that we could

rule out space aliens, but it might be

something from the past. some advanced

civilization. And it could be that there

wasn't just one. It could be that there

were dozens of advanced civilizations

that didn't make it,

which is a little bit scary if you

happen to be an advanced civilization.

So, I don't know about dozens, but I'll

bet you if there's one,

I'll bet you there's multiple.

What do you think? and that maybe it's

just buried so deep in the sediment that

we'll never know. But I'm pretty sure

there were some advanced civilizations.

And then I'd never heard this before,

but this is also on Gorgan show. Did you

know that in Peru they found these

little creatures with three three

fingers and three toes that look like

they really were aliens,

but probably not aliens from space.

again, more more likely some advanced

civilization that was here. I'm not sure

I believe in the aliens yet

or or just the creatures. I I'm not sure

I believe the creatures are real, but

it's fascinating.

So,

here's where I'm going to tie this into

something now. So, you know, Elon is

building an Encyclopedia Galactica,

which at the moment is named

Graipopedia,

but he said he'll change the name to uh

Encyclopedia Galactic, I think.

And his plan is to create a repository

of everything we know and to not only

have that available to everyone on Earth

for free, I guess, but he would put some

copies in space. So there there would be

a library in space forever. Maybe a

library in the moon forever. Maybe one

that just floats around the Earth in

orbit or wherever he can put it. So his

plan

would be if if humans got wiped out

that some future civilization which

might be the you know the remaining

remnants of of uh of humans they would

somehow be able to recover

the lost knowledge.

Now that's a heck of a good idea

but it raises this possibility.

What if the earlier civilizations did

the same thing? What if they found a way

to protect everything they knew, but

they didn't find a way to protect

themselves?

Because it would be easier to launch

something into space than it would be

to, you know, put a shield around the

whole Earth, assuming some comet was

heading this way or something. So, is it

possible

that we will someday discover not just

that there used to be a advanced

civilization,

but that they saved all of their

knowledge and we could unlock it.

What do you think?

I I think that's entirely possible

because if Elon thought the idea of

preserving knowledge, what are the odd

what are the odds that an entire prior

civilization

didn't have anybody who had that idea,

right? And if it's doable, it's not yet

been done, but you pretty close. If it's

doable,

what are the odds it was doable before?

Think about

see now now that's a good that's a good

Christmas conversation isn't it?

Uh even Palmer Lucky backed me up backed

me up and what?

I do not know.

All right. Um, speaking of

Musk and AI, he says that the uh the AI

that he runs, this is his prediction,

will have more AI compute than everyone

else combined

in less than five years. Do you believe

that?

that the Elon Musk AI called XAI

will have more compute than all the

other sources combined in five years.

Wow. And then I say,

um, so we're also right at the verge of

the self-driving cars being completely

self-driving.

What would it take? I asked this

morning, what would it take to turn your

self-driving car into a classroom?

So suppose you had to commute, you know,

an hour each way, but you didn't have to

do the driving.

Could you have a 45minute class, you

know, assuming there's nobody else in

the in the vehicle that just teaches you

some kind of skill and every day you get

in it and says, "Oh, hi Scott.

would you like to continue your physics

lesson? Now, I saw somebody push back on

that and say, "Scott, Scott, u people

are not going to want to learn from

machines. You need a human being to

teach people otherwise they just they're

not going to be feeling it." To which I

say, it's going to look like a human

being. You know, your screen is going to

be somebody who is a deep fake who looks

exactly like a human. It looks and acts.

So you might have like Professor Fineman

teaching you physics and you would

absolutely not know the difference. You

just wouldn't be able to tell. And they

would be able to customize your lesson

uh completely. So I think um at the

moment we might be in a place where the

AI is not as good as the best teacher.

How long is that going to last? You

know, once it looks like a human and

once it's way better at learning how to

teach and once it's more customized to

you specifically, which might be the big

part, it would be way better and you

would probably enjoy it.

So

I think uh then I said that and then

somebody pointed me to a link. Did you

know

that El Salvador has announced a

partnership with XAI

to build a public education program

around AI?

So they're going to use Grock as a

personalized digital tutor. Remember

this is El Salvador. So, Al El Salvador

is weirdly forward thinking. you know,

they're they're well managed and that

they're going to gradually roll down

over two years and it will just be, you

know, fully accredited

and uh and their their leader Betelli

said that using XAI for their education

will be a way to quote leapfrog

traditional education so that El

Salvador can have the best education

system in the world in just a couple

years. All they have to do is go first

and they're going first. So B Kelly very

smart.

So if you want a good free education,

go to El Salvador.

So that made me wonder how many things

are going to go to to the price of free.

So in the United States, we still got

this accreditation

fetish which apparently has been solved

for El Salvador.

But

um don't you think we're very close to

an advanced education, the very best

advanced education costing you literally

nothing?

So instead of paying7 $70,000 a year for

an elite college, you could pay zero

um do it at your own pace and it would

be not just as good but way way better

than a traditional education. So, so as

I'm watching with interest,

uh Elon Musk's idea that eventually

everything will be free,

um there are definitely things that are

going to go first. And if we can get rid

of the uh let's say the roadblocks in

the United States, which would be

teachers unions and accreditation and

inertia.

So if we could get to where you know El

Salvador is, education would be free.

But the best part about it

is if you've ever had kids in the public

school system,

how many of you have had kids

recently in the public school system and

you know what a nightmare it is, right?

It seems to me

that if you put your nice kid in an

environmental where everybody can go,

you know, it's a public place, they will

be bullied

uh beyond repair.

So the damage that's done by going to a

public school is really pretty high. So

there's damage to the family unit

because they over they over homework.

there's a damage to their mental health.

You can make all of that go away and

make you free.

And we're we basically have the

technology to do it already. So people

don't realize the horror and the torture

that they put kids through in public

school. If if you haven't if you haven't

observed it personally, you would never

believe how bad it is.

So education could go zero quickly. But

I've also said that car insurance

could go to zero because once once your

self-driving car has basically no

accidents,

there's always going to be stop. Then

the then the car maker can just add

insurance forever to the purchase price

of the car.

So, for an extra $1,000 purchase price,

the car maker will cover all your

insurance in case you have an accident

for the rest of the life of the car. So,

that won't be free,

but if you compare onetime thousand cost

over the ownership of the car is close

to free.

Then somebody mentioned that uh Optimus

the you know Optimus yeah the the robot

will soon be able to do child care. And

I thought to myself, all right,

if you compared a human

to a robot today for child care, you

would probably pick the human, right?

But because the humans who do child care

are not

maybe not as trustworthy as they could

be.

Maybe you couldn't watch what they're

doing as easily as you could if a robot

was working for you and you could just

ask the robot what's going on.

I feel like child care is going to go to

the robots really quickly,

which would make the cost of it,

you know, drop dramatically.

For example, if you already had a robot

to clean your house or do ordinary

things, you could say, "All right,

robot, for these work hours, you're

going to be doing child care." Because

the robot doesn't need to rest.

So, as long as you have a robot,

it can do child care. Now, imagine if

somebody broke into your home and tried

to, you know, do something bad to you or

your home. Who would you rather defend

it?

A traditional child care person or a

badass robot?

I think it would be better security.

It would be less likely to molest your

child

and it's just going to be better in

every way very very quickly and it could

do multiple people. So your neighbors

kids could come over and one robot takes

care of you and so your kid is not

lonely.

But you'd have to choose carefully.

Then what about security?

We're very close to the point where the

robots could give you security

better than humans. Partly because you

couldn't afford a human, partly because

you need three humans a day just to

cover the 24 hours. And partly because

the robot probably would be stronger and

have, you know, better decision making,

etc. So that's at least four things

that could almost immediately drop to

no cost at all.

So I'm not sold entirely

on the idea that that money will be

worthless, but there sure will be a lot

of times when that money is not going to

look like uh like it used to.

See what else is happening.

So here's a wild uh prediction speaking

of Elon Musk. So I actually he predicted

this that there will be doubledigit

growth meaning the GDP within 12 to 18

months

double digit.

Now why that's ridiculous but might be

right is that we were all cheering that

the GDP went from 35 to 45 roughly. So

we got all excited because it was over

4%. Elon says it's going to be you know

over 10% within a year maybe a year and

a half. Do you believe that? His

reasoning is this. He says if applied

intelligence and that would be AI and

robots, you know, used intelligently is

a proxy for economic growth, which it

should be. He says triple digit is

possible in less than five years. Triple

digit. So now he's going from 10% a year

to over 100% a year.

If you could do that,

does money become worthless? I don't

know. I'm I'm having a little bit of

trouble intellectually following the

argument,

but it's a fun one. Now, the caution is

this. I believe

I think Musk actually said this, but I'm

not sure. Uh I believe he is

intentionally moving toward a optimistic

take on everything

because you know he's he's so well

watched that if he has optimism his

optimism will spread and become a

positive thing. And this could be just

some of that. It could be that he's just

being so optimistic that he knows that's

a good idea for society. It's better to

be over optimistic in this at least in

this domain than it would be to be a

pessimist.

So

I don't know how 100% accurate this is

to his opinion, but it certainly would

uh it would meet the target of being

optimistic.

So, just to be a uh

just to put a wet blanket on this, uh

Mark Cuban today

was posting that uh he said, "I agree.

We're talking about robot tax." Uh not

not we, but on X. And Mark Cuban posted,

"I agree. We need we need to start

discussing now what a robot tax would

look like a straight amount per hour of

use per robot or cobot doesn't matter

what the shape or form is and start

coming up with responses to the

inevitable quote we won't be able to

compete economically with other

countries robots. So of course people

will say hey you can't put a tax on my

robot China will get ahead. Um he says

every country will face the prospect of

national instability if the economics

get out of whack which is far more

expensive than what you were paying in

taxes on your robots. Now I reposted

this but that doesn't mean I agree with

it. So I would say I'm early in the

process of thinking about it. On one

hand, if Musk is right that money will

become worthless very quickly, then talk

of taxing

doesn't make sense. Just why tax of

money doesn't isn't worth anything. But

there should be some interim period

in which money is worth something and we

need more of it.

So it does seem to me that it would be

unavoidable for the government to put

some kind of tax on it. And the theory

would be, hey, if you're really

increasing your productivity by triple

digits, are you telling me that doesn't

create any extra money for paying down

our debt?

And with a little bit of tax, because

the domain would be enormous, so you

wouldn't have to tax at 50% per robot.

Maybe I'm I'm just going to take a

swing. Maybe 5% tax per the value of

each robot, something like that. Uh

would that be enough to pay down the

debt or at least get us out of an

emergency situation with the debt while

we wait

for the day when money is worthless?

So there's there's the the interim

transitionary part that's a little vague

how that's going to work if it works at

all. But I do agree with him that

there's going to be a conversation. I

hate [snorts] using that term, but but

we do need to get serious about thinking

uh will robots be taxed?

I I tend to agree with him

that if we taxed our robots a little

bit, it wouldn't put us behind compared

to say China if we overt tax them. Yeah.

Then of course, right? So there's

probably some number that doesn't hurt

you at all in in the same way that the

tariffs didn't hurt us like we thought

they would.

economics is so unpredictable

that it's really hard to know uh if and

when a tax on robots makes sense. You

know, your common sense

might not be up to the task. I feel

that's my case. I feel like my common

sense, which usually works pretty well,

you know, not that there is common

sense, [snorts] but I don't know.

do not know.

All right. In other news, I think we're

ready for a sip.

Boop.

[sighs]

All right. I'm just going to rest and uh

look at your comments for a minute.

If you want less of something, tax it.

Yeah.

Yep.

So, I guess Trump wants the uh

the vaccine schedule for childhood to be

totally changed from 72 doses when the

kids born basically

all the way down to 11. So, that would

be similar to Denmark.

What do you think of that? Is that a

good idea?

I don't know. I'm no doctor,

but people are definitely worried about

loading up little babies with too much

vaccinations in the beginning.

So, it seems like

there's at least a good argument

for stretching them out. And if we can

look to Denmark as our model of what

works and what doesn't, well, maybe

that's a little bit safer. So, I don't

have an opinion on this.

Um, I will default to people who are

much smarter.

Uh, I'll just note that it's happening.

Well, the company called Gro with a Q

on the end instead of the K on the end,

which I believe is one of Chimamath's

companies,

uh, from the Alen Pod. I think he was

key investor in that.

Um, apparently they've got some kind of

deal.

Uh, I heard yesterday that they sold the

company,

but maybe it's just a working deal. So,

they've got some kind of AI inference

technology that uh, OpenAI was

interested in. So, it looks like a big

win for Chimath.

Chimath,

congratulations.

[laughter] That's a very big win.

Somebody said something like$4 billion

dollars. I I don't know what the real

numbers are, but they're big numbers.

So, he's been busting his butt on this

startup and uh wow.

Wow. That's very impressive. Good work,

Jimoth.

Um I saw a quote today from a writer

from Blaze Media that I really liked. So

JT Young writing from Blaze Media

um said, "Democrats caused the

affordability crisis with their

progressive policies and now pretend to

be shocked by it." But here's the fun

part. Uh

uh Democrats are now left with a single

strategy, campaigning on the

consequences of their own incompetence

and hoping voters forget who caused

them.

That is such a good reframe.

So that the Democrats are only the only

thing they have is affordability and

they're the ones who caused the problem

and it's unlikely they have a solution.

That's pretty funny.

Did you know that the DNC itself, that's

the Democrat organization, is also in

debt? Unlike the Republicans,

the DNC is $16 million in debt. Does it

seem to you that Democrats

overspend in every category, including

their own organization?

And it just doesn't seem like

Republicans are doing that. So,

Republicans have a nice little war

chest.

Well, Ran Paul came out with his

festivist report

for 2025.

He found 1.6 trillion in waste

[clears throat] and fraud.

1.6

trillion

in waste and fraud. Now, people will

debate how much of that is waste of

fraud, but I always say the first

trillion is the easiest to spot. And

once you get that first trillion,

do you believe that there's 1.6

trillion in waste and fraud that he

could find? I do.

You know, I've said this now a number of

times. I could not understand the world,

you know, the political world, unless

the fraud numbers were over a trillion

dollars a year. And apparently they are.

They're over a trillion dollars a year.

And apparently it's also identifiable.

That's the weird part. It's totally

identifiable.

All right. Here's a funny story.

You you've heard that some North Koreans

had figured out how to get jobs at

Amazon and they just acted like they

were remote workers.

And apparently Amazon has blocked 1,800

job apps from these suspected North

Korean agents who when they get a job,

they just do the job and then they get

paid and they give the money to

presumably the regime.

Now, the first time I heard this story,

I assumed

that the reason that the North Koreans

were doing this was to get access to our

technology and maybe to, you know, do

some mischief.

But it looks like maybe their their

primary motive, maybe not the only

motive, but their primary motive is just

to get a job

[clears throat] and to and to put the

money into the regime, which would

suggest that their incentive is to do

the very best job they could

because not only could they get fired,

but they could get executed.

So, it could turn out that they've

always been the best employees Amazon's

ever had. Because you'd have to be

really smart to pull off the deception,

but if you didn't pull it off right,

what does the dear leader in North Korea

do to you? Does he execute you? I mean,

it's a dangerous place. So, the ironic

and funny thing is that, you know,

obviously they have to stop it. you

know, they have to plug that hole, which

they've done. But is it possible that

they've always been their best employees

and that they would have continued to be

their best employees because what they

really wanted was a job.

Anyway, I think that's funny.

Well, did you hear there's another uh

million Epstein records that they didn't

know about?

So suddenly they found another million

records.

So if you thought that the release of

the Epstein file was already too slow,

what do you think by the fact that it's

moving backwards?

that there are more unreleased files

today than there were a month ago

and that [clears throat] every day that

goes by instead of fewer unreleased

documents that there actually more of

them.

Well, this would suggest that the

trickle theory I've talked about might

be in play that if they can add another

million that don't have any real value,

then they can say, "Well, here's another

10,000.

Well, here's another 10,000. And they

would never have to get to the bottom of

the barrel.

So that they could always argue, we're

working as hard as we can. We're doing

our best, but we keep finding all these

files and you want to know about them,

right? So, it's suspicious as hell. And

how do you lose a million documents in

the first place?

But

I went to Grock this morning to try to

see if I could do any kind of a good job

of summarizing the Mike Ben's theory

about Epstein.

Would you like to hear my best take

using Grock? So it's not my take, it's

Mike Ben's who I asked Grock to

summarize. Would you like to hear my

best take on how the Epstein thing makes

sense that we don't know as much as we

should know? I don't know if that's

still interesting

because it'll be a little bit of a

repeat.

I'm just looking at your answers right

now.

You'll never see the files.

All right. So, I will try to use my

skills

for summarizing

on top of Grock's skills for summarizing

on top of the key research done by Mike

Benz who's great at summarizing, but he

starts with a very large body of of

work.

All right, let's see how I can do this.

So, again, credit to Mike Benz. Um,

so back in 1976,

Epstein joined the company Bear Sterns

where he was not exactly qualified.

Um, and he handled accounts for a bank

called BCCI

that I guess was some kind of subsidiary

of Beer Sterns. And BCCI is well known

as being we know this now uh the the

bank for the CIA.

So it was specifically

used by um not only Great Britain and

Saudi Arabia but the United States to

launder money through the for their

intelligence agencies. All right. So the

first the first hint that Epstein was

CIA

is that he worked for the CIA bank.

Obviously he knew what he was doing.

All right. So you got that going on. He

definitely 100% chance Epstein knew he

was working for intelligence agencies

and it was one of the biggest ones of

the time completely confirmed.

You don't have to guess if they were

part of the CIA. That's all proven. You

know, nobody debates it. All right. But

how in the world did he get that job?

Well,

uh, he began his career, Epstein did, as

a math and physics teacher at this elite

Dalton school in New York City.

Now the weird part is he did not have

the credentials

to be a teacher of those topics or any

topics. Um so how did he get that job?

Well the the person running that school

was Donald Bar

who coincidentally or not was the father

of Bill Bar. Now, Donald Bar was known,

again, these are confirmed facts. He was

known to be an employee of the OSS,

which was a precursor of the CIA.

So, now we have confirmed

that Epstein was part of this big bank

that was the CIA. We [snorts] have

confirmed that he got a job that he

probably wasn't qualified for thanks to

somebody who was literally on the

payroll of the CIA and his precursor.

[snorts]

Now, what you might not know is that

Donald Bar was also associated with

coverups

and cleanups.

So, he would be known as somebody who,

you know, hid things so that the public

did not find out about them.

and Epstein worked for him.

Now, his son, Bill Barr, also was on the

payroll of the CIA while he was going to

law school. So, both the father and the

son are confirmed to have been on a CIA

or precia payroll.

Bill [snorts] Barr, the younger one, you

know, as the attorney general in the

first Trump administration and also the

attorney general in the second. Do you

remember who told you that uh that

Epstein committed suicide?

Well, the person who was sort of in

charge of determining that was Bill

Barr, and he literally is from a family

of CIA coverup people.

This is all true. It's it's amazing. All

right. So, Ben argues that Epstein's

rapid rise within Bear Sterns, remember

Bear Sterns was the entity

uh that's working with that crooked bank

uh despite a questionable resume says

Grock

um was that he was he was doing these

CIA transactions.

So, he he had a rapid career rise.

So he worked on trades connected to BCCI

which were clearing billions of dollars

for intel agencies like the CIA and MI6

and Saudi le Saudiled Safari Club

whatever that is. All right.

[snorts] So

now we know Epstein was definitely CIA.

There's no doubt about it. And we know

that his connections were with a senior

bar who was a coverup guy and also

junior bar who was a CIA coverup guy. So

he has a strong connection to two CIA

coverup guys.

Um going further, there's this gentleman

named Stan Pollinger who I'd never heard

of until Ben. So Stan Pottinger was a I

guess he's well known today as a CIA

mop-up man. In other words, he was a

coverup guy for the CIA.

So you got

two bars,

senior and junior, who were both on the

payroll, and they were both coverup

guys. But this Stan Pottinger was the

ultimate coverup guy. And uh he covered

for let's see [snorts] the MLK

assassination

when people were asking if the CIA was

involved, the civil rights movement in a

number of ways, Watergate,

uh Operation Condor.

And [snorts] uh Ben says that Pottinger

appeared in quote every CIA scandal of

the 60s and 70s.

So that if anything needed to be covered

up, you would always find Pottinger. But

what does Pottinger have to do with

anybody?

Well,

uh Pottinger was Epste's roommate during

the early 80s.

Pottinger was his roommate.

So, the three most famous CIA coverup

guys had a confirmed and definite close

relationship

with Epstein.

Epstein was so deeply embedded with the

CIA that he's the guy who signed off on

moving the CIA's airline, which they

used for, you know, moving uh I think

they use it for Iran Contra and some

other stuff. So CIA had its own plane

that they used for sketchy stuff and

somehow Epstein got to sign off on

moving that to be the private plane of

the limited which is remember that uh I

believe that was the company for

Victoria Secrets. Remember his his his

billionaire friend owned uh his

billionaire friend owned Victoria

Secrets.

>> [snorts]

>> So, how in the world, Ben asks, would

Epstein be able to move a CIA plane from

one ownership to the other?

Unless

Unless he was deeply embedded with the

CIA or they wanted him to do it. All

right. So, [snorts]

did that summary work?

Once you realize that his closest

associations

Yeah. Wexler was the head of the limit

once you realize that his closest

associations were CIA coverup guys. Are

you surprised that we're not seeing all

the files?

You should not be surprised there.

There's really no way we're going to see

all the files. Now, I would imagine that

the good stuff has already been deleted

from the files a long time ago. I

assume. But even if it hadn't been,

you're never gonna see it. [snorts] You

will never see it.

So, how many for how many of you did

that answer your questions?

This is a little bit confusing, but once

you know the players, and that's what

Mike Ben does so well, he figures out

who the players are and how they're

connected. Every bit of this, by the

way, is from public records.

So, I don't think there's anything I

said that's not publicly documented

beyond any question.

[snorts]

Yeah, Mike Bert, it's old news for you.

I I think it's old news for a number of

people, but it's still hard to hold it

all in your head, isn't it? That that's

the problem I was having. It's like,

okay, Pottinger, Bar Senior, Junior,

BCCI,

uh what's the name of that bank? Bear

Sterns.

But but once you realize

uh I guess there's maybe half a dozen

names. Once you realize how those half a

dozen names fit together, right? And

then then you look at uh his

his friend there uh Gain Maxwell.

Wasn't her father

intel?

So,

here's the question.

Borrow was Clinton's coverup guy

for the drug running. Yeah. So,

so also

um Bill Barr was hired as attorney

general under George Bush senior who had

been the head of the CIA. So that's yet

another confirmed CIA

connection.

And uh yeah, and he he had a connection

to Koshogi,

who was this big arms dealer for

uh at least until he got bones.

So

anyway,

that answered all my questions about

Epstein.

Well, the McDonald's, there's a

McDonald's in uh in Minneapolis

that you can't get in unless somebody

unlocks the door for you because there's

too much mischief and crime. I remember

a time when you could just go to

McDonald's and walk in and order

something and that was so dangerous even

to be in public in Minnesota that

they've got the door locked and they

check you out before they let you in to

get a hamburger.

Oh no, you're not getting near our

hamburgers

unless we feel safe.

Here's a weird one. So apparently the

Trump administration did an EO

to force Indiana to keep open some power

plants, some coal power plants that they

were going to close.

And it made me wonder, how can the

federal government tell a state to keep

a coal plant open? What what authority

would allow you to do that? It's not

exactly

national defense.

So, seems to me that Indiana might

challenge that and win because I don't

see an executive order having that kind

of power over a state.

But I could be surprised.

Um, you heard that the military

was going to use Grock, the AI.

Apparently, they also are going to use

Gemini, which would be a competing AI.

So, I don't know if they've thought this

through.

Is it a good idea to have two major AIs

in the military or

should they have put all their all their

chips in Grock because it will be

better? You know, Grock will be better

than Gemini.

But is it a mistake that the military

might have two different major AIs? I

don't know. Maybe one keeps the other

one from being too adventurous. I don't

know. There might be an argument for it.

Meanwhile, Russia wants to put a nuclear

power plant on the moon within a decade.

Do you believe that Russia has the

technical capability to put a nuclear

power plant on the moon within a decade?

And how would they get there? Would they

rent space on

SpaceX?

Would uh would they build the power

plant here and then pay Elon Musk to

take it to the moon

or do they have that capability? I don't

know. I'm not so sure they can pull that

off, but maybe

AI will let him pull it off.

All right.

Uh, I saw a clip of Palmer Lucky.

Speaking of Palmer Lucky, and he's the

CEO of founder of Anderil, who's making

high-tech weapons for the US.

Now, apparently he's figured out how to

make a a missile that you could produce

in something like a car manufacturing

line. Now, why that's a big deal is that

you could take a $100,000

missile and make it a $1,000 missile. It

would be just as good if you could

manufacture it more efficiently and you

could quickly change over your domestic

manufacturing from whatever it was

already doing

to uh to make missiles.

He he claims this pretty good argument

that uh China would have to think twice

about attacking because if China thought

haha we can make missiles faster than

they can. will just wait till they run

out of missiles, then maybe they would

get adventurous.

But if they knew we could make missiles

for $1,000 a piece and we could in,

let's say, two weeks convert a car

assembly line into a missile maker, then

they would have to worry that we could

make cheaper, better, smarter, faster

missiles than they do because we did

better with manufacturing.

I don't know if you beat China in

manufacturing, but it's interesting

argument.

So, I've noticed that

um Elon Musk and Palmer Lucky have one

thing in common besides being geniuses.

Um that they they put a high value in

the ability to quickly manufacture.

Um, and if you take the quickly

manufacture part seriously,

then everything changes. So, militarily

it's a big deal, but profit-wise, it's

an even bigger deal. I think I told you

yesterday that Musk thinks they can get

the production of the auto cab. That

would be the one that has no steering

wheel, be self-driving. He thinks he can

get that down to 5 seconds per unit.

So that from beginning to end, I think

that's what that means. Or maybe it just

means that Yeah, it would have to be

from beginning to end. That it would be

so efficient that it would just go and 5

seconds you would have an a new vehicle.

That that's his goal. 5 seconds.

So

good luck China beating 5 seconds.

So, I think that might be

that's all I want to talk about today.

Bo, there's somebody named Bo who's

being a problem.

They have a long view of history.

All right,

let me look at your comments and hang

out with you for a while.

Uh, you used to being ahead of

everybody?

Sure. We could always whip the weagers

off. [laughter]

[gasps]

Yeah.

Cold dust on the fiddle. It's funny.

Yeah. It's not building.

Yeah. Okay. I think you're right. It's

one coming off the assembly line every

five minutes. That's different.

Existing plants are once every minute.

Is that true?

Huh?

Interesting.

I would not have known the answer to

that question, but

a minute feels about right for

Yeah.

A nice dog pictures.

Hey, look at me.

Well, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Yeah. Barbara Ly's sister is married to

Matt Gates. True.

Small world.

Um,

yeah. And the girls were a party favor

probably. So, it makes you wonder what

other bad behavior people linked to the

CIA get away with. If Epstein was

getting away with this stuff because he

was valuable to the CIA,

how many other people fall in that

category?

How many indeed?

He's got a boat.

What am I having for breakfast?

You know, I'm not going to tell you.

Happy birthday, Denim. What?

Oh, you liked it. So, did my summary of

the Mike Benz thing add to what you knew

or did to pull it together? I I hate to

step on his good work, especially if I'm

making it worse,

but I just feel like we had to we just

had to

get that summary down a little bit. It's

really hard to summarize.

Uh, you want a steering wheel in the

back seat?

Well, yeah. Obviously, I credited him as

much as possible. I'm very impressed

with his work.

[snorts] You know, I've said this

before, but when I think of him, I

always think of the Marvel universe,

and there's a famous line in the Marvel

movies where whoever says it, I don't

know. Somebody says, "We have a Hulk."

Who says that? Is it Tony Stark?

Who's the person in the

uh in the superhero movies who says we

have a Hulk?

Well, whoever says it, it makes me think

of Benz because we have a Benz.

They don't really have one of those. And

without him,

we would not have been able to penetrate

the NGO stuff or the Epstein stuff. Two

of the, you know, by far the biggest

things going. So,

and we have a Victor David Hansen and we

have a we have a me.

We we have I don't want to say we have a

Joe Rogan because I prefer to think of

him as an independent,

but uh he's definitely not anti-Trump

and we have an Elon Musk.

But think about it. Yeah, we have we

have a Cernovich

Yeah, I I could go down the line, come

up with another 10 names, but we seem to

have people who are just way better at

stuff. Uh things you didn't even know

needed to happen.

But uh

yeah, we have a data Republican. They

don't have that.

But but really if if you watch any of

the left-leaning content, which I've

started to do as much as possible, like

the bull work, etc., it's mostly just

gossipers.

Like what makes you famous or successful

on the left is that you're good at

insulting Republicans.

You're good at the gossip.

So that seems to me what they they

value. Oh, you did a really good job of

insulting Trump. So, we'll watch your

show. But on the right,

there's some kind of competence thing

that people are valuing.

The people on the right can tell the

difference between what is really useful

and what is just a bunch of insults.

Now, I would I would uh suggest that

I've trained an entire Republican party

about persuasion

and also reframing

So if you take just those two

contributions that just I did,

persuasion and reframing, who did that

on their side? Who who taught the

Democrats how to do that? Nobody. They

they don't have a me. So they don't have

a Mike Bentons. They don't have a me.

They don't have an Elon Musk.

Um, they always complain that they don't

have a Joe Rogan, but again, he's he's I

call him an independent,

but he's super useful.

Yeah, they they have a Rob Reiner.

Their best guy was Rob Reiner and

Stephen King,

the Avengers. Yes, thank you. Yep. Uh,

again, I hate to say that we have an

Elon Musk because I also think of him as

an independent, but [snorts]

I get it. I know why you're saying it.

And when you look at their historians,

their historians are basically just

insultters

that they just use history to insult

Trump. Well, obviously he's a fascist,

but you go to Victor Davis Hansen and

he's giving you this incredible context

that really puts everything, you know,

in order. Completely different.

Completely different.

Yeah, we have one of them. They don't.

We have a Dennis Miller. I don't hear

much from him.

[snorts]

Yep. They have a James Carville and Joy

Reed. You're right.

Some some of their

some of their most notable people are

just idiots.

So what it takes to be notable on the

left is to be wildly lying

like the designated liars

and to be good at insulting

or if you're Rachel Matto to be good at

faceless while you insult. Have you ever

watched her face

while she thinks she has something?

I'm so happy because I've got something

bad to say about a Republican, about

Trump. Oh my god, I can't get this

smile, this this smug smile off my face.

Whoa. Whoa.

And oh my god, it's so cringe.

Yeah, her her face screams mental

illness. And I mean that seriously, not

as an insult. It screams mental illness.

Yeah, they they have a Tib Wall. Oh my

god.

They have a They have a Governor Nuomo.

Are you kidding me? We We have a

Ronda Santis

and they have a Tim Walsh. Come on. Come

on.

Are you going to put them in the same

bag? No. No.

We We have a Trump

and they had a Kla Harris. Right.

Right.

We had a Trump and they had a Kla

Harris. These are not competitive,

you know, because the way the system is

set up, she can still come within

striking distance, but there's no way

that they have any kind of equal talent

set. You know, Trump's talent stack is

extraordinary, and she didn't have any.

She had no tells at all.

They have an Eric Swallwell

and we've got something.

I'm [snorts] running out of names. Yeah,

they have a Jasmine Crockett.

So, but so even if you Let me pick

another name. Even if you didn't like

Ted Cruz,

you're smarter than most of them,

right?

We've got a Ted Cruz and they've got a

they've got some lying weasels.

They have most of the fraud.

Now, I will give them Mark Cuban

because I think he has, you know, like a

real brain.

Um, but he doesn't he's not really

utilized

in a in a strong way politically.

Uh, and maybe he shouldn't be because

he's, you know, it would be interfere

with his businesses. They have a Dan

Goldberg. Oh my god.

[snorts]

Yeah, we've got a Thomas Massie. Not

everybody likes that. I happen to like

it.

What about uh Michael Shelonburgger?

Who do they have that matches Matt

Taibbe and Michael Shelonburgger?

Nobody.

Nobody.

Uh they used to have the CEO of

Starbucks. He wasn't that involved.

Yeah, we have Rand Paul. They have

Bernie. Good one. Yeah, they have Bernie

and we have Rand Paul. Again,

these are not equivalents

even. Well, Glennon Greenwald, I would

still call him an independent,

but he has certainly uh

been useful

to the right.

Uh we have Guffeld. They have Kimmel.

Perfect. Perfect. So we have the number

one guy for late night uh political

stuff. Greg Guffeld. And they've got

three people who are really weak.

Probably won't even be in business in a

little while.

Yep.

Now, am I am I just being biased or is

it super obvious

that the talent on the right exceeds the

talent on the left? Do do you agree with

the hypothesis?

First of all, would you say that's true

or am I just imagining it because I want

it to be true?

I might be.

Yeah, we have Megan Kelly. Who? Who is

the Megan Kelly? Joy Reid. [snorts] They

don't have anything that Yeah.

I don't think the Democrats have

anything that would equal in Bacon

Kelly,

do they? I can't think of anybody.

We have meritocracy and they don't.

Well, Maddo. Okay. Well, I will give you

that Maddo gets a big audience

and she can make a dent, but she's so

insane. She only works one day a week. I

don't know. You could argue that the

right has a Fentes problem.

Um, and I would argue that's true. Has

to be well managed.

Jig Tapper. [laughter]

Laura Lubber. Yeah, [snorts] Laura

Lubber is in her own category.

Um, you could have whatever opinion you

want about her, but she's she kind of

stands alone.

There's there are not two Laura Lumors.

We have Mark Levin.

I don't I don't know if Mark Levin

fits into this model or not. He's kind

of his own guy.

I mean, obviously he's right leading,

but I wouldn't put him in the same

conversation as the others.

They do have John Stewart, but he can't

make a dent.

Oh, we have Scott Jennings, right? We

have Scott Jennings and they have

Jasmine Crockett. again. Not close.

Those are not close.

[laughter] They have Rosie O'Donnell and

Lincoln keeper.

All right, that's enough of this.

Has everybody opened their presence yet?

Are you opening your presents?

Yeah, we have a Caroline Levit and they

had that weird one again. Not even

close.

Oh, we have Nicki Minaj, I guess. I

wouldn't wouldn't count that one.

All right,

who else is having a delicious meal

soon?

I'm just hanging out with you now.

Yeah, we have Roseanne

and they have I don't know what

they have Adam Schiff.

Adam Schiff. Yeah, we have Adam Corolla

and they have Adam Schiff again. Not

even close. I'll take Adam Corolla every

time.

So, we have Dr. Drew and they have

everybody who lied to us about the

pandemic.

[snorts]

>> I wouldn't say we have Dr. Jukas. I also

think he would be considered an

independent.

But you know what I mean.

You do have me. You totally have me.

They used to have RFK Jr. Now we have

RFK Jr.

again. RFK Jr. is not a creature of the

right. He just happens to be smart

enough to to know how to work

productively with the right,

which is a superpower.

Yep. We have got fel. They don't.

Absolutely.

Speaking of Greg,

merry Christmas, Greg, if you're

listening.

All right,

I'm tempted to sign off,

but on the other hand,

I'm tempted to just hang out. So, I'll

tell you what I'll do. I'll hang out for

another five minutes. Okay? So, that it

doesn't seem abrupt.

Another five minutes and then get back

to what you were doing. Oh, yeah. We

have Tulsi. They don't

All right, people. I think we're winding

down a little bit.

Got family stuff to do.

You won't miss anything if you leave

now. We did all the good stuff already.

We have Scott Bessens. Good one.

And they have

We don't know.

They have that too late guy.

Yep. We have Scott Bessins.

All right, people.

I'm gonna make take my leave. I feel

sad. I feel sad to be signing you off

because I already miss you. That's

actually literally true. As soon as I

sign off, I'm going to feel like I miss

you.

Yeah, we have Scott Besson and they have

Paul Krugman. Perfect. Perfect way to

end.

All right, everybody.

Stay dry. Stay cool. See you tomorrow.

Oh no,

it is not ending. Looks like I'm going

to have to close it and reopen it just

to end it.