Episode 2573 CWSA 08⧸21⧸24
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 20 minutes
Words per Minute
145.08173
Summary
In this episode, we discuss the benefits of coffee, Elon Musk, the Shroud of Turin, and why you shouldn t care if your brain hurts when you try to think. Plus, a new concept based on science.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
shiny human brains, all you need is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or chalice or skine,
00:00:04.940
a stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid.
00:00:10.420
I like coffee. Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day,
00:00:15.140
the thing that makes everything better. It's called the Simultaneous Sip and it happens now. Go!
00:00:20.320
Go! How much better do you feel after the Simultaneous Sip? Well, I can't hear you,
00:00:34.960
so I'm going to rely on science. Yes, there's more science about coffee. Yeah, more science.
00:00:42.840
So now the science suggests that drinking coffee can improve your depression. So it can
00:00:51.800
decrease depression and it can lower your risk of suicide. Personally, I feel like living a little
00:01:00.120
bit longer because of that sip. And it turns out that people thought that coffee was maybe bad for
00:01:08.040
your heart or your blood pressure, but there's no long-term negative. It turns out it might be good
00:01:17.500
for your heart, might lower your risk of Parkinson's disease, and just generally is good for you in every
00:01:25.800
possible way. Helps you exercise more. Is there anything coffee can't do? No. No, there's nothing it
00:01:33.900
can't do. That's called science. It's called recreational science because when science agrees
00:01:40.240
with what I'm already doing, I call that accurate. That's called accurate science. When the science
00:01:47.060
tells me to do something that I don't feel like doing, I call that kind of questionable. I think
00:01:53.640
we're going to need further study on this issue. Well, there's more science that shows that thinking
00:02:00.420
hurts. Well, again, maybe you hear this too often, but they could have saved a little bit of money on
00:02:11.420
this one. If they had said, instead of spending whatever they spent on this study, if they'd simply
00:02:17.260
DM to me and said, Scott, we're thinking of doing a study, does thinking hurt? And I would say, oh,
00:02:24.700
don't do that study. Save your money. This one's free. It does. It hurts. That's why people don't do
00:02:32.920
it. It hurts. So yes, believe it or not, when people try to do complicated things that require
00:02:40.040
a lot of thinking, they don't like it because it hurts. Now, I would like to introduce a new concept
00:02:49.320
based on this, if assuming the science has any validity to it. Have you ever noticed that there's
00:02:55.380
something interesting about Elon Musk besides the fact that he seems to be unusually smart?
00:03:03.040
The other thing that really sticks out is that he seems to have a high tolerance for pain. Have you
00:03:10.020
ever noticed that? He has one of the highest pain tolerances I've ever seen. You know, so his famous
00:03:16.900
stories of not sleeping, you know, sleeping in the office all day long and working all day and doing
00:03:23.700
crazy hours and taking on all the abuse from, you know, the critics and everything else. And so it
00:03:31.900
makes me wonder if you were going to evaluate somebody's practical intelligence, their practical
00:03:39.700
intelligence, it wouldn't be just their genetic ability to think. It would also be their willingness
00:03:46.820
to take on pain. Literally. Meaning that it wouldn't matter if your brain was awesome if you didn't
00:03:55.460
like the pain of thinking. Because even if you're smart, whatever you're thinking about is going to
00:04:00.500
challenge you in a discomfort kind of way. So my observation is that maybe what makes Elon Musk
00:04:07.700
more effective than other people who maybe on paper would be almost as smart is that he just has a high
00:04:15.540
pain tolerance. And you see it in everything he does. It seems to be pervasive across all elements of
00:04:22.980
his activities. I would say that I have that going for me as well. I don't have a high pain tolerance for
00:04:30.820
physical pain. Don't like that at all. I'm not a fan of physical pain whatsoever. But I have noticed
00:04:38.420
that I can handle more mental pain than the average person. So I think that helps me. I think it makes
00:04:46.340
my whatever genetic intelligence I have, I think I can take it further than other people because I can
00:04:52.740
handle more pain of that specific nature. Anyway, Breitbart has a big story about the Shroud of Turin. You know,
00:05:02.580
the burial sheet that allegedly Jesus was wrapped up in after crucifixion. Well, Dylan Gwynn is writing in Breitbart
00:05:14.500
that scientists have figured out that it might in fact, the garment anyway, might in fact be dated back to the
00:05:23.540
the actual time of Jesus. Now, the people who had debunked this sheet being related to the actual historical
00:05:31.540
Jesus, they debunked it because they did a standard testing, carbon dating, and they found out it was not
00:05:41.780
nearly old enough. So when they carbon dated the material, the scientists, and this has been,
00:05:49.220
you know, I've known this to be true for decades. So for several decades, it was true that this was a
00:05:57.380
hoax because the garment was not nearly old enough. Well, now researchers have used a different method
00:06:05.300
of dating it. So rather than doing carbon dating, they used some kind of a microscope and looked at the
00:06:13.700
uh, looked at the details of it, the fabric, and then they compared it to other known fabrics.
00:06:20.660
So they looked at things where they knew they could date the fabric to a certain time.
00:06:25.380
Then they looked under a microscope and said, Hey, this looks like the fabrics from this time,
00:06:30.740
based on whatever, you know, micro elements are in there. And they concluded that the carbon dating of
00:06:43.940
Now, if you think this is a story about whether Jesus is real, it's not.
00:06:52.100
I don't have an opinion on that, and that's not what I'm interested in. I mean, it's interesting,
00:06:58.340
but I wouldn't say that Jesus is or is not real based on a piece of cloth. So, so the question of whether
00:07:04.260
Jesus is real, that's not part of the story, right? That's just a separate story. But did the science,
00:07:10.820
the part that interests me is that science had misdated this for decades, allegedly.
00:07:19.780
Now, the people who use the carbon dating may say that theirs is right. But has anybody ever doubted
00:07:27.940
that carbon dating is accurate? Have any of you ever said, How do they know it's accurate?
00:07:36.180
How do you know? Now, the specific complaint with this, um, this garment is that it had,
00:07:43.860
uh, it was basically had too many, uh, pollutants in it. It'd been, it wasn't a pure carbon dating
00:07:52.580
experiment. So perhaps if you're looking at a rock or a fossil, you might be more confident that
00:07:59.140
nothing polluted your experiment to date it. So the thinking is, there was something special about
00:08:04.980
this garment that made the carbon dating not work. But we didn't know that for decades,
00:08:12.980
if this is right. Now, the other question is, is the new information, right? Well, I don't know.
00:08:19.140
All I would like to introduce is the idea that no matter how sure you are that the scientists use their
00:08:26.180
magic tools, there's still a lot of assumptions going into this stuff. And that data is all made up.
00:08:36.820
You know, I've been saying this, it sounds hyperbolic. And it is. But I need you to get
00:08:43.860
closer to the idea that 100% of the things you see in the news, and 100% of the things you see from
00:08:50.660
science, no matter how credible that scientific entity is, you should assume it's not true.
00:08:58.900
Now, if later there's more confirmation, blah, blah, blah, or if you just have to make a pick,
00:09:04.100
because it's one of those situations where you can't just ignore the situation, you got to make a
00:09:08.580
choice. You know, like within the pandemic, you had to make a choice. You didn't have the luxury of
00:09:14.180
knowing for sure. You just had to take a choice. But just don't assume automatically that anything
00:09:20.820
here in the news or from science is correct. Not automatically. It might be. You should take it
00:09:28.180
seriously. So you should definitely take it seriously. But don't assume it's true because
00:09:33.620
it came from experts. Meanwhile, the University of Kentucky is demand is disbanding their DEI office
00:09:42.420
because Republican lawmakers were pushing some anti-DEI legislation. So they said to themselves,
00:09:50.740
well, if there's going to be anti-DEI legislation, let's get ahead of it and get rid of our DEI office.
00:09:56.900
So that's a victory, right? I saw some people on social media saying, yes,
00:10:01.300
it's a victory. We want to get rid of that DEI and we got rid of it. Well, there's some
00:10:07.540
little extra you should know about this story. Number one, it's being reported by the AP.
00:10:15.620
So how's your credibility rating? If it comes from the Associated Press,
00:10:21.460
do you automatically think it's true? Automatically think there might be some context missing?
00:10:28.020
Or automatically think it might be fake? What do you think? Well, the AP wouldn't be on the top of my
00:10:36.260
list of reliable sources, especially for anything political. But it did say, to its credit, the AP did
00:10:44.900
report that there would be no job loss. Wait, what? They have a DEI department and they're getting rid of
00:10:54.180
the function. But there's no job loss because the people in those jobs are being folded into
00:11:01.060
other departments. You know what's missing in this story? The employees that were doing DEI
00:11:10.180
that will not lose their jobs, but be folded into other departments to do what? Are they being retrained
00:11:18.580
for new jobs? Or are they going to do their same fucking job and they're just going to get rid of the
00:11:24.260
the words DEI and just do it from within a different department? The story doesn't tell you.
00:11:32.900
That's the main thing. The main point of the story is, are they still going to do this,
00:11:38.260
what I would consider illegal DEI stuff? Or did they say, oops, you caught us. We're not going to do it
00:11:44.580
anymore. You can't tell. The story is completely ambiguous about whether they did or did not decide to
00:11:51.220
get rid of their DEI. I'm a little suspicious. And so my guess is that they just changed the names
00:11:57.780
and they're going to keep it. That's what I think. What do you think? But it's in the news. So
00:12:08.420
it's in the news. So I don't study it. We will talk about the DNC. I'm just warming you up.
00:12:13.140
There's another study by the Medical Express is talking about this that finds that young people
00:12:22.580
surprisingly are very influenced by experts. And although they're of course influenced by influencers
00:12:31.460
on social media, the good news that's reported is that young people are more likely to believe an expert
00:12:38.340
than some random influencer, even if they follow them on social media. So that's great news, isn't it?
00:12:46.340
Oh, phew. So happy that young people will get their knowledge from experts and not from influencers.
00:12:59.380
Well, let me give you a little lesson on brainwashing.
00:13:04.420
Now, if you're new to my lessons on brainwashing, I come from it from the perspective of being a
00:13:11.700
trained and experienced hypnotist who writes about persuasion all the time. So it's my main domain
00:13:18.500
outside of cartooning, I guess. And here's a brainwashing professional tip. If you can convince
00:13:26.660
the public that the news is real, and you can convince the public that experts are usually right,
00:13:43.940
Let me say it again. If the public believes the news is usually true,
00:13:48.900
and if the public believes that experts, as reported by the news, are usually right,
00:13:56.900
then they can brainwash you on any topic instantly. How do they do it? They just find an expert who may
00:14:04.820
or may not be telling the truth to go on the news. Because then you've got an expert, and you've got
00:14:10.820
the news, and people will say, well, those are two things that boost the credibility. Obviously,
00:14:16.660
the news looked into whether it's true or not before putting it on. I mean, of course,
00:14:21.140
they're going to make sure it's true. You know, they're going to check with people,
00:14:24.020
they're not going to put a bunch of BS on. So if the news put it on, it must be true.
00:14:29.140
And then the experts talking, if the experts there, and you don't hear another expert,
00:14:34.100
you only get that one expert, or maybe a few experts on the same side. You say, well,
00:14:38.740
the experts say it. The news, of course, checked it. So it must be true. This is now my belief forever.
00:14:45.300
Now you add to that the siloing of the news, so that if you're on one side of the news, you only see
00:14:53.220
your news, and you never see any other expert or any other news. You're now done. That is a 100%
00:15:02.020
bulletproof brainwashing machine. All the government has to do, or the Democrats, is find anybody who can
00:15:10.420
say they're an expert and put it on the news. That's all the brainwashing. There's nothing else
00:15:17.140
you need to do. There's nothing else you need to do. There's no extra step. You just find an expert,
00:15:24.420
put it on the news. So we have a brainwashing system that is really effective. Now, I don't think
00:15:33.140
it's much different in other countries, but wow, is this bulletproof. There's nothing you can do about
00:15:39.620
this, by the way. There's no defense against this. This is 100% bulletproof brainwashing, and it works.
00:15:50.100
Which doesn't mean that 100% of things that are on the news from experts is false, just to make that
00:15:55.620
clear. It doesn't mean 100% is false. It just means you're always getting a version, a narrative,
00:16:01.380
a propaganda-biased version. That's always true. But sometimes it might even be accurate.
00:16:11.060
Well, how bad is the brainwashing? Well, PolitiFact, that's a fact-checking organization,
00:16:16.500
and somebody called Capital B. I have no idea who they are. They've announced an election year
00:16:21.620
partnership to counter political misinformation aimed at black audiences.
00:16:26.500
So if you didn't know anything about how anything works, what would you say about this?
00:16:35.540
Let's say you saw it on the news. Well, you'd say, huh, that sounds like a good thing,
00:16:42.980
because you don't want the black Americans to be lied to. Nobody wants that. And so you've got two
00:16:50.340
entities who you don't know much about, but they're probably experts, right? I mean, you wouldn't have
00:16:55.780
a group called PolitiFact checking facts unless they were some pretty good fact-checking experts,
00:17:02.980
you know what I mean? So you got some experts, and then I read about it on the news. Well,
00:17:09.460
so it must be true. It must be true that there's some misinformation, and they're going to clear it up.
00:17:14.660
Or, if you know anything about how everything works, the fact-checkers are almost always fake,
00:17:24.260
literally just fake, and they're part of the brainwashing operation. Always. It might be on
00:17:32.500
one side versus the other, but pretty much they're in the bag. Now, let me call out Snopes as being
00:17:39.940
recently an exception to that rule. Snopes did, in fact, finally debunk the fine people hoax,
00:17:46.980
the biggest, most dangerous hoax in American history. And so at least they're showing some
00:17:52.420
independence. I think that's worth calling out. I don't know why. I don't know why it took so long,
00:17:58.020
but it's worth calling it out as a sign of independence. Meanwhile, the U.S. birth rate hit a
00:18:04.980
new low. So according to the CDC, it's reported in The Hill. And I saw an interesting point of view
00:18:13.380
about this. I wish I had written down who said it. It's just something I saw on the internet,
00:18:17.380
and I saw Elon Musk agreeing with it. So forgive me for whoever the smart person is who said this before
00:18:26.900
I said it. So this is not my original observation, but it goes like this. If you have children,
00:18:36.020
you immediately started thinking everything about the future.
00:18:40.980
Now, how many of you have had that experience? So if you have biological children, you just started
00:18:46.580
thinking about their future. It's all just future thinking because you're trying to take care of your
00:18:51.220
offspring. But if you're single, you're a little bit more living in the moment. Like, hey, what do I
00:18:57.300
want today? Now, that sounds right to me. Now, here's the risk. The risk is that if enough people
00:19:07.220
are single, individually, that might sound like a perfectly reasonable choice in our free society.
00:19:13.860
Not everybody should have kids, probably. So if you're looking at it as just freedom, it's like,
00:19:19.780
okay, good. We got more options, more freedom. But what would happen if 40% of your public stopped
00:19:27.140
planning for the future and just planned to get through their own life? Well, they wouldn't care
00:19:33.380
about stuff like climate change because they'd say what I say, which is, well, I'll probably be gone
00:19:39.460
before that gets me. Now, that's assuming that you believe that it's a crisis. I don't believe it's
00:19:45.380
a crisis. I think it's a manageable issue. That's my personal belief. I wouldn't say that I'm 100%
00:19:54.980
certain, but it does look like there's some, you know, man-made elements in that I think we'll get
00:20:01.780
Ontario, the wait is over. The gold standard of online casinos has arrived. Golden Nugget Online
00:20:08.260
Casino is live, bringing Vegas-style excitement and a world-class gaming experience right to your
00:20:13.780
fingertips. Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting, signing up is fast and simple. And in
00:20:19.540
just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots and top-tier table games.
00:20:25.220
Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots that can turn any mundane
00:20:30.420
moment into a golden opportunity at Golden Nugget Online Casino. Take a spin on the slots,
00:20:36.260
challenge yourself at the tables, or join a live dealer game to feel the thrill of real-time action,
00:20:41.380
all from the comfort of your own devices. Why settle for less when you can go for the gold
00:20:46.060
at Golden Nugget Online Casino. Gambling problem? Call ConnexOntario,
00:20:50.900
1-866-531-2600. 19 and over. Physically present in Ontario. Eligibility restrictions apply. See
00:20:58.100
GoldenNuggetCasino.com for details. Please play responsibly.
00:21:02.340
But forget about climate change, because that kind of confuses the whole argument. The argument is,
00:21:09.240
would the United States fail for no reason other than too many people not caring about the future?
00:21:15.380
And my intuition, and I think Elon Musk as well, is yes. Yes. The risk is not just that you don't
00:21:24.420
have enough people to create a tax base to pay for the retirees. That's a big problem. But the problem
00:21:32.180
might be how we think as a public, and then how we vote. We might not even vote for the long-term benefit
00:21:39.380
of the country anymore, because we'd just be thinking shorter term. So that's sort of a really
00:21:45.540
big deal that I don't know how to weight it. It just feels like it could be a big deal that we haven't
00:21:51.860
talked about. Anyway, over in the UK, I see Aaron Sibarium from the Free Beacon is reporting
00:22:01.060
that apparently, if you say one of these things in the UK, you could go to jail for quite a long time.
00:22:09.460
Here are the things you can't say out loud in the UK without going to jail. Actual jail, like actual
00:22:18.100
jail. All right, here's one of them. It's okay to be white.
00:22:22.420
Jail. I'm not making this up. This is based on actual examples for real people who went to jail.
00:22:41.380
Now remember when I said it would be unsafe for me to travel to the UK? Do you believe me? Because
00:22:49.140
apparently these, the statements you make are not about the things you're saying today.
00:22:54.740
It's about something you've ever said. What do you think my social media looks like?
00:23:01.300
Do you think there's any chance I wouldn't be jailed in the UK? I mean, if they cared,
00:23:06.180
if they ignored it, I wouldn't be jailed. But if they wanted to jail me in the UK,
00:23:11.060
have I said enough online that would make me jailable? Yes. Quite obviously, yes. Let me say it
00:23:21.620
again. It's okay to be white. And you should reject white guilt. I embrace those two messages 100%.
00:23:30.420
So UK, fuck you assholes. Fuck you very much. I'm never gonna come near your fucking country. I'll
00:23:39.780
never go there again. I've been there once, and it was not impressive. Let me just say,
00:23:45.620
the food in the UK is garbage. The traffic in London is a disgrace. And the whole place looks
00:23:51.780
like it's falling apart from bad management. So no, I'm not gonna travel to your fucking piece
00:23:57.140
of shit country. I'm only talking about the government now. I like the people. People are fine.
00:24:02.100
And if I ever have any opportunity to do business in the UK, or to sell any of my products there,
00:24:11.860
I'm gonna try to shut that down. I don't even want to have financial interests, even if I benefit
00:24:18.420
from them in the UK. No, I just can't have anything to do with your country.
00:24:24.900
You're dead to me, basically. All right. Well, speaking of hate speech, Obama spoke at the DNC.
00:24:40.420
All right. But also, here's some things that Biden said recently.
00:24:45.220
So this is not Obama. This is Biden. We'll get to Obama. He said, how can we be the greatest nation
00:24:52.660
in the world without the best education in the system in the world? Donald Trump and the Republican
00:24:59.140
friends, they not only can't think, they can't read very well. This is what Biden said about
00:25:06.180
Republicans, that they can't think and they can't read very well. And the audience laughed. And he said,
00:25:14.420
seriously, think about it. Look at their Project 2025, which is, of course, a hoax.
00:25:19.540
They want to do away with a part of education, which is not true. Of course, they're just lies.
00:25:28.500
But talk about hate speech. Is it hate speech to say it's okay to be a certain demographic white?
00:25:37.060
Or is it hate speech to say you shouldn't be guilty just because the way you were born?
00:25:42.260
That's hate speech in the UK. But over in America, you can have the president say that half of the
00:25:49.700
country are fucking idiots. And he identifies them as Republicans. And that's okay. That's fine.
00:25:59.700
No problem. Well, I do appreciate that we have free speech. So if I had to pick one of these systems,
00:26:05.300
I would pick the one where Biden can lie in front of the public and say anything he wants about anybody.
00:26:10.660
And then we get to vote. So it's ugly. It's messy. But I'll take the free speech. Thank you.
00:26:19.460
Anyway, the DNC, if you want to know how well brainwashing works, there's a great little example
00:26:30.500
that somebody pointed out that Bernie Sanders gives his speech last night. And a lot of it was,
00:26:38.820
you know, rich people are bad. Rich people are bad. Do you think people cheered for that? You know,
00:26:43.860
the billionaires are stealing your money. Rich people are bad. Of course they did. Yeah. Yay.
00:26:48.980
Rich people are bad. They should share their money with the rest of us. So then Bernie gets done. And then
00:26:56.180
one speaker later, J.B. Pritzker gets up and starts mocking Trump's business success. And he tells the
00:27:03.860
crowd that they should take their advice from a real billionaire. And they clap like, oh, yeah,
00:27:10.820
the real billionaire. Yes. Yes. We support a real billionaire and not that fake Trump billionaire.
00:27:16.580
Yes. Yes. And not only is a real billionaire, he's fat. We love it. Fat billionaires. Yes.
00:27:26.420
But wait a minute. Didn't you just clap for Bernie Sanders who said all the fat billionaires should be
00:27:32.980
boiled down to render their fat into soap products? Okay. I may be exaggerating about that a little bit.
00:27:40.820
And it turns out that it doesn't matter what you tell the DNC crowd. Apparently, they're so brainwashed,
00:27:49.620
as long as it comes from their own team, they're all on board. It's like, hey, everybody,
00:27:55.860
we're going to start chopping the heads off of Democrats. Yes. Yes. It's been so long since I had my
00:28:03.140
head chopped off. Where's the line? Where can I get in the line? It's really weird to watch that
00:28:10.100
they'll agree with anything. If I watch a Trump rally, I watch people agreeing with Trump.
00:28:19.460
That doesn't seem weird to me, even when I don't agree with maybe the specific topic. It happens
00:28:27.700
sometimes. But it doesn't seem weird because Trump is typically just offering a common sense solution to
00:28:34.740
the stuff. And then people are saying, I like that common sense solution. What you don't see is one
00:28:42.020
speaker saying billionaires are bad. Another speaker saying billionaires are good and getting the same
00:28:47.140
applause. That's just weird. That's creepy weird to use their language.
00:28:54.100
All right. I've got a hypothesis about all the hoaxing that's happening at the DNC. So you've
00:29:04.260
probably noted that Biden had like six different hoaxes that have been debunked from the drinking
00:29:11.540
bleach to the fine people hoax to the everything else. And then you're seeing that the other speakers
00:29:17.620
are repeating the debunked, the most ridiculous debunked hoaxes. Now, at first, I said to myself,
00:29:25.140
oh, how can they be so misinformed? Or how could they be lying so badly? And, you know, to their
00:29:31.940
audience, you know, all the usual reactions you'd have. But I'm starting to think something else is
00:29:38.100
going on here. Because the the level of hoaxing that they did was way beyond anything I expected.
00:29:48.420
And here's what I'm wondering about. Is this intentional?
00:29:55.540
Do you think that the DNC, the wizards, the people behind the curtain who are the real persuasion
00:30:01.860
experts, do you think that at any time they said something like this? Hey, Kamala Harris's policies
00:30:10.420
are unclear. Her track record is not impressive. And we're not letting her talk to the press.
00:30:19.300
But it's the political season. So whatever we do, the press is going to be talking a lot
00:30:25.380
about whatever they have to talk about. Can we change what they talk about to make it less about
00:30:31.940
the errors that Kamala Harris has and more about anything else? Yes, we can. We can have our people
00:30:40.660
do nonstop debunked hoaxes on TV all day long until the Republicans go crazy talking to each other and
00:30:51.300
not the Democrats. Because remember, Democrats never hear what Republicans say. So they can make
00:30:58.020
the entire Democrat silo go fucking crazy, which they have successfully done. Because I watch it and
00:31:06.100
like my hair stands, I'm like, damn it, how can you be pushing the same hoax a million times in a row?
00:31:12.020
And then they keep doing it. And I say to myself, wait a minute. One of your influencers is an energy
00:31:22.180
monster. Do you recognize this play? This play, and I'm going to call it a play or an op, because it
00:31:30.500
looks intentional to me. I don't know. I can't confirm it. But as someone who, you know, is, let's say,
00:31:38.420
always looking at persuasion plays. The pattern I'm recognizing is they've moved from a talking
00:31:44.980
you into some truth into an energy model. It's the Trump model. The thing that works so well for Trump
00:31:52.420
is he moves energy. He gets you excited about a thing, and you don't care about the hyperbole,
00:31:58.260
the fact checking. So Trump has consistently won as an energy monster, meaning he can tell you 15 things
00:32:07.860
that don't pass the fact checking. But if they're directionally true and they get you excited and it
00:32:12.420
gives you something to talk about, we're all in. You know, as long as it's in the right direction.
00:32:18.820
I don't care about the details of whether it passed the fact check too much, because I've noticed it
00:32:23.380
never matters. I can't think of anything Trump's ever told me or the country that was both wrong
00:32:31.380
and mattered. Can you? I can't think of an example. Lots of things that I would say,
00:32:38.420
okay, technically, that's hyperbole. That's not exactly true. But nothing that ever hurt me.
00:32:45.140
It was always the right direction. Whereas the Democrats seem to be playing a different game.
00:32:50.580
It does look like, you know, actually damaging stuff. Like the hoaxes are just so bad,
00:33:00.180
Bank more encores when you switch to a Scotiabank banking package.
00:33:04.660
Learn more at scotiabank.com slash banking packages. Conditions apply.
00:33:12.980
So I think that the smartest people on the Democrat side, which are very smart,
00:33:19.540
you don't want to underestimate them. Whoever it is that is now advising the Harris campaign
00:33:27.060
is at a different level. All right. The normal level is, hey, look at our policies.
00:33:34.660
They're better than your policies. That's regular politics. You don't need any geniuses to come up
00:33:40.260
with those ideas. But whoever came up with the idea of let us flood the zone with hoaxes
00:33:47.780
and make the Republicans burn up all their energy spinning about how these hoaxes are not true,
00:33:53.700
it will use up all of their time, all their space. And we know that it will never reach Democrat voters.
00:34:02.580
And that's what's happening. I spent a whole bunch of time debunking hoaxes. And I saw all of the usual
00:34:10.340
hoax debunkers who do it with me and also are just doing it on their own, spending all their time
00:34:16.820
debunking things within the silo. All that energy is wasted. It's all wasted energy. And they did that
00:34:26.580
to me. And I'm thinking, OK, I'm supposed to be a little bit clever about this stuff because I at
00:34:32.100
least I pay attention to the persuasion things. And I think I got had. I feel like they they got me on
00:34:39.060
this one. I'm going to score this. I'm going to score that a win on points for the other team.
00:34:46.260
I think they won this round. And I think it's intentional. I can't prove it. I'm not 100% on
00:34:54.580
this. But I've got I've got like a 70 80% confidence that it's an intentional plan to flood the zone with
00:35:04.100
hoaxes that Democrats think are true or at least recreationally. They think it's true enough
00:35:11.060
to have fun with it. And it just burns off all the Republican energy debunking it. I think that's
00:35:16.980
what's happening. And it's working. It's really working well. Well, the apparently the viewership of
00:35:28.420
the DNC is down 22% from 2016. I don't know if that's telling me anything because I feel like
00:35:36.340
television watching is probably down 22% since 2016. Am I wrong about that? I mean,
00:35:44.420
you know, normal broadcast television, it's got to be down 22% since 2016. But if there's something
00:35:52.980
else going on, it would be interesting, because I would say that Hillary Clinton got more attention
00:35:59.300
than Kamala Harris. Maybe, you know, I wouldn't, I wouldn't put too much weight in the fact that the
00:36:07.460
viewership is down. Well, you all noticed that the polls were saying that Trump was going to win
00:36:16.980
like crazy and nobody liked Kamala Harris. And then suddenly everybody liked Kamala Harris,
00:36:23.220
and she's beating Trump in a lot of polls. And you said to yourself, is the brainwashing that good?
00:36:30.900
Did it work that fast? That the Democrats just said, oh, suddenly the worst candidate we've ever seen,
00:36:37.940
couldn't even make it past the first round in the primaries, is now the best candidate.
00:36:42.100
And our best hope for winning and blah, blah, blah. And she's great. Well, here's the other possibility.
00:36:55.300
So let's see, pollster John McLaughlin was talking about this. Was it on just the news? I think it was.
00:37:04.420
Said that they're basically the pollsters just started polling a disproportionate number of Biden voters.
00:37:09.540
Yeah. So John McLaughlin, a pollster said this on just the news, the no noise television show.
00:37:18.580
And so McLaughlin is saying that all they do is just oversample Democrats.
00:37:23.700
So if you want your poll to say that, that Harris is winning, all you have to do is ask more Democrats
00:37:30.740
than Republicans who they're going to vote for. Think about that. That's all it takes.
00:37:37.460
And then the other pollsters who don't do it, there aren't that many, but like Rasmussen, for example,
00:37:44.500
Rasmussen will look at it and say, no, you oversampled Democrats. If you don't oversample,
00:37:50.740
the number is Trump's still ahead. And we'll talk about that. Actually, let's talk about it now.
00:37:57.540
So Rasmussen still has Trump up and Rasmussen still has the generic Republican beating the generic Democrat
00:38:07.460
by a good margin, like five points. That's the margin that in 2022, if I recall correctly,
00:38:16.820
that Rasmussen also had Republicans up by five and they ended up adding nine seats.
00:38:25.860
So the current Rasmussen poll, which is transparent about what percentage of the public they're polling
00:38:34.900
as Democrats or Republican. Now, keep in mind, you know, I'm not the expert that can tell you which polls
00:38:41.060
are always accurate. I don't have that ability, but I can tell what is transparent. And Rasmussen tells
00:38:48.100
you exactly their mix. And they say the other people are gaming the mix. You can look for yourself,
00:38:55.940
you know, because even the ones that are gaming it, if you look in the details, it will show that
00:39:00.900
they gamed it. It's just people don't look at the details. So how could you be sure that that's what's
00:39:08.820
happening? That the, let's say the mainstream Democrat leaning pollsters are gaming the system?
00:39:17.700
How could you be sure that was true? Well, one way would be to see if it doesn't apply to the polls
00:39:23.700
that you don't think would intentionally game the system. So the ones that do show Trump is ahead in
00:39:30.820
a two-way race would be Fox News, Rasmussen Reports, and CNBC. And all the other ones show that
00:39:38.340
Harris has got a one to four point lead. Now, if you looked at these polls, Fox News,
00:39:47.140
Rasmussen, CNBC, would you find any obvious flaws? Nobody's mentioned any, you know, it's not,
00:39:55.700
it's not for me to really know that, but I haven't heard anybody mention it. But certainly,
00:40:01.220
certainly Rasmussen and others experts like McLaughlin do point out that the ones that are
00:40:08.180
pro-Harris are very clearly gamed by oversampling Democrats. So this isn't one of those situations
00:40:18.420
where you can be 100% sure from the outside what's going on, but it looks very much like that's what's
00:40:24.500
going on. If I had to bet on it, I would bet this is exactly what's happening, that the polling is fake.
00:40:32.020
When they get closer to the real election, all the pollsters will want to finish close to the reality.
00:40:39.700
In the beginning, they don't need to, because you can't really hold them to it, because you don't
00:40:44.260
know what the actual answer is in the end. But once it's close to the election, what you'll find is that
00:40:50.100
all the pollsters will start polling the right number of Democrats, and then suddenly it's going to shrink
00:40:56.180
to look like it's really close. And I would argue that it's too big of a coincidence that we're
00:41:03.780
always this close in our elections. And if you were some kind of intelligence unit or deep state entity
00:41:10.740
that tried to rig an election, the thing you would try the hardest to do is make sure the election would
00:41:16.820
look close on election day. You'd want it to look as close as possible. That way, no matter which way the
00:41:23.540
election goes, people will say, well, I didn't know for sure the other one was going to win.
00:41:30.420
It was so close. So I guess I can accept that it went slightly different than I expected.
00:41:38.180
So if the system is gamed and rigged, you would guarantee if they were good at it. But if they
00:41:47.780
were good at it, you would guarantee that it would always be close on election day,
00:41:52.740
if any rigging is planned. But we're close right now.
00:41:59.300
So Kamala Harris has proposed a 45% long-term capital gains tax. That'd be the highest in history.
00:42:06.100
And also a 25% tax on unrealized capital gains for rich people. But nobody believes that they would
00:42:13.860
keep it for rich people. Because once you took all of the rich people's money, it wouldn't come close
00:42:18.820
to paying off the debt or paying all the things they wanted you to pay for. So they would test it
00:42:24.020
on the rich people. If they get away with it, they'd have a model that they could start moving down the
00:42:29.460
income levels. So that's what people expect. It's not what she says. It's just what reasonable people
00:42:36.340
expect that it would get extended. So if you combined that 25% tax with state taxes, in many states,
00:42:46.260
you'd be taxed over 50% on unrealized gains. Unrealized gains. Now, if you're not a finance person,
00:42:55.060
let me explain this. The majority of my current net wealth is in unrealized gains.
00:43:05.860
Meaning that for most of my career, in the early part of my career, I got some extra money and just
00:43:11.540
put it in an index fund 25 years ago. Now, it turns out if you had some extra money 25 years ago,
00:43:18.900
and you put it in an index fund. It was, first of all, good for the economy, because my money is
00:43:24.340
in the stock market. That's good for the economy. But currently, since I kind of spent or donated or
00:43:33.380
invested all of my income after that, I was kind of running on spending it all, basically, as long as
00:43:39.700
other people were benefiting families for kids and stuff like that. And currently, probably
00:43:48.900
80% of my net worth or 90%. I think 90%. 90% of my net worth is unrealized gains.
00:43:59.380
Just think about that. The government wants to take half of it.
00:44:05.220
I worked my entire life with the specific idea that at this point in my life, most of my net wealth
00:44:12.660
would be unrealized gains. And then if I need it, I'll realize the gains and spend it and pay my taxes.
00:44:20.740
So imagine working your whole life and having the government randomly take half of it.
00:44:27.460
That's the situation I'm in. Now, most of you, if you're being reasonable, are saying something like,
00:44:35.780
oh, my tiny violin is so sad that you've got this problem, Scott. Because if you're not rich,
00:44:42.420
it just sounds like a rich guy whining, which it is. It is a rich guy whining.
00:44:48.100
But you can't really build a system that makes your most productive people totally screwed.
00:44:54.980
You can't have people who own farms and own businesses and have all this
00:44:59.620
unrealized gains in their real estate, etc. You would be wiping out boomers pretty hard.
00:45:06.100
Again, once the standard gets moved down to lower incomes,
00:45:11.060
and we expect that that would be a natural progression.
00:45:14.260
So how do people think about that? Well, Elon Musk said this path leads to bread lines and ugly shoes.
00:45:21.540
Bread lines and ugly shoes, meaning communism. That's one of the funniest comments on
00:45:31.220
communism I've heard, bread lines and ugly shoes. Now, that's persuasive, because nobody wants ugly
00:45:38.740
shoes, especially Democrats. All right. But here's my question. And to me, this is hilarious.
00:45:47.380
Harris still has some billionaire supporters. How could you be a billionaire and support Harris
00:45:58.580
after she just said she's going to take a quarter of half or half of your money?
00:46:06.340
You know what I would do if I were a billionaire supporter of Harris? You know what I would do?
00:46:10.580
I would sell my I would sell my NBA team right away.
00:46:20.900
Has anybody done that? Is there anybody who is a major billionaire supporter of Harris who has recently sold their
00:46:30.420
sold their NBA interests so that they won't have any unrealized gains when she becomes?
00:46:35.940
Oh, they have. Oh, apparently somebody did that. Oh, well, that's exactly what I would do if I knew that was coming,
00:46:44.580
because maybe I knew what the advisors were telling her. I would sell. Oh, I'll tell you, if I had an NBA team, I'd sell that.
00:46:59.300
Somebody said I haven't confirmed this, but somebody said Reid Hoffman wants to know more about it.
00:47:05.940
How in the world, how in the world is Reid Hoffman going to go in public and support this plant?
00:47:14.980
Because he knows it's a bad idea. Everybody smart knows it's a bad idea, but it would be extra bad for him specifically.
00:47:23.300
It'd probably take like a billion dollars from him.
00:47:26.580
Imagine you're Reid Hoffman, and you're putting all your time and money into this party, and then suddenly they come up with the, okay, and one last thing.
00:47:36.820
Thank you for all the help. We really appreciate all the donating, you know, and just one more thing.
00:47:44.340
We kind of need you to give up a billion dollars.
00:47:53.940
So what would a reasonable rich person say under these circumstances?
00:47:58.020
Well, let's look at Jason, one of the four people from the All In Pod.
00:48:06.420
Jason is one of the ones of the four who most closely, I think, identifies with more left-leaning than right.
00:48:14.580
And he's been, for the Democrats, not a Trump supporter, even though others, you know, at least two people on the All In Pod were Trump supporters, Sachs and Chamath.
00:48:32.340
He said if Kamala Harris and Tim Walsh go for the wealth tax on unrealized gains, that is A, unconstitutional, and B, disqualifying for me.
00:48:44.580
At Grey Goose, we believe that pleasure is a necessity.
00:48:49.780
That's why we craft the world's number one premium vodka in France, using only three of the finest natural ingredients,
00:48:56.260
French winter wheat, water from Jean Sac, and yeast.
00:49:01.780
With Grey Goose, we invite you to live in the moment and make time wait.
00:49:22.180
They talk about all the politics, so the topics are political.
00:49:30.340
They're four super smart, capable people who just understand how everything works.
00:49:36.720
Now, I think you can be a super smart, capable, practical person and be either a Democrat or Republican.
00:49:50.720
No, there's no such thing as being a smart, common sense, well-informed person and also being a Democrat.
00:49:58.320
You can't do it this year because they're fully into batshit, crazy territory.
00:50:07.120
Trump, as I often say, I can't think of a single thing he's ever suggested, whether I liked it or not.
00:50:13.760
I'm not saying I like everything that Trump's ever suggested.
00:50:16.240
But they all fit into the category of common sense.
00:50:21.600
You maybe have to dial back some hyperbole, but it ends up all being directionally common sense.
00:50:27.360
But the stuff that's coming out of the Democrats are things that every smart person knows would ruin the country.
00:50:33.520
Everyone, Reid Hoffman would know, Mark Cuban would know, Jason knows, they all know it.
00:50:41.760
So if they still, you know, double down for their team, something else is going on, right?
00:50:49.080
Now, it could be just people don't like to change their mind in public.
00:50:57.040
I don't know if there's something else is, but it's probably not good.
00:50:59.900
So kudos to Jason for simply being about what makes sense.
00:51:14.540
And everybody knows this would be a terrible, terrible idea.
00:51:22.300
I think this race, unlike any other prior race, we've left the realm of politics.
00:51:27.420
This doesn't feel like a difference in political opinion to me, where every other race has.
00:51:36.620
You know, you got your Republicans, you got your Democrats, they've got, you know, somewhat different ideas.
00:51:45.840
Whatever this is that we're observing is common sense things like close the border.
00:51:52.180
Don't overtax, you know, don't, don't rape your taxpayers, just ordinary stuff.
00:51:59.760
Don't get overexcited about climate crisis if the other countries are not doing their part.
00:52:08.660
And if somebody says to me, but Scott, why are you registered as a Democrat, but supporting Trump?
00:52:15.380
To which I say, it has nothing to do with Democrat or Republican.
00:52:31.940
Because you can usually tell what a good idea is.
00:52:35.580
You look at what people have done before that would be in that vein that would inform you about the future stuff.
00:52:45.660
You know, I mock common sense because we all imagine we have it.
00:52:49.260
But there are some things that every smart person will agree on.
00:52:53.860
I've never seen a smart person argue for keeping the borders as porous as they are.
00:53:04.440
Even the people who are behind it, make sure that they don't comment on it in public.
00:53:10.860
Have you ever seen Alex Soros give an interview about how the current rate and flow of immigration is a good idea?
00:53:20.980
I mean, he might be sort of generally pro-immigrant, but everybody is.
00:53:30.000
And if you're a public smart person, you're going first.
00:53:41.060
The, you know, Sachs and Chamath are public smart people.
00:54:12.880
He has a source, he says, that he believes that RFK Jr. will announce on Friday.
00:54:18.320
And I don't, I'm not seeing this confirmed from other sources.
00:54:22.500
So, use your judgment about the reliability of the reporting.
00:54:27.240
But he's thinking that on Friday, RFK Jr. might throw in with Trump.
00:54:32.120
And, you know, presumably there would be some opportunity in the future for him to work with
00:54:39.360
the administration in some capacity that would be unnamed.
00:54:57.180
Here's something that RFK Jr. said that is not about this topic.
00:55:01.680
But I want you to listen to how he talks about this topic.
00:55:06.280
And you tell me, does that sound more like somebody who would be a Trump supporter?
00:55:09.720
Or more like somebody who would be a standard Democrat supporter, right?
00:55:17.520
Quote, the COVID pandemic was used to fundamentally change the relationship between U.S. citizens
00:55:24.440
The government's public health response was not a medical response, but instead a test
00:55:28.940
of technocratic power to see how the population would respond to totalitarian edicts masked
00:55:36.220
The government also selected the lockdown winners and losers, transferring nearly $4 trillion
00:55:41.940
of wealth from the middle class and small business to Silicon Valley and big box stores.
00:55:47.760
There have been no corrections and no apologies because the government wants to be able to do
00:55:54.760
Now, he says, that is why we're hearing all the hoopla now about the monkey box and bird
00:56:29.340
It doesn't sound like Trump because he hasn't said this as directly as the base does.
00:56:37.980
The ordinary Republicans say exactly, exactly, exactly this every day.
00:56:44.560
Is it a coincidence that RFK Jr., you know, two days before Friday, comes out with something
00:56:52.820
that matches perfectly one of the most emotional, important issues to the Trump base?
00:57:06.200
How about his VP choice, RFK Jr.'s VP choice, Nicole Shanahan?
00:57:13.520
She just said Kamala Harris's economic plans, particularly her flawed ideas about price
00:57:20.880
gaps on food and the misconception that farmers are responsible for price gouging, echo the
00:57:27.040
very policies that caused, listen to this, echo the very policies that caused the famine
00:57:33.120
my family suffered through in Mao's communist China.
00:57:37.380
Our path forward as a nation lies in supporting our farmers who care for our land and produce
00:57:47.760
Does that sound like Kamala Harris talking there?
00:57:50.940
No, because she's actually directly saying that Kamala Harris would turn us into a famine-ridden
00:58:09.440
But what it sounds even more like, what it sounds like more than Trump, is Trump's base.
00:58:15.240
I mean, Trump's in the same domain as this idea, but this matches the base perfectly.
00:58:28.960
One of the things that makes him extra interesting is that I said, whether he agreed with the
00:58:36.480
Republicans or backed them or not, I said, he fully understands how they think and feel.
00:58:45.940
He fully understands how Republicans think and feel.
00:58:49.620
That doesn't mean he has to agree with them all the time.
00:58:51.680
But he fully understands how they think and feel.
00:59:00.540
I guess you could call it campaigning, which is good technique.
00:59:08.800
And the people that she invites on her podcast were people like me.
00:59:15.980
So does Nicole understand what Republicans think and feel?
00:59:21.680
Even if sometimes she would disagree with them.
00:59:30.560
She talked in person publicly with a whole bunch of people on the left and the right.
00:59:36.180
So, yes, she absolutely knows what Republicans are thinking and feeling.
00:59:53.240
I think I had a couple of things that I wanted to talk about first.
01:00:03.440
I guess what's notable about that is that Trump is really the the perfect podcast guest, isn't he?
01:00:15.700
When Trump goes on a news show, it's just combat.
01:00:18.900
And the combat is kind of repetitive and doesn't look fun and you're fake news.
01:00:24.720
And then the fake news makes him reply to a hoax.
01:00:33.260
But if he goes on a podcast, you don't know where it's going to go.
01:00:36.860
And you get to really see the real person in a situation that's not scripted.
01:00:45.640
I feel like every time you see one of these, you watch the podcaster fall in love with him.
01:00:53.280
Whenever Trump does a podcast, by the time he's done, it's just almost you can see it.
01:00:59.020
Like the podcaster doesn't just enjoy that they had the experience.
01:01:02.840
It's like they fell in love with the fucking guy.
01:01:13.740
As much as I love seeing him talk to podcasters, especially interesting ones who are not your traditional ones,
01:01:21.620
I'd love to see him talk to some Democrats, the voters, only the voters.
01:01:35.460
Now, I don't necessarily think he needs to go on, you know, Charlemagne the God's podcast.
01:01:45.260
He's an interesting addition to the conversation.
01:01:53.520
I think he's in it for the right reasons, as far as I can tell.
01:01:57.840
I mean, I think he'd like the country to do better, etc.
01:02:00.980
But I don't think he's the right fit for Trump.
01:02:06.040
I'd rather he talk to just a regular voter who was just curious.
01:02:10.180
And just say, can you explain why you're in favor of this?
01:02:18.960
Searchlight Pictures presents The Roses, only in theaters August 29th.
01:02:24.740
From the director of Meet the Parents and the writer of Poor Things, comes The Roses, starring Academy Award winner Olivia Coleman, Academy Award nominee Benedict Cumberbatch, Andy Samberg, Kate McKinnon, and Allison Janney.
01:02:37.460
A hilarious new comedy filled with drama, excitement, and a little bit of hatred, proving that marriage isn't always a bed of roses.
01:02:51.100
Well, according to Liz Harrington, so here's something that I see because I'm plugged into a certain part of the Internet.
01:02:57.480
Every single day, I see one or more than one reports about credible-looking, I don't know how credible they are, but credible-looking reports of confirmed election rigging.
01:03:12.100
Now, when I say confirmed election rigging, I mean that's what the report says.
01:03:20.720
Because, unfortunately, these are the kind of claims I just look at and go, well, I don't know who this person is.
01:03:41.060
There's a claim that over 6,000 votes were fraudulently inserted into the Fulton County hand count audit.
01:03:48.400
Now, if I understand this correctly, the allegation goes like this, that the machine count didn't match the hand count.
01:03:58.340
And since they didn't want to go public and say, uh-oh, we're way off and our hand count doesn't match our machine count,
01:04:05.780
allegedly there's evidence, I don't know if it's proof, but there's evidence, that what might have happened,
01:04:12.800
and again, I'm going to say might, and I don't know the credibility of any of these reports,
01:04:17.520
that the people doing this true-up just double-counted some ballots so that they could have the two systems match.
01:04:33.340
Could it be as obvious as somebody did a recount and it didn't match, so they just rigged it so it didn't match?
01:04:43.660
So, those are the times I get a little suspicious.
01:04:53.580
So, I'm going to say I'm very curious about all of these claims,
01:04:58.660
but it would probably be a huge mistake to assume that all of them or even half of them are going to pan out.
01:05:11.040
You do that laundry list persuasion thing where if there's enough on the list,
01:05:15.240
your automatic common sense says, well, the list of claims is so long that even if some of these are not right,
01:05:37.420
I would bet some number of these claims of rigging are exactly what they look like.
01:05:52.140
But, I always go back to whether or not we have found any irregularities.
01:05:56.440
We have designed a system that appears to be designed more for hiding the outcome than for revealing it.
01:06:03.620
So, if you have a system which appears in every way to be more designed to hide an outcome than to give you a real one,
01:06:10.300
I think that you should assume there's a reason for that.
01:06:16.980
I just look at the design of the system and say,
01:06:19.220
well, that design should give you a non-credible election every time.
01:06:34.700
So, the IDF, the Israeli military, has done some airstrikes in Lebanon against Hezbollah sites.
01:06:51.740
and they took out some leader, Abu Ushash, a Hezbollah operative in some buildings.
01:07:03.160
Well, it's more than I've heard Israel doing in one day in that direction lately.
01:07:08.220
So, you know, I always start with the assumption that Israel is smart,
01:07:14.340
and then I analyze everything they do from that perspective.
01:07:20.400
I mean, presumably there are some times when they don't do something smart.
01:07:28.160
I just say, okay, if you were smart, what am I seeing?
01:07:32.600
So, the first thing I'm seeing is it looks like they ratcheted up their attacks on Hezbollah during the DNC.
01:07:41.920
Do you think it's a coincidence that Israel is going in behind the cover of the news being, you know,
01:07:52.800
Now, because my starting filter is that Israel is smart,
01:07:58.040
would they intentionally do a little uptick in violence during the DNC?
01:08:10.580
Now, suppose Israel has already decided that they would rather have Hezbollah actually do a serious attack
01:08:18.980
because they need to provoke it because the timing is right now for their action because we'll be between presidents, right?
01:08:27.440
Next several months, the leadership of the United States is going to be a little shaky.
01:08:32.760
It's like, I don't even know who the president is.
01:08:34.720
So from Israel's perspective, again, if you assume that they're just always operating from smart,
01:08:41.180
they would say to themselves, this next several months, we can get away with the most stuff in terms of public opinion
01:08:52.380
And so they might be prodding Hezbollah and Iran for a bigger response.
01:09:01.340
So one possibility is that Israel isn't just warning them to stay silent,
01:09:08.220
but rather is intentionally poking them because Hezbollah will now have to send more rockets,
01:09:14.940
which Israel can then respond a little extra hard again.
01:09:19.020
And then Hezbollah will say, well, I mean, we might as well just send a thousand rockets
01:09:28.220
The Iron Dome knocks most of the men in the air.
01:09:30.960
And then Israel has a free pass to get rid of Hezbollah once and for all.
01:09:37.020
And I think everything's heading in that direction.
01:09:41.100
And I think that the reason it seems like things might be compressed
01:09:45.420
is because Israel will never have in their whole history a better opportunity to be super violent
01:09:53.160
against the people who would kill them first if they had a choice.
01:09:57.920
So everything is suggesting that it's going to get really hot there really fast.
01:10:10.220
So I believe that Iran and Hezbollah have decided to stand down
01:10:38.480
Well, there's more news about the story about drunk Kamala
01:10:45.000
and it's been captured on video a number of times.
01:10:48.880
I was looking at an article from Vivek Saxena, BizPak Review.
01:10:58.600
and the people on the right making these accusations.
01:11:06.000
It said, this is from Vivek in BizPak Review talking about Newsweek.
01:11:13.960
the drinking rumors began with Trump campaign insider James Blair,
01:11:24.820
That the rumors about Kamala Harris drinking started with James Blair?
01:11:36.080
You've all heard of something called the Gelman amnesia
01:11:42.080
That's that situation where if you know the story,
01:11:45.380
like you have some personal connection to a story,
01:12:06.740
I know for sure James Blair didn't start that rumor.
01:12:16.600
Now, you all, I would consider somewhat insiders on this topic
01:12:23.420
you know, that how I and a whole bunch of other people
01:12:29.040
and very loudly before James Blair made the first mention of it.
01:12:41.060
In fact, I know that the reason he felt safe mentioning it
01:12:44.300
is that it was already saturated in social media.
01:12:48.800
But Newsweek told you it's coming from the campaign.
01:12:53.740
Why would they say it's coming from the campaign
01:12:55.640
instead of it's coming from every single Republican
01:13:07.020
Because if they said something, no matter what it is,
01:13:21.600
So if you say, everybody who's looked at the video
01:13:27.860
has the same opinion, because she certainly looks,
01:13:46.380
People have family members who've been in that situation
01:13:49.320
and say, oh, I wish I couldn't recognize it, but I can.
01:14:18.000
So the fact that she has completely different personalities
01:14:25.620
did she look drunk when she did her appearance at the DNC?
01:14:40.560
where it very clearly looks like she is inebriated,
01:15:05.060
Of course, it was full of hoaxes and lies and bullshit.
01:15:09.420
He looked very uncomfortable and awkward and sweaty.
01:15:28.640
He didn't look comfortable or happy whatsoever.
01:16:58.140
And most of them won't be the ones that you need,