Real Coffee with Scott Adams - February 26, 2025


Episode 2762 CWSA 02⧸26⧸25


Episode Stats


Length

1 hour and 20 minutes

Words per minute

147.88074

Word count

11,845

Sentence count

881

Harmful content

Misogyny

12

sentences flagged

Hate speech

16

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Jeff Bezos announces a new direction for the Washington Post's opinion pages. And China is trying to get you to get married before you're 22 years old, and it's a good thing you can't get married until you're 25.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization, doge and 1.00
00:00:08.960 all. If you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand
00:00:14.140 with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that is a cup or a mug or a glass,
00:00:18.420 a tank or a chalice, a stein, a canteen jug, a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with
00:00:22.940 your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the
00:00:27.560 dopamine at the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called
00:00:31.020 the Simultaneous Sip, and it's going to happen right now. Go.
00:00:42.000 Thank you, Paul. I know you don't like it when I say thank you, but I always appreciate it.
00:00:48.700 It's not trivial. So thank you. Well, so this morning, Jeff Bezos sent a letter to his Washington
00:01:00.040 Post team. And this is just about one of the most interesting things I've seen in a long
00:01:07.140 time. So as you know, the Washington Post gets accused of being sort of a leftist tool. And
00:01:16.580 then Bezos is not really super political. You know, he's more about just making stuff work.
00:01:24.240 So here's what he wrote to his team, and then he's posting it so we can see it too. And I thought
00:01:30.400 I would read it because it's the sort of thing, if you paraphrase it, you're not going to get it right
00:01:36.840 because there's some nuance here. So let me just read it. All right. Jeff Bezos. He says,
00:01:44.220 I shared this note with the Washington Post team this morning. I'm writing to let you know about
00:01:48.440 a change coming to our opinion pages. Now, the opinion pages are where you get the real bias
00:01:55.740 stuff. He says, excuse me. He says, we're going to be writing every day in support and defense of
00:02:04.340 two pillars, personal liberties and free markets. Good so far. We'll cover other topics too, of course,
00:02:11.860 but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others. So if there's anybody who
00:02:19.080 is opposed to personal liberty or free markets, they're just not going to have an opinion in the
00:02:24.740 Washington Post. Okay. He goes, there was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local
00:02:31.720 monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader's doorstep every morning,
00:02:38.300 a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.
00:02:45.080 So he's basically saying, we're not going to try to cover all views. And he says, here's the fun part.
00:02:50.920 I am of America and for America and proud to be so. Our country did not get here by being typical.
00:02:57.740 And a big part of America's success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else.
00:03:02.920 Freedom is ethical. It minimizes coercion and practical. It drives creativity, invention and
00:03:09.340 prosperity. All true. And then just listen to this. He said, I offered David Shipley. So I guess he is
00:03:16.980 the editor of the opinion page. He goes, I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity
00:03:23.600 to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn't, quote, hell yes, then it had to be
00:03:31.040 no. After careful consideration, David decided to step away. He didn't like this new editorial direction.
00:03:39.100 And he said, this is a significant shift. It won't be easy and it will require 100% commitment. I respect
00:03:46.660 this decision. We'll be searching for a new opinion editor to own this new direction. Oh my God. I'm
00:03:54.740 confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints
00:04:00.680 are underserved in the current market of ideas. Yup. They are underserved in the news and opinion
00:04:08.980 stuff. I'm excited for us together. Blah, blah, blah. Jeff. Now, does that feel like a big deal to you?
00:04:16.200 Because it kind of does to me. I mean, you know, Bezos' voice is, you know, bigger than most people's.
00:04:22.380 And that doesn't mean that the Washington Post is completely reformed, but wow, I've got this weird
00:04:31.860 tickle on my nose. Ever have a nose tickle? What's up with that? Just tickles. All right.
00:04:40.520 Did you know that the legal age of marriage in China is 22 for men? In China, you have to be 22 0.98
00:04:53.680 before you can get married and 20 for women. How sexist. But now one of their political leaders,
00:05:02.460 member of the national committee, CPPCC, is trying to put a proposal together that would lower it to 18
00:05:11.840 because they're having a childbirth problem. And does that surprise you? How many of you knew that
00:05:20.480 you couldn't get married in China until you're 22 if you're a guy? So that's one small thing they can do. 0.94
00:05:27.900 Apparently, China has lost population for three years in a row, so it's pretty dire.
00:05:32.980 Now, I once talked about a different problem that China has with marriage. And I don't know if I
00:05:40.360 have this right, but it's something like this. People are authorized to work in the place they live.
00:05:48.560 So if you wanted to fall in love with somebody who lived in a different city but wasn't too far away,
00:05:54.640 you kind of can't, and then you practically go away, end up living in the same place and married
00:06:01.560 because you're both only authorized to work in your area. So if you go to the other area,
00:06:09.240 one of you can't work. And since the young people kind of both need to work in China,
00:06:15.360 it just makes it basically economically impossible unless you meet somebody who's your neighbor.
00:06:22.740 So China does a lot of things wrong in terms of promoting population, but it looks like they may 1.00
00:06:31.420 be trying hard to fix that. According to Breitbart News, Neil Monroe, there was a shocking poll by
00:06:39.260 Harvard Harris that says that 75% of Democrats, 75% say Joe Biden's migration flood was an accident.
00:06:50.720 Do you ever just feel sorry for Democrats that they haven't heard any true news in years?
00:07:01.460 Can you imagine what that would be like? They're living this, you know, and there's fake news on
00:07:06.240 both sides, so it's not completely limited to one side. But imagine thinking, how could he even have
00:07:12.220 this opinion that Joe Biden's migration flood was accidental? It was the most planned and executed
00:07:21.640 and all hands on deck, every single executive order, every single decision, every single everything.
00:07:29.080 Every bit of it was to open the border. And it's the most, probably one of the most well-documented facts
00:07:36.100 in American history. And 75% of Democrats are like, what? I never heard of that. That can't be true.
00:07:48.020 And I think maybe it's just hard for them to understand what just happened.
00:07:55.560 Uh-oh. Looks like I'm being... Create an app to fly in there. Okay.
00:08:10.000 Oh, Elon Musk is mocking. I think he's mocking my post where I was posting about the 75% of Democrats
00:08:17.300 not knowing it. Anyway. Remember, I always warn you, wait until you find out about climate models.
00:08:28.220 Now, most of my viewers are a little skeptical of climate change, or at least the models. You know,
00:08:34.540 I don't know if the climate is changing, but I don't trust the models. And in the context of
00:08:42.180 learning that every part of America is corrupt, just all of it, the judges, we'll talk about this,
00:08:48.860 but, you know, the judges, the media is corrupt because the Democrats didn't even know that,
00:08:53.700 didn't even know that the border was open intentionally.
00:08:58.620 So the news is broken. The, you know, science is broken in five different ways. Healthcare is
00:09:05.160 rigged. You know, the FDA has got this revolving door, or maybe it's a one-way trip,
00:09:10.800 to the big pharma. And every time we learn about anything from NGOs to government funding to whose
00:09:18.360 spouse is collecting money while the other spouse is voting for it, everything is corrupt. Just from
00:09:25.600 finance to healthcare to science and everything. And yet we still wake up in the morning and 80% of
00:09:32.420 the country goes, well, thank goodness the climate models are real. There really isn't the slightest
00:09:39.580 chance they're real. If you've lived in the real world for five minutes or more, everything about
00:09:46.260 this just screams of all the things you should not believe, the climate model should be right at the
00:09:52.820 top. And you don't even have to be an expert. But let me give you a couple of stories. You may have
00:09:59.140 heard these, but these are criticisms of the climate models. So there's a study, let's see, Climate Change
00:10:09.100 Dispatch is writing about this, Kenneth Richards. So there's this new study. It's actually 2024, but it's
00:10:15.660 not, you know, it's not that early into 2025 yet. So it's a new-ish study. It says satellite data
00:10:22.320 shows that ocean evaporation is declining, which is the opposite of what the models say. Now you might say to
00:10:30.000 me, well, I mean, that's just one variable, right? So maybe the ocean evaporation, you know, is now such a big
00:10:38.160 thing. No, the ocean evaporation is like the biggest variable. So because the models are iterative, in the
00:10:47.320 beginning of the model, it might say CO2 will be this level and heat will be this level. And then
00:10:53.540 later, it'll say CO2 is increased and the heat is increased. But also other variables, such as ice
00:11:02.260 melting will be different in the future. And one of the biggest ones is that the climate warming should
00:11:09.720 cause an increase in ocean evaporation. It's one of the most basic assumptions built into climate
00:11:18.020 models. It's maybe the biggest one. And it was off by a factor of 10. It wasn't even in the right
00:11:25.040 direction. So now remember, studies, no matter what the studies say, maybe there's a 50% chance that any
00:11:34.360 given study is right. So even the skeptical ones could be wrong. You know, it's not like all the
00:11:41.460 skeptical ones are correct and all the pro-science, the pro-climate change ones are wrong. But just know
00:11:48.480 that the biggest, and this is a published study, so it's in PNAS, and it seems to indicate very strongly
00:11:57.160 based on what looked like pretty extensive look at the data, that the most basic prediction is not
00:12:07.420 even close and off by a magnitude of more than 10. Now, if that's true, and of course, you know,
00:12:16.420 studies could be wrong, but if that's true, then there's just no credibility to the climate models.
00:12:22.460 Here's another one. This is being written by Charles Rotter in What's Up With That?
00:12:31.220 So did you know that our temperature records have been homogenized?
00:12:37.880 So the biggest, most important data set, I would think, for the climate models is what was the
00:12:45.140 temperature before, and then what is the temperature now on average? You know, the Earth's total
00:12:52.080 temperature. But did you know that because there are a variety of irregular things that happen with
00:13:01.500 the data, they often need to make corrections, you know, adjustments. They call it homogenizing the
00:13:09.660 data so that if they can, they try to get everybody to be on the same page about how to tweak the data
00:13:16.680 from what it actually says to maybe something closer to what they think it says. So they're literally
00:13:26.660 changing it from what the data says to what they think it should say. That's called homogenizing the
00:13:33.620 data. And apparently, this is not just, you know, one study. Apparently, it's just the data.
00:13:41.540 The data doesn't even exist, meaning that there's no actual agreed-upon data for the temperature.
00:13:51.640 There's agreed-upon data sets, but everybody recognizes that there are enough known errors in
00:13:59.740 the data. They have to make corrections. But there are different ways you could correct it. And so they
00:14:05.040 don't even agree on how would you, how would you correct it? Should you correct it? Now, here's my
00:14:09.900 take. Anybody who's lived in the real world and had a job where they had to measure anything,
00:14:18.020 you already know that they can't measure the temperature of the Earth over decades accurately
00:14:24.380 enough to know that it's changing in what direction. That's just not a thing.
00:14:29.500 It's nothing that the best scientists in the world with huge funding and all good intentions.
00:14:38.020 It's just way beyond human capability, way beyond. It has nothing to do with science. It has to do
00:14:44.960 with the fact that it's a big, messy system. And if you've got this big, messy system with
00:14:51.400 different temperatures, and you've got the heat island effect, and somebody's trying to correct for
00:14:57.640 it. And some of the temperature measurement places that the paint on the enclosure has faded,
00:15:06.340 which actually changes the temperature. So they have to adjust for all kinds of things, like
00:15:11.380 different equipment and heat island and paint and all that. So no, they don't know the temperature of
00:15:18.420 the Earth over decades. That's not a thing. It couldn't be a thing. It's a ridiculous assumption.
00:15:23.840 So I'll say it again. If you listen to me about the specifics of what I think is wrong with climate
00:15:31.600 change, I could have all that wrong. It's possible that both of these skeptical studies are off base.
00:15:38.080 But I don't need them. I don't need them. The only thing I need is that I've lived in the real world.
00:15:44.100 These are not doable things. There's no such thing as a complicated climate model that's going to
00:15:50.600 predict the future of the temperature, or even that you could measure the temperature and the whole
00:15:55.500 Earth and get all the warm spots. Really check it out. These are not real things. So just wait till
00:16:02.620 you find out. Wait till you find out. Because I think it'll happen in your lifetime. There will be a day
00:16:09.800 when the news collectively says, all right, we got to admit, it was never real. That's definitely coming.
00:16:20.460 Because everything else is not real.
00:16:22.700 When I found out my friend got a great deal on a wool coat from Winners, I started wondering,
00:16:28.400 is every fabulous item I see from Winners? Like that woman over there with the designer jeans. 1.00
00:16:33.880 Are those from Winners? Ooh, or those beautiful gold earrings? Did she pay full price? Or that
00:16:39.820 leather tote? Or that cashmere sweater? Or those knee-high boots? That dress? That jacket? Those
00:16:44.900 shoes? Is anyone paying full price for anything? Stop wondering. Start winning. Winners. Find
00:16:51.700 fabulous for less. Well, here's a non-surprise. The Obama-nominated judge, a gateway pundit's writing
00:17:00.560 about this, Ben Q, who blocked Trump's ICE raids, is married to a far-left open borders activist funded
00:17:09.280 by George Soros. Now, it seems that, and Elon Musk pointed this out, he said the other day,
00:17:18.860 it's always the spouse. So we also have this problem where members of Congress will vote for funding for,
00:17:25.480 let's say, an NGO. And then you find out that one of their spouses is actually on the NGO and making
00:17:32.140 a lot of money, or is consulting for it, or is attached to it somehow. So here's what I think
00:17:38.860 is interesting. When the founders of the country developed a constitution, they probably never
00:17:45.800 contemplated a situation where both the husband and the wife would have high-end jobs, because that 0.57
00:17:52.880 wasn't a thing. You know, the guy had a job, and the wife did wife stuff, and you never had to worry
00:18:02.920 about this. So for probably, I don't know, the first hundred years, there was no risk of this
00:18:08.880 whatsoever, because the spouse was never really in a position to make any, you know, kind of sketchy
00:18:15.460 money. But now you have all these high-powered couples. And if you have a high-powered couple,
00:18:22.540 you just so easily can have one of them in charge of funding things, and the other one in charge of
00:18:29.700 spending the money from it. So, you know, the judges are just part of it, but also the whole NGO
00:18:36.520 structure. There's a whole lot of spouse stuff going on. So we actually need some kind of either 1.00
00:18:44.200 legislation to at least, you know, reveal these connections or a change to the constitution.
00:18:52.420 But just think about this. The constitution was created before this was even a contemplated risk,
00:18:59.480 because you didn't have two high-powered spouses. It just wasn't a thing. Now, to me,
00:19:05.520 that's really fascinating. Anyway, so somehow we've got to fix that. Maybe it's just sunlight. You know,
00:19:11.400 maybe you can't make it illegal, per se, but you could know if it's happening. That would help a lot.
00:19:18.920 Anyway, so in response to that, there's a, according to the National Pulse,
00:19:23.600 there's a new bill, Representative Daryl Issa, Republican, California. Is it Issa or Issa? Issa,
00:19:32.980 I think. He's introducing a bill aimed at limiting the reach of injunctions issued by federal judges.
00:19:39.860 One of the things that Elon Musk said a few times is that if any federal judge anywhere can stop
00:19:48.560 anything that's happening anywhere else, you don't really have a real system. I mean, you don't have
00:19:55.060 any kind of a democratic republic, because you can have, all it takes is one corrupt judge. Corrupt,
00:20:03.260 I would say, I'm using that not in just a legal sense, but corrupt in the sense that they're
00:20:07.880 political as opposed to following the law. And how hard would it be to find one political judge who
00:20:17.140 would give you anything you want, especially if you can reward them through their spouse?
00:20:22.620 Apparently, it's really easy. You can always find a Soros judge somewhere who is willing to do
00:20:30.260 anything. So if you can stop the elected people by having one judge anywhere decide that the whole
00:20:41.400 country has to do what they say, you don't really have a workable system. So I don't know the details
00:20:47.920 of this, but Darrell Issa's bill is trying to address that, I believe. This case, it's a little
00:20:55.780 over my pay grade to know the ins and outs of this legally, but that'd be great. So I like the fact
00:21:03.080 that it's being addressed. I don't know if that's the exact answer to it. And I also have to ask this
00:21:12.120 question, how many corrupt judges would you have to have in your system before you would even think
00:21:18.840 it's necessary to have new legislation to stop them from doing this thing? It kind of means the
00:21:25.900 whole judge system is infested with weasels. It can't be there's two or three in the country,
00:21:32.060 because that'd be a different problem. But apparently there's just all kinds of weasels 1.00
00:21:37.680 who got into these positions and can stop the entire country from functioning. So yeah, we got
00:21:43.560 to stop that. Let's stop that. Christy Noem found, I guess, some of the leakers who have been tipping
00:21:50.880 off the illegal migrants that the ICE raid was coming. And they've already been spotted and
00:22:01.760 identified and already been fired. Now, can you imagine that? Imagine working for the homeland
00:22:08.900 security and actually tipping off the subject of the raids, which puts the people doing the raids in
00:22:18.140 totally lethal danger. It's almost unbelievable that it could even exist. And it doesn't even seem
00:22:28.380 like firing is strong enough. Shouldn't jail be the right answer? Like, I don't know if there's a
00:22:35.740 specific law that was violated. But if you're thwarting the law of the United States and in the
00:22:42.420 process, putting real people in real danger, like serious, serious danger, like you're going to be killed
00:22:48.080 kind of danger. That's a lot bigger than just getting fired. I just hope there's something bigger
00:22:55.160 than that that they could do. Now, one of the ways that, I guess, Christy Noem and company are
00:23:00.620 spotting these people is they're using a polygraph and also searching internal communications. And I
00:23:08.400 guess the other thing I would ask is, if you were such a weasel that you were going to leak that kind 0.98
00:23:14.140 of dangerous information, would you put it in an email? And the funny thing is, you might. Yep. Yeah,
00:23:22.020 you might. Or at least some indications that would tip off who to do the polygraph on. Now, how many of you
00:23:29.940 know that polygraphs don't work? But they do work. So polygraphs are interesting from a persuasion
00:23:39.180 perspective, because the reason they're not accepted in court is that they're not reliable. And yet they're
00:23:47.680 they're used in a very widespread way in government and other organizations to find leakers and find
00:23:54.900 traders and stuff like that. So how can it be true at the same time that it's not reliable enough for
00:24:01.760 any court in the United States? There's not a single court in the United States that would accept a
00:24:05.640 polygraph. And yet it's a useful tool. How can both of those be true? And the answer is that it's more
00:24:14.960 about the polygraph operator. So the polygraph operator creates this, I'll call it an illusion
00:24:22.580 that the polygraph does work. And then the way they ask the questions and the way they react to the
00:24:28.700 answers will spook the subject such that they somewhat accidentally spill the goods. So you can
00:24:37.600 detect that people are trying to beat the system or they're too nervous to be in it or their behavior is
00:24:43.500 a little weird. And then you could call it out. Even if it's not there, you could call it out.
00:24:48.420 So one of the things you could do is say, you know, did you do this bad thing? And then the answer
00:24:53.400 comes on the polygraph and only the polygraph operator sees the answer. So if the if the polygraph
00:25:00.280 operator sees there's no indication of a lie, but they think this might be a lie. And again, remember,
00:25:06.960 the polygraph is not accurate enough to detect all lies. So the operator can say,
00:25:13.920 hmm, I'm going to ask that question again. Imagine if you were lying and the operator,
00:25:23.560 without telling you what they saw, they just look at the result because it's in real time. It's
00:25:28.320 happening while they're there. And the operator just looks at it and goes, huh. Let me ask that a
00:25:34.820 different way. Basically, you're saying you've been busted. And that that's when I think people
00:25:41.680 crack. And they're like, oh, no, I didn't mean that I didn't do it. I mean that I didn't do that
00:25:48.340 or or I didn't do it that day. And then it just all falls apart. So if you put them in a position
00:25:53.940 where it looks like, you know, they're lying, they're going to try to cover the lie, change their
00:26:00.360 answer a little bit. So it's not a lie. And they're going to start panicking a little bit.
00:26:04.780 And then you can spot, you can spot a liar. So here's what you need to know about polygraph.
00:26:10.980 It's mostly about the operator and how they influence the process. It's not so much the machine,
00:26:17.500 but the machine is part of it. And it can, it can identify some lies. So it's not like it never works.
00:26:24.700 It does work sometimes. You just don't know when. Well, Texas Governor Abbott, according to Fox News,
00:26:32.020 Peter Pineda is reporting. Apparently there's this place called Colony Ridge that's outside of
00:26:41.920 Houston, I think. And it's got so many migrants living there that it's practically Spanish language
00:26:48.560 and the cartels have set up a base. And there's just a lot of, almost like they've captured territory.
00:26:57.880 Not quite, but very similar to cartels holding territory. And what's good is that Homeland Security
00:27:07.460 and Texas have been identifying this. And there are other places like this where there's a big
00:27:13.900 concentration of migrants. They're, they have a lot in common, let's say Spanish language and cartels. 0.94
00:27:21.220 So I don't know if we fully understand how close we were to being just conquered by the cartels.
00:27:31.020 Because they don't need to have much of a bite into your country before they can run the whole thing. 0.98
00:27:36.640 Because remember, they can scare people from running from office. They can illegally fund people they want
00:27:42.780 to be in office. They can kill people they don't like. They can threaten. They do know how to take
00:27:49.140 over places. And if you, you simply get too many of them in one place, they, they don't assimilate. 0.99
00:27:57.860 They're more likely to say, well, we're sort of like our own country here and start expressing their,
00:28:04.020 their own desires that way. So whether or not migrants are the biggest problem in the world, 1.00
00:28:10.600 or just a boon to our economy and, you know, helping us do things that we weren't getting done.
00:28:16.960 It's all about the number. If it's a, if it's a, I don't want to say small, but if it's a smaller
00:28:24.280 number, everything works better. Oh, we got some extra workers and they assimilated. And,
00:28:29.960 but if you get a whole bunch of people kind of soon and they cluster in one place,
00:28:36.240 then you get a problem because they don't even need to learn the language. And next thing you know,
00:28:41.980 the cartels are in charge and expanding their reach because they're getting money from the
00:28:46.320 population and they can hide within it. So yeah, we were, and maybe it's too late,
00:28:52.820 but we're definitely on the cusp of a complete cartel takeover. I don't think we'll ever understand
00:29:00.840 how close it was that if Trump had lost, I think we would just be owned by the cartels in another
00:29:08.240 four or five years, or at least some important parts of the country. So Trump introduced this
00:29:17.240 idea of a gold card, he calls it. So if you're a non-American citizen, but you're rich, you can pay
00:29:24.940 $5 million and get this gold card that's going to give a green card like privileges and a path to
00:29:32.580 American citizenship. And it would only be for wealthy people who would be coming here and,
00:29:37.720 you know, creating investments and jobs. So they'd have to be additive to the country. 0.56
00:29:43.340 It can't be just because they want to. But then Trump said something that only Trump could say.
00:29:52.080 And if anyone else in the world had said what I'm going to tell you, he said,
00:29:58.000 you could, you could know that the whole world would blow up. It'd be the biggest story in the
00:30:02.360 country. But because Trump has worn us all down by, by doing so many things and also saying so many
00:30:10.820 things, you just don't have the time to go after every one of them. But this is just, this is only
00:30:17.220 Trump could say this. So when he was introducing this gold card idea, he was asked if this would
00:30:24.180 apply to Russian oligarchs. You know, if you're a Russian oligarch, can you just apply for this and
00:30:29.920 become an American citizen? Here's what Trump says. And only he can say this. He goes, yeah,
00:30:38.360 possibly. Hey, I know some Russian oligarchs. They're very nice people.
00:30:46.620 Name one other person on the whole planet who could have said those, that sentence.
00:30:52.860 Yeah, possibly. Some of those Russian oligarchs are very nice people.
00:30:59.400 Now, I'm not even disputing whether or not there are any nice oligarchs. The only thing funny is he's
00:31:06.400 the only person in the world who could have said that. And you'll totally get away with it. Now,
00:31:11.880 of course, there'll be the usual amount of, oh, he's so pro-Russian. He's so pro-Russian
00:31:18.200 that he loves the oligarchs. I think you have to see that he's in a negotiation with Russia
00:31:26.500 and the oligarchs probably do have a little bit of influence over the boss. And if he happens to 0.73
00:31:33.620 be saying some nice things about the oligarchs and some nice things about Putin and some nice
00:31:38.180 things about Russia, it should only be understood in the context of negotiating.
00:31:45.200 So you can be tough as long as you're respectful. So he's being tough and respectful at the same time.
00:31:52.500 It's the perfect combination. But again, he's the only person who could do that. Nobody else could
00:31:57.000 even get away with that. Now, there's some risk that maybe some spies would buy their way into the
00:32:03.280 country. But I feel like the spies could get in a lot easier. Like they don't really need to pay
00:32:09.300 $5 million for anything. There's probably plenty of spies. If you're thinking about somebody mentioned
00:32:16.360 that you would only have to get 7 million people and it would pay off our entire $35 trillion debt.
00:32:22.260 But I asked AI, how many people who are not in the United States have at least $20 million net worth?
00:32:31.000 Because that would be, you know, the population of people might be willing to spend $5 million to
00:32:36.480 be an American citizen. And even if you had $20 million, $5 million is, you know, that's a big
00:32:44.180 big price for, you know, for the one drink minimum to enter the United States. So there are not many
00:32:51.340 people, but I would estimate, and ChatGPT didn't know exactly what that number was, but they're not
00:32:58.260 7 million. It might be 20,000, you know, in that range of people who had enough money and are not
00:33:05.140 Americans. But at a 20,000, how many really need to be American citizens and care enough to even bother
00:33:11.840 trying? So I'm guessing the total population of people would be in the hundreds. And even that
00:33:20.320 wouldn't be right away. So it's a fairly small thing, fairly small. But what I like about it the
00:33:26.780 most is that it's part of poaching the best people from other countries. Now, I know there's some
00:33:32.260 MAGA people who say, under no circumstances, do I want to bring in more people from another country?
00:33:38.820 And I don't care how much they're going to add or you think they're going to add. No people from 1.00
00:33:43.460 other countries. That conversation is worth having if you want to have it. In my opinion,
00:33:52.620 poaching, and I guess I agree with Trump on this, poaching the best people from other countries is
00:33:57.660 just sort of always a good idea. I just think that works every time. Because the best people from other
00:34:04.800 country. And maybe it's their best entrepreneurs. Maybe it's just their rich people. Because the
00:34:10.440 rich people can add a lot to wherever they live. They hire a lot of people. They start businesses.
00:34:16.160 They invest. So I appreciate the people who say, let's just make it a zero. Because otherwise,
00:34:24.220 it's a slippery slope. I get that. But I'm not on that page. I think the economics suggests that
00:34:31.920 if you're smart about it, it's really additive.
00:34:39.340 All right. This is funny. I think all the news is funny today.
00:34:43.260 Did anybody notice that yet? All the news is sort of really interesting,
00:34:47.660 but also kind of funny because of how stupid things are. But here's my favorite one.
00:34:53.720 Do you remember James Carville? He had lots of advice for the Democrats and nobody was listening.
00:34:58.680 And then his latest play, this is his actual advice, is that the Democrats just have to do nothing and
00:35:05.900 wait for Trump to become less popular and the administration to collapse.
00:35:12.620 That's one of their smartest advisors. One of the smartest advisors is telling Democrats their best play
00:35:20.720 is to don't say anything or do anything and wait for Trump to become less popular.
00:35:28.240 How has that worked out so far?
00:35:33.400 Now, I think we all expect that Trump's popularity will take a little bit of a dip
00:35:38.420 and might even be a substantial one.
00:35:41.480 And that he's doing a lot of things that could only pay off in the long run.
00:35:46.740 So, you know, history might like him a lot better than, you know, any poll of the moment,
00:35:51.540 but he's not even that low. His popularity is looking pretty strong.
00:35:56.940 And when you look at the top policies, he just commands them.
00:36:02.060 I mean, he's well over, I guess, 60 percent in most of the important things.
00:36:06.880 And that's those are big numbers.
00:36:10.260 So so it makes the Democrat strategy of doing nothing sound hilarious,
00:36:15.540 but it's not just doing nothing.
00:36:18.620 So Hakeem Jeffries was on the Jake Tappers show and Jake was giving him some
00:36:24.520 some pushback about, you know, there.
00:36:29.980 I guess I'm pushed back about the viability of the Democrat Party,
00:36:34.660 because it just looks like it's falling apart.
00:36:37.560 And here's what Hakeem Jeffries said.
00:36:42.060 He simply lied about the Republicans plan to cut Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare.
00:36:48.160 Now, I'll need a fact check.
00:36:50.520 Is it true that that's a lie?
00:36:53.800 Because I don't know.
00:36:55.600 You know, the right say there's no cuts in those things.
00:36:58.600 And the left says, oh, yeah, he's making deep cuts in those things.
00:37:02.900 So I don't know which one's true.
00:37:04.840 But if I had to go by history, history suggests that if this were true, that the news would
00:37:14.040 be saying it, not just the Democrat leaders.
00:37:17.020 Don't you think?
00:37:17.940 Because I haven't seen a news story that said the Republicans want to cut those things.
00:37:24.420 I've only seen the Democrat leaders say it, which would suggest it's just their newest hoax.
00:37:29.800 So their newest hoax is that the Republicans are going to cut things that they're definitely
00:37:36.880 not going to cut.
00:37:38.320 Now, I'll take a fact check on that if it turns out I'm wrong and there is some plan to cut
00:37:43.060 those things.
00:37:43.600 And I'm not talking about waste, fraud, and abuse.
00:37:46.720 I think everybody would be okay with cutting that.
00:37:48.460 But the accusation is that they would just cut surfaces of these well-loved things.
00:37:56.860 And maybe they would.
00:37:58.300 But I'm not aware of that being a plan.
00:38:00.000 So he basically said that Trump's policies, this is what Hakeem Jeffries said to Tapper.
00:38:08.380 He said that Trump's policies were, quote, deeply unpopular with the American people.
00:38:14.000 And then Tapper showed him the popularity of the Democratic Party compared to the popularity
00:38:19.160 of the Republicans.
00:38:20.520 The Democrats are like 20% popularity or approval, I guess.
00:38:26.100 And the Republicans are around 40%.
00:38:28.300 And the policies, as I just said, are just wildly popular.
00:38:32.400 Some of the most popular things in a bipartisan way you've ever seen in this country.
00:38:37.280 So it looks like the Democrats are not going to do nothing, like Carville suggests.
00:38:43.960 They're also going to add hoaxes.
00:38:46.420 So their hoaxes, which they hope will be supported by their fake news,
00:38:50.520 is that Trump is doing unpopular things, exactly the opposite of all reality.
00:38:56.560 And even CNN called him out and showed the chart saying, yeah, popularity,
00:39:02.160 you're not quite on point there on that popularity point.
00:39:07.380 The funny thing is that Hakeem Jeffries is one of their strongest players.
00:39:14.900 He's considered one of the good ones, like really knows what he's doing.
00:39:20.520 But the Democrat strategy of doing nothing and waiting for Trump to become less popular
00:39:25.340 is just fall down hilarious because it really screams, we got nothing.
00:39:31.980 Let's just wait and see if the other side falls apart.
00:39:37.260 So it's like wishful thinking, fiction, fantasy, imagination.
00:39:42.480 Does that sound familiar?
00:39:43.640 As I've often said, the Democrat approach to everything is to literally imagine what could
00:39:53.240 go wrong and make up hoaxes about what's going wrong at the moment.
00:39:57.980 So it's a completely imaginary world that they can sell to their base and the base will buy
00:40:04.200 it because they bought it before.
00:40:07.000 Anyway, so that's a lot of giving up in that strategy.
00:40:10.120 I think it's hilarious.
00:40:11.000 Ontario, the wait is over.
00:40:14.500 The gold standard of online casinos has arrived.
00:40:17.320 Golden Nugget Online Casino is live, bringing Vegas-style excitement and a world-class gaming
00:40:22.440 experience right to your fingertips.
00:40:24.940 Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting, signing up is fast and simple.
00:40:29.400 And in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots and
00:40:34.080 top-tier table games.
00:40:35.420 Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots that can turn any mundane
00:40:40.620 moment into a golden opportunity at Golden Nugget Online Casino.
00:40:45.120 Take a spin on the slots, challenge yourself at the tables, or join a live dealer game to
00:40:49.440 feel the thrill of real-time action, all from the comfort of your own devices.
00:40:53.800 Why settle for less when you can go for the gold at Golden Nugget Online Casino?
00:40:58.680 Gambling problem?
00:41:00.000 Call Connex Ontario, 1-866-531-2600.
00:41:04.300 19 and over.
00:41:05.220 Physically present in Ontario.
00:41:06.600 Eligibility restrictions apply.
00:41:08.200 See goldennuggetcasino.com for details.
00:41:10.680 Please play responsibly.
00:41:12.600 So the House has passed a budget.
00:41:16.000 So I guess that means the Senate gets to play with it and might tweak it, but there's
00:41:22.340 some chance that the Republicans will get a budget.
00:41:24.940 Thomas Massey did not vote for it, probably the only one, only Republican who didn't vote
00:41:32.000 for it, because as he points out, even though it extends the five-year tax holiday, which
00:41:39.620 means not raising taxes to a pre-Trumpian level from his first term, I guess, it doesn't
00:41:48.780 cut enough to reduce the deficit.
00:41:52.220 So as Massey said, that even under the best case assumptions, which never happen, and Massey
00:41:59.800 is completely right about that, under the best case assumptions, which never happen, they're
00:42:07.420 going to increase the budget at $300 billion per year.
00:42:10.220 Now, I can't imagine that the discretionary spending is going to be nothing, right?
00:42:17.700 Because there's always a war.
00:42:19.140 There's always some damn thing.
00:42:20.420 And so he voted against it.
00:42:24.400 And I'm on board with that.
00:42:27.800 I'm on board with that.
00:42:28.640 I like that he operates on principle.
00:42:31.080 He basically said, you've got one job.
00:42:34.420 You know, don't increase the...
00:42:37.420 Man, it's getting loud out there.
00:42:39.840 Don't increase the deficit.
00:42:41.880 And then they increase the deficit.
00:42:45.560 Or at least they increased what would be the total debt.
00:42:49.540 So we'll see what the Senate does.
00:42:54.740 This is a situation where I can't support the Republican approach.
00:42:59.100 They have one job.
00:43:03.080 Get the budget under control.
00:43:05.220 Now, it could be that as a doge does its work, because it's a little early in that process,
00:43:11.580 it could be that there's a point in the future where we have the budget, but we don't have
00:43:17.080 to spend it all.
00:43:17.820 Now, that would be amazing.
00:43:21.860 So maybe the budget says it's going to cost $300 billion.
00:43:25.660 Let's say Trump amazingly does not increase discretionary spending.
00:43:32.980 Discretionary spending means it wasn't in the budget, but we're going to do it anyway by
00:43:36.640 running up to debt.
00:43:37.360 But I don't know.
00:43:40.920 Maybe there's a chance it all could work out.
00:43:43.540 But what I'd like to see is Elon Musk talking honestly about the budget and how it relates
00:43:49.760 to the doge over time.
00:43:51.920 I think Elon's being quiet about this, because I don't think he has anything supportive to
00:43:57.420 say about this budget.
00:43:58.700 Now, I can't read minds, so don't blame him.
00:44:02.460 This is just me speculating that if a few days go by, and give me a fact check on this,
00:44:10.440 because I could be wrong about this.
00:44:12.360 But if a few days go by and you don't see him weighing in, Elon Musk, and saying this
00:44:17.220 is a good budget, or this is a step in the right direction, or if you add doge to this,
00:44:23.080 we'll be okay.
00:44:24.760 If he just is quiet about it, I would suspect that he's not a fan.
00:44:30.960 Because he's not quiet about anything.
00:44:35.880 Trump signed some healthcare price transparency thing in executive order.
00:44:42.360 I guess we had this before, but Biden slow walked in or reversed it or paused it or something.
00:44:50.160 And it makes hospitals and other healthcare people disclose their actual prices so that
00:44:55.420 people can shop based on price.
00:44:58.060 Now, that's free market.
00:44:59.480 If Jeff Bezos gets his way, and he gets the Washington Post to talk about personal freedoms
00:45:08.320 and open markets, free markets, we should see the Washington Post write something that
00:45:14.920 says, there it is.
00:45:16.160 There's a step in the right direction.
00:45:18.120 Because you can't really have a free market if the sellers are allowed to hide their prices.
00:45:24.720 So, in yesterday's world, the Washington Post would have said, well, here's another overstep
00:45:32.120 by the White House.
00:45:35.000 They've gone too far.
00:45:36.440 It didn't work before.
00:45:37.440 It won't work again.
00:45:38.920 You know, it would just be reflexive anti-Trump.
00:45:41.980 But if Bezos makes this change, and he says, we're going to write about free markets because
00:45:49.220 we like America, he might have an opinion person who says, you know, this is just a good
00:45:54.420 idea.
00:45:55.100 We don't know how well it'll work.
00:45:56.920 We don't know how fast.
00:45:58.880 But it couldn't possibly be wrong to have more information about your own prices.
00:46:03.300 Trump also signed an executive order to end the security clearances of members of a law
00:46:15.420 firm called Covington and Burling if those members were helping Jack Smith in his, I'm
00:46:22.520 going to call it lawfare, cases against Trump.
00:46:25.320 Now, those cases have been dropped.
00:46:26.560 But Trump's removing the security clearance of anybody who worked there and helped Jack
00:46:34.320 Smith.
00:46:35.300 Now, on one hand, this does sound a little revenge-y, and I'm not in favor of just pure
00:46:42.200 revenge.
00:46:43.080 There have to be, you know, real bad behavior before I'm okay going after anybody for anything.
00:46:50.240 But this does seem like really bad behavior.
00:46:53.260 And it does seem to me that all the people involved would have known that they're involved
00:46:59.340 in something closer to lawfare than law.
00:47:02.820 They were all sophisticated operators.
00:47:07.420 They would clearly know what they were involved in.
00:47:10.680 If they had been somehow forced to do it or they had, you know, didn't know, they didn't
00:47:19.760 know what was possibly going on, and they just fell into it somehow, well, maybe.
00:47:25.700 But I think they all knew exactly what they were doing, and it wasn't cool.
00:47:30.020 So I'm in favor of this.
00:47:33.740 The Washington Times is reporting, and it's based on a whistleblower, so I don't assume
00:47:39.300 this is true.
00:47:39.940 But, you know, use your own judgment, because I usually say if there's an anonymous whistleblower,
00:47:46.500 that's not good enough.
00:47:49.340 And I want to keep that as standard for both sides.
00:47:51.940 But the allegation is that the whistleblower personally knew, somebody who knew, that James
00:48:04.620 Comey had authorized sort of an off-the-books honeypot operation in 2015 against the Trump
00:48:11.520 administration.
00:48:13.000 Now, a honeypot means that you have, let's say, undercover FBI agents.
00:48:17.660 And they're attractive women, usually. 1.00
00:48:22.460 Could be gay guys if they're trying to honeypot a gay guy. 0.81
00:48:26.440 So whatever they need to honeypot the right kind of person.
00:48:29.940 And they wouldn't necessarily be sleeping with anybody to, you know, honeypot them, but they
00:48:37.240 might be flirting a little bit. 0.98
00:48:39.560 And maybe people would give up a little extra secrets because they're trying to impress the
00:48:47.480 attractive honeypot.
00:48:49.820 So I don't know if this is true, but it's a pretty explosive allegation that Comey might
00:48:57.820 have done an off-the-books, and it would have been illegal, I guess, an off-the-books honeypot
00:49:03.040 operation.
00:49:03.880 And that's without knowing there was any specific thing they were looking for.
00:49:07.440 They would have been just fishing for something to go after Trump for.
00:49:12.160 Very illegal sounding.
00:49:16.740 Now, when I hear about this, again, remember, it's an anonymous whistleblower, so that's the
00:49:22.280 lowest level of proof.
00:49:24.520 But what if it is true?
00:49:26.580 It just sort of reminds me that think about all the things we didn't know, and then time
00:49:35.040 goes by, and then we, whoa, I didn't know that.
00:49:37.320 How many things do we not know that are, let's say, as bad as this allegation, but are really
00:49:45.160 happening or really happened?
00:49:47.220 Just think about what is the percentage of things we find out eventually versus the percentage
00:49:53.560 of bad behavior, you know, criminal behavior, theft, et cetera, that we just never find out.
00:49:59.300 Do you think we find 80% of the bad behavior eventually?
00:50:03.000 Or do you think it's closer to 1%?
00:50:07.360 Because I wonder.
00:50:08.720 I feel like it might be closer to 1% and that there might be something like 100 times more
00:50:14.760 problems than we've ever seen or identified.
00:50:18.800 That'll keep you up at night.
00:50:20.820 Well, Data Republican, goes by that name on X, was on NewsNation, and Data Republican got
00:50:31.880 doxed because I guess she's doing too good a job analyzing the data and finding sketchy 0.85
00:50:37.240 stuff.
00:50:39.880 But she was on NewsNation, and she said that there was one NGO that claimed to promote democracy,
00:50:48.040 and to do that, they received $17 million, so the government gave them $17 million, or
00:50:55.180 it came from some other entity that had been funded by the government, because you know
00:50:59.220 how that works.
00:51:00.300 But they got $17 million, and the only thing that they created with their $17 million was
00:51:05.640 they made a terrible Muppet Show, and they made these Muppet Show videos that had, you know,
00:51:13.440 like 200 views.
00:51:15.580 So whatever that Muppet Show thing was, it doesn't look like it was ever even intended
00:51:20.180 to be real.
00:51:21.540 It looks like just a thing they could say so they could get money.
00:51:25.540 The NGO was co-founded by Norm Eisen.
00:51:30.940 Remember I always tell you to look for the players, not the play.
00:51:36.100 If the only thing you know is what happened, you don't know anything.
00:51:41.920 You have to know who did it.
00:51:43.680 Once you know who did it, then the what happened always has a completely different context.
00:51:49.300 So let me just say this.
00:51:50.780 If this NGO had been founded by somebody you never heard of, just maybe somebody trying
00:51:56.100 to make a buck, it wouldn't be a big deal.
00:51:58.400 But Norm Eisen is a name that comes up a lot, and I don't want to get sued, so I'm not going
00:52:08.380 to make some accusations because, you know, he's a lawyer and it's dangerous territory.
00:52:13.360 But if you ever want to find out what's what, that would be a good name to do some searches
00:52:20.220 on, to find out, you know, what he's been involved in, et cetera.
00:52:25.120 And I think you'd find that he's always in the middle of the worst behavior on the Democrat
00:52:31.800 side.
00:52:33.480 There's a small group of people who are just always involved in whatever the worst thing
00:52:38.980 is you can imagine.
00:52:40.340 And his name just pops up in so many stories.
00:52:43.900 And until you see that name, you're like, well, this could be just a, oh, oh, it's Norm Eisen.
00:52:50.140 So I'm not even going to tell you all the things he's accused of.
00:52:54.040 I'll let you research that yourself, and your jaw is going to drop and your brains will
00:52:59.560 fall out.
00:53:02.100 Anyway, $17 million for a puppet show.
00:53:06.540 So where'd the rest of the money go, says Data Republican.
00:53:10.940 Claudia was leaving for her pickleball tournament.
00:53:13.180 I've been visualizing my match all week.
00:53:15.700 She was so focused on visualizing that she didn't see the column behind her car on her
00:53:19.860 backhand side.
00:53:20.640 Good thing Claudia's with Intact, the insurer with the largest network of auto service centers
00:53:26.320 in the country.
00:53:27.420 Everything was taken care of under one roof, and she was on her way in a rental car in
00:53:31.240 no time.
00:53:31.880 I made it to my tournament and lost in the first round.
00:53:35.360 But you got there on time.
00:53:37.220 Intact Insurance, your auto service ace.
00:53:39.800 Certain conditions apply.
00:53:40.720 Meanwhile, along the same lines, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who's a Democrat, he backed legislation
00:53:49.080 that would give millions of dollars to a non-profit called Ocean Conservancy.
00:53:56.060 Now that's fine, right?
00:53:58.040 Don't you like oceans to be conserved?
00:54:00.880 We all like that.
00:54:01.880 That's probably a really good NGO.
00:54:03.600 Let's see.
00:54:05.500 I wonder if there's anything sketchy about it.
00:54:08.160 Oh, yeah.
00:54:09.200 Well, they were serviced by a consulting company.
00:54:13.320 So there was a consulting company that got paid millions of dollars for consulting for
00:54:18.280 this NGO.
00:54:19.360 But that's okay.
00:54:20.620 There's nothing wrong with that.
00:54:22.200 You know, it's very common to hire consultants for stuff.
00:54:27.540 Let's see if there's anything else about it.
00:54:29.200 Wait, one of the consultants was Sheldon Whitehouse's spouse.
00:54:35.840 So his spouse worked for the consulting company that made millions of dollars, and then the
00:54:42.480 senator voted to fund it.
00:54:44.980 Now, he wasn't the only one who voted for it.
00:54:47.760 Otherwise, it wouldn't have been funded.
00:54:49.240 So there must have been a lot of votes for it.
00:54:51.320 But you do have to ask yourself, why didn't he recuse himself?
00:54:56.080 And did he get his peers to vote for it?
00:55:02.040 Did he say, hey, I'll owe you a favor if you do this for me?
00:55:07.220 I don't know.
00:55:08.720 But because we don't know, it really shouldn't be acceptable that any of this happens.
00:55:17.440 And again, I go back to the founders of the country.
00:55:19.880 They never anticipated that there would be so many power couples where both of them would
00:55:25.260 have high-end jobs, and one of them could funnel money to the other one, which is basically
00:55:30.260 paying yourself.
00:55:32.320 So as Elon Musk said, it's always the spouse.
00:55:35.720 It's always the spouse.
00:55:37.880 That's how they launder money. 1.00
00:55:40.340 So speaking of that, the New York Times and Washington Post and CBS, they're all talking
00:55:50.060 about this story of how there are these bipartisan, and this is the important part,
00:55:54.760 bipartisan town halls where even the Republicans were saying, my goodness, we can't put up with 0.51
00:56:01.260 this Trump and this Doge stuff.
00:56:03.900 And if you saw that reporting, and you said to yourself, wow, it's bipartisan, even the
00:56:10.640 Republicans are turning against Trump, would you have known that these were fake?
00:56:15.820 That's right.
00:56:17.540 They were just organized by far-left entities, funded by all the wrong people.
00:56:23.300 They were fake.
00:56:25.700 So I guess Soros gives money to move on, and something called indivisible, to stage fake
00:56:31.940 opposition.
00:56:32.520 So that's the Washington Free Beacon is reporting on that.
00:56:37.440 Okay.
00:56:38.440 Now, here's what I've been telling you.
00:56:42.760 All large gatherings are fake.
00:56:46.120 I think all of them.
00:56:49.060 And then some of you said, but what about the Tea Party or whatever?
00:56:53.420 Now, I don't think the individuals are fake.
00:56:56.280 In this case, they might have been fake.
00:56:58.100 But often, the individuals are sincere.
00:57:02.320 It's just that the thing never would have been organized, never would have been funded,
00:57:06.580 and never would have been pulled off if it had been left to grassroots people to do it
00:57:11.380 on their own.
00:57:11.920 It feels like there's always some shadowy funding, or it just doesn't happen.
00:57:21.240 So this is more of that.
00:57:23.840 Shadowy funding.
00:57:25.860 Well, there's some explosive allegations about Swalwell, Representative Swalwell, who I believe
00:57:34.060 is my representative.
00:57:35.260 I lose track.
00:57:36.000 But I think he's my representative in California.
00:57:39.240 And apparently, he went to, here's the allegations.
00:57:42.880 We don't know the details yet.
00:57:44.420 But according to Nick Sorter, who's, I don't know how to describe him, maybe independent
00:57:52.080 journalist.
00:57:53.020 He's one of the people on X who's always breaking news.
00:57:55.580 So he goes to a restaurant with his wife.
00:57:59.660 It's like 10 o'clock at night, and it's practically empty.
00:58:03.180 And then Swalwell comes staggering in, or he got drunk as soon as he got there.
00:58:08.180 That was unclear.
00:58:09.220 But he got super drunk, and he ended up at the table right next to him, even though the
00:58:13.780 whole restaurant was kind of empty.
00:58:16.160 And because he's drunk, he's talking very loudly.
00:58:19.860 And apparently, Nick turned on his phone and recorded it.
00:58:23.640 And he was there with some, here's the allegations.
00:58:27.900 So I don't know yet.
00:58:29.320 I'd like to hear the recording myself.
00:58:31.860 But the allegation is that he was dining with lobbyists, I guess.
00:58:38.860 And he was getting really drunk and talking loudly about how to cheat on his wife and some
00:58:48.620 just awful things.
00:58:49.900 Things you wouldn't say unless you were super drunk.
00:58:53.640 And I will go a little bit further.
00:58:56.100 If the allegations of how he acted are true, he is probably more than a guy who had a few
00:59:01.900 drinks that one time.
00:59:04.640 My experience is that nobody acts like that if the allegations are true.
00:59:10.940 Again, I wasn't there.
00:59:12.440 But if the allegations are true, and we'll know pretty soon because there's a recording
00:59:17.540 that's going to come out, that would suggest a drinking problem that doesn't suggest somebody
00:59:25.140 had too many that one day.
00:59:26.520 It's strongly indicative of a deep problem.
00:59:33.360 We'll see.
00:59:34.620 But here's the funny thing.
00:59:35.700 So Swalwell posted, not about this topic, but separately he posted and he said,
00:59:46.300 today I stood on the steps of the Capitol with my Democratic colleagues to say hell no
00:59:51.780 to Trump's reckless budget.
00:59:53.580 And then he showed four photos that showed different angles of him and other Democrats
00:59:59.580 standing on the steps of the Capitol.
01:00:02.760 And I saw that and I said, you know, look how easy it is to claim your accomplishments
01:00:08.400 for the week.
01:00:10.160 Swalwell just did it.
01:00:11.360 There's one of his accomplishments.
01:00:12.940 He stood on some steps.
01:00:15.520 He did.
01:00:16.720 Yeah.
01:00:17.120 No, he really did.
01:00:18.220 He stood on some steps.
01:00:20.200 Other people stood on some steps too.
01:00:22.300 He's not the only one, but he stood on some steps.
01:00:24.740 And that made a difference.
01:00:27.540 Now, I don't know who your representative is, but did your representative stand on any
01:00:32.640 steps yesterday?
01:00:33.740 Probably not.
01:00:35.060 No, but I'm lucky because my representative stood on steps.
01:00:41.240 Good job there.
01:00:43.780 Well, there's a creepy story about people on some kind of message board and it was CIA
01:00:50.260 people and there were kinks involved and a bunch of colorful characters.
01:00:56.320 And since I don't do kink shaming, just, you know, people are people.
01:01:01.640 Let them be over there.
01:01:03.640 I haven't been interested in the story, but apparently Tulsi Gabbard has identified the
01:01:09.500 people who were on that message board and already fired them.
01:01:14.020 So that's all I want to say about that.
01:01:16.140 I don't want to talk about the details because if it's not your kink, 1.00
01:01:20.260 it's just the creepiest story in the world.
01:01:23.420 And if it is your kink, I don't want to hear about it. 1.00
01:01:26.000 You know, I don't have a problem with anything you want to do, but I don't want to hear about
01:01:30.840 it.
01:01:33.500 All right.
01:01:34.000 Here's my persuasion tip of the day.
01:01:37.980 Have you noticed that the Democrats are using chaos and saying, oh, there's a lot of chaos
01:01:43.440 going on, Doge and Trump and chaos and chaos.
01:01:46.900 And you wonder why they use that one word?
01:01:48.840 Well, first of all, it's obviously a published talking point.
01:01:54.320 There is no way that that's happening organically.
01:01:57.840 This is yet again, the Democrats listening to somebody who knows what they're doing, telling
01:02:04.180 them what to say.
01:02:05.020 The reason they say chaos is because they don't have to prove it.
01:02:11.380 And it's scary to seniors.
01:02:13.940 So senior citizens, the last thing they want is chaos.
01:02:17.640 They don't want a lot of change.
01:02:19.920 You know, if they're comfortably retired, they can't really go back to work if something goes
01:02:26.640 terribly wrong.
01:02:27.360 So chaos is the scariest thing if you're on a fixed income and retired.
01:02:33.680 You don't want any chaos.
01:02:35.080 You're just barely making things meet.
01:02:37.980 So from a political persuasion perspective, it's clever.
01:02:42.940 And it looks like the work of a professional.
01:02:44.800 But so just when you hear it, just know that that's not a sincere opinion of the speaker.
01:02:54.220 It's just because somebody said this is a good word.
01:02:57.500 That's why they do it.
01:03:00.140 But let me give you some context about Doge and all the chaos.
01:03:04.000 So here are some of the things that the Democrats are saying about Doge.
01:03:07.720 The problem is not that they don't want to get rid of the waste, fraud, and abuse.
01:03:11.660 I mean, who would be in favor of those things?
01:03:13.560 So they're really in favor of the way it's being done.
01:03:17.840 The way it's being done.
01:03:19.300 And here's what they say.
01:03:21.520 You should use a scalpel, not a chainsaw.
01:03:23.760 They're cutting too much muscle.
01:03:25.360 People will suffer.
01:03:26.420 Employee morale is down.
01:03:27.640 There's not enough communication with the employees.
01:03:32.160 There's conflict.
01:03:33.340 And the bureaucracy is fighting back.
01:03:35.020 And it's a mess.
01:03:36.360 And it's humiliating to some people.
01:03:38.140 And there's bullying, harassing.
01:03:39.800 Everyone except the people doing it know a better way to do it.
01:03:43.600 And things are not being thought through.
01:03:45.560 There's not enough empathy.
01:03:47.640 Have you heard all of those things?
01:03:50.220 So that's basically the Democrat approach.
01:03:52.800 Now, that sounds like a lot of chaos, right?
01:03:56.280 So one of the problems that I've always noted with the popular media is that they don't have real-world experience.
01:04:03.540 They have media experience, and that's a very special kind of business.
01:04:08.160 So they probably know everything about their own industry.
01:04:10.380 But they don't really know what's it like to work at some other big company that has other big processes.
01:04:19.020 So let me tell you how the real world works.
01:04:24.980 100% of the time, if you're trying to do big cuts or a big merger or a big reorganization, all of which are common.
01:04:34.700 You know, I've been through them.
01:04:36.520 I work for a bank that got taken over by another bank.
01:04:39.500 I think I've told you this story before, but it's relevant.
01:04:44.320 We were told, this is the communication we got as employees.
01:04:48.920 We were told, don't worry about your job if you're good at it.
01:04:52.860 Because we're going to use a scalpel, not a chainsaw.
01:04:56.440 They didn't use those words, but that's what they communicated in essence.
01:05:00.440 So we're going to look at everybody individually.
01:05:02.520 And if you're a good employee, don't worry that there might be duplication in the company that's acquiring you, which normally would mean you'd get fired.
01:05:12.560 Rather, we want to keep all the good people.
01:05:15.360 So if you're good, don't worry.
01:05:17.640 You've got a job.
01:05:19.720 What do you think happened as soon as the deal closed?
01:05:22.960 They fired everyone in my department.
01:05:24.960 Now, I was the lucky one because they were discriminating against me for being white and male, so I'd just left.
01:05:33.500 So I wasn't fired, but only because I just quit.
01:05:38.300 Everyone else that I left behind, every one of them fired.
01:05:42.860 So were they lying when they said we're going to use a scalpel?
01:05:47.040 Yes, they were.
01:05:47.920 They were lying.
01:05:49.220 They didn't want people to revolt, and they wanted you to feel comfortable.
01:05:52.840 So they did a really good job of communicating, except the communication was a lie.
01:05:59.560 Now, how do you think we felt?
01:06:01.560 Well, the employees who left behind.
01:06:03.760 Do you think they thought they were humiliated and bullied?
01:06:06.700 Do you think they thought it was chaos?
01:06:08.240 Do you think they thought the communication was poor?
01:06:10.900 Do you think they thought that there wasn't enough empathy being shown?
01:06:14.420 Do you think?
01:06:16.120 Yeah, it's all those things.
01:06:17.700 Everything that people are saying about Doge is 100% common to every large change in any large organization.
01:06:28.340 There's not a single thing that people say about Doge that isn't said about every organization that makes a big change that involves firing people.
01:06:37.420 No exceptions.
01:06:38.420 So does the media know that?
01:06:42.720 I think they don't.
01:06:44.560 I think a lot of people in the media are not really experienced.
01:06:47.420 And when they say, oh, the employees, the employees are reporting that morale is low and the communication is bad, and then nobody knows what they're doing.
01:06:56.420 That's everything, all the time, every single time.
01:07:00.540 If you don't know that that's universal, you would think that there's chaos.
01:07:06.460 If you knew it's 100% universal, everybody's going to feel exactly this way, then you'd say, I guess that's the only way to get from here to there.
01:07:15.980 That's what I say.
01:07:17.060 It's the only way to get from here to there.
01:07:20.700 And yes, it's messy.
01:07:23.000 But there's no second way.
01:07:25.260 There is no second way.
01:07:26.580 It's always this messy, period.
01:07:29.340 Whether it works or doesn't work, it's always this messy.
01:07:33.400 All right.
01:07:34.540 So, chaos.
01:07:39.960 Bank more encores when you switch to a Scotiabank banking package.
01:07:45.020 Learn more at scotiabank.com slash banking packages.
01:07:48.300 Conditions apply.
01:07:50.020 Scotiabank.
01:07:50.900 You're richer than you think.
01:07:51.940 So, meanwhile, Ukraine apparently has agreed to some kind of mineral deal with the United States, and even Zelensky might even come to D.C. on Friday, possibly to sign it.
01:08:03.660 I'm not sure the deal is done, because we've been surprised before.
01:08:07.560 But put this in context.
01:08:11.820 Trump has managed to get Ukraine, and now even Russia, through Putin, to both be competing to be business partners with the United States in major projects.
01:08:26.180 Just hold that in your head.
01:08:27.480 It was a month ago that the frame in Ukraine and Russia was, we're at war, and we don't know how to stop.
01:08:36.520 Now, that's still true, but there's always more than one way to look at things.
01:08:41.180 Trump has changed the frame to, I think you two should really compete to see who can be our best business partner.
01:08:48.900 Now, I'm not naive, so I know that anything that Putin says has to be taken with a, you know, it might be a trick.
01:08:58.640 His long-term objectives might be evil.
01:09:02.520 I get it.
01:09:03.100 I get it.
01:09:03.600 You can't trust Putin.
01:09:05.100 But the same would be true of Zelensky.
01:09:07.660 I get it.
01:09:08.200 I get it.
01:09:08.700 We can't trust him.
01:09:09.740 But just think about how the frame changed.
01:09:12.580 Who else could do that?
01:09:13.820 Who else could be entertaining gigantic mineral and aluminum offers from both of those countries who are at war at the same time?
01:09:26.600 It's almost impossible to even imagine that this is happening.
01:09:30.300 Now, that doesn't mean that the deals work and they're good deals and doesn't mean that we'll do any deals with Russia.
01:09:36.020 I don't know about that.
01:09:36.820 But the fact that Russia and Ukraine went from competing on the battlefield, which is still happening, to elevating it to competing in economics and trying to be our good friend, you know, economically, is just mind-blowing.
01:09:54.920 I mean, only Trump could do that that quickly.
01:09:58.340 A lot of it has to do with the fact that everybody calls him a dealmaker.
01:10:02.380 So, if a dictator walks in, you say, oh, you're a dictator.
01:10:08.460 But if a dealmaker walks in, you say to yourself, oh, maybe I can make this work.
01:10:14.180 It's a completely different frame.
01:10:15.920 And he brings it with him everywhere he goes.
01:10:20.260 So, I asked Grok the following question.
01:10:24.940 In the last hundred years, has there ever been a case where an industrialized country went to war with another industrialized country when one of those countries was the biggest market for the other or the biggest supplier of natural resources?
01:10:42.800 Do you know what the answer was?
01:10:45.500 Once.
01:10:47.440 And it was when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.
01:10:50.340 So, prior to that, Japan was getting most of their oil from the United States.
01:11:00.660 So, Japan was dependent on American oil and still attacked us. 0.83
01:11:07.120 So, that's an exception, right?
01:11:09.800 Nope.
01:11:11.700 They attacked us after we cut off the oil.
01:11:15.200 So, there is actually no example of any industrial country who ever attacked their biggest supplier or their biggest market.
01:11:26.400 Now, there are examples where they were doing business.
01:11:30.320 So, there was business.
01:11:31.760 But they weren't the biggest supplier or the biggest buyer.
01:11:35.780 So, here's what I think is true.
01:11:38.260 And this is how I would see Trump's approach to war.
01:11:41.380 I think his approach, and again, I'm not a mind reader, but if I had to look at it in context, I would say this.
01:11:48.240 If you're doing a little bit of business with another country, the risk of war is, you know, the regular risk of war.
01:11:55.900 If you've got reasons to go to war, a little bit of business isn't going to stop you.
01:12:01.940 If you do a lot of business, it could go either way.
01:12:06.200 Because a lot isn't like, you know, you're depending completely on the other.
01:12:10.760 It's just a lot.
01:12:12.720 But if you get to the point where you're the biggest buyer or supplier to another country of something very important, let's say energy and food or something like that,
01:12:23.600 then the odds of you going to war with each other might be close to zero.
01:12:28.960 Because it just doesn't make sense.
01:12:31.580 Because wars are basically economics without the calculator, right?
01:12:37.380 As others have pointed out, the country with the best economy is usually going to win the war if they have a proper military.
01:12:47.180 You know, Kuwait might be different.
01:12:48.260 But countries with proper economies can fund proper militaries, and that's usually the difference.
01:12:58.180 So could it be that Trump's concept for peace is you've got to force your most dangerous adversaries to do enough business with you that it just doesn't make sense to go to war?
01:13:13.360 I don't know.
01:13:14.360 I don't think any of us are smart enough to know, you know, when that works and when it doesn't, and would it stop somebody like Putin, and would it stop somebody like Hitler? 0.61
01:13:23.800 I don't know.
01:13:25.080 But I kind of like it better than permanent war.
01:13:29.280 You know, it's like we've got to try something.
01:13:32.720 So I'm kind of tentatively supportive of that.
01:13:38.880 You know, I get the risks.
01:13:40.340 I fully understand the risks.
01:13:42.180 Well, here's some good news.
01:13:44.440 The Joel Pollack is updating us in Breitbart.
01:13:49.560 That Lee Zeldin of the EPA is announcing that they finished the first part of the L.A. Fire Palisades, Eaton Fire, of the hazardous material cleanup.
01:14:02.860 And that was expected that it might take 90 days or even up to a year.
01:14:07.500 And Trump basically said, no, everything's going to be faster.
01:14:12.220 Do everything faster.
01:14:14.060 But, you know, it's going to take up to a year.
01:14:16.020 No.
01:14:16.860 Do it faster.
01:14:18.720 And so Lee Zeldin got it done.
01:14:20.480 He got it done in 28 days.
01:14:22.140 They were shooting for 30.
01:14:25.900 But that's in the context of the smart people saying it was going to take 90 days to a year.
01:14:33.040 Got it done in 28 days.
01:14:34.620 And it was there in person to tell people.
01:14:37.400 Now, keep in mind, that's not enough to start rebuilding.
01:14:40.980 That's only the toxic, hazardous material.
01:14:44.280 So the EPA isn't doing the full cleanup.
01:14:48.140 They're just looking for things that are, you know, obviously this is toxic.
01:14:51.380 We're going to have to take care of this.
01:14:53.000 So things like, you know, batteries that caught on fire and that sort of thing.
01:14:57.940 But phase two, the debris removal, which you have to do before you can build.
01:15:03.940 The Army Corps of Engineers told Breitbart that it hopes the process could be finished within a year,
01:15:10.440 which would be six months ahead of the original estimate of 18 months.
01:15:16.420 Now, this is a really good test of whether Trump can really use his magic to make even the state, in this case,
01:15:24.580 do, well, the EPA would be his.
01:15:26.620 But can the, can Trump really just make things work faster?
01:15:30.960 And I think the answer is probably yes.
01:15:34.300 Probably yes.
01:15:35.120 If he can cut the BS out and prioritize and make sure we know exactly what we want,
01:15:42.280 those things do make a difference.
01:15:44.500 So it's still a horrible situation for all the fire survivors.
01:15:48.700 And, you know, who wants to wait another year?
01:15:52.800 But at least it gives them hope.
01:15:55.860 So the difference between this could have been two to three years,
01:16:00.580 and now it might be a year-ish, that's a big difference, mentally, financially, just in every way.
01:16:10.480 So I hope this is a good sign of what's at.
01:16:14.100 There's a new technology that's interesting.
01:16:16.860 It's being written about an interesting engineering, Amman Tripathi.
01:16:20.540 And there's a new development, and I guess it's not theoretical, they've actually built this thing,
01:16:27.960 that where they can extract 14 liters of drinking water from even arid, dry air every day,
01:16:36.220 using only food scraps and solar power.
01:16:40.920 Now, the solar power part is important, because normally you would need, you know,
01:16:46.140 to plug it in and suck up a lot of power to suck water out of the air.
01:16:50.220 I have one of those, by the way.
01:16:51.500 I bought a unit just because I was curious.
01:16:54.120 So I'm making water out of the air right now, literally.
01:16:58.820 I'm making water out of the air.
01:17:00.440 But it's plugged in.
01:17:02.300 So if you didn't need to plug it in, and then the real secret is that they can take any kind of food scrap.
01:17:09.340 It doesn't even need to be anything specific.
01:17:11.820 They can take any kind of food scrap,
01:17:13.500 and the University of Texas has Austin researchers figured out how to turn the food scrap
01:17:21.160 into a moisture attractor, I guess.
01:17:25.280 So it becomes the secret sauce within the machine that drags the water out of the air
01:17:31.720 and converts it into clean water, even though it's food scraps.
01:17:35.700 That's just amazing.
01:17:36.880 But here's the mind-blowing one.
01:17:40.420 This next one will be a reminder that no matter how much you think things are going to stay the same,
01:17:47.220 it only takes one smart person to change the whole freaking world.
01:17:52.960 Now, I don't know if this is one, but this is fun.
01:17:56.900 All right, listen to this story.
01:17:57.940 Now, the context is, you know that one of the biggest issues with China and Taiwan and AI
01:18:05.740 is the cost and practicality of making chips.
01:18:11.540 So listen to this.
01:18:13.580 According to Cyrus Moulton at Northeastern Global News,
01:18:18.280 there's a Northeastern professor who patented a NANU manufacturing process
01:18:23.620 to slash chip production costs by 99%.
01:18:28.660 He built a printer to print your own chip.
01:18:34.460 You don't even have to be like a chip-making company.
01:18:39.220 It's a printer that can print your own chip.
01:18:43.620 We're right at the point where AI can design the chip for you,
01:18:47.680 let's say a custom chip,
01:18:49.180 and then you could print it just at home.
01:18:54.400 You could print your own chip.
01:18:56.820 And apparently it works.
01:18:58.120 It's not theoretical.
01:18:59.420 He already built it.
01:19:00.940 And it's 99% less cost.
01:19:05.480 Well, that would change just about everything.
01:19:08.980 That's incredible.
01:19:10.780 All right, ladies and gentlemen,
01:19:12.340 that's all I had to say today.
01:19:13.900 I'm going to say a few words to the local subscribers privately.
01:19:18.860 I hope you enjoyed the show.
01:19:22.240 And I'll see you tomorrow, same time, same place, for more fun.
01:19:27.120 Because the news is just so much fun lately.
01:19:29.400 All right, YouTube and X and Rumble.
01:19:31.860 I'll see you tomorrow.
01:19:33.020 Locals, I'm going to come your way privately in 30 seconds.
01:19:37.660 I love the fact that I'm going to go to the office
01:19:40.480 and I'll see you tomorrow.
01:19:41.380 I guess you can nature.
01:19:42.140 Yeah, and this is twoци пл disaster. 0.68
01:19:43.740 You'll see you tomorrow, same time.
01:19:44.300 So be back in the kitchen. 0.64
01:19:45.820 I'll see you tomorrow.
01:19:46.660 Bye, of course.
01:19:47.380 And available after you.
01:19:47.480 ll get us.
01:19:47.940 Bye.
01:19:48.460 Bye.
01:19:48.660 Bye.
01:19:49.220 Bye.
01:19:49.820 Bye.
01:19:49.900 Bye.
01:19:50.040 Bye.
01:19:50.500 Bye.
01:19:50.920 Bye.
01:19:51.980 Bye.
01:19:52.660 Bye.
01:19:54.120 Bye, bye.
01:19:55.300 Bye.
01:19:56.440 Bye.
01:19:57.120 Bye.
01:19:58.420 Bye.
01:19:59.600 Bye.
01:20:01.880 Bye.
01:20:02.180 Bye.
01:20:03.720 Bye.
01:20:04.300 Bye.