Episode 2253 Scott Adams: The Avatar Has Been Summoned. Things Are Getting Interesting Now

Do, do, do, do. Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization. Well, as long as it lasts. And if you'd like to take your experience up to levels that I don't think we've seen since, oh, the some epoch that I can't think of right now, but it would have been funny if I could. Is there something called the Upper Dryas period or something? Or something like that. But if I'd thought of that, it would have been funny. Anyway, if you like your experience to be maximized. The younger Dryas. There's no older Dryas. Why is there no older Dryas if there's a younger Dryas period? Well, I don't know. That's why you use a towel for. To dry your ass. But if you'd like this experience to be special, all you need is a cup of margarita, glass of tanker Chelsea canteen drink, a flask of vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip. It happens. Now go. Oh, there is an older Dryas and a younger Dryas. All right, all right, then my reference was correct. Much funnier than younger Dryas. Well, let's talk about all the things. Trump is the showman of all showmen, and he rarely misses an opportunity to get attention for free. So, of course, people have been asking him if he'd like to be the speaker of the House, which would be a ridiculous thing if you're running for president, would you agree it would be kind of ridiculous for him to be the speaker of the House while he's running for President? On the other hand, oh, my God, would it be fun and interesting and make a story? So, naturally, he backs Jim Jordan. So he's doing the, you know, the reasonable thing. But then he says he'd be open to doing it temporarily just to unite the country. Now, I can't think of anything that would unite the country less than Trump, than Trump being the speaker of the House. And of course he knows it. Of course he knows it. But just the fact that he doesn't close off that option is what makes him Trump. Anybody else would have done it wrong. Anybody else would have said, oh, no, I'm running for President Trump. Certainly not going to consider that. Although that would be crazy. All my attention is running for President. I don't want to disappoint my supporters by diverting my attention and not being serious about Running for president. I mean, that would be the obvious thing to say. But no, no. Trump knows that if he dangles that little bit of possibility that he could be the speaker of the House and then also president, and apparently it would give him two ways to be president. One would be impeaching Biden and Kamala Harris as Speaker of the House, which would make him president, which would be the most awesome thing ever, but it would never get through the Senate. So it's not really a. Not really a serious idea. Well, have you noticed that a lot of what we call politics, we've been. We've been bamboozled into thinking that mental health problems are political opinions? They're really not. They're really not. Now, you could say there's a fine line between being emotional and invested and being just batshit crazy. I see Rob Reiner's name going by. Rob Reiner's not crazy. He may have some, let's say, interest. He does have some, let's say, reported ties to the intelligence community. So to me, it just looks like he's doing a job. If you want to be not bothered by Rob Reiner, look at his tweets and then say to yourself, he looks like he's getting paid to do this. The moment you realize it looks like he's just doing a job, everything's fine. It doesn't bother you at all? I do that myself. He used to bother the crap out of me. I'd see his tweets, I'd be like, why? Why? Why does he believe this nonsense? And then I realized he has intelligence connections. I thought, oh, if I just looked at it like he was being paid to tweet, it wouldn't mean anything at all. So the last several tweets, I look at them and go, well, suppose you were paid for that? It would look just like that. And then everything makes sense. But here are some of the topics which I think we've conflated mental health with the science and the politics. Climate hysteria. Climate change is a scientific domain and it's a political domain, but not the way we talk about it. The way we talk about it is with a mental health attitude. First, you know, people are afraid and not having babies, and, you know, they think the world will end in 12 years. That's just bad mental health. But it gets mixed with this other stuff. The whole trans question is something real, but then on top of it, whole bunch of bad mental health. Not just. I'm not talking about the people who are transitioning. Some of them also would have some mental health issues, but I'm talking about the ones the parents, mostly the mothers. A lot of that looks like just bad mental health playing out. School shootings may or may not have something to do with bad mental health, but sure looks like it maybe has something to do with the way they were treated, but don't know that for sure. What about the fact that the Democrats are suggesting that MAGA supporters are domestic terrorists and there's an FBI unit to look for them? Do you think that could possibly happen in a country that didn't have a huge mental health TDS problem? I mean, that's just Trump derangement syndrome right there. So once again, mental health has been conflated with policy because this is a policy based on bad mental health. The idea that there's some group of MAGA people who are trying to overthrow the country, that's just bad mental health. How about mandatory vaccinations and mandatory masks? Given what we currently know, Given what we currently know, that's a mental health problem, wouldn't you say? I mean, there's also money involved, which is why we do anything. But the mask part, that's not even money. That's a mental health problem, which also has a real component to it. So these are in domains that have something real about them, but the mask part is pretty much a mental health problem. How about the open borders and the sanctuary cities? There are no honest mentally healthy people who are in favor of that. None. Not even one. We pretend like these are valid opinions and stuff. There's no valid opinion for keeping the border open. That's pure bad mental health. And. Or the cartels are working with our government. So it's one of those things. But it's not like a policy question. It's either corruption or bad mental health. Mostly like two thirds of it would be that. How about. How about all the drugs and the suicides, bad mental health? So we're treating everything like it's a policy question when we're just like massively mentally unhealthy and is it getting worse? Oh, maybe. So apparently September is being reported as the hottest September because of climate change. The hottest September. Do you think that the idea that we can measure the temperature of the earth and then track the average over time, is that science or is that bad mental health? Or is it bad understanding of what can and cannot be done? Let me say with complete certainty, nobody can track the temperature of the earth, not within a degree or two. No, no, I don't believe it for one second that we can confidently track the temperature of the whole Earth. I don't believe that for a second. And if you do, you have been brainwashed. Which is not to say we don't have some kind of a warming issue. Maybe we do, but the fact that we can measure the temperature within one degree is sort of hilarious. Well, I found out something more about that Democrat leftist activist who got stabbed to death. And it was noted that he and the journalist who got gunned down in his home had both interacted with me on Twitter right before they died or soon before they died. Now, I didn't know about either one of them because I get a lot of critics, so it's not like I'd ever noticed their tweets. I don't think I'd ever responded to them before, but I found out. So one of them, the one that got stabbed, the first instance I saw where he had interacted with me, I couldn't even tell if he was being a troll or a critic. It was sort of an obtuse, kind of weird comment. So I wasn't so sure he was criticizing me. But Andy Ngo found an older tweet in which he had responded to something I said that was very smart, in my opinion. And his tweet on it was, damn, this is some of the dumbest shit I've ever seen. That was Ryan Carson. So after he said that, I tweeted some of the dumbest shit I've ever seen. He was slain by a knife because he was in a bad part of town. So I'm having a real tough time feeling bad for people who have been my critics. Because here's the thing. If the only thing that these dipshits had done had been my critics, then I would feel bad for them. Because somebody dies, that's worse than somebody tweeting at you. But I feel like these two people are part of the larger problem that's fucking everybody up, which is letting crime into the cities and acting like it's okay. So, well, I'm just going to tell you my next target is. So since some of you believe I can make people die at a distance, I thought I would do a test. So I've picked Chairman Xi of China for his work in now stopping the fentanyl, which we assume is intentional. And within the six months, within the next six months, I will be using my psychic powers to give him a grave illness. I'm going to work on illness, not death. So he might be attached to tubes and stuff, but I'm going to go for within Six months. I'm going to try to take out Chairman Xi with my mental powers now. Don't tell him I'm doing this. It'll ruin the whole thing. So that's. If you want to test my mental ability to kill people at a distance. Just check on him in the next six months. I've totally turned the corner on how upset I am about the news. And I swear to God I'm not making this up. It's all starting to look funny to me. Even though it's terrible and even though it's probably more dangerous than it's ever been, I can't help how funny it looks. Let me give you another example. Apparently, some Congress people are sleeping in the Capitol instead of walking home at night because a number of them live within walking distance. Do you know why? Do you know why they sleep at the Capitol lots of times instead of walking home? It's too dangerous. It's too dangerous to walk a few blocks to their house. Too dangerous. Yeah. Now. And one of them says, it would be crazy to have a car, to even own a car in D.C. because it's definitely going to get broken into or stolen. These are the people who are running the country who are afraid to go outdoors because that's how well they're running the country. You're running the country so well that you can't walk outdoors in the capital of the country. Good work, guys. Hey, good job. You can't go outside, and you can't own a car. Remember when they said you won't own anything and you'd be happy? Well, these guys look pretty happy. And they can't own a car, and they apparently have an apartment somewhere, but they can't use it because it's too dangerous to get to it. But they seem happy. I don't know. They seemed happy is what I'm saying. So I think Klaus was right. They can't own a car. They can't walk to their apartment, so there's no point in owning it. And they seem happy. So I think that prediction came true. Won't own anything. So you know what the irony is, if people are staying in the Capitol to stay Safe? That on January 6, we were worried about the politicians who were hunkered down inside the Capitol. Do you know what would have been more dangerous than being hunkered down inside the Capitol while a band of angry people, some of them violent, were trying to get to them? What's the one thing that would be more dangerous than that? Walking to their apartments. That's all I'm saying the only thing that would have been more dangerous that day on January 6th would have been leaving the Capitol and walking to their own apartment. Much more dangerous. And if they owned a car, twice as dangerous. So just know that's happening. Well, of course we have to talk about this wall that Biden's building, but he's totally not building. But he decided to build, but he totally didn't change his decisions. And the head of the Homeland Security Mayorkas says we definitely need this wall, but definitely not a wall, and definitely going to build it, but definitely not anything different. And certainly it was always in the budget, but it's also brand new. And before we couldn't do it, but magically we can. So I would like to summarize that by saying it's perfectly clear. Have you noticed that that's what Democrats say when they're going to give you the biggest load of bullshit you've ever seen in your life? It's perfectly clear that we're totally against building walls, but we're going to build a wall because we have to. But before we didn't have to, but now we have to because it's necessary, but only. We're only doing it because it's necessary, not because we have to, but it is necessary. And we changed all the laws and suspended 26 laws to get it done, which we could have done before, but we didn't because we couldn't. But now we can. But we have the budget, but we're not building much walls. So that's completely different than building walls. And it's more like a physical structure, not so much a wall. Whereas I said before, it's totally clear now. I would like to echo what other people said, the greatest question ever asked at a press conference, the single greatest question on of all time, Peter Doocy. If you didn't see it, it's one for the ages, because we know that Biden tore down all of Trump's wall. He wasn't even, he wasn't even willing to keep it where it was, where it was already built. He had to tear it down. Now he says his feelings about walls have not changed. But, but legally he's required to build it. Do you see where this is going? Biden says legally I'm required to build it because it's in the budget, but apparently it's also legal to tear one down because he's done it and nobody complained. Right? It's completely legal to tear it down, but he's required to build it. So he has to build it, but he doesn't want it. And he has a pattern of tearing him down when he doesn't want it. So Peter Doocy asked the following question. Once you build the wall, are you going to tear it down? It's the greatest question ever asked. Peter Doocy for the win. Oh, my God. Just the best question ever. And do you know how that was answered? To be clear, to be perfectly clear, we've been over this. We've been over this. To be perfectly clear, I have not talked to the president about this. We're not going to talk about this, Peter. We're not going to talk about this. No, no, no. You have your chance. We're not going to talk. I'm moving on. That's it. That's it. Moving on. I've been perfectly clear. We've been over this and seen. All right, let's see what's going on. Mike Lindell. Five of his employees are being audited, obviously as a punishment for supporting Trump. Trump's got 91 indictments, obviously politically motivated. I saw a compilation clip of Letitia. What's her last name? Leticia James. Leticia James. And I saw her publicly saying that they had to stop Trump, like, in public, multiple times. Must stop Trump. Must stop Trump. Then she gets into office and makes up some ridiculous charges to get Trump. How in the world is she not immediately removed from her job? How in the world. Even if Trump did lots of bad things, there's no way in hell that one specific person who has a history of saying she's going to take him down and obviously looked for a crime before there was reason to look for a crime. And, oh, my God. And then, of course, Elon Musk is being investigated in every way that the government can. So can we say that the government, that the government is weaponized against the public? I'd say yes. Before, I didn't. You know, I thought it was just some special cases. I thought, well, that's a bad situation, or there's a special case over there. But we have. I think we've reached the point where if you are a supporter of the President, President Trump, that that's enough. Because the FBI literally started a group that's organized just to find and try to stop or suppress Trump supporters. MAGA extremists are calling them, but they're basically just, you know, Trump supporters. So that's bad. Here's some more fun. Robin d'. Angelo. She wrote what White fragility. So she's one of the leaders in the all white people are racist. And she said this recently. All white people's households are racist. Now she's white. You should know. She says all white people's households are racist and that she talked about herself and she says she isn't any less or more racist than anyone else, and that includes Donald Trump. So the number one spotter of white racism says Donald Trump is no more or less racist than she is. Does that sound like. Like she softened on that point a little bit? I mean, maybe you should have started with that. Maybe say that first. That's not the last thing you say. Because we've been dealing with, you know, being called racist for what, ever since her book came out. And now she says, oh, no more than anybody else. Okay, okay. Well, we have to talk about Hillary, who did an interview and she said that Trump's followers are cult members who need to be reprogrammed. Formally reprogrammed. Does that sound like fucking Hitler? It does, yeah. So she finally went full Hitler. Now, let me be clear. I don't like to say anybody went Hitler unless they do actually something that Hitler did, but this looks like something Hitler did. Didn't Hitler identify a part of his own public and then demonize him? That's sort of exactly what he did. Now, I believe you could call somebody Hitler if they do exactly what Hitler did. So this is Hitler. Like, she hasn't done the death camps yet. But if you want to know who is alarmed by this language. Brian Stelter, now retired from cnn, but he's still Brian Stelter. He tweeted to her comment. He tweeted. What would formal deprogramming look like? In other words, even he's alarmed. Even the CNN guy is like, wait a minute. Formally deprogrammed in the United States. So if you want to know what going too far looks like, it's that. That would be going too far. However, what does it mean when Hillary does a public call for Trump's supporters to be reprogrammed? What is the. There's a ramification of that. Hillary has summoned the avatar. Now, if you don't know that reference, I'm not going to explain it. If you know, you know. But she has summoned the avatar. And do you know when the avatar is summoned? There's a specific situation. There's a very specific situation where the avatar is summoned. It's when the world needs to be reprogrammed. It's when their minds need to be changed. It's when the problem in the country is not our resources. It's not a Shortage of anything. It's that our minds are. Minds are broken. That's when the avatar is summoned. And so the avatar has been summoned and it's game on. The country needs to be reprogrammed. The Democrats think the problem is the Republicans, Republicans think the problem is the Democrats. And the avatar knows it's both. So that's why you need an avatar. So wait for that. MSNBC says that Elon Musk has turned the X platform into a haven for bigotry. A haven for bigotry. So I'm going to draw a picture now of the full extent of the evil that is now coming upon us. And it's pretty extreme. I've never seen anything like it. So msnbc, a major network which is sometimes people say is associated with our intelligence operation in the United States, is calling free speech bigotry. Now, I would agree that free speech can have bigoted elements, but that's not what's going on here. This is a full call for censorship. And the censorship would apply to people that the good people, the MSNBC hosts or the people on the View or Joe Biden have labeled as the bad people. Those would be the bigots. So whenever they talk, it's bigotry. Whenever the other side talks, it's just good, honest science. But once they can label you as the bigots, which Hillary has done and Joe Biden has done as well. So the first step is to label some group, and then you have to label them as bigots, because once you've labeled them as bigots, you can restrict their free speech. You can also eliminate their ability to earn money in the economy. So that's largely what's happening. But you also want the justice system and our investigative arms of the country to be on board with this, because you wouldn't want to be on the wrong team. Right? You need to be all on board. So indeed, the FBI literally is targeting MAGA people. So now you've got the government weaponized in a variety of ways. They're auditing people, they're. They're targeting MAGA people. They're jailing J6 people. There's a very clear pattern of Democrats jailing Republicans for whatever they can get them for. Which would make it haunted. Exactly. The best prediction ever made. However, there's an interesting thing happening right now, which is if RFK Jr runs for president and a third party long before the actual election itself, he will know for sure because there'll be lots of polling whether he is hurting or helping which candidate. So if we assume that he's not in a place to win outright. And he might be. He could actually win outright. But if he's not in a place to win outright and it looks like it's not going to happen, he would have the ability to either stay in the race, and he would know in advance who that would get elected. Let's say it's Trump. Might not be, but let's say it is. And then he would know that if he dropped out before the election itself, that that would reverse and maybe it would make Biden the president. So RFK Jr. Might be the only person who matters. He might be able to determine the next president by choice, not just because of what he's doing, but a month before the actual election. If he looks at the polls, he can just decide who's president. And if I were him, I would put a price tag on that. And I would say, trump, if you want to be president, I'll stay in. But I like to be attorney general because RFK Jr. Is the only Attorney General who could kick as much ass as needs to be kicked without it looking like a Nazi Republican takeover. You would almost have to have a Democrat in there. He's the only Democrat who would have no mercy. Am I right? For him, it's personal. I mean, he's not going to say that, but obviously it's personal. His family was killed, maybe by some of those people, you know, the descendants of them. Not the same people. So all of you say, hey, RFK Jr. Would be a good vice president for Trump. Zero chance of that happen. It's a stupid idea. This is a stupid idea. Do not pair a Democrat and a Republican on the same ticket. I don't care if it's Trump and rfk. I don't care who it is. Terrible, stupid, terrible, terrible idea. Stop saying it. Stop tweeting it. Terrible, terrible, stupid, stupid, stupid. Worst idea ever. But Attorney General, I could see that because I actually would trust RFK Jr. To follow the law. I would actually trust he would follow the law. And I'm not sure I would trust too many other people at the moment. So that could happen. That's interesting if you didn't see that coming. Well, let's talk about the Trump and the nuclear submarine story. So the story as it's developing goes like this. There's this Australian billionaire who was also a member of Mar a Lago and I guess knows Trump fairly well, has for a long time, and allegedly the. And there was a question of Australia buying some submarines from the US So that was an open question at the time that this allegedly happened, and what allegedly happened was that Trump said too much. There were no documents involved, but the allegedly Trump told this billionaire too much about how many warheads are on a sub and how close our subs can get to Russian subs without Russia knowing it. And therefore it was a terrible security breach and it's all bad. Now, what does this have? What does this story have with it that reminds you of some other story? Let's see, we've got the Australian connection first, huh? Just like sort of how the Russian collusion hoax was. Right. There was an Australian element. Right. So Australian billionaire. We've got the Russian element because it's allegedly how close we can get to Russian subs. Didn't say Chinese subs, said Russian subs. Why not just subs in general? Well, Russia. Russia is a little more red meat then. It's a. Of course it's a nuclear secret. So that's like the ultimate, you know, right on the nose. Don't you think they've been looking for those documents? Remember I said if there were any nuclear secrets in those documents at Mar a Lago, we would know that by now. They wouldn't tell us details, but they. But by now somebody would have said, well, there were some nuclear documents that were really sensitive if there were, because that would be the big story that would leak. So we've got a lot of elements here. We've got. I don't believe there are any documents or witnesses. So although it's not an anonymous source, those are the worst. It's a real source who's telling you a story sounds reasonably credible, but can you trust any one person telling you a story in a political environment? Not really. But here's the question that the press will never deal with. So what, they're going to make you think past the sale. They're trying to make you think that it was a bad thing, but that makes you think past the question of what if Russia found out for the first time that Trump said how close our submarines can get? Let's just take it one at a time. Let's say that happened then. Secondly, imagine that the Russia thought they knew, but they were off by a mile or so. I don't know what distances we're talking about, but could they be off by a mile? Would that make any difference to their strategy? What would be different? What would they do differently if they knew how stealthy our submarines were? I can't think of anything they would do differently because they already know that they're hard to track. And they already know that we got a number of them, but they don't know how many. So they certainly know we can reach their homeland with nukes. Right. If they know we can reach their homeland with nukes, then you have complete mutually assured destruction. If you tweak that a little bit, it's still mutually assured destruction. For example, allegedly Trump said something about the number of warheads on the sub. Do you think Russia didn't know that the submarines could carry nuclear multiple warheads? Now, if they thought the number was probably 30, but the real number was 40, or vice versa, will that change their strategy? How would it. How would it make any difference at all? So it might be true that Trump said these things, and I would agree that he should not have said those things if he did. But let's be serious about whether it matters. I doubt it. And secondly, do you think the Russians would take Trump's word for it, knowing he's the most hyperbola, hyperbole producing guy in the world? And it was in the context of trying to sell submarines to Australia. Now imagine for a minute that Trump is trying to sell you something, anything. In this case, it was submarines. Do you think you would say things about those submarines? There were slight exaggerations of their capabilities? Well, that would be predictable, wouldn't it? Do you think that if the submarines could. I'll just pick a number randomly. Do you think if they had 40 warheads, that Trump would say they have 40 warheads, or would he say something like, oh, those things. They could have 40, 50, 60 warheads. You know, if you want to buy something with 60 warheads on it. That's how he talks. He would mention the first number, the real one, but then he would act like it was really a bigger number. That's his style, these submarines. You could put 40 warheads on there. 40, 50. If you wanted to, you could put 60 warheads on there. Right? That sounds exactly like them, doesn't it? You could have billions and billions of warheads on there. And then how about the exaggeration of how close they could get? Suppose the real number, I don't know what the real number of a submarine would be, the. That they could get within a mile without being detected. Do you think he would say they can get within a mile without being detected and he would leave it at that? Or would he say these are so stealthy, they can walk right up to the exhaust pipe of another Russian submarine, won't even know it. We could be 10ft away. You'll not even know we're there. Which would sound more like Trump. The least likely possibility is he gave real numbers for either of those two things. That is the lowest level of possibility. Now, imagine that you're Russian intelligence and you get this report. We've got the number of warheads on their submarines. We thought it was 30, but it could be 50 or 60. So what do you do differently? Do you think if Russia could build a better submarine, they would? I'm sure they would. Do you think if they could do something to, you know, build an umbrella of defense, I'm sure they would have done it already. Right. What are they going to do that's different if they, if they heard this? Because they wouldn't believe it, would they? Imagine going to your boss and saying, yeah, we got the number of warheads from Trump. Is the boss going to say, well, that sounds pretty credible, or is the boss going to say, who? Trump? You mean the guy who failed the fact checking 35,000 times during his first tour? Yeah, him. We got the facts from him. All right. I don't know. Not too dependable. All right. Nukes in space. So apparently Lockheed Martin, Westinghouse, government services and intuitive machines. So they got some big government funding to build small nuclear power plants for Space Force. How many of you remember when Space Force was first created, and I was telling you that if you want a nuclear, you know, if, if we have any hope at all of controlling space militarily, which we're going to need to. That we would have to go strong with nuclear, because that's the obvious way you would power a spaceship. And, and I said that should be part of our larger domestic energy program, because you need to develop people who have the skill to build nuclear facilities. Otherwise there's nobody to build it for your military. So credit to the Biden administration. They appear to be funding Trump's Space Force, and they appear to be funding it in the most rational way, which is nuclear power. So it is weird that they're sort of below the level of notice. Even the Democrats know that nuclear power is going to be the thing. It just has to be the thing. They just can't say it really loudly because it would work against their climate change alarmism. Do you think that the climate change models included Space Force as one of the variables? No, but Space Force is going to create a domestic small nuclear reactor industry. Lots of expertise, there'll be lots of advancements, and that alone would be probably one of the biggest contributors to reducing our load of fossil fuels. So it could be that space force is the single biggest variable to end climate change. And who was it who told you that from the start? I did. Here it is, one of my better predictions. But it's all good news for the country. So nuclear is coming. China has developed a pretty advanced microchip which, which has people worried because if China can make their own microchips, then they're in a better space militarily and economically. The current situation is they buy a lot of their microchips from American chip makers and we don't sell them the best stuff. So we can restrict the best stuff. But the argument goes that if we completely stop selling chips to China, and there's some talk about that, the chip makers who want to sell those chips are saying, no, that's short sighted. If we don't sell chips to China, they're going to build their own chip making facility and then it will be advanced and they'll have any chip they want and then we're in real trouble. To which I say that sounds like something that you say when you're trying to prevent somebody from competing with you. That doesn't sound real. Because if China wanted advanced chips and had the ability to do it themselves, they would be working overtime to do it themselves. You don't think China wants advanced chips that we won't sell them? Of course they do. If there were any way they could make it on their own, they'd be doing it and trying as hard as possible to do it. Apparently they think they can't or they are working on it and they'll get there no matter what we do. But I don't think whether they buy from us or not, that's going to stop them from trying to make advanced chips. It's the dumbest argument ever. All right, so there's a story about the two of the Sinaloa brothers, El Chapo's kids, who run at least part of the what was the Sinaloa cartel. And there's reports that, I think I would wait for a confirmation of this to know it's true, but reports that they're trying to shut down the fentanyl business within their own cartel and that they've actually tortured and murdered people who didn't take their instructions and shut down the fentanyl. Now, I don't know if any of this is true and if it is true, you know, maybe there's a bigger context, we don't know. But I wouldn't be surprised if we haven't worked out some kind of a deal. Because the cartel does not want our military to go in there. Because if the military goes in, they're out of business and dead. But if they simply back off from the one thing that's killing the most Americans and they go back to just cocaine and heroin, then in theory they could just go back to being super profitable, but without the risk of our military getting involved. So it could be that the we worked in a deal with them. It could be they're just being smart and they know that that kind of business can't last forever. As soon as we get a Republican president, the military is going in, I think. Would you agree? The moment we get a Republican president, special forces are going to be all over the cartels? I think. So the cartels, probably seeing that coming, are trying to get out of the business to discourage our military from needing to go in. But they don't control the other cartels or even all of their own cartel at the moment. So I don't see any way we're not going in, because even if one cartel makes less of it, the others will make more. So I think we're going in. Are you watching the big story with Ozempic? I guess It's a diabetes drug, but it also is associated with losing weight. It's like, quite expensive, but some are saying it has side effects. And some are saying it's a godsend. Some are saying that you lose weight, but it's not the weight you wanted to lose. It's the wrong kind of weight. I don't know if any of that's true, but do you believe the safety claims of Big Pharma about Ozempic or. I don't know who makes it, but would you believe any safety claims they make? I wouldn't, no, because I don't believe in any medications anymore. And by the way, don't listen to my medical advice. Do not listen to my medical advice. It'll get you killed. Really, really. Don't listen to any of my advice. I'm just telling my personal opinion. I just don't trust any. Any pharma. Pharma drugs at all. Some of them surely make a difference and save your life, but I'm not sure about it. I don't know which ones, and I don't know if this is one. Is this one that's saving people's lives by saving them from obesity or is it just another reason that they don't have to exercise? I don't know. It feels like it might be another reason to not exercise. All right, I'M going to read you a long Robby Starbuck thread that starts with understand what time it is in America, which is sort of a perfectly written introduction. So these are a bunch of quick bullet points, but together they form a picture that might be alarming. All right, so this is Robby Starbuck on the X platform. He says Trump is being prosecuted by Biden's regime plus multiple state level Democrats. True. Trump is being politically persecuted. The head of, you know, the leading candidate politically persecuted in America in 2023. That's, that's the thing you can say just as matter of factly and people won't even argue the facts of it. You know, a Democrat would say, but, but these are real. But they know they're not. Robbie goes on. Every agency in government has been weaponized to investigate Elon Musk. The true Newsweek just broke the story about the FBI is both investigating Trump voters and treating them like terrorists by using the same tools they created to fight isis, the dhs, Department of Homeland Security and cisa. CISA used proxies to censor influencers like Robby Starbuck and Charlie Kirk for opposing Democrats. So in the real world, there was a secret government program to decrease the voice of some Republican types. A real thing. In 2023 grandmas, including one with cancer who thought they were allowed in the Capitol after police waved them in, were thrown in prison after January 6th despite zero violence. Meaning that the people thrown in prison, some of them had zero violence. Now none of that's cool. Absolutely none of that is cool. Soros. DAs are releasing pedophiles and criminals to carry out record crime. True. Over 7 million illegal immigrants have entered our country under Biden. And then Robby puts that in context. Listen to this context. Only 14 states have entire populations that are more than 7 million. Did you know that? And of our 50 states, there are only 14 of them. That their native population is greater than the number of immigrants we've let in in a year. Or under Biden, I guess under Biden, that's a lot of people. Schools are grooming kids about so called social justice, gender identity and sexual topics, including books with porn in them, while hiding it all from their parents. There's no lie there. Right? There's no hyperbole. That is a straight statement of fact. People fear saying they vote Republican despite Republicans winning the 2022 popular vote because they know they can lose. What? Republicans won the 2022 popular vote. That didn't happen, did it? What? Oh, 2022. Right. I'm sorry. I was thinking 2020. All right, so, yes. His point that you can't even tell people you vote Republican. Doctors are giving kids sex changes with the full support of the White House, including on Children of Our Troops. True. Doctors lose their licenses over disagreeing with the narrative of the Democrats. Several different topics. True. On several different topics. And not being wrong, which is important. They're not wrong. They're just disagreeing with the government. I mean, some of them might be wrong. Banks, big tech and online transaction services have banned prominent influencers for the crime of being conservative. Well, there's a little hyperbole there, but not much. They basically are banned for their politics. So that's true. Inflation and interest rates are destroying our economy in ways that we'll be dealing with for over a decade. 80 to 90% of Congress represent their own interests and lobbyists instead of people. That does feel like the right percentage. I was thinking about this myself, and I do think that there are honest people in Congress. About 10%. 10 to 20%. That would have been my estimate as well. So we don't know that. But that's just what it looks like and feels like. Big tech companies manipulate what the public sees to sell the Democrats narrative. Correct. Yeah. So our online experience is rigged. Our government experience is rigged. Our schools are rigged. Soldiers were fired by the thousands for being conservatives who didn't want the COVID jab. They even denied chaplains religious exemptions. Wow. People are put through public struggle sessions if they say men can't be women. True. The DOJ and Democrats DAs are deploying lawfare to bankrupt prominent Trump officials and supporters. The process is the punishment. True. So it doesn't matter if they're convicted. It only matters they're put through hell and bankrupted. True. College kids won't get into schools if they express any conservative views. And many will be failed in classes if professors find out they're conservative. True. These are real things. In the current year, parents were treated like terrorists by Merrick Garland and the DOJ for protesting school boards over Covid and the sexualization of children. Professional programs to become doctors and nurses are adding steps to screen for ideology to eliminate conservatives. Many do it in sneaky ways. Doctors do this with requirements to get the COVID vaccine in order to get a residency. That is sneaky. Some states pass laws to take custody from parents who don't affirm the new gender identity of their kids. And even legalized kids running away from their state to get an abortion or sex change. True. BLM and antifa members received multimillion dollar settlements after burning down cities with riots and looting for a year because their modern day brown shirts that the Democrats had to reward to ensure they'll do it again in the future. Okay. And Robbie says our future is closer to Russia under Stalin, Cuba under Castro, China under Mao, or Venezuela under Maduro than we are to our Constitution. And he says Americans won't survive unless Republicans get serious and ruthless, as he says. Ruthless. Well, don't take the ruthless to mean anything violent, nothing like that. But certainly they're going to have to try harder. And here's what I really think we ought to do. We should challenge Democrats to debates one on one. And it doesn't matter who it is. It could be just, you know, their champion of the day, our champion of the day, and have some kind of a moderator who can stop the Democrat from interrupting because you know how that works, right? As soon as a conservative talks to any, any Republican, the, as soon as the Republican starts to answer the question, the Democrat will bark at them to stop them from answering and then ask another question. And then when they try to answer either one of those questions, the Democrat will bark and ask a third question to just keep, keep them from talking. They obviously know they don't have arguments, obviously, other words, otherwise they would lead with argument if they had one. So how do we get Democrats to be dumb enough to agree to debate with people who actually know what they're talking about? How do you do that? But that needs to be where this goes. It needs to go the direction of, let's put it under a microscope. Let's see who wins. Now when I heard that the Republicans didn't allow Vivek and Chris Christie to have their own little private debate, I said to myself, oh my God, we're fucked. You never tell anybody they can't debate anybody just because they're in your fucking club. Oh, such a mistake. I mean, the head of the RNC should just be fired for that alone. Yeah. I mean, literally, the Republicans are desperately trying to maintain freedom of speech. And the argument is that even though you can move your lips.