The Scott Adams School - 06/29/26 MONDAY With The Home Team

No.

Good morning, everybody.

Good morning.

Good morning. Happy June 29th in the year of our Lord of 2026. You guys, it's Monday again. How do the Mondays keep coming? Did everyone have a good—

Maybe we should just ban Mondays.

Right? And then have a 4-day week. So what would Monday be called? Nothing. It just ignored.

AI Day.

AI Day.

Just—

all right, I love Mondays.

Working for you?

Oh, I'm weird. I like Mondays.

I like Tuesday is my favorite.

I like all days, but my favorite, Thursday.

Thirsty Thursday, that's what we used to call it back in the club days, kids. It was Thirsty Thursday, and I was a bartender, and my hair was out to here, and the nickname for me was Harika, and You can just imagine one day.

What kind of hairspray did you use?

So it depended. I would use— does anyone remember the Aussie Sprunch spray? And then there was AquaNet, of course, but you had to use it with a blow dryer to like bake in the heat. But it was all in how you dried your hair and then teased it. And I want you to know, I never just did the front like you lame chicks just did your high bangs in the front. My whole head was like a helmet. I went the extra mile.

And how long does it take you to get ready?

Not long.

I had it down. I'm from Jersey. Okay.

But is that what that psychic does? The, um, what is her name?

But she's from Jersey. It's not— wasn't quite like a bouffant hairdo. It was more like—

she still does it.

Yeah, I'll bring pictures next time. It's amazing.

Big—

I want to bring big hair back. Oh yeah, I keep saying that I'm going to come on here one day as Haruka, but oh yeah, yeah, okay. That being said, I think that gave us enough time to get in here. I'm so discombobulated, I need some coffee. I know you do too.

I hope that you have made time for this most important, important, critical, really almost emergency simultaneous up. And it's gonna happen now because I think you need it. I think we all need it. There's nothing we need but a little bit of normal behavior amid all the craziness. And all you need to enjoy the simultaneous sip is a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen, jug or flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that will make everything better, including the coronavirus. We're gonna get this thing. Oh yeah, we're gonna get it. And when I say get it, I mean beat it, not necessarily get it, although you might get it and then you'll beat it too. Because if you've enjoyed the simultaneous sip, you're stronger than most people. You know it. Sip now.

Marcela, you were so obedient on that sip. He was like, sip now, and you're like, um, to answer SJV's question, um, I could not ride a motorcycle without a helmet even though my hair was like that, but I can ride a motorcycle because I have a motorcycle license and I have a little motorcycle. Okay, that was a little fun tidbit. Oh, all right, so we— you know what, you guys, look, look, look at this! Look who we have! Oh, why is that happening like that? Okay, here we go. Look who it is!

Can you see?

It's Gary and Roman! Oh, look at these precious babies! And they're in their, um, like, new home. Everything's good. They're with their little dog friends. Here, look at this one. This is Roman.

Oh, that's Roman.

Look at that face. So, and Gary, I told you, he's the one who's being a little mischievous lately, like, oh, furniture, I like it. There's Gary giving Roman a kiss.

Oh, doesn't look like a kiss to me.

It is. Okay, I have the scratches all over me to prove that those are kisses. So that was a little Gary and Roman update. They're doing very well, um, they're happy as little clams. Everything is great. So for those that were asking and wondering, I have more pictures of them too. I'll show you throughout the week. Male cats don't kiss? Well, let's, let's take a look because my little other animal clip of the day, which was too cute Marcella was talking about her kitties before the show and how like they like to dominate who's sitting where and who gets what spot and whatever. So apparently tigers are like, leave me alone, like I don't want to snuggle. I vibe with that. And lions are like, I need to like snuggle you, like the big male lions. So this is, this is real life happening. The tiger's like, "Get off of me!" And the lion's like, "But I love you." I want to have those cats. Look it.

So allegedly that's a sign of dominance when another cat kisses another cat. It's showing that I'm in charge.

So maybe that's why the tiger's like, "No, you're not." The tiger's like, "For the love of God, just Get away from me!

Yeah.

Aww, don't you just want to snuggle with them? Oh, so like in your face and space. Aww, I know, bless her souls.

I want a tiger.

I know, I want both.

You should have a tiger. California doesn't let me.

Well, probably for a good reason. All right, so yes, male cats, they do. Look at all the animal pictures. If you guys were on Locals, you would see animal pictures. Come on over to Locals, subscribe, join up. And thank you to everybody who has, uh, let me know that you've resubscribed or subscribed for the first time. Welcome over to the beloved family, we're happy you're there. You're at, or here, or wherever you are. And we still love everybody else just as much. YouTube and Spotify and X and Rumble. Um, so listen, I have a new hero. Do you guys have a new hero? Her name is Sophie Cunningham. All right, now all I can tell you, I can't tell you the name of her team.

Heat?

Wave? No, something. Spurs? I don't know, some basketball team. The only basketball player I knew the name of, female basketball player, is Caitlin Clark. And I only know her because she keeps getting the shit kicked out of her by the other teams, like literally, like physically hitting her, tripping her, choking her. Um, and you're just like, oh my God, like why is this allowed to go on? And now I know another player. Oh, the Fever. Fever, thank you. The Fever. Um, So now there was like an incident with Caitlin Clark where this chick on the other team like put like all this like pressure on her neck and like just, they just kept like doing like these hits against her. And her teammate Sophie, who is a badass, let me tell you what, I've watched a lot of Sophie. This is the point, the point, the point that was heard around the world. She's pointing at the chick that did it to her teammate and literally triggered the world with just pointing. Just pointing. She's like, nope, you, you, you, you, you. She didn't say one word.

I love her.

I love her.

It's like, uh, basketball reality TV.

I so vibe with this chick, like, you have no idea. Owen, have you ever been pointed at, at like that at you from a female?

I can't say that I have. No, not like that.

I'm a pointer. Um, I think everybody should start pointing, like, use this finger instead of the other one from now on. Um, did you— did you guys love this moment?

I thought they were gonna get in a fight. I was like, oh, because once you point, you know, the other person's gonna go—

well, yeah, apparently, apparently I think Sophie like pointed at the chick that did it, and then the chick was like, don't you point at me. And she's like, that's all I had to hear. And I was like— she's like, I didn't say one word, I just started pointing. And I was like, oh my God. So I've seen so many clips Sophie Cunningham now, that she's just like, she's hysterical, she's tough, she's, you know, a great player. Um, so now congratulations to the WNBA. I only know two players and they're both white chicks and they're amazing. So yay team! That's what you get for beating up the white chicks. Now I know the white chicks. Um, I— and yes, I'm saying that because it is obviously what's happening over there. Yeah, it is a racial thing, and I'll say it, Cam, I'm saying it. There you go. I said it. Um, so Owen, did you not see that or did you see it?

I think I saw the clips go by in my feed. I don't really pay much attention to the WNBA at all. Just seems kind of like drama for no reason. And maybe it is for a reason. Maybe they're doing it on purpose to get people to pay attention to it. But I can't name a single WNBA team. I have no idea who won any year in the past. Yeah, I do know the name Caitlin Clark just because she makes the news so often, but that's it.

And she's amazing, apparently.

Like, literally, she's a really great basketball player. So is Sophie. So yeah, it's very— they're good. That's why they beat them up, not because generally there's other white players there, but they're really good.

Well, yeah, but there, there has been a lot of like racism talk like for the last like couple years that this has been going on, um, with the players. And it's really, uh, it's a shame because She is a generational talent, and like, let her do her thing. And she's bringing all this attention to basketball because literally I would never utter anything about basketball if it wasn't for Caitlin Clark. And now Sophie, my hero Sophie. Um, they jealous. I see you guys in the chat. So anyway, that was Sophie. And my other fun little tidbit, you know me, I'm just trying to get through my clips so we can get to the news for you guys. Um, so that was like the big point over the weekend. But then I've seen this clip before, and it's just worth showing again because I've been seeing Angela Davis around lately. Um, if you don't know her, you'll meet her now. But I just find her reaction— she's a Black activist, um, is she a professor? Uh, we'll figure it out in a second. But anyway, she finds out from like 23andMe or ancestry.com or something that she is part of the first group of people that came over on the Mayflower, which immediately makes her realize she has white people in her family and she cannot— it's too, it's too much. It's too much to know that and that they were slave owners. So I just call this like the racist giggle of the week.

Any idea what you're looking at? That is a list of the passengers on the Mayflower.

No!

I can't believe this.

No, my ancestors did not come here on the Mayflower.

Your ancestors came on the Mayflower? You are descended from one of the 101 people who sailed on the Mayflower? Oof, that's a little bit too much to deal—

So that woman's name is Angela Davis. She is one of the most anti-white and pro-reparations leaders in America.

Not only does she just learn that her ancestor were colonizers, but she later found out that they were also slave owners. You can't pick and choose your bloodline, Angela, and 23andMe says it's time for you to pay up.

I love that. It just made me giggle, and I was just like, you know what, so don't tell me, you know, who, who's racist and who isn't. I mean, her reaction to hearing that was like, like, like she just got like a cancer diagnosis. You're like, no, 'Angela, relax. It's gonna be okay.' So I just love that. And also another reason I won't ever do 23andMe and ancestry.com. I might find out things that I don't want to know.

It's quite ironic. I think it— to me, it raises the obvious point that you can't be responsible for what your ancestors did. That just doesn't make any sense, right?

It's so stupid. Um, yes, I would be proud too, Marcella. I'd be like, 'Oh my God, that's amazing that my family came here on the Mayflower.' pretty cool. Did you guys ever do those DNA things?

No, I wish, I wish I could have convinced my siblings not to do it because I think some of them have. So I'm probably mostly in there just through that relationship, but I've never done it. I think the Army might have taken my DNA at one point, so there may be some somewhere, but I did read that there's some way to tell them to destroy it, so I might do that at some point.

Oh, interesting. Yeah, well, did you guys ever see that— if you guys can, I am so bad with my recall, but there was a documentary about this kid. He was kind of like special, but there was like, I think he lived like on a, like a farmy rural area and they like went into like his DNA and like took a piece out and then framed him for this murder that he didn't commit. And I was like, I'm telling you, do not hand over your DNA willingly because you just do not know what could happen. Someone's going to know the documentary I'm talking about. Yes, farmy chunks. I said farmy. So yeah, I, um, I never did it. Um, I just, yeah, I just didn't want to do it. Um, did you guys find out anything interesting? You're not German at all. Is that good or bad? You're curious. Yeah, I'm looking at your comments. Your sister's Irish. I mean, how about you find out like, oh wait, mine is different than yours. Uh-oh. And you find out like, people have found out about whole other families and like that their dad or mom had an affair and there's like this whole other set of people. It could be sketchy.

This is how they found out that killer in, in the Northern California Golden Killer, or whatever it's called, um, he ended up killing many— like serial killer, he ended up killing lots of people. But the way they figured out— it had been a cold case for a long time— is that his relatives started getting DNA tests, and that's how they—

and he was busted.

Yeah, his daughter had a DNA test. And then he was busted. Golden State Killer, there you go.

Uh, I haven't seen the one I'm looking for yet, but if anyone knows about the farmy kid who is special that they frame, let me know. Okay, um, ah, okay, sorry, I was reading your comments, I get excited. Okay, so, um, oh, one thing I want to do before I turn over to Bridget Gabriel, I want to show you guys a clip of Bridget Gabriel. Is the last week— I feel like I'm cleaning up clips from last week that I wanted to show you guys. Um, this is David Freeberg from the All In podcast, one of our favorite podcasts. I definitely recommend you guys if you're like, oh, I'm looking for a podcast to watch, it's great. It's called All In and, um, they give great information. Like, what would you say, you guys, about like tech and finance and Silicon Valley?

They're mostly venture capitalist tech billionaire types. I don't know if they're all billionaires, but they're really close. And, uh, you know, it has David Sachs, Jason Calzanes, who apparently was a listener and a beloved in Scott Adams community. And, um, Chamath, and, uh, I forget the fourth one.

David Friedberg. Oh, David Sachs. Um, David Sachs works for Trump. And, um, no comment on what Owen just said about J-Cal. We have very different opinions on that. I hate to break it. And he's the only one that's not a billionaire, just saying.

I don't agree with a lot of his political viewpoints, certainly. And he seems almost like the foil on that show where, like, everyone else is conservative and he's the, you know, the one liberal trying to, like, give the other point of view. And but, you know, he did follow Scott and he was apparently in the community at some point where he would watch the show regularly.

Little behind the curtain, as Scott would say, J. Cal and I had some words with each other and we were very much on the opposite side of something pertaining to Scott, to the point of like being nauseous after Scott passed. So anyway, but I do technically like J-Cal and he is— I mean, the Democrats have gone so frickin crazy that, you know, he— nobody's defending them anymore or trying to say that they're still one. But David Freeberg just made a great, um, observation. And here's a clip from last week that went around.

The Politburo is the leaders who elect themselves to dictate the flow of the economy, the allocation of capital, what work individual they're allowed to do, and what, what activities they're allowed to do in an unfree society, which is what they're creating. They are the true oligarchs. And this is Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna. This is the, uh, the group that is trying to coalesce power and create for themselves a system whereby they have greater influence, greater control over aspects of the economy. They want to seize the means of production. They want to control education. They want to control media. And anytime there's an effort by an individual enterprise or an individual themselves to go out and build a business and succeed and do something that's outside of their scope and their span of control, they lose their fucking minds over it. And that's what we're seeing. So I react to their tweeting and their bullshit where they're basically trying to contort things about inequality and fairness and justice when the truth is they are the rising empire, the evil empire in Star Wars. They are the folks who want to take from all of us what we were endowed with when this nation was started and what many people came to this country for, which is individual freedom and liberty. The ability to build a business in peace, the ability to make decisions, to do what you want with your own assets, and to have functionally private property. And they're taking it all away, and they're trying to take it all away. And we're watching piece by piece, step by step. So they are forming a Politburo where they can effectively control the economy, control education, control the media, and tell us all what we can and can't do and say. And it's frustrating to me to watch it because it's masqueraded as bullshit virtue, as justice, as equity. It's a bunch of nonsense words that they use to try and make themselves seem virtuous when in the end of the day they are fundamentally evil.

And he does not normally get heated like that, so you could just feel his passion in that. And I think that's why J. Cal was like, hmm, you know, like he was like shook. Um, Owen, I mean Marcella, we both agree fully with what he's saying. Uh, Marcella, why don't you give me your take on that?

I just love the fact that he, that he expresses this, uh, very well, you know. Um, I, I agree with him 100%, but, um, when we are finished with this, can we talk about the Supreme Court just came out with one of the major cases?

I—

so we'll get there, Marcela, we'll get there.

That's why I was focused on— sorry.

Okay, no, go ahead, Owen, take your take.

Well, I, I agree with them, and I think we need to fight all the communists and socialist things that are taking root here. I, I think it is something that is contrary to American values and contrary to American culture and just really important to what makes America great. And, um, I think we've gone way too far already with socialism, with all the welfare and social programs. And I don't necessarily think we need to go to zero, but I think we need to at least stop where we are and say, you know, let's not do more because government, the more they get involved in things, the worse things get and the more they mismanage the assets that they have and that they take from everyone. And I'd certainly like to see a lot less spending and a lot less control, especially at the federal government level, but even at the state levels. It's already too much. And I think the Democrat Party is just getting more and more radical with their views on these things where they used to hide these things. They used to try to slip them through without people noticing. Now, they're right out there saying, and we want to do all these blatantly communist and socialist things. We want to freeze rents. We want to have government grocery stores. I mean, it's like, let's become Cuba is kind of the message. It's like just so ridiculous, but at the same time scary. And I think we should be fighting it everywhere we can.

I agree. I think it is scary. And you're right, it is so blatant now. Like, so AOC used to seem scary. Now she's like moderate. Mondani is like— Mondani is, as everybody's saying, he's the talent. I mean, AOC, you know, yeah, she had talent, but now he's like leveling up big time. And the people love him. They love him. I mean, look at the people he endorsed that got in in New York now that are full-blown Marxists. Oh my God, I don't even want to know this one woman's name, but she basically wants to dismantle America. She just got in, in office. She wants to dismantle America, the way, our way of life. And she said she uses the American flag as a napkin. How is this allowed? How is this allowed? I, it's really, you know, I don't know. Like that's, I think that's why I keep harping on things, you guys, like Islam and socialism and blah, blah, blah. Because as you can see, it's kind of all over the news now. These things that we've been talking about have really been pushed to the forefront because it started as a slow-moving disaster for most people. I've been watching it since 9/11 and watching it build and build and build and build. And the train has left the station so long ago where we now have a takeover happening. And because you don't see it in your town or your city does not mean it's not happening. And I'm going to really encourage you guys, please follow Amy Mek, M-E-K, Amy Mek on X. Okay. I've been following her for years. Just scroll her timeline for 10 minutes and just, you know, get involved with that. So please, please check her out. So that being said, Marcella, you're going to have 5 more minutes to check out what's going on with the Supreme Court because I want to just get through this whole thing first and then we'll come to you at the Supreme Court. But when I first found Bridget Gabriel, It was from this clip that I'm going to play for you. Gosh, this must— this is like, I think Obama might have been president when I saw this. So I just want you guys— what the mech— I just want you guys to see, um, just how succinctly she gives you this information. Okay, this is about 5 minutes, and then I'm going to show you one other thing after, and then we're going to get to Iran and the Supreme Court. Okay, let's take a listen.

To you all, my name is Saba Ahmed. I'm a law student at American University. I am here to ask you a simple question. I know that we portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there is 1.8 billion Muslim followers of Islam. We have 8 million-plus Muslim Americans in this country, and I don't see them represented here. But my question is, how can we fight an ideological war with weapons How can we ever end this war? The jihadist ideology that you talk about, it's an ideology. How can you ever win this thing if you don't address it ideologically?

Great question. I am so glad you're here, and I am so glad you brought that up because it gives us an opportunity to answer. What I find so amazing is since the beginning of this panel, which we are here about Benghazi attack against our people, Not one person mentioned Muslims. We are here against Islam, or we're launching war against Muslims. We are here to discuss how 4 Americans died and what our government is doing. We were not here to bash Muslims. You were the one who brought up the issue about most Muslims, not us. And since you brought it up, allow me to elaborate with my answer. There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today. Of course not all of them are radicals. The majority of them are peaceful peaceful people. The radicals are estimated to be between 15 to 25%, according to all intelligence services around the world. That leaves 75% of them peaceful people. But when you look at 15 to 25% of the world Muslim population, you're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. That is as big as the United States. So why should we worry about the radicals, 15 to 25%? Because it is the radicals that kill, because it is the radicals that behead and massacre. When you look throughout history, when you look at all the lessons of history, most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda, and as a result, 60 million people died, almost a 14 million in concentration camps, 6 million were Jews. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. When you look at Russia, most Russians were peaceful as well, yet the Russians were able to kill 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. When you look at China, for example, most Chinese were peaceful as well, yet the Chinese were able to kill 70 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. Irrelevant. When you look at Japan prior to World War II, most Japanese were peaceful as well. Yet Japan was able to butcher its way across Southeast Asia, killing 12 million people, mostly killed with bayonets and shovels. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. On September 11th in the United States, we had 2.3 million Arab Muslims living in the United States. It took 19 hijackers, 19 radicals to bring America down to its knees, destroy the World Trade Center, attack the Pentagon, and kill almost 3,000 Americans that day. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. So for all our powers of reasons and us talking about moderate and peaceful Muslims, I'm glad you're here, but where are the others speaking out? And since you are the only Muslim representative— Thank you. And since you are the only Muslim representative in here, you took the limelight instead of speaking about about why our government— and I assume, are you an American? You're an American citizen. So as an American citizen, you sat in this room and instead of standing up and saying a question or asking something about our 4 Americans that died and what our government is doing to correct the problem, you stood there to make a point about peaceful moderate Muslims. I wish you brought 10 with you to question about what— how we can hold our government responsible. It is time We take political correctness and throw it in the garbage where it belongs and stop calling it safe space.

And there will be refreshments afterwards. Did you want to respond to the— you had a follow-up that you'd— go ahead, go ahead.

Comment. Thank you for your responses, and I do really hope that other Muslims will start showing up at these conservative forums. But, you know, as a peaceful American Muslim, I would like to think that I'm not that irrelevant. I'm just as much an American, and I'm very deeply saddened about the lives that were lost lost in Libya, and I hope that we will find justice for their families. And but I, I don't think that this war can ever be won by just the military. You have to address them. You have to bring Muslims to the table to address this.

I think everyone agrees that it can't be won just militarily, and I think that everyone has said that. You tell me who the head of the, uh—

okay, um, that's just such an amazing clip. And you know what, I, I'm like remembering that. So back with the whole Benghazi time, which was horrible. I remember watching this clip and it resonating so deeply with me. And I feel like that was one of the first times where I was like, yeah, forget the political correctness. Not that I was ever really a rule follower, but I was just like, say your say, call it out for what it is. And here we are today in 2026, still saying, you guys, don't be afraid to be called a name. It's just a name someone's calling you. The thing at stake is so much bigger. Um, I, I just— she's so effective and she's so right. The peaceful majority does not matter when you have the insanity of these people that just want you dead. Did you ever see that before, Owen?

No, I hadn't seen that clip before, but it's a great—

what's your impression? Yeah, it's great.

Well, I mean, I, I think it's still relevant today, and I think, um, you know, I'd love to see more peaceful solutions, more engagement on, you know, with peaceful Muslims to try and eliminate the radical parts. Um, I can't say that it seems like we're making any progress there. I think if anything, it's going the other way. Um, but I mean, we have made progress in some areas. Like, there are several of the, you know, Arab nations that signed the Abraham Accords, and so there have been some significant wins. But I think I think overall it seems like we still have a lot of people who just want to kill us and want to destroy our country. And a lot of them are even here and getting into office and things like that. And so I think we still have a big battle ahead of us. And I'm not recommending military action or vigilante action or any of that stuff, but I'm saying there is still a significant threat that we're dealing with and we need to take it seriously.

Well, so that brings me to this. This will probably be my last clip and then I can hang out in the chat and let Marcella go to town. Um, but so this, this just sickens me. And, and I'm not even singling out Governor Abbott of Texas because this is going on in so many states— my state of New Jersey, Michigan, Minnesota, um, name them all. Like, we're, we're really having quite the takeover. But tell me, tell me, tell me at the end what you think about this. Ready?

Well, in part by that statement, but also in part by information that we've gathered there appear to be multiple violations that have taken place here. One is information has been provided to investors that appears to be misleading. Another is they appear to be in violation of fair housing laws. Also, we found that, you know, they talk about doing all this building, but they don't have any building permits to actually do any building, and they have challenges even getting those building permits. Believe this or not, We've even received information that they may have been conducting a funeral home without legal authority. Bottom line, Laura, is that there are so many questions arose, especially information that we received, that led us to need to call the elite Texas Rangers to conduct a criminal investigation to find out if criminal laws in Texas have been violated.

Hello? Like, what the hell is going on? This guy— let me calm down. This guy is so out of control. You're the governor. I know about what's going on in Texas. I think a lot of you listening know what's going on in Texas. I mean, how the heck did that whole epicenter get built? Like, the first part of it and what they're doing and what their plans are. Like, if any one of you try to put like a new roof on or like, you know, fix something in your house, someone's gonna knock on your door and be like, where are your permits? Um, a funeral home? What are we talking about here? So, uh, this enrages me. Um, besides the Sharia law that they're all trying to have passed so they can beat up their wives and rape young women and all the other BS, like, how— I, I don't know. I Marcella, I'm not trying to bother you because I know you're reading the stuff. So I'm— Owen, I'm coming to you again. So, you know, how does this— how is Governor Abbott not culpable in this?

I don't know.

I mean, it's hard to know what he knew, when he knew it, all that stuff. I think I'm glad he's trying to take action on it and do something about it. I tend to think this did slip in under the radar somehow because, you know, when we started hearing about it, it seemed like it was already pretty advanced in the planning stages, at least. And it looked like it was in the context of Texas trying to put a stop to it. So, um, you know, it may have been like he said that they put misleading things in their materials or in their documents so that it didn't seem like what it was, um, and that may have been how they got away with it for some period of time. But, um, you know, I certainly think he has responsibility to protect the state and to do what's necessary to prevent, uh, things that are clearly illegal and harmful to the state from happening.

Um, I keep trying to find out, uh, by asking people that I know that are connected to the administration, what are we doing about these people that have taken over? Are they leaving? Are they— is there a plan? Is there going to be what, what do you call it, like a reverse, uh, when you get them out? I can't get an answer. I mean, I can hear about, you know, the Haitians and, you know, things like that. But what about Islam? Why are we building all these mosques while churches burn? Why is the call to prayer being played out loud? Why are they kneeling and praying in the middle of intersections and streets and at schools and in front of synagogues? And, you know, what, like, why?

Why?

And I can't get an answer. So if anyone can find information for me Could you DM it to me? Direct message me. I want to know what they're doing about this and, and how is it legal? I mean, we're a Christian-based country. Our Constitution, our entire country was built on Christian values. So how are we having the call to prayer 5 times a day blasting through neighborhoods? I just need answers. I really need answers, and I haven't been able to get any. So if anyone has any idea, please let me know. Send it to me. I want to see what's happening. Yeah, I don't want to become the UK. Um, it's pretty scary. So Owen, do you have anything to add to this?

Um, I mean, I think I kind of covered my perspective on it. I think it's— it is an important thing to look out for, and I think in the hot spots where we there are these really divergent sort of communities where they're trying to put together their own laws and their own culture that's totally different than what American culture is, I think we should crack down on it. I think that's true for Dearborn, Michigan. I think that's true for the Minneapolis stuff that's going on with the Somalis. And I think that's true here in Texas. So, you know, it's, it's a big threat. And I think we need to treat it seriously, just like I said earlier.

I wish I had this other clip I saw of a police chief, and now I can't remember what area this was in, but he's up there reciting things from the Quran and he is like literally speaking in Arabic. He's, he's like a, a Texan. Let's say it's in Texas. I can't remember where. It might be Dearborn, actually. And he's saying how he wants more uh, Muslims on the, um, police force, and that there's already like 45% of them are, and he's trying to bring more on. And we all know that they all turn a blind eye to this stuff, so they're not going to enforce a law. But when we had Brandon Darby here— by the way, Brandon Darby, amazing— you know, one of his solutions was like, you have to let law enforcement do their job, but but you're— they're not going to be able to if they're of the same ideology. So it's, um, it's a problem. I'm really upset, you guys. So anyway, I don't want to be Debbie Downer. So, um, instead of being a Debbie Downer, let me have a little, a little, uh, interstitial sip with just a cute clip, and then we're going to go to Marcella so we can like change the whole dynamic. But, um, let's just have a little FIFA moment, and then Marcella is going to update us. Come on, people, here we go. The, the world showed up on Friday with I love that they're calling it the Great American Sleepover, and it's so sweet, everybody getting along and being happy. I love it. And I love them being obsessed over our food. I'm like, yeah, look at us, we're all like huge and everybody's on Ozempic. Because we eat like we do. Look at the cops, they're all dancing. Hey! And then I heard like a couple people saying, if I had to choose now from going on my vacation to Europe or to America, it's America 100% every time, all day. I'm like, let's go! They were like, I can't believe this place is real. I love it. It starts to repeat a little bit now. Oh, I just love it. Okay, I needed that break. I needed that break. Okay, Marcella, if I had a drum roll, I'd be playing it for you. What do we know from Scott Adams?

So the first thing is they didn't come out with Trumpy Barbara, which was the birthright citizenship. So they're gonna announce when that will be. They always leave the most controversial case to the very end, um, so they have probably their airplanes ready to go and be off term before, you know, it, it gets out. I, I don't know why they do that, um, but I remember with Dobbs, uh, when they overturned Roe v. Wade, they, um, or the Roe v. Wade type of cases they had it released. Well, it got released a little bit before that, uh, leaked, but they released it at the end. So they did come out with like interesting, um, cases. Uh, today it's Watson v. RNC was one of the big ones, was regarding the ballot, uh, the voting day, whether you can count ballots, uh, if you receive them within 5 days. That was Mississippi law, I believe, and basically they ruled for Mississippi. They ruled that you can count ballots after 5 days, and how that comes about is they didn't rule on the actual state law. They ruled that the federal Election Day statutes, federal election law, does not preempt state law which is, you know, it is what it is. That's what the ruling says. Um, allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day and received within 5 days to be counted. This is a win for the left, a win for, uh, you know, questionable voting, uh, practices by California, by every other state that does it. Um, and so who went against the conservative sort of Federalist idea was Justice Barrett was the one that wrote the opinion. And Chief Justice Roberts was also on the side of the three, the three Amigas. And basically they ruled for the left. There was also another ruling, Trump v. Cook, which if you remembered, he tried to fire the, um, the federal, uh, somebody on the, on the federal, um, how do you say it, Lisa Cook was on the Federal Reserve and he tried to fire her. I don't know if you remember that. And then she said, no, you can't fire me. And so she never left. Um, so the Supreme Court sides with her, says that you can't do that. Um, that if you do do that, you have to have cause. He thought he had cause because he, uh, was pointing— by he, I mean President Trump— was pointing to the, um, the mortgage fraud that I think Bill Pulte tried to find on her. But the thing is with that, you have to actually— what they say is that if there is cause, just like fraud is, there has to be a judicial review. It can't just be you think there's fraud and that's enough. Um, there has to actually be a review. And the reason why is that the Federal Reserve, they see it as its own independent, um, quasi-government, quasi-private institution. That's what they claim. And then because the next one, um, is Trumpy Slaughter, um, which is indicating that Trump can fire anyone in the, in the executive branch, which in this case was the FTC. He can fire anyone without cause.. And then you think, okay, he can't fire Lisa Cook with without cause. And so what they, what they differentiate is that they see the Federal Reserve is different than, than all the other agencies that are created under the executive branch. So the other agencies that are created under executive branch that have executive, uh, you know, you executive theory that they are fully controlled by the president, then he doesn't need to have any cause, which is great because he's, um, great for Trump because he has fired many, many, many federal, uh, employees, uh, in the executive branch.

Marcela, the, the group has a question about the, the ballots. Is, do they, can they, can be counted 5 days after, but do they need to be postmarked election day?

So the Supreme Court did not make a ruling on the actual, like, specific laws in each state. Um, what it actually is worse than you think, because the law that they were dealing with is Mississippi, right? And in Mississippi, their law says you can count a ballot 5 days after. But what they're saying is— the Supreme Court saying is any law that is statewide in California, New Jersey, wherever it is, we're gonna let it— whatever it says, we're gonna okay it because federal law does not preempt that law. Federal— the federal election law. So it kind of makes it really bad because it means any state can create a law which can say I can count ballots 30 days later, and as long as all of the states state votes on it, then under this ruling, that's okay. Because what the ruling was is Federal Election Day doesn't preempt any state law. So you could have New Jersey create a new law that says, yes, 4200 years later, we can—

this is crazy.

Yeah, it's very crazy, but I'm not surprised Chief Justice Roberts is on this side of the aisle. He's always been very controversial. He's the one that voted for— voted and wrote the opinion on Obamacare as a tax, but it was never a tax. But anyways, I can go on. But basically, it's kind of worse than you'd think because the Mississippi law at least has 5 days which is a low amount of days, but other states could have quite a more days than that.

They can do whatever they want, apparently.

Yeah.

Um, Montreal Galaxy wanted me to ask you about Alito's dissent.

So Alito dissented on— and in which one?

Watson v. RNC, I'm guessing?

Yeah. Um, so Watson, he, he said, in today's decision creates a serious risk— this is Alito speaking in his dissent— of further undermining public confidence in our election and our system of self-government. Um, it is undeniable that prohibition, prohibition on counting late-arriving ballots would provide an additional hurdle for bad actors seeking to stuff ballot boxes when early election results suggest a tight race. The majority incorrectly removes the safeguard from federal law. Today's decision is inconsistent with the terms of the Election Day statutes, contemporary election law principles, two centuries of historical practice, and the case law on the question presented. So basically, um, he respectfully dissents, but this is a huge issue. Now I have to say that if that's another thing to win midterms for, is that you can actually create another law in the federal government regarding elections.

Um, just to clarify, this is all elections or just state elections?

This is all elections.

That's what I thought. Um, amazing, great.

I mean, the, the question was regarding, uh, elections where, like, um, for November we have federal— we're electing federal, uh, Congress midterms, you know, we're electing senators, congressmen, and then you have your state candidates for governor, for mayor, whatever it is. But what it was saying in the Mississippi law was like, oh, we can— when we have those type of quasi-federal elections, we can still make our own law saying that we can count these votes 5 days after. And then what the RNC was saying is you can't do that because the federal election law Federal Election Day statute says you can't count beyond that. And they cited somehow with it. I mean, I would have to read the entire, but to me it doesn't make legal sense. And I think that's why Alito's talking about 200 years of the law being the opposite. I always, you know, one of the things that you learn when you're a law student, one of the first things is that you're always told federal law preempts state law. Law. And then this case, it doesn't. So I would like to see what it is.

Well, I can understand some argument about state law preempting federal law in this case, just because the Constitution specifically says the election procedures are to be decided by the state legislatures. So it seems like a power that was specifically given to the states. So I can understand that part of it. However, I think the Constitution also says we're gonna have an election day, not an election month. Yeah, like, like, it doesn't make sense that you can say, well, we're gonna pay attention to that part of the law in the Constitution but not this other part, because it seems like you'd have to be able to— you'd have to say that one part of the Constitution conflicts or contradicts the other. I mean, if you have an election day and it's supposed to be, you know, the first Tuesday or whatever, you know, in November, like like, that's what it should be.

Yeah.

And, and you can't say that states can just ignore that part of the Constitution.

Is— this is really, um, this is really a shame. I don't understand why we wouldn't all have the same, the same way to vote. Like, make it a universal thing. You vote on Election Day. All the calendars I've ever had my entire life say Election Day, and, um, everybody knows it's coming. You have 364 days to prepare for that one day. Uh, so this is, um, this is really a shame. This is a— this is bad. I feel like this is bad. It's sad. Um, it's irresponsible, and it does not make anybody feel better at all about how we vote. And is— I mean, is California still counting votes? I have no idea, but Maybe it's sick.

The other bad situation that happened is it's sort of good for Trumpy Slaughter, is really good for Trump and for any, I guess, any chief executive that comes in because he won't be the last president because he can, you know, take care of business and figure out who to remove. But the— but it's sort of a bad day for him because the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal for his jury verdict., with, uh, writer, the famed writer E.G. Carroll. So he has that $5 million judgment against him, and I guess they're, you know, this was the last appeal, so now he owes her those $5 million.

Oh my God, I am just not excited. I am.

But you know what, I have to say, um, Owen kind of looked at the law in the right way. Under Watson v. RNC, it does allow, you know, the Constitution does allow the states to kind of figure it out on their own. It doesn't mean that in your state you can't vote for laws that don't allow for this, you know.

So, um, I agree with you, Mark 716. Under that premise, early voting should not be allowed. Counting after would be admissible if the item was postmarked, but the whole mail-in is the problem. The federal government should require require chain of custody. Yeah, I mean, what are we doing?

This is— I—

this is, um, I don't know. I mean, can this be— no, you can't appeal this.

The election system just keeps— seems to keep eroding. Just, it gets less and less secure, less and less trustworthy. Yeah, you've got all these voting machines that are full of vulnerabilities. You've got all this universal mail-in balloting that clearly has major weaknesses to of it. And I don't know why anyone should trust our elections when it's like this, and when you have a Supreme Court that won't even stand up for election integrity. It's just sad. I, I mean, it— you need to have elections people trust. You need to have elections people actually believe, yes, that's the person who won. And this decision, but also a lot of other changes that have happened, many of which were illegal when they were done, they just make it so that nobody can really trust what's going on. And it makes it super easy to cheat at scale. And whether or not it's happening in any specific instance is another question. But it's about being able to actually trust and believe in the elections and that we actually are represented by the people we chose. And at this point, it's kind of hard to really put a lot of trust into that.

Mm-hmm.

Well, this is a bummer.

You know what, in a way it's a great thing that this happened because it does give a lot of state rights to states compared to the federal government. And sometimes that's better than— yes, there has to be, like, I agree with Owen 100%, there has to be integrity in the voting system and all that, but that's for Congress and the Senate, uh, the Senate and the House to decide that. And and also our states to decide that, to create laws. Because the Supreme Court's not there to create laws, they're there to interpret the law. So we should not be looking towards the Supreme Court to make this—

I don't think we are—

be our answer.

I think what I'm saying is they interpreted the law wrong.

I agree.

I actually think when you brought that up, that, that, that's what the Constitution said I think that the part about the states—

the part about the states, I, I agree. Yes, that— and I think that's probably what they relied on. But again, I, I don't have a constitution in front of me, but I'm pretty sure it says we're going to have one Election Day. We're going to have an election day. And that's where they should be interpreting that to say, no, we meant a day. We didn't mean a month. We didn't mean that you can just keep counting for as long as you want and keep accepting ballots after the fact and find all these ballots and all this stuff, that there, there should be something that says it should happen on Election Day. And the, the way the system has changed, especially recently, has been to just weaken a lot of these safeguards that, you know, they, they probably weren't all that strong to begin with, but they've gotten much worse with all these changes that have been made, with all this massive mail-in balloting and, you know, the, the fact that states aren't really following even their own procedures in terms of things like signature verification. And there's so many vulnerabilities now that it's just— and, and I think the Supreme Court has just fallen down on the job. They haven't done what they're supposed to do. So going back to what Owen said to you about— yeah, go ahead.

The— there is no such thing as Federal Election Day in the U.S. Constitution. That was, uh, Congress established the current federal Election Day, uh, by Statute 1845 USC Section, uh, Statute 7, Section 7.

Does the Constitution say anything about the election?

The Constitution, Article 1, Section 4 grants state primary authority over times, place, and manner of congressional elections, like you did say, while allowing Congress to override by law. How, again, it's Congress that would have to override that. Um, but they did it. The federal election day, like you were saying, is not in the U.S. Constitution.

Okay, but if you say— if you just said that it allows Congress to override things, and they did, right? You just said they did.

So they did in a way, but the— that statute, I guess they didn't see it, as, as meaning more than the Constitution. From— I, I have not read the full case, it's like hundreds of pages, but I'm guessing they went with Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution.

So what about what we've been doing our whole lives here? Like, we've always voted with Election Day until a decade ago.

It just— like, the, the whole system, and the reason our system has worked for so long, is because of— it has a lot of checks and balances to make sure that if someone's doing something wrong, someone else can override it, or someone can check it to make sure that it was being done right. And I think this is a case where that's not happening. And it got worse even in the, in the 2020 election when— or following the 2020 election when Congress basically said, we can't let this Pence thing happen again, so we're just going to make it so that you have to automatically accept all the votes from the states. Which means there is no check on it anymore. Like, whatever the state says is just blindly accepted. And so there is no check or balance on it anymore. A state can probably blatantly say, you know, haha, we're cheating, we're just going to give you this result that you didn't think was right, and there would be nothing that the federal government could do about it.

And the three of us live in the three very corrupt states, so like, to be like, oh, states' rights, yeah, Where do you live? Anyway, so it's time to move. That's what it is. I am very much looking forward to that.

Look to Alaska.

Right. It's Jim Courtney. I am very much looking forward to hearing Stephen Miller today. I'm sure he'll be on a bender. So anyway, you guys, thank you so much for being here today. We'll have more on this tomorrow as the day goes on and we learn more and what's going to happen. Um, but it's bullshit. Um, anyway, so I am going to play out with a song, um, from Scott Adams, Use Your Despair. It starts off with use your despair. It's what I'm choosing for today. So, and you don't have to stay, or you can stay, but we will be back tomorrow. Um, Owen and Marcella, thank you so much for today's show. Thank you guys for being here. And as always, we thank Scott Adams and Shelley for allowing this show to go on. We miss you both so much. And let's have a closing sip to our beloved Scott. To Scott.

To Scott.

Okay, Akira the Don, we're going in with Use Your Despair.

Here's some more. Use your despair to find freedom. Use your despair to find freedom. Use your sadness, loneliness, depression and despair to buy your freedom. Do you know how to do that? And by the way, freedom feels really good. Here's how. Do you remember that day you were lonely and sad and neurotic and anxious and depressed and every other bad feeling in the world? And if only you could talk to that guy or that girl, the person of your affection. If you feel like you're gonna die anyway, just do it. You're free. Go up to that person that you think is gonna turn you down, and guess what? They probably will. Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Everybody's failing all over the world all the time. Go up to that person and say to yourself before you walk up. My whole life is garbage right now. I'm sad, I'm lonely, I'm neurotic. Let's mix it up a little bit. Let's shake the box. Let's just see what happens. Leave your box, walk directly up to that person that is way better than you in your broken mind— they're not way better than you, but you think they are— to say, you know, I just wondered if you'd like to go out to dinner with me. I think it'd be fun. Use your despair to find freedom. Use your despair to find Freedom. Use your sadness, loneliness, depression, and despair to buy your freedom. To buy your freedom. Scott Adams. Well, let me tell you a story that happened just like that. I'm divert—

gonna divert a little bit.

Years ago when I was single, I lived in San Francisco, had no social life whatsoever, no game. It was before online dating. I mean, meeting somebody was really, really very hard pre-internet. And I joined a group called the Spinsters. Uh, well, I didn't join them, I went to an event that they had. Spinsters were young women who were single, and they had an ironic name. And they would have these big parties, and they would invite men, and it was just basically a way to meet people. So I went to one of these events with my friend friend Josh. And we walked in and we looked around and we said to ourselves, hmm, not exactly the most attractive room. I don't want to be unkind, but it wasn't exactly what we were hoping for, with one exception. Across the room there was one unusually attractive woman, and she sort of stood out as the most attractive woman in the entire place. And so I said to my friend, "Well, this is a disaster. We wasted our night. I'm just gonna go over to the most attractive woman in the room. I'll flame out in about a second and a half, and then we'll be done, and we just go home." So I walked directly up to the most attractive woman in the room. And she was my girlfriend for 11 months. Use your despair to find freedom. Use your despair to find freedom. Use your madness, loneliness, Depression and despair to buy your freedom. To buy your freedom. If you had asked me what were my odds, I would have said pretty close to zero. Pretty close to zero. And it turns out that other people were intimidated and didn't talk to her. Why was I able to walk up to someone that I could normally not walk up to? It's because I'd given up. I had absolutely given up. There was nothing for me here. I just said, "Well, doesn't matter. I don't know her. If she turns me down, nothing lost." The moment you realize that your despair is your freedom—

You're free.

You're free.

I love that. That was like the perfect song for today. I love that.

Um, use your despair.

Yeah, use your despair to gain your freedom. And I, I love that. I think I'm going to play that every time I'm like, wah wah. Do you like my finger pointing at the dummy. Hey dummy! Hey you dummy! Um, okay, anyway, you guys, so love you so much. Thank you for being here, and we will be back tomorrow. So have a great rest of your day. We love you guys so much.

Bye guys!