Do they really do good morning everybody and walk out into the highlight of human civilization. It's called coffee was gone atoms because there's coffee in theirs me and if you'd like yours,. Parents to go up, the levels are nobody's ever heard of. Everybody is talking about how great that it would be if you. and all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass of tanker, chelsea style, Kim team, jug or flask of a vessel have a leak or you and fill it with your favorite liquid, coffee and enjoy me now for the unparalleled pleasure or the doping day. That makes everything better is cold. The saudi leadership go so comment here. Let me let me go back there.

Was it mid sept when I thought something about the awake, I can't find it now there we go well. Let's talk about all the news. Shall we Let's talk so as I had line headline without reading the story, but have you noticed that the headline is as good as the story? Usually the headline tells you you need to know. The headline was a fracking good, We do big advances in geothermal power, and so the idea is that all point in france he is a draw laced, beiju and water down there. When they shoot the water down there. Somehow they get a better or bigger hole or something so they use it for producing oil and gas. I guess, but they could maybe use

to get deep into the earth and get some energy out of the heat from the earth. I have long been saying that the greatest technology is the earth. These is holes design very moment. We say that if we could ever I want to build really good holes. We would solve basically everything cause if you could, if you could build big holes like the tests like elon musk's, boring company, that just makes tunnels yeah that's the beginning, but fracking. and boring? My open up the of the interior of the planet before unlimited energy, because if you could inexpensively, dig a really deep hole anytime, you wanted free energy you, after the expense of creating it, is free so and that I also thought that farming inevitably asked to go.

The ground or at least indoors, because you are you're farming to have no no pests and no problems with nature. So thank you inevitably believe us holes. Holes is where the future is space and holes I don't believe I talked about that jason l dean song in the detail that I wanted to so you know, there's a big controversy country, star, jason aldean, that's just small town song or are you saying that the riots, the the urban unrest, if it came to a small town, those small downers, would take care of it Meaning that they would at least use the threat of violence to stop people from doing bad things now. The first thing I'd say that is having now listened to the entire song. The first time I mentioned it.

I heard it is actually a really good song, so so, if I could just recommend it on a purely musical basis, really good, really good. I was actually surprised because country music is not, preferred genre so suddenly and that john run totalling lights me up, it's it's pretty normal. If you can guess somebody From the wrong john to appreciate what you're doing some good stuff So talent, wise, a plus, but the controversy- is that some people are listening to his arm and they think it's a racist and promoting lynching. Other people listen to the same song and is not so much the lyrics as the video video imagery and they look at the imagery and they say work, whereas any of that. I don't see it if the others

highlighting any racial group. In fact, it looked like it was shot to decrease that perception. Yeah, there's a lot of lot of vague images, and you can't really tell who it is. It looked to me intentional that they didn't want it to be about race was about behavior, but then what about the question of lynching? Well, that's not there either, there's just a suggestion that if violence came to a small town, the small town people would react some forceful way to stop at nothing about lynching. So now now I've told you that I saw zero imagery. Zero words to suggest either racism or Now let me tell you what I felt when I heard the song:

totally racist looks like is encouraging. Lynching are those two things out of whack. There's no evidence I saw the song does not have racist imagery. It does not have races words, it doesn't it's just not there, but I felt that way. I feel it. Why did I feel so strongly? So so that I have to go back and look at it. A second time to look for those things that triggered me and guess what the warning there was nothing there there. Have given me. The impression that I got so. Let me ask you this. I legitimately felt the same thing that the Democrats presumably and the people on the left are criticizing. I felt it too, but it wasn't there. I mean I I can guarantee you it's not there. I look very closely and it wasn't there.

solely a blame. Do you blame the artist? May he is all about the point. The artist one to make about violence in small towns was that a problem, I'm going to say? No, I gotta say you have to blame. Well, do you blame me you blame the people who interpret it the same way. I did the first time our now. I think you blame the media. The media has primed us all. The violence was black. Did I come up without my own? Now I turn on the tv and there is violence and then look at the statistics, It was to be a highly correlated with news reports about

be allow more urban areas where this violence and without without any statement of what's truer, wasn't, was not true, statistically, thus my point. My point is inundated with things that that conflate black people and violence in the news. It's all over the place, so what I see something this is: is this vague urban violence? What do you think of when you think of urban violence? We ve all been so triggered into stated that you just assume you see something you're, not actually saying. So. I think this the change they'll do thing is in some ways as nothing to do with racism whatsoever, but has everything to do with explaining year current situation, it explains how you ve been brainwashed, began avoided. When I say you, this is no insult. You not a.

I'm saying that you and I and everybody we're getting the same forces, from the outside and they ve private us to see something that wasn't. There is really freaky to see something clearly that you can confirm doesn't exist. It's it's quite shocking. so I had that experience and but I recommend the year I recommend the song is just good music and I don't think the. I do not think that the creator of the song should have any blowback, but I get it. I mean I understand that, and it just wasn't his whole. Definitely the media, alright, say: I've said this before, but this is the most useful thing. You'll hear it's good to reinforce it. If use twitter.

You have to understand that a fairly shocking percentage of the trolls, whether I literally actually drunk or inebriated in some way. And until you understand that is a very like maddening place, because you'll end up doing things like one, can't you understand my boy. Are you? Are you tangibly missing my point and you just go crazy causes triggering tweets. but the moment you tell yourself there probably drunk it all goes away. All of europe. We're like stress or anxiety about so between the evil things are you just completed? goes away. When you tell yourselves are probably drunk try. It is just a refrain for your mental health right now we re frames in general. They are something really A lot for me, a refrain doesn't have to be accurate, doesn't have to be true, it does.

It's true, some of the time or all the time it doesn't have to have any semblance of reality to it or reframe works because it works. You just try. It and you'll see what happens. It's free, so just try telling yourselves that are probably drug and watch what happens. Just changes your experience totally the other I also wonder how many of the celebrities that you think just have opinions you dont, like are literally drugs. What, when you see a wrong perlman is angry video tweets. Do you think he's always sober I don't know, but he looks like an angry drunk to me. So if you tell yourself run, parliament is an angry drunk, even if he isn't. I have no evidence one way or the other,

It completely explains how is acting looking Keith operative. is he drank what he does is creates, while I doubt he's drunk all the time. I'm sure it's not always drunk, but does he look like you might be drunk when he doesn't? The answer is yes, yes, he does which doesn't mean he's drunk. I want to make a clear distinction between people who act drunk and people are. I can't tell if they are but you can tell us as and yeah and rob Reiner was an extra. I was going to bring up. You don't think rob writer has a little wine with dinner. I'm just wondering:

sabrina any chance at all. He has a drink of wine with dinner. Maybe do you think he does age weeding after a couple of glasses of wine ever even once I dunno- maybe maybe so, but even if you don't know anything about the people who are tweeting that are making you mad. Just tell yourself there, fung and then look at the tweet or you'll be amazed at how, as soon as you tell yourself, they might be drunk the the tweet looks like he came from a drunk. It will look like it immediately and make you feel better. Alright, I'm loving the the folks on twitter were finally all the the grass who had been pushing back on the twenty sixth Eden election

If you haven't seen the cringey video of all the various since you're democrat celebrities, saying that the electors after trump had been elected, at least by the vote, but the electoral college have not done this thing- that they were actually producing your major pieces to say that they elect the electors would be more patriotic if they did not follow. You know the the specific path that they had been, let's say, charter to take by the voters. Now, how do you watch that if you're a Democrat and you're going crazy about january six rob. Do they just not remember that actually curious. I don't know because I don't think they do and then the other question is. Either of them illegal was ill.

well for a bunch of actors to give you their their opinion of what electors should do, not really it wasn't illegal. It was all transparent, it was free speech, but what did trump knew there? Was that different? What what was he plotting is that different, and what, if you're, plotting to do something that you have an expert tells you is probably legal is it? Is it isn't an insurrection if the only plans you have have to have some legal. Packing or you're not willing to consider them, because I'm pretty sure- John didn't do anything without at least one lawyer who may or may not have been right, but I don't think you did anything without anything that was in

action without a lawyer saying that there was an argument, for it doesn't mean it was a good argument, but that's how it works. So to me it looks like in both cases the Democrats and republicans were exercising. Free speech and they were trying to use the law as they understood it is illegal to try they use the law. As you understand it. Well, you can end up running a foul of the law. That way but certainly there is no intention, there's no intention of breaking the law, The intention of using the law as it exists, maybe it'd creative way by using the existing law, so I'd be amazed. Trunk goes to jail for any that's enough, but we are no longer in a world where the actual facts will matter

It wasn't a real problem in both cases that people believes the media. Do you think that you would have had the twenty sixteen people trying to overthrow trump? I remember their argument for why the electors should pick somebody else. This is the part. That's the most mind blowing the argument they made in two thousand and sixteen for why the the electors should pick somebody other than the one who got the most votes, or at least the most votes in the right places was that he was Obviously unqualified. It's is obvious. I mean just look it obviously, and I was there all arguments they argument is that any Reasonable person and elector could just look at trump and they could tell that he was not the right person to be a president. Now, How in the world to do they still think that.

After four years of him president. What did he do that? Let list let's all decide, january six itself for a moment, if you take february six out of the equation, we'll talk about the separately. What did he do that wasn't an ordinary president thing. The only things were things they made up like the fine people, hoax and they're drinking blake, jokes, one hundred percent of what they thought about trump, which is made up. their own newspaper so much so that they thought you couldn't even be present, but in fact, It was such a reasonable president, That is one side by an overwhelming majority. Wants them to try it again, I'm pretty sure if he had done any of the things that the Democrats accused him of you know the big stuff that even the republicans would be looking more for us than other choice, realities,

quite weird, but I would also argue that january six was because people looking at certain new sources got riled up in a way that people looking at different new sources did not, for example, I was only vaguely aware that those give me some kind of protest. Wasn't even on my radar, whatever I was watching on social media. It did not include calls to show up at the I just those another one of those everybody protests, everything that's the end of it. but I was never acted end like that

there's nothing, I saw in my news reading that made me want to drive to washington and try to change everything, so both sides were got their opinions from the new sources that they consumed. Although there's a cause and effect thing there, you, you tend to consume the things you know, you're gonna believe If, but, there's a there's a two way effect there, and then we don't know the effect of the f b, I etc. On january. Six, that's true! Alright, So I will tell you a story: the seems like it's a different topic and who's gonna. We re back here watch this so gardens in new york times. Google is pitching The big news and like is like to wash wall street journal and the new york times new tool, a tool for making news were reported.

now, that's a funny story. You've ever. If, if you don't know, this is funny I'll explain it to you. Google hires the smartest people around when you agree, Google hires rallies more people than other companies. Do too But Google is sort of famous for hiring extra smart people. So imagine these extra smart people. They build some kind of an ai tool for news, and then they took it to the new york times Washington, post and the wall street journal and ask them if they like. It and maybe by it- and you say nothing wrong with a story. The smartest. In the world who work at google were unaware that these are not real news entities, indication to them anyway, they're, not even real news entities. They think the washington post reports news in two thousand twenty three.

or the new york times. They don't know that those are narrative entities, and I was in washington, the wall street journal, West Virginia was the third one mentioned and I think they are in their own category. I think the wall street journal is plays a little bit closer to the middle of the road. But although there are opinion pieces you can make you can make, and you can make a case that there have been new pieces leading right but they're very clear about what's opinion, and I always appreciate that right. They say Opinion opinion so says really clear, but I would say that the new york times in Washington post our narrative, promoting entities that use the news to launder their opinion so wouldn t, I ruin their entire business model, their business

I was telling their base what they want to hear, which is very compatible with what the advertisers want to pay them to be associated with, which is very compatible with what democrats want. None of that has anything to do with the news, I ai tried to solve a problem. This totally, not a problem. In fact, it's a feature that the the ability to shape the news and manage the news is the main thing that those entities do they're not telling you full transparent, both sides of stories. We know that There's no there's no debate on so so I just think all areas the sum of the smartest technology people in the world, because their own new sources lie to them and they believe it. They thought that those new sources might benefit from an objective tool for figuring out what the news is.

Just think about that, they actually believed that the news is real and developed a tool to help develop this real news. Little faster or or I don't know the details, What is what, if the Google tool allowed them to insert the narrative? What if it is the opposite of what I said? What, if, instead of you know being a eyes, was totally objective about what the news is shows both sides? What if, as a feature where you can just push a button, and it gets rid of all one side of the argument? How hard would that be wouldnt be hard to build it. I mean you could design that quite easily, so it'd be the easiest thing in the world. now, our due to be for google to Ella tool to the news industry and then they give addicted to it. They say you know, we don't need reporters anymore. This ay, I told just, kill in it

get all our news, organizing putting it into stories. Do you think that that tool would exist only on the desktops of the people using it or just put it's out there. It would actually be an application that ran in the cloud and you were just attached to it, and google have full control of what that a I did and which narratives is surfaced, which one of those do you think Google was selling the one totally objective or where they saw something where they google could control what I decided was news you should see. Do you think they would leave themselves no option for for managing and on their in secret? yeah you'd think there would be no way for them to do that, though, no way to tweak that code just a little bit little bit,

over, be the easiest thing in the world. If, if they can get the biggest entities to accept their tool for news they on the whole world, would own the world. Now that assumes that the entities used as it was provided they weren't overtime. If the tool was really really good and save them money. If there are really really good and save the money, they would move to the Google tool google would own all the news. They would have it narrative. They wanted, they can just puppets or the system, and people would think it was the news

So that's pretty weird and scary: do one in the pot gases modifies getting to perform that lets? You make one super easily and distributed it everywhere, and even mainly all in one piece for free itself, but if I had four preposterous and use our works satisfied for butter pakistan lets you require that it positive gas retrim your photo compute. So, no, Madame matter why you're set up as a kid you can start repeating today that you can just tribute not cast, despite and everywhere else spot guess heard video pipeline, but guess all available on spun. Fine added when you want. Do you wanna, take your decisions, whether the event fans level, you ve got q days in pole, hold the best ways to do. It was spotted funding for about gases. You can work in a variety of ways and easier than he had bought guests

description, stones and bulk. It is totally free been using it for here for awhile and it's great rape I recommended I had so. How would it a hour to cover a story about trump howard, Google's ai compile a story about trump? Would it look like Let's say you my red in bright barked, would it look like I see my reading the washington post because they're not the same. They don't even look similar, so what would it do? How would it cover the news? Well, let's look at the questions of the possible indictments against trump, so were there all of these topics are going to be related. So if it seems like them, changing topics just understand

all related what will tie it altogether them so job is being data. The new set of enables on three statutes. Reportedly, I so you're, so the charges would pertain to these things. Reportedly, we could be wrong at this point, but something pertaining to deprivation of rights. So we all know exactly what that is right. Where we're all aware of exactly what trump did there will be illegally depriving people of rights right? I don't. I have no idea what that is no idea, but there's more it's not just it's also conspiracy to commit an offence against or defraud the united states. Now is that what I said was getting a legal opinion that what he was doing was legal, so legal opinion and, following you, legal opinion, the way you're doing is legally? Ok is ours

I gotta say is some kind of conspiracy doing what your lawyer says would be illegal? Maybe I dunno too soon to know still fog of war. How about what else tampering with a witness tampering with a witness who. Does anybody know what witness we're talking about with a temporary, so at the moment it made at the moment it makes sense at the moment it makes sense that we don't understand the story right. This is new. As complicated as legal stuff, so we don't know the story. Let me ask you this. at the end of it? All? Let's say trump gives convicted. Let's say he's taken out the race: do you think the public would understand the charges?

they deal repeat them back and tell you. Why was illegal and what happened? No, do you that lawyers watching in this case, even lower, also get a year. All of the evidence will say that cases public, for example, do you think you, a bunch of lawyers, watch all in all the evidence, just where the jury did say why the jaded You think all the lawyers watching them tv, seeing all the evidence would all have the same of in the yeah. Those are evaluated, locked gotta go to jail. Probably not too early to say, but probably not so what happens? If you take the major competitors around the race, one whose polls look pretty promising at the moment you take them out of the race based on crime.

Is that the public doesn't understand and lawyers observing it don't agree, even what happened and what's illegal? Is that a safe, safe situation for the country? That's where we're headed that that's the current trajectory is that trump will be taken out by charges that the public doesn't understand too complicated and lawyers disagree whether whether justice was served. That's that's where we're headed, it is almost unbelief. That we could do it willingly world world. Just sleep walking right into the wood. Chipper and we know is happening, as a wood, chipper walking right toward it? Let's walk into that wood. What do you mean it's a bad idea? Well, I know it's a bad idea, but I'm going to do it anyway, walking into the wood, chipper or

Or as the public so beaten down and discouraged and. Demoralized, that's a democratic, and literally do whatever they wanted this point, because there If I told you you're gonna jail, if even protest, that's what january six was about, in my opinion, in my opinion January six was about stopping the next protest and although he was about the last one there's nobody cares about the last one. Little like a off then generous ex, like like a one off by patriots who baby were misled about what information was true wasn't, or maybe they were right and we don't know It- that's also a possibility. So I think that the january six hammer is to make sure that the same people don't complain when things get worse and it's more obvious that they're being abused now I dunno that people actually have the

at conscious thought. This would be a case of people just were on. The same side would just naturally know what's good for their team, so the collective actions look like a plot, but it doesn't need to be a plot. It's just everybody knows what's good for their team and was good for their team. Is that anytime, the other side complains they go to jail? That's pretty good for your team. Do you think your team is stronger if one or the other, if the other team complains about your cheating, that the team complaining about the cheating goes to jail, not cheaters or potential cheaters, because we don't have proof of cheating, but no the people complained about it. They go to jail because of the way they complained. Would it be the argument right and, of course, nobody's arguing about the ones who are actually violent for the pieces. I'd like to once again deal in two just sum: this up.

There was some people were violent on January ex, we know deal, we know, we know, we know, we know we're not talking about them without fail But did you know that there are some more violent now Dale dale, stop stabbed soiling grievous people just like the matrix they'll go back to hiding place, Now. Here's the interesting part lakes, vague roma swami, whose. again doing amazing, it is job of campaigning

Is there anyone who would disagree with the statement? The the vague ramaswamy is showing republicans at a campaign with everybody agree with that, or is this just my own? Am I biased, because, even if you don't pick him, you know, even if he's not your first choice, which I get that, even if you know you forest choice, he's running a campaign like I've never seem to me to me. This looks like the best so far best campaign. I've ever seen, I would say no mistakes. No mistakes, he gets the news every day by being provocative, but he's provocative within bounds light. He could see the line a walks The line and instead of what trump does which he ll stick, is forever the line like repeatedly

the rate goes up to the line. Maybe he may try to move the line, but your state is very clearly on the side of the line that keeps them out of trouble and allows them to be a credible president. Should it come to that, so I can't say enough about how how how smart he is. In just pushing his campaign- and I would say that others are copying- I think, he's already setting standards that others have to look due to figure out what to do but here's something you said they thought captured a perfectly so making the argument why he should be president instead of trump, when it's obvious that more people like trump? It's a tough argument right. Why would you vote for him if you clearly prefer chop according to the polls, and his argument is: is that about thirty percent of the country becomes quote cycle,

as critically ill in response to whatever trump champions, and they will take a new outsider. Somebody liked with aig to further the agenda. What do you think of that argument? I liked the same things trump does, but because he makes thirty percent of the country's psychiatric Lee IL, he is simply no longer practical. You need the practical alternative that guess you trump like results, but without the trump like the psychological damage is very good. It's not good is perfect. This is exactly the right argument, because it's not insulting job, because he is now saying that people go crazy because of trump. Simply noting the fact that we all see you, I'll, say the same thing: we all say the thirty percent of the public knows absolutely psychologically knots,

would you agree that trump makes it easily? He gives a material that they can do it because you stay is provocative all the time. The vague is a little bit more nimble, so he's not going into provocative territory just to be provocative. Like he, he goes everywhere, he has the better argument and then he wins it and then he finds another place. Whereas the best argument- and he goes, he wins. but he is basically willing arguments he's not just making your hair catch on fire is a very different strands. So I would say that he perfectly framed. I can have you similar results to tromp we like, but I I'll do without making the other side mentally ill. That's a really strong, that's a really strong case, because he knows anything

I hope that the only problem with trump, in my opinion, not the only problem- that's too much. That's too far. The main problem with trump is that the other side goes crazy and that causes trouble for you and me and everybody else who might think that his policies are good So it's a strong black translate these also being completely respectful to trump and his compliments and is and what it out what I will change the country so, he could not be more on point land and he says I think it is unproductive for a country to blame from four january sex. Because it exonerates everyone else from insure introspection. on what actually led to the frustrations of amerika the blood. The boiled over that day is a perfect. I mean that's. That is just so perfect. Communication skills, or just just

The fucking chart, alright to say, is unproductive, is exactly the right frame. Don't say is wrong. To say is true, though says untrue, says not useful. It's unproductive boom exactly exactly the right place like he is finding the exhaust pipe and the death star like three times a day like I dunno, if you're catching that, let me say it again: the vegas finding the exhaust of the death star three times a day right in front of you, if you, if you knows our notice in the pattern after awhile like there's gotta, be on, you guess, there's a very clear pattern: developing which is extreme skill. Extreme skill, like we ve never seen honestly The jobs of the category of zones is one of a kind, so there's no.

It was a more trump than trump is the best trump. But if you want something else that gives you maybe some similar outcomes, that's a hell of an option, and I think I think it's becoming obvious to all observers to which is interesting? I are you watching this, like slow realisation that his polling. Numbers are not through the roof. Vague but there are solid. It does show them people are paying attention and why Is it that every time we want to do a hit piece on him, we can't notice that, have you noticed dog, not barking people, here's the biggest dog is not barking. Nobody has run a big hit piece on the evac. Yet nobody, you know why.

They got nothin, they got. Nothing is the same reason you haven't seen the big piece on me. I got fully cancelled globally. I got claim I got cancelled all over the planet. What's the next thing that always happens after you cancel Oh, it's. There are large articles showing that the recently you did is not unusual, because you have a whole history, a bad things. Did you see that with me, do you think nobody looked into it? You say nobody's I worried all of my old tweets. Of course they did. Did I think they didn't look at every blog post. I ever read wrote every every book I ever wrote. You don't think that looked at all of it. Looking for the supporting data to their there. Theory, of course, that they looked through thirty years of my life and find a fucking thing as well that's, the only reason you agree. Would you agree that

anything was air. There would have been. major story about it cause. My cancellation was a major story. Is the obvious follow up? Oh my god. He was always like this and we just didn't know, and then it turns out. There was nothing there, because the story was, you know ninety percent bullshit the way it was framed. Now there are still people who believe the news, so I feel sorry for you, but if you believe the news about public figures and I'm doubly sorry for you- because that's just never true now back to a vague, vague, is way too strong already, and he does have a path by the way, if you think he doesn't have a path. The Democrats are making the path for him

The Democrats are trying to take out the only thing the stands between vague and the white house, because it's not this answers in my opinion. In my opinion, a straight a contest between two santas involved ache would would go for vex way and it would be just because, if you put the two among the stage together, what ones once a nuclear power plant in the others, you're a lighter, not really. On the same, I don't think on the same plain that the same way. You'd expect you know trump would destroy. You know, plus eight patents. In a in a debate. You can't imagine that dissenters would be able to be vacant the debates because he would have nothing to go after you can't go after vex right, veg doesn't have a a history to go after a political history, so

that entire area of attack just doesn't exist. Nor does he have what trump had, which were some businesses that some sketchy elements too later. He doesn't have either there's just nothing to attack, so you would have to attack with a vague his current opinions, which match republicans well, alright, so dissenters has no, the census has no policy or historical advance.

over the lakes argument. Nothing, so you would have to go against them as smart, capable person, which is alright. Dissenters, is very smart, very capable and has a track record of proving that he is both smart and capable and does things you like and is a very strong package, but the vex at your oratory and his communication skills is framing are a whole different level. These are not they're, not they're, not verbally equal. You all get that everybody guests of of exit on his own level, if you put them in a contest where talking is the game is no contest. If you put them in a contest where they both governed, you know, maybe the is better. I have absolutely nothing negative about this and this nothing, he would be just a solid, solid president-

In my opinion, but I just think he would disappear on the stage next stupid aches firepower. I think he'd just blow away, it wouldn't be instant. I think what you would say if you saw those two debate, I think you'd see your dissenters going from a commanding lead to half of that lead with one debate and then the stories would be about momentum and then it would be over if he could pull out before the actual primary stuff anyway. So if you don't think, vivek has a path. The Democrats are trying as hard as possible to make the

here's my pay payoff for listening to all this weather vivax as it directly or not, and he probably wouldn't, if trump gets taken down you're going to want revenge. Am I right, even if you didn't like trump, even let's say, you're a conservative republican and you didn't like trump, you legitimately didn't want him to be the next candidate, but if he got taken out by dirty tricks in your opinion, there were dirty tricks and wouldn't you want revenge, even if he's not your guy right, just the fact that somebody on your team got taken out by the other side, you're going to want revenge who's going to give it to you pence. Do you think, do you think the santas cares about what happens to trump at the moment? Probably not right. Now it's not just a question of who cares about what is also a question of protecting the base and making sure that once

it is not a victim to the other. I think the fake will rip them apart. I think we're I think vervain would would take out the evil from the roots, because that's what he's talking about, I mean he's talking about going after the root system. Nobody has ever talked about that, though draining the swamp thing wasn't even trump. I think the I think the crowd says it, and he just embraced it Ivanka is talking very detailed about which entities are going to go completely away. Yeah pulling it up by his roots is a pretty strong statement and it would look like revenge to republicans all right. Well, how about your department doesn't exist anymore. as much, we love you so here's the situation I see developing the Democrats are going to try to take trump out, or at least they'll damage him so much that he looks less and less like he could take on Biden at his trump.

Down and so far I would I'm predicting against it. I think it's more likely trump survives all the legal challenges, but if he doesn't, it's certainly not guaranteed. If he doesn't have acres going to be the sword of the Republicans, vivek will be the sword of the Republicans cause. I don't think that's republican, I don't think trump supporters. would trust the scientists to do what needs to be done. Is that fair? You might even like the santas. You might even think he'd be a great president. I think he'd be solid, but you don't think you would necessarily get you the vengeance that you feel

Indeed, and I'm not, I don't recommend vengeance as as a policy preference yeah, I'm not say you should be vengeful I'd, say: you're gonna feel it is just going to be there, whether you like it or not, I'd feel it. I would definitely want revenge, even while I'm telling myself don't be like that, Scott, don't be that guy, don't be that guy who wants revenge, blood on be happy if he added socio those reporting about there other talk about. A study from the J J. I am a surgery journal. did some kind of a study or reporter something said that mass shootings in major metropolitan areas in nice states disproportionately affect black people. An structural racism they play a role according to the study

mass shootings, disproportionately affect the black people. Now. There was no there's no prescription given about what to do about it, but I'd say, move away. I do that's just my first thought I would if I were black, I would want to get away from any place that a high likelihood of mass shootings so shouldn't you just get away from those places. I don't believe that the problem is that white people are coming into the black neighborhoods and shooting a bunch of black people that the study doesn't seem to say that it would seem like it's black people shooting other black people and that my guess is that that doesn't happen in every town.

I would think that might statistically be more likely in places where there is greater densely. So if you wanted to get away from this, you should go get away from densely of any kind and he got a density. So that's my advice to black people who are at risk of mass shootings because they're in areas where they're more likely to happen, you should get away from there and my double cancelled. Yet to do I get in trouble for giving reasonable reasonable advice that literally everybody agrees with you all agree with that, of course, But it's archaic, as I said, I'm helping black people. Let me give you my current opinion:

things that are good or bad for black people, things that are good or bad for lgbtq things that are good or bad for other groups? I don't care, I I think it's stupid to look at group performance in twenty twenty, three, I'm all about the individual. So if there's any individual who is at risk of mass shootings and wishes, they could find a solution. I'd be happy to help. I can advise, maybe for somebody I'd like to help them out more directly right, so helping Individuals sixth said I'm all about that, and I'll I'll talk a lot more about that as the year goes by, but I'm kind of retiring from this group is doing better than this group and therefore I don't care what let me say directly.

I don't care if albanians do worse in school them albanians, I don't care girdle, not even a little bit. I care about every one of those individuals, though, and I'm pretty sure that they can all succeed. Despite racism, if they all do the same things that everybody does so here's the thing I can't get best no matter who you are, if you do the right things in america, you get a good outcome. stay on the jails they of drugs don't get married to early. You don't have a kiss luck, easy stuff develops and skills become useful right. There's nobody! is a different way. It's all the same way and everybody has access to it. So if you tell me that black americans are doing poorly, I don't care. Let me say that again. If you tell me, black americans are doing poorly, I don't care at all.

Well, I used to cause, I used to think that was the right way to approach the issue. Now I can see that that fails everytime, because you end up just arguing about statistics and it's just bullshit, for a while. Does you can make any argument with data and when you're talking about a group of people is always a data argument right all data arguments are false into one. Twenty three, so, if thorough were away to know, the data was accurate, then may I say: ok, maybe you should look at groups. Does that data is accurate and if you have If you're a data, you might actually be able to figure out things that make things better. But if you know you don't have accurate data and never will- and you know that the the way society is organised is that helping classes of people will just grace more

albums, which it does until he's twenty three. Then it only makes sense to shift your frame from how to help people who have something weird in common, largely yeah. It's largely a conceptual thing they have in common. It move from that frame. To do. neighbor who needs and there's somebody I know, was a victim of racism. Could I do something about it?. Could I teach them how to be immune. Good. I hire them and make sure they have job another, no care so much. probably a million ways you can open individual and I'm all about that. So few, If you're a white individual and you can help a black, individual or any other kind of individual, do that do that? But if somebody says

group is doing poorly compared to your group. Fuck them just don't even get interested to say less interesting. Philosophical point that has no interest to me doesn't effect my life, So that's the the change I'd like to see as we transition from the it's really a scam sort of a scam. To imagine that you should compare groups and then make policy based on that in two thousand and twenty three I do think. Historically, it always made sense because the problems were the bigger type where the discrimination was built into the legal system or, it was a reverberated from the past and such an obvious way, but once you get to the point where a hundred percent of individuals can succeed, if they

Do the basic things that everybody will succeed does then stop talking about groups at that point, you're just making things worse, so no interest, no interest in what way people or black people or any other group is doing so, which part of that do, you think, will be taken out of context so somebody's already clipping this shit out, like I got that far, I got that part where he said he doesn't care about black people right. Of course, that will be out of context, because I didn't say that I, if you're listening, I said I care deeply about people, people like an actual human. I care about that. I want them all to do well,

I care about an artificial grouping. Oh my artificial grouping did better than your artificial grouping. I don't care at any individual. Do alright too much on that Jonathan turley continuing to be a national treasure. That legal stuff, the stuff here right, I just don't see anywhere else just I think I feel like all of his takes better than other people's takes. they. Are you having the same oppression like

I know one person could consistently say things that when I read it you know I'm not a lawyer, so I'm doing my best, but when he talks I always say well. That sounds totally right. That's exactly how you should look at this thing, so he was talking about the democrat representative of goldman, who is trying to make the hunter Biden a whistleblower from the irs's he was just trying to you know, take the best side of him and degrades his argument. So there's a whistle blower who says

is that the name shapley who says that the hunter Biden investigations were impeded and slow walk, and he gives specific examples of how it was impeded, and you know what what what was slowed down and it's very compelling as one person's testimony but as under oath. He is public and he was exactly the right person to see it firsthand so as first hand under oath. That's pretty strong right yeah. That is that's pretty strong and also, I believe, backed up by other witnesses. Can somebody give me a fact check on it.

The latest whistle, blower, shap or shapely. Is it not true that we have other public whistleblowers who say the same thing? There's there's more than one right that you yeah okay, I've gotten confirmations more than one all right, so you're now, at the highest level of credibility, the highest level, people who sought themselves have the same story put their own skin in the game begin whistleblowers. This is not good for them. There they're not going to benefit from this, and did it publicly in front of the world. Can it be that that that's pretty

It's pretty serious, but here's what Jonathan Turley points out so Goldman was trying to get to the fact that whatever one hundred did business wise, there was no evidence that he had talked to his father. So goldman is trying to establish, in the public's mind that yeah, maybe hunter did some stuff, but his father wasn't aware of business dealings, part of it and though he s a question and shabbily tells them that no actually I we do have proved that the father knew about it. Yet very specific evidence of the father, knowing about at least some of the business deals. which, which Joe Biden continues to deny is totally points out and What turley was mocking goldman for was. You know that you probably know this The lawyer, can it

the rule is that you'd never ask a question in court. If you don't know the answer heavier that it's like the number one rule of being a lawyer. Don't ask that question. If you don't know what the answer is going to be cause, he asked the question thinking it would go his way and it turned out to be the most damning thing for Joe Biden in the history of the republic for the first time a witness under oath who was an eye witness, and people watch and agree said that Joe Biden lied and he was aware of these dealings beside the biggest thing in the world and a representative goldman is the one who surface that

and he was trying to hide it, so the guy trying to hide it was on the surface that and probably blue. So, Sir Jonathan Turley, at the end of his rallies talking about this, he puts a picture of dresden, Dresden after world war. Two, if you don't know the reference of course, this isn't funny. But Dresden was a german city that was firebombed into complete ruination it was just burned until it was just rubble all all city and that that was a that was charlie's interpretation of the Democrats case. That goldman had turned their own case and addressed. It was good writing. So good writing. Good imagery.

Love early apple says you're coming out with their own. I no surprise one could assume that are a little late, but the rabble so new applicants are the best and and catch up very quickly. I would think, but what do you think about the fact that this would be, in my opinion, the first big things and jobs? There was the apple watch and I guess as successful as not like this, like iphone successful but its successful, so that was the best they ve done. Since jobs is the the watch, but now they can do. I do Is there a way I would disrupt their entire business model? I got a new knows. The app store makes sense if you have a ives right kind. So I think this is such a big,

moment for apple the utter dunno. They I'm the right people there, but we'll find out. I mean jobs, picked tim cook, so many jobs bake them must know something that I don't know, but I will see you will see if apple can pull off Journey I into something that you all want without destroying the room company is, it looks like it would cannibalize the iphone I dunno and when I say that I mean that the whole iphone ecosystem is the third parties make apps and you buy the apps and use them on the phone. But I think ai is going to make apps. No,

unnecessary because in theory you could just tell your ai to become any app you wanted and it would just become it on the fly. It could code itself into that app yeah. The the things that couldn't do is maybe do a dating app cause. That's more about the network effect. So there might be some network effects it can't copy, but it could, if you didn't, have

app on your phone for a math. You didn't have a calculator, you could just say the ai or give me a calculator, the codes it and and presents it on screen just because you wanted it cause. I said that would be like an easy thing to code in real time, so it would just appear, but there would be no app. Likewise, if you want to do a spreadsheet, you just say alright. Do my due my budget and a spreadsheet would appear, but it would have no app for a spreadsheet. It would just know that. That's what you wanted and it was sort of coded on the fly and keep it live so for anything that doesn't have a network effect. You say linkedin, something like that.

I would think those apps will just go away. So what does that do to their whole business model? I dunno. So that's the sort of thing I think of steve. Jobs might have a chance of figuring out, but maybe an apple corporate. You know just keeping the model moving kinds of people, maybe not the right people, but we'll find out Now, I'm for the longest time I've been confused as to why the s I r I product on the iphone and I'm spelling it. So I don't trigger your your phones. I've been wondering. Why is so bad like it It's really bad, barely that the only thing I can use it for successfully is setting my alarm. Over overtime. I used to try to use in a lot because I thought

if the hang of It- and it would maybe understand me better or I would give the better commands and it would just get better over time, but it got worse. I got to the point where the only thing I want to do is set my alarm or my timer. Basically, as They also assume it's gonna. Take fifteen tries it's not a good understand me. You ever try something in sending a voice. Text is just a nightmare. Go cause. It's writing stuff that you didn't want to write and then you're like, oh god, what do I do? Yeah timer! That's about it! Alright, ladies and gentlemen. That concludes my amazing presentation. For the day. Best live stream. You've ever seen. your whole life- everybody say you, everybody say, is raising honest, propose you ip disclosure,

I, I have no interest in the? U f, o stuff cause, it's not real! So no, I'm not interested in a new hearing about a thing that isn't real photographs or it's not real. Don't give me your grainy photographs of a tic tac in a fly on your camera know. Don't care alright, to use ai to resurrect stiff chops. That would be funny. Rfk is testifying on cspan about what big firm. Oh, the threads of you spend time on threads of any of you. Let me ask you this way.

Many of you are using threads more today than you were last week, so if you're using it is written by using more today, then last week,. I stopped even thinking I have it. I actually forgot out it's completely completely off my right. I thought about using it just to promote things on twitter, but I do followers, so there's no point do, and that is the way I thought about use it for just promoting by other things. It's not even that, oh you are oh, I knew what I was going to do. I just want to be. I just want to be a jerk for entertainment purposes. open threads. Now I told you that when I brought over the people I follow from Israel.

I did not get the illuminati. But rather I got people look good pictures. But then they came over here and they started tweeting. so going read you some of the insightful tweets are years, one So here is a kind of thinker I was bring over from swim. I won't tell you just some attractive person. Here's a ears, a threads post, fun fact. I love writing bikes. What

either you love to do so. So I'm glad I signed up for his routes cause. I wouldn't miss that one I would miss them, but there are others and actually Jordan, peterson's tweeting there. So some of these actually make sense or here's another one from one of the influencers from instagram over and threads when in doubt eat chicken and rice. Okay, when in doubt eat chicken and rice It's a good post, there's another one straight from the airport to the gym, just hitting the essentials today to tackle a full leg day after this week,. Well, you know I woke up this morning and I was wondering about this influencer's leg day like what day of the week is, is leg day in and do you do it on the way back from the airport? This is threads.

that's threads now, does anybody have the same experience you go to threads and it's just influencer's who can't you can't make sentences alright? Now I'm going to do the same thing I'm going to go to twitter at this this'll be a biased presentation. Alright, so I'm just going to pick just a random tweet. Alright, just just go good I'll. Just pick a random tweet on twitter and ai progress doesn't sleep at night. new information about the state of the art, speech, recognition and something about ronda santas blah blah blah. It was good stuff, something about the century and records of your heat records basically is all fun. Stuff is all like

please smart people, say really smart stuff all day, long twitter and I go to threads as just is it's all yours c, plus students who have been forced to write things that are not happy about it. That's what it feels like it feels like threads is all the seaplane students. What do you see as union station is empty? I can't be real that doesn't feel real. What that's about That's all I got for you today and I will go. Would you just a bit

They are you a foe. If somebody said these are now no! No, I wouldn't you do disease from joining by for now,.