Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization? The skull coffee was got elms and you're lucky enough to be here, for it live in some cases and recorded and others. Now, if you'd, like your experience to go up to levels, that no one that has ever even imagined were possible? Well, all you need, for that is a cup or mug or a glass. Tanker gels or stiva canteen jovi flask of vessel of any kind fill it with favorite liquid. That, like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the double media. Is the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip happens. Now, go oh yeah yeah! No, it's not called real coffee with Scott Adams. It's only that on youtube on youtube. I had to put the real in front of it, because some

I took my name before I got there bastard, so it's actually called coffee was Gotham's and I just had the reel on youtube. Speaking of youtube, I asked a question this morning. I dunno. If anybody has noticed youtube, seems to have completely changed. It's experience for me and I wondered: is it just? me, in other words, is clutching like crazy and it won't allow you to download and just the monetizing as is adding advertisements in where you don't want them. So basically, this is like a it's like the whole thing just blew up suddenly, so I'm trying to figure out what have I been targeted because it looks like it. You know you have to suspect everything at this point, so it looks like I'm targeted because in the same time that my my followers on twitter

went to rebellion, sardinia, fifty thousand and went to a million. During that same time, my traffic on youtube one four zero to about twenty five thousand viewers and then just stayed like that for five years. You think that's natural. Do you think that anybody on youtube who does a daily highly regarded live stream? They got no traffic in greece in five years now, that's not possible as not even slightly boss. I even my number of subscribers went up and

traffic didn't go up. That should tell you something alright, so I want to find out if that's just sit there. There are two theories that are pretty good. One is that we have this national incompetence crisis and the other is maybe it's personal. I dunno no way to know now and rumble has it's own issues, which is I can't at the moment. I can't do live stream without going through a third party software, which makes it so in practice, that I'm not using nothing about that. So here's a headline that say it is a terrible at last So suddenly bad happened somebody, but I'm going to test your ability to not laugh at other people's misfortune. There's nothing funny about this.

This is not funny so, whatever you do not laugh at this as you'd be a bastard. If you did. The headline on fox news as a woman sues disney for fifty thousand dollars over injurious reggie, On water slide at typhoon lagoon, and it turns out when you read the article the injurious wednesday. Was not a backside reggie, it was a foreign side when she for one side. And she was actually injured. She had a bleeding and so she's suing disney over a wedgie front. Wedgie everybody you better not be laughing at this at home. Take my role, modeling hear nothing funny about that.

Moving up next story: well, we all of this story of jabbar bowman, representative bowman, susie accidently activated the fire alarm, actually pulled the fire alarm in an attempt to open a locked door, because, as you know, the way you open a lot nor is to go to the nearest fire alarm, read the directions and conclude that maybe, if you just pull the fire alarm a little bit the door open now, if, if you add an employee who came to you and said, I'm sorry, I was just trying to open the door, and I thought there pulling the fire alarm was how you do it

Would you have that employee drug drug tested? I would yes, I would have that employee drug tested now. I would also look at the employee's. Other behavior. Did you confuse a lectern for a urinal? Did you try to make a phone call on a sandwich instead of a phone? If you did any of those things, I would say, possibility some going on. So I would like to throw into the mix the most likely explanation for how representative bowman could do something that you and I can understand. Well, anybody can do it was drunk. That's all, as all sorry, he was probably drunk

now I have no evidence that use inebriated or that he was on any kind of drugs. I'm just saying I can't think for another reason, because, even even if you think oh, it was a clever plan, he was trying to stop the vote, which I don't think is proven right. To me, it looks like it was a bad plan, whether he did it intentionally or accidentally in either case accidentally or intentionally. You wouldn't do those things while you're sober. Can we just be honest? The most likely explanation was he was drunk at work. Am I wrong tell me I'm wrong now not accusing him of being drunk. I'm saying that if you are presented with this set of the set of facts, your most likely explanation, even if it's wrong the most likely explanation is that

drug. If it were anybody else, what would be your most likely explanation because nobody's that stupid, even even if it was a clever plan, nobody would be so stupid as to think that plan would work. Don't you think that he knows that there is video security everywhere? No, I I the fact that we don't even include that possibility in the list of what happened. Is that a spot feels like a blind spot? If I had that will let me let me ask you this. If I had done that, you know me as the exact person I am, have you heard I was in the capital and I pulled the alarm and then my explanation was that I thought it opened a door. Wouldn't you assume I was stowed, wouldn't you I mean really

because you'd say to yourself well, he seems smart enough to do this stuff- and you say of a representative. Well, is smart enough to get himself to congress, but he's not smart enough to know how to lock a door. I dunno inconsistent. So I'm going to say, let's put drunk on the list of possibilities, but I don't have any direct evidence of that is just the obvious. Are you a check. well, the southern banking committee is doing something that makes sense on the surface. So it must be a trick something that makes sense on the surface. So obviously, as a drink there I tried to make a legal for a bank state, dull marijuana businesses, which at the moment banks don't like to do, is its illegal.

So so that sounds like progress. Right is just a good thing, while they're trying to fix something is broken that the bank's care, even handedly legal business, that's gonna, write you think, that's why they're doing it do you think this is why they're making Thanks able to handle your transactions, no it's so they can fucking track you as nothing to do with you as a consumer or citizen is so. The government can have more control over you because, right now, if you pay cash for your weed, they're, not sure you'd pay, you bought any weed, but I think they'd like to know and they'd like to know your address and everything else about you know. So I see this as just another sign of the factory. but it would be useful and trials thursday at his. He is

Firstly, the issues about over evaluing, his properties. They say: do you think that you will win this? Do you think they can't make an argument that his property is worth more than the court thinks it's worth? I feel like he should when this one, except for not having ill will justice system so will keep an eye on that and out so he's got tat s amazing,

the fact that over valuing his business in the context of bank loans and also insurance, the fact that the public doesn't even understandable that works. The public actually believes that the bank took his word from the value of his properties. Just just all that you mind the story that we, the public have been told, is that there are banks when maybe one I gather that took his word for like gazillion dollars worth of value. and do their own work. Apparently they just took his word for it. That's what we're being told right now. We are anybody who has even a little bit of experience in business knows: that's not true, yeah, there's, no chance, there's zero chance that they took his word for it. Now. What about the insurance company

suppose he inflated the value of his asset and then he went to get insurance. Does the insurance company he that no, they love that they love that the sir ideal situation. The ideal situation is that the customer pays pays too much insurance and this happy about it, because that's what they think they're properties worth and then of of It gets destroyed and you have to replace it haha. We replaced it for half a half of what you thought. It was worth so we win and we overcharge you for insurance so he's going to he might he might be illegal trouble for making your insurance company rich. Now I dunno all the details. Don't take my word for the details, but what the news has told us doesn't make sense. There can be no situation where a bank took somebody's word for the value of their property. That's never happen and there.

yeah that'd be a situation where overvaluing your assets is bad for the insurance company. Again, that's not a thing jersey governor is going to make sure that they're only reimbursing you for the thing you lost, not for your opinion of it's value, So how did we even get this far that a euro separate from the questions of under the losses appropriate the public is completely misinformed? on the news. The only reason that I know the news is bullshit is that I was a banker and. The big house that I had to get insured, so I know how insurance works right. So I'd know two things that the public should now but probably doesn't allow as well. So maybe we learn something here will say I got it.

to. There are a whole bunch of reasons. Why least, for reasons why Biden could get impeached is our your news is telling you as your mainstream news said- that there are four reasonably likely and people offences now, decent jobs and early is unqualified. To say what is unimpeachable events, nope, no peace, only qualified totally false does Turley long record of doing things which would make him seem less credible, nope nope. He has a long history of calling balls and strikes, be they republican or democrat. Very

long history of that, and he says: there's four pretty obvious: impeachable things they'd still have to be demonstrated right, not they're, not proven, but the evidence we have strongly suggests that if we got a hold of the banking records, that's all you would need to connect at all to the big guy so hold the. for while we'll get to some other stuff. There's a study, some some interdisciplinary research team at the max blank institute for empirical aesthetics. You know the empty I e eight to over in frankfurt anyway. They have collaborated with some people and came up with this shocking result that dancing can make you happy dancing can make you happy. So, if you're in a bad mood- and somebody makes you dance the dancing

The happier now did you not already know that is there's other erode didn't know that. But let me let me give you the reef rape, alright, so my book reframe, your brain, which is according to readers, changing their lives like crazy. Here referring the usual frame, the normal way we look at it? Is that your mind is contained in your brain, so that your skull is the limit to your brain. You mind it's all in there, since I you had the refrain which will change everything, for you is that your mind includes the brave, of course, but also includes your body and all of its experiences and also includes yours, physical surroundings. Right, if you don't see your mind,

is your physical surroundings? You won't know what to do when your mind is not where you want it to be. Do you know what I do when my mind is not right? I go for a nice, long, walk and move my body, or I find my dog and I curl up with her for five minutes and get that little feeling from the dog hugging or I do something else that makes my body feel good eat some food. You know the rest right now so, when I think of my mind, I think of my entire environment cause.

the things I moved to affect my mind, so it's like your environment is a user interface. For your mind, the people who are lost are the people who say my mind is not right. I'm unhappy I'll try to fix it by thinking better thoughts. I can't I can't. I can't fix my mind with my mind. Oh no there's nothing. I can do I'd better, go to a doctor and get a bill Don't do that just understand that your mind is your body and your physical environment, and that, if you move your physical environment, just right and dancing would be only one example. You can change your mind. How often do I do this exact thing really often really often quit several times a week. I say to myself: oh god, my head is not where I want it to be, and what do I do? Do I sit in a chair and think different

Different there we go, I got my mind all fixed now I do not do that. I immediately leave my environment get out of the room you have to get out of the room And you gotta go somewhere else. You gotta walk the dog, you gotta be under a tree. You gotta, breathe differently. You gotta do something. Physical! Everything else is a waste of time. So just remember that refrig. I've been there listening to a lotta relationship advice on instagram, which, by the way is the very best placed to get advice, If you want to know how to handle the most important things in your life, you should go to an instagram influence or not science, not science, gotten instagram info sir, who has had two or three failed marriages, and, and they will tell you.

what to do so, so you don't have to do, and I already did the the research and here's what I ve learned enough. I've sample quite a few relationship. Experts, and so this is just applies to heterosexual men. This advice, so I can speak for the energy bt q community at all, but for enters the hetero man. This is the advice that I've seen as very consistent across all the experts, which is how you know it's right, There are two things you need to do. Is man number one giving a woman whatever she wants will make you look like a weak beta simp and make her lose interest in you sexually until she cheats on you with somebody else. So that's one, the. Lastly, you can do say all of the and by the way the male and female experts say, the same thing is not just the men say this: the mail

And female relationship experts say do not do not gives the woman everything she asked for essential, just think here her servant and shall lose interest in you and go cheat on cell, but there's only one. I mean more than that, so number one is don't give one whatever she wants. Number two is you need to know. not giving a woman whatever she wants will make her go. Look for a guy who will so then show cheat on you. So you got your two situations. You are giving a woman. What she wants will make your like. You lesson cheat on you and giving her everything she wants or giving her nothing. She wants will make her unhappy and go find a guy who will.

And then I was told scott scott Scott. You have to find a happy medium. You have to find the balance. What what exactly is the balance between giving people what they want and giving people nothing they want? Is it giving them half of what they want? Let's say that is giving is giving women half of what they want. What would a woman do who got half or why she wanted if she's, rational. I'm pretty sure she would look for somebody who will give her everything she wanted and then she would cheat on you, because why? Why would you sell for half? Why would she sell for eighty percent? Why would who would settle for eighty percent when you could have one hundred So, according to the relationship experts, there are only two Is to go if your man and both of them

and failure in poverty, literally I'm not even make in this. Those are the only relationship and vices uninstall them is. There are two ways to go and their guaranteed to fail, and I'm not making this up these in the experts. Experts and ever on. Very many figures out what woodwork you should. Let me know our island maggie sutra, whose threatening to or trying to get mccarthy and other speakers job in his big complaint is Mccarthy had made some promises early on. And those promises he says were not kept mostly promises about putting funding bills in one bill instead of collecting things together. Now a lot of people think that's a bad idea, including thomas massie, who tweeted or posted. I fear that attempting to vacate

Speaker, Mccarthy, at this juncture, is a bad idea that will lead to worse outcomes for conservatives and then he he says signed. The only still servant, co, author and co sponsor of the motion to vacate speaker better. So I guess some time in the past thomas bessie had been. A big part of trying to remove speaker baby, so he is making Sure you know that he is not opposed to doing something. That's provocative, and even these in the minority and even going against the speaker. So he's not he's not against it. In principle, this important announced good contact he's just say this case it looks like it would make for worse outcomes.

now. As you know, I love. I love me some thomas massie, because he is unique in the congress and that he is very smart and he's willing to look at evidence which makes him totally unpredictable. You don't know which way he's going to go because you don't know in advance which way the data is going to go. So that makes it fun because he's honest, and he goes where the where We're rational thought should take you add, so he says you probably will get worse outcomes if you read it real speaker, Mccarthy. So what's the obvious was the obvious question they ask in response So you're somebody who has credibility

and says now trying to vacate mccarthy we'll get you worse outcomes, what is the obvious question next worse than what worse than what the current design is destroyed? if the whole country, because we have a system that guarantees we will overspend and over borrow until we're dead, was worse than that. Can you describe me a situation? That's worse than that now I suppose you know nothing improves and you still spend yourself to death, but you still end up dead both ways right. So I don't think is worse. It might be a lateral move, but is it worse

What is worse, look like what is worse than spending yourself into a certain destruction. While we watch it happen, I can't think of anything. Worse was worse than having a congress that doesn't do anything about the border. Literally one is worse than that. I can't think of anything what is worse than mindlessly funding ukraine for what appears to be not national interest, what's worse than that

I dunno everything that congress is doing is already the worst case. It's the worst case scenario. If you could take us away from the worst case scenario, then I would say no don't break it. Let me tell you how engineers think now, I'm not an engineer, but I've spent so much time with them and writing about them. I can pick up some of their vibe. Is now an engineer things number one. If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it right. If it's not broken, don't try to fix it number two. If it is broken and you can't figure out how to fix it, what do you do if it is broken and you don't know how to fix it? What do you do you're an engineer? What do you do know scrapping it would just make you build it back again. Probably you break it, you break it more yeah. If something is broken, and you don't know how to fix it, you break it more because, as one way to get you to a different starting point, it could be that the reason you can't fix it is that there's too much inertia, yeah, there's too much your built in resistance, so you might have to nuke it. So if, if what, if what gates is doing, sends congress into chaos and just completely breaks, it is that worse, give me an argument that that's worse, because what would happen if Congress completely dissolved like they just couldn't, do anything, then they would have to fix it. Wouldn't I wouldn't they then have to fix it, but then they'd be starting from a different starting point. They wouldn't be starting from

I have this cathedral and we're not going to tear down the whole cathedral just to fix these things. So I guess there's nothing. We can do we'll just march onto destruction, no bomb the cathedral, bulldoze the cathedral and then see what you've got to work with. So if it's broken, he can't fix it. You gotta break the shit out of it. Some more you've got a further breakup. You've got to really really break it. Then you might have a way to go forward, but if you don't break it you're on a design cruise to destruction, the design will destroy you. You have to change the design, and that means breaking so I'm fully in charge of the chaos and complete destruction. We do not have a congress system which is worth maintaining now, I'm saying, keep all the same people for the most part, but they're going to have to operate differently they're, either going to have to show their work. You know show that they've got signal issues that they're voting on

or something something, but whatever they're doing now is not working so break it just break break it all and that will be rational. Now, if I haven't see the thomas Massie has responded, sometimes he does respond. He may have a good argument if he has good argument, I'm totally going to listen to it. Why this is credible. He earned it. The reason that I would take my time to listen to thomas massey, whereas I might not bother with somebody else

he's gonna, say something sensible, so I will listen to them and may be changed. My mind, hello. This is god atoms and now is your chance to reply to questions hot. Take some calls for feedback from myself and all of your favorite part gasters unspecified. Every new episode could have a q and a report with a topic for you to wait on so lay your voice be heard. Personally, I plan to use these tools to get you to enjoy the content even more so that over to respond by search for coffee was got Adams or your favorite punk. in view the latest episodes and respond to q and a and polls on spotify. Only while governor a huckle, she's governor of new york right, hawk old as governor of new york yeah, and

Clinton in agreement about something they both want new york city to stop being a sanctuary city. Do you know why? Because there's too many immigrants. Now our our governor hogle and bill Clinton saying that the immigrants are worse than the people who already live here that do they are bad genetics. Is that what they're saying is that with the governor in brooklyn? No, no, no has nothing to do with the genes or the race of the people. So that's not part of the conversation has nothing to do with their gender.

That's not part of the conversation is purely the situation. It's a design problem. If you take a bunch of people who are doing well, the other people who lived in new york in the first place, and then you introduce a large population of people who are not doing well. The the natural outcome is that the people doing well, look after you stopped doing well and they're not gonna, be able to walk down the streets safely and and they will have to give their money and give up other things,

with that money would have done for them. So when the bill Clinton and governor Huckle say that new york city should stop being a sanctuary city cause it's attracting too many immigrants. Are they being racist or they being racist? Now, no, they are not because, first of all, it's all kinds of different races. It's a bunch of different people from different places. It's not all central south american lot of it is african and eastern european Chinese etc, so as not racist, but if you were to summarize what governor hawkins the answer is saying about the immigrants. What would be a folks year more

agile way to say you should stop being a sanctuary city like what words, if you were, let's say if you're a crude and provocative what will be another way to stain it, get the fuck away right right. So basically, they're saying that the people in new york city did to get the fuck away from the immigrants, but has nothing to do with the quality of their character. The immigrants has nothing to do with their genes or chemist. Their chromosomes has nothing to do with their gender.

It's not based on bigotry. Its system design is just system design. If you put the wrong people in the wrong place, you get a bad outcome. I right is. It has nothing to do with any police quality of human being. Has nothing to do with the boys worth has nothing to do with your worth as a person. In fact, I think I would guess that the immigrant population coming in now. This is just a guess- is the highest quality of immigrants we ve, I know you don't want to believe that my opinion, this is probably the highest level of quality. Here's. Why? If you can get all the way from europe through central america, you ve got enough money to do that. You have enough ambition to do that and you and the type of person who can even conceive of this working and you can pull something together in your homeland. You ve already demonstrate

a whole bunch of qualities. I like, if you didn't, know anything else about em. You say I can work with us. I could work with us. I've ever tried to hire a native american lately native as in not nata, not original americans, but somebody was born here. Try to try to get somebody who was born here all their life to come. Do some work for you not so easy try to try to get a recent immigrant to do some work for you. Yes, you can get arrested. Immigrants do almost any kind of work and be delighted and really put the effort that that's the kind of people who are coming here. So I want you to know from my perspective, although we don't

well for sure, because we don't really know the composition of them? We assume that more criminals are coming through. Would you agree for more terrorists? Absolutely definitely more terrorists, definitely more criminals, but on average, if you are not counting the criminal elements which are certainly part of it, on average I'll bet we're getting a higher level higher quality of immigrants than we have ever got before, because we have a bigger filter like it's really really expensive to pay the pay, the cartels and it's really really dangerous.

Which means you get all the risk takers, I, what risk takers, who can figure out how to get out of the hell hole they came from and to get into america? It's like your perfect test is the perfect test. Now this is not my ideal situation. Alright, my ideal situation is totally controlled immigration in which we get to pick. You know our our favorite people, the people at the most, but we don't have that sons of liberty we're going to delete you for saying the same fucking thing fifty times in a row, goodbye we'll get rid of everybody else who says that.

Ingos ngos, ngos, we don't need you anymore. So would you say yes or now that the Cathy Hogle, the governor, vocal and the ex president bill Clinton are saying the same thing that I say it was? It was not about anybody's culture, any differences on people at all. It was a system design problem that, if you, if you take half of the population and teach them that the other half have their shit and you should go get it if that has been taught young if you're in the half that has their shit, you should get out of their getaway So you don't want to be worth something things: the other ship. Here's a simple example suppose your estate was getting really serious about reparations,

you are literally gonna, be taxed just for being in that state. I will say, though somebody has bad genes. No, that has nothing to do with any individual. It's the system, that's bad for you, so you should get the fuck outta there. So if you could move to a state that is not considering taxing you specifically for reparations, you should go there now. Does that have anything to do with anybody's genes? Now that's a system design, so you you can go where the system design works in your favor and anybody who stays where the system design is clearly designed to make them suffer at the for the benefit of others. You should get the fuck outta there. If you can now realistically, there's no place to go,

it's. So if there are worse a place to go, that would be serious, but it's hyperbole, because where would you go alright? So in the limited case, maybe you could change states or something, but people don't really do that. Alright the story. The says that the mark Zuckerberg and his wife sold their san francisco home, so they ve had it for one thirty one million dollars for it. Now. Why do you say

as Zuckerberg would sell a home in san francisco. What what would cause him to not want a home in san francisco where he used to he used to like having a home in san francisco? Could it be that he spent hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money to guarantee that Democrats got elected so that they could put in place a system that he can survive? Because that's what it looks like it looks like you said: shoot this place has gone to hell because of the people I helped get elected, and so I've got gotta get the fuck out of here now. Does Zuckerberg make any statements or do you believe in his mind, he's thinking? Oh, they moved in a bunch of people to mine,

who have bad genes or bad character. Now is the system san francisco have a system that used to keep it clean and inviting people came there and then, thanks to people like secretary who got democrats in in place and sorrows and Sarah there there is now a new system in which the smartest thing that he can do is get the fuck out of there. So we solve this house how much more right do. I need to be. Do you remember the coverage of my of my cancellation? Do you remember how many the stories wrote that what I was complaining That was a system as opposed to some of these genes. Do you remember all those stories you never saw? One in hawaii you never saw one. The only the only place you've seen is where I've been.

Podcasts, and- and I explained that the reason you've never seen those story. Nobody ever asked. I was cancelled worldwide by miss indication all the newspapers and my publisher. They never asked why they never asked what was on my mind why I said it. What was the context? Never asked? Oh you're, so broken Alright, sam bagman freed, apparently according to Michael louis, was writing a book on had kids. Seriously, offering donald trump a large amount of money to run in twenty. Usually for now he got popped before eager to execute that

but the allegedly somebody gave him a number of five billion dollars, and so the speculation is that trump himself. Maybe behind that estimate? Do you think the trump would have taken five billion dollars and crypto do not run? I dont really see it. I don't see it so, but

Do you think, do you think, though somebody who isn't in the trump organization may have floated their own number, which was their own best guess of what it might take to talk him into easily? If you'd asked me, I could have given you a number, you should have asked me, I'm good at estimating I'll give you a number. You know my number would have been if you had asked me, what do you think is the number one number I would have given you just guess guess what number I would have given you as trump's price to live well I'll. Tell you five billion. That would have been my exact guess. You know why, because three or four billion are not round numbers, they seem just weird and trump was probably already worth somewhere in that low billion dollar number.

So getting a billion might not change his life, getting five billion that might change his life. You know he could buy entire new businesses, he could start a media empire. If you wanted to do a lot of stuff, he could run the country sort of without being an elected official sort of like a soros type or a murdoch type.

Where a basil stipe the one, a major publication, so you can imagine that trump might have at least considered five billion, but it's the same number I would have come up with cause over five seems like unnecessary, like if five doesn't get it done, I don't see how six would write. So five is enough to matter it'll. Be enough to give him a new set of power, you know they could buy entities, but I doubt he was ever involved in that conversation, it seems unlikely that anybody would have taken that to trump, because I think you would have I mean I dunno

while he is not violent, but he might punch somebody if they said that anyway. Well, we got a new senator in California. Governor newsom is appointing the replacement for Dianne Feinstein, who passed away, and, let's see, if there's a surprises involved here, Ok put into job a black lesbian, long, black lesbian, so I'm starting to think I never had a chance for the job. I mean obscene subtle signs that if I tried really hard to get their job now that I'm a democrat- and I feel like I just feel like- maybe the deck was a little stacked against me

in some ways. Yeah, you could say it's the fifth career that I've lost because of being a white guy. Once again, I cannot be a senator couldn't work at the bank because, as a white guy couldn't work at the phone company cause as a white male, they told me that directly by the way that could never be promoted at those places. My tv show didn't work because I wasn't black and I had to be black to be on Monday night anoop year, and then I got cancelled for saying something about the system that had nothing to do with anybody's genes or race. So now it's the fifth time in a row. I've been blocked by my

white maleness could not be a senator in california, but I'm sure she is great and the reason I'm sure she's great is, as she is, a woman, a lesbian and black. Those are three of the greatest things I've ever heard of in my life. Can we all agree on that there's, nothing better than being any one of those things, but if you ve got three things, europe maneater or lesbian and you're black. Well, that's who I want for my senator, because one way to know you get good quality is to artificially restrict your choice to the smallest pool of applicants, because that's the way you get

the best, the best people, all your all your best entrepreneurs do that you've probably seen the clips of steve jobs say when I hire people. I don't like to talk to more than two. I'm sure you said that right cause. Otherwise it's like we'd be acting stupid or something, but I'm sure he said that. Probably something like that. Alright, she has been a fierce advocate for working people. Excellent, not the good news is I'll. Tell you the good news. She has more eyes. Do you think? That's the thing. I really think that's the thing, the smart eyes. I just look at the picture of. Let me get her name right, la fonda, a butler.

So yeah. I looked at a number of pictures ever and you look at her face, and you say to yourself wow. She looks smart everybody's agreeing. All of the comments are the same. She has smart eyes. That does mean something. It does mean something I mean you can really tell if she has an animated sort of smart face. Alright,. I Joe Biden recently said in some interview that he was worried about the x platform and musk's ownership, and he said- and I quote they they they they they that's the first part of the quote: they they they they they they go online, they go and you have no notion whether its true or not. He said.

so there is directly Joe Biden doesn't want you to see what people say on x cause it's not his truth. Because I don't think Biden thinks that he knows the truth in a way. That's like you- and I don't know- is that the claim yes, some special access to truth. So he could look at acts and he knows what's true because of his superior. You don't have access to information. No, it is the government directly telling you they want to censor you. It couldn't be more direct than than the president of the united states tried to discourage people from using your platform or the l and eighty l, which is part of the democrat machine trying to destroy it before it was even paid for yeah. That's purely

an attack on free speech? There's no other way to put that. So that's why all the investigations into you learn rattling now. Do you know who is not being investigated? Policy is a must as a whole bunch of investigations and also my bullshit to us, and none of them sound, even vaguely like real crimes or anything but are there also a lot of investigations into george soros? Does anybody remember that a lot of lot of george soros investigations? I don't remember any. Let me ask you this: do you think that the intelligence, apparatus of the united states, would allow any billion there. You have it usual level of control over the country? Do you think they would let that happen.

while the nile they're not letting it happened with eleven months, is the alarm stood everyone's now is, is being blocked by forces that we assume are part of the deep state so bizarro seems to be operating with impunity, even though he seems to be funding things that would lead to the certain destruction of the united states, such as lawlessness, and you know no cash, bail and stuff. So why would this one guy be able to do things that even on the surface, look like they're designed to destroy the country? And yet mosque, who everything he's doing is clearly designed to help the country more free speech. You'll get humans do becomes space varying civilization, electric cars for climate change and he's the one

thus gives why, because he has a lot of power. So do you think that mother person has a lot of power would be allowed to operate just by his own whims, this kind of impossible in the world as as we know at that sort, it doesn't happen no one asked resume. Their sorrows is just a tool of the government, or at least the tool of the democratic. So I don't see him as separate from the elected officials. I think they just uses and maybe the until people do until If people do it looks like they just use them as a piggy bank and in return he gets everything he wants. That's what it looks like now, there's no way to know

but I see no situation in which the intelligence apparatus of a country would not have total control over an individual or a limit. Let me ask this a different way. If the intelligence apparatus of the united states wanted to cute troll soros, could they do it? Remember he's the cism, so they'd have physical control as well as his citizen. Of course they could with our intelligence people could control any individual. Would you agree with that statement? You know unless that individual decides to off themselves or something they could blackmail or bribe anybody cause, there's no limit to what they would do. That's bad and no limit what they can do for you that's good, as they have unlimited tools, of course again

So the only logical conclusion is, as soros is part of our intelligence operations or at least compatible with em. What else Kennedy. Which also tells you that whatever else is doing is either being tolerated, because it's not the top priority or we want it to happen. Who exactly wants to destroy our cities? I can only come up with one hypothesis. That makes sense, so I can come up with one hypothesis where, if you really twisted lay with a little bit you can make it makes sense. It goes like this. Let's say: soros is genuinely concerned about. the distribution of wealth and as rich people have too much, and he wants to poor people are more now

insistent with the fact that he is giving away a lot of his money, so he seems to be sending his money toward other people, partly self defense, I'm sure. But what? What would the possible plan or benefit be to destroy the cities of the united states with unlimited, duration. What would be the end state of that here is the only one I can think of. We would fix immigration cause. You realise that all of our problems is because our own system for illegal immigration is totally broken. So, at the very least.

if sex immigration at that, but you also my have to fix your neighbors. In other words, we might have to invest in countries that are doing well to get them to stay home. Maybe that's what he wants. More investment in in countries where there are so desperate they have to leave

I think that's the best I could come up with, and I would argue that it would look like the Matt gates approach, where I said congress is broken, so you should break it further because you can't fix it from where it is, it could be. The soros has tried to break city's, just break them and make them nonfunctional cause. Once once you break the country. Well, then, you have more options and one of those options might be way more immigration, but controlled. I actually think we would be better off with way more immigration controls do. Do you agree with that? Could we increase the numbers if we also increase the vetting and made sure that we have some control some say now, so I think it depends what you think about our birth rate.

if you think our native birth rate will keep up that, you can make an argument for restricting immigration if you think it will not, which is what I think it will not. Then the only way you can become a viable country in the long run this through immigration, because there are no other people here is the fact that you need to know about economics. Economics is population. There's your reframe economics is people right. The reason that india and china are world powers is not because each person makes a lot of money. You get that right, there's not a lot of rich chinese people and rich indians as a percentage of the population. It's only because there are so many of them. If you take you know,

italian middle class chinese? They can pay more taxes than america. That is maybe more rich people, so power is people. So if you say, if you say I want to stay a superpower, but I want to keep my population low or not growing too quickly. You can't have both of those those are incompatible. People equals economics, that's it now. You want to do it right and have them train and get the right people at the right rate. But people are people are money, that's it alright. So too,

and I can see some of you are not too delighted with it. Alright, here's a dog, not barking. If you have to say the the one thing, that's a problem that is causing our immigration crisis. What would be the one thing? That's the problem, this, the single root cause of immigration, go and watch how wrong you are damn at somebody. You were right incentives. Democrats when its embassy, so we have an amnesty law, there was designed for one purpose but has been. wildly abused for a different purpose, which is illegal immigration now, which members of congress have introduced the new amnesty laws, particularly given the name then

whims of the politicians who have proposed a solution which is affects the amnesty laws? What what nobody? Nobody? So one hundred percent of us agree that this wouldn't be happening, except for the amnesty law and that's not being debated. Am I right, somebody says scott weaver was doing something. That's a real person is not I'm not making fun of myself, but can you explain that yeah exploit a whoa asylum? I'm sorry aside, am I using the amnesty instead of asylum? I should say asylum right, which is the right word: asylum.

Credit correct incorrect, my language for less five minutes to asylum, asylum, asylum, asylum, asylum so who is working on changing the asylum laws which, which both democrats and republicans agree, are being abused? Isn't it the news? Is the news covering there's? Somebody is trying to get that changed. There's something completely missing in the story right. It doesn't matter if a candidate is talking about it because they can't make laws, so congress is, Completely uninvolved in changing the only thing that would matter is right

and you're not saying this on the news right. If I hadn't mentioned this, would it be at the top of your head that there's a simple facts? You just change that one law or you can just suspend it. You can just suspended.

say it's not working at the moment, maybe someday later we'll we'll reintroduce it just suspended. You don't think a president could just suspend it with an executive order. I do I believe that a president could suspend it with an executive order, because the president is the commander in chief. So if this law was being used to make us less safe and military age, people and terrorists and stuff are coming across the border executive order commander in chief shut it down, but don't make it go away forever. Just say at the moment this is too big of a risk so suspended until later. Well, here's here's my take. Obviously the media is not legitimate because they would be reporting out a simple fx and here are the people working on it. So maybe-

to give them some support, but instead we just show pictures of people screaming across the border and then talk about sanctuary cities where we are thinking so pass the sale that were in the world where there are no solutions. The solution was the part we ran past as fast as we could back up to the part that caused the asylum law, change it or suspended and then you don't have to worry about to many people in new york city and whether you should be a sanctuary setting. It would just go away so there's some kind of force at work that we don't understand or is very evil, because everything tells us that this is the easiest problem we have. Can you think of any other problem can be solved with a pen. I care that they get just sign a little piece of paper and the asylum law

problem solved. so yeah. There's something going on is not good, I will talk about the garbage science euro again, I have the skinner we'll go to the way boards now So I like to explain to you why science is broken and why everything else is broken to ready to partner Here's what you need to know about science that cannot be told to you by the media does the media's in on their they're polluters, and it looks like this.

graph. Goes like this ass, a money involved in the in the topic. That's on the left and then level of corruption is on the bottom it is very easy to understand if there's no money involved, just pure science, there's probably not much corruption, so you can trust when there's no money involved, probably not much corruption, because you can't make any money. But as you go up the money scale you get things like climate change and covered. If money works, the way it always work. Everywhere else overtime, your guarantee, that none of this is true. Why? Because criminals will always try

game every system, and eventually it will only be criminals, because money is good, so it's not going to pay to do things that are just true when you could do things that are not true and get a big jack so overtime. If there's a lot money involved in the topic like climate covert. What should happen, particularly by the design of the system, not by accident by the design of the system? You guarantee that your most important questions or all fraudulent there's no other way. This good work, there's no other way I can go. It is not like. Oh maybe this could lead to something bad now. It can only lead one way. There's not a second thing that can happen

It will always always always trend toward fraud, always it has to because that's where the money is now you might say to yourself, but Scott. You know there. There are some criminals, but mostly there's honest people. So wouldn't the honest people sort of crowd out the the criminals you know wouldn't want the criminal part always be smallish necessarily know. The criminal part is guaranteed to be the controlling part. Here's why and it's just math

It's just math, there's no opinion here at all pure math. Let's say you started with some kind of a system that was completely legitimate when you started it could be anything it could be the the system of science yeah the whole scientific community, everything it could be the republic that's a system, it could be a voting system, these systems within the larger systems. If you started with these all being completely legit on day one, and then you wait what's going on, because all of these things have a lot of money involved, really big stakes like the biggest money of all billions and billions of dollars. You know big money, you can assume there'll be insignificant, all attempts to get some of that money and some virtue, your intentions,

Now, let's say somebody tries, but they ve only got a five percent chance of success boom. It didn't work so everything's good for some people tried, but there is a ninety five percent chance they would fail. Current Robert tomorrow comes somebody else tries ninety five percent chance. They fail. It failed again day three failed again day for failed again, failed again, failed again failed again. Yes, what is it? What happens if you can go and eventually somebody's going to succeed, And then they're gonna get ensconced and then more people will succeed. Overtime there is no way you can avoid.

all of our systems being corrupt eventually because they can be corrupted. It's just unlikely most of the time you get caught, but only a few people have to get through the system and succeed. Five percent would be plenty to guarantee guarantee that eventually all of these systems are corrupt. This is our current design. Our current design guarantees corruption. Do you know it would be something The workers against corruption term limits term limits they just about the only thing you can do to make people not steal from you is to not keep them around for long How can you fix the election system? If you believe the election system is not fair was the only thing you can do to fix it,

fire one hundred percent of the people will work on it every year and the next year a whole other group of people. Then maybe you could find out if somebody was doing some cause, the the good people would get fired, like the people who are good at cheating might be replaced by somebody who's, not as good at it, and then they get caught so pretty much. The only thing you can ever do to assist them as people and money in the Is you go eliminate all the people now and then do you know why we don't have term limits in congress? Now you do not do because if he had turned limits, you could not stay in congress long enough to be Bob menendez, bobbin and bomb menendez, the guy who's yeah accused of taking bribes as head of the foreign intelligence. Clearly, the reason

He was in a position to take bribes this he was there. for a very long time and eventually got to the place where he could get away with it, and so he did. If you ve got. Somebody is bad in congress for a long time and that you put them in the job. That is the most easy to get bribes. What do you expect to happen? What would happen every time when Biden was their looks like it was about the same?

So if the design of your system is a union that keep the same people in place for a long time, there are just get a chip away at things until they find a way to steal all your money by design. So don't think that we have bad people. We also have that, but the design is guaranteed, make everything corrupt, including science, including science. The correct the design of science at the moment is that the only way I can get it you get ahead is to say things that I agree with the narrative and are in a big topic. So it's gotta be year. You created a system that guarantees a whole bunch of people whose a climate change is real.

Then they compete to say how bad it is. Whoever can say it's the worst gets the most money if they can make a case for it. So why are things broken? They were designed to break if you designed things to break, don't be surprised when they break. right. So that's happening. I do remember the study I talked about it yesterday and a lot of you have heard about it. So nate silver was talking about the belt. The fact that there was some big They showed that the people in red states were dying at a higher rate than the blue states. After the vaccination came out.

So nice over, as I've said, a number of times is one of your most qualified people for Loki data and evaluating. If you want to hear the counterpoint to nasal. Mistake that the data shows that, as soon as the vaccinations came out, the red states did worse that that different started before the vaccinations came out and it's in the data. If you dig into the data, you can see that the different started long before the vaccinations came out. Are we done? Are we done? That's all you need to know right, there's nothing else. You need to do If the difference happened before the vaccinations, it wasn't. The vaccinations now this comes to us in the wall street journal from leash urgently I'll just read her words

study in the journal of american medical association purporting now remember, the journal of american medical association is one of the respected ones. That's one of the biggest So the study there was an that purported to find her. a rate of excess deaths among republican voters in florida and ohio after vaccines have been rolled out Differences in partisan vaccinations unto the study concluded may have contributed to the severity and trajectory of the pandemic. I now there's a counterpoint, but the study lack information on individuals, vaccination and cause death way is a study about vaccination status and cause of death. But what it lacked was information on your vaccination status and cause of death.

I'm starting to smell a problem with this will go on. It also didn't adjust for confounding variables, such as underlying health conditions and behaviors up. Apparently the age. The age part was not the biggest problem, as others pointed out charts buried in the studies Appendix showed excess desk. on older republicans started to accede, democrats and bid twenty twenty well before vaccines were available. Is there anything else? I need to tell you about how science is done. Here was ear was science in which their own data that they published disagreed with their own interpretation and not just a little bit, not just a little bit. It was opposite, it was obvious,

that and now we did the opposite gets through the peer reviewers got through the peer reviewers. But to go all the way, the probably day, silver, I'm not sure if he was looking at this, one are not more than some other data he was looking at, but certainly other qualified smart people looked at and said. Well, that looks good because how many people are going to dig into the appendix and see if see, what's going on, they're, probably not many. Now, if I got a second opinion from the study authors, would they agree with what alicia Finley says about them? Probably not. They would have their own argument about. Why? Maybe something made sense and you don't think it is maybe I dunno but.

we don't have the science that works when money is involved. Would you agree that if money is involved, size just breaks just brace instantly, the site is like glass, yeah sciences like steal, when no money is involved, because then just the truth matters, but as soon as money is involved, it's glass. You can't trust a little alright. Well, ladies and gentlemen, now that I have proven that I was right about everything and you can see the gears of the machine I'd like to say this is probably the best live stream you've ever seen, and if you like this- and you have not yet picked up my book reframe your brain.

It's over here, it's right there and a lot of people telling me it's. The best book, they've ever seen actually they're, saying literally, is the best book they have ever they've ever read. Now I dont know how often you read a book and you walk away saying this is the best book of ever read But people are saying that about this book, so if that doesn't make you curious, I dunno what will alright thanks for joining youtube and go say goodbye to you now and hope you enjoyed it and I'll see you tomorrow,