Episode 2598 CWSA 09/15/24
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses a variety of topics including the SpaceX Polaris Dawn mission, the first-ever private space walk, and Elon Musk's contributions to space exploration. It criticizes the Washington Post for lacking credibility and discusses the speaker's own experiences with cancellation due to political views. The script also touches on theories about gravity, relationships and happiness, and the influence of online influencers on public health. It concludes with commentary on the current political climate, the role of men in voting, and predictions about the upcoming election.
Takeaways
- 🚀 The SpaceX Polaris Dawn mission with three crew members was successful, marking a historic achievement in space exploration and a private space walk.
- ☕️ The 'simultaneous sip' is introduced as a pleasurable daily ritual involving enjoying a favorite beverage, suggesting it enhances the experience of the moment.
- 🎉 Elon Musk is celebrated for his significant contributions to space technology and his vision for an interplanetary civilization.
- 📰 Criticism is directed at the Washington Post for what is perceived as a biased portrayal of Elon Musk, with a claim that the newspaper is not a credible source.
- 🗳️ The speaker reflects on their own 'cancellation', attributing it to political support rather than any specific statement, highlighting the lack of dialogue before the cancellation.
- 🔬 There's discussion about the search for gravity components, with a personal hypothesis proposed that gravity might be a rule in the universe's simulation rather than a mechanical part like a graviton.
- 🤔 A humorous take on a study suggesting a lack of sex can affect a woman's mood, with a playful challenge to the audience to read the speaker's thoughts on the matter.
- 🎬 Praise is given to Matt Walsh's film 'Am I Racist?' for its high audience approval and success despite minimal media coverage, suggesting a disconnect between critic and audience reception.
- 💊 Concern is expressed over influencers promoting medication like OxyContin with potentially false information, questioning the balance between free speech and public health.
- 🗣️ The speaker predicts that the presidential election outcome may not be decided by the end of the year, suggesting potential delays and controversies in the election process.
Q & A
What is the 'simultaneous Sip' mentioned in the script?
-The 'simultaneous Sip' is a pleasurable activity suggested by the speaker where one fills a vessel with their favorite liquid, such as coffee, and takes a sip to enhance the listening experience.
What significant event did SpaceX's Polaris Dawn mission achieve?
-SpaceX's Polaris Dawn mission, with three crew members, successfully returned to Earth after a historic 5-day mission, which included the first-ever private space walk.
What is the speaker's view on the Washington Post's credibility?
-The speaker considers the Washington Post not credible, suggesting it is influenced by entities like Democrats, the CIA, the FBI, or a 'deep state' and should not be seen as a reliable news source.
Why does the speaker believe he was 'canceled'?
-The speaker believes he was 'canceled' for supporting Trump, not for anything he said, as evidenced by the lack of inquiry or request for clarification from those who worked with him for decades.
What is the speaker's hypothesis regarding gravity and the concept of a 'graviton'?
-The speaker hypothesizes that there is no need for a 'graviton' or a mechanical part of gravity. Instead, he suggests that movement in the universe might be a result of objects disappearing and reappearing closer to areas of higher density due to a hardcoded rule in the universe's 'simulation'.
What does the speaker think about the study that suggests a lack of sex can make women angry?
-The speaker humorously dismisses the need for a study by stating the obvious—that people, both men and women, are generally happier when they are sexually satisfied.
What is the speaker's opinion on the film 'Am I Racist' by Matt Walsh?
-The speaker has not seen the film but recommends it based on its high audience approval rating and the controversy surrounding it, suggesting it challenges the mainstream narrative.
What is the speaker's stance on influencers promoting prescription drugs like OxyContin?
-The speaker questions the need for regulation, suggesting that if people are getting medical advice from influencers, they should also be consulting doctors who can provide accurate information.
What prediction does the speaker make about the outcome of the presidential election?
-The speaker predicts that there will be no clear decision on who the president is by the end of the year, suggesting potential delays and disputes in the election results.
Why does the speaker suggest that men might not respond to polls or might lie?
-The speaker hypothesizes that men, particularly conservative men, might not respond to polls or might lie as a form of pushback or prank against a system they perceive as biased against them.
Outlines
🚀 SpaceX Polaris Dawn Mission and Elon Musk's Vision
The paragraph discusses the successful return of SpaceX's Polaris Dawn mission to Earth, highlighting the historic private space walk and the mission's significance. It praises Elon Musk's contributions to space exploration and his vision for an interplanetary civilization. The speaker criticizes the Washington Post for allegedly running a hit piece on Musk, questioning the newspaper's credibility and suggesting political or deep state influences. The paragraph also touches on the importance of understanding the players involved in news stories to discern the truth.
📊 Public Perception and Cancellation Culture
This paragraph delves into the aftermath of the speaker's cancellation, led by the Washington Post, and explores public perception through a non-scientific poll. It reveals that the majority believe the cancellation was due to political support rather than statements made. The speaker emphasizes the lack of dialogue or opportunity to clarify before cancellation, suggesting a rush to judgment. The paragraph also discusses the role of media and the impact of cancellation on long-standing professional relationships.
🧠 Hypothesis on the Nature of Gravity and Reality
The speaker presents a personal hypothesis on gravity, challenging the concept of a graviton and aligning with Einstein's theory of gravity as a curvature of space. The hypothesis suggests that movement in the universe is not smooth but rather a series of disappearances and reappearances, influenced by density. This idea is presented as a potential rule within a simulated universe, positing that the universe could be governed by simple rules rather than complex particles or forces.
🤔 The Impact of Sexual Relations on Emotional Well-being
This paragraph humorously addresses a study suggesting a correlation between sexual activity and a woman's mood, questioning the need for extensive research to conclude that sexual satisfaction may improve happiness. The speaker playfully challenges the audience to read their mind on the matter, implying a common-sense understanding of the connection between sexual fulfillment and emotional well-being.
🎬 Matt Walsh's Film Success and Hollywood's Double Standards
The paragraph discusses Matt Walsh's film, which has become a surprise box office success despite limited screenings, suggesting a disconnect between critical reception and audience approval. The speaker criticizes mainstream Hollywood for producing movies that avoid controversy but often lack humor or depth. They also touch on the role of social media and online influencers in shaping public opinion and the potential regulation of deceptive practices in online health-related content.
💊 The Role of Influencers in Promoting Medications
The speaker ponders the ethical implications of influencers promoting medications, questioning whether such promotions constitute free speech or should be regulated. They argue for personal responsibility in seeking medical advice and suggest that doctors are the appropriate sources for such information. The paragraph also touches on the potential dangers of unregulated online health advice and the role of prescription requirements in ensuring safety.
🗳️ Encouraging Voter Participation Through Pranks
In this paragraph, the speaker encourages men to increase voter turnout by framing it as a prank, particularly targeting non-traditional voters. They suggest that men are motivated by clear, specific tasks and the element of humor. The speaker proposes a strategy to engage men in voting by making it a social experiment, using the excuse of 'saving the cats' to provoke a reaction from the opposition, thus increasing voter enthusiasm.
📰 New York Times' Warning on Election Night Results
The speaker critiques a New York Times article that anticipates potential delays in election results, suggesting that such delays do not necessarily indicate process failures. They argue that the article is an attempt to manage public expectations and counter conspiracy theories. The paragraph also discusses the potential for the 2020 election results to be contested, with the speaker predicting that a clear winner may not be declared by the end of the year.
🤔 The Influence of Media on Public Perception
This paragraph discusses the role of the media in shaping public perception, particularly in the context of political campaigns. The speaker agrees with Brian Stelter's observation that the messaging and feelings conveyed by a campaign are more influential than the specific words spoken. They critique the media's selective fact-checking and the tendency to ignore or downplay certain controversies, such as those surrounding Kamala Harris's public appearances.
🕵️♂️ The Fine People Hoax and Media Bias
The speaker challenges the media's portrayal of Trump's 'fine people' comment, arguing that the context and assumptions made by the media are flawed. They discuss the logical disconnect in the media's fact-checking and the importance of understanding the full context of statements. The paragraph also touches on the role of personal bias in shaping media narratives and the public's perception of political figures.
📢 The Role of Fact-Checking in Political Discourse
This paragraph examines the practice of fact-checking in political reporting, specifically calling out instances where fact-checks may be used to divert attention from more significant issues. The speaker critiques the media's focus on less important details while ignoring broader context or more substantial claims. They also discuss the potential for fact-checking to be used as a tool to reinforce existing biases rather than to inform the public.
📈 The Impact of Media Bias on Election Integrity
The speaker discusses the potential impact of media bias on the perception of election integrity, suggesting that the media's focus on certain narratives may influence public trust in election outcomes. They explore the idea that media coverage can shape opinions on the fairness of elections, even in the absence of concrete evidence. The paragraph also touches on the broader implications of media bias for democratic processes.
🤷♀️ The Controversy Surrounding Laura Loomer
This paragraph delves into the controversy surrounding Laura Loomer, a controversial figure associated with the Trump campaign. The speaker discusses the accusations of misinformation and the media's response, including the claim that she is only correct 80% of the time. They also touch on Loomer's ban from the Trump campaign plane and the potential implications of her views on various topics, including election integrity and conspiracy theories.
🎉 Conclusion and Engagement with Locals
In the concluding paragraph, the speaker expresses appreciation for the audience, particularly those on local platforms, and contrasts their commitment to continuous content creation with podcasters who take weekends off. They also hint at a private engagement with the audience on local platforms and encourage viewers to join for future discussions.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡dopamine
💡SpaceX
💡Washington Post
💡graviton
💡cancellation
💡influencers
💡pranks
💡polling
💡Deep State
💡petition
Highlights
The host encourages listeners to enhance their experience with a favorite beverage, highlighting the 'simultaneous Sip'.
Celebration of SpaceX's Polaris Dawn mission, applauding Elon Musk's vision for an interplanetary civilization.
Critique of the Washington Post's credibility, suggesting bias and a lack of balanced reporting.
Discussion on the aftermath of the host's cancellation, attributing it to political support rather than言论内容.
A humorous take on the hypothesis that gravity might not involve particles like the graviton, but rather be a rule in the universe's 'simulation'.
Commentary on a study suggesting a lack of sex can affect attitudes in relationships, with a call for a more straightforward approach to such studies.
Praise for Matt Walsh's film 'Am I Racist?' and its success despite minimal media coverage.
Debate on the role of influencers in promoting medical information, questioning the boundaries of free speech versus misinformation.
Analysis of polling data's accuracy, suggesting that current polls may not be as reliable as previously thought.
A call to action for men to vote as a prank, emphasizing the importance of political participation in a light-hearted manner.
Prediction of potential delays in election results and the implications for the public's trust in the electoral process.
Critique of the media's focus on image over substance in political campaigns, using KLA Harris's media presence as an example.
Discussion on the handling of the Trump assassination attempt, questioning the Secret Service's preparedness and response.
Examination of the 'Charlottesville fine people hoax' and the media's role in perpetuating misinformation.
Reflection on the role of fact-checking in debates, questioning the impartiality of moderators and the media.
Final thoughts on the value of working with others despite disagreements, emphasizing the importance of collaboration over uniformity of opinion.
Transcripts
well ladies and
gentlemen you should be streaming on in
here for the
fun the best Sunday
[Music]
ever good morning everybody and welcome
to the highlight of human
civilization yeah and if you'd like to
take this experience up to levels even
higher than this higher than your tiny
shiny human brain can even comprehend
well all you need for that is a cup or a
mug or a glass a tanker chel orstein a
Canen juger flask a vessel of any kind
fill it with your favorite liquid I like
coffee join me now for the unparallel
pleasure of the dopamine h of the day
the thing makes everything better it's
called the simultaneous Sip and it
happens now
go oh my God that was
good extra extra
good well the
SpaceX polar Polaris Dawn had three crew
members has successfully returned to
Earth after a 5day historic mission and
had the first ever private space walk
and so this is one of those days where
we should all celebrate the great
Mastery of Elon Musk and the risks he's
taken and the work he's put in to make
the world a
interplanetary civilization and extend
the light of human consciousness
throughout the
universe or or if you're the Washington
Post this would be a good time to run a
hitpiece
uh in which you would paint him as
uniquely
dangerous uh because of his standing up
for free speech basically the Federalist
has a story about
this now I often tell you if you only
know what happened that's how you
reading the news oh tell me what
happened you won't know anything that's
true you have to know who if you don't
know the players all the news is
backwards or
misleading or makes no sense whatsoever
so let me explain it the Washington Post
is not a credible news organization I
don't know exactly what they are but
they're clearly influenced by I don't
know Democrats or the CIA or the FBI or
some damn deep State thing but they're
definitely not
news you know they do a little news too
but they're not really something you
should see as a credible news source
and as I was thinking about this and it
really doesn't matter what they said
about Elon Musk because you know it's
just
you could just ignore anything
in the Washington Post but you know the
Washington Post was the paper that led
my
cancellation and so now that some time
has passed I wondered how people were
viewing my cancellation LED Again by The
Washington Post which is not a credible
news organization
and so I asked this question the poll on
acts non-scientific of course I said now
that time has passed what is your
interpretation of the reason I was
canceled in newspapers and books
worldwide and the choices were did I get
cancelled for supporting Trump or for
quote something I
said 79% said I got cancelled for
supporting Trump and 21% said it was
something I said the correct answer is
for supporting Trump do you know how you
know that for
sure because I got cancelled without
anybody even asking me what I meant or
if I wanted to
apologize in the real world if the only
problem had been what I said then all of
these people who had worked with me for
30 years just think about it these are
people I worked with for decades in you
know perfectly good
relationships when you say something
that gets everybody upset what is the
normal thing that people do in a normal
situation they say okay we might have to
cancel you but before we do this you're
really going to need to answer like we
need we have some questions you know do
you mean it were you joking do you want
to take it back is there anything you
want to
add nobody
asked
nobody in the entire news industry with
one exception guess what the exception
was it it was news
Nation Chris Cuomo who by the way did a
great job of of basically being balanced
just being fair and news Nation did not
run
Dilbert so it so it took somebody who
wasn't even involved with me in any way
to
actually ask the question why' you say
it what was the point do you have
anything you want to apologize for now
they may have still canceled me but the
reason you can know that it wasn't what
I said is they never asked for for any
clarification that's all you need to
know and there were literally hundreds
of entities involved if you count all
the newspapers there were thousands of
newspapers and you bookstores and
Publishers nobody nobody not a single
person said do you want to add to that
apologize correct it nothing
no it was because of trump of
course I think it's obvious anyway um
and I I laughed because an Indian
publication over in India they just
matter ofly say I was cancelled for
supporting Trump if you're in another
country it's like oh that's kind of
obvious they just treat it that
way all right there's a according to
popular scientists there's some new
tests going on where scientists are
trying to find the the comp components
of gravity and and long has it been
speculated that there might be something
called a
graviton some kind of not discovered
particle or entity or piece of reality
called a
graviton but I'm going to bet against it
now partly because I'm going to agree
with Einstein Einstein said gravity was
just an aspect of bent
space but I don't know do you need any
gravitons to bend space feels like
that's just
different but I'm going to give you my
hypothesis it goes like
this that nothing in the Universe moves
smoothly from one place to another that
that's an
illusion what happens is that things
disappear and then they reappear in a
new position now we don't notice because
it's happening so
quickly and that the Only Rule in the
simulation
is that the next time you appear it's
going to be probably closer to where
there's already more stuff as in density
like a planet so if you were you know in
space near a planet and you disappeared
like everything in the universe
disappears and then
reappears the next time it reappeared it
would have moved a greater distance
because that's just the rule so I
believe that they'll never figure out
a mechanical part of
gravity like a
graviton I predict they won't find it I
think there's just a hardcoded rule in
the simulation it's just a software Rule
and that and that we'll not be able to
find any bases for it in what we think
is our reality because it just comes
from outside our reality and they just
say ah every time you reappear it's more
likely to be closer to where there's
more stuff already and that's it and it
could be
as I speculated in my book God's debris
it could be that the entire universe
could be described by just a few Simple
Rules such as the next time you appear
you're going to be closer to things that
are like
you that's
it all
right that's just fun by the way don't
take it too
seriously
um there is a story in a public apption
called Vanguard that uh the title is men
beware a lack of sex can make your woman
angry and apparently there's quite a bit
of a study into this concept that if
you're not giving your woman sex her
attitude will not be
A+ what do you think I'm going to say
about that um let's see if you can put
on your thinking caps read my mind go
ahead read it read it and got it I think
you all got it yeah they could have just
asked me are people happier or less
happy when they get laid H let me let me
fund a gigantic
multi-year study and then we'll do
multile studies then I'll do a mult meta
study of the studies and then I will
determine that people who get laid are
slightly happier than people who didn't
get laid
men and women is men and women I know I
know I'm starting to think that women
like sex
too do they do they yes yes they
do all right so here's some good news
I'm loving this story by the way I'm
just loving it so Matt Walsh apparently
has a hit on his hands his new film am I
a racist am I racist am I racist so
apparently it opened as the third
highest grossing film in the country
despite as you could imagine being on
far fewer screens because you know it's
a little more
controversial now uh I hear great things
about it I think uh got like a
99% viewer approval but no critics
covered
it Ju Just hold this in your head let me
just say it again because it just tells
you everything about the world
99% audience
approval zero critics have covered
it third highest grossing movie in the
country oh my God they must be
frightened of this thing so I hear great
things about it I plan to see it haven't
seen it yet I just I just every moment I
get I want to just help help promote it
because it has to be said that well I
believe the movie is quite good and
everybody seems to like it so I
recommend it without even seeing it
um the other movies it was competing
against are all
garbage the the Classic Hollywood movie
where you don't offend anybody means you
can't do
humor and then other movies are just way
too long for anybody's attention span
and they're designed to make you feel
bad the entire enre time you're there
all right we're going to start the movie
by watching somebody you probably like
as a character and we're going to slay
their family in front of
them why why are you doing that it's a
movie it's a movie that's what we do we
make movies where there's problems and
then people solve them and I say but
paying money to feel like somebody I
like their familyes being slain right in
front of me don't worry an hour later
when they kill the back guys they'll be
happy again but really killing people
shouldn't make you happy after your
family's been slain and all of your
friends died trying to help you yes but
he'll win in the end Willie will he
because his family's dead and all of his
friends and all the the W all the people
who died in car accidents during the car
chases it feels like it's just all bad
to me why am I watching this so that's
my experience of watching movies so I
don't do it so uh but anyway watch that
one
uh couple of senators in a bipartisan
move according to the Wall Street
Journal are trying to Target teleah
Health firms and and uh online
influencers who are maybe saying things
about uh false things about OIC and wi
GOI I think it does similar things so
apparently there a deceptive online
practices so and some of the influencers
are getting paid for promoting these
drugs and that's extra bad if you're
being paid for it and you're misleading
people what do you think of that is it
free speech that the influencers can lie
to you about medical
things or you need to make that illegal
remember it's
bipartisan I don't know I'm a little bit
on the uh I'm a little bit uncertain on
this one because it seems to me that if
you're getting your medical advice from
an influencer
online maybe a little of that's on you
you
maybe maybe you should ask your doctor
you know you're not it's not like you're
going to get a nobody's going to get a
OIC prescription from an online
influencer am I right and shouldn't your
doctor be telling you what the risks and
the rewards
are so if it were If This Were a
nonprescription item that could kill you
then I would say oh you know this is
something we need to talk about but if
it's a prescription
item I feel like I'm leaning toward free
speech and let the idiots say idiot
things about it because the entire
internet is full of people saying wrong
things about drugs and food and
nutrients so how in the
world how in the world could you ever
Poli that so I think if specifically in
the case of it being a prescription
drug which it is right you can't you
can't go give yourself OIC over the
counter I think just let the doctors do
what the doctors do tell you who's lying
to you and who isn't and do the best you
can Robert
dairo is back he wants us to know that
Trump will never give up power because
he thinks he's a gangster but the real
gangsters would know better oh the real
gangsters would know he is so batshit
crazy that I don't think he knows that
his entire point of view is based on the
imagination that he can read a mind of a
stranger and that what he sees in there
is inconsistent with anything that's
happening in the real world but he's
pretty sure he sees
it again if we treat mental illness as a
political opinion that's not going to go
well there there needs to be some way
way that our media makes some kind of
distinction between what is clearly a
mental problem clearly this is not a
political
opinion in my
opinion well there's a uh pollster
called Atlas Intel who I didn't know
this but uh was one of the most actually
the most accurate pollster of
2020 so it had estimated Biden would be
up
4.7 and the final result was Biden up
4.5 and I guess that was the best of
anybody and uh I tell you that because
their current prediction is that Trump
has a
99.9% chance of winning the election
under the current polling
situation now if I understand
correctly uh if a republican is
basically polling about
even it almost always means that on an
electoral uh sense that they would win
easily and it has something to do with
let's see if I have this right that the
big cities that are definitely going to
go Blue have lots of population so it's
not a surprise that maybe Democrats
would have more total votes in the
country but Republicans might get them
in rural areas and and pick up enough
electoral votes to dominate I think
that's a reasonable explanation but um I
will note that this morning alone I saw
people confidently say that the polls
are heavily favoring Harris and I've
seen people confidently say the polls
are heavily favoring Trump the same day
within minutes and all of everybody who
said it was a credible Source you know
like a new source uh and they were quite
certain that the world was one way and
the other said the world is the other
way now I don't think polling is ever
never looked less credible to
me even though I always doubted it a
little bit it's never looked less
credible than it looks right now I mean
how could it be that half of the
pollsters say Harris is dominating and
the other half say Trump is
dominating you know if it was something
like some people say one candidate is
way ahead and then other people say that
candidate is ahead but not as way ahead
then I would say okay that you know that
might be honest difference of
approach but if you're showing me that
one says one is way ahead and the other
says the other was way ahead that's
something
different that's a different thing I
don't know what it is but it's
different but according to breit Bart
they're talking about how uh Trump has
consistently outperformed his poll
numbers here's something I didn't know
did you know the pollsters are very good
at getting Democrat predictions right I
I didn't know that apparently they're
good at getting the Democrats right do
you know why I think it's because the
Democrats tell the truth when the
pollsters call them I think and I think
that Dem that Republicans have learned
not to tell the truth or to avoid the
call and and so there's thought that men
in particular so men kind of stand out
in this this concept that men in
particular conservative men tend to not
be responsive to polls or maybe just
outright
lie now why would men do
that would they do it to make the world
a better place maybe in some way yes I
mean but it's just one poor
response um I'm going to tell you
something about men in a
moment if if you're a woman this is
going to surprise you if you're a man
and I when I say when I tell you I want
you to tell me in the comments if I'm
accurate and it will be something I
think you've never heard before so I'm
going to say something about men that's
different from women and it's a
stereotype but I want you to see if if
you agree with it if you don't agree
then I'll say oh I guess I'm just a I
don't know bigoted stereotyper or
something but I want to see if you agree
so wait for it it's coming real soon
anyway so the idea is that maybe men in
particular are not answering polls but
here's two things that motivate men more
than women all right here's where I want
you to agree or disagree in the comments
so just just give me the you know just
dump it don't be good to me if you you
know don't be kind to me if you disagree
so I'm looking for
disagreement statement number
one here's something that motivates men
way more than
women
pranks
pranks yes or
no men are motivated by
pranks they're fun we like to we like
the just the fun of it getting something
over on somebody yes yes or no yeah not
only are we
motivated but we're often extra
motivated
as in if you said to me Scott uh we're
playing a prank on Bob and uh can can
you help out the first thing I'd ask is
what's the prank and let's say I liked
it and then they'd say do you have time
and I would say who I don't know I've
got deadlines today I've got some
meetings today when do you need it oh we
kind of need it right now can you help
us I would say all right I'll clear my
calendar
because there's no way I'm going to let
a good prank get away without helping oh
I'm in if if it's a prank and I can be
part of it please uh I will rearrange my
schedule to be part of the prank now
tell me I'm tell me I'm right men now
women you don't know right women you
don't know one way or another you you
have no visibility into this but men in
your inner mind maybe you don't say it
you'll love a prank all right so that's
the first point here's the second one
this will be a little maybe more
controversial might maybe a little more
disagreement but I say the following
there's something that men love way more
than women way
more clear and specific
asks that they can
do if you say to me Scott can you make
me happier today I would say um like how
what like what would I do well you know
the things that make me happy and you
know the
things and I would say you mean like
same thing I did yesterday yeah yeah
like that but a different thing because
you did that yesterday and then I'd be
like well I don't really know a thing I
could you be more
specific and then you're ma says to you
yes can you scratch my back at
800m and then I
go yes yes that's clear that's specific
I can absolutely do that and when I'm
done I'm going to feel like I got
something done and I won if you make it
clear and you make it specific and it's
something I can do I'm all
in so now I'm going to put those two
things things
together if you want men who have never
voted before to
vote here's
how you make it a
prank the
prank is to beat the
bolsters the
prank is that when when the uh results
are read you knew what was going to
happen but the news didn't know the
prank is watching the faces of the
Democrats when they find out what
happened the
prank is men we've put up with years of
and maybe we just want to push
back a little
bit in a way that doesn't get you fired
in a way that doesn't ruin your
relationship but in a way that is and
here's the important
part
hilarious and so here's the clear and
specific ask for young
men
vote but the clear and specific ask is
to get at least one non-traditional
voter to vote also as part of the prank
your job men each of you for the prank
this is for the prank your job is to to
locate if you can one person who hasn't
voted or is unlikely to vote at all and
get them in on the
prank just one every one of you one
person now the easiest way would be if
you're both going to do mail and votes
you know just say hey stand right here
fill this out with me just you know do
the line of Republicans that would be
ideal and just treat it as a prank if
you treat it as voting people who vote
will show
up if you treat it as a prank we all
show
[Laughter]
up ladies if you don't understand men
let me say it again if you treat it as
election you'll get I don't know half of
the people showing up if you treat it as
a prank we're all coming we're all
coming CU we're not going to miss the
prank especially if we can achieve it
with a clear and very specific
ask and that's my clear and specific ask
men find one man that you know isn't
going to vote but you think would vote
for Trump as part of the prank and then
get him to
vote and then if you want to really sell
the prank if you're going to tell
anybody you voted you should tell them
it's to save the
cats that's it now would that be the
reason you voted of course not would it
make Democrats go absolutely
crazy yes it would that's the prank it
was the cats you know I wasn't going to
vote till I heard I could save some cats
now you don't even need to like cats you
could say dogs if you like if you like
dogs better the funny thing is the
reason you should give should be the
dumbest one
don't don't say that you like his
economics better just say you want to
save the cats it will make them crazy
they will just go crazy it will
be the funniest thing that ever happened
to you just imagine visualize this for a
moment will you visualize you're
watching the results come in on MSNBC
and
CNN and they're they're doing exit
polling and you're seeing somebody with
like their their their faces Fallen you
know it's one of their MSNBC reporters
and they have to do the the exit pole uh
report yeah um we're a little bit
surprised at a lot of the
comments a lot more men than I've ever
seen voting before um and when we ask
them they say it's uh it's about the
uh it's about saving the
cats and then they
cry come on you don't want in on that
prank all right now so that's my case
clear and specific ask find somebody to
vote put them in on the prank and uh
treat it as a
prank especially for the younger men for
the older men it's it's a different
process
probably
men men you tell
me that would work you know it
would men also like to have direct
so and again you know men some men like
to be leaders some like to be followers
but even the leaders and the followers
like a clear Direction I'm giving you a
very clear Direction men it is time to
save the country if the way you can do
it is also with a hilarious prank you
need to do it but what you need to do is
you have to rest control away from the
batshit crazy women who have been
ruining our lives and destroying the
country no I'm not saying every woman is
bad there's tons of great women on the
left and the right if you're also going
to say to me Scott you're being a bigot
because you made a generalization that's
what we're trying to stop we're trying
to stop the people who will stop you by
telling you you made an a generalization
no it is true that women are destroying
the country and a lot of it has
to do with being literally mentally ill
we should stop listening to them and
take back the country men it's
time it's time to do the prank of all
pranks let's get this
done now watch this is there one man who
disagrees with me even one go look at
look at the
comments I'm looking for even one man
who would say this is a bad idea or that
it wouldn't
work yeah look at the comments this is
100%
stake through the heart it's an
Unstoppable stake through the heart you
just have to let people know this is the
plan that's it and it's
over it's over as long as people know
that's the plan it's
over all
right shouldn't have canceled me that's
what I'm
saying New York Times is warning us that
the election results huh this is
interesting the timing of it and the
story in the New York Times The
Source huh so the story is that uh quote
if a winner is not declared on Election
night huh why wouldn't it be with with
our excellent systems I'm pretty sure we
fortified them pretty well but you know
if if you know in the unlikely event
that a winner is not declared on
Election night New York Times wants us
to know that it will not necessarily
point to failures in the process no no
no just because because everybody else's
elections can be figured out the same
day and the fact that we know in advance
ours are designed so that we can't
that's not a failure of the system No No
in fact it's so far from a failure in
the system let me tell you what it is
it's more likely they say quote it will
be result of the intense security
measures required for counting mailin
ballots election officials across the
country are trying to Telegraph to
voters they're waiting long hours or
even
days days for result is not unexpected
in a close election huh and the
elections are suspiciously magically
almost miraculously close what could it
possibly cause that and they're and they
are eager to counter conspiracy
theorists you know people like me people
like you they're eager to counter that
so we're being countered
people stand down Stand Down The New
York Times is C cing us you're being
countered stop it stop it you've been
countered and you've been countered by
them
saying that
really uh the real thing is that it just
takes longer to make sure it's done
right that's why it takes longer it's
not longer because they got to figure
out how many ballots to ship in which
you people are thinking stop it I'm
countering you I'm countering you with
this damn it you're
countered yeah so I'm going to Triple
down or quadruple down on my prediction
I've been saying for a while that we
will not have a decision of who the
president is by the end of the year I
think we'll figure it out January is but
I don't think it's going to happen
before the end of the year now there
might be people individuals saying oh
yes we have decided
but I don't think the country is going
to be decided in other words at least
half of the country is going to be
looking at whatever the decision is and
saying nope I don't know which half
it'll be but I do predict there could be
problems imagine if you will that Trump
wins well by the way Peter teal actually
said at the all-in
Pod that uh if if the election is close
Trump can't
win because the Democrats will quote
fortify the
election and he jokes because he has to
use that word fortify because it's the
one that's allowed you know he doesn't
want to get canceled for saying that
there might be a problem with the
election so instead of saying it's a
problem he says that they might fortify
it now he gave some examples of what he
meant by fortifying it and they would be
within the legal and um observable
process so fortifying might be a rules
change or ruling or a process change
that just happens to be good for one
side and bad for the other but yeah
Peter teal thinks a little fortification
will make it impossible for Trump to win
if it's a narrow election but suppose
Trump wins
handily do you think we're at a trouble
I doubt it because they still can do
this trick where they try to say he's an
insurrectionist or something they I
think Jamie Rasin has some kind of plan
but what if here's the worst case
scenario what if Trump wins by a lot
but so
much that it violates the
polls which is exactly the
prank do you think there's a situation
where he could win so much that the
Democrats would hit the streets and say
it must be
cheating because he couldn't possibly
win by that much because the poll said
he wouldn't which of course would be the
entire nature of the
prank yeah if Trump wins by two much the
Democrats are going to say the polls
must have been right so therefore the
election's
wrong they're they're not really the
Democrats don't seem to be redpilled
enough to understand that the polls are
not real or at least some number of them
are not real or they're not really
trying so we can have
trouble anyway Brian stelter is back on
CNN you know Brian stelter does
everybody know him uh I refer to him as
the poor man's Jeffrey
tubin and if you'd like to find a way to
be funny if you're not good at jokes it
turns out that when you call somebody
the poor mans of something if you pick
the right person it's kind of hilarious
he's the poor man's Jeffrey
tubin I think that's just one of the
funniest things I've said in a week all
right but uh stelter was on today and he
made the observation that what KLA
Harris says isn't going to be nearly as
important as the images and the the
feeling and the vibe and the hope and
the change and the the youth and the
excitement
um and uh my comment on that is that
first of all from a persuasion point of
view I feel he's coming closer to
me so I'm going to I'm going to give him
a compliment for saying yeah I agree
that what says is going to be far less
important than how she makes people feel
so I'm going to give
him
A+ he I think that's actually a additive
useful and provocative so it hits hits
every uh hits every point so as I have
fun um mocking Brian stelter he is 100%
right
but let's dig a Little Deeper why is he
a 100% right that it won't matter what
she
says it's because he works for an
industry that won't fact check
her that's why it won't matter it won't
matter because I don't fact
Checker now I'm lying a little
bit they do fact check her a little bit
and we're going to get to that but they
fact check her in a way that makes her
look better than not worse wait for it
all right there's a new video of uh
kamla giving a talk somewhere and she's
triying out yet another accent we don't
know
what uh is an alien accent or some other
country or we don't I don't know what it
is and she's cackling again so she's
cackling with her accent to me she looks
inebriated like actually literally I'm
not joking she looks inebriated I've
said it a million times yes I mean
exactly that it's not a joke it's not
I'm not saying it just for politics
there's my honest opinion that she looks
inebriated often I don't know on what
exactly but she looks
inebriated so back to that and that
dovet tales with the fact that uh so
Joel poock mentioning this that it seems
that on social media there was a lot of
attention to KLA Harris's recent
interview that the one she did where she
recently sat down and answered some
questions from a local
reporter and it went around because it
was a complete train wreck in other
words you didn't even have to tell
somebody what she did wrong before you
showed it to them you just say oh you
have to watch this like all of it every
part of it was weird cringy something's
wrong with you we don't know what the
problem is I mean it was
bad so which of the major news entities
covered that and said well she did give
an interview and here it is and by the
way it's a total train
wreck none none they just ignored the
whole thing so stelter's right it
doesn't matter what she says it only
matters that you know people get some
feeling from the general Vibe of the
campaign he's totally right about that
um and then how good is the
uh oh and then there's more items so
apparently the proud boys or at least 12
of them 12 of them went to Springfield
Ohio where the rumors are that the
Haitians are eating pets and They
Carried a flag and they marched through
the streets to which I'm thinking that
must be the most boring trip that the
proud boys ever took they got like five
seconds of coverage for 12 people
walking down an empty Street what were
they looking for did they think they
were going to see like cat carcasses
laying by the side of the
street it it I think it was kind of a
wasted trip so good
luck I have no idea what they were
trying to accomplish were they going to
find somebody barbecuing a dog and then
beat them up or something like what how
was that supposed to work anyway
um msnbc's panel says that the uh what
they call the lies about eating pets
could get somebody
killed so that's the real danger so if
you've got a town of
6,000 and you ship in 20,000 uh
Haitians the real
danger is the rumors about the pting
it's not the fact that you just shipped
20,000 Haitians
into a place that only had 60,000
people no that's not the problem it's
not the unchecked immigration that could
kill you it's the rumors about animals
it's the animal rumors there that's the
dangerous stuff new levels of absurdity
and then if you haven't watched Joy Reed
mock Trump for claiming that he talked
to a Taliban leader named Abdul and then
the other hos apparently he just thinks
every everybody named he must think that
everybody's a Muslim is just named Abdul
so he tells this story where he says I
was talking to Abdul as if Abdul is a
real person because he's such a racist
that he thinks all he must think all
Islamic people are named Abdul or r or
something because he's so
dumb and then they show the compilation
clip of all the people in the news
referring to Abdul who was actually the
name of the co-founder of of uh of the
Taliban and did I say Isis before I
meant Taliban if I said it wrong
um and I wonder if they'll ever correct
it so they made like lots of content
saying that Trump was just making up a
story about a guy named
Abdul then it was very easy to
demonstrate that he was really actually
that's the name of the guy he did meet
him he did actually meet the guy named
Abdul this is all confirmed
and that the news had reported his name
as Abdul as a co-leader you know co-
creator of the Taliban for years like
every form of the media had called them
Abdul do you think that the MSNBC only
Watchers know that that was completely
made up of course not they never
corrected
it never even corrected it of course
not well there's an update on the
assassination attempt on
Trump
so all
right so my my prediction was that in
the end we'd find out it was a dilber
situation meaning it was just Mass
incompetence because we're seeing Mass
incompetence in every every Walk of Life
it's everywhere now now you could
speculate the cause of it but I'll just
say it's there we all see it if you call
tech support for anything good luck if
you try to get any company to do even
the thing it does normally good luck I
mean good luck getting anything to work
because whatever the mass incompetence
problem is caused by it's pretty bad but
we but we were led to believe that the
Secret Service is The Shining exception
and if you're in the Secret Service let
me tell you people uh allow me to tell
you every interview I saw well uh I I
worked in the Secret Service you know
back when people were capable and I can
tell you there's no way that any of this
was an accident could not have been done
because they're so professionals and
professionals are so professional and
they'll be so professional that there's
no way it could just be an accident and
I said oh there's a way it could just be
an accident and the way is the normal
way the most common human experience is
that any large group of people are
incompetent that's my experience I made
a comic strip about it now before you
get mad at me I will tell you uh first
let I'll give you an idea what they did
wrong there is still very much open the
question of why did they do it so
obviously badly and it does open the
possibility that some something was
going on I'll tell you what Mike Ben
says about in a minute
so here are the things we know uh that
the Secret Service did not ask the
police to get on the roof and guard it
now that would have been the obvious
thing they should have done because the
police were in charge of the Outer
Perimeter Secret Service was the inner
perimeter and uh the Secret Service was
in
charge so if they told them to be in the
roof they would have been but they
didn't instead they talked about putting
up some kind of barrier
but when the Secret Service arrived
there was no
barrier so did the word go out to put up
a barrier and it didn't happen was there
incompetence involved where they put up
some barriers in the wrong
place maybe so we don't know that um
they did not have a common communication
system so that the police and the secet
service could not know things at the
same time so apparently the shooter was
walking around the police knew it but
they couldn't get that information in a
usable form to all the people who needed
to know it on time they've made a change
recently to make sure that there's at
least a police person and a secret
service person together in a command
room because at least if they're in the
same room then the police communication
will be heard by the police the Secret
Service communication heard by the
Secret Service but they'll be standing
next to each other so they can just say
hey there's a guy out there now better
than that would be to have communication
that they're all on the same channel but
maybe that's a little harder I don't
know um and uh reports that they were
slow to beef up the protection after the
Iran threats and then there was a
problem of that they were overextended
and blah blah blah all right now that
would be the argument for it being
totally just
incompetence I don't think that's ruled
that one but there's one other option
that's not ruled down either and Mike
Ben says
quote they deliberately left the roof
roof
unguarded likely because a small
compartmentalized cell inside Department
of Homeland Security had Advanced
awareness through informance in Crooks
encrypted chat network of his intent to
go up on the roof to shoot Trump during
the
speech
oh now if this came from anyone else I
might you know discard it but Ben's more
than just about anybody seems to
understand how the entire system works
and then he goes on to clarify he said
again this is just my opinion because
I've seen this movie so many times
before obviously I'm not reporting this
as a fact it's just my working theory
that Congressional investigators should
assume as the default of what happened
unless evidence dispels it yes exactly
let me say this as many times as need to
if you're a citizen of the United States
and you're accused of a crime you are
innocent until proven guilty there is no
wiggle room on that you're a citizen of
the country you're are innocent until
they really prove you're guilty if you
are the
government that rule doesn't apply if
you're the government you are guilty
unless you can provide transparency to
show that you're not have they shown
transparency that is sufficient to show
that you've ruled out the possibility
that there's you know any inside
connection no they haven't so is it
reasonable as men says his working
theory that is reasonable it might not
be accurate and Ben says that very
clearly it's an opinion but as a working
assumption what we know now the correct
working assumption and I'm going to
agree with his opinion opion the correct
working assumption is that there was
some kind of Insider
help only because there's no way to
disprove it and the government is guilty
until proven
innocent so I think he's right on you
know as long as he's saying is clearly
as possible that this is not an
established fact it's an opinion you
should have a working Theory and it will
get you
further totally agree perfectly
perfectly stated
all right CNN uh woke up Daniel Dale to
do some factchecking on some claims
coming from one account that's
associated with the um KL Harris
campaign what's the first thing you
would say about them factchecking a an
account on X as opposed to factchecking
what K La haris said with her own
words huh it feels like you're trying to
divert
from what Kris says or said at the
debate and make me think you're doing
real factchecking when all you're doing
is is checking an account on X that
probably conell Harris didn't even know
what you were what was being
posted okay so he did fact Jack eight
different claims from this one account
and I think all of them had one quality
in in common I may may have missed one
they all had the following quality
the Democrats took out of context a
piece of
video or a quote so they're all rars so
he found eight
rars eight rars so the rupar is when uh
you edit a clip by clipping off the
front or the back so it reverses the
meaning to the people who see
it eight of them now if you don't think
that the Democrats do this
continuously even CNN just picked out
eight examples of rars and that's just
you know things that happened in the
last three weeks eight in the last three
weeks that's a lot yeah all all of
politics is fake but let me tell you
what they
are I'll just list some of them and I'm
going to talk about one um misleadingly
described a trump comment about his
supporters uh deceptively clipping
misleading describing a trump comment
about immigration again they're all anac
context Clips right deceptively clipping
and
misleading a trump comment about his
Charlesville remarks I'll get back to
that in a
minute deceptively clipping and falsely
describing a trump quote about penalties
for damaging monuments deceptively
clipping and misleading describing a
trump comment about taxes cutting out
critical words from Advance comment
about unions falsely describing a
comment from a trump
rally now what do all of these fact
checks except the one about to find
people hoax that have in
common we'll see if you can catch it
what did they all have in common now
they're all done with Clips that's one
thing they have in common you know edits
but what's the other thing they all have
in
common none of them are
important it's all the smallest stuff
I didn't even know about most of these I
mean I I follow the news more than 99%
of the people I didn't even know of
these never even heard them and they're
they're debunking the least important
ones do you think that's an
accident I don't I think it's a
diversion because then you could tell
yourself well they debunk both sides you
know the fact Checker went hard at him
found eight eight things no eight
completely unimportant things well seven
unimportant and then let me talk more
about the Charlottesville thing so to
his credit Daniel Dale called them out
for the Charlottesville fine people hoax
but within his fact
check and I can't even believe this
happened within his fact
Jack he said quote and while there's a
solid case that he talking about Trump
there's a solid case that his 2017 V
fine people remark was about some white
nationalists and then he refers to a
source called the bullwark have you ever
heard of the bullwark
it's not exactly the source you want to
point to but I went to the bullwark to
find out what the argument was that it
wasn't a hoax and the argument goes like
this that there are two nights of
protests and on the first on the second
night uh when he referred to it he did
say the right things it was just clipped
out and he did say that the the white
nationalists and the neo-nazis should be
condemned totally but here's their
argument in the bulwark that on the
first night he also said there were some
fine people there but the writer says
that he knows there were not do you know
how he knows on the first night there
were no people there who are non-racist
who just were there for the the statues
and by the way this is important he says
he also opposes the
statues and he's a
non-racist so he even referred to
himself the writer in the boar as a fine
person I would be the person that Trump
is referring to I I would like to keep
the statues for historical reasons but I
definitely disavow all those marching
races and then he said he
knows that there were no people like him
on the first night do you know why
here's his proof that there were no fine
people there that night let me read
it um he said I live um I live in the
Charlottesville area and I know very
fine people who oppose the removal of
The Monuments based on high-minded
Notions about preserving history he says
I'm one of them so I know that we
weren't there that night only the white
nationalists were there wait a
minute wait a minute he said he's one of
the fine
people and so meaning that this is
connected logically I'm one of them so I
know there weren't there that we weren't
there that night we did he think it was
a club of six
people did did he think that the the six
people he knows personally weren't there
and there for there were only white
nationalists there okay that's
batshit crazy and CNN pointed to this
because they don't think you're going to
be smart enough to go look and read it
because their their readers are not this
is the most messed up up thing
you're ever going to see in your life
but this is the important part it
doesn't matter who was there that's not
even on point the point is that Trump
told you his assumption if his
assumption was wrong and there were no
fine people there the first night that
doesn't make Trump wrong it makes his
assumption wrong if he said I assume
there were good people there and it
turned out there weren't that doesn't
mean he said the racists were
good people there's no connection
logically between him possibly being
wrong and his assumption I think he was
right actually but if he was
wrong he was only wrong on a fact that
nobody checked and the reason
that they didn't check well I guess
there's no reason to check because we
know that this one fine person wasn't
there and therefore logically if one
person wasn't there we could know that
no people who would think like him would
also be there no that's
stupid and that's their fact
check he he fact check it while actually
saying well but you know there's a
strong argument that's actually true and
then he points to the weakest argument
you've ever seen it wasn't even on point
the argument isn't even on point because
it doesn't matter who was there it only
matters that Trump made a reasonable
assumption that it was a mixed crowd
with different opinions which by the way
would be true of just about any large
Gathering of Americans I can't even
conceive of a large Gathering of
Americans for anything for anything that
wouldn't include people on all sides you
know maybe several
sides so his assumption if it was wrong
would be weird that it would be the one
time in the world that there was only
people on one
side that would be pretty
weird
anyway um the ABC moderator who did the
debate one of the two of them uh the
partner with David Mur was Lindsay Davis
and she's actually told the LA Times
that the reason they fact checked
Trump but not Harris is because um CNN
didn't fact check him and they didn't
want Trump's comments to just quote hang
there and they the moderators studied
hours of trump rallies and interviews to
be ready to counter him they didn't do
that with Harris they didn't need to
study her to know what to counter so
they only studied one person to counter
him and uh she said people were
concerned the statements were allowed to
just hang there and not be disputed by
the
candidate uh and then they decided to
check Trump four times and Harris
none now this is a confession that you
should be fired
right if if I were her employer and I
saw her say this in public to a news
Outlet a
competitor that she had not done her job
and had injected bias and she describes
it in detail there's no question about
what happened and even why they did
it that's a firing offense do you think
she'll be fired no not a
chance not in our
world well the Laura
lumer controversy it's one of those fake
things that nobody really cares about
but it's kind of interesting I was
trying to ignore it but it keeps getting
bigger uh MSNBC so if you don't know the
background Laura lummer controversial
character uh has been working on behalf
of the Trump campaign but not for them
so she's an independent opposition
researcher uh story breaking kind of
person but MSNBC you know confirmed
she's not working for the campaign um
but they say the problem is she's only
right 80% and the
time how how does MSNBC compare to
that now first of all is it true that
she's only right 80% of the
time that sounds about
right sounds about right what about
me I'm only right about 80% of the time
which is pretty good by the way what
about um I know Fox
News I think they're right about at
least 80% of the
time um 80% is pretty
good if you follow the news at all 80%
is not
bad it makes a big difference what the
20% is like if you pick something that's
outrageous but being right 80% of the
time I'll take that and and I don't
think the
MSNBC is Right 80% of the time or
anywhere near it remember they're
primarily propaganda outfit they're not
really trying to tell you the news so I
would say if I were to score them every
time I turn it on I see a lie every time
I mean its IMM medience within the first
30 seconds so that's a weird thing for
them to say but I suppose in their
bubble isn't make
sense um here are some things they say
that Laura lomer said that they say are
not true she claimed Haitians are eating
pets and maybe people
okay the people part I don't know if she
said that but uh I would say there's
still an open question on the pets uh
Christopher ruo did a a investigation
and he has a number of credible sounding
claims not massive but they seem to be
credible sounding claims of of somebody
they're barbecueing
pets I'm still not at a point where I'm
going to declare it's true Beyond maybe
a special case you know I'm not going to
say it never happened but to imagine
it's you know something that's happening
on a regular or growing
basis I don't have that
evidence um so I'm treating it as a
recreational
belief um she said that Harris lied
about being black well that's more of an
exaggeration about what she
emphasized um she said the 2020 election
was stolen they count that as false and
that's proof that the news is fake
because whether or not the election was
true or false the one thing you can know
for sure is the news doesn't know CNN
doesn't know the election was fair
nobody does it's designed so you can't
know if if you're reporting that somehow
you could know if an election is fair
you couldn't know if a state actor got
into our systems and changed something
how would we
know apparently according to Christopher
Ray the
FBI uh China's already got their hackers
in you know a whole bunch of our
critical infrastructure in the United
States why don't we get rid of it
because we can't find it we're just
pretty sure it's there so a state actor
especially working with insiders who
might be bribed or
blackmailed there's no reasonable
assumption that you could find out or
know for sure if something's been rigged
you could only know that it wasn't
proven in a court that you can know but
that's a long way from knowing it didn't
happen those are unrelated
Concepts um let's see what
else she had some offensive racially
charged theories that 9/11 was an inside
job let's see racially so would that
involve blaming
Israel and uh she's also been accused of
being a anti-semite by CNN and Laura
lum's uh um her response to be calling
an anti-semite is to remind them that
she's
Jewish can you be a Jewish
anti-semite on on need a ruling on
that it feels like that ought to be sort
of automatically not true but things are
so weird in the work in the woke world
can you be a an
anti-semitic Jewish person is that a
thing I don't
know but uh CNN says so K Caitlyn
Collins she said uh let's see there UK
um msnb is saying that she said
Ukrainian spies infiltrated the capital
on January
6 how does MSNBC know that that's not
true how would anybody know that's not
true so they're reporting it like it's
not true without without doing any
investigation now I'm not saying it's
true
true I'm just saying how can they say
it's not true you could just say she
said it you could say she didn't prove
it you could say there's no evidence but
you can't say it's not true how would
you
know um they say that Laura lumer said
that some school shootings were staged
or allowed to
occur
um I don't have an opinion on that I
mean it's not my opinion
uh she said that Des Santa's wife
exaggerated her brand breast cancer
diagnosis I don't know enough about that
story one way or the other um and that
the Deep state may have manipulated the
weather ahead of the Iowa caucus to help
Haley now that's
interesting because we do know that
there are efforts to you know seed
clouds and create rain and stuff and
maybe some of it was happening around
then um I I I wouldn't assume that there
were connected to the election if they
were doing any cloud seating but it's
not the craziest thing anybody said
about politics or the
world so let me conclude this way by
saying that uh I don't know all the
things that Laura lumer said and
therefore it's not my problem to defend
her um but I do like and I'll say it
many times I do like the fact that Trump
does accept people who are working in
the right direction even if he doesn't
agree with all the things they say I
feel like that's the most American thing
you could ever do say I will work
productively with you but I disagree
with a lot of your opinions it doesn't
get better than that so you could
disagree vehemently with her opinions
and still love Trump for being willing
to you know deal with the good parts and
work toward a common Mission while while
saying overtly and clearly I disag agree
with some of the things she
says that's the country I want to live
in I want to live in a country where you
can be friendly and productive and work
with people you disagree with even if
you disagree a lot that'd be
great um the other thing that's funny is
that there are lots of photos of Laura
lumer that are associated with these hit
pieces and maybe it's just
me but she looks great in the pictures
that they the pictures they're trying to
bash you with and I don't know if there
it's because there aren't that many
publicly available
photos but they're just great pictures
if if I were her I'd be thinking okay
the fact that I look good in these
pictures is probably beating whatever
they're saying that nobody's going to
remember so I feel like she's coming out
ahead and she's probably growing
followers and you know her her uh her
impact is is improving
I believe she's been banned from the
Trump uh airplane which is just a good
prudent move um you know she's not she's
not excommunicated from the world just
it's a bad look to be in the plane so
fine no problem all right that's all
I've got for
today's plan program I'm going to talk
to the people on locals privately
because they're so awesome thank thanks
for joining and uh I feel bad for all
those all those podcasters who take the
weekends
off lazy
lazy and uh at least I'm here putting in
the work so that you don't have nothing
to look at this morning all right uh
locals I'm coming at you if you're on uh
rumble or X or YouTube uh thanks for
joining and I'll see you tomorrow same
time same place
locals let me sip to you while we
wait
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e e
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
SpaceX’s Starship Plans Thrown Off Course! What’s Really Going On?
Kamala Harris Slammed for 'Fake Accent' in Detroit Speech and more news!
‘Chicken shack’ Trump: Former president panders to Black voters with chicken, Joy says
Future of a Visionary: Elon Musk’s Astrological Predictions!
A Cor Do Dinheiro - Ao Nascer do Dia - 29/08/2024
Encryption Explained Simply | What Is Encryption? | Cryptography And Network Security | Simplilearn
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)