Episode 2598 CWSA 09/15/24

Summary

The 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

00:00

🚀 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.

05:01

📊 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.

10:04

🧠 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.

15:05

🤔 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.

20:06

🎬 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.

25:09

💊 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.

30:11

🗳️ 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.

35:12

📰 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.

40:12

🤔 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.

45:13

🕵️‍♂️ 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.

50:16

📢 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.

55:18

📈 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.

00:21

🤷‍♀️ 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.

05:22

🎉 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.

Keywords

💡dopamine

Dopamine is a neurotransmitter associated with reward and pleasure in the brain. In the script, the term is used metaphorically to describe the pleasurable experience the host is trying to convey to the audience, suggesting that the content of the video is as enjoyable as a dopamine-inducing activity.

💡SpaceX

SpaceX is a private aerospace manufacturer and space transportation company founded by Elon Musk. The script mentions SpaceX's Polaris Dawn mission, emphasizing human achievements in space exploration and Musk's contributions to making space travel a reality, thus highlighting the theme of technological advancement and the future of humanity.

💡Washington Post

The Washington Post is an American daily newspaper. In the script, it is criticized as not being a credible news organization, which the speaker believes is influenced by political or bureaucratic entities. This keyword is used to discuss issues of media credibility and bias, which is a central theme in the narrative of the video.

💡graviton

A graviton is a hypothetical elementary particle that mediates the force of gravity in quantum mechanics. The script speculates on the existence of gravitons and the nature of gravity, suggesting an alternative theory that movement in the universe is not smooth but rather a series of disappearances and reappearances, challenging the viewer's understanding of physics and reality.

💡cancellation

Cancellation, in the context of the script, refers to the act of publicly discrediting or boycotting someone, often a celebrity or public figure, because of their controversial statements or actions. The host discusses his own experience with cancellation, linking it to political support rather than any specific thing he said, illustrating the theme of political and social consequences in the media age.

💡influencers

Influencers are individuals who have the power to affect the purchasing decisions of their audience through social media. The script touches on the responsibility of influencers, particularly when promoting medical products like OIC, raising questions about the ethics of online promotion and its impact on public health.

💡pranks

Prank refers to a mischievous trick with a humorous or embarrassing effect played on someone. The script uses pranks as a recurring theme to illustrate the idea that men are motivated by humor and clear, specific tasks, suggesting that engaging men in voting could be framed as a prank against the establishment.

💡polling

Polling refers to the practice of surveying public opinion on various matters, especially in a political context. The script discusses polling in relation to the accuracy of predicting election outcomes, with the host expressing skepticism about the reliability of polls and suggesting that they may not reflect the true sentiments of the public, especially conservative men.

💡Deep State

Deep State is a term used to describe an alleged secret network of influential figures or organizations within government agencies, often claimed to be acting outside of democratic controls. The script mentions the Deep State in the context of criticizing media sources and suggesting that they are part of a larger, hidden influence on government and society.

💡petition

A petition is a formal request, often with signatures of supporters, made to a government or other authority, with the aim of achieving a particular goal. The script mentions a petition as part of a prank to save cats, which is used to illustrate the idea of engaging voters through humor and clear, actionable requests.

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