Joe (11:19)

Are you still quoting 30 year old movies? Have you said cool beans in the past 90 days? Do you think Discover isn't widely accepted? If this sounds like you, you're stuck in the past. Discover is accepted at 99% of places that take credit cards nationwide. And every time you make a purchase with your card, you automatically earn cash back. Welcome to the now it pays to Discover. Learn more@discover.com credit card based on the February 2024 Nielsen report.

Scott Adams (11:50)

Well, a Texas state representative who, because of the nature of the story you need to know is a black woman is pushing for race based classroom assignments. So she claims that the science shows that students perform better when they're taught by teachers who share their skin color. So her idea is that white people would have a white teacher, black people would have a black teacher, etc. I saw this in the Amuse account on X. So I'd like to give you some advice. If this topic ever comes up wherever you are and you're a white person, you want to act like the studies are all incorrect and act like this is totally racist and you would never be anywhere near it because you could get canceled for saying that kind of thing. Yeah, you don't want to get canceled. So just say, oh, I think those studies are flawed. The very best teacher could be any kind of thing. Which is true anyway. According to the Gateway pundit, Harvard is admitting that Trump's crackdown on Harvard and some other universities is having a, quote, devastating impact on Harvard. But they're going to keep fighting anyway. Thank goodness they're going to keep fighting. And how are they going to fight? Well, they're sending out the designated liars. So Jamie Raskin is defending Harvard. When you see Jamie Raskin again, it's not what happened, it's who's involved. And suddenly if Jamie Raskin appears, he's a designated liar. He's one of the ones they send out when the normal people can't tell the lie. So he'll take care of it. He'll say it. But here's what J.D. vance says about the university situation. He did a lengthy post today on X that I thought was worthy of just reading to you. So, J.D. vance on the universities. He says there is an extraordinary reproducibility crisis in the sciences, particularly in biology, where most published papers fail to replicate. Most universities have massive bureaucracies that inhibit the translation of basic research into commercial adoption. The voting patterns of university professors are so one sided that they look like the election results of North Korea. On top of all this, many universities explicitly engage in racial discrimination, mostly against whites and Asians, that violates the civil rights laws of this country. Our universities could see the policies of the Trump administration as a necessary corrective to these problems, change their policies and work with the administration to reform. Or they could yell fascism at basic democratic accountability and drift further into irrelevance. Now this is pretty interesting because one of the things that I always thought something like Harvard was adding to the world is all that excellent science. Because they get these massive grants or they did before Trump stopped them, and you'd have all these top scientists doing all this top science. But as Vance points out, half of the things they have reproduced, not just there, but in general, are not can't, you can't be, they can't be replicated. Meaning that's fake science basically. And then even when they have things that can be replicated, they got some kind of bureaucracy that stops them from commercializing it. So it sounds to me like the whole will give you money so you make some science and then we're all better off. Sounds like that doesn't work at all. So yeah, maybe they should look at fixing that instead of complaining about Trump. So J.D. vance, good communicator. And then we find in related news, according to MedPage Today, that you know how science always gets a peer review if it's good science? Well, apparently there's a massive problem of peer reviewers having financial conflicts. How not surprising that is. The majority reviewing for top medical journals had conflicts and they made a billion dollars in three years. I don't know who made the billion dollars, the journals. Anyway, more than half of peer reviewers for four top medical journals received payments from drug and medical device manufacturers totaling a billion dollars from 2020 to 2022 according to an analysis of the Open Payments database. So you know that whole thing where you thought, hey, if I get a peer review, that's a pretty good indication that my science is good? Apparently there's nothing like that. It looks like, it looks like the peer reviewers are basically beneficiaries of big pharma and big Medical. All you really need to do is Find a peer reviewer who will be willing to say something that big pharma would want to hear, and you're all set. Speaking of Harvard, so you probably heard this story. It's just the conclusion of it. So the Harvard Medical School morgue. So Harvard Medical School had a morgue not for the students, but for donations of bodies. So if the medical school wanted to do some, you know, some dissecting or something of human bodies, there was a morgue that would handle all that. And apparently the morgue manager was selling organs on the black market, but he wasn't selling them until they were already used by the medical school. So once the Harvard Medical School was done with a body part like a hand, you know, you'd have like a severed hand. Once they were done with it, they were supposed to be disposed in some legal way, I guess, but instead the morgue manager was selling them. So it really gives meaning to second hand parts. Second hand parts, because I'd use the hand more than once. All right, well, that's all I got on that. It does seem that wherever there can be corruption, there is corruption. If it's possible, it's going to happen. Well, let's see if there's anything more like that. According to the Blaze, there's a North Carolina Democrat who used the pandemic loans to throw herself a lavish of 50th birthday party, according to prosecutors. So she got $124,000 in loans and part of what she spent it on was a big old birthday party for herself. So that's another situation in which it was possible to have fraud and there it was. So the peer reviewers in science, they could be fraudulent and apparently they are. The Southern Poverty Law center could be sketchy, and apparently it is. The morgue director could be selling his body parts and he was. And during the pandemic, a lot of the loans could be fake and they were. Well, but in other good news, Liberty Nation News is reporting that crime is down across the US and we're talking about the bad crimes, the, you know, the murders and the rapes and stuff. Now the question would be it's down for the first three months of this year. Now why do you think that is? Could it be, could it be because of the mass deportations of criminals? I don't know. It's too early to know. But if crime stays down everywhere, we're going to ask the question. Is that because Tom Homan did an extra good job and he got rid of the really the criminals who were repeat offenders, it could be that might be the reason. It's too early to know, but could be.

Joe (21:54)

Hi, this is Joe from Vanta. In today's digital world, compliance regulations are changing constantly and earning customer trust has never mattered more. Vanta helps companies get compliant fast and stay secure with the most advanced AI automation and continuous monitoring out there. So whether you're a startup going for your first SoC2 or ISO 27001, or a growing enterprise managing vendor risk, Vanta makes it quick, easy and scalable. And I'm not just saying that because I work here. Get started@vanta.com.

Scott Adams (22:24)

So here, here's something that I'm kind of happy about, but I don't know if it's enough. Our government is sort of designed for doing certain things, but one of the things our government is not designed to do is be efficient and save your tax money and not overspend. Because whoever cuts a budget ends up getting fired. They don't get elected. Hey, you cut that budget for whatever that good thing was. So we don't have any mechanism for a government that can do anything except overspend your money until we all die. But there's sort of a private industry thing that's sort of filling that gap. I don't know if it's enough to make a difference, but the All In Pod seems to be like a almost a national treasure at this point because you got four of the smartest people you've ever seen who are willing to talk about any topic that's important to the country and they can do what Congress can't, which is tell the truth. And I think that's an important step. Now, telling the truth is only halfway to fixing a problem. You still have to have some mechanism to fix the problem, which we don't, but at least we're getting something like the truth. So David Sacks, one of the four in the all in podcast, he was talking about Doge. I saw this on the Vigilant Fox account. They did a summary. He said Doge made great progress. I would agree. But there's one thing that Elon and Trump can't fix, which is Congress. So Congress would still have to agree to all the Doge cuts, and that part is just broken because Congress can't cut costs, they would get fired, meaning they would lose their next election. If they cut anything, it wouldn't even matter what they cut. If they cut anything, they would probably get fired. So Doge proved that. You could find a lot of fraud. You could identify it, you could, you know, at least at least have the possibility of cutting it, but we don't have anything that could actually cut it. So that part had to be quite disappointing for Elon as well as Trump. But there was a second part of this. But then yesterday I saw a. I think it was. They. They called it an emergency broadcast from the all in Pod. So two of the all in Pod guys were there, Chamath and Friedberg, and they were talking to Ron Johnson, Senator Johnson, who's a. I guess he was a Tea Party guy, and he's trying his best to figure out how to cut costs in the government, but there just doesn't seem to be any way to do it. But I recommend that you watch it because it's the most honest take on the trouble that we're in, because they can say in direct language we're in a death spiral and absolutely nothing is going to change it unless we come up with some whole new plan that nobody's thought of or nobody was brave enough to do or something, but that was really valuable. So I'll say again, I think the all in pod because the four of them are so smart and so credible that when they take on a topic like this where nobody's being honest about it, it's the first time the country can hear the honest. The truth, basically. It's the first time they can hear the truth and in context because, you know, the news is all biased and they don't even cover the deficit. Most of the time when the news is talking about the budget, they don't even mention. They don't even mention the fact that, all right, well, there's a troll who needs to be disappeared. Let's get rid of the fart troll. Anyway, so most of the time when the news covers the budget process, even the big beautiful budget, they don't tell you the only important part, this budget will kill us all. That's the truth. Now, maybe not tomorrow, but if we don't figure out how to reduce the budget and we keep doing budgets like this, where the deficit gets bigger instead of smaller, we're all dead. So that's something the all in Pod can say because it's true and it's demonstrably true. But we need that extra part. Maybe it's Trump, but it doesn't look like he has the interest or maybe even the ability to cut it without losing the midterms. I would recommend the all in Pod for you, so you're at least well informed on that topic. But separately, I think it was a different podcast. I saw Friedberg say that there's some theoretical amount of energy, that if the United States could create this amazing amount of energy, the deficit wouldn't be a problem. Now, that's sort of a thinker, and I think I missed part of it because I just saw a little clip on it. Just think about that. The energy and money are sort of interchangeable because you would use money to buy energy, etc. So if you had a way to create just a ton of energy, let's say nuclear fusion, for example, let's say tomorrow it became cheap. Let's say somehow we figured out how to build a nuclear power plant in one year. You know, these are things we can't do, and I'm not predicting we can, but there's possibly one way we could escape the doom spiral. And you wouldn't know about it unless you'd watch the all in podcast, explain that we're in a doom spiral. But in theory, if you could create a massive amount of power, you know, electricity, energy, they would be irrelevant, basically. So, anyway, keep that in mind that they're like a national treasure right now. But we still do that last part where knowing the truth isn't enough. You got to be able to act on it, and we still need that part where we act on it. Oh, wait. All right, here's something that I thought was weird. I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but you've probably heard before that the people in the news business, they have to play nice with the administration, whoever that is, because if they don't, they'll lose access. Meaning that if they want an interview with somebody in the administration, the administration might say, oh, you wrote a hint piece about us yesterday, so we're not going to give you anybody to do an interview. And then you're in the news business, and you can't really do ordinary news and ordinary interviews, so you're really screwed. So in the Biden administration, you had this weird situation where the. Where the news had to be nice to them to maintain access, but they didn't get any access because they're all surprised that Biden was degraded and he was basically being hidden from the, you know, hidden from the. The news. So their business model of the. The news is collapsing because their whole idea of, well, at least if we're nice to you or nice enough, we'll have access. They didn't get access. They didn't even get close to access. They were not behind the curtain whatsoever. So I thought that was interesting.

Joe (31:55)

This episode is brought to you by Lifelock not everyone is careful with your personal information, which might explain why there's a victim of identity theft every five seconds in the U.S. fortunately, there's LifeLock. LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity. If your identity is stolen, a US Based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year by visiting lifelock.com podcast terms apply.

Scott Adams (32:25)

I saw a Sam Harris clip where he was saying that he fell for the idea that Biden was sharp when we weren't looking because he said, neurologically speaking, that is an intelligible claim to make a better person, that he's capable making important decisions behind closed doors. But maybe he's not so good at communicating anymore. Does that make sense to you? Do you believe that if you saw him in public and he wasn't good at communicating and it was a big change, you know, because he used to be better at it, would you assume that he was fine behind closed doors? Well, Sam Harris did, and the Daily Caller was talking about this, and it seems like a lot of prominent anti Trumpers are figuring out that they have to come clean that they were fooled. And it's getting safer because the, the Tapper book is, you know, drawing so much fire. And it's also making it easier for people to go public and say, oh, yeah, yeah, I guess Jake Tapper was fooled and other people were fooled. Oh yeah, I was fooled too. Oh yeah. But of course, of course I was fooled because I didn't have access to the real information. They were hiding it from me. All right, if my engineer is watching this, we really got to get rid of that guy. I think you know who I'm talking about. All right, and then I guess I would ask you this question. If the political experts were so bad at determining that Biden was capable, haven't the experts had a really bad 10 years? Do you remember when Trump was first running for office, 2015? What did all the experts say about his chances? They said no way. Right? All of them. All the experts. What did the cartoonist say? He's going to be your next president. So that was a case of the experts having a really bad time. And then the experts got Biden's brain wrong and the experts got everything about the budget wrong, in my opinion. And you probably want to say the experts got a lot wrong on Covid and the experts are not doing so good on the peer reviewed papers. So what do you think? Are the experts even worthwhile anymore? I feel like the experts are not really doing well for the past 10 years. We've got a 10 year failure rate experts where ordinary people are just like guessing and guessing correctly. I don't know, it doesn't look like that to me. And the guessers are literally beating the experts like time and time again. So meanwhile, NYU Professor Scott Galloway, I think you know him, Fox News is reporting that he's also coming clean about his Biden support. He says the Biden family's narcissism severely effed the country. Basically he's blaming the Bidens for hiding his situation and then putting Kamala as the heir apparent. And he says it's the Democratic Party is hurting his legacy. Well, I don't know if all the non experts could clearly see that Biden was degraded. Can you really blame the Democrats? Don't you have to blame the people who couldn't see the obvious? Seems to be. Anyway, speaking of the budget, the big beautiful budget, so the Senate is going to make their mark on it. And as I mentioned, Senator Ron Johnson, he's a deficit guy, he wants to make sure that we can pay our bills. And I guess Rick Scott and Mike Lee from Utah are similarly looking for bigger cuts. Do you think they're going to get them? I was looking at the list of things that the Senate wants to tweak, which by the way is a weird process to me because you've got these two entities, you've got the House and then you've got the Senate. Isn't it the weirdest thing that the House could vote on a bunch of elements in the budget and then the Senate could just change them and then they would vote on it and it would become a law or it would become the law of the land. It just seems like the worst system that there are two entities and one can change what the first one just approved. But that's what's happening and it looks to be a quick look at what the senators are looking at changing. I'm not so sure this is going to pass because if the 3 deficit, what do you call them, deficit hawks, the ones who are getting real serious about overspending, that's probably enough to hold things up, isn't it? So we'll see if they can hold tight. But yeah, I'm not so sure the big beautiful bill is going to pass as easily as people thought. Mike Benz was talking to Alex Marlow on a podcast and he had a great turn of a phrase that I wanted to share with you and he was talking about the National Endowment for Democracy Now Whenever there's a Mike Ben story, there's usually some kind of a three word government entity that's dealing with some other three word government entity and they're doing something you wish they weren't doing with your money. Well, he's talking about the National Endowment for Democracy. He says the, but anyway, the, the, it's a Cold War era NGO armed with the CIA and is still being bankrupt, bankrolled by the Trump administration. So why would we still be funding something that was a Cold War era entity? Well, we never cut anything. So if there's no Cold War, what are they doing? Well, according to Ben's quote, they have pivoted completely from countering left wing communism to countering right wing populism, bragged about censoring Trump voices, had entire operations to stop Trump from the inside. And the fact that they remain what appears to be almost fully funded is like voluntarily giving your own government cancer. That's a great, that's a great, just a great frame, I guess. Yeah. I guess we should ask why is there an entity that we're funding whose seems to be, its mission is to stop the government from functioning? That doesn't seem like a good use of my money. Is that what you thought you're paying taxes for? To stop the person that you voted for? It's unbelievable. But like I say, everything that can be corrupt is corrupt. And I guess all these government NGOs and government entities, you know, they didn't seem to have any kind of audit or control or check on their activities. So they're all just corrupt, you know. Now I'm sure they wouldn't say they're corrupt. They would say, we're, we're making sure that there's no disinformation. But to us, it looks corrupt. Meanwhile, remember how Rick Grinnell got put in charge of the Kennedy center and you probably said to yourself, like I did, oh, that's a, you know, sort of a harmless job. He's got other responsibilities as well. But I always thought, well, at least that's, you know, just sort of a harmless thing being in front of the, in charge of the Kennedy Center. But it turns out that according to Rick Grinnell, he wants the FBI and the DOJ to investigate what looks like obvious gigantic financial fraud from whoever was in charge before he got there. So have I mentioned that every place there can be corruption? There's corruption? Yep. So this was yet another place that wasn't being audited. I believe some Democrats were in charge and some tens of millions of dollars look like they're fraudulent. And so Grinnell is like, all right, bring in the doj. See what we can do. Anyway, apparently the European Unit Union is concerned about war, potential for war in Europe. And these blackouts are kind of freaking amount too. So they're sort of suggesting that people stockpile things and get ready for disasters, and they're talking about building emergency sirens and crisis shelters and telling everybody to stock up on essentials. Now, here's what I'm worried about. Isn't the only risk to the European Union. Russia. It's Russia, right? It's not like Greenland is going to attack the European continent. So all of these, these worries, including the blackouts, they must think are Russia related and might be. So here's the weird thing. Russia has this ability because they can sell their oil to China, that they can be pretty tough with Europe and just grind them down until they can kind of control Europe. But what happens if they succeeded? Then Russia would still sort of depend on China. So it feels like the. The end game is that China controls Russia and Russia controls the European Union because China is such a big customer that if, if everybody decided not to buy the oil in Russia, Russia would be in real trouble. So I feel like China has just the perfect play for dominating the rest of the world. As long as they back Russia and Russia can stay in business, as long as China buys their energy, then Russia can do all the bad things. The cyber attacks, maybe eventually physical attacks, maybe bribery, maybe trying to corrupt other countries. So it looks a lot like maybe China is the power behind the power behind the power. Just a speculation there. Meanwhile, according to the Gateway Pundit, a notorious Mexican cartel leader who had a million dollar bounty on his head has been killed. He's one of the Sinaloa cartel people, so he was killed in a raid on Friday. Now, whenever I hear anybody in the cartel who's a leader being killed in a raid, and by the way, he was in the fentanyl distribution business, so we're glad he's gone.

Joe (45:59)

But.

Scott Adams (46:00)

But don't you wonder if that's real? Don't you wonder if really just the army was working for the other faction? Because the, I guess the Caloa cartel was in a pitched battle with another rival cartel. And So I guess 1200 people have been killed in these rival factions. So do you really think it was the government that got him? And I wonder if we're working with both sides. Are we saying, all right, I'll tell you what. If you tell us where the leaders of the other cartel are, we'll kill them for you. And then you go to the other cartel and you say, if you tell us where the leaders of the other cartel are, we'll go kill him for you. So I feel like it would be a good strategy if we got the. The two rival cartels to be narcing on each other and acting like it's the best way to get rid of the rivals. So I do wonder what's going on there. I don't feel like we were ever going to hear the truth when it comes to cartel stuff. All right. It's a weird Sunday. The news is weird. That's all I got for today. And I'm gonna say hi to the locals people privately. We're gonna do an extra sip with them. And the rest of you, thanks for joining. It looks like the troll went away. Thank you. And we'll see you again tomorrow, same time, same place, and locals. Hang on a minute.