Sponsor/Advertiser (10:50)

Running a business comes with a lot of what ifs, but luckily there's a simple answer to Shopify. It's the commerce platform behind millions of businesses, including Thrive Cosmetics and Momofuku, and it'll help you with everything you need, from website design and marketing to boosting sales and expanding operations, Shopify can get the job done and make your dream a reality. Turn those what ifs into Sign up for your $1 per month trial@shopify.com specialoffer.

Scott Adams (11:19)

Meanwhile, the US economy has added 139,000 jobs in May. They beat expectations, according to Steve Moran, and that sounds good, I guess. I don't have any comment about that except it looks like good news. But do any of you have the reflex that I've developed, which is it doesn't matter how good the economic news is, it only matters how big our deficit is. So when I hear jobs are good, blah blah blah, jobs are good, all I really hear is you're driving toward the abyss. You do not have a solution for debt. It doesn't matter how many jobs there are, they'll all be out of work soon. So yeah, I'm not really moved by good economic news, but I suppose it's better than bad. Barely is barely better than bad. So Adam Schiff decided to weigh in on this Elon Musk Trump issue, and especially about the big beautiful bill, the spending bill. That's not a spending bill, according to Steve Miller. And Adam Schiff said an X. I can't believe I'm saying this, but Elon Musk is right. The big beautiful bill is filled with all sorts of hidden and dangerous far right pork. Is it? Is the big beautiful bill full of far right pork or is it just far right things that the far right likes, like protecting the border and, you know, building up the defense industry? So he's the biggest liar in the world so he can just put it out there and his Democrat followers will say, huh? I think must be full of hidden and dangerous far right pork. But we don't have any examples. And Elon Musk saw that post from Adam Schiff and he said he responded to it, saying a few things could convince me to reconsider my position more than Adam Schiff agreeing with me. And yeah, yeah, that was my first impression too. It's like you don't want him on your side. So Elon Musk unfollowed cat turd well, it's about time. I unfollowed cat heard a long time ago blocked him. All right, so here, here's the here's a News item that you didn't need to do any research on. It looks like AI came up with it. So the Financial Times is reporting that allies of Trump and Musk are, are urging them to repair their relationship, seeking to limit the political and commercial damage. Now, what else are they going to do? They're allies. It's literally their friends. Do they have any allies who are recommending the opposite, that maybe they fight a little harder? What kind of a headline is that? So that was on X and I'm thinking, was there any ally of either Musk or Trump who pulled them aside and said something like, you know, I think this situation really calls for more accusations. I think, you know, things are going well, but you should really ramp up the accusations. You know, the personal ones or professional ones, the ones that could get somebody in jail? I don't think so. I've got a feeling that the allies are all, yeah, maybe you should take a day off and cool it a little bit on this. Well, Trump is playing it correctly, I think. And so yesterday Trump wished Elon well and he noted that he's been that Trump has been so busy dealing with Russia, Iran and China that he hadn't had any time to think about their spat. Now, I don't know how true that is, but it's a perfect, perfect president answer. Oh, I'm working on all these important things. Can't possibly get involved in that. Meanwhile, do you remember the Maryland dad, so called Maryland dad who was accused of being a ms.13 guy and he got deported wrongly. Wrongly, meaning that the court order did not support him being deported or the court did not. Now, do you remember what I've been saying since very near the beginning of that saga about the Kilmar Abrego Garcia guy? I kept telling you that what's funny about it is that it started out being he's a Maryland dad. Oh sure, he's not here legally, but you know, that's millions of people are not here legally. That's not the biggest problem. I mean, if he's built a life and you know, a lot of people would be in favor of someday giving him citizenship, you know, not Republicans, of course, but, but it started out with, well, he's, you know, a little bit bad and he may, he may well be an Ms. 13. And then you say to yourself, yeah, but any specific crimes? You know, I don't know if anything specific. And then you find out, well, he may have beat his wife with his fists twice. But then she said something, you know, to mitigate that a Little bit. And then you say to yourself, well, I wonder if it's going to get any worse. And then we find out that he was pulled over for human trafficking, meaning that he was transporting a car full of people, probably from the border, presumably illegals and presumably getting paid for it. So now you've got illegal trafficking, you've got, you know, beating your wife, you've got, maybe you're a member of Ms. 13. And now he's been, for reasons I don't quite understand, he's been brought back to the United States, which is what all of his supporters wanted. But he's being brought back because they're like horrible charges that he was part of a larger operating ring where he may have transported who knows how many people. So it wasn't just that one carload of people. It looks like he was pretty active in the human trafficking. But now there are additional accusations that are not charges yet, they're just claims. So a co conspirator has allegedly accused him of involvement in the murder of a rival gang member's mother. Now, there's nothing funny about murdering a rival gang mother. Gang member's mother, but it is worse. It does show that trend of every time we hear from them, things are worse. So that's pretty bad. But no charges have been filed on those claims, which makes them, I would say, less credible. But the fact that the claim even exists, if the police picked you up, what are the odds that one of your co conspirators would say that you were involved in the murder of a rival gang member's mother? And the answer is low. Low. Probably nobody would mention that at all. But apparently this gentleman, this Maryland dad, has a co conspirator who is willing to accuse him of that. So that's not ideal. So I think the Trump administration, although they made mistakes for the process, I would agree with Democrats who say, know independent of how bad this guy is, there have to be some kind of process that makes sense for everybody. And it looks like he got deported incorrectly. There was the claim by the Trump administration that once he got to El Salvador, hey, what can we do? You know, it's out of our hands. But apparently it didn't take much to get him back. All it took was all these indictments. So you might have the worst lawyer in the world. I heard Alan Dershowitz saying that if he had been the lawyer, he would have said, let me loose in some country where there's no risk. But coming back to the United States, that almost guarantees he'll be in jail for the rest of his life. And now if you ask yourself, what parts will people remember? Now the Democrats will try to remember that the Republicans did not use the right process and it resulted in somebody temporarily, temporarily being deported incorrectly and unlawfully and being in the wrong prison. So that's what they'll remember. Republicans will remember that they got a alleged gang member, possible possible assistant and a murderer wife beater, you know, off the streets and will put him in jail for many years. So who won? I mean, obviously the Maryland dad lost, but who won? The, the Trumpers won so hard? Because while I fully understand the argument on the other side, it just shrinks to nothing, doesn't it? Like, are you going to remember in 10 years that this guy had some, you know, know, some kind of process problem that temporarily put him in the wrong prison? He's going to be in prison no matter how you slice it. It looks like, I mean, we, he's innocent until proven guilty, but I've got a feeling they've got some goods. So to me, it's kind of hilarious that the people trying to help him may have ended up putting him in prison forever. And they're still going to say, yeah, but we were right about that process part. This is the part that the Democrats get wrong every time. They don't quite understand that being technically right about something doesn't help them at all. It doesn't help at all. What, what matters to politics and to the country is, is what Trump understands perfectly, which is how does it make you feel? If you feel better because this individual is, you know, captive, then Republicans win. If, if you feel better because some process got followed with this one guy. And by the way, the mistake was only temporary because it's already been corrected. Well, not much of a feeling associated with that. So they always get the feeling part wrong.

Sponsor/Advertiser (24:10)

The rural way of life is about making everyone feel at home. Tractor Supply chose advanced 5G solutions from T Mobile for business to transform intelligent customer service. Together we put the power of AI to work across 2,200 stores, keeping things running seamlessly inside curbside and countryside. This is elevated customer experience. This is Tractor Supply with T Mobile for business. Take your business further@t mobile.com now.

Scott Adams (24:41)

Meanwhile, in the UK, where freedom of speech is an illusion, it is now, I think, think it means it's illegal. They have something called the Prevent program in the UK government that if you speak positively about something called cultural nationalism, I think you can be put in jail. And that would be believing that mass migration threatens Western Culture, and it's being called a subcategory of terrorism. Now, can you believe that the UK is not allowed to say that if we increase our immigration, it will change the culture of our country? And maybe not in a way that we intended or wanted. Right to jail. How many of you would ever travel to the uk? I think it's too dangerous. I don't think I've ever said anything that would get me put in jail. But I also don't know, wouldn't that be weird? Imagine you just take a vacation and you're over there in London and you just. I think I'll send out a little post. And you send out a little post and you don't realize that you just broke their speech laws. The next. Next thing you know, you're in jail in the UK just because you posted something that you could have posted anytime you wanted in the United States. Well, good luck with them. Well, there's a rare. I think it's rare, nine to nothing Supreme Court decision that side with an Ohio woman. I guess she claimed that she was denied a job or a promotion, actually, and it went to an LGBTQ colleague instead. And the court was trying to decide if somebody who's in a majority category because it was a straight white woman, whether or not she could sue for discrimination using the same burden of proof as for those of a minority group. Well, it turns out that from by a vote of nine to nothing, the Supreme Court decided that straight white women are people, too. Yeah, they're also people. So they get to play by the same rules as people. Yeah, they're not special. They're people. And so they get to be treated the same. Good. Then Kathy Griffin was on a Don Lemon podcast and she said, quote, I do not think Trump won in a free and fair election. I believe there was tampering. I don't know if it was the Elon connection. My gut is telling me that something was up with that. So perfect. So now Rosie o' Donnell and Kathy Griffin have both come out saying the exact same thing that a lot of Republicans were saying about the 2020 election. And they get to say it without any consequence. Well, I recommend that they storm the Capitol immediately and try to push the way in. So I love the fact that it seems like everything is going the Republicans way except the big, beautiful bill. That may be a little hiccup, but every time I see a Democrat doubting a election result, I think to myself, well, if you believe that it's possible for Trump or his allies to have rigged an election without getting caught by any court because no court has ruled anything of the type, then what would make you think that it was impossible for that to have happened the other way in 2020? What would be the argument that only Trump supporters could rig an election? It's either riggable or it's not. Now, I don't have any evidence that either of those elections were rigged, but if you think that one of them can rig and the other cannot, and the reason that you know that one cannot, because the court, court cases didn't support it, it's not much of an argument. You've kind of lost that argument. So thank you, Kathy Griffin. Well, if you didn't notice or watch, Cash Patel, head of the FBI, was on Joe Rogan just recently and broke some news, I guess you call it, that one. One of the pieces of news he broke is that he'd been swatted. So the head of the FBI got swatted. Now, I assume that means that they actually showed up at the door. It seems to be, you know, far, far more likely they would have just said, oh, that's the FBI's director's house. So it's obviously not real, but. But maybe they have rules that say they can't pretend anything's not real unless they know. Not pretend. But they can't act as though something's not real until they get there and they find out for sure. So that's why the swatting works. But if you can't get rid of the swatting when you're the director of the FBI, I don't think you and I are going to be able to stop it. So that's pretty awful. Well, as you know, both Dan Boncino and Kash Patel have maintained that they've seen the Epstein files and it was definitely a suicide. Now, my question would be this. If the only thing you've seen are the files, what would make you think the files are complete and real? How would you know that? Well, they would know better than I would. You know, whether a document's real. I'm sure the, you know, it's all been looked at. But don't you think if someone had the ability to kill Epstein and make it look like suicide, hypothetically, would they not also have the access to make sure the file didn't show that they killed him? It feels like a little bit incomplete. Meaning, yeah, I hear you. And I believe Bongino and Patel are telling the truth. Meaning, in their opinion, based on everything they've seen, it's a slam dunk. You know, definitely a suicide. But would they know, do you think that just their experience, plus looking at the files, would that be enough, that you know they have the right answer? I know it's a little bit short for me, but anyway, so you made some more news. You said that anybody expecting video evidence from Epstein's private island might be disappointed, as no such footage exists to his knowledge. Really? What exactly does he mean by that? There's no video footage of a celebrity, or he's saying there's no video footage of anything. Now, suppose he said Epstein definitely killed himself, and also there are no videos, and then nobody has any. Now, I don't. I don't know if he's saying that. It's a little unclear. But if he did say that, wouldn't you just believe the entire package? Because if he tells me there's no videos and there never have been and nobody's had any, I'm not going to believe anything he ever says again. Now, my current opinion is that they're straight shooters and they're looking out for the American public. But I also believe that we live in a world where sometimes the security apparatus, the fate of the country can depend on not telling the public everything. So if they had to choose, and I'm not saying they are, but if they had to choose between keeping a secret that was so dark it would destroy the country versus telling you the truth because they're truth tellers, which would they do? Which would a patriot do? Because I'll give them the benefit of a doubt. I think they've earned that. They're both patriots. So the thing I worry about is not that they're honest, because I think they are. It's just that if you live in a world where keeping secrets is part of the operational expectation of what you do, I don't know if you can ever trust anybody whose job it is to make sure we don't find out things we're not supposed to find out, right? If somebody is a journalist and they have access to all the files, and maybe you let a few journalists run free, if they all came back and said, all right, we've looked at everything, somehow they would know that that would be a problem. Would they know and they come back and they say, all right, we've looked at everything, and it looks like it was a suicide, and there's no videotapes, well, I might believe them because they're journalists and they don't have an interest in keeping a secret, and they probably would want to get there first and Have a scoop and all that. But if it's your job to determine what the public hears and what they don't hear, that's their jobs. Does that give them the, let's say, the right or privilege to lie to the American people as long as it's in the interest of the American people. And it would be really easy to imagine a set of circumstances where lying would be the right, I hate to say it, but the right answer. So unfortunately they just have jobs where you have to say to yourself, maybe, maybe what they're saying is true, but you can never know for sure. And even, even with the journalists, you wouldn't know for sure, but you'd feel a lot more comfortable that they had no reason to keep a secret from you.

Sponsor/Advertiser (36:55)

Nurses, are you tired of spending weeks or even months finding the perfect job that matches your specialty with your ideal shift and salary? LinkedIn has improved your job search experience. Search by specialty, the shift you want to work and the salary you want to make. Go to LinkedIn.com nurses and begin searching today. That's LinkedIn.com nurses side effects may include less time finding the perfect job, working a shift that you love with a salary that can take you to St Thomas, Jamaica and continuous smiling because of how simple this process was.

Scott Adams (37:26)

Yeah. All right. And then also Cash said that the US Is working with India to try to stop some China backed trafficking network. So I guess India has some connection to it and if they work through India, they have a little better chance of stopping it. And he suggested Patel did that. The Chinese Communist Party is strategically targeting the US with fentanyl to weaken its population. And he notes that there's an absence of fentanyl deaths in other countries. Now are you convinced? You know, I don't want to believe that's true, but the opioid wars, if you've, you know, if you've looked into the opioid wars, you know that the west has targeted them. But it wasn't the United States that did that. Wasn't it the uk so why would the United States be targeted if it's revenge for the opioid wars? Because we weren't involved with that. Right. And the answer would be it just works. You could take out an entire generation of men, you could give them cell phones and video games and fentanyl and next thing you know, an entire generation is taken out. I don't know. I'm going to say it seems probable. It does seem probable. And one of the, one of the ways you can know it's Probable is. Do you remember the ex CIA agent, John Kirakao Kereki? Last time I mispronounced his name, he contacted me to. To correct me, he'll probably do it again. But he pointed out that when he was in Afghanistan with the CIA, he was asking, you know, why are these giant poppy farms allowed to operate? And the answer was, because the heroin is all being sold to Iran, and it's a way to weaken Iran. And I thought to myself, oh, my God, we're terrible people. But it looks like that's just the kind of world we live in and the. The risk we'll have to take. So, given that there's at least one source that says we would do it to another country, Iran, is it much of a stretch to say that China would do it to us? Nope, that is not a stretch. I don't know that it's true, but it's not a stretch. Meanwhile, whiskey sales are down, according to one of the executives of Jack Daniels. And reasons given are the alternatives of marijuana, weight loss, drugs, and a lackluster demand from generation C. So the young people are drinking less, but I think there's one other variable that's not mentioned, which is age. I don't know that this is true, but wouldn't you expect that alcohol use decreases with age? So if the, if the new generation is smaller because we've got this demographic problem, wouldn't alcohol use just drop off just because of age? I think there would be some effect there. I don't know how big it would be, but we'll talk later about how it affects crime. Anyway, remittances to Mexico have collapsed. John Nolte, and Breitbart is writing about that. So if he didn't know what a remittance is to Mexico, as the. The Mexican undocumented people come into the United States and make money, they send some of their money back to Mexico. That's called a remittance. I don't know why it's just sending money. But Trump plans to tax those reamins, but at the moment, they're way down. It's not entirely clear to me why they're down. Would it be because there are fewer people here? I. I thought they, you know, I don't think we sent back that many Mexicans, did we? But anyway, remittances are down, and Trump's planning to put a 3.5% tax on those remittances. So it might make $22 billion over the next several years. If he does that, Newsmax is Reporting that Trump's not happy with surprise the Federal Reserve and their interest rate policies. So Trump says that Powell, head of the Fed, is too late. He should go for a full point reduction in interest. He goes too late that the Fed is a disaster. Europe has had 10 rate cuts. We have had none. Despite him, our country is doing great. Go for the full point. Rocket fuel. Trump posted that on True Social. All right, now, I don't have an opinion on what is the right amount of interest rates to be set, but it does feel to me that Trump is a little bit more right than Powell. Does anybody have that same sort of just instinct? I feel like Powell might be holding back for political reasons that maybe he doesn't process as political reasons. You might think he has other reasons. But I do worry that our interest rates are not being set by economics. Does anybody else worry about that? Now, you could blame Trump and say, well, if Trump had not been so hard on Jerome Powell, Powell would admit it, maybe just on his own lowered interest rates more. But there's no evidence of that because, you know, in both cases, he would be helping Trump. And if he didn't think that helping Trump was a good idea, well, we'd be in the same place. So home means something different to everyone.

Sponsor/Advertiser (44:27)

But with Rocket Mortgage, home can mean even more. It can mean a college education, taming your high interest debt, even a renovation.

Scott Adams (44:36)

We've made it easier than ever to use your home equity. That home you worked so hard for, now it can work hard for you. Call 804Rocket or visit Rocket.com to find out more.

Sponsor/Advertiser (44:47)

Rocket Mortgage LLC. Licensed in all 50 states. Nmlsconsumeraccess.org 3030 in surprising news.

Scott Adams (44:57)

Just the news is talking about this. Alan Dershowitz is urging a pardon or commuted sentence for Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's accomplice. Now, I've been saying for years, so most of you have heard me say this, that when there's a big legal question, I like to wait for Dershowitz because.

Sponsor/Advertiser (45:24)

Not quite sure how to help you with that.

Scott Adams (45:27)

I like to wait for Dershowitz because he always has the cleanest, what I consider the most reliable answer. And, you know, if you check back later, you'll, you'll see he's usually right, but this one's a weird one. So I don't think I can automatically agree with this. And the argument is that Maxwell got a stiffer sentence than people who did similar crimes. So I said to myself, really? Is that true? First of all, what kind of Crime would be similar to this. And the second thing is her sentence. So she got 20 years in prison and she's been there. How long has she been there? Four years. How long has Ghislaine Maxwell been in prison? Four years, five years, something like that. It's already been a while, but she's got a 20 year sentence. And Dershowitz thinks that it would be. It would make sense to commute or something or her sentence. Now it's been three years, so I'm doing this. Three years. Okay, now, how many of you think that what she did fits a three or four year sentence because it literally involved trafficking minors? That's a tough argument. So I went to Grok and I asked if her sentence was on a line with comparable court cases and sentences. And Grok basically threw up its hands as hands. It doesn't show them very often because there's nobody who did a crime that's quite like that. You know, it was over a length of time and involved lots of different variables. And she may or may not have been coerced by Epstein. And part of Dershowitz's argument is that Maxwell was a victim too, so that she was a victim of Epstein as well as an accomplice. Now, if that were true and you could prove, would look like she had no choice with what she did or she got brainwashed or something. But I don't think we've seen any evidence that points in that direction, have we? To me, she looked like she was a pretty happy participant. We only see pictures, but who knows? So the question you must ask yourself is, is Dershowitz being influenced by any outside forces? And of course, the most obvious thing that you would say is, since you already suspect that Maxwell was part of the, you know, Mossad operation, and you also believe that Dershowitz, quite openly, is very pro Israel, is it too much to imagine that Mossad said, hey, it's time to see if he could get her out? Because the longer she stays in, you know, the more risk we have that she talks, and the sooner she gets out, the better. Now, I have zero evidence, zero evidence that any kind of influence is happening. But I would look and see if any other lawyers have a similar opinion. You know, if. If today you see, oh, five more lawyers who were in this field of law had the same opinion that that sentence was too long, then I would say, oh, well, I guess. I guess I'm no lawyer. So if normal lawyers who are just observing say it's too long, well, okay, maybe there's something There. But if Alan Dershowitz is the only one who is willing to say anything like this, and he's very public, you know, there's, there's no hidden agenda whatsoever, but he's very pro Israel, then you have to ask yourself how much of this is about Ghislaine Maxwell, how much of this is about the law, and how much of this is about whatever influence Alan Dershowitz might have or interests. I'll say influence and. Or interests because he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who could be pushed around. So maybe it just makes sense to him on some level that we don't quite understand for whatever reason. I, I see in the comments somebody saying the CIA. Yeah, you can make the same argument about the CIA being an influence on him. If you believe the CIA was, you know, somehow involved in the Epstein thing. I don't, I don't see the evidence for that, but it's not a crazy hypothesis anyway. So President Trump was asked about Iran. He says, if they enrich, then we're going to have to do it the other way, meaning something military. And I don't really want to do it the other way, but we're going to have no choice. There's going to be enrichment. Now, that's just a setup for the next thing I want to talk about. So Trump has very clearly said, we're going to bomb your country unless you give us what we want on giving up your enrichment. Related to that, I was watching a podcast with Matt Gates, and he was talking to the author of a book called Future Jihad Terrorist Strategies against the West. And this was on Newsmax. And this was a Dr. Farris, I think P H A R E S Farris. Would that be the way you say it? Anyway, so Dr. Farris recommended that Trump give a televised speech directly to the Iranian people, and he compared it to Reagan with the Soviet Union. Now, you know what I say whenever I see an analogy? As soon as you see the analogy, it feels like there's a lack of argument because it's not really like Reagan and the Soviet Union. The big difference is that Trump is threatening to bomb Iran any minute now. I don't believe that. When Reagan gave his speech, you know, tear down that wall. I don't believe we were threatening to bomb the Soviet Union any minute now. So you can't really compare those two situations. But I thought about it. My first thought was, that's not going to make any difference. You know, the Iranian people aren't going to buy that, especially if you have a sword over their head, because what would he say? I mean, he probably would throw in the threat. And if he throws in the threat, it's going to make things worse. Because if the Iranian public hears you need to do this or else you get bombed, that's not going to make friends. You. If the idea is to get the public on your side, that's not going to do it. So I don't know how he could do this in the context of threatening to bomb them at any minute. But I do think there might be something to it if he cannot mention the bombing, because Trump does have a way of communicating that's unlike anybody else. And if he did say the right things at the right time, he might find a way to connect. So I think as long as you don't mention we're going to bomb you, if you don't give us what we want, just don't mention that at all. Then if you use the documentary effect, the documentary effect is where there's one side of an argument presented over a long period of time, and there's nobody on the other side that can be very persuasive. So if he gave a speech directly to the Iranian people and he made it persuasive, and there wouldn't be any counter argument, it would just be his speech. The odds of him having an upside, surprisingly good result are pretty good. The downside risk, probably nearly nothing, as long as you don't put a thread in there. If you put a thread in there, there's no way that's going to turn out well. So I guess I would be cautiously in favor of this if it were implemented correctly.

Sponsor/Advertiser (55:30)

Out having fun. But the background noise makes hearing impossible. Your friend just crash cracked a joke, but you completely missed it and then, like, immediately ordered tacos. Discover Nuance Audio, the new invisible hearing solution that's built into your glasses. Discreet, comfortable, and easy to use. Nuance Audio glasses help you hear better and reduce annoying background noise so you can focus on the conversations that matter. Find a store near you@nuanceaudio.com.

Scott Adams (56:00)

My next story gets to the concept of what I call how lost are the Democrats? I love hearing their. Their best and brightest people, you know, the ones who should be helping them correct the ship. I love hearing them give advice. That really sounds bad. So CNN's Van Jones said on air that Trump should investigate and prosecute the Doge staff. Quote, I don't think what they're doing is legal now. He didn't give, he didn't give examples of what he thinks are illegal. But that might be some of the worst advice I've ever heard because obviously Trump's not going to do that. And all it is is attacking the people who are trying to get something done on behalf of the American people, such as get rid of the fat and bloat and corruption. So once again, we have the pattern developing where Republicans are trying to get something done that would be doge. And Democrats are trying to use some kind of legal process to prevent them from getting anything done. How do you miss the pattern at this point? Even if you're a Democrat, do you not realize that Republicans are trying to get things done? Sometimes you won't like them, but they're trying to do things that are good for the country. And Democrats are almost entirely involved with stopping any progress in any way. It's kind of hard to miss the pattern after a while, isn't it? And you know, Van Jones, one of the smartest people who's also a Democrat, looks like he's falling into the same trap of just saying that this thing that's probably popular by 80 to 20 in the United States, that they should all be arrested or at least, at least an investigators. Well, here's my persuasion lesson on Trump. And I've told you before that his writing style and his writing ability is never going to get the credit it deserves. But my goodness, is he a good writer. And he did a truth social little write up about his ballroom. You know, the ballroom is being built at the White House. And I just want to read to you Trump's words when he talks about it. Now, keep in mind that because we have, you know, fiscal constraints and we've got a deficit problem, that if you're the president and you're bragging about your ballroom, it doesn't sound good to the public who thinks, do you really need a ballroom? Could we not really cut that budget? And you know, you can stand in the muddy lawn when we need to do something outdoors. So he's got this delicate thing that he's trying to manage where it looks like it might be a vanity project. And also we're in the context of, you know, fiscal constraint, but he's building a ballroom, so he's got to navigate all of that. And let me just read what, what he wrote. All right. He says, quote, just inspected the site of the new ballroom that would be built compliments of a man known as Donald J. Trump at the White House. For 150 years, presidents and many others have wanted to beautify, wanted a beautiful Ballroom. But it never got built because nobody previously had any knowledge or experience in doing such things. But I do, like maybe nobody else. And it will go up quickly and be a wonderful addition. Very much in keeping with the magnificent White House itself. These are the, quote, fun projects I do while thinking about the world economy, the United States, China, Russia, and lots of other countries, places and events. It will all be good, maybe even great, depending on who is President of the United States. Now, he basically disarms you with this sentence, compliments of a man known as Donald J. Trump, because that's what, that's what's called voicy within the writer's world. If somebody is voicy, it means you can feel their personality in the writing. And you might even say to yourself, nobody else would say that. Nobody else in the world would use those words. And I don't think anybody would. No other president would ever write like this. So this is the most voicy, optimistic, fun way you could ever introduce this thing. And then he brags about his ability to build things, which most people would agree that he has. Right? I mean, you'd have to be a pretty hardcore Democrat to say that Trump doesn't know anything about construction. I mean, really, of course he knows construction. So, yes, he's probably the. The ideal president for, you know, adding a major addition to the White House. And then when he gets to the end, he talks about this being his fun project that's not interfering with all of his other stuff with Russia and China, but that's what you are thinking. So one of the things I teach with writing is if you can say something that is exactly what your reader is thinking, and, and then you take it off the table because they're thinking it, they've got a question, and then you just sort of automatically answer it. That's a home run in writing. So by the time you got to the end, you were. You probably would have been thinking, you know, why are you wasting your time on this when there's so many important things to do? And then he gives you the answer. Now, I don't know if the answer is, you know, adequate or true or covers everything it needs to cover, but the fact that he knows when you're going to be wondering, and then he supplies the answer to your wonder, that's really good technique. So it's voicey as hell and well constructed in a way that I don't think. I just don't think historians are going to fully appreciate that he's the best writer we've ever had in government, probably. All right, I've told you before, the California government seems to be a criminal racket. And almost every day there's another story in the news that kind of bolsters that opinion. So according to interesting engineering, Sujitha Sino is writing that there's a new study that reveals the deep corruption in California's clean energy push. So apparently the process of getting everybody on solar has created. Let's see what kind of corruption. A sobering array of corruption. A sobering array of corruption. So I guess there are. So here are some of the alleged corrupt practices. So shocking abuses of power in the approval and licensing phases. Now, how many of you are surprised that a very expensive project has a shocking abuse of power in the approval and licensing phase? Meaning the contracts are going to friends of the people who have the power to allocate the contracts? Let's see. It's also as well as the displacement of indigenous groups. Okay, I don't know about that. And also nefarious patterns of tax evasion or the falsification of information about the projects. Now, I don't know how much of this is true, but every single time California gets a bunch of money to do something that sounds good on paper, somebody just steals the money. It's like you might as well just dump it on the ground and let everybody come and grab some. So. So remember the high speed rail that we didn't build anything. Sound familiar? And then there's all the stuff that's not happening and the rebuild of the fire zones and I mean, it's just one thing after another, just complete criminal enterprise. How could it be worse? Is it possible for California to be any worse? Well, they're taking a run at it. So the California Senate passed a bill that will allow violent convicts with life sentences to get out of jail. Now they have to have served 25 years and been convicted before 26. So, you know, it's not everybody. But what would happen if you release somebody who has spent their entire adult life in prison? And the reason that they were there is because they'd done something so heinous that you get life in prison? There aren't too many things you get life in prison for. What do they do? They get jobs at McDonald's. There's not really anything they can do. Right. It's not like they're going to get a job at your local construction place, will they? So I don't know too much about the rehabbing people, but if you spent your entire adult life behind bars, I don't know if you're ready. So, once again, dangerous for Californians. All right, ladies and gentlemen, that is the completion of my planned comments. And as I warned you, Owen Gregorian will be hosting a Spaces event on X that will happen in a few minutes after we're done here, and I invite everybody to give a listen. I usually listen while I'm making myself some breakfast, so I'm. I'm usually anonymously listening, and I hope you enjoy it. And that's all I got for today. So everybody have a good time today. I'm going to say just a few words to the locals people before we go. So locals people will be private in 30.