Episode 3120 - The Scott Adams School 03/23/26

Summary

Real Coffee with Scott Adams

Episode 3120 – The Scott Adams School
Date: March 23, 2026
Theme: Using Persuasion Filters to Make Sense of Current Events, Emotional Resilience, and Technological Disruption

---

Episode Overview

This lively episode, hosted by Erica with contributions from Marcella, Owen, and participation from Scott Adams (briefly), weaves together practical advice on reframing emotions, commentary on AI’s growing influence, political campaign spending oddities, the latest outlandish ambitions from Elon Musk, and high-stakes world affairs involving Iran, Israel, and the US. The hosts use Scott Adams’ signature “persuasion filter” lens to analyze both the power of personal mindset and global news. Lighthearted asides and wit keep the conversation engaging, making even weighty topics feel accessible.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Reframing: Who Controls Your Feelings?

(07:55 – 15:38)

• Scott Adams’ “Reframe” Principle

  • Erica reads from Scott’s “Reframe” book (p.81):

    “The usual frame is: my feelings are the result of my situation. The reframe: how I feel is my choice.”
    (08:03)

  • The power lies in reminding yourself "I could choose not to be bothered," even if it feels weird at first.

• Joy Behar as Surprising Inspiration:

  • Erica recalls learning a reframing trick from Joy Behar (“so what, who cares?”), which instantly takes the edge off negativity.

    “To me, that's like the reframe right there. So when something's happening...my brain immediately goes to 'so what? Who cares?'”
    (08:20)

• Marcella’s “Good” Reframe (from Jocko Willink):

  • Turn every negative event into an opportunity:

    “He had to keep his cool even during chaos...with everything that happens, you always say 'good'...just level-headed.”
    (09:30)

• Owen’s Tools:

  • Eckhart Tolle’s "being in the now" to avoid spiraling about past/future problems.
  • Scott’s “crowding out” effect: Positive thoughts can displace negative ones.
  • “Earworm” trick: Replace an intrusive song with “Shout” by Tears for Fears to clear his mind.

• Practical Try-Now Tips:

  • Erica swears by doing 10 jumping jacks to instantly change your mindset.

    “Literally stand up...do ten jumping jacks. Everything changes.”
    (14:44)

---

2. AI’s Persuasive Power and Political Bias

(16:27 – 20:23)

• Yale Study:

  • AI-generated (e.g. ChatGPT) educational content makes learning easier and more persuasive—people retain facts better, but there's a liberal slant bias.
  • “If it did take a conservative slant, it would also shift your opinions.” (16:27, Owen)

• Prompting for Balance:

  • Discussion on how configuring AI prompts can reduce bias, but Owen notes AI reflects the sources it ingests (e.g., Reddit, the internet at large).
  • Advice: Use multiple sources; “Trust nothing. Get a few answers to everything and then still make up your own mind.”
    (20:03, Erica)

---

3. Campaign Spending Ethics: AOC & Broader Corruption

(20:49 – 25:34)

• AOC’s Campaign Funds Used for Ketamine Therapy:

  • $19,000 spent on ketamine-based psychiatric consulting, labeled “leadership training and consulting.”
  • Raises questions about the line between legitimate campaign spending and personal benefit.

• Broader Context:

  • Other politicians (mentioning Trump, the Clintons) also exploit lax campaign finance oversight; enforcement is inconsistent and penalties are minor.
  • Erica’s frustration:

    “There’s always two sets of rules... It’s a shame...I would just like to see anyone [held accountable] because there's so many brutal things happening on the other side.”
    (25:30)

---

4. Elon Musk Updates: Chips, Robots, Mars and Beyond

(26:15 – 34:56)

• “Terrafab” and the Future of Computing:

  • Musk plans to build chip capacity 50x the world’s current supply, leveraging new physics, recursive processes, and satellite ambitions.

    “His goal is basically this multi-planetary future like Star Trek...just imagine 50,000 launches per year.”
    (27:22, Owen)

• Contingency Concerns:

  • What if Elon Musk is gone? Will his vision continue or stagnate like Apple post-Steve Jobs?
  • Jokes: “Maybe he’ll upload his brain into a robot.”

• Structures on the Dark Side of the Moon?

  • Discussion of a viral “Y Files” podcast episode about possible moon structures; jokey speculation about government secrets.

• Von Neumann Probes & Humanoid Robots (Optimus):

  • Musk envisions 10 billion humanoid robots by 2040, capable of replicating themselves and expanding globally (and off-world).
  • “What could possibly go wrong?” hosts joke about the sci-fi risks.
    (33:07)

• Neurosymbolic AI:

  • Hybrid neural-symbolic models slash energy use 100x while boosting accuracy (showing typical AI innovation explosion).

---

5. Global Affairs: US, Iran, Israel, and Negotiating Peace

(35:31 – 55:34)

• Trump’s “Persuasion Play” on Iran:

  • Trump publicly announces postponement of military strikes on Iran for five days, contingent on negotiations.
  • Effectively boosts markets, lets Iran “save face” by boasting on state TV, and keeps military options open.

    “He caused Iranians to be put in this defense mode...even if they weren’t planning on being serious about these negotiations and also giving Iranians...a possibility to save face.”
    (37:43, Marcella)

• Selective Enforcement & Political Willpower:

  • Cites Trump’s and AOC’s different legal treatment over similar campaign fund issues.
  • “Selective enforcement”—rules apply differently depending on who you are.

• Japan’s Role in Maritime Security:

  • Japan sending advanced minesweepers to the Strait of Hormuz to protect shipping lanes.

• Iran’s Extended Missile Reach:

  • Attempted strikes as far as Diego Garcia demonstrate risk to European allies; UK response deemed weak (and mocked on SNL).

• Israel’s Complex Position:

  • Discussion on Israel’s probable calculus: balancing defense, three-front pressures (Gaza, Hezbollah, Iran), and their limited resources (“Iron Dome” capacity).
  • “Israel will always defend itself... they will do whatever they need to do.” (50:53, Marcella)

• Trump’s Endgame:

  • Emphasis on threading the needle—neither escalating nor abandoning, keeping flexibility, using negotiations as leverage for de-escalation and possibly peace brokering.
  • Erica:

    “I stand by Trump...praying for a swift, safe end...that puts an end to all the over there once and for all, and people can feel safe and free.”
    (54:19, Erica)

---

6. A Lighter Note: Chicken Nugget Defense

(57:15 – 58:21)

• Absurd UK Legal Tale:
  • A criminal migrant beats deportation by arguing his son can’t tolerate “foreign” chicken nuggets—an illustration of bureaucratic loopholes, prompting laughter and exasperation.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Scott Adams:

  “How I feel is my choice.” (08:03)

• Erica (on reframing):

  “My brain immediately goes to ‘so what? Who cares?’ Because when you just make it that stupid, it kind of just takes the sting away.” (08:20)

• Marcella (on Jocko’s “Good” frame):

  “With everything that happens, you always say ‘good’...just level-headed. It works during war.” (09:30)

• Owen (on AI bias):

  “It's like asking if The Internet can be trusted...AI is summarizing essentially the opinion of the Internet and one of the primary sources is Reddit. So ask yourself, do you trust Reddit?” (20:23)

• Erica (on campaign corruption):

  “There’s always two sets of rules. We've all seen that. It's a shame.” (25:30)

• Owen (on Musk’s unchecked ambitions):

  “[He] wants to...build 50 times more chips than the world currently produces using some kind of new physics.” (26:15)

• Erica (on Moon conspiracies):

  “It was supposed to be, not supposed to be, but I thought this was going to be about UFOs and oh my God, this thing took a left turn...” (30:54)

• Owen (summarizing Trump-Iran negotiation):

  “It's kind of genius, I think, in a way that...he’s not saying, you know, psych, I'm not doing it...he basically just created a third way.” (48:28)

• Marcella (on Japan’s aid):

  “Japan is made promises to bring in their ships that are anti-mine ships in the area...great technology.” (40:00)

• Owen (on UK’s legal absurdity):

  “[A criminal] fought his deportation by arguing his son disliked foreign chicken nuggets. This is the country that Tories and Labors have created. The chicken nugget defense.” (57:16)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Segment | Topic | Start-End | |----------------------------------|---------------------------------------|---------------| | Welcome, Sip, Reframing Book | Power of emotional reframing | 01:37–15:38 | | AI Study, Prompting for Balance | AI’s role in learning & bias | 16:27–20:23 | | Campaign Spending Drama | AOC and campaign fund use | 20:49–25:34 | | Elon Musk’s Tech Moonshot | Chips, robots, moon stories | 26:15–34:56 | | Iran/Israel/US World Affairs | Trump’s negotiation & global impact | 35:31–55:34 | | UK Nugget Defense Story | Lighthearted wrap-up | 57:15–58:21 |

---

Tone & Style

• Conversational, collaborative, and wry—hosts riff and banter, but always return to “useful” takeaways.
• Emphasis on practical mental tricks, questioning media narratives, and not taking the world (or technology) at face value.
• Frequent references to the “persuasion filter” and Scott Adams’ philosophy even in his absence.

---

Final Thoughts

This episode offers a toolkit for resilience—in emotion, persuasion, and discerning news in a chaotic world—while never losing its sense of fun or irreverence. There is as much practical self-management advice as there is sober geopolitical analysis, with a side helping of wild speculation (the Moon!) and legal absurdity (chicken nuggets, anyone?). The spirit of Scott Adams’ analytical approach runs through every minute.

---

Closing Note:
“Go out and be useful today. Let us know if the jumping jack trick works for you!” (closing – Erica, 58:22)

“Closing sip to Scott Adams. We love you, Scott Adams.” (closing – Erica, 59:22)

---

For listeners who missed this episode:
Expect thoughtful, actionable mind hacks, sharp and skeptical takes on world events, a running commentary on accelerating technology, and plenty of good-natured mischief as the hosts channel the “School of Scott Adams”—persuasion analysis for real life.

Transcript

[Marcella]

Look at everybody. Looking beautiful. Stephen gonna be first. Steve, the Texan one. Today,

[Erica]

race of the Stevens.

[Marcella]

Jared Stein third. Bob four.

[Owen]

There's Gracie.

[Erica]

Bob Lawler. Are you talking about.

[Marcella]

Yeah.

[Erica]

Or his pants on.

[Marcella]

Does Bob has his pants on?

[Erica]

Yeah, they are optional.

[Marcella]

Good morning, everybody. It's a Monday.

[Erica]

We are rolling into a new week. It is March 23, 2026. We are fully in spring. I'm taking allergy pills every day already. It's amazing. How does the world know? It just keeps happening.

[Marcella]

Oh, the tv. The TV version of us is. Is not here today, but maybe one day.

[Erica]

Maybe we'll morph. Come on in, everybody. When you come in, we're gonna. If you guys have your reframe books just to get ready, we are going to do page 81. And I think it's always useful to have a little reframe action going. I. Okay, I see people coming in now. Welcome. Good morning. We have a special sip today. I see. I haven't watched it yet, but I can tell it's from out of this world. All right. Do you think we have enough time? Do you think everyone's in?

[Marcella]

I think so.

[Erica]

Okay, let's do this. Ready? Grab a vessel.

[Scott]

Got to do a little tweaking. Some of the programming has some issues. So this reality that you're experiencing, the one that you think is real, It's a simulation. I'm actually in the control room that controls the simulation. For reality, I had to tweak a few things. I'll be talking about that, but not until. Not until the simultaneous sip. What do you need for the simultaneous sip? Well, you don't need to be in the control room for the simulation yourself. You can just be where you are. All you need here's a cup or mug or glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen, jug or flask. A vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. You might be wondering how my coffee stays in my cup as zero GS, but it does now. Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure. The dopamine hit of the day. The thing that makes everything better. Simultaneous siphon.

[Marcella]

Ah.

[Scott]

Space version.

[Erica]

Oh, that was good. I did wonder how his coffee stayed in his mug. Only Scott. Only Scott.

[Owen]

I forgot about those olden days when he used backgrounds and stuff. That was cool.

[Erica]

The green screen. It was so fun. Good morning, everybody. My name is Erica. Welcome to the Scott Adams School. Like I said, we're rolling into a fresh new week here on March 23rd. I thought we. So I'LL give you a little bit of housekeeping first. We have some guests lined up for you this week, not only here, but also on Locals. So today you have the home team and Friday I think it's going to be us, the home team.

[Marcella]

Yay.

[Erica]

And then tomorrow we're going to introduce you to someone new. And his name is. How, how does he show up? Owen, Again, on Twitter, I think it's take naps.

[Owen]

Take naps. All one word, of course. But yeah, take naps.

[Erica]

Okay. His name is Bobby Sauce and I asked him to join us. He has some hot takes on things and he's passionate about things and maybe he doesn't think the way same way a lot of us do, or some of you do or some of you don't. So it'll just be interesting to hear from a different voice. So he'll be on tomorrow. Should be exciting. And then tomorrow night on Locals, an OG of Scott's forever, Jeff Pilkington will be on with me tomorrow night on Locals. And he's, he's amazing with AI. He's doing all sorts of fascinating things, but most importantly is he is a massive beloved. And I have never got to see him in person. We've communicated over the years. I don't, I don't know if he's still a Democrat and I'm curious to know, but we were always like on the opposite side of the political spectrum on things, but we were always respectful, we always got along. We agreed to disagree and I just genuinely appreciate him and I was like, it's time for you to come talk to all of us. So he'll be with us. And then Wednesday, BJ Ditchter returns and he's going to join us here in the morning. We're going to talk about all the Canadian things you guys wanted him to talk about before we left the other day. So that'll be great for him to return to do that. And we'll also talk about current events and news. And then Thursday, Steve Cortez comes to join us again. So we're really excited to hear his take on things and what he's working on now. He is a very busy guy. And Thursday night, Jimmy from Scott Adams Meetups will be on Locals with us to talk about the meetups at and show us his new website. And that's going to be a lot of fun.

[Owen]

So busy week.

[Erica]

It's a busy week here and on Local, so I hope you join us on both. And we're going to try to do the local shows at 8pm Eastern time. So if you want to mark your calendar, that's. That's the time we're shooting for. Okay. And again, it's a relaxed atmosphere. Bring whatever you want. Wear whatever you want. I don't care. Having dinner. I might be chewing bubble gum. You never know. You know, It's a casual hangout. Okay. That was a lot. So listen, you guys, I thought we would do a reframe, and I think the next few reframes that we're going to do are, like, in these continuous pages. But I wanted to just start with this one, and then I'm going to turn it over to Owen. We'll discuss it and turn it over to Owen after. But this one is on page 81 of the paperback, and it's titled who controls your feelings? Most of us grow up believing our feelings are the product of whatever is happening to us. It sure seems that way. When you can control your schedule, where you go, and who you are with, you generally feel happy. When you have no control over those environmental variables, you are less likely to feel happy. Therefore, logically, your environment and your situation are controlling how you feel. By that view, you are nothing but a victim of a random and often cruel universe. That's no way to go through life. I recommend flipping that worldview using this admittedly weird reframe. The usual frame is my feelings are the result of my situation. The reframe how I feel is my choice. The first time I heard this reframe, it hit me as both ridiculous and powerful. I've since used it often to clear my mind of junk feelings. I simply told myself I could choose not to be bothered. And it worked. Or at least it took off the edge. I would love to tell you that the logical reason this reframe works, but I don't think there is one. Maybe it works because the sensation of taking control is generally good for most people. Maybe it works because it gives you permission to feel good. Perhaps it works by triggering you into cognitive dissonance. Or maybe it's just yanks you out of a mental prison you put yourself in and returns you to the present. I don't know. All I know is that it has given me comfort. Maybe it can work for you, too. Don't be surprised if a reframe works one day and then never again. Or that reframe that didn't work for you. Before starts feeling profound. Try several reframes on the same topic and see what works that day. Reframes are quick and cheap, and if you know immediately if they and you'll know immediately if they have an impact. You can feel it. If you don't feel it, try another. Um, this is going to come as a crazy shock to you guys, but one person who helped me with a reframe like this was ready. Joy Behar from the View.

[Marcella]

What?

[Erica]

Right. We didn't see that coming, but back in the day, before I knew that they were like mentally insane people and we would like watch that show kind of regular. I just always remember she would always say, like something would happen. She'd say, so what? Who cares? And I adopted that. And so to me, that's like the reframe right there. So when something's happening or someone's hyped up about something or whatever, my brain immediately goes to so what? Who cares? Because when you just make it that stupid, it kind of just takes the sting away. It takes the edge off like Scott said. So I love how you can just tell yourself something different because like I always say, it's so easy to wallow in something and be negative and it's, it's harder to get out of it. But try like a couple of phrases like that like so what? Who cares? Or what Scott suggested just to be like, oh, let me just deflate this. But you know, Marcella, do you have anything, you know, something's bothering you that you can talk yourself off the ledge and, and not feel hurt by something?

[Marcella]

Well, I mean this, this reframe is really helpful because it tells you that you control your emotions. The emotions don't control you. And it's good that to do that because the world's going to do a lot of things to you, but you can control how you react to it. But I mean my, my number one to go reframe is always Jocko, where he says good. With everything that happens, you always say good. Oh, you have more work. Good. Love that you're going to do that. Good. And I know that's very simplistic, but it works for me.

[Erica]

So what's his, what's his reasoning behind it? Like, what does he say about that?

[Marcella]

His reasoning is just that he ended up figuring out that that was the best course of action to take when it comes to negative news or any news. So one of the things he talks about is not reacting happy or sad about certain situations, just level headed. It works during war, which he's a. Jocko is a. If. If there's anybody out there that doesn't know who Jocko is, I'm a big fan, as you guys may know. He's a former Navy Seal and he went to Iraq and Afghanistan, I think Iraq mainly. And he had to keep his cool even during chaos and chaotic times. I think that's a good motto. Other, other people that are always in danger keep that motto of level headedness. Not don't get too happy about things, don't get too sad about things, just keep your level. And so good became that chant for him.

[Erica]

And good is also an opportunity, right? Like, oh, good an opportunity.

[Owen]

I think it comes out. He wrote, Jocko wrote a book called Extreme Ownership. And I think that's very closely related to the good attitude of saying good even when you know things bad happen to you. Because if you take this mindset of extreme ownership that he recommends, it's like no matter what happens, you're in charge, you're taking control of the situation, you're embracing whatever happens so that you can improve the outcome. And so I think it's that extreme ownership where it's like, I'm not going to let other people dictate the circumstances or determine what happens. I'm going to be an active participant and take control of things and make things better. So that's the way I see Jocko approaching it.

[Erica]

I love that. Jocko is amazing. You guys should check him out if you don't already know him. And what do you do? Owen, what's your go to?

[Owen]

Probably a few different things. I think the one that I find most helpful is probably the Eckhart Tolle idea of being in the now or being in the present. Because a lot of times when you are thinking about some negative thing, it's something in the past or it's something maybe in the future that may or may not actually happen. And if you bring yourself back to the present, you can usually just look around yourself and say, okay, am I all right? Like, do I really have any problem that's immediate that I have to deal with right this second, or am I okay? And a lot of times you'll just that that thought process will calm you down and kind of get you back to reality in terms of, okay, this isn't, you know, an insurmountable problem or it's not even necessarily going to be real. And so I think that to me is probably the most helpful. But, you know, I think a lot of it is maybe you can. Scott used to talk about crowding out the negative thoughts with positive ones because it's a psychological sort of trick that you can't really hold both in your head at the same time. And if you do focus on the negative, it just makes it worse. And so if you can think of something positive and maybe gratitude or even just whatever you find that would make you happy, which I think Scott talked about too. You know, just think about some positive time in your life or think about something good in your life, that. That will crowd out the bad thoughts, and there just isn't any room for them anymore. And also, I like his other reframe of just get out or you can just kind of, like, do that. I use something similar for earworms. When there's a song stuck in my head, there's another song that I use

[Erica]

that don't tell me. Which one is it?

[Owen]

It's Shout. It's that song that goes shout, Shout. Get it all out.

[Erica]

Yeah. Tears for fears.

[Owen]

Yeah.

[Erica]

So that's how you get rid of another song.

[Owen]

Yeah. So for some reason, that one, even though it is kind of an earworm, I guess, doesn't stick in my head. So if I just, like, sing that to myself, then the other song's gone, and then I don't have to have anything going through my head anymore.

[Erica]

You know what song does it for me to get rid of a song. But then this song is so much worse. I'm sorry. I'm gonna do this to you guys.

[Scott]

Wow.

[Erica]

It's the 1-800 Cars for Kids song.

[Owen]

Oh, my God, those jingles are nasty.

[Erica]

Oh, my God. It's the worst ever. You guys are posting some great, great reframes of your own for how you deal with things. And I love. I just love. Oh, you know what? What did I call him the other day? Anthony Robbins. You guys laughed at me. Tony Robbins. You know what works for me also, you guys? Just. So if you want to just try this over the week, I swear this works. So let's say something's bringing you down, and, you know, it's like, what we're talking about. Like, you're heard about something or whatever. Hands of God. Do 10 jumping jacks. Literally stand up from wherever you are. Do ten jumping jacks. Everything changes. It's the most crazy thing, and I want to know if anyone does. Everyone laughs at me, and I'm like, I've made people. I'm like, no, get up right now and do it. They're like, holy cow. It just changes everything. All right, so that's the end of my. My spiel on that stuff.

[Marcella]

Everybody gets injured.

[Erica]

Everyone. Right now. Shut up.

[Marcella]

You guys. Assume your own risk.

[Erica]

Yes, assume your own risk. Our attorney's here to protect Us. All right, so you guys try those things. Let us know. And also after the show, when we repost this show on X. I'll repost it. Tell us what your favorite sayings are. You know, like how Scott gave us one. Joy Behar, of all people, gave me one. She should actually use it for herself now, but let it. Yeah. Oh, see, good. Bookish is gonna try it. I love that. Gracie. You go, girl. All right, you guys, so let's switch gears and get into some current events. Current events and news. And Owen and Marcella are going to alternate stories. We're going to start with Owen this morning. Let's go.

[Owen]

So there's a article in Tech Explorer about some research that Yale did about AI saying that tools like ChatGPT make learning easier and more persuasive. And so the person, Daniel Carell, was one of the researchers. He says people recalled facts better after reading the AI version than the version written by experts. Imagine that. We can imagine the large language model starting with something like a Wikipedia article and transforming it, making the text smoother, more engaging, and easier to retain. AI tools like ChatGPT are becoming common ways to learn about history and other topics. This study shows that AI written content can actually help people learn better, even if the writing is clear and easy to understand. Yet it also suggests that relying on AI to learn about things like history may end up influencing how we think about the world, because they also found that, number one, AI is slanted liberal, and it leads to more liberal opinions. So that's a problem. It did say that if. If it did take a conservative slant, it would also shift your opinions. Right. So, you know, it probably will have more of that bifurcation effect of skewing people to one side or the other. But unfortunately, it looks like Most of the AIs are kind of skewed liberal. So hopefully GROK can at least be a shining beacon of light without that.

[Erica]

And even when you ask your AI to, I mean, I find that if I can't answer, like, let's say from Chat GPT, and I'm like, okay, wait, like, I know better that that's so skewed. And I feel like if I say, please, I don't want any bias, you know, for a political direction, give it to me straight down the middle, then I feel like I do get just more of the facts. But you have to.

[Owen]

Yeah, and you can. You can configure those things. Like, if you have an account with one of these places, there's a place where you can grab Give it like global instructions that says this is how you should behave or this is how I want you to be different than just the default. And you can put in, you know, you are a conservative or you are a MAGA person or you're, you know, right leaning or, or you can say you're totally neutral, not biased in either way and just see how it changes the responses. It's an interesting experiment just to see because it's kind of like, you know, basically correcting its own bias, which means it can kind of see its own bias. I know it's not actually thinking, but it's, it does adjust, you know, because it is probably just because it's trained to please you and it's trained to give you whatever you ask for. And so unless they put some kind of guardrail on that forces it to be liberal, like I think Google did for a while with that diverse image generator.

[Erica]

Oh my God. Yeah.

[Owen]

Except for that most of the time it'll cooperate and it'll do what you ask it to do. I, I caught something like that in my AI that I use with my news curation system because I have it basically look through all the stories that are coming through my feeds and rank them, right. And so it's, it'll summarize them and it'll, you know, do things that'll say, okay, you know, what are the best stories you might want to think about posting? And I caught one of them when I saw some of the output and it's like, wait a second, this, this is like some crazy liberal because it's like criticizing stuff that I don't think he should be criticizing at all. And I'm like, what the hell's going on? So I had to adjust the prompts and say, don't do that. I think what it was doing was it was actually kind of like Apple News where it was criticizing one of the sources that I use all the time. And it was like, oh, this is a crazy right leaning site. And I'm like, don't do that. Just, you know, this is a good source. Don't, don't do that.

[Erica]

Yeah, it's pretty funny how it does that. So if you ever wanted to control or boss something around, get involved with AI and somebody asked before, you know, can ChatGPT be trusted? Nothing can be trusted, you guys. So just remember that. So get a few answers to everything and then still make up your own mind is my advice.

[Owen]

In my, in my opinion, the way I would respond to that is it's like asking if The Internet can be trusted.

[Erica]

Right?

[Owen]

Because that's what AI is summarizing essentially is the opinion of the Internet and one of the primary sources is Reddit. So ask yourself, do you trust Reddit? Which if you do, you're crazy.

[Erica]

Trust nothing. I love that. All right, Marcella, take us to another place.

[Marcella]

Meanwhile, Zero Hedge on another news story. Alex. Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, AOC, better known as used her 2025 campaign funds to fund spend $19,000 on Dr. Brian Boyle, who is a psychiatrist specializing in ketamine based therapies for depression and ptsd, labeled the, you know, they publish this campaign spending. Not published, but it's, it's public. So we could look at it. So it was the, the, the cost, the $19,000 cost was labeled as leadership training and consulting in FEC filings. Erica felt very strongly about that and she left. I'm sure she's fine. The, the ketamine therapy. The ketamine therapy brings, you know, it is what it is. We're not very surprised by AOC using it. However, she might be in some hot water. The, there's ethical questions under FEC rules allowing consulting broadly whether this would apply. There's no indication that she is in trouble or anything like that. But it does kind of lead to how far you can take and use your campaign funds.

[Erica]

Yeah, you can't do that. I mean, I don't know anything. Wait a minute.

[Owen]

No, I mean, you can't. Yeah, but it says that all the time.

[Marcella]

I mean, there's under consulting, right? Yeah.

[Erica]

Wait, she can do it, Owen.

[Owen]

Well, what I'm saying is there's a lot of abuses. So these campaigns, I mean these are like piggy banks for a lot of these politicians. And there's all kinds of stories I've seen over the years of people saying, well, you know, is this is kind of questionable, like can you use it for this luxury vacation or this trip with this fancy hotel and you know, are you allowed to use it for whatever? And I mean, but there's lots and lots of examples of things where I think AOC is probably one of the worst offenders.

[Erica]

Yeah.

[Owen]

Where I remember she got in trouble because she used it for that Met Gala and the dress that she used. And it's like, what does that have to do with politics or campaigning? You know, you can't just say, oh, I'm just going to do this. And I think wasn't. Didn't the Clintons get in trouble for this for like using money for their daughter's wedding? Or something.

[Erica]

Oh, I don't remember. Maybe the chat remembers might have been from their foundation.

[Owen]

But, you know, but, you know, the problem is, again, Scott would say there's corruption wherever there's lots of money and there's not anybody watching. And that's what this is. It's like you get all this fundraising, have this like, million dollar piggy bank, and of course you're going to have so much temptation to use it because nobody's going to stop you. You know, there's nobody that doesn't allow you to do that spending it. You might get in trouble before it afterwards and have to pay a fine or you might have to pay it back if you get caught, but chances are you probably won't because most of the politicians look out for each other and they don't police each other. There's no, like, real audits necessarily. And I mean, there is some disclosure rules, but not everybody always looks really closely at it. And even when it does happen like this, you know, Marcela, you just said it doesn't look like AOC is in trouble. Like, I mean, it's not very strict. It's not really enforced.

[Erica]

Didn't. Didn't Trump get like a felony charge for this over the Stormy Daniels payment that went through his. Yeah, did.

[Owen]

Which is, you know, that, that to me is part of the outrage with what happened to Trump, because it's this selective enforcement. Right. Like, the people break this rule all the time, and I'm not defending it that people break the rule, but they're very inconsistent with who they apply it to, how much they enforce it, what the penalty is. It's usually just a slap on the wrist where they just have to pay a little fine, which might also come out of the campaign funds, for all I know, and there's no real consequences for it. And the other thing that's outrageous about Trump's is that there was literally the way they presented it in court, there was literally no way for him to follow the law. Like, if he classified it as a campaign expense or if he didn't classify it as a campaign expense, the way they presented the argument, both of them were illegal. Like the. Because, you know, I remember thinking this when I was reading these stories. I'm like, okay. They basically are saying, no matter what he did, it's the wrong answer and it's illegal.

[Erica]

Yeah, there's always two sets of rules. We've all seen that. It's a shame. That's why I'm just like, it's aoc. Nothing, nothing happens Ever. I really do want to see things happen. Scott was more gracious about this stuff than I was. Like, he would always be like, well, should they get. And I'm like, yes. I'd be screaming, I can't stand it. And he's like, well. And I was like, oh, you're too kind. I can't take it. But I mean, I would just like to see anyone so someone. Because there's so many brutal things happening on the other side that I never see anyone get in trouble for. When you think about people like Navarro and all these people that had to go to jail and you're like, are you kidding me? But that's another story for another day. All right, so who's up next? Do you, Owen?

[Owen]

I think I'm up next. So Elon Musk is changing the world again. He's building this Terrafab, which is like a chip factory. And he's saying that he's going to. He wants to build 50 times more chips than the world currently produces using some kind of new physics. And right now, apparently the world output is 20 gigawatts. He's saying he wants to buy all of new Nvidia, Samsung and Micron capacity. He's using some kind of new recursive process for wrapper production and redesigns. And he mentions some kind of very interesting new physics that he's confident in. He's going to build two chips. Apparently one is for Earth inferencing and robots. And that's, you know, billions per year that he wants to make of that one. And then he wants to make one for space satellites, which is 100 kilowatts to get to megawatt scale. And so he's going to be upgrading the starship for 200 ton payloads. He needs 50,000 launches yearly for that terawatt in orbit. Just imagine 50,000 launches.

[Erica]

I can't.

[Owen]

Per year. And the goal is basically this multi planetary future like Star Trek. So it's just a completely different world that he's creating. And you know, it's getting the point where like we might run out of helium because we just don't have enough. But apparently he has this Padawak goal and he wants to even create a moon mass driver, which a mass driver I think is some kind of launch pad where like you would fire rockets off of the moon where it's lower gravity so there's a lot less cost because you don't have to overcome Earth's gravity.

[Erica]

All right, here's a basic B question. What if something Happens to Elon?

[Owen]

It's a good question. I mean, a lot of his Companies are public. SpaceX is public, and Tesla. And so, you know, most of what he has created in theory would continue, but I would certainly question, like, what is it going to be without Elon Musk? At one hand, you have to say, yeah, exactly. I was going to compare it to Apple. That's right. It's like, you know, it's not necessarily going to be the same. The innovation might not be there and it might just sort of stagnate. But I would wonder, like, you know, is anybody really going to have the ambition to take the helm to say, I'm going to do this vision that Musk has?

[Erica]

Maybe little baby X. Yeah, maybe.

[Owen]

I mean, Baron's getting older. Maybe Baron Trump could step in.

[Erica]

Baron. Okay. My God.

[Marcella]

Oh, I'm just. I'm. I'm extremely happy about Tara Fab. I mean, this is. This is what I dreamed of. One terawatt of a computering. He's gonna do so much. And, you know, maybe I'll visit Mars or the moon.

[Erica]

The moon, I think. Oh, my God. I heard such a podcast yesterday, you guys. I'm gonna link it later, but. Ooh, I think, Owen, you might have been talking about this the other day, about the moon. Did you say something about structures on the moon?

[Owen]

Yeah, on the dark side.

[Erica]

Okay.

[Owen]

There was a story I read that about. So a little more detail. There was a story from some kind of guy that was involved with the government as, like, a contractor or something. And they're like, they brought me into this room and they asked me to look at these pictures. And I start looking at these pictures and they look like buildings. They look like skyscrapers. They look like structures. And I'm like, wondering what this is. And they're saying, yeah, these are pictures from the dark side of the moon.

[Erica]

Okay.

[Owen]

And he's like, this wasn't ambiguous, like, it might be a rock. No, these were like big, huge structures, like a city on the moon. And he's like, why doesn't anybody know about this? And they're like, well, this is all classified. You can't talk about it. And he seemed. He seemed very credible. So I don't know. I mean, you know, you never know whether or not he was a plant.

[Erica]

But below is where I saw it. That's exactly right, Stell. It was the Y Files episode. Holy cow. I listened to it yesterday. If you guys are pressed for time, listen to it, like on 1.5 speed. It's totally perfect. That way, but oh my God, you want to talk about a conspiracy theory? And don't worry, my wheels are already turning. Like, what guests do I want to have on? Like, can we talk about this? There's like, not enough time in the day.

[Owen]

But I don't care what have Anna Paulina Luna on. She just talked about this in a way. She, she's like, everybody that goes into the skiff and looks at the UFO files come out, comes out saying, holy shit.

[Erica]

Yeah. Well, I was like, holy shit yesterday listening to this. It was supposed to be, not supposed to be, but I thought this was going to be about UFOs and oh my God, this thing took a left turn to a road I did not see coming. And I was like, what? Did anyone else watch this? I was shooketh, but I'll post a link to it after the show. And yes, we have to have somebody come on about this. It was fascinating. Is it true? I don't know. I mean, it's just me talking again, but anyway.

[Marcella]

All right, interesting going in that topic of left field or, or sci fi. Elon Musk also came out with this vision of 10 billion humanoid robots by 2040. So you'll have a robot behind you, or three of them behind you, Erica. Into an annual global production of 1 to 10 billion units, 10 to 100 times the car volume that we have. Currently framing Tesla's Optimus as an expert exponential revenue driver is what he called it, an infinite money glitch. He talked about the Von Neumann probe. As most of you in the chat know, the Von Neumann probe, I'm sure you guys all know, is a theoretical concept from mathematician and physicist John Von Neumann that says the core idea is to have a machine that travels to a new location, use local raw materials and fully replicates itself, then sends those copies onwards to new locations. And that's what he envisions. That's what Elon envisions for Optimus.

[Owen]

What could possibly go wrong with that idea?

[Marcella]

Yeah, he wants to send Optimus robots to places like Mars or asteroids. They use local resources to build more Optimus robots. Solar arrays, factories, habitats, and basically exponentially expand humanity through robots. What could possibly go wrong? Nothing.

[Erica]

I, I mean, she is speechless. I, I, I again, like, what would we do if something happened to Elon? Like, what's going on? I don't know. Robots, the whole thing.

[Owen]

Maybe he'll upload his brain into a robot and then it won't be a problem.

[Erica]

Oh, that's true. Maybe he has already. Maybe he has.

[Owen]

He's Got neural link too, you know.

[Erica]

Oh, I'm posting the link for you guys on Locals and I hope everybody got it. That's the link to that episode.

[Marcella]

For the Y files.

[Erica]

For the Y files.

[Marcella]

So post it on X later.

[Erica]

We will. I don't have anything to say about that. That is your wheelhouse.

[Owen]

So apparently there's new, new technology about AI, this thing they call neuro, symbolic AI that could slash energy use while drastically improving performance. It's some kind of neural network that's combined with symbolic reasoning using 100 times less energy than the standard models while boosting accuracy. It was tested on visual language action models for robots and. Hit 95%. So I'm sorry, the standard test for this sort of thing fails on tasks like the Tower of Hanoi. I'm not sure exactly what test that is, but it's probably some standard tests they do for these sorts of things. And the standard before this was 34% success. And it said with this neurosymbolic, it hit 95% on the trained version and 78% on a complex unseen one. It was trained in 34 minutes versus a day and a half, used 1% of the energy for training, 5% for execution. So it looks like this could be one of those technologies that would just totally change the game.

[Erica]

Oh my God, 34 minutes. We're getting too fast at everything.

[Owen]

I mean, and Scott talked about this where it's like, it may not be this one. There may be some reason why this one won't work, but there's a lot of these things happening, kind of like with batteries, where it's like one of these is probably going to hit and someone like Elon Musk is going to put it into production really fast. And then all of a sudden everything changes. And you know, the AI companies might be profitable, which seems impossible right now, but it might have some sort of explosion in AI, more than we've even seen.

[Erica]

Wow. All right.

[Marcella]

And then meanwhile, Iran, your favorite subject, Erica.

[Erica]

It is.

[Marcella]

Well, today we woke up to good. Some would say maybe not so good, but basically Trump did the persuasion. Allegedly the persuasion powerhouse that he is. He went on Truth and posted that he was pleased to announce that he's going to postpone any and all military strikes against Iran power plants and energy infrastructures for a five day period, subject to the success of the ongoing talks with Iran. Later on he clarified. I don't know what news program he went on or, or how he clarified this, but it is accurate. From Fox News and New York Times was posting was saying it, that he, that the negotiations are in fact true and that it's between Widkoff and Kushner and they're negotiating with Iran and basically it's happening. However, Iran came out and said, no, it's not happening. You know, in those voice, that voice, no, it's not. And basically they went on Iranian tv, which I'm sure you guys watched, they said, oh, Trump is afraid of us. He wants to, he heard that we're going to fight back, so he backed off and all that. So Trump is kind of creating several different dimensions of power or persuasion because at the one point he caused the market to go up as soon as he posted. This is before the markets opened and it influenced the markets. But on another level, he caused Iranians to be put in this defense mode of whether they're going to do this or not, even if they weren't, or they were not planning on, on being serious about these negotiations and then also giving Iranians the, the IRGC and the leadership a possibility to save face in front of their people and have them be on TV saying, oh, Trump is scared of us. You know, so it, it works in all sorts of ways. Anybody that doesn't see what Trump is doing, which is a lot of the regular mainstream news, they're just thinking this is just chaos or this is just him blow beating. But it's, it's amazing to see the skills that he has.

[Erica]

Well, all right, so here I go. All right, I'm going to ask the question that I know there's some people that want me to ask, and did Netanyahu approve of this? Like, what's BB's take?

[Marcella]

So Israel is aware of this situation. I mean, he doesn't really have a take. He's going to continue doing what Israel continues to do, which is, you know, defend itself if they get hit. But the, the White House did say that Israel was aware of it and that they were informed.

[Erica]

Okay.

[Owen]

I don't, I don't think Israel has a vote.

[Marcella]

Yes, Israel does not have a vote,

[Owen]

but I think certainly they want to coordinate with them. And I know Israel has talked about the fact that they may keep fighting even after the US leaves, but I have to imagine that at least, I don't know. To me, I find that unlikely. I don't know, maybe it's not unlikely, but I just think at least while we're there, I don't think they're going to do that. Like, they're not going to be like, haha, we're going to keep Bombing, you know, and because that would just piss off Trump to no end. So maybe after the aircraft carriers turn around and we're on our way back and we're going to swing by Cuba on the way, you know, then maybe, maybe Israel say, oh, we have a new threat, we got to go do this. And they might take advantage of the fact that all the air defenses are still down and they can, you know, have their way with it, but temporarily, I think they have to do whatever Trump tells them to do.

[Erica]

What's Japan's role in this? Like what are they bringing in and who's, who's stay there?

[Marcella]

The Navy just recently, if you want to know, Erica, on Sunday, Japan is made promises to bring in their, their, their ships that are mine, that anti mind ships in the area. They, they have such great, great technology that they're going to go to the Strait of Hormuz to as some people know, there's a possibility of Iran either having already mines there previously or putting in mines in that area so that they'll explode when you pass by. So Japan is one of the countries that has supported the US and is going to send ships and, and, and their technology to find mines and minesweep the area. So that's great to hear. But the other thing that we have to realize is that the thread is mainly not to this country, but it is to our allies. And on Saturday I talked about this. Thank you for everybody that showed up on the.

[Erica]

You did great party.

[Owen]

Yeah, you did great.

[Marcella]

It's so great. I lasted four hours, people.

[Erica]

Girl, it's amazing.

[Marcella]

Well, anyways, I digress. Basically what happened on Saturday morning, I guess for us or night, Friday night anyways, what happened then is Iran, Iran hit the Diego Garcia, didn't hit it, but attempted to hit it with two missiles. And the Diego Garcia, as most of you know, because I know how genius you guys are, is about 2, 500 miles away from Iran. And that means that they could potentially hit any other target that's that far, which if you calculate it, it would be Europe and other Gulf nations and all sorts of other things. And the funny part about it is, it's not funny, but the, the funny thing is that people were saying that Trump didn't know this, that there was no such missiles, but obviously there is. And one of the people that would be affected or one of the countries that would be affected would be the UK And Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister has always been hesitant to support any kind of deployment or of any kind of their forces. But they're actually a target. And yesterday he was asked about this or this morning he was asked about what he would, how he's reacting to the fact that Iran can hit the UK and he didn't have anything to say. He basically said, oh, okay. Or something like really very beta. Not that leadership at all. Even the Saturday night life made fun of him. Saturday night life showed. And the only reason I know that Saturday Night Live made fun of it is because Trump posted the Saturday Night Live clip on his Truth Social and I'll post it later. But it was basically Keir Starmer trying to avoid Trump's phone calls and looking very, you know, hesitant to do anything. So that's, that was funny, but it is a danger. And so I'm glad that there's negotiations happening and the back channels say that it is true that they're happening and Iran still denying it.

[Owen]

I mean my, my question on that would be like, who is Trump talking to?

[Marcella]

Because, oh, they said the name.

[Owen]

Oh, you did?

[Marcella]

Okay, yeah. Ash Goli. I, sorry, I butcher names, but something Asher Goli or something like that. He is part of their intelligence from the irgc, I think. But he, they, they named, they mentioned names because he was asked about it because Iran right away came out against, against it and then he had to give more information. The White House did.

[Owen]

Okay, interesting. Because I, I, you know, I was just thinking the possibility might be that Trump has somebody in mind to take control and he might be negotiating with one element and then another element doesn't agree with them and they might, you know, be saying, oh, we we're not talking to Trump and it just might be that they're different people, but maybe that's not the case. And it might be the persuasion play that you're talking about where it's a way to let them save face and de, escalate. The other thing I was thinking was Trump made this 48 hour deadline thing and that's true. That was a really provocative move and I think he may have just been testing the waters. Oh, I can do this. And then now I'm saying, oh, well, we're having these productive talks, so we're going to put it off for five days and see how it goes. And it's a way that Trump could potentially say, I'm not actually going to hit the power plants yet without, you know, without, I mean, basically he had the two days to see what happened. Right. Like to see if Iran would back down or make some kind of deal. And if they didn't, he might have just had that in his mind, like, well, I don't really have to hit the power plants. I can just say, oh, we're having these productive talks, so I'm going to give him another five days and see how it goes and have a ceasefire. And he still has all his options open, right? Like, he could still hit the power plant. He could do whatever else he wants to do. He could, you know, go in a completely different direction, which. Because all he's really saying is we're going to take a pause here and see what, see whether we can make

[Marcella]

a deal, you know, and he added this very interesting part this morning. I don't know if it was with Fox and Friends or. Sorry, I didn't, I didn't look at the source. But he added that the five days is conditional. So he can change the five days to be zero days if they, because in his, in his post, he says this condition on these talks and how they're going. So if the other side walks out, he can be like, oh, they walked out. We're on again. So the 48 hours, if you want to tell Owen, that's a post right from yesterday, I believe.

[Owen]

Yeah. He basically said, you have 48 hours to open the Strait of Hormuz, and if you don't, then we're going to start hitting your power plants, starting with the biggest one. And that's a really provocative thing because that may actually mean they don't have water because their desalinization plants stop working. I'm hoping that wouldn't have been the case if he was going to do that, but even if it wasn't affecting desalinization, because I think that's like, on some coastal areas and maybe on an island. So it may not be where their largest power plant is, but it would certainly create a shortage of electricity, probably blackouts, a lot of chaos, a lot of civil unrest. Potentially it would be harder to have them keep control of the population. And that may have positive or negative effects, depending on your point of view. But it's would definitely be a destabilizing move and also would potentially take them years to recover from. Like, it's not something you can just stand up another one tomorrow. You know, if he really bombed those big power plants, it might include the transformers that are really hard to replace. Like, literally, it might take years to get them back online. And so it could really be a crippling move. And I know Trump has said that over and over again that, like, we could take him out in 10 minutes if we wanted to. We're kind of holding back. And so, you know, I'm glad they didn't do that. I'm glad we didn't hit him. But, yeah, I mean, it was just, you know, going into that, when I saw that 48 hour post, it was like, well, you know, to me, the most likely scenario is he will hit the power plants because Trump's not going to back down and Iran's not going to back down. And so I think Trump is kind of threading the needle here. He's not really backing down, but he's kind of saying, oh, we're going to have these talks and we're going to put it off for a while. And so it's kind of genius, I think, in a way that, you know, he's not saying, you know, psych, I'm not doing it, or, you know, he basically just created a third way.

[Erica]

Well, didn't Iran threaten the same thing that they would knock out the desalination plans for all the other countries surrounding them? So, yeah, you know, a lot of people will die if that happens without, Without a nuke. So I think, I think. I mean, what do you think, everybody? I, I would say that we have to agree. I'm assuming this is me, but I feel like Trump knows he has to wind this thing down, right? So I don't know. I. I just, I'm just wondering, you know, like, who he's listening to and what's happening, because, you know, I see half of the people, like the Lindsey Graham people want to wind it up further. And, you know, they love this. And then there's other people that are like, you got to bring this thing to an end, you know, or there's no coming back. So I'm assuming Trump would want to end this faster for his.

[Marcella]

I think he's listening to himself. I mean, I think he. He knows what we all know. I mean, that he shouldn't continue there, but he wants to also not get out and then leave chaos. You know, he wants something productive, be left behind, even if the leadership stays.

[Erica]

Help me with this. Here's what I wonder. So I feel like, you know, we're. And again, I just talk casually, you guys, I'm not Owen or Marcella. Okay? But I look at it like, not them. They're much smarter about these things. I'm just taking the. Every, Every man and woman's point of view. But so I feel like, okay, so we're in a war, like, with Israel. Like, we went into this together with them. Now if we want to get out and Israel doesn't. And they keep escalating. Because what I'm hearing from Netanyahu is like, Iran needs to know that they're on the bottom and we're on top. And, like, I don't see them calming down at all. So how do we handle our business and get out? But they're going to keep going, full free force, and now we are linked to them. I mean, Iran's like, this is the two of you now. So I feel like it's even more negotiating, more 4D chess. Like, what is he going to do to say, like, we're leaving? What they do now is up to them. And Iran's going to be like, oh, no, no, no, no. Like, you guys did this together. So how do we handle that?

[Marcella]

Well, I mean, the Midnight Hammer, which was last year, we had. The US had bombings in Iran, which then there was different missions that Israel had afterwards. And there was no issue of the US Leaving because the US Left. They just did a quick, here's the bombs, we go out. So I don't foresee any issues. Israel will always defend itself, you know, like any other country. And they will do whatever they need to do. The. The US Being there or not is not going to change that. So I don't see any issue.

[Owen]

But I think there's potential, several potential paths here. Like, one is that Trump may just convince Netanyahu to just hold off, at least for a while, because in theory, just like Midnight Hammer, we bought a lot of time. Like, they're not going to have new nukes anytime soon. They're not going to be able to enrich the uranium next week. They're not gonna. You know, it's gonna take a long time for them to recover, even from what has already happened. So there. There's lots of room for Israel to just take a step back at this point. And I think it. It also probably makes sense for Israel to do that, because look at their situation. Like, they're getting bombed right now by Iran. You know, there was some cluster munition that just landed in the middle of Tel Aviv. It didn't kill anybody, fortunately, but it landed. You know, it got through the Iron Dome. And that Iron Dome has limited capacity. Like, it only has so many Patriot missiles, and once you run out, it takes a while to replace them. And so it probably doesn't make sense for Israel to go much longer than they have, because if they keep lobbing missiles or keep strikes and bombings happen both ways, then eventually they're going to be vulnerable. And then on top of that, they've still trying to disarm Hamas in Gaza. They're also bombing Hezbollah. They just. There was a story I posted today about how they took out a bunch of bridges to try and reduce Hezbollah's ability to move around. And so they're kind of like on a three front war right now. And I don't know how much longer they can do that without, you know, opening themselves up to some pretty bad consequences.

[Marcella]

So you're right. I mean, we don't know if behind the scenes, Israel is asking, is asking Trump to negotiate this. So we don't know what we don't know.

[Owen]

And the interesting thing to me is if Trump leaves and if Israel keeps bombing or keeps going, Trump might actually be in a position to broker the peace deal.

[Erica]

Right, True.

[Owen]

You know, right now. Or witcock, you know, we, we can't, you know, we're not going to talk to you, or, you know, Iran's just resisting and saying, you know, death to America or whatever else they're saying. Right. But if Trump leaves and says, we're done, you know, we've gotten our deal or whatever, and then Israel keeps going, Iran might say, what the hell? Why, you know, why are you still attacking? I thought we had a deal or something. And then Trump could potentially use that as leverage to say, well, let's broker a deal. I can get Israel to stop, but you got to do X, Y and Z.

[Erica]

Right. So you guys, you guys are so good in the chat. And to Rob, that said, I'm selling Trump short. It's not that. It's just, it's complicated. And what I want you to know, and I think all of us who voted for Trump should remember, you know, he's our guy, we voted for him. He's our president. I stand by him. We have three years left with him, and I think he wants to do as much as he possibly can before he leaves, as probably only he can do. He's got the negotiations going with Wyckoff and Kushner, who I would love to talk to them about their negotiating and persuasion game, because holy cow. And Trump is amazing at negotiating. And I want this to go really well, and I want it to wrap up soon, but in the best possible way. Like, I don't want it to wrap up too soon. And then we fall short, and then the problems come up again. I mean, this is a long time coming. And I think we never thought we would see the day where we're actually fighting with Iran, but here we Are. So now that we're here. Yeah, let's finish it. Let's finish it the right way with the least amount of casualties. Please, Lord.

[Owen]

So I live gay Atolla.

[Erica]

Yeah. Long live the gay Atolla and his erectile dysfunction. But so, you know, I think everybody, no matter how we feel, we really have to support our president, especially during a war. Now, I also want to put the other light on it, where I've asked myself, and I do this often, what if Biden was doing this? Like, how would we feel about it? And that's where I just want to say, sometimes you have to think about that, too. Like, all right, it doesn't matter whether he would or he wouldn't or how he'd do it, but how would we feel if Biden was the one doing this? Like, we might be outraged and freaking out. So I only say that to just make you understand that, like, sometimes people are just, you know, can see both sides of an issue or they're, like, on the fence about it or, like, yeah, I want that to be the result. But I don't know if this is the right way to go. And you said no more wars, but now we're doing this. So it's not always black and white, and there's a lot of gray area, and there's a lot of unknown and uncertainty, and we don't know what they know, yada, yada. So I just want to say I stand by Trump. I am trusting him, that he's doing the right thing for all of us, for, you know, for the benefit of everybody, for the future moving forward. I just pray that it comes to a swift, safe end and that it puts an end to all the over there once and for all, and people can feel safe and free. That's what my hope is. And I'll stand by him for his entire term, for sure. That being said, we're coming to the end of the show. Does anyone, Marcella or Owen, have, like, a little light story that they could leave us with something fun?

[Owen]

I do.

[Erica]

Good. Do it.

[Owen]

So there's. There's a migrant criminal that beat his deportation order from the UK with the chicken nugget defense.

[Erica]

Tell us.

[Owen]

So he was going to be deported from the UK and he claimed his British son hates foreign chicken nuggets. Texture. He entered illegally in 2001 with a fake ID. He got indefinite leave in 2005. He was jailed for two years for £250,000 of dirty money. And the judge ruled under Article 8 of Human Rights that he's Allowed to stay. The reform UK Zia Yousef said a criminal migrant who had an entered Brit Britain illegally under a false name and lied in a failed asylum claim has successfully fought his deportation by arguing his son disliked foreign chicken nuggets. This is the country that Tories and labors have created.

[Erica]

Wow.

[Owen]

What chicken nugget defense.

[Marcella]

Son needed the the UK nuggets.

[Owen]

The chicken nugget defense.

[Erica]

They need Maha.

[Marcella]

Wow. That is insane. They do need.

[Scott]

We need.

[Owen]

We need a BJ dictor for the UK to explain what's going on in over there.

[Erica]

Oh my. Yeah. Who do we know you guys? UK drop. Drop us a message. We need like a UK correspondent. So if you know someone DM me or if you are that person, let me know. We definitely need. We definitely need UK representation. That's amazing. I wonder what kind of sauce he used. That is amazing. All right, well that kid might need a new diet. All right, good on him. Chicken nugget defense everybody. There's just never ending source of useless information and we love all of it. All right, you guys, let's have a closing sip to Scott. I'm starting to close now, so happy idoc, wrap up your. You wrap up your messages. Okay, we're gonna close a sip to Scott Adams. We love you, Scott Adams. We thank you for everything you've given us and we will continue to to do our best to make you proud. To everybody out there, go out and be useful today. Let me know if the jumping jack works or whatever works for you. Tell us so we can all do it too. Okay, so here's a closing sip to Scott and we will see you tomorrow. Be useful to Scott.

[Owen]

Be useful.

[Erica]

Say bye for now.

[Owen]

Bye for now.