The Scott Adams School - 04/27/26 HOME TEAM / White House CD. Trump. and more

Summary

Podcast Summary: Real Coffee with Scott Adams

Episode: The Scott Adams School - 04/27/26 HOME TEAM / White House CD. Trump. and more
Date: April 27, 2026
Theme: Interpreting the White House Correspondents Dinner Assassination Attempt Through Persuasion and Media Filters

---

Episode Overview

This episode is a deeply engaged roundtable between show regulars (in the absence of Scott Adams, due to illness) reflecting on the attempted assassination at the White House Correspondents Dinner. The panel applies Scott Adams’ signature “persuasion filter” to discuss the broader causes and implications, particularly media rhetoric, political radicalization, security failures, and cultural responsibility. The episode also includes key archival audio from Scott Adams himself, providing context and continuity with show themes.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. Setting the Tone After the Assassination Attempt

Timestamps: 03:01 – 06:33

• The hosts decide not to name the suspect, focusing instead on facts and preventing notoriety for such acts.
• They attribute the incident not to randomness but to “predictable” consequences from extended heated rhetoric, especially by media.
• The panel underscores Scott Adams’ enduring lesson: not to lose control or standards in times of chaos and to approach crises with intention, not reaction.

Notable Quote (A):
“We are all Scott’s debris. And that means something. It means we think for ourselves. It means we stay steady when things get loud.” (05:13)

---

2. Political Rhetoric, Media, and Predictability of Violence

Timestamps: 06:33 – 15:31

• The team references Scott Adams' past predictions— notably that increasing anti-Trump rhetoric would eventually inspire violence against Republicans.
• There’s consensus that Trump is a lightning rod, but a broader point is made: “It’s not about Trump anymore… it’s about a bigger agenda, a power grab.” (10:39)
• Panelists lament how divisive language has escalated political animosity to dangerous levels, with both mainstream media and popular culture fueling extremist sentiments.

Notable Quote (B):
“They’re pushing it too far. They’re pushing it too far. And I think something needs to happen, something needs to change.” (08:57)

---

3. Archival Scott Adams Clip – Responsibility and Rhetoric

Timestamps: 15:31 – 28:54

• The episode features a comprehensive clip of Scott Adams from 2024, directly tying left-wing “Hitler” rhetoric to the “predictable” event of an attempted assassination.
• Adams lists media and political figures he considers “part of the problem,” including Joy Reed and Rachel Maddow, then details how “hoaxes” like the “fine people” narrative can brainwash susceptible individuals.
• He likens the process to a “perfect crime”—high probability violence incited through indirect culpability and plausible deniability.

Notable Quote (Scott Adams):
“Here’s my hypnotist take: to me, it looks like a slow-motion assassination. It was based on statistics … At what point does doing something that has a high statistical chance of killing somebody become actual murder?” (27:41)

---

4. The Escalation and Spread of Extremist Rhetoric

Timestamps: 28:54 – 36:19

• The discussion notes the mainstreaming of extreme rhetoric, once whispered among fringe groups but now reflected in regular conversation and online.
• The panel returns frequently to the theme that calling Trump names like “rapist” or “pedophile” is both unsubstantiated and dangerously inflammatory.
• Cognitive dissonance among detractors is noted, illustrated by increasing claims that the assassination attempt must have been “staged,” since the reality is too unwelcome for some to process.

Notable Quote (B):
“That’s cognitive dissonance in action…. That’s just a way they can fit it into their worldview and say, ‘How can I turn this into something bad for Trump?’” (35:47)

---

5. Emotional Regulation and the ‘Persuasion Advantage’

Timestamps: 36:19 – 39:07

• Another Scott Adams audio clip is played, urging listeners not to act out of anger or revenge and not to cede the moral or political advantage by stooping to the behavior of political opponents.
• Adams praises Trump’s measured public reaction after the attempt, as an example to emulate.

Notable Quote (Scott Adams):
“Don’t become the thing you hate. That’s the biggest risk … besides being injured, is that you become the person who did it to you.” (38:25)

---

6. Security Failures and Event Vulnerability

Timestamps: 39:07 – 51:32

• The team sharply critiques the insufficient security at the Correspondents Dinner— referencing reports from attendees like Bill Malusian, noting how easy it was for the suspect to access sensitive areas.
• They express disbelief that so many high-ranking officials were present in one unsecured location, referencing policies like the “Designated Survivor” in other contexts.
• Secret Service actions are discussed—praise for reactive bravery, but concern that planning and preventive protocols fell short.

Notable Quote (D): “I want to trash the Secret Service. … After Butler and after all that, why President Trump hasn't trashed them, I would trash them.” (51:07)

---

7. Broader Context – SPLC Allegations and Media ‘Hoaxes’

Timestamps: 54:08 – 59:04

• The conversation shifts to allegations against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), discussing financial links to extremist groups and how such organizations may stoke racial or political division for fundraising.
• The hosts are cautious to distinguish between what is alleged, indicted, and proven, but argue it fits a “pattern of hoaxes” weaponized for social control or grift.

Notable Quote (J - quoted in clip):
“This group that was supposed to be fighting racism, in fact was fomenting racism by paying these groups to basically organize protests… So that $270,000 investment led to an $81 million return.” (54:10)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• A (Host), discussing media culpability:
  “The Democrat Party as a whole has become so radicalized that the things Chuck Schumer will say today... would have never come out of his mouth, you know, 10, 15, 20 years ago.” (11:10)
• Scott Adams (clip):
  “The fine people hoax killed people. It almost took out a president, but it killed somebody in the stands and got two people seriously wounded. So if you don't think that the hoaxes matter—oh, they matter.” (23:37)
• D (Marcella):
  “More violence is not the solution… but all of what this alleged shooter says is what is being said on Blue sky, on threads… It's become impossible to figure out because the left is using this, but so is the right.” (34:54 & 57:21)
• B (Owen), on future risks:
  “I would predict this isn't the last one. Someone else is going to try something.” (09:56)

---

Timeline of Crucial Segments

| Segment | Timestamp | |------------------------------------------|----------------------------| | Introduction and Tone Setting | 00:01 – 06:33 | | Rhetoric, Media, and Predictable Violence| 06:33 – 15:31 | | Scott Adams Archival Clip (Responsibility & Rhetoric) | 15:31 – 28:54 | | Panel Reactions to Adams and Escalation | 28:54 – 36:19 | | Persuasion Advantage Advice (Clip) | 36:19 – 39:07 | | Security Criticism and Secret Service | 39:07 – 51:32 | | SPLC Allegations, Hoaxes, and Grift | 54:08 – 59:04 | | Final Thoughts & Looking Ahead | 59:04 – End |

---

Episode Tone and Style

The conversation is urgent, sometimes exasperated, and frequently self-reflective. The tone is direct, occasionally sardonic, and always tightly connected to Scott Adams’ guiding principle: process information through a “persuasion” and systems lens, not pure emotion. By including Adams’ precise, clipped media analysis, the episode perpetuates his influence on the show’s community values.

---

Closing & Call to Action

• The hosts urge listeners not to get swept up in reactive anger but to remain vigilant, rational, and committed to “exposing it all.”
• They announce an upcoming episode with Walter Kern as guest, promising further exploration of cultural and political turbulence.

Memorable Toast:
“To Scott. To Scott and you guys, I'll be posting that clip right after—that isolated clip so you can share it with all the idiots out there.” (61:35)

---

This episode is essential listening for those interested in the interplay between political rhetoric, media persuasion, and real-world consequences—especially in volatile, high-stakes moments. The blend of group processing and Scott Adams’ legacy clips creates a rigorous template for critical, thoughtful response beyond this single news cycle.

Transcript

[A]

Hello.

[B]

Good morning.

[A]

Good morning, Gracie.

[B]

Right? Brain Nikki.

[A]

Are you guys liking that? I can get the chat going earlier. I only recently figured that out, and I think that's fun. So you guys are the pre show, right?

[B]

So you have to tell us what we missed.

[A]

I know. I can imagine. So good morning, you guys. It is. What's the date? I covered my. My date. Oh, it's 4. 27. Is that a significant date for some reason? Does that sound familiar? I don't know. It feels like something. It is April 27, 2026. You are at the Scott Adams school. Is Rumble live. Yes. Okay. X YouTube. How are you? Okay, you guys. So I think since we got started a little early, we can get right into it and grab a vessel of any kind.

[C]

This is the place. You came to the right place. So far, you've done everything right. Congratulations on that. But it gets better. Yeah, it does. You're about to enjoy. The simultaneous sip is one of the greatest feelings in all of online life and offline. And you don't need much. All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen, jug, or flask. A vessel of any kind. So join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day. The thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip, and it's going to happen right now. Oh, right on schedule. Yeah. That's some good stuff.

[A]

That is some good stuff. Marcel and Owen, how are your weekends?

[B]

It was great. Marcel filled in for me on the after party. How did it go?

[D]

It went well. It. I survived. And everybody survived. It went actually really well. They had a lot of opinions, and. And we listened. We did it for what, four hours and 15 minutes?

[A]

Wow, girl.

[D]

Yeah. Everybody was like, wow. And maybe I'll be doing it soon. I told them.

[A]

Ooh. All right.

[B]

Something else coming up, but I was helping my son move, so that was my weekend.

[A]

Oh, good. How is the move?

[D]

Owen, his son?

[B]

Yeah, it went well. We still have his dogs, but they'll be going home soon.

[A]

A. Well, that's happy. Yeah. Marcella, I got to peep in a couple of times. She. She is the perfect substitute for you, Owen. Oh, my gosh. Marcella was holding court and chatting it up with everyone. It was so fun. So, you guys. Boring weekend, right? Nothing happened, so. Seriously, I know a lot of you are like, oh, that was. That was a lot. That White House correspondence dinner. Of course we're going to be discussing that. The first thing I wanted to tell you is that Owen and Marcel and I, you know, in light of what happened at the correspondence dinner, I can do this today, you guys, because I have a couple little notes. So, in light of what happened Saturday night at the White House correspondence dinner, where an assassination attempt was thankfully thwarted, we made a decision. As a show, we will not be using the suspect's name. We're not interested in giving attention or notoriety to individuals who carry out or attempt acts like this. So on the show, we will refer to this person simply as the suspect, and our focus will stay on the facts and what actually matters. So, you guys, you've probably all heard the person's name by now. It's out there. But, you know, enough of talking about giving him notoriety that way. And before we begin, we just need to say this out loud, that what happened Saturday night at the White House correspondence dinner wasn't random. We all know why this happened. We're not stupid. When rhetoric gets pushed to the edge over and over again by people on both sides and especially by the media, this is the kind of outcome it leads to that doesn't make it acceptable. It just makes it predictable. And that's a problem. We're all feeling the absence of Scott right now because this is exactly where he would step in and help us see clearly. But he already did that work. He taught us how to think, how to stay grounded, and how to not get pulled into the chaos. So that's what we're going to do. We're not going to be like them. We're not going to lose control or abandon our standards. But we're also not going to stay quiet. We have a voice in this, and we're going to use it responsibly. We are all Scott's debris. And that means something. It means we think for ourselves. It means we stay steady when things get loud. And it means we come together and move forward with intention. Intention, not reaction. He taught us well, and we're going to prove that now. And I truly believe that because I have said before that I spoke to Scott when I learned of his illness. And, you know, one of the things I said was, well, how will I know what to do when there's a crisis? You know, I, I. How can I, you know, go forward without you guiding me? And he's like, I already taught you. I already taught everybody, like, this is what I've been doing. And he's right. And it's in his absence that we will, like, dig down and collectively, not, not any one of us. Could ever possibly think like Scott, but as, like a collective mind together with guidance and also, thankfully, with guidance from Scott. We have so much video of him. We're going to all process things as best we can to the way Scott did. So, Marcela, I'm just gonna ask you first. You know, you're. You. Don't you agree that we can get through anything together because of how Scott taught us?

[E]

Yes.

[D]

I mean, he, He. This is. This. This is what he predicted would happen. That. That Republicans would be hunted. Because one thing that. That we're talking about is, oh, another attempt on. On President Trump. But this. On President Trump. This is an attempt on the entire cabinet and different. Except. Except Cash Patel.

[B]

That was weird.

[A]

Although.

[D]

Although he's not part of the cabinet, I guess he is the FBI director, so technically he's not a cabinet member. But it was interesting to know that TDS has moved forward. But everything that Scott told us is coming to fruition as we saw last week with the news. Now it's becoming even more apparent. And if you read. I would. I would tell you to read the religion war because that will also open up a whole another account of worms of what we could expect. But one of the things that Scott would tell us is that it's going to be very difficult to have in going forward to have events like. Like. Like. Like the event that they had at the White House correspondence dinner because the security issues are so great. Like, you can't really completely make it 100 secure unless you build your own ballroom, I suppose. Mm.

[A]

Owen, I'm gonna come to you, and then we're gonna play a clip after you make your remarks.

[B]

Yeah, well, I mean, obviously, I agree. I think Scott taught us well, and I think he prepared us for things like this. And I think we, you know, we are pretty able to carry on as far as how to deal with this, how to feel about it, how to think about it, and what to do. I think that, you know, he did certainly also predict this. I know Elon Musk reposted that recently about Republicans being hunted that everybody was mocking him at the time for. And, you know, now it's all come true. And, you know, I'm hoping that we will see some better actions to take down the rhetoric of the left and not have them portraying Trump as this dictator, Hitler, king, whatever they want to use at the time, because it is very divisive and dangerous, and it is causing this. I don't think there's any question in my mind that these actions are a direct result of the way the media talks about Trump and the way they portray him as, like, the end of the world or the, you know, destroying the country or that he's taking all your rights or he's destroying everything. And it's, you know, it's one thing to have two movies on one screen, but they're pushing it too far. They're pushing it too far. And I think something needs to happen, something needs to change. I mean, I'm hoping that some of the media, given that they were also put at risk, might have some realization that they're playing a part in this and that they're actually risking their own life as a result of it. Because I think a lot of the rhetoric is spoken to by elite people that feel like they're protected and they're never going to have to deal with this. So they're just trying to get other people to do their dirty work, and they don't think they're going to have any consequences. And I think they need to have those consequences. And I'm hoping they're starting to see that, but I'm not very optimistic. I think if they're not already very soon, they'll be back to what they were doing before. And I think we need to put a stop to that so that we don't have this kind of violence continuing. And I would almost say right now, I would predict this isn't the last one. Someone else is going to try something. And if you look back through the records, it's more than three. It's probably closer to eight or 10 times that people have tried to kill Trump. You've only heard about three because they were so visible and they got so close. But there's been a lot more that they've stopped earlier than that. And it's. It's gotta stop.

[A]

I think it's also important to remember, like this, this isn't even about President Trump. It wouldn't matter who was the president. Okay? So, you know, everybody knows Trump is out of office in a couple of years, so you think they would just, you know, wait it out. He's gone in a couple years. But it's not about Trump. It's about a bigger agenda. It's about a power grab. It will be whoever the next president, if the next president, or, or you could just say the next Republican president. Whoever it will be, whenever it would be, this is going to be the same thing. So they're so far off the deep end now with their rhetoric. It's like, what do you want? Like, what Is it that you want? Like, what is this power grab about? Like, why is it so important to divide this country? And honestly, you know, Bob, you wanted me to speak from my heart. I mean, I am happy to do that. I want it to be measured for an opening statement on behalf of all of us. But from my heart, I just don't understand what it is that they want to see happen to this country. I don't know who is pulling the strings, and I don't know what the outcome is. But it's clear that there are darker forces at work. And if you are still calling yourself a Democrat, if you are so desperate to cling to that label, you have really got to. I don't know, you've got to reevaluate what you're saying and doing, because the Democrat Party is showing you who they are. That's the Democrats now. They are radical. I'm not saying there aren't idiots on both sides, okay? But the Democrat Party as a whole has become so radicalized that the things Chuck Schumer will say today will. Would have never come out of his mouth, you know, 10, 15, 20 years ago. Never. But now he's like, oh, yeah, you know, they're just. They're. They're radicalized.

[B]

So I agree with you on that last point, but I would say because of that, I kind of disagree with you that it's not about Trump to some extent. I do agree that it probably also is the future for whether it's Vance or anyone else that continues on as the next Republican president. They will have similar risks. But I think the reason we're here, I think, is very much because Trump was such a shock to the system that it was the first president in a very long time, maybe for I don't know how long, probably at least my lifetime, that the President wasn't going along with what the party wanted and wasn't going along with what the deep state wanted. And I think that was what caused them to go into such a panic mode and pull out every stop and just abandon every standard and say, we're gonna stop this guy. We're gonna impeach him multiple times. We're gonna lawfare him to death. We're gonna try and put him in prison. We're gonna do every possible thing we can to keep this guy from getting in office or to take him out of office or to keep him from being reelected. And they went way farther than with any other president. I mean, yes, they called Bush Hitler, but they didn't do what they did

[A]

to Trump if they had. If they had Bush in right now. And, yes, but Bush, you know, could, in my opinion. Here's my sign. Be, you know, Deep Stady himself. But they didn't have all the resources they have now. Had there been social media, it would have been a lot different for Bush, because that was the worst rhetoric I had ever heard for a president in my lifetime was against Bush. It was like he was Hitler. It was like, you know, he's like, people were out of their minds with him. But when you amp it up with social media and then people just breaking down, you know, civility. I mean, we had civility still when we had Bush, but now, like, all bets are off. Like, take a look around. But I do agree that, you know, yes, it's far worse with Trump, but I just think it's because they learned how to game the system further. They've, you know, installed judges. They are paying people off. You know, people got more creative with, you know, their shell companies and how to distribute money and promises. So it's pretty gross. Um, I just think Trump's the first one to get it this bad, but I don't see it cooling down. I just don't. You know, Trump could probably help cooling it, cool it down with his own rhetoric. I found him very measured that night, and same on 60 Minutes, and I hope he kind of stays that way because it would be nice for everybody to take it down a notch. But I want to get to a clip I want to play for you guys. So kick back for. For a minute, and let's take a listen.

[F]

Here's a brief list of people who predicted this day. Here are the people who said explicitly, the rhetoric from the left is going to inspire this. You got your Mike Cernoviches, your Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, Greg Gill, Jesse Waters, Jack Basabic, John Nolte, Breitbart, and me. Now, that's a very partial list. Do you know why the list is partial? Because I don't have time to list all the people who saw this coming. We all saw it coming. It was clear as day. And anybody who says, well, I can't imagine that the rhetoric from the left calling one of the people Hitler for seven years could cause somebody to want to kill Hitler. Well, surprise, surprise, surprise. By the way, if I left anybody off that list, it's only because there's. There are another hundred people. I could add the list, right? So I left a lot of people off the list. And many of you, if you had been public Figures would have been saying it in public as well. So it was obvious we won't let that go. Not going to let that go. That's the only story I want to talk about is how you could see it coming. And we all called it out and it happened just like you thought it would. Here's my narrative. You know, in the end, the law enforcement people, the Secret Service, they're going to have a narrative. They're going to tell you, here's the official story, this lone gunman did this or that and something happened. But here's the hypnotist take on it from a perspective of a hypnotist. Back in 2020, I got mocked, I think all of you remember, for posting that in 2020 before the election, I said that if Biden wins, Republicans will be hunted. And then we watched as one Republican after another went to jail. And now this.

[G]

Some follow the noise. Bloomberg follows the money. Because behind every headline is a bottom line, whether it's the funds fueling AI for crypto's trillion dollar swings. There's a money side to every story. And when you see the money side, you understand what others miss. Get the money side of the story. Subscribe [e-mail].

[F]

Now, you can't say that nobody saw it coming because it was obvious in 2020 and you can see it from there that it was heading in this inexorable, you know, direction. There was nothing to stop it. And the recklessness with which the Democrats use that rhetoric, Indeed, Biden actually ran on the fine people hoax. Now, the reason I spent about seven years trying to debunk the fine people hoax is this. This is the reason. Because that hoax weaponized people's minds. Because if the person running for president says, hey, the other guy's a Nazi and here's the proof, and then he mentions the fine people hoax as the proof. What are you going to do if you're a 20 year old, allegedly the shooter was 20 years old. Do you think a 20 year old can resist that level of brainwashing? Because it's on every channel except the one he wasn't watching, probably. And it was consistent and it was all Hitler, Hitler, Hitler. What did they think was going to happen? Now, I've said a number of times that Democrats have this consistent problem where they can't see systems. They operate on a goal basis. Get rid of Trump, that's the goal. But they couldn't see the system. The system was that they were creating a situation that guaranteed violence, largely guaranteed it. It was just A matter of time. How could they not see that? And today, will they pretend they couldn't see it? Will they pretend that they're not part of the problem? Will the, will the opinion people on MSNBC come on the air today? I dare them, I dare them. I dare you to come on the air today. Joy Reed, Rachel Maddow, I dare you show your face today. Because I watched yesterday and I noticed the opinion people were kind of missing. They went with the more newsy people on msnbc. That was the right call. We don't want to see their faces today. We don't want to hear from Joy Reed, we don't want to hear from Rachel Maddow. They are part of the problem. I blame them directly by name. I believe they are culpable along with Biden and along with anybody use that kind of rhetoric and meant it. Joy Reid, as you know, just did a big video calling Trump Hitler. And she wasn't joking and she wasn't using hyperbole. What are you going to do? As we've been saying forever, if you think somebody's actually going to be Hitler? Well, you do what a 20 year old did. It's what 20 year olds are designed to do. They're designed to get violent when it's necessary, unfortunately. And some poor bastard was convinced it was necessary. So the fine people hoax killed people. It almost took out a president, but it killed somebody in the stands and got two people seriously wounded. So if you don't think that the hoaxes matter. Oh, they matter. Oh, they matter. Of course, the Democrats and the trolls are already trying to spin this thing. I had one troll come to me and say, you're crazy for saying that the Biden rhetoric caused this. It's Trump's rhetoric that caused it. Yes, that actually happened to me today. Somebody said to me on X, are you kidding? It's Trump's rhetoric that caused all of this. Now, I don't think I have to defend that to you. I think you know that Trump never called anybody Hitler, which would be a call to kill them, basically. So reject that. I saw Bill Maher tried to handle this. He was giving a stand up right after it happened and he of course had to talk about it. But he said some of the right things about, you know, we're too fired up for violence. But then he went and blamed Project 2025. He actually blamed Republicans for raising the rhetoric in, in that Project 2025 thing. Unbelievable. Now, I don't think, by the way, I don't think that Bill Mars specifically contributed with his rhetoric. I just think that he needs to be a little bit more honest about where the cause was, because this one's a little more obvious than most things. Let's, let's talk about some of the things people have been saying. Do you remember in March when James Carville said, it's time to do the wet work, and Anderson Cooper said, you know, that term sort of sounds like a Mafia hit term? And Carville laughed. Oh, no, I'm just referring to the, you know, the advertising and. But why would you use that term? I've never heard that term wetwork used in any other context other than killing. So he's one of the notable people in the party, and he uses an assassination term in casual language about Trump. That's not normal. Now, I'm not going to say that he was running a plan to get Trump killed, but I think there's a recklessness that gets into the category of you should have known what would happen. Right. Isn't there a. There's a form of murder where it's not good enough to say you weren't intending it. All you have to do is say you should have known what you were doing was going to cause this or be contributing to it. How would you not know that that would contribute to it? Here's what would have not contributed. If he had said wet work and it was an accident, he should have said, oh, I'm referring to the advertisements. You know, for sure, I don't want any violence. I better correct that. I used the wrong term. I'm not advocating any violence. I just mean the advertising needs to be tougher and tighter. Would have been easy to say that. Biden on July 8 said, we're done talking about the debate. It's time to put Trump in a bullseye. Why would you say that? What kind of language is that? Is that normal? Does Trump use language like that? We're going to put him in a bullseye, remember? Yeah, Kathy Griffin and the severed head. Got lots more of that. Do you remember Owen Gregorian was reminding us today that Alex Soros posted a picture of a bullet hole next to $47 back in January. 47. And. And a bullet hole. So kind of suggested, as some said, that there was some intentional intelligence. And I said, I said back at the time, in my opinion, our intelligence services just listed a hit on our next president and offered a free pass to the perpetual. To me, it looked like a signal because I associate Soros with our intelligence people. It seems like that's a clear association and to me, somebody who would post something so dramatically inappropriate and having an association with our intelligence people, it's really sketchy. I think Victor David Hansen had the best take on this. If I can find his notes, talking about some of the people who have been calling for violence for so long. Here's something Victor David Hansen said in his post today. It's a longer post, but I'll just like this part of it. And he says that the left has been engaged in sort of a parlor game of imagining murder against Trump. So here's some examples. By slugging his face, Robert De Niro. By decapitation Kathy Griffin, Marilyn Manson. By stabbing that Shakespeare in the park play. By clubbing Mickey Rourke, by shooting Snoop Dogg, by poisoning Anthony Bourdain, by bounty killing George Lopez. By carrying, eating his corpse, Pearl Jam by suffocating Larry Whitmore, by blowing him up, Madonna and Moby, by throwing him over a cliff, Rosie o', Donnell, just by generic killing him, Johnny Depp and Big Sean or by martyring him. Reid Hoffman who recently said, yeah, I wish I had made him an actual martyr. They didn't see a comment. Didn't see a coming. Yeah, you might have seen it coming. So here's my hypnotist take to me, to me, it looks like a slow motion assassination. It was based on statistics. In other words, the people who wanted Trump literally dead knew that if they kept acting a certain way, the odds of somebody acting on it was pretty good. At what point, at what point does doing something that has a high statistical chance of killing somebody become actual murder? It's kind of the perfect crime, isn't it? You, you get somebody to do it, but you have deniability. No, I was just talking. I was just using my free speech. It's kind of the perfect crime.

[A]

Yeah. So I thought that was important to hear Scott's opinion. That was from after what happened in Butler. That was from July 14, 2024. And I'll be sharing that clip right after. And I agree with everybody in the chat. Let's share it far and wide. The calm voice of Scott and, you know, calling people out by name. And I agree that if you keep doing this type of thing, especially if you're a celebrity and you have, you know, your kooky, radical fans, they're going to want to impress you, as sick as that sounds. So I love that. Oh, and you got a shout out and I did. Was that the best, most perfect clip we could have from Scott today?

[B]

Yeah. No, I mean, it was right online, unfortunately, because that means this is just happening again. But definitely right on target. And I think it is. I mean, he was just nailed. He nailed it. Like, it's just. It was inevitable. It was predictable. They all had to know what they were doing and what they were trying to make happen, and it happened. And I think they're all complicit. I think they should face consequences for it. Frankly, I don't know that they will legally, because, you know, the courts will probably say that you can't really draw a direct line from one to the other, but everybody else knows that you can, that they're the ones that caused this to happen. I mean, the suspect directly quoted things that were completely false, just 180 degrees out of reality. And where did that come from? We all know where it came from. It's from these Democrat politicians, the media personalities on the left, and a whole bunch of leftists on social media that are pushing these conspiracy theories about Trump and, you know, calling him the opposite of what he is. You know, he called him a traitor. Well, he's the opposite of that. He's the most patriotic president I've ever seen. He. He called him a rapist. That was not at all true. And it has. You know, I know they did their lawfare to try and make it look true, but that was a whole op, and that's exactly what they were trying to do with that, is to try and make something like this happen. And the same thing with the pedophile thing, there's no evidence of that at all. He didn't do anything like that. He's obviously not a pedophile. And, but he's this. The media and the Democrat politicians have convinced these people that it's true. They believe it's true, and it's not going to make everybody do it, but it's going to make somebody do it. And, you know, it's already happened, what, three times where they've gotten close and probably at least half a dozen more where they were stopped earlier than that. And it's going to keep happening until somebody puts a stop to this.

[A]

I'm going to go to you, Marcela, but I just want to say, too, of course we've been thinking about this nonstop, and it's like, for as much as I could not stand Joe Biden, let's say, never in my wildest dreams did I fantasize about him being dead. Like, never. That's just so sick, you know, would I fantasize about the day he wouldn't be the president for sure. Daily. But I mean to, to actually say that you want to see the president of your country die or be assassinated. God, you gotta check yourself, you guys, you know, if you know anyone that's acting this way. I mean, I've heard people saying it too, like, oh, you know, and you see all these tick tock videos that they're posting on X. And these people are fundamentally broken and they don't know it because they surround themselves with news and other people that, you know, pat them on the back for this behavior. But Marcela, what did you think about that amazing clip

[D]

that I miss Scott quite a lot. I don't know. I mean, the same people that he listed in the clip are still doing the same thing. Nothing has changed. It's actually become worse because he used, he used to. Trump used to be called just Nazi. Now he's called the rapist and a pedophile. Sorry to put those words out there in the video, but that's what he's called. And basically the, the craziest thing is I'm not surprised the shooter is from. Or alleged shooter, I guess is from California and, and a tutor dash adjacent teacher. I'm not surprised. It does not surprise me at all. This is what all of them say. This is my day daily with these people. I am told by regular working people that teach our kids. Not mine of course, but you know, some kids, this rhetoric all the time they say this like, like, oh yes, he was part. That's why he hasn't released the Epstein files because he's, he's keeping that to himself because he's a pedophile. Hello, Joe Biden. President Biden had the Epstein files. He could have just released them. If they really are. If, if Trump has really all of this.

[A]

So did Obama.

[D]

Yeah, so would Obama. But you said something and, and Owen said something and so did Scott is true. But now all this rhetoric that used to be hidden, you know, with the weird people and oh, you know, the, the, the pundits and all that, that's just now the regular rhetoric from regular people. Yeah, and you were right. The Democratic Party has changed quite a lot. So.

[A]

Yes.

[D]

Yeah, it's sad. I don't know what the solution is, but more violence is not the solution. But I, Yeah, they keep doing it and they keep. And all of what this alleged shooter says is what is being said on Blue sky, what's being said on threads. They call this. Of course I went on there for you guys. Thank you. And what they call this is this.

[A]

It's all staged oh, yeah, this is a mother. Staged.

[B]

Oh.

[D]

And how they prove it's staged is because how can there be. How can this have happened, first of all? And second of all, everyone on X started talking about the ballroom after that, and that's just for President Trump to be able to get the ballroom going.

[A]

Yeah.

[D]

Because that's what he would do.

[B]

He would just point out that to me, that's one of the tells of cognitive dissonance. This is an example of that. Where immediately going to, oh, it must have been staged. That's cognitive dissonance in action. That's when someone says, wait a second, I wasn't expecting this. How do I fit that into my worldview now? And the only way they can do it is to come up with this conspiracy theory that it was staged. There's no evidence of that. There's no indication of that. But that's just a way they can fit it into their worldview and say, how can I turn this into something bad for Trump? Because everything needs to be bad for Trump.

[A]

Mm. All right, so another clip, you guys. What, you know, what would Scott tell us to do in our reaction? Let's hear from him.

[F]

Here's what you need to do. Don't be like them. If you've got some feelings of revenge, keep them to yourself. If you've got some anger that needs to come out, go for a walk. Don't give away your advantage, because they're waiting for you to do that. This does create a political advantage. And again, I feel icky. Like I. I just feel icky talking about it, given the tragedy. But it's a true. It's true. Don't give it up. If you start talking like they talk, you're giving up your advantage. Listen to Trump. Do what Trump tells you. Right? This is the time to rally around your leader. He's going to tell you to be cool because he's smart and he knows that he's gained a accidental advantage. Nobody would want it, but he got it. Here's what he didn't say. Democrats did this to me. Did you notice? Did you notice he didn't do that? Did you notice he didn't do what I did. Blame Biden. His instincts are freaking incredible. And I've said it before, I'm going to say it again a million more times. Whoever is advising Trump is really doing a good job and has been for a while. Just noticeably. Obviously, high quality of advice. But as I also always say, the boss still gets the credit because the boss has to pick the person who Gave the advice. The boss has to look at the advice, and the boss has to decide if it's good. So credit goes to the boss. And Trump handled this perfectly. Perfectly. Be defiant, be strong, be determined, and we're facing wickedness. You don't need to put a further name on it. You don't have to say Democrats are bad, because then you become them. Don't become the thing you hate. That that's the. The biggest risk for violence, besides actually dying and being injured, is that you become the person who did it to you. Don't become the person who did it to you. You got to be better than that. That's. That's how you win.

[A]

Great advice. Right? So it's hard sometimes, you know, I. I get feisty, and I need to remember that because, like, my reaction, my instinct is always to, like, freak out on somebody, but I do hear Scott's voice in my head all the time. And so, you know, we've had, you know, we're on day two now from. From this incident, which, thank God, you know, it wasn't. I mean, it sounds so dumb to qualify assassination attempts. It wasn't as bad as Butler, but it could have been, right? And I just want to leave if Owen and Marcello don't mind. Like, I just want to go from that right into the security issue, because what. All right, here. Here's what I want to pose to you two. Why would they bring the entire cabinet with them to an event? I mean, that was probably the dumbest move. When I heard how many of them were there, I'm like, oh, so everybody's there? You know, why would everybody be there? And I heard the security was horrendous that night. I saw. Here we go. We had Carrie Lake, if anyone wants to screenshot that and read it or go to her profile. But she was. She was saying, like, nobody was, like, name checking her badge or checking her ID that there was, like, no security. She could. You know, it was extremely lax. Now the entire cabinet is basically there. Bill Malusion, he wrote, Let me just move that. Okay? Bill Malusian wrote my thoughts on the security at the White House correspondence dinner last night. The first exterior security for me was on the street outside of the hotel. I flashed my ticket and was waved through in one second. My name was not checked against any list. I showed no ID I was not patted down and did not go through a metal detector. I probably could have shown a ticket from a prior year or a fake one, as they barely looked at it. I don't Know who that exterior security was? They were guys in suits. From that point, I walked into the hotel with no further security check, and I walked down to the Fox pre party where there were multiple ballrooms that were absolutely packed with attendees. Still did not go through any security at that point. Hypothetically, if I had hidden in an explosive in my shoe or my jacket, I would have had no problem getting into one of those ballrooms. Only once it was time to get into the main ballroom for the dinner did we pass through magnometers, empty our pockets, and get a pat down. And even at that checkpoint was just outside the dinner room. Two things can be true at the same time. Secret Service reacted quickly to an active armed threat and prevented the threat from getting into the ballroom. But the security leading up to that point, in my opinion, appeared to be lacking severely. And I feel like we say this after every major thing, like it's only like by a miracle that President Trump didn't die at Butler. And last night could have been a lot worse with a dais full of people and a room full of the administration and reporters and family members and everything else. And it's pretty shocking to me. Marcella, you know, did you feel that way about the security?

[D]

Yeah, I mean, the, they're, you know, the Secret Service. You know, President Trump had an interview with 60 Minutes yesterday, and he was very supportive to the Secret Service. But I mean, it just looks terrible to. We're under war. It would look terrible to any of our enemies. I mean, this is a. Is an alleged shooter from California. But what would have happened had it been more than one person running through there? You can't stop a whole group, or it would have been very difficult to stop a whole group, which is, I guess, goes to the fact that some people is too on the nose or it's staged, because how can it be so lax? How can, after Butler and after the golf course incident, how can the security be so laxed, I guess, is the point that people are making. And I don't believe it's. It's a staged event or a stage attack, but at the same time, I don't know if it's incompetence or intentional incompetence, because it just seems like anybody could have gone in there. One of the things that's, I forget who said it, but they were talking about when Netanyahu comes to that hotel or another event where he stays at a hotel, Israel actually goes through the entire building, the entire hotel rooms and searches hotel rooms. Because one of the things that this man was able to do is he had. He was staying at the Hilton at the same place where the event was. And so he brought in his weapons early, and he was able to have them in his room, and he was able to take a different stairs than the regular stairs. But you think, you look at the plans of the stairs. I mean, I can protect President Trump. I'm. I hire me, I'll protect you. I was actually DMing Sandy when we were, when the White House correspondence dinner was. And I told her, oh, my gosh, this is happening. And, And I remember her telling me, why is everybody there? Yeah, where is our designated Survivor? Because, you know, it would have been Nancy Pelosi or something, you know, Hakeem Jeffries. Was he not there? Oh, wow, that's just.

[A]

Oh, I don't. I don't think he was. Was he there? I don't know.

[B]

I think he was. I think they said the speaker of the House and I don't know, maybe not the minority leader. I can't remember.

[A]

Was Mike Johnson there?

[D]

Yes.

[A]

What are we doing? What are we doing? Are we not in a serious country? What are we doing for the, for the White House correspondence dinner?

[D]

Is that why he said, Said the alleged shooter said that he would leave Cash Patel alive so that he, Cash Patel, would become president?

[B]

I don't. I don't know. I don't think the FBI director is anywhere near the top of that list, but.

[D]

Well, if you get rid of the entire room, I guess so. I mean, really, you know, you know,

[A]

I, I so dumb.

[D]

Either simulation or God, but it is something that is really protecting President Trump.

[A]

I fully agree.

[D]

He, instead of a gun, he could have brought a bomb.

[A]

That's right.

[D]

He could have even set it up before because he had been staying at this hotel, so. Oh, okay. So regarding the hotel and them staying, I guess from the reports, at least, from what we know, is that they did not go through hotel room after hotel room because. And they do not ban any other. They don't ban regular people from staying there.

[A]

So, yeah, even the suspect was like, oh. It was like there was no nothing. There was no cat. He was just like. This was so easy. I'm like, oh, well, that's good to know.

[D]

And the worst part is Iran is watching, China's watching, Russia's. Why any, Any of the enemies are watching. So it's like, oh, all we need to do is get a hotel room.

[A]

So I understand President Trump and Cash, you know, saying good job to the Secret Service, who, by the way, can we open the government again and maybe pay some people? Okay. But anyway, here's. I mean, okay, so here is President Trump on 60 Minutes. And then, Owen, you respond right after

[E]

the other thing in the manifesto that I think is worth looking at in terms of determining his motive. He had been staying at the hotel since Friday. He checked in. He said he had cased the place, and he wrote, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? And he wrote this quote, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10ft, metal detectors out the wazoo. What I got is nothing. He wrote, like, this level of incompetence is insane, sir. You have already had two.

[H]

Well, he was pretty incompetent, too, because he got caught, and he got caught pretty easily, so I'd say he was pretty incompetent, too. You know, I could take any event having to do with security or anything else. I can always find fault. Those guys did a good job last night. They did a really good job.

[E]

I mention that because, again, as his motive. You brought this up. He had social media accounts that had anti Trump and anti Christian rhetoric.

[H]

You should read. Why don't you read all the anti Trump. Why don't you read it? You just did, so why don't you read it?

[E]

Well, he had a lot of anti Christian rhetoric. He had. He was part of a group called the Wide Awakes. He had attended a no kings protest in California. What did security tell you about what

[A]

may have been his motives?

[H]

The reason you have people like that is you have people doing no kings. I'm not a king. What I am. If I was a king, I wouldn't be dealing with you.

[A]

Okay, that line I did enjoy. Owen, go ahead.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, I. I mean, I understand why Trump would want to, you know, compliment the Secret Service. Number one, they saved his life. And number two, I think, you know, he wants them to be on his side, so trashing him wouldn't necessarily be productive. But I do think the security protocols need to be totally changed. I mean, I think we need to understand this is a different reality than we've had in the past. The odds of someone doing this have gone way up. And as Marcella pointed out, we're in wartime, you know, so we may have foreign actors that might be much more professional doing similar things. And so I think we need to treat things that way. And I think we need to kind of go into every one of these events thinking, okay, there's going to be an attacker. How are we going to stop it? Yeah. It's going to happen every time. They should be assuming that somebody with a gun or somebody with an explosive or somebody with something is going to try and take Trump out, and they should be making their plans accordingly and the security should reflect that. And clearly it didn't. So I, you know, I'm not going to defend that the way Trump did, but I think certainly I'm not going to trash the Secret Service. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. So, you know, I think it was successful from in this instance, but I do think there was probably a fair amount of luck involved. And there shouldn't be, you know, it should be that someone's left to be totally, you know, just out of this world, lucky to get, make something like that happen. And I know there's talk about maybe giving Trump a bulletproof vest, but I mean, come on, like that, that's just like a last ditch thing. I think the reality should be no one should ever be able to get close to him if they haven't been vetted.

[A]

Although one Secret Service member was shot. I don't know, they didn't say by if it was friendly fire or if that guy got a shot and his vest saved his life. President Trump talked to him and he said he was good. Now, this clip, I mean, this is what Secret Service does. I just want to play this clip really quick, but I mean, and I think you guys are going to feel the way I did. I felt like, you know, they were sitting at those tables on the stage for quite a long time before they got them out of there. I understand, like, you know, okay, what's happening, but. All right, so, but watch. So this is what the Secret Service does here. Do you see Trump sitting on the left, but look how much commotion there is before someone gets there. And now he positions himself in front of him.

[D]

I want to trash the Secret Service.

[A]

You what, Marcella?

[D]

I want to trash the Secret Service. I understand what Owen is saying. And after Butler and after all that, why President Trump hasn't trashed them, I would trash them. I would completely go through how their protocol is. I hope he's doing it privately. That's what I'm hoping. Because there's no way. There's no way. You saw the people moving around.

[A]

Yeah.

[D]

It's like, how fast can you react to. You're not reacting. I heard the shots myself and I kept yelling at President Trump to get down and he wasn't listening. He was not listening because he couldn't hear me.

[A]

He couldn't hear you. Marcella, if only you couldn't.

[D]

But I kept yelling.

[A]

Yeah. So I. I know, because I'm like, wow, it really took a long time before anybody got to him. They got JD off fast, faster than President Trump and the First Lady. But it's like he's just sitting there, like, wide open, you know? And, yes, God bless the people that stand in front of him willing to take the shot. I mean, I know it's their job, but, like, okay, you know, and you saw in some of the clips, Secret Service running through, like, holding their weapon. It could have really been mayhem. I mean, they're running around with their guns drawn. It's chaos, the whole thing. I don't know. I. I don't know. And I. I'm fully, fully on board with this ballroom. I always was like, why wouldn't we improve the White House? Why wouldn't we level up our security in the most, like, volatile times we've ever lived in? Yeah. So make it bulletproof, drone proof, with a shelter under and all the other things, and have this stupid dinner there. I'm sure people would feel a lot safer there than, you know, going to that hotel again, which was completely wide open, apparently. And I do love this picture, though. I don't see how big I can make it. So this is after President Trump has a fresh Diet Coke. He's in his tux, you could see. I'm assuming he's going over his speech that he's going to give. They're probably showing him a picture of the suspect running in a blur, as he said, just kind of an iconic picture. It's a weird night. Can we shift again, you guys? I just, you know, we were listening to Scott always, you know, even today, talking about the Charlottesville hoax. We're very heavy into, you know, debunking that hoax here along with Steve Cortez and Joel Pollock and all of us. And back to the Southern Poverty Law Center. I definitely. Oh, I'm getting more angry by the day. But anyway, here's our friends from the all in podcast. I'm particularly good friends with jcal, and here is David Sachs with an update.

[I]

A lot of detail to this case.

[J]

Yeah, so you're right that the SPLC allegedly did fund $270,000 to help plan Charlottesville. In addition to that, they secretly funneled more than $3 million to a bunch of violent, racist extremist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan, the American Nazi Party, Aryan Nation, United Klans of America, and it goes on from there. So I think don't forget about the 3 million bucks. So this group that was supposed to be fighting racism, in fact was fomenting racism by paying these groups to basically organize protests that SPLC could then point to and say that America has a huge racism problem, donate to us. And that's basically what happened. After Charlottesville, they increased the amount of money that they were able to fundraise by $81 million. So that $270,000 investment led to an $81 million return. Pretty good. But this is kind of the whole point of the story, is that these guys are basically running a grift. And one of the ways that, you know, this is a grift is because according to the indictment, that they opened bank accounts under fictitious entities to conceal the payments that they were making from their own donors. Because if their donors knew that they were funding the kkk, they wouldn't be getting all these contributions from Hollywood celebrities and all the rest of it. So it's really just this unbelievable story. It really boggles the mind.

[I]

And just to clean up a little bit there, these are allegations. They haven't made the jump from planning these events. And the SPLC claims they were not planning these things. They were monitoring. So that's going to be their argument on the side. I'm not saying I agree with that.

[B]

I'm not saying that.

[J]

I know you're right that the SPLC's cover story is that they were simply paying informants.

[A]

So to me, that's just like stoking the flames of taking out our president and then just like, sitting back and be like, oh, I didn't do it. Owen. Do you just want to scream, you guys? Oh, you know, like, Scott is probably like, oh, you know, I just, you

[B]

know, Scott nailed this one, too. And I think we played that clip another day. But it was, you know, he saw that coming, and he. He knew that this was going on. And I think, you know, it's just confirmation. Like, everything is what you thought it was, and. But, you know, that is directly connected to this, and I know that's why you included it. Now, is that it it? You know, the SPLC was one of the main organizations that was pushing this type of rhetoric, trying to get people to do this type of violent act. And so I think it is all connected. And I think there's a lot more organizations that should probably face the same consequences as the splc, because they're all doing similar things. They're all trying to, you know, pump up the rhetoric, get people to be violent, and that's Just the way these Marxist color revolution sort of things work is that they try to make disorder, they try to make violence and they try to tear down the system. And that's pretty transparent. I don't think they're really even hiding it very well.

[A]

Marcella.

[D]

Well, I have to say that the indictment doesn't indicate that. There's no, nowhere in the indictment that SPLC has planned these events. If they have, I want to see them being charged with that. The investigation is still ongoing, so we'll see right now like J. Cal said and I don't know, I'll set it in the, in the clip you showed David Sachs regarding insider, insider trading, regarding having somebody on the inside and paying them more has to be looked into because you know, for example, the alleged shooter at the White House correspondence dinner was part of Wide Awake. Was Wide Awake another group that the SPLC gave money to or the ADL or whoever, whatever, whatever letters you want to use. You know, how did they exist? How did he purchase these guns? With a tutor, I guess he lived at home. So, but, so that could be, give the sense that he must have used it to buy these weapons. How did he purchase, you know, a few hotel stays at the Hilton. But in regards to the splc, I mean, we'll see. But it's, it's a lot, it's a lot of hoax. Between hoaxes, between hoaxes, you just, it's become impossible to figure out because the, the left is using this, but so is the right. So I, you know, you never know.

[A]

I do want to give you some encouragement. It's that Pam Bondi is not there. Thank God. I mean thank God. Not seeing her after this attempted assassination was so refreshing. I was like okay, let's go. So let's, let's. Obviously we're going to follow the SPLC hard because literally just, just to satisfy our, our itches and our scratching and Scott and all the work everybody put into this and, and we knew, you guys, we all knew Scott's debris, the beloved, the simultaneous sippers. We knew this was a hoax from the get go. And we had to endure watching the lies and the BS spew out of the media's mouths and politicians mouths and whoever always says that, you know, you can't hate them enough, you can't. So this, this, we're going to have to really hope and pray and push resolve for this because we are going to stay calm like Scott said, channel our energy where it can be useful and channel it that, you know, we push for this to be fully exposed and for consequences and punishments to happen accordingly and to, to keep digging because it's the only way out. It's the only way out is to expose it all and burn it all down. It's be tough. But you guys, guess what? We thought that you would really enjoy having a sage revisit us again. So on Wednesday, somehow we convinced Walter Kern to come back. So Walter Kern is gladly coming back on Wednesday as our guest professor. So I can't wait to hear. He's, he is into some amazing different topics from the scientists to UFOs to the Luigi Mangioni effect, which I think is pertinent to now. So we'll see what, what he wants to talk about and we'll just, we'll just go with it. So, you guys, we will be back tomorrow. Thank you so much for everything, Owen and Marcella and I appreciate you guys showing up every day and that we can all stay together as a group. So I'm literally going to go be useful right now. I know that sounds shocking, but I am. And Marcella, Owen, are you going to be useful?

[B]

I am.

[D]

Yeah. I'm going to court.

[A]

Yep, Marcel is going to be particularly useful. Okay, so you guys, we always thank Scott and Shelley for letting us keep this going. And a closing sip to Scott and we'll see you tomorrow. To Scott. To Scott and you guys, I'll be posting that clip right after that isolated clip so you can share it with all the idiots out there. Okay, Love you guys.

[D]

Bye, guys.