Transcript

Episode 3094 - The Scott Adams School 02/13/26

From Real Coffee with Scott Adams · Episode page · Watch on YouTube

· 1 h 8 min · 12,288 words · 139 timestamped sections

This is the full, timestamped transcript of "Episode 3094 - The Scott Adams School 02/13/26", an episode of Real Coffee with Scott Adams published February 13, 2026 (1 h 8 min, about 12,288 words). It mentions 17 people, works and ideas, including Scott Adams, Owen Gregorian, Marcela Gregorian, 7-Eleven, Venezuela.

What this episode is about

The main topic discusses the logistical challenges and platform interactions experienced during the live broadcast of "The Scott Adams School," while emphasizing the community aspect and ongoing content available through Scott Adams' various channels, including YouTube and Locals. The hosts also highlight upcoming interviews and the supportive environment fostered among their audience members.

Key takeaways

  • Syncing tech is harder than finding your missing earphones—embrace the chaos, we’re all in this together!
  • Coffee may not solve all problems, but the 'simultaneous sip' clearly delivers daily doses of dopamine.
  • Expecting longer interviews on Locals? It's time to redefine 'guest respect'—less time, more content!
  • New mouse studies suggest brains can time travel for rewards; forget sci-fi, welcome to the lab life!
  • The myth of 'fake news' looms large; remember, even hoaxes have a surprisingly reliable fanbase!

Who speaks in this episode?

What is discussed, and when

  1. – 10:00: Scott Adams, Marcela Gregorian, Owen Gregorian, Brian Romeli
  2. – 30:00: 7-Eleven, Chat GPT, OpenAI
  3. – 40:00: Venezuela, Curtis Wayne Wright, Marcela Gregorian, Natural disasters
  4. – 50:00: Caitlin Collins, Marcela Gregorian, Owen Gregorian, Venezuela
  5. – 1:08:04: Scott Adams, Owen Gregorian

Notable quotes from "Episode 3094 - The Scott Adams School 02/13/26"

  • I'm Erica and this is the Scott Adams School. I'm joined today by our beautiful Marcela, the Gregorian, and our Sergio in Tucson.
    about Marcela Gregorian · at
  • And bond with you guys. So, we encourage you to come over there. Our guest yesterday was Brian Romeli. he's going to be with us doing a long form interview where we can ask a…
    about Brian Romeli · at
  • Of well better lifestyle factors had slower memory decline as well. So, they're getting into the healthy diet stuff and that it worked more for people with this APOE gene that I think is the one that puts you at risk for Alzheimer's.
    about Alzheimer's · at
  • Did you try Scott's method to try and stop yourself from sneezing?
    about Scott Adams · at
  • May have seen this viral video of the Border Patrol people being turned away from a 7-Eleven. I think it was a speedway, but they are owned by 7-Eleven. And the quote from that is I don't support ICE, and nobody here does. From the manager.
    about 7-Eleven · at
  • In Target. There's even now people are doing some kind of boycott on OpenAI. there's some kind of organized boycott trying to get people to stop subscribing to Chat GPT because…
    about Chat GPT · at
  • Let's see. So Venezuela looks like they are being pretty friendly to us. Chris Wright went down there, our US Secretary of Energy, and he got the red carpet treatment. They had…
    about Venezuela · at
  • Good. That's good. And Owen's articles are all under his handle on X, Owen Gregorian. So, if you want to read more about it or see the videos, you'll find everything we're talking about today.
    about Owen Gregorian · at

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

  • Scott Adams — Person · Referenced host/creator (namesake of the show) · 5 mentions · first at
    Central figure the hosts are honoring; his prior show ('Coffee with Scott Adams') and methods/framings are repeatedly referenced as the template for discussion.
  • Owen Gregorian — Person · Co-host / news lead · 3 mentions · first at
    Leads the episode's news and analysis, references his own posting on X, and is described as running additional news discussions (Saturday show and possible subscriber spaces).
  • Marcela Gregorian — Person · Co-host / legal perspective · 5 mentions · first at
    Introduced as part of the core group; contributes legal framing (judicial appointments/injunctions) and is addressed as a lawyer by the others.
  • Brian Romeli — Person · Referenced prior guest · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned as the previous day's guest and teased for a longer-form interview; used to explain why some videos are time-limited and longer content goes to Locals.
  • Caitlin Collins — Person · Referenced journalist (press access anecdote) · 3 mentions · first at
    Appears in a story where Saudi officials allegedly threatened to bar her, and the Trump team defended her access—used to argue Trump supports press access despite criticism.
    Maybe she wouldn't be invited back there or that they were going to bar her from the press conferences and the Trump team defended her and said no, she's going to be with us and insisted that she's allowed in. And so, I think Caitlyn was.
  • Curtis Wayne Wright — Person · Referenced government official in Venezuela story · 2 mentions · first at
    Named as the U.S. Secretary of Energy visiting Venezuela and receiving a 'red carpet' reception; used to illustrate shifting diplomatic/energy dynamics.
    Let's see. So Venezuela looks like they are being pretty friendly to us. Chris Wright went down there, our US Secretary of Energy, and he got the red carpet treatment. They had…
  • Donald Kinsella — Person · Referenced legal appointee in DOJ/judiciary dispute · 1 mention · first at
    Cited as an example in a story about a judge appointing a U.S. attorney and DOJ immediately firing the appointee, illustrating separation-of-powers conflict.
    So there was someone named Donald Kinsella that was appointed by a judge and they DOJ just turned right around and said judges don't pick US attorneys the president does see article 2 you're.
  • Michael Forest Reol — Person · Referenced name in a comedic aside · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned briefly during the 'simultaneous sip' bit as a throwaway reference; the speakers themselves say they don't remember who it is, indicating low contextual grounding.
    I feel the soul of Michael Forest Arena going to hell.

Companies & orgs

  • 7-Eleven — Company · Business focus · 5 mentions · first at
    Discussed in the context of a controversy involving Border Patrol and corporate policies.
  • OpenAI — Company · Business focus · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned in the context of a boycott discussion due to government involvement.
    In Target. There's even now people are doing some kind of boycott on OpenAI. there's some kind of organized boycott trying to get people to stop subscribing to Chat GPT because…

Products & tech

  • Chat GPT — Product · Product mentioned · 1 mention · first at
    Discussed in the context of a boycott due to its association with OpenAI and government involvement.

Concepts & topics

  • Alzheimer's — Concept · Key argument · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned in the context of a study linking the APOE gene to Alzheimer's risk.
  • APOE E4 gene — Concept · Key argument · 1 mention · first at
    Discussed in relation to Alzheimer's disease risk and memory decline.
    Of well better lifestyle factors had slower memory decline as well. So, they're getting into the healthy diet stuff and that it worked more for people with this APOE gene that I think is the one that puts you at risk for Alzheimer's.
  • Natural disasters — Concept · Key argument · 1 mention · first at
    Discussed in relation to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants affected by such events.
    Stands for temporary, was never designed to be permanent. So certainly makes sense to me. but especially for things like natural disasters, it shouldn't be permanent. And so looks like some good news on the legal front that and this seems.

Places & events

  • Venezuela — Place · Setting · 3 mentions · first at
    Mentioned in the context of US-Venezuela relations and oil overhaul discussions.
  • COVID-19 pandemic — Event · Referenced event · 4 mentions
    Mentioned in passing in the context of government contracts and news funding.
    Government side that they used to get a lot of money from the government in one form or another. I think that was certainly true in the COVID years where it seems like a lot of…
  • Hurricane Mitch — Event · Referenced event · 1 mention · first at
    Mentioned in the context of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants.
    Nicaragua. The Ninth Circuit overturned a block on ending the TPS for 90,000 migrants. So, all the asylum people from the post hurricane Mitch in 1998 and the Nepal quake in 2015.

Full transcript with timestamps

Oh my goodness. Howdy. How Oh, wait. Can I see locals on Rumble Studio? Is that what's happening?

You guys, where's my earphone? Good morning. Is there an AWJB Rick SGV? You guys, I'm in full Scott Adams mode today with technology and it is not fun. But, you know, we'll see how it goes. Do I sound as All right, let's do a quick sound test. How do we all sound? Do we sound like we're in sync? Okay, everybody talk.

Do we sound like we're in sync? Hello. Hello. Are we in sync? You're loud. Sorry.

Loud. Okay. Yeah. So, it's going to take a minute for them to get there. But in the meantime, I would like to say good morning to all of the platforms um on X. I hope X is running well today. We know that there's a little glitch with it, but we're working that out. If it's not worked out, it will be. Um, so welcome to the beloved locals, to YouTube, to Rumble. Um, good morning. I'm Erica and this is the Scott Adams School. I'm joined today by our beautiful Marcela,

the Gregorian, and our Sergio in Tucson. Whoop. So you guys, just as always, we want to remind you that Coffee with Scott Adams, which was like what brought us all here, still lives on its own. Um, there's a thousand hours of Scott and his wisdom, his lessons, his genius on YouTube, but there's even more on Locals. Okay, so he had his own subscription channel, which was I think it's scottadams.locals.com, but we'll make sure we post it. And also the locals community, you guys, is chef's kiss A+ the most amazing people.

We've really formed a family. We are kindhearted and we're all walks of life, but we really love to bring everybody in and bond with you guys. So, we encourage you to come over there. Our guest yesterday was Brian Romeli. he's going to be with us um doing a long form interview where we can ask a ton of questions and we'll have not unlimited time but we'll have a lot more time um on the YouTube channel. Uh some people ask why we, you know, maybe cut a video to an hour. It's because we have to respect the time of our guests. So if we, you know, if if we were Scott and he had the day ahead of him and he could go on for three hours, he could do that.

But we're inviting guests to come in and we want them to know we respect their time, that we have a start time and an end time. But if we do want to do longer videos without a constraint, those will be on Scott's Locals channel for subscribers. So, we encourage you come on over. It's a good time. Um, but anyway, today we have the core four here to do some news and some current events. And Owen uh Gregorian as always has picked some fun news stories as he does every single day. And then he does a show on Saturday with his co-host Sergio and they talk news for hours and hours and hours and you can all participate there.

So, thank God it's Friday. Thank God it's a news day and we're so happy you're here. So, Owen, um we're gonna let you lead with the news stories you want to talk about today.

Absolutely not. You missed something here. SB the simultaneous sip. I told you it's a day. We can't do news without the sip. So this it takes a village, you guys. Especially today. All right, you guys. Are we ready? Lord, I'm going to even do it from my phone. Old school like Scott. Here we go.

Hey everybody, come on in. It's a very newsy day. There's news all over the place. You got your real news, you got your fake news, all kinds of news. You got your hoaxes, and we have a brand new hoax. The hoax of the day. We don't have a name for it yet. Let's call it the losers and suckers hoax. Goes well with the fine people hoax, the drinking bleach bleach hoax, the overfeeding the goldfish hoax, and all of the other hoaxes. But first, what do you need first to get ready for all this excitement? I think you know you you need a cup, mug, or a glass, a tanker, gels, or stain, a canteen, jug, or flask. A vessel of any kind.

Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called the the simultaneous sip. And it's happening right now. Go. I feel the soul of Michael Forest Arena going to hell. That's good coffee. Makes everything better.

All right. And of course, who's like who's Michael Forest Reol? I don't remember who it is and what that was about, but somebody is going to look it up and let us know. So, I'll drink to that and I'll turn it over to Owen.

All right. Much better now. So on the science side to get us started, uh there's a story about hippocample neurons shifting their activity backward in time to anticipate rewards. I don't know that I would necessarily call this time travel. I think it's more that when you test it, this is of course like most things a mouse study. And when they tested it with mice, they found that the reward, like the peak reward in the brain started off being when they would receive the reward, but then it shifted earlier and earlier to the point where they were getting their peak long before they got the reward. So, um, you know, it was basically going backwards in time over, you know, while they were trained.

And um so it it you know shifted that that reward cycle I guess. And um I think they're also tying this to being healthier in your brain. They said the favorable group um that had like a bunch of well better lifestyle factors um had slower memory decline as well. So, they're getting into the healthy diet stuff and um that it worked more for people with this APOE gene that I think is the one that puts you at risk for Alzheimer's. Um so, combination of things there, but I think it was interesting to me to say that, you know, you as you get trained to get a reward and I think Scott taught us that it's often better to be intermittent. So, sometimes you get the reward and sometimes you don't. But as you get used to that it you start anticipating it and um you actually get the reward far before or your your brain gets rewarded before you actually get the the physical reward. So

so the anticipation is also a reward. Yeah. And I think this definitely falls in the category of you could have just asked God. I think we probably all knew this that um you know it's that whole dopamine cycle that once you get into a habit that is rewarding then you start anticipating it and the anticipation becomes better than the actual realization.

I could get down with that. I feel that way about sneezing. Sometimes the anticipation of a sneeze is so good. I love that. Like especially if you know it's going to come out, but if somebody says bless you to me before I sneeze, it ruins the sneeze and it's upsetting.

Did you try Scott's method to try and stop yourself from sneezing? No, I like sneezing. It's a reward. I like it.

Oh my gosh. I think I tried it and it didn't really work for me. So I'm not It worked for me.

It worked for me. Oh yeah. Every time since he talk about it, um I have used it. Maybe one time it failed, but it has worked every time. And it also works with uh other um other secretions of your body. You know, it could be like your tears, you know. It can be you can cry in your mind and uh and avoid a cry too. But uh it's better to cry sometimes. You know, the sneezing it's good to sneeze too, but not in company, right? So,

yeah, it does. It does matter what you're sneezing on. Um, but for anyone who isn't familiar, um, Scott's method was that he would, um, in his mind, I guess, sort of simulate the sneezing, like he would visualize himself sneezing before he sneezed and that if he visualized himself sneezing before he sneezed, then it would stop him from sneezing. And he seemed to think that was something that everybody could do could try and a lot of people could do. Sounds like Sergio was able to pull it off.

I feel like my head many more many people. Well, I I do I'm kind of with you, Erica. I number one, it is kind of a pleasurable experience. And number two, um I also just think it's healthier. Like, you know, you're sneezing for a reason. So, I'd rather let it out.

My body, my choice, right? You can choose to sneeze or not. I suppose so. I suppose so. All right. Um, so there's another one here that says, um, online banking may be shifting household money control to women, that it makes women five times likelier to manage their money independently of the men they're married to. Um, and that, you know, this is partly in the UK, but I would imagine it extends to other places. It says they found that 49% of UK couples pull their income jointly, 17% manage independently, and 83% make major decisions jointly. Um, but maleled decisions were only in 11% of heterosexual couples. And um, so it seems like the the shift to online banking is somehow giving access to women. And um it says, "For men, online banking often increases their involvement in day-to-day money's management and reinforces their control over big financial decisions. For many women, it can level the playing field, opening the

door to shared decision-making, giving them a stronger voice in the household. Who manages the money in your family?" Erica,

me. Yeah, I'm sure you're shocked to hear that. I I am. I'm I'm shocked. But right um

me controlling something. I think in in my case it is probably more me but I and my wife has asserted more control over time um that more recently she's doing a little bit more stuff independently like you know in her job she would obviously have her own retirement accounts and she's taken it upon herself to learn a lot more about investing and so I think it's more of a joint thing at this point. Um, but I would say earlier in our marriage, it was mostly me that I would just, you know, make sure all the bills are paid and make sure we had investments for retirements and all that. So,

I didn't necessarily want to do it. I don't know what you guys experienced, but when we first got married 800 years ago and Keith would be doing the bills, he would get so like upset and you know, not like at this spending, but just like, oh, like where's this thing and what about this thing and whatever. And I'm like, oh my god, like I I can't like he can't get upset every time we do the bills. The bills are never going to stop. And so I' I'd bring him a sandwich. I'd be like, "Hey, what are you doing with the bills?" And he and then he'd be like, "Oh, yeah, okay, great." But then he'd get upset again and then I was like, "Why don't I just take that from you?" And then this was like a hundred years ago and I was like, "Let's just avoid it." Like, so, you know, I'd make him a sandwich if he still wanted one, but I'll just do the bills. And it just has been great for the last hundred years.

Yeah, I think that's a good way to to work it out. I think certain people are a lot more anxious about stuff like that and other ones aren't. and it's probably better to let the person who's not going to freak out every time um manage that process. But I think in in modern times, you know, at this point, almost all of our bills are just automatically paid. Like I don't we don't write any checks anymore. It it's not really even a thought process. I mean, we might review the bills or review the spending every so often. And I do track our spending pretty closely and quicken, but um you know, like except for major things like if we're going to buy a car or a house or you know, some big furniture or something like that, um we usually do those things together, but otherwise it's kind of like it just flows, you know? We don't really do anything.

Doesn't this um doesn't this go back to billionaires and their wives controlling the money um for leftist uh like leftist um charities and all that. So like

we could certainly talk about that too. I I to me I put that in a whole different category because that's where like you have so much more money than you could ever spend. And I would imagine there's no talk about any kind of budget at that point. Although I'm sure there are some billionaires that give their wife an allowance or whatever. But um yeah, I think to me it's kind of like when you have that kind of money um

it's your money manager, your your finance guy. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I guess to me the the it if I try to put myself in the shoes of a billionaire, I would say, "Okay, at that point I'm going to be more defensive." Like, I want to make sure I never go broke. You know, I I'm not so worried about making more money at that point. It's just I want to make sure I don't get scammed. Nobody drains the account. Nobody does something so irresponsible that all of a sudden I am broke because that does happen to a lot of rich people,

especially ones that aren't, you know, they didn't like slowly make their way to being rich. um if they don't have experience managing money. A lot of athletes and lottery winners like most of them I think actually are a high percentage end up broke or bankrupt because they just don't know how to manage money. And I think probably most billionaires are you know experienced by the time they get there with it that they don't have that problem. But I think um it really does depend on you know what your prior experience was.

Like if you're starting out poor and then you suddenly get millions or billions of dollars like it's it's a difficult thing to manage I think because you just don't have the experience of saying how do I avoid getting scammed or how do I make the right decisions and so I think it is an important skill set to develop over time.

Yeah. All right. Yeah. Skill sets are important. All right. Well, here's another one that's uh you could have asked Scott. Uh self-esteem may predict who pursues leadership roles. People with high self-esteem with promotion focus boosts leadership pursuit when it's encouraged. Low self-esteem has more of a prevention focus and it reinforces reluctance. Um regulatory focus is pliable and uh you know it's a little bit different than fixed traits like personality or gender. So, I think they're pointing to self-esteem as a big big factor there. I I don't know why anyone needed to spend money on this study.

No. Um I I guess we could just say like Scott has said before that, you know, being overconfident is a good thing and it will help you get ahead. And I would I would probably counel to to focus on confidence rather than self-esteem. Um because I think those are different things. I think self-esteem is like your personal opinion of yourself and confidence is more of how you present yourself,

right? And they don't need to be the same. You know, you can have the imposter syndrome going on inside as long as you're confident externally and you can be very successful, I think, but um you know, it could be that they're not able to really tell the difference between the two when they're doing a study,

right? All right. Let's see. We can get into some of the political stuff. So, we have um story about Mexican cartels employing drones to smuggle drugs and fight enemies. I know Sergio perked up at the story. Um looks like Mexican cartels are using drugs or drones daily for drugs, surveillance, migrant operations, and attacks. Uh apparently there's been over 27,000 detected near the US border in late 2024. Um, and they're shifting from planes to drones for fentinel. Looks like the drones can have up to 100 kilograms of capacity and they've had explosive drones since 2021. Um, now that's widespread and Mexico's trying to fight back. So, seems like it's a bigger and bigger problem. There was a related story a few days ago where it was in Texas. I forget the city exactly, but it was um one of the airports was shut down for 10 days and um it looks like what happened was we were testing lasers to

shoot drones down and there was apparently some disconnect between the FAA and the defense department, I guess. And so the defense department started firing off these lasers and the FAA said, "Whoa, whoa, you can't do that. We got planes all over the place here." And the Department of Defense just said, "We're going to keep doing it." And so the FAA said, "Fine, then we're shutting down the airport." Um, and I think they were just shooting at balloons or something, but there was some I don't I don't know if I'd call it misinformation, but um, you know, there were some statements made about maybe they were shooting down Mexican drones.

Um, but I think that turned out not to be the case that they were just shooting at balloons and stuff and they didn't really shoot any Mexican drones down during this operation. But, um, it looks like we are certainly working on our our anti- drone capabilities and probably planning to use it at the Mexican border.

I still stand with that the drones over New Jersey were very sus and we will never have the real answer on it. And uh I remember getting into debates with Scott about it and you know people be like they look like airplanes and it's like no there's something really sketchy going on. We know what the airplanes look like over our skies. These were not them.

And I remember when Scott was doing the story about the drones that have machine guns on them. I mean you know like drones are scary. I mean the the good thing is is you know you you don't have to have boots on the ground when you have drones in the sky. So technically it should save the lives of especially our troops um which is always a good thing but drone I mean how do you regulate the drones especially when there's so many commercial not even commercial I mean uh private drones like Sergio flies a drone and he does that for part of his job is using a drone and I can see clearly I I could think of a thousand scenarios of how bad this could go for people and I'm sure you guys could too and I would never say one publicly to put an idea out there for some psychopath. But I don't know. I think drones are really our future fear like should be

and and how do you regulate this? It's very concerning. Yeah. I mean it's definitely concerning to me. I think um especially since you have people like the cartels using this. I'm kind of surprised we haven't seen more attacks even in the US um from the cartels because it seems like they've got the equipment, they've got the money, they've got the technology, they know how to do it. And um it does look like they are using it a lot in Mexico. Maybe they're just, you know, essentially not wanting to provoke the US into invading, which is probably what would happen. So, um but it'll be interesting to see with all this laser technology because that seems to be the primary counter that's coming out.

Ukraine had a a similar story where they developed some kind of laser that was anti- drone. Um, and it seems like that's the counter technology. So, could be that we'll be seeing a lot more lasers going off.

I just wanted to clarify, Owen, when you say Mexican drones, you mean Mexican cartel drones or me or the or the country?

Yeah, I'm talking about the cartels using drones. Yeah. I mean, I I would I would assume maybe the Mexican government has some drone capability, but I think the problem we're talking about is the cartels. Um, there's been stories about this over the past

Chinese drones mostly, Chinese drones. Um, you know, like some some people in Mexico have complained that they've had drone attacks from the cartels, like, you know, any if you get on the bad list and they want to get rid of you or get get you off your land or something.

Oh, no way. like drones in for attacking. Yeah. Yeah. So, I think, you know, the stuff that's happening in Ukraine is spilling over into Mexico essentially and they're copying all the same technologies. So, it is a scary time. I mean, you know, certainly I would never want to be chased by a a malicious drone, but Yeah.

Exactly. Hopefully Sergio will never come after me that way. What do you think about this, Sergio? Well, h the this the the part about drones being used by the cartels in Mexico. I known about that for a long time because um you know I fly drones, right? I do real estate media. That's a photography of houses for people, you know, videos and and the the main uh maker of drones is DJI. is a Chinese company that uh now they have uh pulled out of um offering their drones officially in in the US but in Mexico there's stores everywhere in all the main cities you have all these stores for um agricultural drones okay those the big ones you know they carry

a lot so so the cartels have been using those uh you know for war basically against each other and against uh um the military. So, but it has been all always inside um Mexico like in Sinaloa, Mitakan and all those places where is heavily controlled by the cartels and um now that is crossing into El Paso for anybody in Texas um I will be like thinking about it more right I will be really aware about it and ask uh to make sure that like Erica was saying like in New Jersey they were saying all these things that this is happening that's happening you know just don't believe anything until you check and um and and and it's going to be uh three years ago I can I can disclose this because I didn't sign an NDA for this part but we did some test uh we were hired by a company I'm not going to say the name to test um a drone detection radar and uh I thought like well it's going to be great you know we're going to get paid really

well we have all these drone pilots there and we did this test about for about two and a half weeks and um and and the system was I'm not going to say it was not good. I mean it it was not as good as it should have be and I was like I hope they do something. So now that I see that all this is happening I'm kind of like happy and that is happening but also I'm afraid that my drones are going to get shut down sometimes if get mistaken for a cartel drone but uh but I think it's a good thing Owen and u and Marcela. Yeah, these all these drones are Chinese-made. Um, Mexico doesn't have any drone technology at all. I think they have a just a buying technology just to buy the buy them. And uh, like Ukraine, they have actually I heard reports maybe Owen, you should you know about this. They have a Ukraine Ukrainian pilots in Mexico training cartels. So, it might be a rumor. I don't know.

Yeah, I hadn't heard about that, but I I don't doubt it. I mean, I think Ukraine is certainly trying to leverage their drone technology and export it. Um, so, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if the some of them got hired by the cartel. I would hope that we might be able to get them to stop doing that if they are. Um, but, you know, I at the end of the day, it's probably, you know, kind of a losing battle like that you're going to have people flying drones and it's not something you can really prevent from happening. I think um the technology is too pervasive at this point, but you know, it is interesting that we did kind of ban the DJI DJI drones from America.

Um I know you know you like them a lot and and I'm not telling you to stop using them, but um it does look like we're trying to move that industry here or at least out of China um due to all the national security concerns which I think are real. I mean, I think to me, if if China is making all the drone hardware and the drone software, um, even if it's the best stuff out there, it might also mean that they're watching everything you do with it and that they might even have some level of control over it or a kill switch or who knows what. And so, I do think it's a legitimate concern and I would love to see more domestic drone capabilities where we could get Americanmade drones and have it be competitive. So, I'm hoping that's underway. I know we are doing that with Anderil and things military-wise, but I haven't really seen anything on the consumer side.

Yeah. Yeah, that's the issue because uh it's been years since we known about that uh this happening. We it was not a surprise in the in the drone community. The everybody knew that this was going to happen and they were not the companies were not incentivized. I guess it was the Biden administration that was doing it. Uh so, you know, there's no surprise on that. So, maybe now I'm thinking that there will be a renewal. um um encouragement to to get going. So, sorry, Erica, I interrupted you.

No, no, that's okay. I I just I want to make sure we get to other news, too. Yeah. Well, so the next story is um you may have seen this viral video of uh the Border Patrol people being turned away from a 7-Eleven. I think it was a speedway, but they are owned by 7-Eleven. And um you know, the quote from that is like, "I don't support ICE, and nobody here does." From the manager of that speedway. Um, so now the Trump administration is threatening to sever the partnership that they apparently have with 7-Eleven. Um, because apparently there is some kind of agreement where they can use their GSA fleet cards to gas up all the vehicles and, you know, buy snacks or whatever.

And it looks like, um, Trump is saying, you know, you need to start answering for this and stop this from happening. Otherwise, they might just stop doing that. And I think that could be a big monetary problem for 7-Eleven. So hopefully they they have some leverage there. But right now, apparently this GSA fleet card is mandatory for non-tactical vehicles and it's accepted for n 95% of stations. Um so looks like there's some conflict going on with 7-Eleven. Um it looks like we've had similar denials from Hampton Inn and McDonald's. So seems like we're having a lot of corporate friction with our ICE and Border Patrol.

There has to be rules with the franchising of these places. I'm guessing that these people will have their franchise license take not the not 7-Eleven as a whole thing, but the individual franchise partner. Like I'm I can't imagine they'd be allowed to continue.

Yeah, I think there might have been at least one of those already. I I think I remember a story like that where the the the individual store was going to lose their license and they'd have to become some other, you know, brand um and not keep the brand. And I don't know if it was 7-Eleven or something similar, but I think this is not the first time this has come out.

So, you might be right. Jump on this opportunity now to distance themselves from that and just say that they're taking their franchise license away because you you see how it goes here. You know, when when the majority gets upset, you know, they'll be boycotted and they will probably get run out of business. So,

yeah, it's a bad I mean, it's bad all around. I mean, you see what's happening in Target. There's even now people are doing some kind of boycott on OpenAI. Um there's some kind of organized boycott trying to get people to stop subscribing to Chat GPT because of their involvement with the government. And um I I think it's just bad for business and it's bad for our economy. It's bad for everybody. Um and I don't think it works out well for the businesses either way. I mean, I I would certainly counsel any business to just stay away from politics

and, you know, maybe have a policy that just says you can't discriminate and you can't

make any political statements because it's just bad for business. It's like, you know, you're cutting off half your customer base.

Yeah. And then worse than that, when you when you see what happened with Target with all the LGBTQ clothing they were selling, um, you know, they got boycotted by the right when they were selling it. And then when they pulled it off the shelves, now they're boycotted by the left. And like they're just getting whiplashed to the point where everybody's boycotting them. And that seems to be the natural path for these things. Like if if 7-Eleven comes and says, "Okay, we're not going to turn away ICE." Now they're going to get boycotted by the left. It's just a it's a vicious cycle. So,

this is why we can't have nice things, people. Yeah. All right. Well, good news. Um, the appeals court has ruled that Trump can terminate deportation protections for migrants from Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua. The Ninth Circuit overturned a block on ending the TPS for 90,000 migrants. So, all the uh asylum people from the post hurricane Mitch in 1998 and the Nepal quake in 2015. um we can send them all home. So Christy knows saying that's a win for the rule of law. Temp TPS, which I think the T stands for temporary, was never designed to be permanent. So certainly makes sense to me. Um but especially for things like natural disasters, um you know, it shouldn't be permanent. And um so looks like some good news on the legal front that um and and this seems to be a trend that a lot of the district judges are these activist judges that'll block stuff and then it gets the appeal court level and then it gets overturned.

So it seems like things are moving in the right direction at least at the court level.

It's so nice to see the law working right. Mhm. Well, the interesting part about this story is that it's the Ninth Circuit uh which is the most liberal circuit in the entire country. So that tells you a lot.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think in some cases it might have to go to the Supreme Court. But um yeah, it is interesting that

I mean they might appeal this decision. So then it would uh then go to the Supreme Court and they might uh reject it under saturia. Uh but you know what I mean. So it it it's still appealable.

It's still appealable. Yeah. Cuz ninth circuit is not yet the to the higher level. Yeah.

Okay. As Scott would often say, it's often too complicated to follow these things. I'm sure you can maybe understand it, Marcelo, given that you're a lawyer, but you know, it's like you get all these stories and sometimes when they say like this one where it says they overturned a block, it's like, well, that might just be a temporary ruling. Like that might not actually be even the case. They might still have to hear the case and then decide, but they're making some preliminary ruling just to say, "Okay, we're going to overturn the injunction."

And the injunction itself was not necessarily an actual ruling on a case. It was just we're going to block this. Right.

It's temporary. And in most of the most injunctions are temporary unless they're permanent. U the word permanent, isn't it?

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So getting through the ninth circuit is a good step. like it's leaving them now.

It for the ninth for the ninth circuit to agree with the Trump administration is like winning the lottery. It's not often. So the so what this means is the law is very clear on this because it's TPS temporary um it's a temporary protection.

Yeah. So we got a win there. And then more good news just overall there's a record high number of detained illegal aliens that are voluntarily leaving the country. So what this gets into is that um as of um 2025 28% of the detainee removal cases ended up in a voluntary departure, meaning the person agreed to leave. Um and that's a record high. Um and it went actually higher near the end of the year. So I think it's up to something like 38% now. Um, so ICE detention hit 73,000 by mid January. Um, the bond grants fell to 30%, asylum fell to 29%. So Trump is saying over 3 million people have left in Trump's first year. And of that 3,675 were actual formal deportations, but 2.2 million were self- deepportations. And they still have that CBP home app where you can get $1,000 in free flights home.

So it seems to be working. and we've had three million people leave apparently.

Wow. All right. So, progress and we still have a ways to go. The next story was actually that we in some congressional testimony, uh, they said there's 1.5 million illegal aliens with final deportation orders that are still in the country. Um, and of those, I think 800,000 are have criminal convictions. Um, so there's still a large number of people we're trying to get rid of. So, we haven't reached the end, but that does mean that if they follow through with that, it means we might have another 1.5 million leaving. So, it could get up to four and a half million, I suppose.

Um, it's not, you know, it's so amazing how slow the process has to be, though, considering how many flooded over during uh Biden's term.

Yeah. Yeah. So, the next story, I don't know if it's good or bad news. Um, Homeman announced they're ending their operation in Minnesota. Um H Homeman is calling it a victory. Like basically saying we've done our job, you know, mission accomplished sort of thing. Other people are saying you back down. Hman's response is saying to those people, you know, we're prioritizing public safety threats and we're focusing on national security and other things. Doesn't mean we're forgetting about everybody else. Um but it looks like they are pulling out of Minnesota. So hopefully that'll at least mean that we'll have less of the organized resistance that we've seen in Minnesota. Um, but I'm sure ice will be going somewhere else. So, we'll have to see what pops up elsewhere. I think California has certainly been mentioned.

Um, and that may be another hot spot, but um, you know, I think it seems like the overall trend is they might be going to friendlier places where they're not going to have as much resistance and um, hopefully just, you know, still be getting rid of good numbers of people. Wouldn't that be two movies on one screen thinking that um them pulling out is a victory for them, but the administration thinking it's a victory also for them.

Um so it could be it's always that way, isn't it? Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I I think this definitely is a case of that two movies on one screen where both sides are going to claim victory. Um and you know, I think it really is a matter of perspective. I think I could certainly see Tom Hman's point of view that they got rid of a lot of people and they, you know, also got some concessions from Waltz and the rest of the government to cooperate more and to, you know, work with them, but certainly pulling out, you know, means they're not going to have those agents there. And so, um, you know, I could see the other side, too. But I think um it is going to be one of those things where the left thinks they won and the right thinks they won. And

well, they said that the people that are leaving, the agents that are leaving were protecting the pe the the agents that were trying to do their job. So they were actually they were actually protection for ICE that was trying to do their job. So if they don't cooperate and things act up again, they'll just bring them back. But I also feel like they're gonna follow Nick Shirley wherever he goes and he's in California now. So, we'll see what fraud he uncovers and then they'll need a distraction.

Yeah. And uh I'm sure there will be a lot more going on in California on the fraud front as well. I think I had a story later on on that, but um so apparently there's a a CIA video encouraging Chinese officers to inform on the CCP. Um, I'm kind of surprised that they're being so public about what the CIA is doing. Um, but there's this save the future video that is making the rounds on the news and um, I think, you know, in the context of this she has gotten rid of a lot of his military officers um, in some sort of purge. So, there's been a large number of people that have left or been forced to leave. I'm not even sure if they're alive at this point, but um you know, it does seem to be creating some paranoia in the CCP. So, it looks like our CIA is um doing their part to uh encourage Chinese military officers to leak information and um you know, putting out their propaganda.

But it's just, you know, in the past, I always kind of thought the CIA was doing all this stuff secretly and they would try and do it without taking credit for it. But now it seems like they're being kind of very upfront about it and just putting these videos out there. But apparently this one went viral. It had something like 35 million views. So it's getting a lot of getting a lot of play.

And all right, so um let's see. So Venezuela um looks like they are being pretty friendly to us. Uh Chris Wright went down there, our US Secretary of Energy, and um he got the red carpet treatment. They had the US flag out for him, shaking hands. Um I think there was a comment made. It was like the only thing missing was a MAGA hat in the article. Um so it seems like they are being pretty friendly to us. Um so it seems like there is a lot of progress being made there that um they're at least not being hostile to us. Um, apparently that's the highest US official that's been there in 30 years.

Um, he's pushing an oil overhaul and um, they're talking about win-win sort of arrangements. So, it seems like they're making progress there. I think there is a lot of uh, controversy still going on about some of the political prisoners, but they have freed about 431 of them. So, it looks like they're making some progress there, but I think there's still a ways to go to clean everything up there.

So, what do you think that is? like why are they being so agreeable now? What's the threat?

I Well, I think the threat is obvious that if they didn't cooperate, then we'd probably go in and do the same thing to the next leader. I think we certainly demonstrated the capability that we can just take out somebody who isn't cooperative. So, um I would imagine they're they're scared and and they want to stay in power. So, they're trying to play along as best they can, at least for the time being. Um, but, you know, it'll be interesting to see what happens in terms of the next election um, and how the leadership changes hands at that point. But, right now, I think it's that vice president that was working for Maduro. And so, I'm sure a lot of people are thinking it's not really different or it's the same people, but um, it does seem like they're at least trying to do what the US wants them to do in the short term. So to me that's good news but

or not but yeah um it'll be interesting to see you know if if there is any kind of radical change um there is apparently some support coming from students. There was a video that I posted as part of the article of some student that was talking about making big changes there and so it does seem like there's more confidence to speak up from people who were dissident um and anti-hero. So, it does seem like there's some movement in the right direction.

Good. That's good. And Owen's articles are all under his handle on X, Owen Gregorian. So, if you want to read more about it or see the videos, you'll find everything we're talking about today um Owen has posted. So, definitely go there and check check it out for more information.

Okay. So, our next Yeah. So, um I think there was another story with Caitlyn Collins kind of saying something surprising in the sense that um well, what happened there was they were in Saudi Arabia and I think Caitlyn asked one of her outrageous questions again and uh I think there was some comment from Saudi Arabia that maybe she wouldn't be invited back there or that they were going to bar her from the press conferences and the Trump team defended her and said no, she's going to be with us and insisted that she's allowed in. And um so, you know, I I think uh Caitlyn was kind of relaying this story and admitting that the Trump team was defending the free press. And so it's very contrary to a lot of the statements that she and others have made that seem to indicate that Trump was anti- press and trying to shut down free speech. Um, so it was interesting that she called attention to this, that, you know, Trump

is actually defending her right to be at these press conferences and ask her stupid questions.

Not. Yeah. It's interesting you bring it up because Caitlyn Collins um she recently had an interview or there was a clip uh that went viral on X, you probably seen it where she was like we treat Trump fairly in CNN and everyone's like sure you do. So, I mean, they the fact that Trump and the administration defended her says volumes, but we already know um they defend freedom of speech, but Kaitlin saying, "Oh, no, we also treat him fairly. We don't have TDS." So, that's interesting. And there was a story, maybe you're covering it today, that CNN's ratings have gone down even further into the abyss. So, I don't know if you're going to cover that, but

um that was something I posted yesterday, but as I recall, it was that they've lost twothirds of their viewership since 2016. So, yes, they are down in the abyss, and I'm not sure they're ever going to recover. Um, my question on that is just like, how can these stations even stay in business? I it it seems like we keep seeing story after story like this where MSNBC and CNN and especially a lot of these left-leaning stations um are just cratering in the ratings. You know, Fox is by far the leader in any news station and I think they're the only one that might have a positive trend. Um and so it seems like it's just killing these places, you know? I mean, we had I think it was the latest story I saw was half of the reporters from the Washington Post have been let go. And so, it just seems like they are having to renegotiate their contracts with all these supposedly celebrity broadcasters

and they're, you know, cratering the ratings, which means they're not getting all the ad revenue that they used to get. And I just don't know how they even stay in business at this point. And I'm kind of wondering if some of them are going to start disappearing. I think some of them are just funded by nefarious people and um so it kind of doesn't even matter. That's my personal opinion.

Well, I think that was the case on the government side that they used to get a lot of money from the government in one form or another. I think that was certainly true in the COVID years where it seems like a lot of contracts were put out from the Biden administration to essentially pay off the news to say what they wanted him to say about CO. Um, but all that's behind us now and I think anything that was like that is is done now because I think Doge put an end to all that stuff. So any government support is gone. Um I I don't know if we have much information on the NGO side if there are people that are just kind of like keeping these things afloat. Um but you know one example of that might have been the Washington Post where you know he took over and gave him you know infused a bunch of cash to keep him afloat but now even Bezos is saying you know we got to cut this back and he let I think half the people go. So um you

know it doesn't seem like it's able to keep itself sustainable at this point. Yeah, I agree. H All right. Well, you know, listen you guys, if you're hearing this, you you know, like the content here, subscribe, like, hit the thumbs up buttons on whatever platform you're watching because maybe we can overtake CNN. That would be amazing. Let's go. Let's do it. Let's do it for Scott. We could do it.

So, apparently, uh, there was a lawyer that was appointed by a judge, um, a US attorney, and the DOJ fired them immediately. So there was someone named Donald Kinsella that was appointed by a judge um and they DOJ just turned right around and said judges don't pick US attorneys the president does see article 2 you're fired and he posted that on X. So, um, seems like there's an ongoing battle here that if you recall, there was a lot of, um, controversy, I guess, over some of the picks that Trump tried to appoint people and then the judges apparently decided this person wasn't qualified and took him out. I think a lot of the US attorneys right now are in this acting status, which is kind of like a temporary status where they can do the job, but they they can't formally have the title and they can't do it for more than a certain amount of time. Um, but now apparently the judges were appointing people to replace some of

those people and the DOJ is just turning around and firing them. So, seems like this will be a fun thing to watch where um judges are firing judges and then the DOJ is firing judges.

It's kind of fun in the in the regard of Trump's you're fired. Yeah. And I do think there's, you know, some question over like all the consent of the Senate in terms of approving these things. But I think the problem there is all this blue slip stuff. I think we need to get rid of the blue slips where senators from a particular state can just veto any judge they don't like. Um, and I think that's a policy that needs to change. Um, and I know there's a lot of controversy over that, too. But um you know some people are worried that Democrats will do the same thing to to Republican states um when they have power. So it does go both ways. But I think it by and large has been much more one-sided where blue state senators will just block everybody that Trump tries to put in there. So it's a big problem.

How do you think it's going to work itself out, Marcela? the with the judges. Yeah.

Um yeah. No, I agree with the administration. Federal judges have to be appointed. Uh there is some specific judges like bankruptcy court and all that that have different rules, but they're still appointed. Uh um you know, so I don't I I would have to look into the story. Why would a judge appoint someone, you know?

So it could be on a temporary basis. I'm not sure. Um because I I don't see a judge even liberal judge doing that because they could also be removed for what they did.

Yeah. So I don't know if the if we have the entire story, you know, I'm not sure.

All right. But if we do then Yeah. then the administration's correct completely.

Okay. So, we have Judge Booseberg acting up again, ordering the Trump administration to return all the Venezuelan illegals that have been deported. Um, he's asking for a status report by March 13th. U, there was a prior temporary restraining order blocking TDA gang deportations. Um, so if we can impeach a judge, I'd certainly like to start with Boseberg. seems like he just ends up getting getting all these immigration cases and um consistently just being an activist against Trump. So,

how is that allowed to stand especially in New York like that? I I I cannot understand this. I guess it's not a newfound power, but this flex that these judges are so blatant, like they know nothing's going to happen to them, but why is nothing happening to them?

I don't know. I I know there has been talk about impeaching Boseberg, but I think the problem to me is just that impeachment process is really tough to actually do because I think it's similar to impeaching the president where you have to go through the Senate and you might have to get twothirds of the vote and so how would you ever do that when we have like a 50-50 Senate. It just would never happen, right? So, I think the process is broken because it's just too hard to impeach a judge and there's no real policing of it internally.

um at least nothing that's actually working. So, it seems to me like we need some kind of reform over the judicial system to make it easier to get rid of a judge when he's acting outside of his normal guidelines.

Well, I feel especially for people who are not even that you're a Trump voter, but you're not a Democrat or you're just not in line with lawb breaking in this country. I feel like we're in this weird position where you you can't trust judges. You can't trust voting. You might not be able to trust your doctor, you know, because it's like everything's like a team sport now. And it seems like a lot it seems like and I'm sure it's not as many, so I don't want to be overstating it, but it feels like to me a lot of people in these positions are radical. And so, you know, I'm always like, "Oh, well, if I have to go to the hospital or, you know, to a new doctor or something, I want to make sure I don't say anything about the way I think about anything because

I don't I'd get a fair shake." So, if I feel like if I had to go to court, I am sure that I've seen the things that, you know, these criminal leftists have done and they're getting away with, and if we like one tiny little thing of what they've done, we'd be in jail. So, it's really bad to go through life as a free American not trusting any of our systems.

I agree. It's a problem. All right. But I I was just going to add Owen and Erica to make it a more positive outlook. This is how justice works. There's there's leftist judges. There's there's there's centrist judges. There's different type of judges. But guess what? an appeal is going to be made of Boseberg's ruling and up to another court and then that's going to be blocked. So remember how like I think Owen talked about it today. Scott was like I can't keep up with which you know so in the positive side it will be blocked again. So

yeah it just I mean to me this is all about obstruction at this point. That's what Boseberg's doing. I'm sure he knows that his rulings are going to get overturned and he's doing it just to make things harder and to slow things down. And it just seems like something that needs to be fixed. But I, you know, I and I think that I don't know if it was this particular issue, but I think it was something close to this where the Supreme Court already ruled that said the Trump administration can do this stuff and and then Boseberg's continuing to just disregard what the Supreme Court already ruled on and is violating that.

So, it just seems like it's all about obstruction. And it's all about trying to just put roadblocks in the way to keep Trump from being able to do what he's trying to do.

Yeah. But I agree with you. Ultimately, it probably will end up on Trump's side. I think he's won more often than he's lost at the Supreme Court level, but it just takes a lot of time to get there, you know.

All right. All right. Well, we can talk a little bit more about the economy. Um,

yeah, good. Well, I don't know if it's good. Uh, not good, but okay. Good. the so apparently 10% of all student loan borrowers are over 90 days past due on payments. There's a million that defaulted last year in the in the fourth quarter of 2025. Um I think there's been talk about garnishing people's wages and there's, you know, a lot of talk that maybe the Trump administration shouldn't do that just because, you know, we got a midterm coming up and if you start taking people's money, they're not going to vote for you. So, I'm not sure what the right answer is, but it does seem like a lot of student loan borrowers are in in a world of hurt economically speaking and not able to keep up with their loans. So, I don't know what the right answer is, but I suppose from a political standpoint, I would probably say it's better to just leave them alone for a while and not deal with this right now.

What do you think? Um, I think that everybody should consider if you're not in college yet or even if you're in it now, get out and learn a trade and stop giving these crooks your money to be indoctrinated. Also, if you're going to go there and take a loan, you're going to pay for it. That's your choice. Okay? Like, live within your means. You can get an education at a community college. You could also work while you're at community college or again learn a trade. This country needs tradesmen. We don't need more Tik Tockers. We don't need more influencers. We need people that can do things with their hands and their brains. Go be an apprentice for anybody out there that has a small business or even a big business. Learn a skill. Be an essential worker. And um I I'm I'm not paying for anybody's loans.

I pay for my own loans. I find this so offensive. So, I don't have children. I pay so much tax to the school taxes in my town, okay? And I don't have children and I do it and it's whatever. But if you choose to go to college and you choose to take a loan because you can't afford it,

I'm not paying for it. And I I I'm just like so sick of hearing this argument like is someone going to pay my credit card bill? Like, oh, I can't pay my credit card bill. Will you pay it? No. And if you want to have forgiveness on your loans, I could rant about this forever, especially because I don't have kids and I don't have debt and I didn't go to college. So, um, if you want to have that forgiven, go to your college, have them forgive it because they're the ones that are charging way too much and they're enriching themselves and they're the ones that should have to take it on the chin. You know what? Figure it out.

Let the colleges figure it out. Let them get together with their little math department and run some numbers and figure out where they can trim the fat and they can deal with it. This is such a pisses me off issue. Like I I can't And then what? So like, okay, well forgive these people, but hey, all of you people that already paid for it, you're not included. It's just it makes no sense. I'm just sorry guys, but I'm not sorry. I just I'm so sick of this like coddling behavior and oh there's elections and what no you're accountable for your own debt. I'm not. You are.

I'm with you and I have kids and they do have student loans and I still think they need to pay them and you know my older son is out in the workforce now and he is paying off his loans and he'll have them paid off I hope relatively soon. Um my younger son's about to graduate. he's going to have a similar amount of debt. And you know, I I would say like I, you know, my wife and I paid for most of their college on both of my kids. So, they aren't going to have like this massive six-f figureure type of debt that you sometimes hear about because I think that is crippling debt.

And I would never put that on them. But, I did want them to have some skin in the game and to understand that, you know, they have to pay something for this. It's not just all his all the parents. And um you know I probably if they did get behind or couldn't afford it, I might help them. So you know there's a backs stop there, but I still think it is their debt. It's they need to pay it and you know they they're aware that this is happening and

so you know that's just part of the deal. And um I do think it it's a good thing to have some skin in the game, but I think to your point, you shouldn't be signing up for six figures of student loan debt when if you did the math, you would see that this is going to be with you for the rest of your life and you're going to be paying it off and it's going to keep you from being able to buy a house and all sorts of other things. And I think the equation is certainly changing rapidly in terms of what value you get out of a college education. So for a lot of people, I would say your advice of going into a trade probably is much better financially. Um, and there may be other paths even for people who want to do, you know, coding or other stuff. But I I certainly would encourage people to your point to go to a place you can afford, whether that means that you're getting a scholarship or whether

that means, you know, it's a community college that just doesn't cost so much because I think in many cases the education is just as good. And I I would love to see a lot more pressure on these universities to lower their prices. Um because it does seem pretty outrageous to me that massive amounts they're they're outwardly racist and bigoted and they're lining their pockets and the endowments they get and you know it's it's a money laundering scheme in my opinion. But um yeah, so thank you for understanding that. I don't want to pay for your kids' education. And you don't need a college degree, kids, to understand that you're going to be in debt forever. And you're not going to get the job that you think you're going to get in your field. It does not exist.

You're going to end up being a manicurist like everybody else. And you don't even need to go to college. So that's an Erica's advice for you.

I was just gonna I was just going to add a positive note. Um I think the job numbers are um you know again all data is what was it that it's all fake. Um but it went down. Um and then the other thing is that the Dow Jones hit 50,000.

Yeah. No, there there definitely is good news in the economy and and that was another story I was going to mention here at the end was that there's a lot of fake news about it. The media is trying to say that the tariffs are costing Americans $1,000 each, but they're ignoring all the other savings from all those other policies. That, you know, they're not talking about all the no tax on tips or no tax on social security or the car loan deductions or the bigger refunds that people are getting, which is bigger than $1,000 and the fact that inflation is a lot lower now than it has been. And gas prices are down, you know, and so there's all this investment coming in. And to your point, there's a lot of jobs being created. And you know, Vance came out and said in his estimation, households are actually one like $1,200 better off under Trump, but he recognizes there's more work to be done because they're 18 they're still

$1,800 worse off than they were under Biden. So, um, you know, that's that's just a leftover from all the inflation of the Biden years. So, I think there's still a recognition that it's hard on a lot of people, but I think we are actually making it more affordable for people and it's just going to take more time to get back to where it needs to be.

Um, I want to quickly ask Sergio, do you have an opinion on this topic too before we come to an end?

Oh, um, yes. Um, what was this topic again? Because, uh, no, no, I got it. Um, when it comes to to I I didn't hear the topic. I was on doubt. Sorry. It was it was the tariffs and how the media is reporting that it's costing families a thousand dollars, but they're ignoring all the plus sides of all the Trump policies and that really inflation's down, there's no tax on tips, they're getting bigger tax refunds, all the other things. So, it was kind of the fake news story around that. So, so the thing the overall story here is that uh if we're going to overcome um debt, which is like the one thing that everybody thinks that is going to be what is going to kill us at the end, um the only thing that is going to overcome that is going to be growth. And when Trump says that we can do a 15% uh growth GDP, everybody says like that's impossible. That's uh unprecedented.

Nobody can do that. Um well Trump is the guy that has been able to do all the things that nobody has ever done. So it's time to re-evaluate all our assumptions uh previous assumptions about every president ever and what they can do. Um and uh and the left has a great imagination but they don't have an imagination enough to see what Trump is can can do. So I think slowly we're getting more recruits into the side of I'm going to say the right but the common sense and um people like um Collins uh from CNN um praising the administration uh for sticking up for them in in Saudi Arabia and all those things. All those personal stories they accumulate and accumulate and accumulate and all those reporters are feeling the the warmth of capitalism instead of uh the coldness of socialism.

So yeah, I think that is uh it's going to be great and uh you know some uh I got my Trump right here. Let's see what he has to say.

And then I tweeted you have many millions between Facebook and Twitter. It's great. It's like owning a newspaper without the losses. It's incredible.

Okay, so yeah, the newspaper is dying. You know, that was random, by the way. So, the newspaper, the Washington Post is dying right now. And uh and thank God for, you know, those are the first guys that took out Scott and uh and I celebrate the their defeat. So,

okay. So, um you guys, it's been um one month. It's been one month without Scott. Uh wait, just in case I have my tissues here. Okay. So, you know, we we cannot thank you enough for sticking by our side, especially in this last month. It's been a trying time for all of us and um we feel the love from you and the feedback we've been getting has been great and um you know, we plan to go forward and you know, reshape some things and add some things. We have um lots of plans for Scott's Locals channel coming up and we just want to say that we miss him immensely.

His wisdom, we know it's hard when the news is hard and we don't know how to dissect it. You know, it's like just ask Scott and we can't. So, I'm, you know, saying to myself, what would Scott say? What would Scott say all the time? But I I usually am always like, "Okay, Scott, like what do I need to know about this?" Like, "Send me the answer to send my brain in the right direction." So, you know, we miss you, Scott, and we love you. We honor him and his wishes by continuing here on his channel. Um, not creating an AI version of him like he did not want that to happen or his likeness or anything about him. And I appreciate you guys for defending those wishes of his along with us and um sticking together as a family and a group and um you know we're listening.

So, you know, definitely you can send us feedback and, you know, give us your opinion on things, but just know that we are striving every day to make this better experience for you and to do it in the way Scott wanted. And um, you know, please keep showing up for us like Scott showed up for us and we will keep showing up for you. And um I just wanted to say thank you and we love you. And Shellyley has been amazing um keeping this going for us. And she's in her own grief and then she also has so much on her plate as you guys could imagine sorting out everything after Scott left us. So um please you know allow grace for everybody. It's very fresh and Scott was a a a personality that only we could really truly understand. You know, I think we all get it and I love that you guys are going to the Scott Adams meetups. I think it's really important to be able to talk to other people that love and understand

Scott. Like we get it, like we all get it. So, keep doing that. Keep talking about him. Keep sharing his lessons and his stories. And um you know, we'll we'll just keep communing here together in Scott's honor and Scott's memory, but um always out of love for him. Okay, so you guys, we'll do a final sip to our beloved Scott and to Shelly. Shelly is a saint. I see you, Annie. She's amazing. She's an amazing amazing human. Um she's in communication with us. I talk to her every day and she has a big heart and she's um a very unique person. I mean to say like you know your ex-wife is your best friend, your ex-husband is your best friend. I mean that's that's pretty remarkable an example. So all right you guys I love you. I love you guys. And um we have Owen coming on tomorrow with Sergio and SJV and uh they will be on spaces at 7 Western and 10 Eastern, same time as Scott would be and you guys can

participate in there and chat it out with them all about the news and all fun stuff. And then Owen might also have a subscriber only spaces on Sunday. So you know, please consider subscribing to Owen's channel. He brings a great service to all of us and we appreciate it a lot. All right, Sergio, Marcela, Owen, I love you guys. Shelley, we love you. And a final sip to um you guys in honor of Scott. To Scott.

To Scott. See you.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "Episode 3094 - The Scott Adams School 02/13/26"?

Scott Adams (Guest), Erica (Guest), Marcela Gregorian (Guest), Sergio (Guest), Owen Gregorian (Guest), Brian Romeli (Guest).

What is "Episode 3094 - The Scott Adams School 02/13/26" about?

The main topic discusses the logistical challenges and platform interactions experienced during the live broadcast of "The Scott Adams School," while emphasizing the community aspect and ongoing content available through Scott Adams' various channels, including YouTube and Locals. The hosts also highlight upcoming interviews and the supportive environment fostered among their audience members.

What is mentioned in this Real Coffee with Scott Adams episode?

17 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Scott Adams, Owen Gregorian, Marcela Gregorian, 7-Eleven, Venezuela, Brian Romeli. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "Episode 3094 - The Scott Adams School 02/13/26"?

The episode runs 1 h 8 min; the transcript is about 12,288 words in 139 timestamped sections.

More from Real Coffee with Scott Adams

About this transcript: the episode's spoken words as captioned on YouTube, split into timestamped sections. Reclip.Me locates every person, work and idea in the text, keeps the time it is first named, and quotes the words around it verbatim. Last updated February 15, 2026.