Episode 1047 Scott Adams： That ＂Dark＂ Speech at Mt. Rushmore That Looked Unifying to You
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 2 minutes
Words per Minute
155.98015
Summary
A coronavirus outbreak that could have killed 120,000 people in the United States, and a new drug that could cut the death toll in half. Plus, how many people died because the news treated it like poison because President Trump was promoting it?
Transcript
00:00:00.820
Bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum
00:00:09.160
hey everybody. Come on in. Come on in. We've got things to talk about. Yeah. Is today the
00:00:18.380
4th of July? Oh yeah it is. Happy 4th of July. Do you know the last time I knew what day
00:00:27.140
of the week it was or what time of the month it was? It was a long time ago. Or as I said
00:00:34.040
to Christina just yesterday, can you remind me when we're supposed to get married? I have
00:00:41.680
this calendar problem. It's a lifelong problem. But anyway, I know why you're here. Yep. Yep.
00:00:49.420
It's for all the fun and the simultaneous sip. And all you need is a cup or mug or a
00:00:54.940
glass of tank or chalice or sign a canteen jug or flask a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your
00:01:00.340
favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine
00:01:07.500
of the day, the thing that makes everything including the coronavirus better. It's called
00:01:12.800
the simultaneous sip. It happens now. Go. Here's a question for you just to blow your
00:01:25.620
mind. You want your mind blown? Have you noticed that it seems like when there's one crisis in
00:01:35.120
the news and that's the focus of the news, all the other problems go away. You notice
00:01:40.680
that? Do you see a lot of people complaining about climate change? Not so much. And that's
00:01:49.100
a little lesson for you on how subjective your experience is. Because if we did not have a
00:01:55.920
coronavirus and we did not have whatever the protests are about, we would have the same amount
00:02:03.840
of fear about something else. Your fear would just be transported into a new vehicle. And
00:02:11.800
you know, we had this fresh new fear. Ah, coronavirus. We don't have to talk about climate change for a
00:02:17.240
while. But climate change will be back. It will be the most important thing in the world again
00:02:22.400
someday, as soon as we get past this. All right, let's check to see how our prediction and
00:02:30.560
suggestion records look. In the beginning of the coronavirus, who told you that maybe we should
00:02:38.440
move the restaurants outside into the streets for the summer? Probably me. And you see restaurants
00:02:45.420
all over the country moving into the streets and outside. Who told you that it would be great
00:02:51.360
to have outdoor movie theaters again? Probably I'm the first person who told you that. And now
00:02:57.880
Walmart is transforming 160 of its parking lots into summer outdoor movie theaters. Yay.
00:03:09.260
Who was, you know that I told you to close travel before a week before the president did from China. You
00:03:17.100
know that I told you the experts were lying to you about masks the first time I heard it. But here's
00:03:24.820
some more. Remember I told you that hydroxychloroquine, whether it worked or not, was a good risk management
00:03:32.800
decision. That still looks like it's right. I would say this latest study out of Detroit, the one that's
00:03:41.120
on the news that says it's that hydroxychloroquine works, I would say it's a little early for that.
00:03:47.460
If you're relying on that study to say, well, it's over now, it looks like it works. That's too early.
00:03:56.440
The odds of that study being debunked in the future, probably over 75%. So whether or not
00:04:05.540
hydroxychloroquine works or does not work, this latest study that says it works will almost certainly be
00:04:12.720
debunked. But that doesn't tell you whether it works or not. That's the world we're in. But in
00:04:19.900
terms of a risk management decision, I think it already looks like it was strong, because I doubt
00:04:26.960
it's hurting anybody. Here's a question that was asked, how many people died because the news
00:04:35.300
news treated hydroxychloroquine like poison because President Trump was promoting it? Think
00:04:42.640
about that. You might actually be able to do the math and figure out how many people were
00:04:46.940
killed by the illegitimate news business. Right? You could actually do the math. Now your
00:04:54.900
estimate would be subject to lots of uncertainty, but let me put a number on it. If it's true
00:05:01.800
this latest study is true that it cut the mortality rate in half, which would be a big claim, I'm
00:05:08.200
not sure that that will stand up over time. But let's say it did. This is the way the news
00:05:13.380
would report the story. If this were reversed, and President Trump is the only one who is saying
00:05:19.880
don't use it, and the mainstream media had been saying yes, use it, it's worth the risk. If this
00:05:25.800
had been reversed, the story would be this. If the president had gone the other way, we might have
00:05:32.140
saved 20,000 American lives. Right? Because, you know, over 100 and what, 120,000 people have died
00:05:41.980
in the United States from coronavirus. If you could cut that in half, now it wouldn't get to every
00:05:47.680
person, obviously. There's a supply problem and blah, blah, blah. So you wouldn't necessarily get to
00:05:53.460
use the medication on everybody. So it's not like you'd cut the entire death rate in half.
00:05:59.420
But let's say it would have made a difference. We're talking about 20,000 people that were killed
00:06:05.260
by the news. Think about it. Think about the fact that if the hydroxychloroquine study holds up,
00:06:14.220
and again, I would say that's probably not going to happen. But let's say that hydroxychloroquine
00:06:19.800
does turn out to be good and useful. That's all we'd be talking about. We wouldn't be talking about
00:06:29.140
anything except how the president had killed 20,000 people with bad advice. But he's probably
00:06:38.700
saved, you know, 20,000 people if they took it, and otherwise they might not have. Whereas the news may
00:06:45.600
have killed 20,000 people. But you won't see that in the news because the news, the news does not
00:06:51.860
indict the news. So it's a deep little situation. The only thing better would be a doctor. Because if
00:07:00.120
you're a doctor and you make a mistake, you could just bury it. Right? You know, it's like, well,
00:07:05.560
I'll just bury this mistake. But if you're the news, you can kill 20,000 people with intentional
00:07:11.060
fake news, and just don't report it. You just don't report it. It's like it didn't happen.
00:07:18.160
That's convenient. So what else did I get right at the very beginning? What was one of the first
00:07:25.680
things I told you? That's right, vitamin D. Do you remember that I told you at the very beginning,
00:07:32.480
make sure you get some sun and vitamin D because it's going to make a difference. That was a generic
00:07:36.960
statement based on the fact that vitamin D is just generally good for you in your immune system.
00:07:42.040
But did I not also, before you heard it anywhere, say, it looks to me that there's this weird
00:07:50.500
correlation, which I just noticed in the wild. I was just looking at the situation and said,
00:07:56.060
what is it about this group of people that are susceptible? And so I started googling,
00:08:01.060
because I had a hypothesis. And it was that. So I said to myself first, African American people seem
00:08:09.480
to be getting coronavirus worse. Google African American vitamin D. Yep, they get less of it.
00:08:16.860
For obvious reasons, their skin color makes it a little harder to absorb. So I think that's the
00:08:22.840
reason. I actually don't know if that's the reason, but it would be one of them.
00:08:26.820
And then I said, huh, what about the countries that are doing worse? And I googled it. And what
00:08:33.340
about people who have diabetes? And I googled it. And basically, the correlation really held.
00:08:38.440
So today, there's a report that there was a study that found out that vitamin D is very highly
00:08:45.040
correlated with the death rate of coronavirus. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that if you boosted
00:08:53.080
your vitamin D, you'd do better. But all common sense says yes. So again, the correlation looks
00:09:00.320
really strong, based on this one study, which could be wrong tomorrow, when there's another study. But
00:09:07.100
looks like I was right about that, too. So if you're keeping score, if you had done everything that the
00:09:15.020
idiot cartoonist told you to do about your health, you would be way ahead of what the news told you,
00:09:22.040
what the experts told you, and all of your doctors. That's just a fact. Sorry. You know, I can't,
00:09:30.540
I'm not going to tell you that I could do this. The next time there's a, the next time there's a
00:09:35.920
crisis, that doesn't mean that I'm going to be right every single time again. But it's starting to
00:09:42.460
look like a pattern, doesn't it? If you would trust in me on most things, you're, you know,
00:09:48.780
you wouldn't be right every time, of course, but you'd be way ahead. Does anybody know what the net
00:09:57.280
deaths are for this year? So one of the things I predicted, which I think I'm going to be wrong
00:10:04.180
about, but maybe not. I don't know. I want to see the numbers. It doesn't seem to you that the number
00:10:10.600
net deaths in the United States is being suppressed because you know that the protests are being
00:10:17.480
suppressed, right? So the news is no longer showing the news. The news is becoming a decision maker for
00:10:24.160
what you can see. That's, it's sort of turned into that. So we don't see the protests because
00:10:30.840
obviously they're trying to reduce the impact of the protests. So the news is not so much reporting it
00:10:38.040
as making the news. They're creating the situation by actively trying to suppress the protests just by
00:10:45.120
not covering them. But likewise, it seems to me that the number of net deaths for this part of the year
00:10:53.720
would be the most prominent thing you would see, right? Don't you think you should be seeing just
00:10:59.180
about every day on the news? If this were a normal year, here's how many deaths we would have on average,
00:11:05.120
this many per month. But because it was a coronavirus year, the number is 20,000 a week
00:11:11.520
higher than normal or something or whatever the number is. Ask yourself why you don't see that number
00:11:20.340
every day. Ask yourself why you don't see that number every day. It's because we were being
00:11:28.260
manipulated. So whoever makes these decisions, I don't think it's like one person who's deciding
00:11:34.640
the whole news cycle. But the people who decide what you see have decided that you shouldn't see
00:11:40.640
that. Yes, I may be using the wrong term. Somebody in the comments is saying, do excess deaths,
00:11:48.920
not net deaths. That's probably the better term. So excess deaths, meaning compared to the normal
00:11:55.740
baseline, how many people died that you would not have expected in a normal year. And then you assume
00:12:01.640
that most of them are coronavirus, but not necessarily. Yeah, so you do see the number of
00:12:07.220
deaths total for coronavirus, but you don't see excess deaths every day. Is that because it's high
00:12:16.480
or because it's low? Ask yourself this. Why don't you know the most important question in the country
00:12:24.520
or the world, really? What's the most important question in the world? Are excess deaths more or
00:12:32.500
less than there would be? Is there any excess deaths at all, I guess? You don't even know. You don't even
00:12:39.920
know. It's the most important number in the world. Does anybody know? Of course. It's a gatherable
00:12:46.420
number, obviously. What's up with that? Every time you see something like that that's now reported,
00:12:52.660
you have to ask yourself, is that a decision? Did somebody say, we don't want people to know this?
00:12:59.980
Maybe. Don't know. So Trump gave a speech last night. Probably you heard.
00:13:08.160
And the first thing I did was I tried to watch the speech without the benefit of any commentary.
00:13:14.500
So I like to watch it and say to myself, all right, what are the, what is this base going to think of
00:13:19.520
it? And then I try to put myself in the other head to say, okay, what is, what is the other team
00:13:25.540
going to think of this? Now, the other team is easy. You just say, oh, they're going to take stuff
00:13:30.840
out of context and say it's dark and evil and racist, right? Kind of easy. You didn't have to
00:13:36.300
actually hear the speech to know what the criticism would be. Am I right? You did not need to hear the
00:13:42.720
speech to write any of the criticisms that appear today. Look at the criticisms. You tell me that
00:13:49.960
you could not have written all of the criticisms before he gave the speech because they're sort of
00:13:54.840
generic. Two pundits have so far used the word dark. I wrote about this in Winn Bigley and I talked
00:14:03.920
about it in the 2016 cycle that there was a persuader who I speculated was Robert Cialdini
00:14:12.440
himself, the greatest persuader or expert who wrote the book Influence and Persuasion. So he would be
00:14:19.080
considered sort of the gold standard for influencers. And when everybody on the Democrat side in 2016
00:14:28.500
started using the word dark about Trump's speech at the convention, I said, there it is. That's the
00:14:34.200
mark. That word dark does not come from normal political people. This looks like an outside advisor
00:14:40.820
because that's a weapons-grade persuasion that you just don't see from the regular political advisors.
00:14:48.680
And it turns out that Cialdini refused to, he had a no comment when asked if it was him.
00:14:55.340
No, but nobody would no comment on that unless it was actually them. All right. Who in the world
00:15:01.560
would, if you said, did you give this specific piece of advice to the president? Who in the world
00:15:06.420
would say, no comment? You would only say that if he did. If he didn't, you'd say, no, that wasn't me.
00:15:14.240
Right. Because why would you, you know, unless you were just like the worst liar in the world or
00:15:18.720
something? All right. So we think that dark was probably given to the Democrats back in 2016.
00:15:28.360
I've only seen it twice this year. Looks like they're trotting it out to see if it'll,
00:15:32.760
it'll work, but I don't know. It doesn't seem to have any purchase yet. So what I picked out was
00:15:39.980
that Trump used the phrase bad, evil people to talk about the ones who are causing trouble and
00:15:45.980
taking down statues that were, you know, not even Confederate statues, et cetera. And I said,
00:15:52.860
ah, there it is. That's the quote that CNN will take in the context.
00:15:55.940
And sure enough, was it Mary, Mary Ann Williamson. So she was the first one to take it down in
00:16:08.060
context and say this. He is in her tweet, she said about the president's speech, he is positing
00:16:15.200
all those who don't agree with him as evil people who are enemies of America. Nothing like that
00:16:21.880
happened. If you watch the speech, the president's words were extremely clear. We're all, we're all
00:16:30.460
Americans unifying. We're all Americans. And there were these, some troublemakers were knocking down
00:16:37.580
statues and he's condemning them. The exact opposite of what Mary Ann Williams has says is that he's
00:16:45.100
positing that all those who don't agree with him are evil people. Not even close to anything like
00:16:52.040
that happened in the speech. Nothing close to that. Literally the direct opposite of this. But if
00:16:58.400
somebody didn't see the speech, what would they think? If you hadn't seen the speech, you'd think,
00:17:04.960
well, you know, maybe, maybe he said something like that. No, he said exactly the opposite of that.
00:17:11.200
Okay. Here's what, so here's the other thing I was looking for. I was looking for whether the
00:17:20.020
president hit a nerve. In other words, everything is a giant test of, how about this message? How
00:17:27.600
about this statement? How about the way I framed this? Everything in the campaign is a continuous
00:17:33.040
test to see if you got the right message that hit a nerve. And sometimes you can't tell if you hit a
00:17:39.740
nerve unless you see the reaction of the people you're trying to move. And let me, let me read
00:17:46.460
this reaction to you from Aaron Rupar, who is a notable anti-Trumper. So this was his comment about
00:17:56.020
Trump's speech. He said, Trump offers some remarkably overheated rhetoric. Interesting. All right. So the
00:18:04.180
first thing you should note is that Rupar is calling the president's rhetoric overheated.
00:18:10.160
All right. Just hold that thought. And he said, and he's quoting the president
00:18:16.740
saying, the president said, there is a new far left fascism that demands absolute allegiance.
00:18:25.360
This left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American revolution.
00:18:29.860
All right. So Rupar is pointing out that this is overheated rhetoric. And of the things he wanted to
00:18:36.440
point out for a criticism, he wanted to point out that this was going too far to say that the left
00:18:43.960
was trying to demand absolute allegiance and that they were trying to overthrow the American revolution.
00:18:51.600
Here's what I think. I think that hit a nerve. I, you know, all of this is very subjective, but I'm going
00:19:01.600
to tell you that based on all of my lifetime of experience with persuasion, I think Aaron Rupar is
00:19:08.920
telling us directly, please don't do more of this. That's what it feels like. It feels like it's true
00:19:17.720
enough that Aaron Rupar is trying to brush it back and say, uh, no, this is bad. Uh, better not say
00:19:25.200
that anymore. It feels like he knows that a nerve has been hit. Now, of course, there's a big difference
00:19:32.840
between saying there are some troublemakers versus saying it's all the Democrats. They're all
00:19:37.860
troublemakers. There's a difference. But if the Democrats are sort of supporting the team that are the
00:19:43.880
small group of troublemakers, you can sell the argument pretty well. You can sell the argument
00:19:50.260
that they're all the same on the left, as long as the left won't condemn them and does support them
00:19:56.860
in other actions. Would you say that the left does support the small group of people who are taking down
00:20:04.640
statues and, and whatever, do they support them? Do they even support the looters? Yeah, they do.
00:20:12.440
They even support the looters by being very vocal about not wanting force being used, you know, to
00:20:20.040
being the anti-police in a sense. I think that Trump hit a nerve. Now, I'm going to tell you some
00:20:27.760
things that I don't think he did right in a moment. But on this one, because remember, everything's an
00:20:33.140
A-B test. You're not trying to hit winners. You're not trying to hit home runs every time. You're trying
00:20:38.220
to get that one that goes beep, beep, beep. This is the one. This is the one. And I think Aaron
00:20:45.220
Rupar, who reads the room well, in other words, he understands his, you know, his side of things and
00:20:51.660
is involved in politics. So I would say that his censor is probably pretty well tuned. You know,
00:21:00.400
that's not to say I agree with what he says. I'm just saying that he's sensitive to the situation.
00:21:05.320
He can read the room. And I think he's afraid of this attack, because I feel like he thinks it's
00:21:11.460
too close. So did you notice that something seemed to happen in the last 48 hours?
00:21:17.880
When the president basically, I forget his exact term for Black Lives Matter, but he basically said it
00:21:26.480
was a, you know, violent hate group or something. I think he said a hate group. You saw that I tweeted
00:21:32.300
that Black Lives Matter is a violent racist group. I got 10,000 retweets. I got 10,000 retweets
00:21:44.020
from people, not all of them, not all of them were anonymous, right? So Twitter isn't just
00:21:50.500
anonymous people. I got 10,000 retweets calling Black Lives Matter a violent racist group. Do you
00:21:57.720
know how many retweets I get on a normal retweet that does pretty well? A thousand? It was about
00:22:04.940
probably five to 10 times bigger response on something that you wouldn't expect people to
00:22:11.120
even stick their head above the foxhole on. I mean, I thought I would, you know, had a good
00:22:15.440
chance of getting canceled just for tweeting it, right? It was controversial enough that I thought I
00:22:21.660
might, you know, might be the end of my career the day I tweeted it. And 10,000 people retweeted that.
00:22:29.540
All right. So it is obvious now that this attack is hitting a nerve. I think that the left
00:22:37.120
understands they went too far. And I think they know that they overshot the mark. And I think they
00:22:43.960
know that their brand is now lawlessness and support for the complete destruction of the United
00:22:51.240
States. Now, is that overheated rhetoric for me to say that the left wants the complete destruction of
00:23:00.560
the United States? Well, actually not. That's the problem. The problem is that it's not overheated
00:23:08.380
rhetoric. Because Black Lives Matter, and their supporters and Antifa especially, they say directly
00:23:15.000
they want to dismantle the entire system. You can't tweak the patriarchy. It's not a tweak fix.
00:23:22.940
It's a dismantle. And they use the words. Now, if Black Lives Matter uses the words,
00:23:28.440
dismantle the system, and they have demonized white people quite directly as the racist and white
00:23:36.940
supremacist and slave owners, is it too far to say that they would seek retribution the moment that
00:23:42.820
they felt safe in doing it and hunting down people like me? Did you see what happened when I said in
00:23:49.520
public that Trump supporters might be hunted down and you could be dead in a year if Biden wins?
00:23:58.440
It wasn't because Biden and regular Democrats were going to hunt down anybody. I'm not suggesting
00:24:04.320
that an ordinary middle-of-the-road Democrat is going to look for revenge against Republicans or
00:24:11.380
anything. No, no. All they have to do is give cover for the groups that will, which they're doing quite
00:24:20.240
plainly right now. You don't have to wonder if most Democrats will give cover for the few Democrats
00:24:27.980
who are causing the trouble because we're watching it. It's happening right in front of you. You don't
00:24:31.760
have to wonder how that would play out. Of course they would. Would they do everything that they could
00:24:37.020
do to protect Trump voters in a Biden administration? No. No, there's no indication that they would lift a
00:24:46.180
finger to protect anybody who wasn't their own team. There's nothing that would indicate that's the
00:24:51.440
case. You've never heard one bit of rhetoric from the left that they would protect Trump voters. Have
00:24:58.400
you? Have you ever heard one person on the left say, if I'm president, or even just the way I think
00:25:04.760
things should be, is that people should leave Trump voters alone? Have you heard anybody say it?
00:25:12.880
Anybody? One time? A celebrity? Politician in the House? Senate? Candidate for president? Have you heard
00:25:23.440
anybody on the left, or even in the news, say, you know, people, we should not demonize regular Trump
00:25:30.940
voters? They just have a preference that's different from yours. Have you ever heard it? Not once. That is
00:25:38.480
approval. There's no way that could be interpreted anything but approval. So it's silent approval, but
00:25:45.900
approval nonetheless. So here's what I think happened. The moment that the president and people like me, you
00:25:54.040
know, less impact in my case, the moment that the president was willing to say in public, directly,
00:26:00.240
that Black Lives Matter is a hate organization, and we're not going to, we're going to put them in jail
00:26:06.880
for knocking down our statues. Ten-year prison sentence for knocking down, I guess, maybe a federal
00:26:12.220
statue. I think that the left realized they overplayed the hand. I don't think the left understood
00:26:20.360
that people on the right are legitimately afraid because they've said it directly. They want to dismantle
00:26:27.200
the country. If you want to dismantle the country, you are saying, I want to destroy everything. Now
00:26:34.020
normally, normally in a situation like this, I would say, no, no, no, they don't want to destroy
00:26:39.140
everything. They just want a different system, you know, transition to something that works better.
00:26:44.240
That's not what's happening. The, the loudest voices in the Black Lives Matter don't want to
00:26:49.980
transition anything. They just want to blow it up. There's no new plan. There's no plan.
00:26:58.580
Tell me if you've seen one. Has somebody drawn up the, the way the government will look without all
00:27:03.980
the systemic racism? Have you seen that blueprint? There is none. They only have a, they only have a
00:27:10.940
plan for destruction. That's explicit. It's not an interpretation. To prove me wrong, you just have
00:27:18.100
to show me their plan for what it should look like when they're done. If you can show me the plan of
00:27:23.380
what it looks like when they're done. Yeah, this is, this is the world we're trying to build. It
00:27:27.340
would look a little bit more like this. If that exists, well, then I'm certainly wrong, but it
00:27:33.600
doesn't, it doesn't exist. And it won't exist because they're not, they're not in the building
00:27:38.460
business. They're in the destruction business. So here's what I think happened. I think that the
00:27:46.200
Democrats realized they overplayed their hand and they're trying to walk it back without looking
00:27:52.220
like they're walking it back. So the more that any of you are willing to say that Black Lives
00:27:57.840
Matter is a violent, racist organization with lots of people who have good intentions. So when I talk
00:28:05.080
about Black Lives Matter, it's a very diverse group, which is the good news, right? The one good news
00:28:12.920
about anything is that if you can get any diversity to agree on anything, you know, maybe that's good
00:28:19.940
unless you're leading a revolution that you don't understand, which would be bad. So lots of people
00:28:25.160
within the movement are just well-meaning people who got caught up in something they didn't quite know
00:28:30.300
what they were getting into. How many people who are supporting and marching with Black Lives Matter
00:28:35.420
understand that their entire way of life in the United States would surely be destroyed
00:28:41.940
if Black Lives Matter got what it wanted? How many of the protesters understand that?
00:28:49.940
Now, I've said it before. This is the one, there's one group in the country, maybe the world, that you can
00:28:57.320
criticize and nobody can fault you for it. Like you can't make fun of people for their appearance,
00:29:03.200
their ethnicity, their gender, and I don't suggest that you do. You know, I'm happy that those things are
00:29:10.400
largely off the table. But there's one group that we can all mock mercilessly, and I hope you'll join
00:29:17.280
me in it. It's young people. And the reason you can mock young people is because either you are one,
00:29:24.980
I mean, there are only two conditions if you're alive. You either are a young person,
00:29:29.680
or you used to be one. So you do have a right to mock young people, because it's you. You used to be
00:29:38.240
one. You know how smart you were when you were 20. And you know how smart you were when you're 40,
00:29:44.100
if you're 40 or over. And it's not very close. It might, it might feel like it's, it should be close
00:29:52.280
when you're 20. When you're 20, you're pretty sure you've got the context now. You're like,
00:29:58.140
all right, I'm as smart as I'll ever be IQ wise, which might actually be true. But you don't know
00:30:03.980
very much about context and framing and how much you've been manipulated and how you've been
00:30:09.500
brainwashed your entire life. And it might take you another 10 years to figure it out.
00:30:14.140
So we have a revolution that's being led by, and I say this with love,
00:30:18.960
our dumbest citizens on average. Dumbest meaning young. All right, there's no ethnicity in what I'm
00:30:25.800
saying. I'm only talking about young is always less informed than more experienced. It's just a
00:30:33.500
fact of life. So here we have a group of people who are leading this thing. They went way too far.
00:30:40.900
They have convinced the people on the right that they mean it. Let me ask you this. Do you think
00:30:48.880
there are any people on the right who are preparing to leave the country because they think it's all
00:30:53.840
going to, that society itself will be ripped apart? Yes, there are people on the right who are smart
00:31:02.060
and they're not crazy people whatsoever who are planning to leave the country because they think
00:31:08.660
that the left will actually become a violent mob that will destroy whatever is here. And there's
00:31:14.720
nothing that can stop it. Now, I don't think that's the case. I'm not in that camp. But the left has
00:31:21.000
gone so far that people are considering moving out of the country. And I'm not talking about the people
00:31:26.600
who said, if Donald Trump is elected, I'll move to Canada. None of that was serious. I'm talking about
00:31:32.560
people who are actually making plans to get theirself the fuck out of this country because the Black Lives
00:31:38.460
Matter people and the protesters and Antifa appear to be unstoppable if nobody's willing to stop them.
00:31:45.640
And there doesn't seem to be a willingness to stop them. Now, I don't agree with that. I think things
00:31:50.880
will far more likely just revert to something close to normal in a few months. In my opinion,
00:31:57.560
the only reason any of this is happening is a weird coincidence. And the weird coincidence is that
00:32:04.300
coronavirus made it necessary to wear masks at the same time that people wanted to protest.
00:32:11.280
And wouldn't it be convenient if you could wear a mask? All right. So if we did not have this weird
00:32:17.020
mask coincidence, which is the weirdest coincidence, you have to wear a mask. And by the way,
00:32:23.480
you might be protesting. Wouldn't that be convenient? So it is by its nature something that would not be a
00:32:31.720
long-term problem if we can contain it, which I think we will, which is why the news is now actively
00:32:37.180
managing the protests to decrease them. Let me ask you this. If the people who ran the mainstream news,
00:32:43.920
which of course is corrupt and nothing like news anymore, it's just fake news. It's just straight
00:32:49.240
up propaganda. If the propagandists who do what looks like news, if they thought that the showing the
00:32:57.060
protests were good for their side, wouldn't you see a lot more of it? Have you noticed that they
00:33:04.520
stopped coverage of the protests? And doesn't your common sense say, if these protests were bad for
00:33:12.660
Trump, I think we'd see a lot more of them, just a lot more footage and stuff. So you're definitely
00:33:20.080
being manipulated by the news. All right. If you didn't know that, here's a really good mind spinner.
00:33:30.640
So Ghislaine Maxwell, the co-conspirator with Epstein, as you know, got picked up. And Alan Dershowitz wrote
00:33:41.360
a fascinating article about that situation. Now, of course, he used the situation to defend himself
00:33:48.320
against allegations that he was with some young woman. And if you've ever seen one of the top
00:33:56.540
lawyers of all time defend himself, it's really worth looking at. It's worth looking at just to
00:34:04.960
see how well he makes his argument. It's just every time I read Dershowitz, I just go, oh, wow,
00:34:10.500
that was really well done. Even if you don't like his point of view, you end up going, okay,
00:34:15.980
that's really skillful. And he did it again. So he writes this article, in which he is noting that
00:34:22.720
a lot of the people who have testified, the young women who have these horrific stories of things
00:34:28.640
that happened with Epstein and on the island, Dershowitz very persuasively points out that
00:34:35.980
they have been, what would you say, discovered to be liars at the highest level. In other words,
00:34:44.400
we know they made up stories about other people being on the island, because you can check the
00:34:50.580
record and you can know for sure that they weren't there when these witnesses were claiming it was
00:34:56.240
all happening. So Dershowitz's explanation of the witnesses being completely unreliable. I mean,
00:35:04.880
as unreliable as anything could be. Let me tell you how unreliable it would be. Imagine if you had a
00:35:10.940
person who claimed he saw a murder on his front lawn. Well, the first time it happened, you'd say,
00:35:19.640
well, we don't see any signs of a murder, but we're going to treat this seriously because you
00:35:23.720
reported a murder. And then in the end, they say, all right, it looks like nobody got murdered on your
00:35:28.580
lawn. And then you call the police the next week and you say, another person got murdered on my lawn.
00:35:33.520
Well, maybe you take it seriously. You say, that sounds a little familiar, but we'll check it out.
00:35:41.520
And again, nobody got murdered on the lawn. Playback the video. It's obvious there was nothing
00:35:47.420
happening on the lawn. The third time you call and say somebody just got murdered on my front lawn,
00:35:53.900
what do the police say? They say, well, maybe work it out yourself, right? So if you've been caught in
00:36:01.160
an exact lie of the type that is on the table, that is the lowest level of credibility you can
00:36:08.900
have. You're not just somebody who in some general way is undependable. You're someone who is
00:36:14.540
specifically undependable on this exact question. And it's been proven. That's the lowest level of
00:36:22.360
credibility you could actually have. You can't get lower. You lie on this exact question. And we know
00:36:28.880
it. It's proven. So Dershowitz makes the case that the witnesses that sound, when you see them
00:36:35.080
at a context, and by the way, I watched the Epstein movie on Netflix, which threw Dershowitz under the
00:36:43.580
bus pretty hard with allegations against him in that film. And Dershowitz tells the story of giving them
00:36:52.120
all of the background information that was exculpatory. Some of the same stuff he mentions in the
00:36:58.000
article. He gave it to Netflix, a complete defense that, in my opinion, is actually really strong.
00:37:05.020
I mean, really strong. I wasn't there. I don't know what happened. I'll never know what happened.
00:37:10.440
But I'm just looking at the defense based on real facts that could be checked. Facts you could check
00:37:16.940
yourself. He gave to Netflix, and they didn't put it in the film. They didn't put it in the film.
00:37:24.000
Think about that. They threw Alan Dershowitz under the bus, accused him of being a sex criminal.
00:37:32.940
And the accusers have a record, according to Dershowitz, of being liars on this exact thing,
00:37:40.660
accusing other people that we know for sure weren't there. How do you not include that?
00:37:46.240
How do you not include that? Really? What kind of world are you living in where the exculpatory
00:37:53.720
information they just ignore, like it wasn't there? So the level of evil that requires is just
00:38:00.980
mind-boggling. But anyway, I don't think that Ghislaine Maxwell is innocent by any means. But when you
00:38:08.960
see Dershowitz set it up, say, well, basically his argument is this, that he's not saying anything
00:38:15.500
about Maxwell because he doesn't know. So he's saying, I don't know anything that she did. I
00:38:20.080
didn't observe anything wrong. But here's the context. All of the accusers have been proven liars
00:38:26.260
on these very accusations. I mean, this type of accusation, not the specific ones against her.
00:38:33.380
That's a really strong argument. I can't even imagine a jury that could convict on that unless
00:38:44.480
video appears or something later. All right. So don't be surprised. Don't be surprised if Ghislaine
00:38:52.760
Maxwell does not get convicted of anything. And the other possibility is apparently there was some
00:38:58.540
kind of a plea deal when Epstein originally went to jail, I don't know, one of those times.
00:39:04.200
There's some kind of an existing plea deal that might give Maxwell immunity. But it's sort of
00:39:10.180
untested. She might have immunity. There might be, she might not go to jail at all. Think about that.
00:39:19.440
All right. Here's the worst idea I've ever heard in my entire life. They're going to play the black
00:39:24.480
national anthem before the NFL games and then do the regular national anthem prior. Now, of course,
00:39:33.580
one understands why they're doing it. They're trying to do the best they can to satisfy not only their
00:39:39.640
players, but their fans. And it's just a tough situation. All right. So I feel bad for the NFL
00:39:45.540
because there's just no way to win. They just don't have a winning play. But I think they found the worst
00:39:55.560
solution. Because how do you feel if you are, let's say, a football watcher and you see an alternate
00:40:05.800
national anthem? The alternate national anthem. Now, they're referring to it as a black national anthem,
00:40:13.940
but let's take the black out. You just heard there's an alternative national anthem for a subset
00:40:21.080
of America. How does that make you feel? Does it make you feel like an American now that there's two
00:40:28.560
national anthems? It doesn't matter if it's a black national anthem. It could be the woman national
00:40:32.880
anthem. It could be the LGBTQ national anthem. It doesn't matter what subset of Americans we're talking
00:40:39.000
about. This might be one of the worst ideas I've ever seen from a business.
00:40:46.900
I feel like the NFL is going to have the lowest ratings they'll ever have, unless people are so
00:40:55.400
starved for entertainment that they watch anyway. I guess it's a wild card because people are starved
00:41:01.240
for entertainment. So maybe it'll be the highest ratings they've ever had. But they might, people
00:41:06.180
might tune in, you know, 10 minutes after the game starts to not watch it. Now, what's my personal
00:41:12.960
feeling about it is, I don't get worked up about, you know, symbols. I don't care about flags and flag
00:41:20.780
burnings. I don't care about national anthems. I don't care about kneeling. And I don't care about
00:41:25.200
statues too much. Just generally speaking, if you're talking about symbolism, I don't know, just work it out,
00:41:33.160
work it out among yourselves. If there are Americans who care deeply about these symbols,
00:41:39.380
and they want to mix it up with, you know, verbally mix it up with other people who have a different opinion,
00:41:45.400
I just, I'm just going to watch the show. Wherever it comes out, statues, yes, statues, no. I'm going to be
00:41:52.060
fine with it either way. I just can't get invested in something so ridiculous. So personally, I'm not invested
00:41:58.840
in any of it. I don't think football is important. I don't think it should be played. By the way, I
00:42:05.060
think football should be banned, you know, because they had injuries, especially for children. Maybe
00:42:11.920
for adults, you let them take the chance, but certainly I would ban football for children. That's
00:42:16.460
another, another story. So I think the NFL is shooting themselves in the foot with this, but we'll see.
00:42:22.480
It could turn out to be brilliant. We'll see. Here's something that's a worrisome trend.
00:42:32.040
Self-defense is starting to look illegal now. Did you know that? Didn't you have a pretty good idea
00:42:38.400
in your head what self-defense looked like, and you thought you knew what it was? It's starting to
00:42:44.020
get murky, and I'm worried that the realm of what we would call self-defense is shrinking so that the
00:42:52.740
angry mobs can get at you a little bit better. Let me give you an example. So apparently, I don't
00:42:59.600
have an update on this, but the last I knew, the McCloskeys, the couple who were the gun-wielding
00:43:05.620
couple in their big house that they protected against the crowd, apparently they're still being
00:43:10.800
considered for charges. Are you kidding me? They are still being considered for maybe being charged
00:43:17.340
with a crime for simply having guns to at least have some defense against this crowd. Now, I don't
00:43:25.560
know if it was because the wife pointed her gun. Does that make a difference? I'm not a lawyer, and maybe
00:43:31.440
it varies by state, but where exactly was the crime? That was as self-defense-y as anything I've ever seen in
00:43:39.860
my life. They were lawyers, for God's sakes. They knew what a crime is. They're lawyers. They know what
00:43:45.500
a crime is. They weren't trying to commit a crime, that's for sure. And then I heard another one today
00:43:52.940
about, there's a question about what police should do, or really what anybody should do. Let's say the
00:43:58.640
mob surrounds your car. If the mob surrounds your car, and they start breaking the windows, and there's
00:44:04.820
even somebody with a gun, and you know they shot somebody in a car, so it's like the worst, scariest
00:44:09.740
situation. But the mob is all around your car. What can you do in self-defense? Can you drive forward
00:44:17.580
at the risk of hitting people when you know you would hit people? Can you drive slowly? Can you give
00:44:23.340
them like warnings of like, you know, sharp little moves forward to get them out of the way, but if he hits
00:44:28.120
somebody, you're still liable, and you go to jail, even the question of your car surrounded by people,
00:44:36.140
you're not allowed to just drive through them, even if they're attacking your car.
00:44:41.520
And the fact that that's even a question, are you kidding me? That's a question? Well, let me say,
00:44:49.740
if somebody surrounds my car, I'm going to drive forward. If there's somebody in front of my car,
00:44:56.800
they will be killed or injured, but I'm going to do it. I'm not going to sit there with a crowd
00:45:04.900
that's beating on my car and threatening me. I'm going to drive forward, and I'm going to take out
00:45:10.020
anybody who's in front of me, and I'm not going to even think twice about it. I'm not even going to
00:45:14.620
feel guilty about it. I'm going to look in my rearview mirror and see brains spilled on the road
00:45:20.980
behind me. I'm not going to have a nightmare about that. I'm not even going to have PTSD about that.
00:45:26.800
All right, that's just me. But let me say it again. If you put me on a jury in this country,
00:45:35.120
I am not going to convict anybody for what looks like self-defense. Moreover, if it's a gray area,
00:45:43.120
they're not going to be convicted by me. Put me on a jury if it even looks a little bit self-defency
00:45:50.540
in the context of these big crowds. I'm not talking about a normal crime. All right, a normal crime,
00:45:56.300
you have to look at each one individually. But in the context of these protests, if somebody does
00:46:01.740
something that's even arguably a little bit self-defency, they're good with me. Good with me,
00:46:10.080
because here's what I don't expect of my fellow citizens. I don't expect you to be speed lawyers
00:46:16.960
in an emergency. You're probably not a lawyer. And if you were, you don't have much time to think.
00:46:24.120
I'm not going to ask you to be a legal scholar while a crowd is ascending on you. If the crowd
00:46:30.780
ascends on you, this is Scott's rule. Let me put it out there. Are you ready? This is Scott's law.
00:46:37.960
I'm just making this up now. Scott's law says that if the crowd comes after you, there's nothing you
00:46:43.200
can't do to defend yourself. Got it? There's nothing you can't do to defend yourself if a
00:46:50.320
crowd threatens you. That's Scott's law. Put me on the jury. Let's say the crowd comes in and they're
00:46:57.180
chanting things and they surround you. And you pull out a machine gun and you kill 27 people.
00:47:03.780
self-defense, self-defense. That's just me. You can do anything you want. It's a free country so far,
00:47:13.340
a little less free than it used to be. But if it's me, you could take out a machine gun and you could
00:47:18.480
take care of the entire crowd that's threatening you. And you could even finish off the people who
00:47:23.560
are on the ground suffering. And I would still, still say, looks like self-defense to me.
00:47:30.460
I don't know, because you don't know if those people on the ground were going to get up.
00:47:35.700
Right? I mean, you're not some expert on military or defense. So if a civilian gets surrounded,
00:47:43.480
that's just me. I don't recommend that you do that because taking self-defense recommendations
00:47:49.940
for me would be a certain way to get you killed. I'm just telling you my attitude. So I think we've
00:47:55.720
reached the point where the slippery slope has met the wall. Slippery slope, meat wall.
00:48:04.260
We are all able to say now that Black Lives Matter is a violent, racist organization. Now, by the way,
00:48:11.660
that's not an opinion. That's actually Black Lives Matter's self-branding. You saw Hawk Newsom,
00:48:17.960
head of the Black Lives, he's a leader in Black Lives Matter in New York, which is obviously an
00:48:23.320
important, important branch of Black Lives Matter. And he said on television, I think he said it more
00:48:28.180
than once recently, that they do not eschew violence. That, you know, they'll be peaceful if
00:48:37.400
they can get what they want. But if they can't get it through peace, violence is on the table.
00:48:42.300
And he said it, he said it directly. I'm not interpreting, I'm not like reading between the
00:48:47.460
lines. He said it directly. And guess what? I agree with him. The reason I know I'm not
00:48:54.940
misinterpreting it is because it's a perfectly reasonable statement, which is, and here's the
00:49:00.320
second part, as Hawk points out, that if you look at the history of this country, almost nothing ever
00:49:07.100
changes without violence. And it's a really smart thing to say, because it's true. This is one of those
00:49:15.000
countries, and maybe it's just true everywhere, that until there's at least the threat of violence,
00:49:20.600
things don't really change, you know, because you don't have to, you can say, well, deal with that
00:49:25.140
tomorrow, and then don't. So he's not wrong, that if they need, you know, if they feel that they're
00:49:32.680
willing to do whatever it takes to get these changes, whatever they might be, that violence is
00:49:37.280
on the table. So if your organization leader says violence is on the table, you are a violent
00:49:43.120
organization. And you can see, you know, individual members who are being violent.
00:49:49.400
Secondly, is it racist? Of course it is. Of course it is. It's totally racist. Let me make an analogy
00:49:55.500
for you. Is Black Lives Matter, you know, equally concerned with other lives? Obviously not. The whole
00:50:06.580
point of Black Lives Matter is that it's a preference. You know, they're not looking for equality, they're
00:50:12.360
looking for, at least the way the slogan is presented. I'm not mind reading anybody's individual
00:50:18.080
thoughts. I'm saying that the way it's presented is that their problems are special, because they
00:50:26.600
came from a certain, you know, a certain historical path. I would argue that saying that Black people's
00:50:32.980
problems are special, whereas let's say some Hispanic American, Filipino American who was born into
00:50:40.240
poverty, I guess their problems aren't special. They don't get any help, because they don't have the
00:50:46.300
right kind of skin. It's just purely racist. It's violent and it's racist. Now again, I think by and
00:50:53.860
large, most of the members, most of the protesters have something like good intentions, but they have
00:50:59.520
joined on to a violent racist organization without realizing it. Speaking of that, let's talk about the
00:51:05.120
president's speech, which is being called racist and divisive. Those of you who watched the speech
00:51:11.800
last night, give me your opinions. We'll take, there's a little time lag in the comments, but your
00:51:17.660
opinion, was the president's speech unifying or was it racist and divisive? Go. What is your
00:51:27.220
opinions? And then I'll tell you about it. By the way, I do plan to have surgery someday if the
00:51:33.900
coronavirus doesn't keep delaying it. I'll get my sinuses fixed. All right, so I'm looking at your
00:51:42.520
comments coming in. I guess it's going to take a little while for them to go in. Here's what I
00:51:47.500
think. If the president wanted to be unifying, it wouldn't have sounded anything like that.
00:51:54.400
So I don't think it was a unifying speech or even close to anything like that.
00:51:59.440
Did anybody think that was unifying? So he decided not to tell jokes and he played it seriously.
00:52:08.400
He talked about America and he talked about, you know, we're all Americans, et cetera. So there
00:52:15.080
were definitely things he said that you could identify as attempts at unification. But here's
00:52:22.880
the thing. If the president, so I'm looking, okay, comments are coming in now. Good, good. Somebody
00:52:32.280
says dark. Somebody says best, truth. Somebody said low energy. I will agree with low energy. It
00:52:38.600
looked low energy to the point where he looked really tired, actually. Some people saying it's
00:52:45.560
very unifying, patriotic. Somebody said too mild, which is not divisive enough, I guess.
00:52:52.220
Uplifting and unifying, unifying, unifying, unifying. All right, here's what you all got wrong,
00:52:58.380
unfortunately. All of those who, all of those of you who are saying that it was unifying,
00:53:04.800
unifying, I hate to break it to you. I gotta, I hate to break it to you. That might be the least
00:53:14.540
unifying speech I've ever seen in my whole fucking life. Let me tell you why. If this isn't obvious
00:53:20.580
to you, you really haven't been listening to the, the protesters. You know, if, if you have this many
00:53:27.500
protests, you, if this many people are protesting, at the very least, you ought to listen to them.
00:53:33.720
You don't have to agree. You don't have to agree. But I'm starting to think you haven't even listened
00:53:41.400
to them. Because here's, here's why this was the least unifying speech of all time. That's saying
00:53:50.340
too much. It wasn't unifying. Here's why. The president talked about all of us appreciating our
00:53:58.040
great history and our, and our shared heritage. How does that sound to you? Let's say, let's say,
00:54:05.980
for example, you're watching this Periscope. There is a statistical chance that you might be
00:54:11.180
white and a Trump supporter. How does it sound to your ear when you hear you'd like to, everybody to
00:54:17.720
share and, and, and honor our, our heroes and our shared cultural, you know, history. How's it,
00:54:26.900
how's it feel? Unifying, right? You're like, yeah, our shared history. We're Americans. Let's revel in
00:54:35.080
our shared history. Okay. Here's what's wrong with that.
00:54:39.040
A lot of the history was people being enslaved. How in the world are black Americans supposed to
00:54:49.540
look at the history of the United States and say, yeah, that, that looks good. Well, let me buy into
00:54:55.400
that shared heritage where, where I, you know, my great, great, great, whatever was a slave. How in
00:55:02.360
the world does that, is that unifying in, in the context of protests with Black Lives Matter, you
00:55:10.480
know, the statues coming down, the, the legacy of slavery, that the room is about slavery. Slavery is
00:55:18.560
like the biggest topic in the news right now. It's on the top of minds. And the president said, let's
00:55:24.040
celebrate our shared history. Well, the shared history is some people doing well and some people
00:55:29.000
slaves. How in the world are the slaves, you know, the people who descended from slaves or have any
00:55:35.520
connection to it? How in the world are they supposed to hear that speech and hear words like heritage and
00:55:41.520
culture and saying, yeah, let's, let's honor some of that stuff where my people were slaves or let's
00:55:48.720
honor that part where the native Americans were slaughtered to get their land. How in the world is that
00:55:56.060
unifying? I would say that that speech was an attempt to be not unifying, in my opinion, in my opinion, in my
00:56:02.960
opinion, it was written with the intention of being a, you know, more for the base. Now, did the base like it? Yeah,
00:56:10.740
they did. So I, I, I was wondering how the base was responding. And they're responding very well, because the
00:56:19.720
base has a gigantic blind spot. You know, you do not every single person, obviously, but the base has a
00:56:26.600
gigantic blind spot, which is history is not so kind to a lot of people who live in this country and
00:56:36.400
should be, you know, should feel good about it just the way you feel good about it if you do. So I would say
00:56:45.040
that, uh, a unifying speech would have directly referenced that and would have directly acknowledged
00:56:54.160
that. And, and some, something would have looked more like, um, you know, let's, let's appreciate
00:57:02.380
more, blah, blah, blah. Now, here's what, here's what I like that he did. He did mention the heroes of our
00:57:08.640
history. And he quite pointedly mixed in a lot of African-American heroes with the other heroes.
00:57:15.700
But did that make everybody happy? No, because there was no LGBTQ in that list. I don't even know
00:57:22.560
if there was a woman in the list. Was there? There might've been one. Was there maybe one woman in the
00:57:28.700
list of American heroes? So you can't really satisfy people with, Hey, we'll throw in some statues for
00:57:36.720
you guys too, you know, to show that everybody's, everybody's equal. We'll give you some statues
00:57:41.380
because the group that didn't get any statues is going to say, um, ah, it's great that white people
00:57:47.900
and black people have statues, but how about me? So there's no winning. So did the president take the
00:57:57.320
most politically advantageous approach, which is pushing back on the statue people, which is base
00:58:03.700
wanted using words like culture and heritage, which sound racist to half the country, but to
00:58:10.520
his base just sounds like common sense. Um, then you generally, genuinely don't hear it. I think it
00:58:18.120
is, it is legitimately true that people on the right just don't hear that. They don't hear it as racist,
00:58:25.360
but it's because you haven't lived anybody else's life. Um, everybody else has the same problem.
00:58:31.860
It's not, it's not a problem on the right. It's a problem that nobody really knows what anybody
00:58:35.080
else is feeling or thinking. All right. So my opinion is that the speech might've been good for
00:58:42.420
his base, which was important. So maybe it was politically correct in terms of unifying. I would
00:58:48.880
say it used the words that, you know, won't unify. So if you intentionally put into a written speech
00:58:56.380
words that are guaranteed to not unify, you can't really say it was an attempt. It wasn't really
00:59:02.180
an attempt to unify. Oh, so somebody is saying that there were some women in his list, several of
00:59:07.620
them. Ella Fitzgerald, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman. Thank you. Clara Barton. Oh, thank you. Okay.
00:59:15.660
So when I was hearing the list, um, I was not taking note of them. Dolly Madison, was she
00:59:23.720
on the list? All right. Somebody says statues are idols used for mind control. I agree with
00:59:32.280
that. Statues are a form of mind control, just as the history of the country is just as the
00:59:38.660
pledge of allegiance, just as the flag is. So all of our symbols are, um, they have utility.
00:59:45.660
We use symbols because they do something. They have a function. It's a tool. It programs people
00:59:52.080
to think a certain way. That's why we do it. Uh, so the president suggested building a special
00:59:58.060
garden in which statues would be, but he didn't say if we would be moving statues and he didn't
01:00:04.860
say, are we building some extra statues to those other people you mentioned? So there's
01:00:09.460
some questions to be answered, but that wasn't a bad idea. I think on the right, people were
01:00:15.380
pretty happy with the idea of putting them in a special place where you've got better
01:00:19.100
context. Yeah. So I would say the president, uh, did a good job from the perspective of his
01:00:26.220
base. He did nothing to, uh, to make the left move toward him, but maybe that doesn't matter
01:00:32.660
because maybe you can't, maybe you can't move the other side toward you. So maybe it doesn't
01:00:36.900
matter. But here's the, here's the takeaway. I believe the left is afraid of the president's
01:00:43.260
framing of them as dangerous, um, basically dangerous racist hate groups. So that does seem
01:00:51.140
to be the most productive attack, the one they worry about the most. And there's plenty of evidence
01:00:57.060
to make that case. So it's very dangerous. All right. Um, everything is a form of mind
01:01:04.540
control. Somebody says with a smiley face, that's true. Everything does impact the way
01:01:10.380
you think your environment does that. All right. Um, professors are indoctrinating kids with
01:01:22.060
mind control. Yeah, I think so. I think that's a fair thing to say. Um, did you see, I tweeted
01:01:30.600
this around, uh, that there, I mentioned this, there actually is a national effort to build
01:01:35.820
a national, uh, bike paths around the country so that you could bicycle from one side of the
01:01:41.540
country to the other, and it would be a touristy thing to do. So that's actually underway. I tweeted
01:01:47.140
that the other day. Amazing. All right. Somebody says dumbest idea I've ever heard. I don't know
01:01:55.100
if you're talking about the garden full of statues or not. All right. That's all I got. I will talk