Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1196 Scott Adams： The Kraken and Bigfoot Still Missing. The Bad Guys Are Hunting Me and Election Predictions

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, come on in. It's time for coffee with Scott Adams. Probably the highlight of your

00:00:19.880 whole week, if not your year. It's been a crappy year, so it doesn't take much to be the highlight.

00:00:25.420 And all you need to make it better is a cup or mug or glass, a tanker, a chalice, a stein,

00:00:31.220 a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:38.460 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes

00:00:45.400 everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip. And it happens when? Now.

00:00:55.420 Oh. Yeah, that's good stuff. I feel the republic getting stronger with each sip.

00:01:07.300 Shall we talk about the things, all the things that are happening? Sure. Let us, can we agree as a

00:01:15.140 country on one thing? Just one thing. We disagree on so many things, but can we agree on this one thing?

00:01:23.220 Trump is Trump. Trump is not sometimes Bernie Sanders. Trump is not occasionally Joe Biden.

00:01:35.020 Trump wakes up as Trump and he's Trump all day long. And so all the people who are saying,

00:01:41.620 I think he should concede while there is still a technical way he could prevail.

00:01:47.220 Did you not hear the first part where I said he's Trump? What the hell good would he have been as a

00:01:54.900 president if he would quit? He's the ultimate come from behind guy. He's been bankrupt. He's been

00:02:04.260 bankrupt and came back. He was down in the polls in 2016 and came back. He

00:02:13.940 will probably get crushed business-wise. The Trump business probably is going to take a huge hit.

00:02:22.420 But I'll bet he'll find a way to make that bigger. Maybe form a media empire or something.

00:02:27.460 But we should stop pretending there's any chance that Trump will wake up as Trump, change into some other

00:02:36.660 person during the day, concede while he still has any chance left, and then call it a day. That's not

00:02:46.900 going to happen. And you wouldn't really want it to happen, would you? Because what made Trump

00:02:53.460 succeed at the things that I would say he didn't succeed at is this sort of thing. It's the fact

00:03:01.060 that he finds the impossible to be merely inconvenient. I've told you that before, that

00:03:12.740 the most defining characteristic of Trump as a president is that he's no good at the easy stuff,

00:03:19.940 but he keeps doing the impossible stuff. Like we just saw that Netanyahu's meeting with

00:03:26.340 the crown prince of Saudi Arabia. It looks like maybe there's something good going there that'll

00:03:31.140 be a continuation of the Middle East stuff. That looked impossible. Shaking hands with Kim Jong-un,

00:03:39.140 it looked impossible until he did it. You know, getting those vaccines available as quickly as

00:03:50.340 possible, it looked impossible, right? I mean, I could make you a list of the things that looked

00:03:56.260 impossible that Trump actually did. Even, I would argue, even the trade war with China looked like it was

00:04:05.460 impossible to win. And in the end, I think if Biden takes over, we won't win on that. But it looked like

00:04:13.060 Trump had at least proven that it was way worse for China than it was for us. I think the experts agree 1.00

00:04:19.780 on that now, right? The economists say, oh yeah, it didn't hurt us that much, but it hurt China a lot

00:04:25.940 more, which was the whole point. So I feel as if Trump in a situation which looks to other people

00:04:36.020 to be impossible is one we've seen him in quite a bit. And we've watched him succeed from a point

00:04:44.340 that seemed impossible. Now, when I say he's bad at the easy stuff, I mean, just not causing trouble.

00:04:50.340 You know, you know, just wear masks, you know, the easy stuff. He doesn't do the easy stuff.

00:04:59.140 All right. Let me give you a little view of the world that maybe you don't have. And it will help

00:05:07.220 you for my credibility. For those of you who remember, back in 2016, when I said to you, I think

00:05:15.020 there's a specific persuader that's helping Hillary Clinton, and I named him eventually. I called him

00:05:21.900 Godzilla until I was confident, and then I named him Robert Cialdini. Now, he has not admitted that he

00:05:30.940 helped consult Hillary, but he's also not denied it when he was asked directly. And that's the sort of

00:05:38.460 thing where if you didn't do it, it's kind of easy to deny, right? Did you did you consult for Hillary

00:05:46.060 Clinton? Nope. I mean, you would obviously say no, because you would never say yes, or maybe

00:05:55.100 about consulting for a presidential candidate, because people would know if you did. It would be,

00:06:00.940 you know, embarrassing professionally. So I'm going to assume that I'm right about that and that I

00:06:07.180 that I picked him out of a crowd of seven billion people as the voice that must be pushing some of

00:06:15.180 the persuasion. I still think that's the case. Now, as we're watching this Sidney Powell situation play

00:06:24.780 out, let me tell you a view of the world that may not be the one you had when you woke up.

00:06:31.980 And it goes like this. I've made reference to this before, that there's a blazing war happening

00:06:40.140 that you don't see. There's the stuff that's in the public, the stuff that's in the news. But below

00:06:48.140 that surface, there is just a raging permanent war. And various people are involved, you know,

00:06:56.460 spooky people and, you know, operatives and the dirty tricksters, etc. But a big part of that is

00:07:03.420 the persuaders, the people who have almost wizard-like talents of persuasion. And they come in two flavors,

00:07:12.780 I would say. There's the ones who persuade positively, as in this candidate will do great,

00:07:19.340 that would be like positive persuasion. But then there's also the disinformation people.

00:07:24.380 Now, that's the part you're less aware of. And you might say to yourself, I don't think there's any

00:07:31.260 disinformation going on. But let me tell you, it's a small world. And the people who deal in this kind

00:07:41.740 of content, they find each other. All right? So do you believe that? Do you believe that the people who

00:07:49.660 have this weird and unique skill that they can move an entire country, they find each other?

00:07:56.620 Because in many cases, they may have been trained in the same places. They're watching each other.

00:08:01.900 They, it's a small world, and they know each other. I'm going to make a another prediction.

00:08:09.180 There's probably fewer than 20 people in the country who have the training and skill to pull off the

00:08:19.340 Venezuelan election machine disinformation. Now, I'm going to say that I could be wrong,

00:08:27.980 right? But it looks to me exactly like professional disinformation. Meaning it's not just something that

00:08:35.260 somebody came up with. It's the work of real professionals. And there are only

00:08:43.020 maybe a dozen, maybe two dozen. I'm not saying that it's an intelligence agency.

00:08:51.740 It could be. You can't rule that out. But it could be just the Democrats. Because you can hire these

00:08:57.020 people. They're, they're people who have a skill, you can hire them. You don't have to be, you know,

00:09:04.140 an intelligence agency. They're for hire. So given that this has every look of a disinformation campaign,

00:09:13.900 and let's compare it to the persuasion that's going on from the Trump campaign. So now I'm going to take

00:09:20.380 you from the surface of the news. You're going underground with me now. All right. So we're deep

00:09:27.260 underground with the real war, not the fake one. That's all just fake news up above. Now you're down

00:09:33.420 in the real one. And the real one shows the Trump campaign using persuasion, in which I've described

00:09:40.940 before the laundry list. In other words, they're saying, there's a whole bunch of stuff wrong with this

00:09:46.860 election. You don't like that one? Well, how about this one? Not that one? How about this one? How

00:09:52.140 about this one? Now, the beauty of the laundry list is that although it would not hold up in court,

00:09:59.740 in other words, every claim you make should be strong, and you should really get rid of the weak

00:10:04.540 claims before you walk into a courtroom. That's just going to make the judge angry. I learned that from

00:10:10.940 Robert Barnes. But in terms of public opinion, the laundry list works really well. It's very,

00:10:19.580 it's sort of a dirty trick, because the point of it is, they're not all equally strong things on the

00:10:25.180 list. But if you see enough stuff, you're going to say, with all that smoke, there's got to be some

00:10:31.660 fire there. I mean, you know, the sky is full of smoke, got to be a fire. But that's why it's

00:10:38.300 persuasion. The point is to make it look like there's a fire, even if there isn't. Now, in my

00:10:45.900 opinion, there is a fire. But they need some time to prove it. But in the short run, you do the laundry

00:10:52.780 list, you get the public on your side. And then here's the key part. Alan Dershowitz talked about

00:10:59.820 this. Now, skipping some of the constitutional technicalities, and I'll skip over a couple of

00:11:06.860 steps. But there's a step coming in which, if I understand this correctly, the House has to say

00:11:14.080 the election was clean and certified. And I believe the House with, I think, I heard, you know, one

00:11:24.200 senator and one congressperson can hold up the process and say, wait, the election doesn't look

00:11:29.840 fair to us. So maybe we can ignore it and, and just go ahead with the vote and pick President

00:11:37.060 Trump, because he would get selected if the House does the selecting. Now, or at least, there are more

00:11:45.100 Republicans, that doesn't guarantee it. But there are more Republicans. So they could, if they wanted

00:11:49.120 to, just vote in the president if they thought that was the right thing to do. And they legitimately

00:11:54.080 thought the election was stolen. They'd have to actually believe that, or say they believe it.

00:11:59.920 Now, the laundry list doesn't just work on you and me. It doesn't just work on the general public.

00:12:09.140 It also works on Congress, because Congress is a bunch of human beings. So a bunch of human beings

00:12:17.420 in Congress aren't going to be that much different from a bunch of human beings anywhere. And we're

00:12:22.900 all susceptible to the laundry list. The laundry list is really strong. So that's the path that the

00:12:32.480 president has, which is keep the laundry list going, and hope that there's enough smoke there,

00:12:40.820 that people will say, oh, yeah, there had to be a fire. And even if we don't have rock solid proof

00:12:46.200 yet, maybe you get Congress convinced. Maybe they're convinced. So that would be a path.

00:12:55.780 Now, compare that, which is pretty strong, by the way. You know, in terms of a persuasion play,

00:13:02.520 it's not bad. Now, if I had to predict, I would predict that Biden will take the job. So my prediction

00:13:10.920 is that the system will install Biden. But the Trump campaign is doing everything they can to

00:13:18.500 make a difference there. Now, compare that to the disinformation campaign and watch how well this is

00:13:26.940 done. So today I had people coming after me on Twitter to say some version of ha ha ha and dunk on me.

00:13:37.340 And what do you say now about this Sidney Powell thing? Because the Trump administration and the

00:13:45.240 campaign issued a statement saying that she did not work for the administration, did not work for

00:13:51.800 Trump. So, and I guess she agrees with that because she was not being paid by them. She's sort of

00:13:57.960 independent, but related. And so that made her story about the Venezuelan whistleblower and the

00:14:07.540 machines, et cetera, that made that look even less credible than it was before.

00:14:16.280 So people came to me on Twitter and said, ha ha ha, Scott, you said that there was going to be good

00:14:21.800 information coming. And it looks like even the Trump administration isn't buying this

00:14:26.920 Venezuelan whistleblower thing. So aren't you so wrong? Except I'm the one who said it wasn't true.

00:14:37.340 So now I'm getting dunked on for being right that the Venezuelan whistleblower thing was not credible

00:14:45.340 and looked like disinformation. So the people who are dunking on me agree with me. But this is how good

00:14:53.460 disinformation works. Because the point of disinformation is to spoil the rest of the

00:14:59.240 information. It's not supposed to just live alone. It's supposed to be a spoiler so that everything else

00:15:06.100 you've heard, you go, ah, that's probably not true either. If this part wasn't true, that part's not true.

00:15:12.540 So here's what the disinformation did. It took Sidney Powell right off the field.

00:15:21.580 Now, maybe she's still got some game left. She might have some plays left. But at the moment,

00:15:27.760 it really, really worked, persuasion-wise. It took Powell off the field. It divided the Trump supporters,

00:15:36.700 certainly within the inner circle, you have to assume some of them were buying into

00:15:42.400 the Venezuelan story. Some were not, I assume. I don't have any inside knowledge. So it split the

00:15:50.520 team. It got rid of one of their stronger players. And it took me out. It took me out. Because forever

00:15:59.720 now, the fake news will record that I supported the Venezuelan whistleblower story, when in fact,

00:16:08.800 the clear public reality repeated a number of times is I said exactly the opposite, that I didn't believe

00:16:16.080 it. That's the one you shouldn't believe. So that's how good the disinformation is. That I was not even

00:16:23.700 part of being wrong at any point, at least in terms of that specific thing. And yet, it took me out.

00:16:31.080 Because I will never be able to be credible on this topic again, because I will be blamed for

00:16:37.060 something that I wasn't even part of. That's how good it is. Somebody says, you're lying now.

00:16:43.720 Now, let me get back to, and I think I know why you're saying that. Normally, I would block you

00:16:50.340 for just saying something like, you're lying now, because that's like mind reading or something.

00:16:54.560 But I think you're referring to, I did say when Sidney Powell was originally coming up with her

00:17:01.500 claims, I did say that that that's going to be something. Now, I'm going to give you some nuance

00:17:08.520 here that at least a third of you won't be able to handle, because in a big crowd, a third of the

00:17:14.880 people can't handle nuance. It goes like this. It can be true at the same time that the Venezuelan 1.00

00:17:22.060 whistleblower is disinformation, while it is also true that any software-based election system

00:17:29.640 will eventually be compromised. Now, I'm just saying that's the nature of the system,

00:17:37.760 is that it is a compromisable system, which there is a gigantic motive to compromise. So if it hasn't

00:17:45.960 already been compromised, you can guarantee it will be compromised eventually, because it's built

00:17:51.340 for that. I mean, it's not built to prevent it, meaning that the system itself is not sufficiently

00:17:59.240 secure that you could ever guarantee that at least an insider didn't do something, right? You might be

00:18:06.600 able to keep somebody from getting into it from the internet directly, but there's nothing you can do

00:18:11.860 to stop an insider from getting at it, and there's nothing that would stop an intelligence agency from

00:18:17.920 turning an insider. I mean, that's pretty ordinary business, right? So it can be true that you don't

00:18:25.620 believe the disinformation about the Venezuelan whistleblower, while at the same time, I have a high

00:18:32.120 confidence that the system was hacked, or will be hacked, if it hasn't been already. Now, here's something

00:18:43.300 that the head, it was the CEO of Dominion Voting System said, quote, this is a nonpartisan American

00:18:55.680 company. It is not physically possible for our machines to switch votes from one candidate to the

00:19:02.600 other. This is a CEO of a voting system who has a software-based product who says, quote,

00:19:11.980 it's not physically possible for our machines to switch votes. Okay, he's lying, or really stupid, 1.00

00:19:22.460 because it's software, right? And haven't you seen plenty of, you know, YouTube specials where people 1.00

00:19:32.320 were hacking the machines right in front of you? Yeah, it's the most ridiculously, ridiculously

00:19:40.800 non-believable thing in the world that they're not hackable. Of course they're hackable. Come on,

00:19:48.800 everything's hackable. Do you think Google is hackable? Yes. Do you think Twitter is hackable?

00:19:54.780 It happened. It happened. Do you think Facebook is hackable? Yes. Do you think that Google, Facebook,

00:20:03.240 and Twitter have the highest level of technical people compared to this voting company? Yeah. Yeah.

00:20:13.760 The very best, most protected systems in, you know, the commercial world get penetrated regularly.

00:20:21.240 It's not even, it's not even a question. So of course, our electronic voting system is either already

00:20:30.660 compromised, or will be, or will be, because it's not like people are going to stop trying. And if you

00:20:37.660 have a situation where people are going to stop trying, they can fail 99 times out of 100 and still

00:20:42.860 succeed, because they keep trying. All right. So I would say that the disinformation people who, by the

00:20:51.300 way, just to make this extra fun, I, I'm reasonably sure that that within that small group of people

00:20:59.280 who actually pulled this off, this Venezuelan whistleblower thing, I think they're watching this

00:21:06.540 right now. So if any of you are watching this, we'll pull this off. Really good job. Good job.

00:21:17.760 Now, did the laundry list work? Going back to the Republican persuasion play. Here's the data.

00:21:26.080 The data is that 30% of Democrats believe the election was stolen from Trump. 30% of Democrats

00:21:34.760 think the election was stolen. So how good is Trump's persuasion? It's really good. That's really

00:21:43.460 good. And of course, 75% of Republicans believe it is likely the election was stolen. So I would say

00:21:50.780 both the campaign, Trump campaign, as well as whoever it is, the dark forces working for the Biden

00:22:00.100 campaign. This is good stuff. This is really top level persuasion brilliance.

00:22:10.860 Let's talk about something that's a little more fun. So I told you people are coming after me now

00:22:15.620 because they, they think I was buying into the crazy parts of the Venezuelan story. So a guy named

00:22:22.720 Peter Wang came after me on Twitter and he said, this is a, this will give you an idea of the quality of my

00:22:33.400 trolls. They're, they're smart and stupid at the same time. And Peter Wang says, 2020 season finale 1.00

00:22:42.200 is showing us the existence of epistemic closure so tight that even intelligent people will stick their

00:22:51.040 heads into themselves in awkward ways. So as to turn into human Klein bottles of stupidity, not a good 1.00

00:22:58.520 look for Scott. Not a good look for me. Yes. If you tweet and your tweet has the words epistemic 1.00

00:23:10.020 closures and Klein bottles in it, you're not a good tweeter. You're not a good tweeter.

00:23:16.680 And one of the things that you should never do is start an insult contest with a cartoonist in

00:23:25.160 public. All right. Now, if you were dumb enough to start an insult contest with a professional 0.73

00:23:32.080 humorist in private, well, nobody would know how stupid you are. That might work out for you, 1.00

00:23:38.220 but you don't want to do it in public because I have a little more practice at this.

00:23:46.180 And so noticing that Peter Wang has a first name and the last name that are a little bit phallic,

00:23:55.140 a little bit phallic, Peter and Wang. I tweeted back this response. I said, look, Dick Dick,

00:24:03.880 you don't disagree with anything in that thread. Stop pretending you do. So that's the other thing 0.97

00:24:09.300 my critics do is they, they go after me personally, but they will never tell you what they disagree

00:24:15.360 with. And the reason is they don't, they don't disagree. So I asked him to tell me what in my

00:24:22.100 tweet thread, it was the thread that he's complaining about in which I have shown my stupidity. 0.99

00:24:27.240 I said, there's nothing in there you disagree with. Did he, did he come back and say, oh yeah, 0.99

00:24:33.920 here's the part I disagree with? No, he came back and insulted me again because there was nothing he

00:24:42.120 disagreed with in the tweet. He just wanted to be a, a dick dick. So that's the quality of my critics. 1.00

00:24:50.940 Here's another critic I got. So apparently, uh, I'm on China's radar. Now, if you don't know this,

00:24:58.860 uh, there, there are media entities that pretend to be, you know, independent media in China that are

00:25:07.000 really just, uh, organs of the, the communist, uh, government, right? So I get a, I get a clap back

00:25:16.560 from, uh, this Chinese individual, Chen Weihua, I think. And when he tweets at me, Twitter, uh, puts a

00:25:26.260 warning on his tweet and complain as you will about Twitter with their little warnings. This one, I

00:25:34.700 appreciate it because Twitter is the one that made sure I knew I would have known this anyway, but

00:25:40.640 Twitter made sure I knew that this tweet came some, came from somebody associated with the Chinese

00:25:46.120 government. So they, they actually added that label on the tweet. Good job, Twitter. Um, you know,

00:25:52.680 I would have known, but I don't know if anybody would have, everybody would have known. So that was a

00:25:57.020 good label. I appreciated that one. Um, so this is what Chen says about me. Now, keep in mind,

00:26:04.520 if he's saying it, probably he's doing it as an organ of the government. It doesn't mean he got a

00:26:11.900 specific instruction to send this tweet, but rather he's, he's operating, you know, within that umbrella

00:26:18.740 for the benefit of the, the government. And he tweets this at me. He says, can't believe so many

00:26:25.500 in the U S like to flirt instead of learning from China. I don't know what that means. Like to flirt

00:26:32.240 instead of learning from China and other East Asian nations and regions. Politicizing the virus

00:26:38.440 is what made the situation in the U S so bad, like a failed state. So, so here's an official

00:26:46.700 Chinese guy who was clapping back at me. And it was in response to one of my tweets that he wrote that.

00:26:54.780 So I tweeted back to him and I said, so how does China beat the virus? I'm all ears.

00:27:00.800 Now here's the advantage that I have in this conversation. I can say anything I want,

00:27:08.480 you know, so long as it's within Twitter's guidelines, but if you're sort of representing

00:27:14.000 the Chinese government, there's some topics you probably don't want to get into in public.

00:27:20.440 So, so watch me set the trap. Okay. So I asked, so how China beat the virus? Cause I wanted to see

00:27:29.220 him deal with this question. Here's how he answered. He goes, the rigorous contact tracing,

00:27:34.300 isolation, and quarantine, which is key in China and East Asia is virtually non-existent in the U S and

00:27:40.880 Europe. It takes huge efforts, not to mention the masks and social distancing all well observed.

00:27:47.740 Now, do you believe that? Do you believe that the reason that China is doing so well

00:27:53.300 is that they had rigorous contact tracing, isolation and quarantine and, uh, masks and social distancing?

00:28:03.320 Good. Do you think that explains the whole situation? And then he went on to say that, uh,

00:28:11.380 South Korea doing great. Same thing. Contact tracing, same thing as China, wear the masks, 0.99

00:28:18.300 lots of compliance. And then he pointed to Indonesia, I believe. Indonesia, very similar,

00:28:26.440 right? Lots of, uh, masks and, uh, probably did some contact tracing. Very similar. So he's making

00:28:33.280 a good case, right? He's made his case that the people who acted like China got the same result.

00:28:40.240 So it must be the way China is acting because people who imitated it also got good results.

00:28:46.260 Except, except, do you know who else got a good result? Japan. And do you know what Japan did 0.66

00:28:58.740 that is so similar to what China did to get a good result? China got a good result. Japan got a good

00:29:05.700 result. How did Japan do it? Nobody knows, but they didn't do this yet. They didn't do the,

00:29:14.480 the, the severe lockdown, the severe masking. You know, they just didn't do it. I don't think they

00:29:20.840 did the contact tracing either. So you've got another Asian country that didn't do any of that 0.53

00:29:27.180 stuff, or they didn't do them at the same rate or degree. They were, I think they were closer to

00:29:32.360 maybe the European model. So I, you know, of course, pointed that out as well, and also pointed out that

00:29:38.760 South Korea and Indonesia, and anything that's an island tends to do better. Now, I think the island

00:29:45.700 part matters because it's easier to close out, you know, outside infections. I'm not positive about

00:29:52.360 that, but there's certainly a correlation, if not a causation. And so here's the part that got fun.

00:30:00.540 Um, um, I asked him how all these South, these Asian countries did so well. And I tweeted this,

00:30:08.180 I said, other than a weaponized virus. And then parenthetically, I put for which there is no

00:30:14.000 proof. There is no proof. How to explain how China did well in all Asia. This is before I talked about

00:30:21.740 Japan, uh, no matter the method. So why is it that, oh, this is actually after Japan. So, so I said,

00:30:30.080 why is it that, uh, these Asian companies, countries are all doing well, yet they're using different

00:30:38.080 methods. In other words, Japan isn't doing what China did and they're doing well. So how do you explain

00:30:45.800 it? Now here's the persuasion part that was entertaining to me. The last thing that somebody

00:30:53.120 representing or speaking under the umbrella of official Chinese government wants to hear in public

00:31:00.280 is that, uh, the only other explanation I can think of is a weaponized virus, which by the way,

00:31:08.360 there is no proof of, let me say that again. There is no proof of any kind of a weaponized

00:31:15.800 coronavirus. No proof. Um, but what's the other explanation? So the other explanations that people

00:31:27.100 weighed in with is that the, these same countries had experience with prior coronavirus or prior other

00:31:35.400 infections that gave them immunity. Do you buy that? Is that enough? Do you think that China got down to 0.88

00:31:42.700 basically no coronavirus problems because of their prior infections? I don't, I, I'm not going to say

00:31:53.020 that this is a weaponized virus. I'm going to say that all of the other explanations don't handle the

00:32:01.060 observation. Okay. Now I think it would be crazy for any country to intentionally let out a virus that

00:32:09.280 could cause this much trouble, especially if it did kill some, some people in your own country.

00:32:14.300 I don't see anybody doing that. I mean, I suppose anything's possible, but I don't see it. It is,

00:32:22.020 however, the only explanation that fits the observation that the country is in a certain part with a certain

00:32:29.400 genetic commonality. Genetic commonality. Don't be, they don't be, they're not suffering as much no

00:32:39.340 matter what technique they use to fight the virus. So I don't think, uh, Chen wanted me to talk about

00:32:45.460 weaponized viruses, even though there's no proof, no proof that such a thing happened. Um,

00:32:54.440 yeah. All right. So, you know, I don't know about you, but one of the things I'm looking forward to

00:33:02.940 is not being in the kill box. You know, if you're a prominent Trump supporter, you're just always

00:33:11.620 attacked all day long. It's just nothing but attacks all day long. And I got to say that,

00:33:17.260 although my first choice would be a second term of Trump, I, I think I could be pretty happy

00:33:25.160 not being the, you know, having a target on my back all day long. I don't mind that at all. Um,

00:33:33.440 and I was listening to, uh, Biden talk yesterday and some recorded thing. It was on Smirkanish's,

00:33:40.400 um, serious show. And by the way, let me give a shout out to Smirkanish. Uh, you know him from CNN.

00:33:49.720 He is the most, uh, fair and balanced opinion person on CNN by far. I don't know if you've noticed

00:33:59.600 that, but Smirkanish, when he talks about, even when he's criticizing the president, he will talk about

00:34:06.260 it with objective statements that you recognize as true. It's like, oh yeah, that did happen. They

00:34:12.500 did do that. But when other people talk about it, they, they talk about mind reading and flailing

00:34:18.200 around and all kinds of crazy stuff. He doesn't do that. Smirkanish, um, you know, I feel like I can

00:34:24.480 detect his opinion, which that's no surprise. You can kind of detect everybody's opinion on,

00:34:30.960 on Trump, but he does a really professional job. Uh, I, I take my hat off to him and I was listening

00:34:37.620 to him yesterday and he was doing that again, being very professional about this. And even he

00:34:42.460 was saying that Biden sounds, uh, weak and low energy and he just sounds so like there's nothing

00:34:52.080 in him. And he was answering questions that it was like, uh, yeah, yeah, we, we should do this

00:34:57.960 and we'll do this. And I thought, oh my God, I'm going to fall asleep before he finishes that

00:35:02.200 sentence. And then this morning I heard a brief clip of Trump talking, whatever, whatever he

00:35:08.520 announcement he made yesterday. And then you hear Trump's projection and the energy and the

00:35:14.380 power he puts into just talking, you know, just talking about an ordinary topic. And it just like

00:35:20.080 fills the room. I mean, the, the star power, you don't really understand how big Trump's star

00:35:27.020 power power is until you see Biden doing the job of president. It's going to be jarring. It really

00:35:33.880 will be when you see how, how little energy he produces. He's like a 15 watt bulb. All right.

00:35:42.900 Um, here's an interesting thought. The, that disinformation campaign I was talking about,

00:35:49.540 allegedly about the Venezuelan whistleblower could backfire because if it convinces,

00:35:57.020 anybody in the Republican, uh, part of, uh, Congress to, uh, to say no to the, uh, election

00:36:06.220 integrity, it backfired. I don't know how many people are going to believe that story, but

00:36:12.380 could backfire. You never know. Um, Joe Biden's picking his, uh, cabinet. And of course, because

00:36:22.160 it's the simulation, and I told you that the simulation would be winking at us more often,

00:36:26.960 the guy that would be really key to negotiating with our adversaries, the guy who would be the

00:36:34.300 secretary of state under Biden, his last name is Blinken. It's exactly the word that you don't want

00:36:43.020 to have in your name if you're negotiating. Well, he blinked first. My guy's blinking. He's blinking

00:36:51.680 hard. That's just a weird simulation thing. All right. Here's a question for you. Um, Trump is

00:37:00.320 asking for a machine recount in Georgia. They already did the hand recount. Now I can't imagine

00:37:05.560 that the machine recount is going to do anything because they can't do a signature check. As I

00:37:11.060 understand it, the, the ability to do a signature check ends on election day because they separate

00:37:17.300 the envelopes and signatures from the votes. That's my understanding. So is it even possible

00:37:24.420 to audit? I don't really understand how the Trump campaign could possibly prove that votes were

00:37:35.200 illegal if they can't audit the signatures. And that doesn't sound like that's even a thing that

00:37:41.180 can be done. So unless you had, uh, eyewitnesses and even if you had eyewitnesses, you know, imagine,

00:37:48.860 imagine the Supreme court is hearing this story and all you have is eyewitnesses and you've got an

00:37:54.720 eyewitness that says, I was in this precinct and my boss said, uh, do this or that with this little

00:38:01.120 pile of blank ballots. I think the Supreme court is going to say something like this. How tall was

00:38:09.180 that pile of ballots? And they're going to say, oh, it's about an inch tall. That's not enough to

00:38:14.140 change the election. We're done here. And that's it. So the anecdotal stuff can support, um, let's say

00:38:23.480 data or some kind of documentary evidence, but you would need something in cumulative that adds up to

00:38:32.120 enough votes that it could have changed the election. And the problem that Rudy and the lawyers have

00:38:37.680 is that even if they've got 200 completely valid testimonies, probably if you added all of them up,

00:38:45.540 it wouldn't be enough votes. Even if every one of them was true and, and the judge believed every one

00:38:53.000 of them. So the, the question about why, um, why it's taking so long for the, the good, the good

00:39:01.040 argument, I guess they've only used bad arguments so far, but the good argument is going to be both

00:39:08.160 witnesses and then the, the data and maybe the documentation that coincides with those witnesses.

00:39:15.820 And that takes a little more time to put together. So people who are smarter than I am about

00:39:22.920 the law have come to dunk on me on Twitter and say, Scott, Scott, Scott, if they had good

00:39:30.900 information, they would have led with the good information. And since they didn't, let me tell

00:39:38.080 you as a lawyer, this is what people are saying to me as a lawyer, let me tell you that proves

00:39:44.460 pretty much that there is no good evidence because you start with the good evidence. Indeed,

00:39:51.680 have I not said the same thing? I've said the same thing. I think it's in my book that if you have

00:39:57.880 good evidence, you're going to lead with it. Anybody who starts out with bad evidence, well,

00:40:04.500 you can just say, all right, we're done here. If you started with bad evidence, that doesn't,

00:40:08.860 that means you don't have any good evidence, right? Makes sense. You would always start with the good

00:40:14.140 evidence. So why didn't they? Well, how about you live in the real world? How about a normal good

00:40:21.280 lawsuit takes a year to put together? How about you don't know which of those statements from those

00:40:27.340 sworn testimonies are real? You got to sort of look into them because what you don't want to do is go

00:40:33.020 into court with your strongest case that also has some weak parts accidentally attached to it because

00:40:40.220 it'll make the whole thing fall apart. So you don't want to go into with your evidence until it's

00:40:47.680 really tight. And I imagine that takes a while. So does that mean that there is evidence? Well,

00:40:55.160 the evidence that will be by far the strongest will be the fake ballots and the ballots thrown away and

00:41:01.640 the ballots may have been run through the machine twice, although that seems like that's something they

00:41:06.620 could catch with the recounts. I think it's going to be that. It's going to be ordinary stuff. We're

00:41:12.320 just ballot mischief. And somebody says, you don't have to be a lawyer to figure that out. I don't

00:41:19.640 know if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing with me there. All right. So I don't know that any of

00:41:25.700 the challenges that the Trump team is doing, I don't think they can get an audit of the kind that they

00:41:35.740 need. I'm looking for a fact check on that. But if you can't check that the ballots really came from

00:41:44.100 a real person, and I think you can't check that once the signatures are removed. So that's the part

00:41:50.060 I'm a little foggy on. So fact check me on this. Is there any way to audit this election? Because I

00:41:56.760 think there's not. Can somebody fact check me on that? And so I think that what will happen

00:42:02.360 is that this will go the way of Kennedy versus Nixon, which is Kennedy took office. But historians

00:42:11.600 could later look at the facts and say, it looks like the election was stolen and that Nixon actually

00:42:20.360 won. So I think that's what we're going to end up with, that sort of thing. And you would probably

00:42:25.280 have to do that with the data analysis to show that things are impossible. Now, by the way, there is

00:42:33.600 a claim hanging out there that I've been waiting for the debunk. And I haven't heard it. So I'm going

00:42:40.600 to ask you, have you seen a debunk of the following claim? That there are a number of precincts which had

00:42:50.860 far more votes than voters. Is that a real thing? Because I feel as if that should have been debunked

00:43:01.960 on the first day. Because I would think that we know how many voters, we know how many voted. So if

00:43:09.180 that claim, which I keep hearing, I kept expecting that would be the first one to be debunked. Have you

00:43:16.080 seen that one debunked yet? Somebody says that the election can be audited, not with signatures,

00:43:24.520 but other aspects. Well, other aspects may not be enough. All right. So that's enough on that.

00:43:37.240 There are going to be some interesting pardons. If this is Trump's last few months in office,

00:43:43.420 do you think you should pardon Snowden and Assange? I say yes. Because I think those two know things

00:43:53.780 that we should know. So yes, I think Trump should pardon Assange and Snowden, if only because it will

00:44:01.760 make the intelligence agencies really, really mad. You know, the Brennans, et cetera, are really,

00:44:08.860 really going to hate that. And I think he might do it just for a final poke in the eye. So if I had to

00:44:17.040 put a bet on it, it's looking pretty good for pardons. Even if he doesn't want to, I think he

00:44:24.020 might still do it, even if it's not something he personally wants. Reuters did a tweet today. And

00:44:30.420 they, it's funny watching these news businesses completely give up on being objective news. So this

00:44:37.580 is what Reuters says. They say, uh, Trump's campaign distance itself from lawyer Sidney Powell,

00:44:44.220 who has aided the president's flailing effort to contest the results. It's a flailing effort.

00:44:51.400 Flailing is kind of an opinion word. Here is how they could have said it without the opinion.

00:44:58.460 Uh, distance herself from Trump's effort, which has so far failed, uh, 26 and a 27 lawsuits or

00:45:07.360 something like that. You could simply describe it. You don't have to call it flailing,

00:45:12.460 right? You don't have to call it flailing. Um, I would love to see Trump get, uh, put Pence in charge

00:45:26.220 on the last day and have Pence. Uh, I don't know the legality of this, but could he pardon Trump for

00:45:33.960 everything that happened prior to and during his presidency? Is that a thing? Can, can a president

00:45:42.020 issue a pardon that says, I don't even know what you, you might be charged with in the future, but

00:45:47.740 everything from this date backwards, you're pardoned. Is that a thing? I don't know if you can do that or

00:45:55.740 do you need to be pardoning with specificity? All right. Uh, I'm seeing some yeses, but I don't know

00:46:04.160 if you're answering the right question. Uh, I'd love to see that because I'd like to see, I would like

00:46:09.600 to see Trump be completely free of those risks should he leave office. I'd like that. I think it's

00:46:17.400 good for the country. I would say that about any president, by the way. Um, there's a really

00:46:23.820 interesting, uh, opinion piece by Shelby Steele in the wall street journal Fox news has a excerpt from

00:46:31.600 it. And let me just read you this one sentence from it. Now, Shelby Steele is a black man in America,

00:46:39.820 which is important to the story. Someday we'll, we'll never have to say that again, but here's what

00:46:45.600 he wrote. He said, uh, it's part of a larger article, but he goes, yet there's an elephant in the room.

00:46:51.640 It is simply that we blacks aren't much victimized anymore. Today, we are free to build a life that

00:46:58.540 won't be stunted by racial persecution. Today, we are far more likely to encounter racial preferences

00:47:04.740 than racial discrimination. Moreover, we live in a society that generally shows us goodwill,

00:47:11.840 a society that has isolated racism as its most unforgivable sin. It was that sentence

00:47:20.600 that just lit up my, my brain. This is such a good sentence. Like just as a writer, you know,

00:47:29.240 if you're a writer and you see a good sentence, you just go, Oh, wow, this is pretty good. I have

00:47:34.640 to read this again. Moreover, we live in a society that generally shows us goodwill, a society that

00:47:41.040 has isolated racism as its most unforgivable sin. That is just such a good sentence. But here's what,

00:47:49.700 um, caught my attention also about this. So his statement is wildly provocative, right? So I'm,

00:47:57.460 I'm giving you his opinion, not my own, which is part of the story. I can, I can tell you what his

00:48:04.900 opinion is, but I can't give you my own because, uh, you know, I get canceled. But he's saying that,

00:48:10.740 uh, there are more, more likely to, to encounter racial preferences for being black. In other words,

00:48:18.500 let's say getting into college or getting hired by a fortune 500 company that wants their diversity to

00:48:25.040 be improved. And I would like to reintroduce my idea that, uh, to get past, uh, racism as best we can,

00:48:36.380 you know, some things can't be a hundred percent solved, but to get past it as best we can,

00:48:42.140 we should reframe our experience away from racism, no racism, fair or no fair, and, and have strategic

00:48:51.560 parity, strategic equality. And what I mean by that is my path to success might be different than your

00:49:00.180 path, but we both have a perfectly good path and there's no, there's no, one is not worse than the

00:49:06.300 other. So if I were black, I'd say, Oh, I will build a strategy that works for me being black. So I 0.75

00:49:14.860 would, um, study hard in school, probably get a scholarship to a good college, uh, and then get a

00:49:22.500 job at a major corporation that's looking for people like me. And that would be my path. It's very,

00:49:28.720 um, very clear path and a very good one. Like that can get you to the top of a big corporation,

00:49:36.180 very high pay. It's an excellent path and it's really available to a hundred percent of people

00:49:42.480 who can do well in school at the very least. So does every black person have the same opportunities

00:49:50.040 that I specifically have? Maybe not. There might be some small company that says, ah, you know,

00:49:57.120 they're racist, you know, or something like that. So we don't have the same path, but strategically

00:50:03.420 they're very similar. And I think that's the frame we should keep in our mind is we don't have to walk

00:50:09.680 down the same path. We just want to get to the same place. If my path goes left, yours goes right,

00:50:16.300 we both get there. I'm not going to complain that you've got a path I don't have. I'm going to say,

00:50:21.200 I got a path. You got a path. It's a tie. And then here's the final irony of this Shelby Steele piece.

00:50:31.280 Uh, he's a really good writer. Um, is that I couldn't have written it.

00:50:36.660 So his point is that he's more likely to encounter racial preferences than discrimination. And his,

00:50:46.620 his article is an example of that because what he wrote, I couldn't have written without getting

00:50:54.480 canceled. Now, of course I couldn't have written it also because I don't have, you know, that

00:50:58.460 experience and blah, blah, blah. But so I wouldn't be credible saying it, but I also couldn't even make

00:51:04.660 the point. I can talk about him making the point, but I can't make that point without getting canceled.

00:51:12.620 So his, his point is well made. There are some advantages, also disadvantages. Uh, uh, unlike

00:51:21.480 many of you, I do believe the systemic racism is real. What you do about it. I think I stand alone in

00:51:31.140 terms of what to do about it, but it's definitely real. All right. And that is all I have for today.

00:51:40.900 And I think it was wonderful.

00:51:46.900 And, uh, if the, if the simulation,

00:51:51.260 so, so somebody in the comments says, poor Scott, he falls for a critical race theory.

00:51:57.980 Did I say that? Did you hear me say that? So the, this is my continual experience is that, uh,

00:52:06.820 people will imagine I have an opinion that I don't have. I have the opposite of that opinion

00:52:11.540 and then I will get blamed for it.

00:52:14.420 So even, even now while we're sitting here, I'm being blamed

00:52:17.780 for supporting something called critical race theory,

00:52:21.380 which I am definitely opposed to, but here I am being blamed for it right in real time.

00:52:27.340 I'm being blamed for the opposite of my actual opinion.

00:52:31.820 So thanks for that. All right. That's all for now.

00:52:38.280 All right. You YouTubers got any more, uh, mind reading and bad, bad takes on my opinion.

00:52:46.780 Pardon Joe Biden and Hunter. That would be hilarious.

00:52:53.280 Somebody says critical race theory foundation. Uh, so somebody here is saying that, uh,

00:52:59.800 systemic racism and critical race theory are basically connected. Not in my opinion.

00:53:05.300 So when I say that there is, uh, the systemic racism is real,

00:53:10.580 I mean it in this specific sense that, uh, black people in general started from a lower base

00:53:19.240 and that that has a ripple through time. That's all. Is there anybody who doesn't agree with that?

00:53:26.400 Do you, do you think that if, uh, if any group, it doesn't matter who it is, if any group started

00:53:32.680 with literally nothing starting from slavery and you fast forward 150 years, would you expect

00:53:39.300 everybody to be doing the same? It's just sort of common sense. Now the other stuff, you know,

00:53:45.540 the, the details of it, I don't buy into that stuff, but certainly if you start from behind,

00:53:51.600 there is a greater likelihood you're going to stay there. That's all. I think it's just common sense.

00:53:58.420 Um, what are your thoughts on election oversight by comments are going by too quickly. I think we have

00:54:05.140 to rethink the whole election process and I'll tell you how I would do it. Cameras are really cheap.

00:54:13.480 I would say that you can't do any ballot handling unless you're in a room that has, uh, ceiling cameras

00:54:20.980 every five feet enough so you can actually read a ballot. I feel as if you shouldn't be able to have

00:54:27.860 a ballot in your hand unless there's a camera directly above you. Everywhere. Now it can't be that

00:54:35.600 expensive to have cameras, right? I mean, there are a lot of small places that maybe can't afford it,

00:54:40.940 but you don't have to do all the small ones. You could just do the big metropolitan ones because

00:54:46.300 that's where all the volume is. So I'd say camera the heck out of it. That would be one thing.

00:54:53.320 Uh, yeah, I, I know I can scroll the comments to pause them. I'm being lazy.

00:55:05.340 All right. That's all I got for now. And I will talk to you.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - November 23, 2020

Episode 1196 Scott Adams： The Kraken and Bigfoot Still Missing. The Bad Guys Are Hunting Me and Election Predictions

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript