Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1247 Scott Adams： You Might Have Heard Trump is Banned From Twitter. What Now？

00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody. Come on in. Come on in. You may have heard that there is some news. Thank

00:00:10.160 goodness we've gotten past the holiday season and the news is plentiful and interesting and

00:00:16.020 we can be entertained once again. I don't know how long I will be still platformed coming to

00:00:25.160 you at the moment on both the Periscope and YouTube platform simultaneously. But how long

00:00:32.000 will I still have the ability to be platformed? Probably not very long. But let's see if we

00:00:41.640 can get through today. And in order to enjoy this to its maximum potential, all you need

00:00:47.780 is a cup or mug or glass, a tanker, chalice, or stein, a canteen, jug, or plastic, a vessel

00:00:51.900 of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure

00:00:59.860 of the dopamine here in the day. I think it makes everything better. Call the silent thing

00:01:04.960 you say. Oh, it seems that the, uh, there's some complaints from YouTube. Let's see what

00:01:18.220 we can do about that. YouTube, are you happy? That should make it better. All right. Um,

00:01:29.940 you know, I own some Twitter stock, full disclosure, but I don't know if it's going to go down that

00:01:38.740 much on Monday. I hear a lot of people saying that. But what exactly is the other Twitter

00:01:44.340 service you're going to use? Parler and Gab are probably going to be taken down by Apple and,

00:01:50.540 uh, the Apple Store and Google Pay. I think Gab's already taken down. So let's try this again

00:01:59.080 with sound. Okay. All you need is a cup or mug or glass, a tanker, chalice, stein, the canteen,

00:02:06.540 jug of flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with, I'm not picking a man. Simultaneously, set, go.

00:02:15.200 All right. Well, the good news is I've, uh, ordered an adapter. So this problem where I can't be

00:02:21.200 charging my iPad at the same time the microphone is plugged in should be solved by this afternoon.

00:02:28.660 Yeah, it was the best sip ever. You're right. It was the best sip ever. Let's talk about the news,

00:02:34.380 not coffee. Well, you all know that Twitter has banned Trump for eternity from Twitter. Now,

00:02:44.260 it's hard to imagine what that meeting was like. I don't know if it was a physical meeting or a Zoom

00:02:51.520 meeting, but don't you think Twitter had some kind of a management meeting to decide whether Trump

00:02:59.320 should be banned forever? Now, I think that the, uh, the justification is that he might've been,

00:03:06.240 in their opinion, fomenting some kind of, you know, uh, trouble.

00:03:13.760 But how did they do the calculation? Because leaving Trump on there to say things, you could

00:03:21.820 assess that, uh, you know, with some risk. You could say, okay, the things he says might cause more

00:03:28.000 things like the, uh, attack on the Capitol. So you don't want to have that risk. So you can reduce

00:03:34.880 it by taking him off the platform. But isn't there an offsetting risk? I mean, isn't there a risk of

00:03:42.800 actual civil war? How do you weigh those? So let's say that, uh, taking Trump off the platform,

00:03:50.780 if you were just going to go through the math of it, let's say that you believed it would be a 50%

00:03:57.660 likelihood to reduce 20 deaths because there might be more unrest. Let's say 20 people might be killed

00:04:06.880 by the time all the unrest is done. If Trump were allowed to stay on the platform and said things that

00:04:12.480 got people fired up, maybe a 50% chance of 10 people dying. Now, the way you would calculate that is

00:04:18.700 you'd say a 50% chance of 10 people dying, just for analysis purposes, you'd treat it as, uh, 10

00:04:27.740 people. So a 50% chance of 20 people dying, you'll, you'll weigh that as the value of 10 people. It's

00:04:34.920 not really 10 people. This is just how you do the analysis. And then you say, okay, but what about the

00:04:40.400 other way where you take him down and you anger 71 million people who feel that they've lost

00:04:48.180 everything that, that makes the country, the country, freedom of speech, freedom, basically the,

00:04:56.080 the freedom to have an opinion and not be punished for it. What is the risk of that? Well, I would say

00:05:00.920 the risk of that is full civil war. Wouldn't you like actual civil war, not the kind where some people

00:05:07.260 are protesting and saying things and things like that. But if you shut down the ability to

00:05:13.100 communicate, or it even feels like you did, uh, because Trump's such a big part of that communication,

00:05:19.400 what would be the expected risk? Now, I think the risk of an actual physical civil war is low,

00:05:27.080 but what is low? 5%? Let's put a number on it. Let's say 5%. Is that fair? Do you think that,

00:05:36.720 uh, shutting, uh, shutting, shutting down, uh, Trump from Twitter gives you a 5% chance of civil war

00:05:45.420 that didn't exist before? Is that too much? So let's say 5% of civil war, what is, what would be

00:05:53.000 the expected risk or number of people who might die in an actual civil war? Let's say a million.

00:05:59.880 I don't know, you know, you'd be guessing, right? Let's say a million people could die in a civil war.

00:06:04.640 So you would take 5% of a million and you would compare it to 50% of 20 and you'd say, which is

00:06:15.200 bigger? 5% of a million, it's a lot bigger. So if I were in that meeting and somebody said,

00:06:23.140 we're trying to reduce the risk to the country. And let's say it was, let's say it was, uh,

00:06:28.500 entirely non-political and it just had to do with safety or safety plus the, you know, the future

00:06:36.260 of Twitter, which would be similar. You know, if they don't, if they don't protect safety,

00:06:41.200 they're going to have to pay for that too. So if I were in the meeting, I would say it looks like

00:06:46.820 you're taking a 50% chance of 20 people dying, 10 people comparing it to, uh, what 50,000 people

00:06:55.120 dying the other way. So you've saved 10 at the cost of 50,000. Now remember, we're only talking

00:07:03.280 statistics so that 50,000 is very unlikely because it's unlikely there would be a civil war. But what if

00:07:11.020 it's a 5%, that's how you do the analysis. If it's a 5% chance more of civil war, you don't do that

00:07:19.100 if you know how to make decisions. So I asked on Twitter, um, ironically, uh, whether this would

00:07:26.620 be viewed as one of the biggest mistakes in American history. And it could, you know, it's in

00:07:33.740 that 5% range, but it could be one of the biggest mistakes in American history, actually. Now we don't

00:07:40.120 know where it's heading yet, but in terms of its potential, it's potentially one of the biggest

00:07:47.500 mistakes in all of human, well, American history, not human history. So one wonders, were there other

00:07:56.060 considerations? In other words, if it were just a business decision and it were just based on saving

00:08:03.560 the most people, is that the way you'd go? Because it looks like exactly the opposite of what you would

00:08:09.860 do if you wanted to save lives or at least reduce risk. Now it could be that if, if, you know, 10 people

00:08:16.840 died tomorrow because of something Trump did, that would look like Twitter is directly responsible.

00:08:22.280 Why didn't you do it sooner? So 10 people dying that can be blamed on you specifically,

00:08:27.660 you might take that more seriously than 50,000 people dying that maybe doesn't get blamed on

00:08:33.880 you specifically. You know what I mean? So it could be that it has to do with how blame would be

00:08:40.560 attributed. And we'll talk about that a little bit more. So I asked on Twitter, everything's sort of

00:08:49.400 meta today, but I did a Twitter poll, which of course are highly unscientific. They're just sort of

00:08:55.400 interesting. And I asked people who do they think is most responsible for the Capitol protests. Now,

00:09:02.520 when I said that, I think most people understood that to mean, you know, with the violence, not just

00:09:07.420 the peaceful part. But who is most responsible for the protests, which led to violence? And the

00:09:14.340 responders, I gave them four choices. You could argue that there should be more choices. But I said,

00:09:20.100 would it be Trump, the fake news, social media, or Congress? Now, of course, my Twitter followers

00:09:25.180 lean pro-Trump. But here's what they said. They said 13% said Trump is most responsible for the

00:09:33.100 Capitol problems. 46% said the fake news. 13% said social media, about the same as Trump. And Congress

00:09:43.680 got 29. So by far, the two entities which are blamed the most for the Capitol protests are the fake news

00:09:51.860 and social media. And social media. And social media, of course, is a booster of fake news and a creator of

00:09:57.560 fake news. So here's how I see the world. Yeah, there's a whiteboard. Yeah, didn't see this coming, did

00:10:04.820 you? Bam, whiteboard time. Coming right at you. All right, here's how I see the world. There is a blame

00:10:13.240 chain, which is to say, it's not that one person had to do what they did in order to get the result

00:10:19.560 we got. It had to be way more than one person. You had to have everything that was part of the

00:10:27.040 causal chain had to be just the way it was to get just the result you got. If you change any of those

00:10:35.580 elements, you get a different outcome. But let's say you tried to apply that thinking to a murder.

00:10:43.600 And you say, wait, wait, it's not the murderer's fault. Because all of the other things had to be

00:10:48.920 placed before that murder could happen. The victim had to be there. Well, that's not the murderer's

00:10:54.840 fault, right? So it doesn't make any sense for a criminal situation. Because when it comes to crime,

00:11:00.480 you need a specific criminal to punish so that society can see people getting punished. And so

00:11:07.760 there's a reason not to do the crime. But in the criminal situation, you're really just looking at

00:11:14.360 stopping crime. You're not philosophically asking, well, who is really responsible? Could it be the

00:11:22.500 parents of the criminal? Could it be society or the way they learn things? Could it be that they were

00:11:28.400 bullied in school? Those could all be 100% true. And they could be 100% the cause. But in the legal

00:11:36.540 world, you just say, it's just got to be the person who pulled the trigger, right? So let's agree

00:11:41.960 that an analysis about the legal system and who's to blame would be unique and you would ignore a lot

00:11:50.580 of reality because you have to for the legal system. But let's say you're just saying, in general,

00:11:56.740 whose fault is it? I'm not putting anybody in jail. It's not the court. It's just we're talking. And we're

00:12:03.960 going to say, who actually should take the blame? And here's how I see it. You've got a fake news

00:12:12.060 business, which gave us the fine people hoax, the drinking bleak chokes and nonstop bias. You can say

00:12:19.620 that it was on both sides. You can say that right was biased and fake news, but it's just different

00:12:24.220 fake news. And I won't argue with you on that. My only point is, what would things look like

00:12:31.180 if we had a reliable and credible free press? Well, when the election happened, the free press

00:12:38.940 would have done two things if they were like a real free press. They would have dug into each of

00:12:44.140 the allegations. They would have created a master list and said, here are the allegations. Here are

00:12:49.600 the people debunking it. And here are the ones that were judged in court one way or the other.

00:12:55.160 And every citizen would be able to look at that and say, oh, okay, I was quite concerned about

00:13:00.980 the integrity of the election. But now I see that the free press has done the work for me.

00:13:06.100 They've investigated. They got other experts. They've debunked. And maybe they debunked them all.

00:13:11.920 What would be the outcome if a credible press, both the left and the right, looked into it,

00:13:19.240 compiled a complete list, considered every claim, and debunked it all with experts, not themselves?

00:13:26.040 What would have been the outcome? Well, not a riot, right? Why would you riot if you knew that your

00:13:34.420 side lost fair and square? You wouldn't. You'd say, damn it, got to try harder next time we lost fair

00:13:41.440 and square. So I would say that the fake news is 100% responsible for the outcome. They created this

00:13:48.840 situation in which they took themselves out of the equation as a credible player and probably only made

00:13:55.600 things worse. I mean, you could point to elements of the press that promoted ridiculous conspiracy

00:14:02.040 theories on the right, primarily. So how does the press not get blamed for this outcome? Well,

00:14:09.880 the reason is that the press's influence is harder to trace down to any individual person.

00:14:17.140 What about social media? Social media is kind of a booster of the fake news that's full of hoaxes

00:14:22.480 and conspiracies theories. The algorithms divide us so that there's natural division that's worse than

00:14:28.760 it would be normally without it. So it's divided the country. Now, once you've divided the country

00:14:34.840 and people are just going to take sides, because that's what social media did to us, what happens

00:14:40.320 when there's any disagreement? Does the disagreement get resolved in a reasonable way where people go,

00:14:47.460 ah, I don't love it, but I'll compromise for the good of the system and stuff like that? No. No, you can't

00:14:53.740 get that. You can't get a negotiated agreement where everybody goes away and goes, ah, it wasn't perfect,

00:15:01.620 but we can live with it. You can't get that if the social media is dividing the country. People just go to

00:15:08.460 camps and they think that's where they need to be. So they've been brainwashed into this division through the

00:15:14.300 algorithms and, um, and also the social media allows protests to organize. So if you didn't have social

00:15:21.140 media, I doubt you could have been as organized as they were to, to get people there. So that's part of

00:15:27.380 it. So I'd say social media, probably, uh, if you removed social media, would the, uh, riots have happened?

00:15:36.080 I feel you could make a strong case, really strong, that without social media doing what it does

00:15:43.200 intentionally and unintentionally, you wouldn't have the riots. So are they responsible? If,

00:15:50.320 if they didn't do what they were doing, it wouldn't have happened. So are they to blame? Well,

00:15:55.540 the answer is they have a hundred percent responsibility at the same time that the fake news has a hundred

00:16:00.920 percent, because if they didn't do what they were doing, probably we wouldn't have had this outcome.

00:16:07.760 Now let's take, uh, uh, Congress and state governments. They gave us a non-transparent

00:16:14.160 election with lots of last minute changes and they resisted audits. Does this situation pretty much

00:16:22.640 guarantee that sooner or later you're going to have a election related riot? It does. It guarantees it.

00:16:29.500 Now it wouldn't necessarily guarantee it if you didn't also have social media dividing the country

00:16:37.460 and the fake news, you know, doing the same really. So is the Congress and the state governments

00:16:44.620 collectively, are they responsible for the riots? Yes. What percentage of responsibility would I give

00:16:51.220 them? A hundred percent. Because if they'd done their job and given us transparent elections or let us audit

00:16:58.180 them or not made last minute changes, which destroyed the credibility of the system, if they had not

00:17:04.240 done these things, we wouldn't have had protests. So a hundred percent blame social media, one hundred

00:17:12.400 percent blame fake news, one hundred percent blame. Any one of them could have done a good job

00:17:19.100 job or a different job or a different job and gotten a different outcome, but they didn't. They didn't.

00:17:26.740 So what about Trump's, uh, calls to protest the language he used? Was it responsible for

00:17:33.800 the bloodshed? Yes. Yes, it was because Trump easily could have done something else. He could have said,

00:17:43.580 look, absolutely no violence. I don't want to see anything like that. If you come to the, to DC,

00:17:50.080 make sure you're in the, you know, you're in the safe zones. Don't bring any lead pipes. He could have

00:17:55.580 said that, but he didn't. And so I back, um, I backed his removal from office because that was a pretty big

00:18:03.420 mistake. But I do not back Trump's removal from office without an equal amount of punishment for the

00:18:12.300 other entities, which have equal responsibility. Now, again, the way our legal system is organized

00:18:18.620 and the way we're all trained is that the last person who does something is the guilty one.

00:18:24.500 And if it were a legal case or a lawsuit, yeah, that's the way we treat it. You have to,

00:18:29.980 because there's no practical way to treat it any other way. You wouldn't really know what to do with

00:18:34.040 these other entities. It's too, too hard to trace the influence, but you know, it's there.

00:18:38.520 Right. So here's my take. Should Trump be removed from office for this specific infraction,

00:18:47.340 which probably did lead to some deaths? I'd say yes. And I think it's an easy call because he only

00:18:53.540 has a few days left in office and what was he going to do anyway? Right. And if you're going to send a

00:18:59.060 message to say presidents should not act this way, you know, to drum up any kind of attack on the

00:19:06.620 Capitol, you could argue that his exact words never said anything like that. And you'd be right.

00:19:12.120 There was nothing in his exact words that told anybody to do anything violent. But you know,

00:19:20.780 he could have played it differently, right? It's not what he said that was a problem. In my opinion,

00:19:27.760 he didn't say anything that was a problem. It's what he didn't say. It's what he could have said,

00:19:33.300 easily knew that he could have said. So I think that accepting responsibility for that is fair.

00:19:40.500 If you will also let him accept credit for things he did in his presidency, which I think were

00:19:47.200 unparalleled and incredible. But can't you hold both thoughts? Can't you say he was really good at

00:19:53.540 this? This part, not so good. That's fair, right? Is there anybody who can't hold those two thoughts?

00:19:59.700 You probably shouldn't follow me if you can't. All right, so here's my take. The scariest part about

00:20:08.500 this system I just described is that social media and the fake news, more of the fake news working

00:20:16.240 through the social media, they're the ones who can assign blame. So we have a system that if you had

00:20:23.100 designed the system from scratch, people would laugh at you. They would laugh at you. All right,

00:20:28.540 let me describe the system as if I were designing it from scratch. All right, we're gonna, I'm gonna

00:20:33.700 build a system. So we'll have something called the free press, and we'll have this thing called

00:20:37.640 the government, and there'll be a public, and this is how they'll all work together. Now there's, there's

00:20:43.560 one bug in the system, I gotta admit, and it is that one of the entities can cause the problems

00:20:51.280 in society, and they're the only ones who can distribute the blame. And I'd say, hold on, I

00:20:59.100 probably heard that wrong. Are you saying you're intentionally designing a system where the people

00:21:04.600 who are the main cause of all of our problems are also the only ones who can assign the blame?

00:21:10.220 And the person would say, yeah, yeah, that's, that's what we're doing. I go, well, hold on,

00:21:15.740 wait a minute. Do you not see a problem here? You just said that the ones who cause the problems,

00:21:22.640 let's say the fake news, you're saying they also get to blame other people for the problems that

00:21:27.380 they caused right in front of you? Yeah, that's the system. What would you do if somebody presented

00:21:34.560 you with that, that system? You'd laugh. You would literally laugh. He's like, well, that's not gonna

00:21:40.060 work. Because obviously the people causing the problems are gonna blame other people, like Trump.

00:21:46.740 Now Trump made it easy. He made it easy to blame because he didn't play it right. So that's, you know,

00:21:52.500 that's the problem with being a politician. If you make it easy, they're gonna come, they're gonna come

00:21:57.060 for you. So this is a completely unworkable system for the long run. I don't know exactly.

00:22:07.340 I don't know exactly what we're going to do to fix this. But I do expect there'll be enough ingenuity

00:22:13.980 and enough A-B testing and enough free market stuff and enough energy to probably find some

00:22:19.840 alternatives. It's just not obvious what they're going to be. Now the, the public is quite good

00:22:26.520 as solving things eventually. We're pretty good problem solvers. But I gotta say, it's not obvious

00:22:34.900 to me what you do about any of this. Because right now you see Trump losing his, effectively,

00:22:41.780 his freedom of speech by being deplatformed from Twitter. But these other entities, I don't think

00:22:48.980 they're gonna lose their freedom of speech, are they? Because they got to blame other people.

00:22:52.920 So as long as the fake news can just make stuff up, what are you gonna do? Let me suggest a

00:23:00.560 possibility. I'm just gonna brainstorm right now. We watched Trump get kicked off, not just for

00:23:08.800 inciting violence, but I think they would have kicked him off anyway for making election claims

00:23:13.640 that social media says are not true. But you know what? Social media also needs to do a little

00:23:20.820 better job on the fake news because, for example, these hoaxes, the fine people hoax, the drinking

00:23:26.500 bleach hoax, those were allowed to spread. What do you think did more damage to the country? The

00:23:33.140 fine people hoax or Trump telling people to protest in D.C., which led to the violence? Which do you

00:23:41.880 think hurt the country more? I don't think it's close. I think the fine people hoax is one of the most

00:23:49.380 damaging things that's ever happened. Not even close. It's maybe a thousand to one. You know,

00:23:56.540 I wouldn't compare them. As horrible and tragic as it is for five people to die and all those people

00:24:03.320 being injured, completely unacceptable on every level. But the fine people hoax is worse by maybe

00:24:10.700 a thousand times worse. It's not even close to what it did to this country. But social media allows that

00:24:16.480 to stand. Now, that's an obvious lie. You just look at the transcript. Oh, obvious lie. Why is that allowed

00:24:24.680 to stay? Could it be that the real way to solve this is to put pressure on social media to, wait for it,

00:24:35.320 wait for it, use their own standards? Because that's a pretty strong argument, isn't it?

00:24:42.740 Hey, social media, we'd like you to use your own rules. Just use them consistently. And I think we

00:24:51.000 would need to pick a few items. Let's say we being anybody who's concerned about the issue. Pick a few

00:24:56.400 items and just die on that hill. Just say, look, as long as you're allowing people to say that the

00:25:05.460 fine people hoax is a real thing, and that you can just say that on social media with no

00:25:11.000 repercussions. Just pick one thing and say, you need to be regulated or shut down if you can't

00:25:19.460 treat these the same. Right? Now, wouldn't you think, there's a question, would it be possible to do a

00:25:27.400 lawsuit in which you just pointed out this difference and said that it's two classes of people being treated

00:25:34.300 differently by the same company? Is that legal? One class of people being Republicans, let's say,

00:25:42.120 the other part being non-Republicans, could a social media company treat them completely differently

00:25:49.780 when their policy says, their own policy says, they don't? Their policy doesn't say anything about

00:25:58.380 Republicans and Democrats. It just says, you know, information that's terribly wrong and might be

00:26:03.500 dangerous to the country, they're going to ban. What if I agree with that? What if conservatives said,

00:26:10.340 hey, I like this? What if conservatives embraced it and said, absolutely, here's our list of other

00:26:19.360 things you should ban on your platform. And let's just go for it. Let's do it consistently. Let's do it

00:26:26.080 once. Let's do it right. Let's get rid of the following lies. Now, probably it would be good to

00:26:32.760 have a list of maybe five good lies, like the five top lies that social media allows. And you pick the

00:26:40.080 ones that are the most damaging. The ones that literally you can say, okay, that probably killed

00:26:46.280 somebody. For example, when the fake media said that President Trump was suggesting drinking bleach,

00:26:55.280 which never happened, or anything like it, nothing similar, nothing in that, nothing like it. And if

00:27:02.420 you still think that happened, you need to read up on it. But what happens when the fake media says

00:27:09.080 your president is so unscientific and dumb that he said drink bleach, which never happened?

00:27:17.500 What does that do to people's compliance? When the president says maybe you should wear masks?

00:27:22.840 He was a little reluctant, but you know, well, he got there. Do people say, yeah, I'm going to listen

00:27:29.480 to the guy who said drink bleach? No, no. They discredited Trump. So anything useful,

00:27:37.440 he might have said, and he did eventually say wear masks, didn't have any effect, because he's the

00:27:43.240 drink bleach guy, according to the media. So you could easily, I think, find strong arguments that say

00:27:49.400 that the two sides are being treated unequally, and maybe the Supreme Court would hear that.

00:27:56.700 Now, I'm not a lawyer. Is that a case? Can somebody who actually knows anything about the law,

00:28:01.520 which would not be me, tell me, could you bring a case about unequal treatment when it's so obvious?

00:28:07.440 This is the most obvious case you could ever see. There's no jury in the world

00:28:11.960 who would disagree that they're making up, you know, they're making up stuff and publishing it

00:28:18.200 like it's true. All right. So maybe that's the way to go. As we're learning more about the protests

00:28:26.200 themselves, and I have to admit, I was taking a little bit of a humorous approach to it because

00:28:34.200 there was a guy in a Viking helmet and blah, blah, blah. But when you hear the details,

00:28:39.260 there were apparently members of that group with lead pipes, and it was probably the lead pipes on

00:28:47.020 the head that injured the cops, and at least one died. And let me say this as clearly as possible.

00:28:54.200 Anybody who had a lead pipe and used it, in this situation, should be the death penalty.

00:29:03.720 You know, normally maybe not, if it was like a fight or something. But if you're trying to

00:29:08.100 overthrow the government, you know, if you attack the government with lead pipes, the government in

00:29:14.940 this case, including the security force, I don't even know if that's jail. That should be execution.

00:29:20.700 Shouldn't it? If you get all the way into the Capitol building and start killing people with a deadly

00:29:27.820 weapon, that should be death sentence. I'd be okay with that. As opposed to all the peaceful

00:29:35.920 protesters, of course not. There's some fake news going around on a video. I've told you that video

00:29:43.600 is the biggest liar. We used to think if you saw it on video, you saw it with your own eyes, and therefore

00:29:48.880 it's true. It's right there on video. But of course, the last couple years we've learned that video is

00:29:53.840 the biggest liar. It's the easiest way to lie. It's a misleading edit. And there's a video on the

00:30:02.920 internet that people are saying in the comments that what they're seeing in the video is that the law

00:30:08.940 enforcement opened up a door and let the protesters into the Capitol. So that's what the comment on the

00:30:15.500 video says. You can see it with your own eyes. There are police officers opening the door to let

00:30:21.760 people in. And then you watch the video, and nothing like that's on the video. You see a door open, but

00:30:27.860 there's no suggestion that the police did it. There was somebody on the inside, but probably a protester

00:30:34.980 who got in there and opened the door. So the ability of people to be fooled has gone to a whole new

00:30:44.400 level, it seems like. That you can actually look at the video that doesn't show that thing,

00:30:49.600 and then tweet it with a statement that says, look at that thing on this video, and it's just not there.

00:30:54.940 This is not there. What the hell? All right. Apparently, according to Rasmussen, Trump's approval is up

00:31:03.340 since the protests. What do you think Trump's approval is going to be after he gets kicked off of Twitter?

00:31:10.180 You know, he has been. I feel like it might go up. What happens to Trump's approval the less you can

00:31:19.520 hear about him tweeting? It goes up. But here's the interesting thing to me. So the things that

00:31:28.620 Trump got banned for, ultimately, were nothing you should get banned for in any of our opinions.

00:31:34.860 I mean, it's obviously subjective. But I don't think anybody thought there was any content that

00:31:40.400 was bannable. Even the ACLU, no friend of the president, even they're saying it went too far.

00:31:49.800 But apparently, one of the tweets just before he got banned was he was talking about starting a

00:31:54.980 competing platform to Twitter. Now, is it a coincidence,

00:31:58.960 is it a coincidence that as soon as Trump said something that was vital to the bottom line of

00:32:06.840 Twitter, that he was going to start a competing platform, that that's when he got kicked off of

00:32:12.900 the platform for something that didn't look like a big deal? Is that a total coincidence that he was

00:32:20.100 using Twitter to take down Twitter and they banned him? I don't think so. I mean,

00:32:27.600 I don't know if anybody was at the meeting and said it out loud, hey, Trump's talking about a

00:32:34.200 competition, let's use an excuse to kick him off. I doubted anybody said that out loud.

00:32:39.640 But if you own Twitter stock, and you see Trump talking about making your stock worth less,

00:32:48.240 which way are you going to decide? If you own Twitter stock, would you let Trump stay on there

00:32:55.180 talking about stuff that would make your stock price go down? I think you'd find a reason to

00:33:00.200 get him off, and it might not be the strongest reason, if you know what I mean, if you catch my

00:33:04.840 meaning. So I would say that everything about the way Twitter has treated that raises questions.

00:33:13.300 So Dominion Voting System is suing Sidney Powell for $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit. And I think

00:33:23.960 she's got trouble. She's got trouble because the claims that she made were really specific and

00:33:31.380 really, really debunked. So she might have a problem there. And when I saw the number suing for

00:33:39.020 $1.3 billion, I thought, well, that's like a crazy number, right? You can't sue for...

00:33:46.460 There's somebody yelling at me in all caps. Scott spelled wrong with one T in all caps.

00:33:54.260 This isn't about stocks, boomer. Did I say this was about stocks? It's one variable. It's one variable.

00:34:06.500 All caps guy. Relax. Relax. I have some advice for you. All caps guy. You'll probably see a lot of

00:34:18.120 people making comments in a public way. You know, they'll write their comment, and then it'll show up

00:34:23.000 on the screen, and then sometimes thousands or tens of thousands of people will read those comments.

00:34:27.800 That's not for you. That's not for you. You maybe should whisper to people that you know really

00:34:36.100 well. Tweeting in public? Not your strong suit. Just rethink it. That's all I'm saying. Maybe put

00:34:46.500 your energy somewhere where you're not embarrassed. Anyway, when I thought this $1.3 billion defamation

00:34:55.560 suit against Sidney Powell, that's probably not too far off from what this is going to cost them.

00:35:01.860 I wouldn't be surprised if Dominion lost over a billion dollars. I mean, that certainly seems

00:35:09.640 possible because if people believe these allegations... Now, I, of course, have said that any digital

00:35:17.080 system can be compromised. So if you believe that their digital systems are the ones that have not

00:35:23.220 been compromised, it's probably because you did a deep audit of it yourself, right? Because nobody

00:35:28.980 else did. Nobody audited that stuff. So I would say that I have no specific reason to think there's

00:35:38.560 anything wrong with this system or any other, except that 100% of the times that you have this set up,

00:35:45.120 somebody's going to hack it. Every time. You don't know if it was this year. You don't know if it's

00:35:52.420 happened in the past. You don't know if it'll happen in the future or when. But it happens every time.

00:35:58.180 It's not like this will be the one situation. There won't be a hacker. That's not a thing.

00:36:04.880 Here's some more stuff that got removed. I guess Steve Bannon's The War Room got removed from YouTube.

00:36:12.400 Google Play is getting rid of Parler and Apple might as well. Gab is already banned on Google Play

00:36:20.760 and Apple Store. So if you don't think this is serious, that's pretty serious. I went down, I thought

00:36:28.860 I went down 40,000 followers on Twitter in the last few days. And is it a coincidence that the purge

00:36:35.520 starts, that the purge began right on January 6th when Biden was sworn in? It feels as if

00:36:43.800 that date was picked because that would be the safest day to do it. So I don't know how many of

00:36:54.820 the removed users are because of bots being removed. I think that's the biggest reason. I think the main

00:37:01.880 reason was getting rid of bots. But I think the, yeah. But you also wonder how many people just left

00:37:11.940 the platform. So a lot of people left and have gone to the Locals platform. I will tell you that

00:37:18.020 if I get banned here, you could find me on a subscription platform called Locals. And the

00:37:23.980 URL would be scottadams, all one word, dot locals, with an S, dot com. So I'll be there if anything

00:37:32.600 happens to this. Lindsay Graham, he says, he tweeted, he says, I'm more determined than never to strip

00:37:41.280 Section 230 protections from big tech. Now keep in mind, Lindsay Graham, if you strip those protections

00:37:47.820 from big tech, you're also stripping it from Parler and Gab. And Parler and Gab would go on a business

00:37:54.980 pretty much the same day. Because they allow more free speech, which allows, you know, more bad

00:38:04.600 voices to be part of the system. And so if they had to start moderating all of their voices,

00:38:12.680 if Parler and Gab did, then they would just become Twitter. So the only choice they would have is to

00:38:19.620 become Twitter, at which point there's no point in having them. Or they just get sued out of business

00:38:26.340 for having, you know, Nazis on their website. So, um, Lindsay Graham, you're a little bit too late.

00:38:35.740 I don't see any way that a Section 230 thing could work, uh, in the coming administration. Do you?

00:38:42.860 I don't, I don't believe that the opportunity to regulate the social media companies exists anymore.

00:38:51.400 I think on about January 6th, the, the, even the possibility of regulating the social media companies

00:38:58.620 just went away. So, you know, Lindsay Graham can talk about it, but it's not going to happen

00:39:04.740 because the social media companies just have too much power and they're too connected with the

00:39:09.980 Democrats. It just can't happen. There's just no way that can happen. So there's no point talking

00:39:15.220 about it, actually. Um, weird story that, uh, that w there was a lot of job loss recently in December

00:39:22.120 and, but women lost jobs at a rate of 10 to one compared to, to men or nine to one or something,

00:39:29.780 something in that range, you know, like 10 to one. Now, why would that make sense in a world in which

00:39:35.480 a female employment had been zooming, uh, to the point where actually for a while it was higher.

00:39:40.940 There were more women working than men. I mean, that's how good female employment was. It just

00:39:45.560 dipped below that number. But why would it be that women would lose jobs 10 to one or something in that

00:39:53.060 range? And the, the answer that I saw, I don't know if it's true, is the teachers unions. Is there

00:40:02.220 anything that the teachers unions haven't broken? Because the teachers unions are keeping the schools

00:40:07.820 closed. They have the power to, you know, influence that. And because we live in a sexist, gender sexist

00:40:15.160 country, uh, more women are staying home because the kids have to stay home from school than the men.

00:40:20.960 Now, who saw that coming? So I don't think there's anything that you can't blame on teachers unions at

00:40:31.280 this point. So teachers unions are, you know, brainwashing people that, you know, gets you this

00:40:36.340 kind of situation. They're, uh, preventing school choice, which is the fundamental cause of, uh,

00:40:44.400 structural racism. Because if you can't get a good education, you're not going to get ahead.

00:40:50.960 So as long as the teachers unions are destroying the country from the, from the bottom up by

00:40:56.660 destroying education and the opportunity to have competition and education, we would make it good

00:41:02.100 as opposed to what it is now. Um, teachers unions are now invulnerable because of the Biden

00:41:09.680 administration. So now teachers unions, the most malign influence in the country are now completely

00:41:15.760 safe. The second most malign influence, which also has lots of benefits, right? There, there aren't

00:41:21.660 anything that's completely bad or completely good would be social media and social media now is

00:41:28.200 completely invulnerable under a Biden administration. So the two most negative forces in the country just

00:41:35.840 became invulnerable under, under Biden. Am I wrong? Is that, is that hyperbole? The two most destructive

00:41:43.720 forces just became invulnerable. I think that's true. I don't think that's an exaggeration.

00:41:51.580 All right. Um, how long do you think Republicans will be allowed to use banking?

00:41:57.640 You know, when we had lots of, uh, non-digital systems and people could be anonymous and, you

00:42:06.060 know, you could use your little bank and it's not connected to anything else. Everybody could

00:42:11.800 make mistakes or be unpopular and they can still live a life. But what happens when, what happens

00:42:19.240 when you, you get to the point where you say something in a tweet and all of your banking gets

00:42:24.660 turned off? You know, that's a thing, right? That's a thing already that if you say something

00:42:31.760 in public that, uh, is not popular that you can't bank. Now, what can you do in this world if you

00:42:39.780 can't bank? Well, you could try to get by with crypto, but it's not much of a life, right? At the

00:42:44.860 moment that'll probably correct itself in a few short years, but at the moment you wouldn't be able to

00:42:50.320 start a business, get a loan, anything. So the ability of the fake news to just cancel you

00:42:59.080 is reaching, you know, higher and higher levels to the point where once the government gets this

00:43:05.620 power, and it will, of course, the government will be able to just turn off any critic. So let's take

00:43:14.460 me, for example. Have I done anything that would, in your opinion, earn me a ban or get me kicked off

00:43:23.460 of banking? I think the answer is no. And I, I try really, really hard to make sure I know where that

00:43:30.580 line is. And I don't say anything that would, um, cause trouble. And if there's a story in the news that

00:43:37.580 turns out to be not true, I think I'm pretty consistent in saying, oh, I was wrong, not true,

00:43:44.700 as soon as I know. I think you would find that I've probably debunked more conspiracy theories than

00:43:50.460 anybody. So I'm not really in the business of promoting them as much as debunking them.

00:43:55.560 So if you were to look at, you know, my body of work, you'd say, no, he's okay. He'll be okay.

00:44:01.700 But here's the thing. There's a lot of subjectivity involved in that, isn't there?

00:44:08.160 How much subjectivity would it take to take me from my safe little content to just stretch that

00:44:15.460 over the line a little bit to where I'm bannable, just because of somebody's opinion of what I said,

00:44:21.560 maybe not even because of what I said. Now, am I vulnerable to being banned because someone else

00:44:28.560 has an incorrect opinion of what I said? The answer is yes. Our current system allows somebody

00:44:36.860 else to say, you know, in my opinion, Scott, you've crossed the line, even if I haven't,

00:44:44.980 even if I haven't. And they can just turn me off. Now, the banks can do the same thing.

00:44:53.480 How long do you think it'll take before they figure that out? So here's, here's the play.

00:44:57.500 You might see people like me targeted for destruction. I would expect that. You're

00:45:02.740 seeing it already, by the way. If you're following me on social media, you know that they are coming

00:45:08.000 for me. And there will always be a reason that's not the real reason. So the reason will be somebody

00:45:15.920 else's opinion turned into fake news of what I did or did not say. The fake news will become

00:45:23.500 what I have to explain, but I can't. Do you know why I won't be able to explain it away?

00:45:30.000 Because it's on social media and fake news. And they control who sees what. I don't have a chance.

00:45:36.540 I mean, I can say what I can say, but they could just suppress it. So let's say this scenario.

00:45:43.740 Let's say there's somebody who's got a strong association with Jack Dorsey. Or let's just say

00:45:51.180 somebody at Twitter. Let's take Jack out of it. It doesn't have to be his personality because that

00:45:55.280 that just makes everything confusing. Let's just say it's Twitter. And there's some executives there

00:46:00.700 who could push the button and erase me. All right. And if some politician knows this person at Twitter

00:46:08.460 and says, you know, it would really be good for the cause to get rid of a guy who talks about persuasion

00:46:18.440 and is maybe helping the other team. Wouldn't it be good if there were less of him?

00:46:25.620 And now the person at Twitter, hypothetically, this is just a speculative kind of thing,

00:46:30.920 says to themselves, well, I'll take a look at him. And if he's done anything to violate our guidelines,

00:46:36.120 then we'd have cause. But I'm not aware of anything. So then he starts looking at my Twitter

00:46:41.340 feed. Do you think somebody who's looking for a problem could find one? Every time, yeah. There

00:46:49.380 would be no chance that they couldn't find one. And yet, there's nothing there. As far as I know,

00:46:55.780 I've never done anything that would be even really close to that line that I know of. I mean,

00:47:02.120 I'm not aware of anything that's even close to the line. But so easily it could be interpreted as

00:47:07.500 something that I didn't say, meaning more than it meant, wrong context, leave out something, etc.

00:47:14.940 So then what happens if that Twitter executive does a favor for his friend, the Democratic senator?

00:47:21.340 This is all just made up. None of this is happening. And they take me off. What do I do?

00:47:27.200 What's my recourse? My recourse is nothing. Nothing. There's no recourse. Twitter was talking

00:47:37.720 at one point about having some kind of independent mechanism for judging who gets kicked off. But

00:47:44.160 that's not happened. And I think that enough time has gone by that you should assume it won't.

00:47:49.780 I don't think there's much chance that's going to happen. So if there's no process for getting

00:47:55.160 kicked off, and you can get kicked off because of an opinion, somebody else's opinion, not your own,

00:48:01.520 why wouldn't they come for me? Really? Right? Why wouldn't they try to get rid of me?

00:48:08.580 It would be the smart play. So I think people like me will be targeted for destruction. And if you said,

00:48:17.500 well, Scott, you can go to one of those other platforms, no, you can't. No, you can't.

00:48:23.780 You could try. But not many people would see you there. And you wouldn't be interacting with the

00:48:29.580 other side, which is the whole fun of it anyway. But what happens if they turn off my banking?

00:48:37.740 That could happen. How hard would it be for somebody to get to somebody in one of the

00:48:42.100 payment processing companies, Stripe or something like that, and just say, you know,

00:48:46.840 you've got standards, Stripe, and this guy. And then Stripe would say, well, what did he say?

00:48:54.000 You know, we need some information. We can't just ban somebody because you want them.

00:48:58.080 I go, well, look at the news. Look what it says on social media that this guy did.

00:49:02.680 He's already been banned by Twitter, already got kicked off of YouTube. So why are you giving him

00:49:10.560 banking? See what happens? You don't need any new rules. You don't need any new laws. You don't

00:49:19.440 need anything to change. And people like me can be kicked off of both social media and banking

00:49:25.100 with no recourse. No recourse. And that's our current situation. That's right now. Now,

00:49:34.420 you don't think that's dangerous? The only thing that I would add to that,

00:49:46.660 I might get kicked off social media right now. Let's see if I can word this in a way that keeps

00:49:54.000 me here for another day. All right. Yeah, Stripe did it to Gavin McGinnis, somebody saying in the

00:50:00.880 comments. So this is real, by the way, what I'm describing is something that already happens.

00:50:08.000 I'm not talking about something that might happen. You get that, right? This is happening now. I'm just

00:50:13.720 saying that they could just do more of it and it could pick me up easily. It would be easy to

00:50:18.600 disappear me if they want to. But here's the part, though. I got to say this really carefully.

00:50:26.520 Let me say it generally. I'm going to say it in the most general way. And then you can fill in

00:50:34.800 with your own mind what I mean. And it goes like this. I'm probably the last person you want to fuck

00:50:42.340 with. I'll just say that. Probably just about the last person in the world you want to fuck with.

00:50:50.500 Because I am really, really flexible about most things. I'm really, really flexible. If somebody

00:50:59.920 makes a mistake or they criticize me, yeah, no big deal. I mean, I tend to respond to criticisms,

00:51:07.840 but that's just for fun. But if I got taken out just to take me out, that might put me in a whole

00:51:21.200 different mood. Whole different mood. And I'm just saying, I'm the last person you want to fuck with.

00:51:30.440 So we'll see what happens there. The FBI released a poster of 10 of the Capitol rioters who they have

00:51:41.820 good pictures of their faces. And they're publishing the 10 faces because they're looking for the public

00:51:48.360 to help them identify them. What's wrong with this story? Before I tell you what's wrong with the story,

00:51:55.260 this is being reported. I think it's a real thing, that the FBI has 10 faces they're asking the public

00:52:02.480 to help them identify. What's wrong with that story? See if you know. And remember that the faces are

00:52:11.500 really clear. You can see them really well. What's wrong with the story that they're asking the public

00:52:16.340 to identify them? Here's what's wrong with the story. They don't need the public to identify them.

00:52:23.400 They know who they are. So why are they asking the public? When I say they know who they are,

00:52:29.440 have you heard that there is facial identification applications? You don't think the FBI has facial

00:52:35.760 identification such as, I don't know which one they use, but Clearview AI is the leader in the field.

00:52:42.620 You think there's nobody in the FBI who has the app that thousands of law enforcement agencies use

00:52:51.620 routinely? Nobody at the FBI knows that there's a facial recognition app that they can have in,

00:52:58.660 I don't know, 30 minutes. It would take them to, you know, buy a license for it.

00:53:06.220 What's wrong with the story? The FBI publishing these faces, I don't know what the purpose is,

00:53:14.280 but it's certainly not identification, because they know who they are. You could call somebody today.

00:53:21.580 I could literally do this. I could literally, personally, get their identities probably in half

00:53:28.480 an hour, you know, if I had access to the app, but you have to be law enforcement to do it.

00:53:34.220 So you could pretty much find somebody in law enforcement who has the app, and without,

00:53:39.320 you know, any violation of any licenses or privacy say, hey, do you have the app? And the, let's say,

00:53:47.080 some police officer somewhere says, yeah, we use this all the time. And they say, did you see this

00:53:51.920 tweet? Here's 10 faces. Point your app at the tweet and tell me who they are. And this is how hard it

00:54:00.040 would be. Here's the tweet. And then you take your other phone with the app, and you just point it at

00:54:09.280 it. And you identify them instantly. Now, you're telling me the FBI doesn't know that? What is the

00:54:17.440 FBI doing? Is it part of demonizing Trump supporters? Is that what's happening? Because I can't think of a

00:54:27.060 reason they do it, unless it's just some automatic process. And, you know, maybe it's just the process

00:54:32.500 that they always publish them or something. I don't know. But I got a question, because they

00:54:38.440 certainly don't need to do it. By the time that was tweeted, they had all those names. You know,

00:54:43.620 long before somebody could have done a Photoshop to put the 10 faces onto a page, the time it would

00:54:50.620 take you to Photoshop the page of the 10 faces is way longer than it took to identify them.

00:54:56.780 Literally, this is them, identify them. Snap. And there's the name. That's literally it. If you

00:55:06.980 haven't seen it done, it's shocking. It's shocking that it works, and it basically works every time

00:55:13.400 for all practical purposes. Have I considered starting my own bank? Well, I do have a crypto,

00:55:23.020 the when. So I have my own currency. That's a start. Oh, yeah. And somebody's saying it's the FBI

00:55:34.700 thing is training people to snitch. Maybe. I don't have a better theory. And I don't know that

00:55:44.400 that's true. But why else would you put down a list and ask for help on something you don't need help

00:55:50.560 on? There's some other reason. It's definitely not identification. Why limit it to law enforcement?

00:55:59.200 Well, you don't want your stalker to have it. You know, there are reasons that facial recognition

00:56:06.260 probably needs to be limited. If you were to fast forward 20 years from now, yeah, it'll be ubiquitous

00:56:12.800 in 20 years. But at the moment, while we're feeling our way through the market,

00:56:17.280 I think limiting it to law enforcement makes sense. That's just a good guardrail for now.

00:56:23.280 But it'll change.

00:56:28.740 Treating them like outlaws? Well, that's the point, is that they were breaking some laws.

00:56:37.380 What is the freest place on earth? I don't know. Good question.

00:56:41.280 Was there a poster of Antifa and BLM rioters? Probably. I mean, I wouldn't say there wasn't.

00:56:49.780 That's why I'm saying the FBI just might have a process where it doesn't even matter if they've

00:56:54.700 already been identified. There's just somebody's job it is to put things on posters. So maybe it's

00:56:59.480 the person whose job it was to put things on a poster just went ahead and did it, even though

00:57:04.160 it didn't have to happen. Treason needs to be dealt with. Well, here's the problem with treason.

00:57:17.520 Treason would be helping China take over the United States. Unambiguous. And we'd all agree,

00:57:25.240 well, there's some treason right there. There's a traitor. But what if there's a genuine and legitimate

00:57:32.060 disagreement about who won the election and who is the one doing the coup? So if you're

00:57:42.340 trying to take over the Capitol because you're trying to stop a coup, is that the same as taking

00:57:50.960 over the Capitol because you are a coup? Because who was it who got to decide that the protesters were

00:58:00.820 a coup versus people trying to stop a coup? Who got to decide? Well, social media, fake news.

00:58:12.100 They get to decide. Now, you can say to me, but Scott, Scott, Scott, the protesters were operating under

00:58:21.880 bad information. Bad information about the election having problems. And since there was no court case or

00:58:30.040 official ruling that there was any problem, that therefore they're the treasonous ones. Now,

00:58:37.860 wait a minute. That doesn't make any sense. If they were just mistaken, it's not treason.

00:58:43.820 They were just mistaken. If they thought they were doing a counter coup to a coup that just took over

00:58:50.640 the United States. They are patriots. They are misguided patriots. And the ones with the pipes

00:58:58.820 broke the law and they will have to pay for that. But why were they doing it? Were they doing it

00:59:07.220 because they thought they were overthrowing a legitimate government? Or did they do it because

00:59:12.080 they thought they were stopping a coup, which would have been cheating in the election to get the wrong

00:59:18.020 people elected? I think the minimum requirement to call somebody treasonous or a traitor is that

00:59:27.320 they have to, in their own mind, be working against the best interests of the country. They would have

00:59:33.580 to be working against our Constitution. In their minds, they were working for it. I won't say that's

00:59:41.120 true of every single person with a pipe in their hand. But in general, they were working for the

00:59:49.360 benefit of the country to keep the United States strong and to make sure that it had not fallen to

00:59:56.700 a coup. That is literally the opposite of treason. That is opposite. Because the only thing that

01:00:06.280 mattered is what they thought when they were doing it, in terms of how you label it. Now, in terms of

01:00:12.000 what they were thinking when they did it, doesn't make any difference to the criminality of it.

01:00:18.360 And unfortunately, we all have to accept that. Because you can't have a system where somebody with a pipe

01:00:24.440 can get away with it because they had bad information. Right? If you kill your neighbor with a pipe and then

01:00:30.120 later say, ah, I had bad information. I thought my lawyer, my neighbor did something bad. Turns out

01:00:36.980 he didn't. But, you know, you can't convict me because in my mind, I thought I was actually doing

01:00:43.780 a good thing. That doesn't work. You can't use that with the legal system. You just sort of have to

01:00:49.840 blame the person who had the pipe in their hand or the whole system falls apart. But treason?

01:00:55.960 Treason? Treason's an opinion and it's not based on any observation. Do you think there was anybody

01:01:02.240 in that crowd who would have said to you, yeah, we do think Biden won fair and square, but still,

01:01:08.560 we don't like it. So we're going to try to overthrow the government because even though the election was

01:01:13.680 fair, we don't like the outcome. Do you think you could get even one person to say that? Literally

01:01:19.720 one. Could you get one person to say that in that crowd? I'll bet not. I'll bet there wouldn't be

01:01:25.120 one person who in their minds thought they were doing anything remotely like treason.

01:01:31.380 They thought they were protecting the country. Now, why is it that somebody could be so uninformed

01:01:37.560 according to other people? How could they be so uninformed according to social media and fake news?

01:01:46.100 Well, could it be the information comes from the sources that don't give good information?

01:01:51.360 fake news and social media. I would think they would be to blame. So that's enough for today.

01:02:03.020 Nobody knows exactly where all this is going, but there is a breaking point. Nobody knows where it is,

01:02:11.380 but there is a breaking point. Trump, I think, is a special case in every way. He's a special case.

01:02:22.080 And he certainly was intentionally pushing, you know, pushing the boundary. He knew he was doing it. He

01:02:29.560 knew the odds of him being banned were really high. So I'm not sure we can count him like everything else.

01:02:35.200 But if you see me disappear, and I think that's at least a 50-50 chance, at least, maybe higher. If you

01:02:42.320 see me disappear, that's the beginning, not the end. That's all I'm going to say. If I disappear,

01:02:52.420 that's the beginning. And you'll know what to do at the time. All right, that's all for now.

01:02:58.060 I'll talk to you tomorrow. Bye for now.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - January 09, 2021

Episode 1247 Scott Adams： You Might Have Heard Trump is Banned From Twitter. What Now？

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript