Episode 1266 Scott Adams： GameStop, China, and How to Lie to the Public
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
157.22745
Summary
In this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, we talk about all the latest fake news, including the arrest of an iranian agent who has been accused of spying on the New York Times, and a new segment called "The Fake News News" about the fake news.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
um hey everybody come on in it's time yeah it's time for coffee with scott adams is it still the
00:00:13.560
best time of the day yeah yep every single time some of you are prepared i know you are
00:00:20.860
and if you're really prepared what do you have with you well you probably have a cup or a mug
00:00:28.880
or a glass maybe a tank of gels or stein a canteen jug or flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your
00:00:34.440
favorite liquid i like coffee join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine here of the
00:00:40.480
day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous sip and even if you have
00:00:46.780
a tiny little hotel cup it's still gonna be awesome go
00:00:50.560
so i'm in tahiti at the moment which is a stopover from bora bora it's the big island you go to for
00:01:04.920
your main flights back home but i also have to get a coronavirus covid test this morning before i can fly
00:01:13.440
so am i concerned that i could get a covid test in tahiti and actually get a result before i get on
00:01:22.580
my plane i'm a little concerned about that yes i am but the worst case scenario is i have to stay in
00:01:30.040
tahiti for another day so wouldn't be the worst thing um let's talk about all the news are you ready
00:01:37.840
got lots of it got lots of good stuff it's a it's a fun news day and i'm going to start a new segment
00:01:45.520
i'm going to call the fake news news it's news about the fake news because the fake news has covered
00:01:53.620
the fake news i don't need to cover that i'll just cover the fake news is news for example uh apparently
00:02:01.640
there's a gentleman who's been uh arrested uh i don't know if he's been arrested but he's being
00:02:07.620
charged or something as an iranian agent who apparently has contributed opinion pieces to the
00:02:14.740
new york times that's right an unregistered agent of iran uh has written opinion pieces in the new york
00:02:23.100
times now do you say to yourself uh new york times how can they be so whatever they are
00:02:30.580
to allow some unregistered agent of a foreign country to get you know get through and be putting
00:02:37.140
opinion bases in their in their in their publication i have a feeling that this is so common
00:02:45.640
that probably almost every news organization has been at least a little bit touched by this sort of
00:02:53.820
thing i feel as if you know china and iran and russia etc they probably all have journalists don't you
00:03:02.320
think you know either directly or by influence or people who lean their direction just get the kind
00:03:09.680
of right kind of jobs and they become uh they become the writers so i don't know that this is unusual
00:03:16.580
i would expect that iran and lots of other countries would have people they influence who
00:03:22.560
in turn influence you and you wouldn't necessarily know about it until one of them gets caught and
00:03:28.220
it's a and it's a headline so unfortunately i think this is more normal than not normal and when
00:03:34.440
you're reading your fake news one of the questions you could ask yourself is this hey is that article
00:03:40.800
being written by an enemy of my country you don't know you just don't know but you have to at least
00:03:47.560
at least consider the possibility that the person writing the article is literally the enemy of
00:03:54.120
your country that's a real thing and it's common enough i think that you should sort of have that
00:04:00.560
little program running in the back of your head hey is this a real opinion or is this an enemy of my
00:04:06.520
country here's some more fake news news about fake news so john carey was uh asked about uh
00:04:19.400
i i can't think of john carey without thinking of a tree he reminds me of an old growth tree so much
00:04:28.200
that that's all i say i've told you before that i can't see people the same way if i ever see their
00:04:34.680
animal because most people look like some kind of animal you don't realize it until until the idea
00:04:40.760
occurs to you like oh that person looks a little bit like a i don't know a horse i think and then
00:04:48.600
you can never see anything else except that person looks like a horse well john carey i just see a tree
00:04:55.640
and so that's all i can see when i when i see him a talking tree
00:04:59.240
um and by the way i'm sure there's i'm sure there's something that i remind you of that's
00:05:09.240
um so he was saying in response to the question about uh people in the oil industry who might lose
00:05:16.600
their jobs pretty big deal right oil the energy business in this country is a giant industry
00:05:23.480
critical for national success and if we go green and try to keep the oil in the ground as they say
00:05:32.360
and the gas in the ground i suppose it's a big deal and it could have big employment impacts so what
00:05:40.680
did john carey say about the people who would lose their jobs if the oil industry gets squeezed he said
00:05:49.000
quote what president biden wants to do is make sure that those folks have better choices that they
00:05:54.920
could be the people to go work to make solar panels what did he really say that in public
00:06:04.040
john carey really said that the people in the energy business would lose their jobs
00:06:09.320
they can go make solar panels there are a few problems with that number one when when does that
00:06:17.960
solar panel make it kick in same day they lose their job or would it take years to build an industry
00:06:25.160
that could employ as many people as as have been lost to it could you have an american solar panel
00:06:33.160
manufacturing industry that would ever be price competitive with making them overseas there's a
00:06:39.640
reason it's made overseas we don't know how to do it we don't know how to do it uh inexpensively
00:06:46.760
compared to where they where it could be done somewhere else so is there going to be a domestic
00:06:52.360
solar panel industry when they can't possibly make them in a way that they can make a profit now
00:07:02.360
maybe and i'd like to think this is true automation will make it possible to do that and be competitive
00:07:08.920
with with china because if china needs robots to make stuff and we need robots to make stuff
00:07:14.680
it ends up being about the same price it's only when people are making stuff that they get the
00:07:20.520
they get the big advantage so maybe we can make uh solar panels cheaply enough but if we make them with
00:07:28.520
robots that's also not labor right the only way we can compete on price and that's the only way the green
00:07:38.680
new deal energy stuff will work is if it's economically competitive only way you can do it is without labor
00:07:46.920
i think you know just economically it makes sense i don't know how you can do it with labor
00:07:51.720
when our labor is more expensive than other countries so that's the first problem there's a timing problem
00:07:58.200
but it's not really the same people that's the problem do you think that the oil industry people who get
00:08:05.560
fired are living in the place where the solar the solar factory will be do you think the people in
00:08:11.800
pennsylvania will say if they lose their job do you think they're going to say oh good pick pack up the
00:08:18.440
car we're going to go live in i don't know sunny someplace else and make solar panels well some will
00:08:27.080
but here's the thing that makes it the fake news uh and i'm sure that cnn for example will never say what
00:08:33.560
i'm saying that is that it is true that they might create new jobs with this green technology
00:08:41.880
at the same time it's true that there will be jobs lost in the more traditional older energy companies
00:08:48.840
but what he's not telling you is that the people who get the new jobs will be different people
00:08:57.800
hey a million people will lose their job but don't worry there will be a million new jobs
00:09:05.480
for other people the people who are going to lose their jobs still have a problem
00:09:10.840
you know unless that solar panel factory springs up the same day they lose their job and they're
00:09:17.320
and they have the right kind of skills and it pays pays the right amount of money
00:09:20.840
i mean there is a lot of ifs in this idea and so what makes it a fake news is that
00:09:31.880
leadership is all about tough choices right now is it a correct but tough choice to move the economy
00:09:41.400
toward a more of a green green industry hard to know hard to know in the long run of course we need to
00:09:49.960
get there but it's a question of timing and you know do you do it do you do it economically or do
00:09:55.560
you rush etc so there are very smart people um i think mark cuban would be an example of a very smart
00:10:04.760
person who would say that the green new technologies are are really good they're going to be good for
00:10:10.680
the economy good for jobs etc i hope i'm characterizing his opinion correctly that the green new energy
00:10:18.040
business could be quite a hopping thing um but if it's different people and it doesn't happen at the same time
00:10:30.200
shouldn't you tell the public that shouldn't that be one of the things you say look public
00:10:35.640
i know this isn't going to be easy but we have these reasons we want to do this we think it's good in
00:10:40.840
the long run for the country um but it's going to take some sacrifice by this group this other group
00:10:49.880
will get the benefits they'll get jobs over here and this state this state will lose jobs and nothing's
00:10:56.680
going to happen for you you're just going to lose jobs but this other state will do great because they're
00:11:01.080
going to build some build some green factors that would be honest honest leadership would be
00:11:08.680
it's going to hurt but some other people will do better and on average that's where we need to be
00:11:15.240
as a country in the long run so there's just no way around it that would be leadership but they can't
00:11:22.440
say that because they don't want to lose a state so they have to lie lie and say that those people
00:11:28.200
losing jobs i'll just get other jobs all right you're all watching the the news about gamestop right
00:11:33.560
how many of you understand that story so the the basic story that a bunch of individuals on reddit
00:11:44.600
got together and decided to massively collectively buy stock in this one company called gamestop now
00:11:57.080
uh you can see in the comments there's uh lots of yeses lots of yeses wow i'm actually quite kind
00:12:05.400
of impressed at the quality of this audience and i mean that i don't know how many general audiences
00:12:13.160
would have so many people looking at the comments and most of you say you understand understand that
00:12:18.360
story it's kind of impressive actually jesus look at look at the look at the number of people in the
00:12:24.440
comments who say they actually understand that story it's a complicated story i thought i was
00:12:29.320
going to have to explain it to you wow wow i think some of the smartest people in in the internet are on
00:12:36.680
this uh are on this uh live stream now this is amazing i'm really very impressed i suppose it's the
00:12:43.720
people who understand it we're we're going to comment but but even still i'm surprised but let me give
00:12:49.320
you the basic idea for if anybody doesn't know how this works so there are big companies called hedge
00:12:55.400
funds who try to make money by driving down the price of a stock this is not good for the company
00:13:03.160
that owns that stock because people are just playing manipulating their stock the way they would do that
00:13:08.600
is they would buy a contract if you will that says they will make money if the stock goes down now if
00:13:15.240
you see that a bunch of smart investors with a lot of money have just made big bets that a stock will
00:13:21.320
go down what are you going to do if all the smart people just made giant bets that a stock is going
00:13:27.320
to go down and you own that stock you want to get the hell out of there right because it's going down
00:13:34.280
not only are they telling you it's going to go down but they make it to go down that's that's the
00:13:39.960
manipulative part right there might be some stories that come out about some bad things happening at the
00:13:44.840
company they may be true they may be more opinion you don't know but the the big hedge funds have
00:13:51.320
the power to drive down the price of a stock which does nothing for you does nothing for the company
00:13:58.680
now in some cases they would argue that they're just adding efficiency and they're they're driving
00:14:04.280
down the price of a stock that deserves to be driven down in other words they're they're not
00:14:09.960
destroying good companies they're destroying companies that have some issues but keep in mind they've
00:14:14.680
gone after tesla imagine if they drew they had driven tesla and a business that was a possibility
00:14:22.920
i think i don't know if they have that much power but they did try to drive down the price of tesla at
00:14:27.480
one point which makes uh elon musk not their friends well let me just say that elon musk
00:14:35.400
is enjoying watching the short sellers get taken at least that's the reporting
00:14:42.120
so here's how it works if i can explain this easily um if you let's say you own some stock
00:14:48.360
in a company called game stock and i can go to you and i can say hey i would like to borrow your stock
00:14:57.000
for x amount of time specific amount of time and at the end of that i will give you your stock back
00:15:03.000
and you would say why would i let you borrow my stock why the hell would i do that and there are two
00:15:09.080
reasons one is i'll give you a fee for borrowing it you could think of it like interest but it's not
00:15:15.240
it's like a fee for borrowing it for a while and so you'd say okay i get a fee but what about when
00:15:22.360
you give it back to me that stock might not be worth the same amount i'll give you 100 shares
00:15:28.360
and when you give 100 shares back to me are they still worth something because the stock went down in
00:15:34.200
the meantime i got a little fee and that's cool but when you gave me my stock back it wasn't worth
00:15:40.360
anything it went down to you know a dollar or something so you would have lost as the person who
00:15:47.080
let me borrow your stock you would be a loser in that case why would you do with that why would you
00:15:52.440
ever let me borrow your stock well the only reason you do it is that you think the stock is going to go
00:15:57.400
up so you think that when i give that stock back to you it'll be worth more than when you got when you
00:16:03.720
when it was first borrowed and enough more that you come out ahead not only did i get a fee for
00:16:09.560
letting you borrow it but when you gave it back it was worth more than i gave it to you good deal
00:16:15.240
right so you always have to have somebody who thinks something's going up and somebody who thinks it's
00:16:19.800
going down to make a trade one of them's right and one of them's wrong that's how the stock market
00:16:25.560
works but you need somebody on both sides right so that's why somebody would lend you stock they think
00:16:30.760
it's going in the other direction so let's say you're uh you're a hedge fund and you've you've
00:16:38.120
done one of these deals and you say i'm going to give this stock back to this guy it's just 100 shares
00:16:43.800
of stock but the people at reddit get together and they say we don't have a lot of money individually
00:16:49.880
we're just people but if we all get together and buy this stock like crazy the hedge funds
00:16:57.560
don't have a choice later of buying the stock at your higher price and therefore you make a profit
00:17:04.760
because they're they have a contract that says on this specific date i have to go get stock that
00:17:10.920
i've already sold by the way i borrowed your stock but as soon as i borrowed it i sold it
00:17:16.440
it so as soon as you lend your stock to me you don't have it anymore but neither do i i borrowed
00:17:24.120
it and sold it all i have is cash so at the end of that contract period all i have is cash but i owe
00:17:30.840
you a stock you know you got to get your 100 shares back so i have to go buy those at the in the market
00:17:37.320
but the reddit people drove up the price now i can't afford to buy them i don't have enough money
00:17:44.280
i can't get enough money there's nothing i can do but i owe this gigantic amount of money because the
00:17:51.400
redditors drove up the stock price how do i give you back the money the shares i borrowed i can't
00:17:57.000
afford them so i go out of business so you i go bankrupt at least maybe not out of business ultimately
00:18:04.680
but uh so the redditors are intentionally driving out of business the hedge funds because they did the
00:18:10.440
math or somebody did and figured that they could buy enough collectively to actually bankrupt gigantic
00:18:17.080
hedge funds which they don't really feel are so good for the country and it's this massive shift in power
00:18:27.960
because the the retail small investors found out hey if we band together and use these communication
00:18:34.680
tools we can be as powerful or more powerful than the the hedge funds and we can just drive them out
00:18:40.680
of business and make a profit too now if you're listening to this and say to yourself hey i think
00:18:48.200
i just found a way to make some easy money i'm going to buy me some game stop uh stuff and that stuff's
00:18:55.160
going to keep on going up and i'll just make a quick quick profit a lot of people did that a lot of people
00:19:02.040
got in low probably sold high made a ton of money with almost no time going by but don't assume that
00:19:12.600
because it happened to you there should be in the long run about as many losers as winners right
00:19:18.600
because there always has to be a buyer always has to be a seller otherwise there's no transaction
00:19:23.960
so in the long run you're going to get i don't think this is exactly true but something closer to as
00:19:28.920
many winners as losers so if you want to flip a coin and bet your entire uh net worth on it
00:19:37.800
i would advise against it sort of a coin flip it's not it's not a guarantee that's not it's not safe
00:19:45.240
and if the coin flip doesn't go your way it's not that you didn't make money it's that you lost it all
00:19:51.000
right you just lost it so super risky if you're trying to figure out how risky it is
00:19:57.240
super risky but if you have lots of people putting in small amounts that wouldn't make a difference
00:20:02.760
to their life if they lost them you know hundreds of thousands of people putting in a thousand dollars
00:20:07.720
a piece say wouldn't change their life if they lost them so i think this is really it's not a question of
00:20:14.280
what's right or wrong good or bad we do see that the robin hood app apparently stopped letting people buy
00:20:22.040
the stock they can sell it but not buy it which is good for the hedge funds but not good for the retail
00:20:27.240
people so let's see how much power the hedge funds have because the hedge funds are still trying to
00:20:33.800
still trying to uh you know manipulate it in their direction so it's a battle of wills at the moment we
00:20:39.960
don't know which way it's going to end but it's an interesting story and apparently it shows some hatred for
00:20:45.640
the big money people that is bubbling into the you know bubbling up from the public in a way that we've
00:20:52.200
never seen before all right um i'm still getting uh still getting weird comments about my tweet
00:21:03.160
when in which i asked if it's too late to impeach george washington for slavery and i'm watching a
00:21:11.160
technique by the the fake news industry uh to marginalize me as as a public commenter because i
00:21:20.120
don't comment exactly the way they would like and and i've seen the technique before so here's the
00:21:25.880
technique and this is how uh trump uh trump was the victim of this once and now it's happening to me
00:21:33.720
in a smaller way do you remember when trump made his john mccain statement uh they were talking about
00:21:40.520
john mccain being a hero and i think it was when trump was running for office and he said i prefer people
00:21:47.480
who don't get caught now if you don't know that was a joke then it looks very disrespectful
00:21:56.120
to anybody who's served but if you do know it's a joke well it's not really disrespectful it's just a
00:22:03.560
joke all right and it was a funny joke stop everything stop everything hold on hold on
00:22:19.800
i just had to show you what it looks like out my window right now
00:22:22.440
that's crazy take a look at that if you're listening on podcast i'll i'll get back to uh
00:22:31.880
our scheduled program but the uh the scenery here is just a joke this it's just crazy all right
00:22:42.120
back to john mccain i know that's what you really want to talk about so what the what the fake media does
00:22:48.600
is they they will misinterpret somebody say trump and then i'm going to tell you how they do it to
00:22:55.960
me they'll they'll start by misinterpreting something that was clearly a joke and they
00:23:00.040
turn it into oh it's a disrespectful thing if they repeat their their misinterpretation enough
00:23:06.280
the misinterpretation becomes the truth at least in terms of the public and the public says oh yeah it
00:23:13.000
wasn't a joke it was being disrespectful so once they've they've sold you on the fake news that that
00:23:21.160
trump was being disrespectful to service people which is of course not what was happening he was
00:23:25.800
just mocking mccain um then that becomes the truth and then they mock you for it and then the mocking
00:23:34.120
is of the thing that never happened right so the thing that trump would be mocked for is the thing that
00:23:39.400
didn't happen likewise when i did my tweet about uh you know maybe we should think about impeaching
00:23:44.680
george washington the first thing they do is misinterpret it as not a joke
00:23:51.560
it's such a joke it's a joke do you think that i really want to impeach george washington no
00:23:59.080
now the second thing they do is even if they recognize it as a joke they you know even a joke has
00:24:05.320
a political point to it and this one does now the point i'm making is that it would be a complete waste
00:24:12.920
of the public's time and the government's time to impeach trump because he's not going to run for office
00:24:19.720
again if you think he that if you think that's going to happen or at least if he ran he wouldn't he
00:24:24.600
wouldn't have a chance of winning at this point if you're worried about it that's kind of tds
00:24:29.800
because trump wouldn't have enough support from republicans to win again right and you need at
00:24:36.120
least your own team you can't win without your own team and he would he would have lots of support but
00:24:41.640
not enough so i think uh trump would know somebody still thinks he would win he wouldn't win you
00:24:49.080
wouldn't have any chance if he ran again i understand that you think uh you think that's not the case but
00:24:55.880
but my point which is my opinion is he has the same odds of winning and being in office again as
00:25:04.760
george washington meaning none right so my point is it's a waste of time because neither of them will
00:25:11.320
ever be you know president again but instead of that obvious point which i thought was obvious when i made it
00:25:17.960
that uh the democrats who are criticizing me have decided to interpret it as me not understanding
00:25:26.360
that the issue of slavery was very different from the issue of inciting people to do whatever they
00:25:33.480
claim trump did in the capital now that's a case of not understanding how analogies and jokes work
00:25:40.760
or at least not understand the point in this case but since they can repeat that forever forever
00:25:47.800
now if uh if i do something else that they don't like they will say and he thought that uh slavery
00:25:56.120
was the same as you know so they'll create a story in which i'm so dumb that i made this tweet but it
00:26:03.080
will be based on misinterpreting a simple point that it's a waste of time to impeach anybody after
00:26:07.400
they're out of office and not going to run again uh so that's that's the fake news play they'll create a
00:26:13.480
fake narrative and that will be the thing that you'll have to answer for the rest of your life
00:26:19.320
and they can use that against you at any future time
00:26:23.720
um i'm actually surprised there's so many people who think trump could win
00:26:28.840
uh and i don't think there's even the slightest chance you would run for a lesser office such as
00:26:34.360
governor or senator you don't go from president to a lesser office i mean you could i just don't think
00:26:41.720
that's just not anything anybody would do um somebody says why purposely try to be misinterpreted
00:26:51.720
well uh sometimes i do that for fun and this was a case where i was pretty sure people would
00:26:59.480
misinterpret it and i thought it would be funny and it was but they'll use it against me the trouble
00:27:05.160
is that it just won't have that much effect in my case um here's uh here's a little thing you should
00:27:13.560
know about so some academics from harvard duke and johns hopkins got together pretty smart people right
00:27:21.960
if they're academics at those schools harvard duke and john hobson john johns hopkins pretty smart people
00:27:29.400
got together and released a paper in which they claim that the coveted lockdowns will result in a
00:27:36.200
staggering one million excess deaths over the next decade and a half due to increased problems with
00:27:44.200
health and health related issues because of unemployment so what they've done is they say
00:27:50.040
we know that unemployment leads to you know x percent of problems the coronavirus will cause more
00:27:57.960
unemployment and therefore you can you can just figure out how much that will affect things
00:28:05.800
here's my problem with that doesn't that sound like something you want to believe
00:28:11.640
right when you heard this you said yes finally i got science on my side right but was it science
00:28:21.640
was that science or was that an economic kind of projection um except with except economics it's more
00:28:30.280
of an employment uh estimate and then related to health care and how people will uh will thrive or not
00:28:39.480
under different employment scenarios here's my problem when you hear a new paper came out that exactly
00:28:48.280
agrees with what you want it to say that's when you should really crank up your skepticism because the
00:28:56.120
best way that you can be fooled is by somebody telling you that science agreed with you but you gotta know
00:29:03.320
that science is wrong in this kind of stuff maybe more often than right when it comes to financial predictions
00:29:11.000
does this sound familiar in any way all right it might sound like my criticisms of climate change economic
00:29:19.000
predictions if you've watched me for a while you know that i i don't argue with the science part of
00:29:24.680
climate change because what do i know i'm not a scientist and uh their arguments seem to have lots
00:29:31.320
of backing from lots of different directions no matter how they slice it it looks like co2 added to the
00:29:37.560
the atmosphere should cause warming all things being able but when they take that which i can't judge
00:29:45.880
and don't have any reason to think it's false um they take it to an economic projection over 80 years then
00:29:52.600
it's just ridiculous because nobody can do that that's not a real thing that's like a horoscope reading
00:29:59.000
tea leaves nobody can make an 80 year economic prediction it's just not a thing
00:30:03.720
but they do anyway to scare you into action today now the reason that economic projection
00:30:11.640
doesn't make sense for 80 years is because there'll be lots of innovation and surprises you know nobody
00:30:16.200
saw the coronavirus coming a lot of surprises could be wars could be meteors could be we discovered gold
00:30:23.720
and you know how to make gold out of plastic i don't know anything could happen in 80 years
00:30:29.480
the same the same is true of this economic prediction if you're willing to go with me on
00:30:36.440
the fact that you can't predict climate change economics which could be bad or could be good
00:30:42.280
they're just not predictable you just can't predict that stuff um it should be the same analysis for this
00:30:49.400
do you think people can really no matter how smart they are because these are smart people
00:30:54.360
working in the right fields it looks like and would you trust them they're very smart i believe they're
00:31:01.160
almost certainly trying to tell you the truth probably credible professionals should you believe that
00:31:07.800
there'll be a million excess deaths for because of the shutdowns and coronavirus when it agrees with
00:31:15.960
what you want it to agree with that's the problem isn't it it's the same problem with the economic
00:31:21.800
predictions for climate change the people who want that to be true so that their argument is true
00:31:33.080
somebody says twitter is ruining conservatives what do you say scott
00:31:37.240
well i don't know that they're ruining conservatives i would have to i think i would have to see some
00:31:44.760
examples of conservatives being banned from a social media platform for saying things that are true
00:31:54.040
you know if you get banned for being reasonable that would be a problem if you get banned for things
00:32:01.480
that you know a reasonable person could say is hate speech i don't know if i can defend that if you get
00:32:07.960
banned for saying things that um are clearly not true you have some explaining to do but the real problem
00:32:17.960
of course is that it's not um it's not uh it's not applied equally right so the people who get to
00:32:26.360
decide what is true will say that when conservatives say something that they don't think is true they have
00:32:31.880
to go away uh whereas if if cnn tells you the fine people hoax was real or the the bleach drinking hoax was
00:32:40.840
real or or russia collusion was real and it turns out it's not that nobody gets uh penalized for that
00:32:48.520
stuff adam schiff no penalty for lying to the public for for years um somebody says why did peter navarro
00:32:57.240
get kicked off i don't know the specifics um i know for example in the carpe donctum situation i think
00:33:03.880
that was a copyright issue wasn't it uh which is just its own its own issue um and peter navarro if he
00:33:12.760
got kicked off i don't know the situation people are telling me he's banned i would assume he made some
00:33:18.440
claim about the election integrity and the powers that be have decided that questioning the election
00:33:25.160
the election is too risky so where they might allow something to remain on the internet that is
00:33:33.320
known to be false as long as it's harmless but that one could be you know potentially deadly if you get
00:33:40.840
that one wrong so should people be banned for saying that the election was stolen i don't think so
00:33:49.160
don't think so um but you don't have to say that let me tell you what i said recently give you give you
00:33:58.040
a better way to approach this um which i'm pretty sure i wrote down here huh maybe i didn't
00:34:09.480
do do do do oh here it is so here's something i tweeted which has not gotten me banned yet this is a
00:34:19.640
technique which i've taught you before which is you take people's opinion that you believe is absurd
00:34:26.200
and you agree with it and then you amplify it so agree and amplify so instead of saying
00:34:33.000
uh i think this election was stolen which for which there is no court approved proof and then getting
00:34:40.520
banned by by social media here's what i say i agree with i agree with the narrative but watch the way i do
00:34:48.360
it so here's me agreeing with the narrative and i tweeted yesterday in my ongoing effort to avoid being
00:34:55.080
canceled so i've set the stage so people know that whatever comes is because i'm avoiding being canceled
00:35:02.120
and then i say i hereby agree that an absence of court approved proof of election fraud is proof it did
00:35:07.800
not happen courts are the ideal place for those challenges software systems are unhackable and full
00:35:15.800
election transparency already exists what did my critics say when i said that because i just described
00:35:31.000
but because i'm associated with you know a political side whether whether i think that or
00:35:36.760
not i'm associated with it people are going to need to argue it which part of this
00:35:44.040
hundred dollars per word removal i see where you're going with that but that's a different topic
00:35:47.960
um let me read the the pieces of this again people call this sarcasm or satire let me see if you can
00:36:00.280
find any satire or exaggeration or sarcasm i'll read the parts again and here's the clever part there isn't
00:36:10.360
many there's there's no there's no hyperbole in here there's no exaggeration there's no satire i
00:36:17.480
literally wrote the mainstream narrative down first part that i said i agree that an absence of court
00:36:25.000
approved proof of election fraud is proof it did not happen now as you know absence of proof is not
00:36:34.280
logically proof of absence but that is the narrative it's what george stephanophilus says it's what cnn says
00:36:41.640
every day it's what msnbc says every day it's what the biden administration says every day i'm agreeing with
00:36:47.960
them that the lack of proof is proof that it doesn't exist now the fact that that is a log a famous
00:36:55.560
logical impossibility not impossibility a logical fallacy it isn't my fault it isn't up to me to
00:37:04.040
defend having an opinion which is a logical fallacy and like a famous one it's not even a it's not even
00:37:12.040
a remote one that not too many people have heard but it's like one of the most famous logical fallacies
00:37:18.280
that an absence of proof is not proof that there is nothing there
00:37:22.120
so i simply stated the exact belief that's coming from every direction with no exaggeration
00:37:32.280
are you with me so far you're with me so far that there's no exaggeration in that
00:37:37.400
so is that sarcasm is that satire it's literally what they're saying if i had if i had extended it
00:37:45.560
that would be satire if i had made it something it wasn't really meant to be
00:37:50.040
sarcasm maybe but this is actually precisely what it is there's no deviation from what i said from the
00:37:57.800
actual official narrative that a logical fallacy is the policy of of the government and social media
00:38:05.800
literally that's the policy about the second part the courts are the ideal place for these challenges
00:38:13.880
the questions about fraud now do you believe that courts are the ideal place for this well you could
00:38:21.400
argue that the court said we don't have jurisdiction so that would be a variable the courts have said
00:38:29.960
it's too late to make this challenge in some cases they've said that there's a technical problem in some
00:38:36.840
cases but that's you i mean that might be something you say but not me i agree with the mainstream
00:38:47.080
narrative that the courts are not just a good place for that the courts are not just the only option
00:38:55.160
that anybody has it's way better than that because the courts have shown that there's no fraud
00:39:02.440
fraud and if they can do something that powerful to show there's no fraud without even looking at the
00:39:08.920
evidence they're ideal because see how inefficient it would be to have a court case and people would
00:39:17.240
present evidence and it takes months and you need a jury and it's very expensive well that's not very
00:39:23.160
ideal is it that's not ideal the ideal is they don't even have to look at the evidence and they can still
00:39:31.160
conclude with certainty that there's no fraud that's ideal it's ideal so if i agree with the narrative
00:39:41.960
that the courts they got this that you couldn't even come up with a better place to take these court
00:39:49.480
challenges it's ideal and you know that they that you're thinking to yourself scott they don't think it's
00:39:57.080
ideal they think this part i'm not making up that the courts have settled it they don't say the courts
00:40:07.960
have mostly settled it they don't say the courts have given us an indication that everything's all right
00:40:14.040
they say unambiguously completely the courts have have decided on this it's done if that's true
00:40:22.680
and they decided on all of this without even having actual cases you know where evidence is shown and
00:40:29.240
all that stuff if they did all that without the expense of the evidence that's ideal how can you get
00:40:36.920
better than that somebody says the courts did not rule how does that matter if they're the ideal place
00:40:45.080
and they said i'm not going to rule on that then that's all you need to know because it was done at the
00:40:49.800
ideal place so i'm just agreeing with the official narrative that courts are ideal for that um now
00:40:59.400
you might say to yourself but even your critics reading that would say well not really ideal maybe
00:41:05.880
it's just the only option you have but that's not their story i'm just agreeing with their own narrative
00:41:13.240
then i also said that software systems are unhackable that is their position because there's lots of
00:41:23.160
software involved in the accounting etc there's no um there's no belief that they were hacked there's
00:41:32.040
no evidence of that or there's no proof of it let's say there's no court approved present there's no
00:41:37.720
court uh let's say agreed evidence or proof that any software was corrupted so i want to make sure i
00:41:46.200
don't get sued by dominion or anybody who's who's suing somebody personally i have no information
00:41:53.960
that would lead me to conclude that any software system had been corrupted
00:41:58.280
but i would go uh i would agree with my critics here as i am quite aggressively that we also know
00:42:08.040
it can't be hacked in the case of the election software how do we know that it can't be hacked
00:42:15.720
we know that because the people who are happy with the outcome tell us there's nothing to look at
00:42:21.000
if there's nothing to check no reason to check what do you conclude can you conclude that you know
00:42:30.360
everything's fine without checking well only if you know that it can't be hacked you would have to know
00:42:37.080
it can't be hacked or at least can't be hacked without being detected you would have to know it
00:42:42.040
can't be hacked and is therefore unhackable to be happy with not checking i don't see how you could
00:42:50.840
conclude anything else you would have to assume that software systems at least some of them are
00:43:02.200
and you would have to assume also that the election had full transparency because if there were if any
00:43:06.920
transparency problems existed then the people asking for audits and more transparency would be
00:43:13.320
right because everybody wants more transparency in an election right who would argue against it
00:43:18.760
so i'm just agreeing with it the elections must have already complete transparency because otherwise
00:43:26.200
any reasonable person would say oh maybe we need a little more transparency but they don't so
00:43:31.640
find any part of this in which i'm departing from the mainstream narrative i don't think i am i think
00:43:41.800
they literally believe an absence of court approved uh proof is proof it doesn't exist i think they
00:43:49.640
actually believe the courts were the ideal place for these challenges i think they actually believe
00:43:54.680
that at least the election software was unhackable which which you would have to generalize if there's
00:43:59.960
any software that's unhackable it's all unhackable right because unless they invented something that
00:44:08.040
nobody else has uh such as a way to keep insiders from ever taking a bribe then why doesn't everybody
00:44:16.360
else use it unless they're just making mistakes they should use the same unhackable technology
00:44:23.720
that the that the elections use if it if it exists and i and i believe it exists because i'm told it does
00:44:30.120
and they must also believe there's full transparency in the election otherwise they wouldn't be arguing
00:44:34.600
and saying that everything's fine so um that would be an example of aggressive agreeing with people
00:44:43.000
and how much pushback do you think i got on that tweet
00:44:50.360
it's hard to push back on it isn't it the only way you can push back on that tweet is by disagreeing
00:44:55.880
with your own opinion because i agreed with your opinion everything i said agreed with your opinion
00:45:02.680
so if if it looks stupid to you i don't see how that's my problem if i agree with you and you and
00:45:10.920
my agreeing with you looks stupid maybe you should have rethought your opinion in the first place before
00:45:17.080
you got me to agree with you all right um reuters is reporting that enrique terrio the
00:45:27.320
leader of the proud boys which at least reuters calls an extremist group makes you wonder what's what's
00:45:34.440
the definition of an extremist group is there is there a definition of that or can the news just
00:45:41.720
tell you somebody is you know are democrats an extremist group is aoc an extremist for wanting to
00:45:49.640
radically change the economy with the green new deal i don't know is an extremist always somebody who
00:45:56.600
has bad intentions what's what's what's it mean anyway so they they just label the group extremists
00:46:04.520
now i'm not supporting the group or denying the group or disavowing them i feel like they got some
00:46:12.520
they've got some good things but uh a lot of problem things with the proud boys so it's not it's not
00:46:18.440
to me to defend them uh but you know you can condemn things they do which is different from
00:46:26.280
condemning all the members all right and by the way i would apply the same standard to every group you
00:46:32.200
know there's got to be some good people in antifa probably there's probably at least one person in
00:46:38.040
antifa who's not a complete loser so anyway he's uh he's being accused of being uh an informer a past
00:46:47.800
informer for the feds and local law enforcement apparently they say he's repeatedly worked undercover
00:46:55.240
for investigators after he was arrested in 2012 according to a former prosecutor and a transcript
00:47:01.880
from 2014 from federal court stuff so what do you make of the fact that the leader of the proud boys
00:47:11.480
is a well-known informer police informer or law enforcement informer do you think he was doing the
00:47:20.280
same thing with the proud boys or is that the biggest coincidence in the world is that the
00:47:26.600
biggest coincidence in the world that's a big one that's a big coincidence yeah somebody's saying it's
00:47:34.360
a psyop can't rule it out i don't have any reason to believe he was but uh he's an interesting character
00:47:42.840
and i would i would say if if i were a member of the proud boys the day that i learned this i would
00:47:49.880
not be a member of the proud boys anymore yeah you can do whatever you want and i suppose just getting
00:47:56.920
a new leader might be all you need but if i found this out that my leader was a well-known police informant
00:48:06.120
i'm pretty sure i would change change organizations or form a new one or something
00:48:14.280
gordon chang who is very anti-china maybe as much anti-china as i am he writes in the in the hill that
00:48:23.160
the chinese leaders did not test trump militarily late they didn't they didn't push him but they're
00:48:30.120
already pushing biden and this part blew my mind this is what gordon chang writes in the hill he says
00:48:39.320
that uh she president she looks like he is going after biden as it is clear chinese leaders think
00:48:46.440
or at least thought they could bully the new american president now that's the kind of statement where you
00:48:52.440
say how do you know what anybody's thinking right and that's kind of a stretch but uh gordon chang
00:49:00.600
supports that statement by saying how do we know that he goes the derisive derisive is it derisive
00:49:07.160
or derisive the derisive comment of d dong chang a professor at renmin university were recorded and
00:49:14.760
publicly circulated around china d basically claimed that china would be able to determine outcomes in
00:49:21.400
washington washington if trump lost the election
00:49:29.240
that's pretty shocking right so in other words we actually have a recording where somebody who's a
00:49:35.000
professor at a university that's you know well controlled by the the chinese government
00:49:41.000
and he was willing to say in public that china would be able to determine outcomes in washington
00:49:51.400
what they're saying it out loud that if it's biden they can push him around
00:49:57.640
and that trump they weren't they weren't willing to push him around because it was too risky
00:50:01.400
wow now will you see this story in reuters no will you see this story in cnn no msnbc no no you won't
00:50:15.080
um so it's it's left to you know pundits and people like me and people like gordon chang to tell you that story
00:50:25.640
um i think we're we've reached a point especially with the ability to communicate anywhere anytime
00:50:33.960
adding to that the fact that uh humans are bribeable and there's a lot of money in the world
00:50:40.120
i feel as if we're reaching the point where every government is just going to be controlled by
00:50:50.120
uh and the way it looks like the way governments will be controlled is through the news
00:50:57.400
so if you try to control the government by let's say bribing or directly controlling an american
00:51:03.240
politician well you can do that but that's a little risky isn't it controlling a politician
00:51:10.760
you know somebody else if somebody finds out the politician took a check or did a did a paid speech
00:51:15.800
for some other country yeah you're probably going to find out there's going to be a record of it
00:51:21.480
somewhere it's a bad look but suppose instead you create an army of uh influenced journalists
00:51:30.680
who little by little seep into the into the you know the mainstream media and become your news
00:51:39.480
what happens when you've got some influential journalists
00:51:43.000
journalists um influential journalists and they're they're creating the news narrative
00:51:51.320
and it's just based from china or russia or iran or something that looks to be what we have
00:51:58.920
because what would have stopped china or iran or anybody else from capturing journalists in this
00:52:05.960
country what would stop them from doing it i can't think of anything because there'd be probably a
00:52:11.720
hundred different ways that you could bribe somebody and why wouldn't they i'm sure we're doing it we
00:52:16.920
must be doing it in other countries right so the the new uh the new war if you will is an information
00:52:26.600
war i hate to say info wars but maybe somebody who came up with that term understood what was coming
00:52:33.640
better than anybody else uh and that is is world war three essentially you know world war three is uh
00:52:45.000
you know what we do with cyber plus what we do with information warfare so we are in deep information war
00:52:53.320
with china and iran and our other adversaries and i don't know if we know it
00:52:59.240
it's hard to win a war you don't know you're fighting right so china could actually conquer the united
00:53:05.720
states just with changing the news narrative and you know looking at the way things are going it looks
00:53:21.080
so our country has given its information by stooges so here's a question for you
00:53:27.560
do we know how much influence uh china in particular has on different news organizations
00:53:35.560
do we know i don't know um somebody's mentioning andy no gno no and apparently he had to move out of
00:53:44.280
the country or he did move out of the country because of death threats against him and his family
00:53:48.440
for just reporting that's it he just reported mostly on antifa black lives matter protests
00:53:56.760
but for that you know his family was targeted he got lots of death threats and has moved out of the
00:54:02.120
country are there any are there any democrats who've had to move out of the country yet because of death
00:54:09.640
threats nope remember i when i told you that republicans would be hunted now i don't know if andy would
00:54:18.520
i don't think he would classify himself as a republican i don't know you know i don't know one way or the
00:54:23.240
other but since he was clearly reporting on stuff that the left didn't like and i think he gets you
00:54:29.720
know andy's probably has more followers on the right he would be associated with them now when i said
00:54:36.280
republicans would be hunted and people would say to me mockingly give me one example of that
00:54:43.800
well there it is andy no he he was hunted literally they found his family they found his home
00:54:50.280
and they did threats against him and his physical home he was hunted he had to leave
00:55:03.720
they moved to canada and spain on their own when trump won in 2016 oh yeah that didn't happen
00:55:08.440
somebody says yeah yeah nobody really moved rand paul was hunted by his neighbor right
00:55:14.600
um steve scalise was hunted by that shooter but that was a different situation
00:55:26.200
twitter must really be afraid of peter navarro's navarro report you say well you know the trouble with
00:55:33.080
uh the navarro report and the trouble with anything that does a laundry list of election allegations
00:55:40.440
is that if you do if you do a list of things that you're alleging about the election credibility
00:55:47.960
that list is guaranteed to have some bullshit on it guaranteed because we don't know what's true and
00:55:56.120
what isn't so if you put together a bunch of allegations and let's say there are 10 things on the list
00:56:01.400
there's no way all 10 of those things are going to be true no way they might none of them be true
00:56:09.320
but with the one thing you can guarantee is that not all 10 of them are true there's going to be a
00:56:15.320
an explanation for something and if you do if you do that approach it makes you very
00:56:20.680
non-credible because it guarantees you're saying at least something that's not true
00:56:25.480
about the election and then you can get banned so if i were to give you advice i would say do maybe
00:56:33.720
one claim at a time if you think it stands out as one that hasn't been addressed in any way
00:56:41.320
then then you would live and die on that one claim so maybe maybe you feel like you've got a good case
00:56:47.160
there i wouldn't recommend it actually because it's actually a little too dangerous to question the
00:56:51.720
election but if you do a laundry list you're definitely dead because the laundry list will
00:56:57.640
have enough wrong stuff in it guaranteed that that will be enough to get rid of you all right um
00:57:08.040
and yeah i think some of the math claims are interesting but they don't guarantee anything
00:57:15.000
you know that the statistical stuff would have to have been
00:57:18.120
backed up with some some more detail to be meaningful it raises questions but that's all it does
00:57:26.200
am i moving to texas i think i have too many reasons to stay here
00:57:32.040
here being california not here here all right i'm going to give you one more look
00:57:35.800
we're here in tahiti on the way home to the states tonight late flight oh so tomorrow morning i should
00:57:53.560
be still flying or at least unavailable if i land before it's time for the periscope maybe i'll try doing
00:58:01.880
it from the car or something if i have a signal but chances are you will not see me tomorrow but
00:58:06.680
you'll see me the day after and i'll try to do it tomorrow if i can see you later