Real Coffee with Scott Adams - October 17, 2021


Episode 1532 Scott Adams： Let's Talk About Mandatory Vaccinations for Robots. And More Nonsense.


Episode Stats

Length

48 minutes

Words per Minute

139.26791

Word Count

6,818

Sentence Count

532

Misogynist Sentences

11

Hate Speech Sentences

12


Summary

In this episode of After Dark with Scott Adams, Scott talks about a new kind of airplane, the mystery of the Havana Syndrome, and the strange things people are saying about the long-range strike on Cuba. Plus, a lot more.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 I wasn't going to be here.
00:00:02.220 Come on, all you YouTubers.
00:00:05.300 You know I wouldn't miss it.
00:00:07.760 One minute delay.
00:00:09.160 A little technical problem.
00:00:11.080 Practically nothing.
00:00:13.180 And by now, you're starting to realize
00:00:17.000 that something special has happened, right?
00:00:20.520 Somehow you made it to the best place in the world.
00:00:24.880 Seven plus billion people wandering around lost
00:00:29.060 by you, my friends, made it to exactly the right place
00:00:32.840 and even before the time to start.
00:00:36.540 Very good, very good.
00:00:37.940 If you'd like to take it to another level,
00:00:39.900 all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass of tanker gel,
00:00:41.780 a canteen jug or a flask of a vessel of any kind.
00:00:44.760 Fill it with your favorite liquid.
00:00:45.700 I like coffee.
00:00:47.460 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure,
00:00:50.980 the dopamine here of the day,
00:00:52.840 the thing that makes everything better.
00:00:57.240 Except my throat.
00:00:59.060 It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens now.
00:01:01.560 Go.
00:01:07.720 Antibodies.
00:01:09.260 Yep.
00:01:10.520 Those antibodies are surging.
00:01:13.840 Now, some of you,
00:01:15.840 and I'm sorry, YouTube people,
00:01:19.540 I hate to tell you, but you missed this.
00:01:21.680 Last night was the prototype first episode
00:01:26.500 of After Dark with Scott Adams.
00:01:30.100 Yes, not the simultaneous sip,
00:01:32.600 but the simultaneous talk.
00:01:36.080 And only the people on the local subscription service
00:01:40.180 got to see that.
00:01:41.920 Yes, we hung out in my man cave.
00:01:44.160 A good time was had by all.
00:01:45.820 Might do more of that in the future.
00:01:47.060 Well, how about the good news?
00:01:50.400 Shall we start with that?
00:01:52.040 Shall we start with the good news?
00:01:55.240 Here's the coolest news
00:01:56.660 and the one I've been waiting for.
00:01:59.220 There's a company called Joby Aviation.
00:02:03.160 CNN is reporting this.
00:02:04.520 They have a,
00:02:06.000 they've developed at least a prototype
00:02:07.420 of a six-rotor helicopter slash airplane.
00:02:13.140 Now, it's a slash airplane
00:02:14.820 because it can lift off with its six rotors
00:02:18.020 like a helicopter.
00:02:20.080 So suddenly you don't need an airport.
00:02:23.180 It can fly 200 miles an hour.
00:02:26.160 Do you know how fast a Cessna flies?
00:02:29.660 Not that fast.
00:02:32.460 So it's faster than a small airplane.
00:02:35.240 It's actually faster than a PITS,
00:02:38.840 which is an aerobatic plane.
00:02:40.640 Oh yeah, I know all about planes
00:02:42.240 because I listen.
00:02:47.120 Somebody says 250.
00:02:48.760 I think it depends on the Cessna,
00:02:50.480 but your typical Cessna,
00:02:51.960 you could be, you know,
00:02:52.920 if you're getting 160, 180,
00:02:55.600 wouldn't that be on the high end?
00:02:56.880 145 for a typical Cessna,
00:03:00.340 somebody's saying.
00:03:01.480 Anyway, it's quite, it's electric.
00:03:05.060 Did I mention that?
00:03:05.900 It's electric.
00:03:07.940 And it's safer than a helicopter
00:03:09.920 because it has six rotors.
00:03:11.420 I assume six engines,
00:03:13.460 probably some redundancy.
00:03:15.040 I'm guessing that if you lose one of the rotors,
00:03:17.440 you're probably in pretty good shape
00:03:18.740 to finish your flight.
00:03:20.320 Guessing.
00:03:23.400 And it'll go 150 miles on a charge
00:03:26.080 at 200 miles an hour.
00:03:27.920 It'll seat four passengers and one pilot.
00:03:32.480 I think they solved everything.
00:03:35.220 Didn't they?
00:03:35.820 It feels like they solved every problem
00:03:38.560 with flight.
00:03:40.720 Think about every problem you have with flight.
00:03:44.560 Doesn't this kind of solve most of them?
00:03:47.320 Not the long hauls,
00:03:48.640 but certainly the shorter flights.
00:03:51.540 All right.
00:03:52.460 So that's pretty cool.
00:03:54.560 Looking forward to that.
00:03:56.080 Dr. Anarchy on Twitter,
00:04:01.120 who's a real doctor,
00:04:03.640 suggests that maybe when I was talking about
00:04:06.020 the Havana syndrome being a mass hysteria,
00:04:09.920 which I wouldn't say is confirmed yet,
00:04:11.860 but at this point,
00:04:13.620 the smart money is on mass hysteria
00:04:15.680 for the Havana syndrome secret sonic weapon.
00:04:18.440 And Dr. Anarchy points out,
00:04:21.260 you know,
00:04:21.820 it might be a mass hysteria
00:04:23.400 with this long COVID stuff.
00:04:26.420 To which I say,
00:04:28.220 hmm,
00:04:29.380 could be.
00:04:31.680 Because it does have the right characteristics,
00:04:34.420 which is the news is talking about it,
00:04:36.420 people are suggestible,
00:04:37.940 and there's a whole bunch of gray area stuff
00:04:40.080 like brain fog,
00:04:41.160 headaches,
00:04:41.480 some loss of appetite
00:04:43.020 that people get anyway.
00:04:45.500 So it's pretty,
00:04:47.200 pretty easy to imagine
00:04:48.880 that people would be,
00:04:50.160 you know,
00:04:51.160 imagining they're having more problems
00:04:52.760 than they have.
00:04:53.260 Now,
00:04:53.580 let me be,
00:04:54.200 let me be really specific here.
00:04:56.240 I'm not suggesting
00:04:57.920 that long COVID isn't real.
00:05:00.400 I'm not suggesting it isn't real.
00:05:03.140 I'm saying that whether it's real or not,
00:05:05.900 almost certainly there are lots of fake,
00:05:10.400 or let's say misdiagnosed symptoms
00:05:12.720 that are just accidental and coincidental.
00:05:16.100 So we don't know how big that effect is,
00:05:18.620 but if you think that you know
00:05:20.560 that long COVID is real
00:05:24.260 and that it's,
00:05:25.560 you know,
00:05:26.260 25% of the people who get it
00:05:28.120 or whatever the statistic is
00:05:29.920 from some study,
00:05:31.160 I don't think we know that.
00:05:33.120 I don't think we know that.
00:05:34.940 I think all we know
00:05:36.420 is that it's reported.
00:05:37.340 And so we have this bizarre situation,
00:05:42.480 the most bizarre situation ever.
00:05:46.500 What are all of us trying to do?
00:05:48.580 Make decisions based on data, right?
00:05:51.540 So 100% of us
00:05:52.940 are making decisions based on data.
00:05:56.040 Now, of course,
00:05:57.280 it's how much you trust the data as well.
00:05:59.380 But we've come down to the point,
00:06:00.760 we've actually evolved to the point
00:06:02.260 where our decision
00:06:04.360 on getting vaccinated or not,
00:06:06.160 at least the individual's decision,
00:06:08.340 is based on comparing
00:06:09.820 two mass hysterias.
00:06:15.460 Two mass hysterias.
00:06:17.640 Maybe.
00:06:19.440 Or at the very least,
00:06:20.560 we don't know what the data is.
00:06:22.540 So if you're making your decision
00:06:24.140 on vaccination,
00:06:24.860 you're probably saying,
00:06:26.060 all right,
00:06:26.280 what is the risk
00:06:27.000 of getting vaccinated
00:06:28.160 and being damaged
00:06:29.880 by the vaccination?
00:06:31.540 Do you know
00:06:31.880 what the answer to that is?
00:06:34.160 You don't know.
00:06:36.060 You don't know the risk.
00:06:37.660 It can't be known.
00:06:39.200 You can know
00:06:40.020 what they've found so far
00:06:41.380 and reported,
00:06:42.720 but that's not the same
00:06:44.200 as what the risk is.
00:06:45.080 Now what about
00:06:46.520 all the anecdotal reports
00:06:48.800 of people having problems
00:06:49.900 after the vaccination?
00:06:51.920 Well, there's enough noise
00:06:53.340 on that
00:06:53.840 to say
00:06:55.700 it could be real,
00:06:58.140 but it also could be
00:07:00.720 mass hysteria.
00:07:02.360 How would it look different
00:07:03.860 if the reports
00:07:05.500 of vaccination damage
00:07:08.380 and side effects,
00:07:09.300 how would it look different
00:07:10.440 if it were mass hysteria
00:07:12.020 or completely real
00:07:14.200 as many of you believe?
00:07:16.420 How would it look different?
00:07:19.100 The answer is it wouldn't.
00:07:21.320 It would look exactly the same
00:07:22.700 if it were a mass hysteria
00:07:24.000 as if the vaccination
00:07:26.260 actually has lots of side effects.
00:07:28.240 It would look
00:07:29.240 exactly the same.
00:07:32.140 So you don't know what it is
00:07:33.400 because it would look
00:07:34.060 exactly the same,
00:07:34.840 but which one's more likely?
00:07:37.520 I don't know.
00:07:39.400 You know,
00:07:39.900 there's some cases
00:07:40.760 where mass hysteria
00:07:41.800 is easy to spot.
00:07:43.380 Let me give you some examples.
00:07:45.440 Mass hysteria
00:07:46.280 that the devil
00:07:47.160 has occupied
00:07:49.080 a bunch of people.
00:07:52.240 Easy.
00:07:53.160 Because the devil
00:07:53.880 claim would be
00:07:55.020 so unlikely.
00:07:57.160 Just on the face of it,
00:07:58.280 you can say,
00:07:58.560 that's a mass hysteria.
00:08:00.480 The Meg Martin school
00:08:01.660 kids case
00:08:02.700 was an obvious
00:08:03.560 mass hysteria.
00:08:04.840 A bunch of people
00:08:05.460 believed in
00:08:06.120 satanic worshipping
00:08:07.640 happening at a school.
00:08:09.320 That's crazy.
00:08:09.960 And it turned out
00:08:11.380 it wasn't true.
00:08:13.240 Mass hysteria
00:08:14.120 about witches.
00:08:16.380 Believing that witches
00:08:17.440 are all around
00:08:18.560 in Salem,
00:08:19.420 for example.
00:08:20.180 That one's easy.
00:08:21.520 Because witches
00:08:22.320 are real.
00:08:23.860 So you say,
00:08:24.380 wait a minute,
00:08:25.200 you're believing
00:08:25.800 in something
00:08:26.280 that's almost
00:08:27.360 certainly not real.
00:08:28.440 A witch.
00:08:29.280 Probably a mass hysteria.
00:08:31.180 Look at the Havana
00:08:32.420 syndrome.
00:08:34.500 Easy to spot
00:08:35.660 as a mass hysteria.
00:08:37.020 Because really?
00:08:39.220 A secret sonic weapon
00:08:40.440 that's just being
00:08:42.380 used on Americans?
00:08:44.080 I don't know.
00:08:45.540 Right?
00:08:45.940 So there's just
00:08:46.540 an obvious thing
00:08:47.480 on the face of it
00:08:48.420 that's probably
00:08:50.380 not true.
00:08:51.360 Like a ghost
00:08:52.340 or a devil
00:08:52.900 or a secret sonic weapon.
00:08:55.580 But what happens
00:08:56.440 if you have
00:08:56.860 a normal situation?
00:08:58.780 A normal situation
00:08:59.760 is that
00:09:00.500 medicine
00:09:02.820 and vaccinations
00:09:04.320 can have side effects
00:09:05.480 for some people.
00:09:07.080 So you can't really
00:09:08.340 spot a mass hysteria
00:09:09.520 in this case.
00:09:10.840 Because there's nothing
00:09:11.620 on the face of it
00:09:12.900 that's ridiculous.
00:09:15.000 If you tell me,
00:09:15.880 but Scott,
00:09:16.300 it is ridiculous
00:09:17.100 that all these smart people
00:09:18.920 would approve a drug
00:09:19.980 that has all these
00:09:20.680 side effects.
00:09:22.500 No,
00:09:23.100 that's not ridiculous.
00:09:25.440 That's something
00:09:26.640 you hope didn't happen.
00:09:27.600 I don't have a spoon.
00:09:34.760 If I had a spoon,
00:09:35.800 I would clank it
00:09:36.480 in my coffee
00:09:37.100 for a sticks and hammer.
00:09:39.460 If I had one.
00:09:41.880 So,
00:09:43.240 yeah,
00:09:44.840 there is no spoon.
00:09:46.800 I don't have a spoon.
00:09:48.340 Sorry.
00:09:49.100 If I had one,
00:09:49.780 I would be happy
00:09:50.440 to comply.
00:09:50.960 do you feel
00:09:57.800 that you're making
00:09:58.420 your vaccination decision
00:09:59.860 based on data
00:10:01.020 or lack of trust
00:10:04.620 for the source?
00:10:06.760 Which one
00:10:07.180 do you think it is?
00:10:09.380 Because
00:10:09.980 the two datas
00:10:11.720 that you're comparing
00:10:12.560 could be both
00:10:13.480 mass hysterias.
00:10:14.840 We might have
00:10:15.540 a mass hysteria
00:10:16.360 about vaccination
00:10:17.200 side effects.
00:10:18.420 At the same time,
00:10:19.500 we have a mass hysteria
00:10:21.260 about COVID
00:10:21.840 long haul.
00:10:23.400 Or
00:10:23.840 one of them
00:10:25.200 could be real
00:10:25.820 and the other one not.
00:10:27.860 Or
00:10:28.300 both of them
00:10:29.640 could be totally real.
00:10:31.780 You don't know.
00:10:33.300 How could you tell?
00:10:35.140 How could you tell?
00:10:38.940 So,
00:10:39.460 if somebody says
00:10:40.040 that they're basing
00:10:40.780 their decision
00:10:41.340 more on lack of trust
00:10:42.680 based on the source,
00:10:47.040 I would
00:10:48.080 suggest to you
00:10:49.460 that no matter
00:10:51.180 which way you go,
00:10:52.580 it's because of
00:10:53.440 lack of trust.
00:10:55.660 Lack of trust
00:10:56.560 should be universal
00:10:57.480 on both sides
00:10:58.300 of the question.
00:10:59.560 You shouldn't trust
00:11:00.140 anybody at this point.
00:11:01.780 Really.
00:11:02.420 You shouldn't trust
00:11:03.020 anybody.
00:11:04.400 So,
00:11:04.940 if the only people
00:11:05.920 you're not trusting
00:11:07.220 are the government,
00:11:08.900 you need to ramp up
00:11:10.480 your skepticism
00:11:11.320 at least double.
00:11:13.580 Because the government
00:11:14.540 is not the only
00:11:15.940 source of bad information.
00:11:18.280 It's one of them.
00:11:20.460 It's not the only one.
00:11:22.220 So,
00:11:22.540 you would be comparing
00:11:23.300 your lack of trust
00:11:25.180 in the government
00:11:25.960 to your more
00:11:27.880 trusting belief
00:11:29.380 that shit you see
00:11:30.680 on the internet
00:11:31.200 is pretty good.
00:11:33.860 So,
00:11:34.720 we don't have data.
00:11:36.960 And if you're using
00:11:37.680 some kind of,
00:11:38.840 you know,
00:11:39.060 in other words,
00:11:39.460 you can't use the data
00:11:40.260 to make a decision
00:11:41.080 because we don't have
00:11:42.060 good enough data.
00:11:43.480 But,
00:11:44.040 if you're trying
00:11:45.520 to game the system
00:11:46.900 with a rule of thumb,
00:11:48.040 like,
00:11:48.320 oh,
00:11:48.480 these people
00:11:48.960 are always lying,
00:11:49.980 or this group,
00:11:51.320 let's say the government,
00:11:52.580 is always trying
00:11:53.440 to put one over us,
00:11:54.580 or the big pharma
00:11:56.260 is lying about
00:11:57.340 its statistics,
00:11:58.840 maybe all of that's true.
00:12:01.860 But you know
00:12:02.560 what else you can't trust?
00:12:04.940 Everything on the other
00:12:05.920 side of the argument.
00:12:06.620 If you think
00:12:08.500 one side of the argument
00:12:09.520 is credible
00:12:10.380 and the other isn't,
00:12:13.580 where have you been lately?
00:12:16.700 Because I'll tell you
00:12:17.640 what's not happening
00:12:18.540 is you're not getting
00:12:20.120 any credible information.
00:12:22.680 Credible doesn't mean
00:12:23.640 incorrect.
00:12:24.640 It just means that
00:12:25.400 you shouldn't believe it
00:12:26.720 on the surface
00:12:27.420 because you can't tell.
00:12:29.420 All you know
00:12:29.860 is it came from some source
00:12:31.060 and it's a source
00:12:32.220 that's been wrong
00:12:32.840 a lot before.
00:12:34.280 Either people
00:12:35.540 on the internet
00:12:36.180 been wrong a lot
00:12:37.380 or the government
00:12:39.140 been wrong a lot.
00:12:41.880 So how in the world
00:12:42.660 are you convincing yourself
00:12:44.060 you're making
00:12:44.480 a data-driven decision?
00:12:46.460 You know you're not, right?
00:12:49.020 Don't you know that?
00:12:50.820 And if you try to
00:12:52.120 game the system,
00:12:53.920 like I said,
00:12:54.580 with,
00:12:55.080 oh, well,
00:12:55.540 I don't need the data
00:12:56.580 because I can just look
00:12:58.240 at the situation
00:12:59.040 and the players
00:13:00.000 and I can figure out
00:13:01.560 which are the credible players
00:13:02.840 and which are not
00:13:03.720 and sort of that's
00:13:04.960 that's how I'll make
00:13:05.840 my decision.
00:13:07.400 You can't do that.
00:13:09.660 You don't know
00:13:10.640 who's lying to you
00:13:11.740 because they're all
00:13:13.680 not trustworthy.
00:13:16.060 Everybody,
00:13:17.060 including me.
00:13:18.480 Do you trust me?
00:13:20.720 Should you?
00:13:23.160 Well,
00:13:23.860 what the hell
00:13:24.580 do I know
00:13:25.100 about medicine?
00:13:27.740 I wouldn't trust
00:13:28.420 me too much.
00:13:30.420 I mean,
00:13:30.760 here's the most
00:13:32.020 you should trust me.
00:13:32.880 This is the maximum
00:13:34.320 amount you should
00:13:35.020 trust me.
00:13:35.860 You should trust me
00:13:36.940 to be similar
00:13:37.660 to the way I have
00:13:38.520 been in the past.
00:13:40.680 Is that fair?
00:13:42.000 You should trust me
00:13:43.120 to be the same person
00:13:44.360 I was,
00:13:45.160 you know,
00:13:45.420 a year ago.
00:13:46.060 I haven't really
00:13:46.480 changed that much.
00:13:47.220 That's all you can trust.
00:13:49.020 Now,
00:13:49.280 if you said,
00:13:49.740 okay,
00:13:49.980 a year ago,
00:13:51.260 you said some things
00:13:52.280 that were surprisingly
00:13:53.420 good predictions,
00:13:54.900 but you also got
00:13:56.100 some notable things wrong.
00:13:58.680 Is that a fair statement?
00:13:59.800 Is that a fair characterization
00:14:01.960 of me?
00:14:03.960 That I had some
00:14:04.760 impressive predictions
00:14:05.980 in the last five years,
00:14:07.560 let's say,
00:14:08.260 but also got some
00:14:10.420 big stuff wrong,
00:14:11.640 like everybody did.
00:14:12.940 Is that a fair characterization?
00:14:16.300 So why would you
00:14:17.300 trust me?
00:14:19.980 How can you tell
00:14:21.300 that the next thing
00:14:23.000 I make a prediction
00:14:24.160 on is a good one?
00:14:25.000 If you could tell
00:14:27.960 which of my predictions
00:14:28.800 were good ones,
00:14:30.380 then you would be
00:14:31.120 good at predicting.
00:14:32.040 You wouldn't need me at all
00:14:33.040 if you could tell
00:14:34.700 the good ones
00:14:35.340 from the bad ones.
00:14:36.960 You can't.
00:14:38.540 Even I can't tell
00:14:39.300 the good ones
00:14:39.800 from the bad ones.
00:14:41.160 You know,
00:14:41.420 I have varying levels
00:14:42.860 of confidence,
00:14:43.760 but that's different
00:14:44.400 from knowing
00:14:44.920 what is likely
00:14:46.280 to be right.
00:14:47.800 So,
00:14:48.400 I think all of us
00:14:50.060 need to get
00:14:50.520 a little more humble
00:14:51.960 about how we're
00:14:53.860 making decisions.
00:14:55.000 Let me tell you
00:14:56.140 what I learned
00:14:56.680 on day one
00:14:57.460 in hypnosis class.
00:14:59.380 If there's anybody
00:15:00.040 on YouTube watching,
00:15:01.800 there might be
00:15:02.420 three people
00:15:02.940 who don't know
00:15:03.460 I'm a trained hypnotist.
00:15:05.560 But the first day
00:15:06.500 of hypnosis class,
00:15:07.640 decades ago,
00:15:09.200 the first thing you learn
00:15:10.080 is that people
00:15:10.560 don't use information
00:15:11.500 to make decisions.
00:15:13.560 And when you hear it,
00:15:14.380 you're like,
00:15:14.720 oh, I think
00:15:15.420 that's an exaggeration.
00:15:17.200 I mean,
00:15:18.120 yes,
00:15:18.540 some people,
00:15:19.540 some decisions,
00:15:20.340 yeah, I see what you mean.
00:15:21.480 But now you're
00:15:22.080 into outright hyperbole.
00:15:23.560 Because obviously
00:15:25.420 people do use data
00:15:27.280 to make decisions.
00:15:30.120 Nope.
00:15:32.100 Nope.
00:15:33.300 Never.
00:15:34.780 Never.
00:15:36.020 They just don't.
00:15:37.580 They don't use data
00:15:38.520 to make decisions.
00:15:39.440 It's just an illusion
00:15:40.640 that we do.
00:15:41.880 Now,
00:15:42.460 do we
00:15:43.140 make decisions
00:15:44.480 that are in the same
00:15:45.260 direction as the data
00:15:46.320 and then they work out well?
00:15:49.180 Yes, we do.
00:15:50.320 Yes, we do.
00:15:50.840 We also
00:15:52.260 look at the data
00:15:54.000 and misinterpret
00:15:55.100 and do things
00:15:56.780 and sometimes
00:15:57.280 that works out well too.
00:15:59.160 Because we not only
00:16:00.160 misinterpreted the problem,
00:16:02.040 but we misinterpreted
00:16:03.120 the answer.
00:16:03.940 And we got lucky.
00:16:05.580 And our misinterpreted problem
00:16:07.020 was solved
00:16:07.500 by our misinterpreted answer.
00:16:10.080 But mostly,
00:16:11.060 we're doing random stuff
00:16:12.200 or we're doing things
00:16:13.780 because other people
00:16:14.660 say we should do them
00:16:15.520 or we're,
00:16:16.340 you know,
00:16:17.060 we're afraid to buck
00:16:18.180 the other opinions
00:16:20.120 or something like that.
00:16:21.500 But does it have
00:16:22.120 anything to do
00:16:22.700 with the data?
00:16:25.000 We'd like to think so.
00:16:27.120 But trust the hypnotists.
00:16:30.380 Funniest story of the day
00:16:31.500 is Don Lemon
00:16:32.320 doubling down
00:16:33.300 and defending CNN's
00:16:35.480 characterization
00:16:36.920 of Joe Rogan's
00:16:38.920 COVID treatment
00:16:42.100 that included,
00:16:43.220 among other things,
00:16:44.080 ivermectin,
00:16:45.040 the humankind.
00:16:45.640 Yeah, yeah.
00:16:47.520 Has anybody heard
00:16:48.220 that before?
00:16:49.460 That ivermectin
00:16:50.320 comes in two forms?
00:16:51.920 One, the humankind,
00:16:53.700 developed first,
00:16:54.880 very important.
00:16:56.000 Later,
00:16:56.580 became also
00:16:57.200 a veterinarian
00:16:57.920 horse dewormer.
00:17:01.340 And Don Lemon
00:17:02.040 has Sanjay Gupta on
00:17:03.480 and he's doubling down
00:17:06.020 on CNN's lie.
00:17:07.520 Now, it's a lie
00:17:08.140 of omission.
00:17:10.240 Right?
00:17:10.800 Don Lemon tries
00:17:11.660 to go technical.
00:17:13.560 He's like,
00:17:13.980 it's not a lie
00:17:15.140 that ivermectin
00:17:16.120 is a horse warmer
00:17:17.200 and Sanjay,
00:17:19.740 to his everlasting
00:17:21.320 lack of credit,
00:17:23.520 agreed with that statement.
00:17:25.800 Sanjay,
00:17:26.660 I just embarrassed myself
00:17:28.380 by defending you yesterday.
00:17:30.440 You motherfucker.
00:17:32.180 I just defended you
00:17:33.540 in public yesterday
00:17:34.460 for being reasonable
00:17:36.180 in not defending CNN
00:17:38.320 for the dewormer stuff.
00:17:40.700 And then he goes
00:17:42.780 right on back
00:17:43.520 on CNN
00:17:44.120 and lets the lie
00:17:45.840 by omission
00:17:46.500 stand.
00:17:48.380 I mean,
00:17:48.740 seriously, Sanjay.
00:17:50.860 Mmm.
00:17:52.580 We do expect
00:17:53.720 a little more
00:17:54.240 out of you,
00:17:54.820 if I'm being honest,
00:17:56.040 because I know
00:17:56.620 you have more.
00:17:58.780 I will reiterate
00:18:00.240 that I don't think
00:18:02.100 Dr. Sanjay Gupta
00:18:03.500 is one of the bad guys.
00:18:05.280 I think he's one
00:18:06.040 of the good guys.
00:18:07.200 But he also
00:18:07.860 has a boss, right?
00:18:08.840 If you have a boss,
00:18:09.840 you're going to respond to it.
00:18:11.360 And I would advise
00:18:13.580 Sanjay Gupta
00:18:15.180 that he could push
00:18:16.660 a lot harder
00:18:17.360 on his bosses
00:18:18.500 and his co-workers
00:18:19.700 without real risk.
00:18:22.000 Because the only thing
00:18:22.980 I would ask him to say
00:18:24.060 is it could be misleading
00:18:27.280 to people
00:18:27.860 to not call this
00:18:29.400 a human drug first.
00:18:32.380 It's worth pointing out
00:18:33.600 if you'd like to
00:18:34.300 for context
00:18:35.020 that it's also
00:18:35.660 horse dewormer.
00:18:36.700 But that part
00:18:37.360 is not relevant.
00:18:38.840 What so ever
00:18:39.820 to Joe Rogan's decision
00:18:42.060 to take a human drug.
00:18:44.200 Now that would be
00:18:45.020 a good answer, right?
00:18:46.280 It would not
00:18:47.740 directly call CNN
00:18:49.020 liars.
00:18:50.340 But it would correct them
00:18:51.620 and say,
00:18:52.120 you know,
00:18:53.380 let's say the better context
00:18:55.560 is to start by saying
00:18:56.920 it's a human drug.
00:18:58.960 They can be
00:19:00.060 prescribed off-label.
00:19:02.620 Don't know
00:19:03.100 if it works or not.
00:19:04.900 The evidence
00:19:05.920 is not confirming
00:19:06.880 that it works.
00:19:08.820 But it's not unusual
00:19:10.340 for people
00:19:10.860 to take that kind
00:19:11.640 of risk
00:19:12.040 with such a
00:19:13.040 small chance
00:19:14.120 of side effects.
00:19:15.840 Now if Dr. Sanjay Gupta
00:19:17.160 said anything like that,
00:19:19.380 I'd say
00:19:20.060 that's a pretty good answer.
00:19:21.400 He's not really
00:19:22.040 calling CNN out
00:19:24.100 as liars,
00:19:25.500 but he's fixing
00:19:26.280 their context
00:19:27.020 for them.
00:19:27.540 Don't you think
00:19:29.500 he should do that?
00:19:30.180 I feel like
00:19:32.020 there's an ethical
00:19:32.980 lapse
00:19:33.600 in this story.
00:19:37.020 I mean,
00:19:37.360 just from,
00:19:37.900 it's subjective, right?
00:19:39.240 You know,
00:19:39.420 you can't,
00:19:40.040 it's not an objective thing.
00:19:41.560 But subjectively
00:19:42.480 it looks like
00:19:43.000 an ethical lapse.
00:19:45.040 Not a big one.
00:19:46.480 I mean,
00:19:46.900 it's smallish.
00:19:48.520 But I feel
00:19:49.240 if you're in the
00:19:49.980 medical field
00:19:51.200 that you shouldn't
00:19:53.040 have any of those.
00:19:54.320 And when you do,
00:19:55.660 you should quickly
00:19:56.520 circle back
00:19:57.160 to correct it.
00:19:58.220 Because obviously,
00:19:59.040 you know,
00:19:59.240 mistakes happen.
00:20:00.900 But,
00:20:01.800 so that would be
00:20:03.000 my ask
00:20:04.180 for Dr. Gupta.
00:20:06.160 If he had a chance
00:20:07.180 to circle back
00:20:08.040 and just put a little
00:20:09.520 context on that
00:20:10.400 for us.
00:20:11.300 It would just feel,
00:20:12.700 feel a little better.
00:20:16.260 All right.
00:20:17.180 But the fact
00:20:17.940 that Don Lemon
00:20:18.500 is trying to double down
00:20:19.500 on that live bio mission
00:20:21.000 is hilarious.
00:20:23.340 He's a broken man,
00:20:24.640 isn't he?
00:20:26.260 Don Lemon
00:20:26.820 looks broken.
00:20:28.360 I mean,
00:20:28.520 he's got,
00:20:28.840 he's dealing
00:20:29.700 with a pretty
00:20:30.120 serious
00:20:30.640 sexual harassment
00:20:32.980 allegation
00:20:33.740 from a man
00:20:35.620 who says
00:20:36.000 that he got
00:20:37.340 touched.
00:20:38.260 We don't know
00:20:38.900 if that's true.
00:20:40.020 Remember,
00:20:40.660 the context here
00:20:41.480 is we don't know
00:20:42.040 if anything's true.
00:20:43.320 It's just an allegation.
00:20:45.500 But he's having
00:20:46.360 a tough time
00:20:46.900 with this.
00:20:47.720 Don Lemon is.
00:20:49.480 I wish him well.
00:20:52.220 So,
00:20:52.800 here's a question
00:20:53.880 for you.
00:20:54.240 I tweeted
00:20:55.060 I tweeted
00:20:55.080 a thread
00:20:56.020 yesterday
00:20:56.560 in which
00:20:58.120 I
00:20:58.540 reframed
00:21:00.140 Trump's
00:21:00.840 challenging
00:21:01.360 of the 2020
00:21:02.260 election
00:21:02.780 and
00:21:04.680 it got
00:21:06.220 very few
00:21:06.920 retweets.
00:21:08.960 What's up
00:21:09.700 with that?
00:21:11.560 So,
00:21:13.020 keep in mind,
00:21:14.060 here's some context.
00:21:15.020 When most of you
00:21:15.720 were claiming,
00:21:16.420 I think,
00:21:17.360 Twitter is shadow
00:21:18.180 banning me
00:21:18.820 and your tweets
00:21:19.640 don't show up,
00:21:20.880 I was pretty much
00:21:22.000 on the side
00:21:22.540 of saying
00:21:22.980 that's probably
00:21:23.860 an illusion
00:21:24.480 based on the fact
00:21:26.140 that not all
00:21:28.300 tweets show up
00:21:29.120 and there are
00:21:30.000 reasons for it.
00:21:30.680 It might not be
00:21:31.320 a bad reason.
00:21:33.300 But,
00:21:33.980 I tweeted
00:21:35.420 something that
00:21:36.120 in any prior time
00:21:37.720 I think would
00:21:39.560 have been over
00:21:40.080 a thousand
00:21:40.600 retweets easily
00:21:41.640 just because
00:21:42.480 of the content.
00:21:43.440 I'm reasonably
00:21:44.080 good at guessing
00:21:44.740 which of my tweets
00:21:45.540 will get big
00:21:46.760 responses and
00:21:47.620 which won't.
00:21:48.980 I have a pretty
00:21:49.960 good track record
00:21:50.860 of it.
00:21:51.160 Because the ones
00:21:51.880 that go viral
00:21:52.600 have certain
00:21:53.120 qualities to them.
00:21:54.800 This one had
00:21:55.560 all the qualities
00:21:56.560 of a viral tweet
00:21:57.780 and it just sat
00:21:59.280 there and died.
00:22:00.540 When I checked
00:22:01.040 it was at
00:22:01.520 187
00:22:02.540 tweets,
00:22:05.080 retweets.
00:22:06.620 Tweets,
00:22:07.060 I guess.
00:22:07.820 What would you
00:22:08.360 call it?
00:22:08.620 I guess it would
00:22:08.960 be a retweet
00:22:09.440 because I'm
00:22:09.840 the original
00:22:10.240 author.
00:22:13.380 And I'll
00:22:14.620 tell you what
00:22:14.960 the thread was
00:22:15.440 about in a minute
00:22:15.920 but is this
00:22:17.920 an obvious
00:22:18.420 shadow ban?
00:22:19.800 Now,
00:22:20.260 the people who
00:22:20.740 said they
00:22:21.000 didn't get it,
00:22:21.760 remember,
00:22:22.240 you don't get
00:22:22.800 everybody's
00:22:23.420 everything.
00:22:24.500 That's normal.
00:22:25.660 Does everybody
00:22:26.080 know that?
00:22:26.940 It's normal
00:22:27.740 that you don't
00:22:29.460 get everybody's
00:22:30.340 every tweet.
00:22:32.620 You should know
00:22:33.360 that's normal.
00:22:33.880 I think there's
00:22:34.660 a setting
00:22:35.140 that allows you
00:22:36.880 to see them
00:22:38.900 all or see them
00:22:39.860 according to the
00:22:40.480 algorithm or
00:22:41.060 something,
00:22:41.420 right?
00:22:41.560 Now,
00:22:44.280 you're wondering
00:22:45.240 if it picked
00:22:45.900 up a keyword
00:22:46.480 the algorithm
00:22:47.140 did and
00:22:47.640 suppressed this.
00:22:48.840 I had 38
00:22:49.760 quote tweets.
00:22:52.160 Listen to this
00:22:52.760 ratio.
00:22:53.380 There were 187
00:22:54.240 tweets which
00:22:55.600 would suggest
00:22:56.260 a low amount
00:22:57.580 of interest
00:22:58.160 based on the
00:22:59.440 size of my
00:23:00.100 follower base.
00:23:00.760 So over
00:23:01.680 640,000 followers,
00:23:05.360 something like
00:23:05.900 that.
00:23:06.120 And for me
00:23:07.640 to only get
00:23:08.120 187 tweets
00:23:09.760 after a day
00:23:11.260 would be low.
00:23:13.680 So that would
00:23:14.020 be a low number
00:23:14.680 of tweets.
00:23:15.380 But 38
00:23:16.080 quote tweets,
00:23:17.200 that's a lot.
00:23:19.580 So it suggests
00:23:20.540 that the people
00:23:21.120 who did see it
00:23:21.980 were very
00:23:23.140 interested in
00:23:23.820 engaging with it.
00:23:25.240 But not many
00:23:25.880 people saw it.
00:23:27.900 So what is
00:23:29.220 the situation
00:23:29.780 in which many
00:23:30.460 people are
00:23:30.900 interested in
00:23:31.640 engaging and
00:23:32.480 yet many people
00:23:33.140 didn't engage?
00:23:34.500 How does that
00:23:35.020 happen?
00:23:36.120 Well, am I
00:23:37.260 reading too much
00:23:37.960 into the data?
00:23:40.460 Yeah, because
00:23:41.460 sometimes you do
00:23:42.120 get a lot of
00:23:42.600 quote tweets
00:23:43.240 relative to the
00:23:44.360 number of tweets.
00:23:45.420 So I check my
00:23:46.400 history to see
00:23:47.600 if that ever
00:23:48.120 happens.
00:23:48.560 And it does
00:23:48.880 happen in
00:23:49.800 situations where
00:23:50.680 just people have
00:23:52.220 a reason to
00:23:52.800 comment.
00:23:54.040 It doesn't
00:23:54.540 necessarily mean
00:23:55.700 something's up.
00:23:56.720 But it's a
00:23:57.580 flag.
00:23:58.880 Sort of a
00:23:59.580 flag.
00:24:00.020 You say,
00:24:00.220 maybe I should
00:24:01.780 look at this
00:24:02.560 a little more.
00:24:03.580 Now, would
00:24:04.200 you be surprised
00:24:04.980 if Trump
00:24:05.940 being banned
00:24:06.740 from Twitter
00:24:07.320 was not
00:24:08.380 also at
00:24:09.780 least suppressed
00:24:10.520 so that other
00:24:12.000 people don't
00:24:12.620 just tweet
00:24:13.440 his material
00:24:13.960 for him?
00:24:15.400 Because what
00:24:15.800 would Twitter
00:24:16.180 do if,
00:24:17.260 let's say,
00:24:18.240 let's say
00:24:19.980 somebody like
00:24:20.560 me,
00:24:21.580 just to make
00:24:23.160 it interesting,
00:24:24.080 let's say
00:24:24.340 somebody like
00:24:24.840 me makes a
00:24:26.120 deal with
00:24:26.540 Trump and
00:24:26.960 says, hey,
00:24:27.620 I'll retweet
00:24:28.560 everything you
00:24:29.180 want me to
00:24:29.580 tweet.
00:24:30.460 It'll just
00:24:31.040 come from my
00:24:31.560 account.
00:24:31.940 You can
00:24:33.240 tell that
00:24:33.640 it's from
00:24:34.000 you,
00:24:34.920 but I'll
00:24:35.520 just be
00:24:35.800 your official
00:24:36.340 retweeter.
00:24:37.920 Now, what
00:24:38.200 would happen?
00:24:39.020 Wouldn't
00:24:39.400 Twitter shut
00:24:39.940 you down?
00:24:41.240 I mean, they
00:24:41.620 should, right?
00:24:42.360 It makes
00:24:42.760 sense.
00:24:43.140 If they're
00:24:43.380 going to ban
00:24:43.800 the author,
00:24:46.780 which would
00:24:47.100 be Trump,
00:24:48.800 wouldn't they
00:24:49.440 necessarily need
00:24:50.360 to ban
00:24:50.840 anybody who
00:24:51.480 was just
00:24:51.800 going to
00:24:52.040 retweet
00:24:52.380 everything he
00:24:52.900 said?
00:24:53.800 Now, there
00:24:54.360 are people
00:24:54.760 who retweet
00:24:55.400 everything he
00:24:56.540 said, but
00:24:57.800 they tend to
00:24:58.180 be smaller
00:24:58.680 accounts, and
00:24:59.440 they haven't
00:24:59.740 really been
00:25:00.120 picked up
00:25:00.720 as the
00:25:01.880 way to
00:25:02.400 follow him.
00:25:03.420 If he
00:25:04.020 actually gets
00:25:04.920 in the race,
00:25:06.520 I think
00:25:06.880 those, let's
00:25:08.160 call them,
00:25:08.820 what would
00:25:09.120 you call
00:25:09.280 them, mirror
00:25:09.740 accounts, or
00:25:11.480 retweeter
00:25:12.140 accounts, or
00:25:12.720 something, I
00:25:13.440 think there
00:25:13.740 will be a
00:25:14.040 number of
00:25:14.400 them, so
00:25:15.420 you'll be
00:25:15.780 able to
00:25:16.040 follow Trump.
00:25:17.300 You'll just
00:25:17.720 be following
00:25:18.240 the mirror,
00:25:20.280 people being
00:25:21.260 a mirror.
00:25:22.340 Now, will
00:25:22.700 all those
00:25:23.080 people be
00:25:23.520 banned?
00:25:25.340 They should,
00:25:26.240 right?
00:25:27.020 I mean, should,
00:25:28.440 based on the
00:25:29.220 consistency of
00:25:30.260 the guidelines,
00:25:31.920 I would
00:25:32.220 think.
00:25:32.940 It's the
00:25:33.340 same content,
00:25:34.180 so why
00:25:34.480 wouldn't you
00:25:34.800 ban it?
00:25:36.240 I don't
00:25:36.760 know.
00:25:37.000 I don't
00:25:37.300 know if
00:25:37.540 they would
00:25:37.800 treat it
00:25:38.080 that way,
00:25:38.560 but logically
00:25:39.320 you would
00:25:39.780 imagine they
00:25:40.240 might.
00:25:41.000 So here's
00:25:41.460 my question.
00:25:42.360 If Trump
00:25:42.900 himself is
00:25:43.560 banned, why
00:25:44.600 wouldn't
00:25:45.700 Twitter also
00:25:46.640 suppress topics
00:25:48.400 that are
00:25:48.820 favorable to
00:25:49.560 him?
00:25:50.560 I feel like
00:25:51.140 that just
00:25:51.520 makes sense,
00:25:52.760 right?
00:25:53.560 Less Trump
00:25:54.200 is less
00:25:54.580 Trump.
00:25:55.300 They either
00:25:55.740 wanted more
00:25:56.260 of him or
00:25:56.660 less of him,
00:25:57.200 and they
00:25:57.420 decided to
00:25:58.140 have less
00:25:58.480 of him.
00:25:59.220 So let
00:26:00.740 me tell
00:26:00.980 you what
00:26:01.240 I tweeted,
00:26:02.520 and I
00:26:03.380 need your
00:26:03.740 help here,
00:26:04.400 okay?
00:26:05.200 I'm asking
00:26:06.100 for your
00:26:06.740 help.
00:26:07.820 I have a
00:26:08.780 bias here
00:26:09.420 that's pretty
00:26:10.320 obvious,
00:26:11.100 because I
00:26:11.420 think my
00:26:11.820 tweet was
00:26:12.220 good,
00:26:13.000 but I'm
00:26:13.800 operating from
00:26:14.420 deep bias.
00:26:16.000 You have
00:26:16.700 less bias
00:26:17.340 relative to
00:26:18.020 me on this
00:26:18.660 topic.
00:26:19.320 I want to
00:26:19.660 see if you
00:26:20.920 can call out
00:26:21.540 my bias on
00:26:22.320 this.
00:26:23.320 Am I
00:26:23.720 wrong?
00:26:25.260 All right,
00:26:25.480 let me tell
00:26:26.060 you what the
00:26:26.360 point is.
00:26:26.760 So the
00:26:27.820 point of
00:26:28.120 the
00:26:28.220 thread was
00:26:28.580 this,
00:26:29.420 that most
00:26:30.180 people think
00:26:30.720 Trump is
00:26:31.240 making a
00:26:31.700 terrible
00:26:32.020 mistake in
00:26:33.700 continuing to
00:26:34.760 hammer on
00:26:38.920 the 2020
00:26:40.000 election,
00:26:40.820 and also to
00:26:41.680 continue to
00:26:42.260 claim that
00:26:42.820 there was
00:26:43.100 massive fraud
00:26:43.880 and that
00:26:44.260 it's all
00:26:44.600 been documented.
00:26:47.220 Now,
00:26:48.380 number one,
00:26:49.140 how many of
00:26:49.600 you think
00:26:50.000 that's a
00:26:50.620 bad strategy?
00:26:52.140 Or up
00:26:52.620 until my
00:26:53.440 tweet,
00:26:53.800 how many of
00:26:54.560 you thought
00:26:54.860 that was
00:26:55.100 a bad
00:26:55.560 strategy to
00:26:56.920 just keep
00:26:57.440 hammering on
00:26:58.120 that 2020
00:26:59.200 election?
00:27:01.180 All right?
00:27:02.060 Forget about
00:27:02.760 whether he's
00:27:03.180 right.
00:27:04.080 We're not
00:27:04.680 talking about
00:27:05.120 right or
00:27:05.440 wrong.
00:27:05.740 We're only
00:27:05.980 talking about
00:27:06.320 strategy.
00:27:08.320 All right,
00:27:08.540 so a lot of
00:27:09.040 people saying
00:27:09.880 they think
00:27:11.340 it's a bad
00:27:11.820 strategy.
00:27:13.580 All right,
00:27:14.100 so here's my
00:27:14.920 argument for
00:27:15.520 why it's a
00:27:15.980 good strategy.
00:27:18.260 You ready?
00:27:20.280 Do you think
00:27:20.960 I can convince
00:27:21.580 you it's a
00:27:22.020 good strategy?
00:27:23.580 How many
00:27:23.900 think I can
00:27:24.440 do that?
00:27:24.860 Here's the
00:27:27.400 argument,
00:27:27.880 and it goes
00:27:28.260 like this.
00:27:30.040 What are
00:27:30.280 the odds
00:27:30.840 that at
00:27:32.140 least one
00:27:32.760 precinct
00:27:33.380 somewhere in
00:27:34.520 all the
00:27:34.940 precincts
00:27:35.840 can be
00:27:36.580 found that
00:27:37.180 was clearly
00:27:37.720 fraud?
00:27:39.980 Now,
00:27:40.580 we're not
00:27:41.100 looking at
00:27:41.540 every precinct,
00:27:42.720 so that
00:27:43.040 doesn't mean
00:27:43.420 we'll find
00:27:43.820 it,
00:27:44.240 but it's
00:27:44.560 a big
00:27:44.800 country.
00:27:46.220 What are
00:27:46.560 the odds
00:27:46.920 that there's
00:27:47.320 no precincts
00:27:48.800 which flip
00:27:49.700 from Biden
00:27:50.540 to Trump?
00:27:51.380 Now,
00:27:51.540 remember,
00:27:51.860 a precinct
00:27:52.240 is not a
00:27:52.760 state,
00:27:54.000 and a
00:27:54.280 precinct is
00:27:54.840 not a
00:27:55.140 county.
00:27:56.140 Precinct would
00:27:56.660 be the
00:27:57.220 smallest unit.
00:27:59.720 In any
00:28:00.400 large,
00:28:01.040 complex
00:28:01.400 system,
00:28:02.580 is there
00:28:03.980 fraud?
00:28:05.480 Let's take
00:28:06.100 the stock
00:28:06.540 market.
00:28:07.720 The stock
00:28:08.340 market is
00:28:08.980 policed
00:28:09.580 pretty carefully.
00:28:12.020 The stock
00:28:12.500 market is
00:28:12.860 also a big
00:28:13.660 thing with
00:28:15.060 lots of
00:28:15.380 people involved.
00:28:17.020 Is there
00:28:17.560 always fraud
00:28:19.200 in the stock
00:28:19.840 market?
00:28:21.160 Yes.
00:28:21.800 Yes.
00:28:22.080 The odds
00:28:22.480 of finding
00:28:22.920 fraud in
00:28:24.180 the stock
00:28:24.580 market,
00:28:25.040 let's say,
00:28:25.420 next year,
00:28:26.660 specific
00:28:27.100 examples are
00:28:27.980 100%.
00:28:28.640 Does everybody
00:28:29.640 agree it's
00:28:30.000 100%?
00:28:31.400 That if you
00:28:32.480 look for
00:28:32.880 fraud,
00:28:33.540 some,
00:28:33.960 just any
00:28:34.400 example of
00:28:35.020 fraud in
00:28:35.420 the stock
00:28:35.820 market,
00:28:37.240 next year,
00:28:38.880 100% chance
00:28:39.740 you would
00:28:39.940 find it.
00:28:41.520 Yes,
00:28:42.000 right?
00:28:42.200 It's just
00:28:42.460 obvious.
00:28:43.340 Now,
00:28:43.620 let's take a
00:28:44.200 big pharmaceutical
00:28:44.840 company.
00:28:45.640 Pick any one.
00:28:47.120 They've got
00:28:47.400 lots of
00:28:47.840 products,
00:28:48.480 lots of
00:28:48.820 trials,
00:28:49.240 lots of
00:28:49.760 things.
00:28:50.440 Do you
00:28:50.700 think that
00:28:51.780 in any
00:28:52.060 big pharma
00:28:52.640 company,
00:28:53.100 even one
00:28:53.560 that you
00:28:53.820 respect,
00:28:55.440 do you
00:28:55.680 think that
00:28:56.040 if you
00:28:56.380 could somehow
00:28:56.980 look at
00:28:57.340 all the
00:28:57.740 things they're
00:28:58.180 doing,
00:28:59.140 like all
00:28:59.620 the employee
00:29:00.160 decisions,
00:29:01.060 the studies
00:29:01.720 and everything,
00:29:02.540 do you
00:29:02.740 think you
00:29:03.020 would find
00:29:03.340 any
00:29:03.620 corruption
00:29:04.060 in a
00:29:05.340 big
00:29:06.140 pharmaceutical
00:29:07.100 company?
00:29:08.100 Just one
00:29:08.680 person doing
00:29:09.280 one corrupt
00:29:09.780 thing,
00:29:10.100 do you
00:29:10.260 think?
00:29:11.060 Yes.
00:29:11.840 And what
00:29:12.180 are the
00:29:12.380 odds you
00:29:12.740 would find
00:29:13.080 it?
00:29:13.620 What are
00:29:13.840 the odds?
00:29:16.080 100%.
00:29:16.520 I mean,
00:29:17.760 if you
00:29:17.980 had the
00:29:18.240 ability to
00:29:18.800 look for
00:29:19.240 it,
00:29:19.660 you don't
00:29:20.000 always have
00:29:20.320 the ability
00:29:20.740 to look
00:29:21.160 for it,
00:29:21.780 but if
00:29:22.180 you could,
00:29:23.720 it would
00:29:24.020 be 100%.
00:29:24.880 You don't
00:29:25.580 know how
00:29:25.800 big it
00:29:26.080 is.
00:29:26.720 I'm not
00:29:27.040 saying it
00:29:27.380 was big
00:29:27.700 enough to
00:29:28.320 recall a
00:29:29.680 drug or
00:29:30.060 anything like
00:29:30.460 that,
00:29:31.320 but yeah,
00:29:31.820 100%.
00:29:32.640 how about
00:29:34.800 the government?
00:29:36.580 Let's
00:29:36.860 take Congress.
00:29:38.020 Congress is
00:29:38.620 a pretty
00:29:38.900 big body
00:29:39.520 of people.
00:29:40.740 What are
00:29:40.960 the odds
00:29:41.440 that there's
00:29:42.560 not one
00:29:43.440 person in
00:29:43.980 Congress
00:29:44.420 who's
00:29:45.320 somewhat
00:29:45.960 explicitly
00:29:46.580 taking a
00:29:47.300 bribe?
00:29:49.180 Zero,
00:29:50.200 right?
00:29:51.840 Even if
00:29:52.680 you believe
00:29:53.100 Congress is
00:29:53.740 mostly pretty
00:29:55.180 honest,
00:29:55.920 because we're
00:29:56.340 watching them
00:29:56.880 pretty closely,
00:29:57.420 what are
00:29:59.040 the odds
00:29:59.340 that at
00:29:59.740 least one
00:30:00.320 person is
00:30:02.280 doing something
00:30:02.920 that's close
00:30:03.740 to,
00:30:04.060 maybe it's
00:30:04.400 legal,
00:30:05.240 but in
00:30:05.680 effect it's
00:30:06.280 a bribe,
00:30:07.040 something unethical?
00:30:08.640 What are
00:30:09.080 the odds
00:30:09.300 that at
00:30:09.480 least one
00:30:09.980 congressman
00:30:10.620 will do
00:30:11.060 that next
00:30:11.580 year?
00:30:12.320 It's 100%.
00:30:13.300 It's 100%.
00:30:15.480 Now let's
00:30:16.360 get back to
00:30:16.800 the election.
00:30:18.120 So the
00:30:18.360 election is
00:30:19.100 thousands and
00:30:20.260 thousands of
00:30:20.820 people operating
00:30:22.260 semi-independently
00:30:23.600 all over the
00:30:24.320 country.
00:30:25.140 Every precinct
00:30:25.940 is managed
00:30:26.540 in its own
00:30:27.120 way,
00:30:27.420 with its
00:30:27.760 own people.
00:30:29.080 A vast
00:30:29.960 process.
00:30:31.800 What are
00:30:32.020 the odds
00:30:32.520 that one
00:30:33.780 of those
00:30:34.180 precincts
00:30:35.620 cheated in
00:30:36.500 a way that
00:30:37.060 flipped it
00:30:38.180 from,
00:30:38.460 and intentionally
00:30:39.040 cheated,
00:30:39.820 from the way
00:30:40.240 that flipped
00:30:40.620 it from
00:30:40.920 Biden to
00:30:41.440 Trump?
00:30:41.800 Just one
00:30:42.180 of them.
00:30:43.160 How many
00:30:44.360 precincts
00:30:44.860 are there?
00:30:45.440 Somebody
00:30:45.880 give me a
00:30:46.260 fact check.
00:30:47.160 How many
00:30:47.560 precincts
00:30:48.100 are there
00:30:48.360 in the
00:30:48.540 country?
00:30:48.900 Just Google
00:30:49.340 that and
00:30:49.660 put it in
00:30:49.940 the comments
00:30:50.320 for a
00:30:50.580 second.
00:30:51.460 Yeah,
00:30:51.740 100%.
00:30:52.520 Now look
00:30:54.360 at Trump's
00:30:55.120 bet.
00:30:55.560 does Trump
00:30:57.520 need to
00:30:58.140 prove to
00:30:58.560 you that
00:31:00.380 enough votes
00:31:01.540 were flipped
00:31:02.180 to change
00:31:04.220 the election
00:31:04.760 result?
00:31:05.660 Does Trump
00:31:06.380 need to
00:31:06.960 prove to
00:31:07.340 you in
00:31:08.540 court that
00:31:09.900 there were
00:31:10.180 enough votes
00:31:10.980 flipped to
00:31:12.520 change the
00:31:13.080 election?
00:31:13.900 He does
00:31:14.300 not.
00:31:14.700 because you
00:31:16.760 know why?
00:31:18.340 You all
00:31:19.240 operate on
00:31:20.020 anecdotes.
00:31:21.820 You need
00:31:22.720 one good
00:31:23.620 example that
00:31:24.560 you believe
00:31:25.080 for sure.
00:31:26.820 Arizona is
00:31:27.580 kind of
00:31:27.860 sketchy,
00:31:28.320 isn't it?
00:31:28.720 Because even
00:31:29.140 the people
00:31:29.540 who ordered
00:31:29.980 it said,
00:31:30.440 you know,
00:31:32.240 maybe we're
00:31:34.460 a little
00:31:34.820 uncomfortable,
00:31:36.460 but we
00:31:38.300 can't say
00:31:38.840 for sure
00:31:39.780 it was
00:31:41.020 rigged.
00:31:41.540 But what
00:31:42.400 if you
00:31:42.600 had one
00:31:43.040 precinct
00:31:43.580 where the
00:31:44.780 question was
00:31:45.460 asked and
00:31:45.980 answered and
00:31:46.560 everybody knew
00:31:47.220 it was
00:31:47.420 rigged?
00:31:48.240 Even the
00:31:48.760 Democrats said,
00:31:49.640 oh, okay,
00:31:50.200 that one's
00:31:50.540 rigged.
00:31:51.280 But it's
00:31:51.880 small.
00:31:52.280 It's small.
00:31:53.060 It's just
00:31:53.360 one precinct.
00:31:54.540 Nobody's
00:31:55.020 proving that
00:31:55.580 the election
00:31:56.080 was rigged.
00:31:56.820 Just one
00:31:57.260 precinct.
00:31:59.280 If Trump
00:32:00.180 gets one
00:32:01.180 precinct that
00:32:03.420 even Democrats
00:32:04.380 can see was
00:32:05.360 clearly fraud,
00:32:07.660 he's your
00:32:08.340 next president.
00:32:09.000 because how
00:32:10.900 does January
00:32:11.440 6th look
00:32:12.520 if he can
00:32:14.260 find one
00:32:15.100 precinct,
00:32:16.140 just one,
00:32:17.160 that there
00:32:18.040 was fraud?
00:32:19.700 Suddenly,
00:32:20.400 January 6th
00:32:21.120 looks really
00:32:21.580 different,
00:32:22.000 doesn't it?
00:32:23.060 Now, it
00:32:23.900 doesn't make
00:32:24.420 any of the
00:32:24.840 crimes go
00:32:25.440 away, right?
00:32:26.360 Anybody who
00:32:27.060 engaged in
00:32:27.780 violence will
00:32:29.220 pay a price,
00:32:29.920 and I'm
00:32:30.740 happy about
00:32:31.320 that.
00:32:32.520 But your
00:32:33.900 overall feeling
00:32:35.280 of how
00:32:36.540 inappropriate
00:32:37.260 Trump was
00:32:38.600 will very
00:32:39.740 much be
00:32:40.280 modified if
00:32:41.680 we find
00:32:42.200 one solid
00:32:43.140 example.
00:32:44.840 So Trump
00:32:45.680 is making
00:32:46.140 a bet that
00:32:47.740 he has a
00:32:48.080 good chance
00:32:48.440 of losing,
00:32:49.780 because maybe
00:32:50.300 we won't
00:32:50.740 find one
00:32:51.300 precinct with
00:32:51.900 that problem.
00:32:53.020 But he's
00:32:54.680 only one
00:32:55.320 precinct away
00:32:56.240 from being
00:32:57.140 the next
00:32:57.540 president.
00:32:59.120 Nothing else
00:32:59.880 could keep
00:33:00.280 him out of
00:33:00.600 the office,
00:33:01.540 I don't
00:33:02.060 think.
00:33:02.560 I don't
00:33:03.100 think there's
00:33:03.440 anything else
00:33:04.000 that could
00:33:04.300 keep him
00:33:04.640 out of
00:33:04.900 office.
00:33:05.680 And because
00:33:06.020 he's so
00:33:06.440 far into it
00:33:07.040 at this
00:33:07.340 point,
00:33:07.620 January 6th,
00:33:09.460 etc., he's
00:33:10.580 so far
00:33:11.460 invested, he
00:33:12.180 kind of has
00:33:12.920 to ride this
00:33:13.720 horse all
00:33:14.200 the way.
00:33:15.300 If he
00:33:15.860 suddenly changed
00:33:16.700 opinion and
00:33:17.480 said, you
00:33:17.720 know, I'll
00:33:18.660 let this
00:33:19.040 election go,
00:33:20.920 his base
00:33:22.020 would rebel.
00:33:23.760 He would
00:33:24.340 lose his
00:33:24.840 base if he
00:33:25.500 let go of
00:33:26.020 it.
00:33:26.200 So, you
00:33:26.460 know, let's
00:33:27.300 let it go.
00:33:27.820 We'll just
00:33:28.100 play another
00:33:29.440 day.
00:33:30.500 He'd lose
00:33:31.100 his base.
00:33:32.260 So he
00:33:32.800 wants to
00:33:33.120 keep his
00:33:33.460 base, and
00:33:34.680 he's placed
00:33:35.540 a bet,
00:33:36.080 that they
00:33:38.380 can find
00:33:38.840 one example
00:33:40.320 he can
00:33:40.680 sell.
00:33:41.100 He only
00:33:41.460 needs one.
00:33:42.720 If he
00:33:43.140 can sell
00:33:43.560 one, he's
00:33:45.040 the next
00:33:45.420 president.
00:33:46.800 Now, here's
00:33:48.300 my question
00:33:48.760 I'm asking
00:33:49.200 you.
00:33:50.500 Is that
00:33:51.240 point of
00:33:52.060 view, whether
00:33:52.540 you agree
00:33:52.920 with it or
00:33:53.240 not, we're
00:33:53.660 not talking
00:33:54.180 about whether
00:33:54.600 you agree
00:33:55.000 with it,
00:33:55.980 is that the
00:33:56.580 kind of
00:33:57.020 tweet that
00:33:58.920 you would
00:33:59.200 expect to
00:33:59.740 see get
00:34:00.180 a thousand
00:34:00.600 retweets?
00:34:01.920 Am I wrong
00:34:02.620 about that?
00:34:03.040 So just
00:34:03.980 check my
00:34:05.140 viral tweet
00:34:07.460 assumption.
00:34:08.200 Now, remember,
00:34:08.860 threads always
00:34:09.500 get more
00:34:10.160 attention than
00:34:11.360 tweets.
00:34:12.340 So it's part
00:34:12.800 of a thread.
00:34:13.480 Factor that
00:34:13.960 in.
00:34:14.760 Trump stuff
00:34:15.540 always gets
00:34:16.040 more attention
00:34:16.660 than non-Trump
00:34:17.340 stuff.
00:34:18.000 Factor that
00:34:18.500 in.
00:34:19.500 I'm known
00:34:20.280 to say this
00:34:21.120 kind of
00:34:21.480 message.
00:34:22.400 So when
00:34:22.780 the tweeter
00:34:23.420 is talking
00:34:24.000 about their
00:34:24.480 topic of
00:34:25.680 expertise,
00:34:26.780 or something
00:34:27.440 they're known
00:34:27.900 for, they
00:34:29.780 get more
00:34:30.080 attention.
00:34:30.780 When Monica
00:34:31.440 Lewinsky
00:34:31.820 talks about
00:34:32.520 Bill Clinton,
00:34:33.640 she gets
00:34:33.960 more retweets
00:34:34.640 than if she
00:34:35.100 talks about
00:34:35.600 purses.
00:34:37.380 So the
00:34:38.180 things which
00:34:39.880 make a
00:34:40.340 tweet get
00:34:41.320 a thousand
00:34:41.720 retweets,
00:34:42.680 I feel are
00:34:43.680 all in this
00:34:44.500 tweet thread.
00:34:46.720 But it
00:34:47.360 didn't.
00:34:49.880 Now,
00:34:50.460 again,
00:34:51.400 since most
00:34:52.080 of the
00:34:52.340 theme of
00:34:52.780 what I've
00:34:53.080 talked about
00:34:53.460 today is
00:34:53.860 don't make
00:34:54.260 too much
00:34:54.660 from
00:34:54.880 anecdotal
00:34:55.520 evidence,
00:34:56.960 aren't I
00:34:57.580 judging whether
00:34:58.700 this got
00:34:59.240 shadow banned
00:35:00.080 based on
00:35:00.680 anecdotal
00:35:01.280 evidence?
00:35:02.820 Okay,
00:35:03.480 yes.
00:35:05.480 Yes,
00:35:05.940 I am.
00:35:06.440 That's why
00:35:06.780 I'm asking
00:35:07.340 instead of
00:35:07.900 stating.
00:35:08.980 I just
00:35:09.180 want to
00:35:09.420 get a
00:35:09.640 second opinion
00:35:10.180 on this.
00:35:10.560 Just see if
00:35:10.920 you feel
00:35:11.340 the same
00:35:11.700 way about
00:35:12.080 it.
00:35:12.660 We won't
00:35:13.140 be able
00:35:13.360 to confirm
00:35:13.800 anything.
00:35:20.740 Should put
00:35:21.360 down a
00:35:21.720 rhino black
00:35:22.480 list.
00:35:22.900 You know,
00:35:23.120 I don't
00:35:23.340 care about
00:35:23.680 that rhino
00:35:24.180 stuff.
00:35:25.600 The whole
00:35:26.460 Republican
00:35:27.520 and name
00:35:28.080 only thing,
00:35:29.440 I don't
00:35:30.020 have any
00:35:30.520 interest in
00:35:31.400 that as
00:35:32.160 a way
00:35:32.820 to frame
00:35:33.180 things.
00:35:34.860 Things are
00:35:35.340 either good
00:35:35.700 ideas or
00:35:36.220 they're not.
00:35:37.440 How you
00:35:37.980 decide to
00:35:38.960 label yourself
00:35:40.500 or other
00:35:42.060 people,
00:35:42.780 I don't
00:35:43.140 care.
00:35:44.080 I'm going
00:35:44.560 to look at
00:35:44.860 the topic.
00:35:45.940 If the
00:35:46.300 topic's good,
00:35:47.560 I might
00:35:47.940 support it.
00:35:49.340 But I
00:35:49.960 don't care if
00:35:50.480 somebody is
00:35:51.160 relabeling
00:35:51.820 their friends.
00:35:53.340 Oh,
00:35:53.680 you're a
00:35:54.060 rhino,
00:35:54.440 you're not
00:35:54.760 a rhino.
00:35:55.640 That does
00:35:56.240 nothing for
00:35:56.700 me.
00:36:00.580 All right.
00:36:03.700 Let's see
00:36:04.180 what else
00:36:04.460 we've got
00:36:04.720 going on
00:36:05.160 here.
00:36:06.080 Nothing.
00:36:07.760 Nothing at
00:36:08.440 all.
00:36:09.740 All right.
00:36:10.960 Yeah.
00:36:11.860 Let's go
00:36:12.420 Brandon.
00:36:15.960 All right.
00:36:16.580 Am I
00:36:16.840 missing any
00:36:17.260 big stories?
00:36:17.860 U.S.
00:36:22.100 intelligence
00:36:22.580 caught flat
00:36:23.320 footed again
00:36:23.900 by China?
00:36:24.640 In what
00:36:25.060 context did
00:36:26.460 the U.S.
00:36:26.940 intelligence
00:36:27.320 get flat
00:36:27.880 footed?
00:36:29.140 China
00:36:29.660 weapon?
00:36:31.080 Hypersonic
00:36:31.720 weapon?
00:36:33.620 Oh, is
00:36:34.360 there some
00:36:34.640 kind of
00:36:35.240 China has
00:36:36.620 a hypersonic
00:36:37.400 missile?
00:36:40.620 Right.
00:36:42.280 You know,
00:36:42.840 the one thing
00:36:43.320 that I worry
00:36:43.920 the least
00:36:44.480 about is
00:36:45.180 China launching
00:36:46.520 a preemptive
00:36:47.440 nuclear attack.
00:36:49.420 There's
00:36:49.740 probably
00:36:50.100 nothing that
00:36:50.960 I think
00:36:52.640 less about
00:36:53.360 than China
00:36:54.380 launching a
00:36:55.620 preemptive
00:36:56.160 attack.
00:36:56.880 Because China's
00:36:57.760 game is
00:36:58.160 wait.
00:36:59.300 They just
00:36:59.740 wait.
00:37:00.860 You know,
00:37:01.060 they can
00:37:01.260 wait a few
00:37:01.660 hundred years
00:37:02.120 and dominate
00:37:02.840 the world.
00:37:03.940 It looks
00:37:04.180 like it's
00:37:04.460 going that
00:37:04.820 way.
00:37:07.740 Never talk
00:37:08.560 about, oh,
00:37:09.460 yeah,
00:37:09.700 Katie Couric.
00:37:10.820 So there's
00:37:11.220 a story about
00:37:11.720 Katie Couric
00:37:12.460 who edited
00:37:14.060 a Ruth Bader
00:37:15.080 Ginsburg
00:37:15.460 interview.
00:37:16.200 to make
00:37:18.500 Ruth Bader
00:37:19.680 Ginsburg
00:37:20.020 look better.
00:37:22.920 What was
00:37:23.540 the topic?
00:37:26.000 Ginsburg
00:37:26.400 said, oh,
00:37:27.780 voter registration?
00:37:29.380 Was it
00:37:29.740 voter registration
00:37:30.580 that she was,
00:37:31.380 oh, kneeling?
00:37:32.760 Yeah.
00:37:33.200 Ruth Bader
00:37:33.840 Ginsburg said
00:37:34.600 something that
00:37:35.320 the kneelers
00:37:36.080 were kind of
00:37:37.340 spitting in the
00:37:37.900 face of the
00:37:38.380 country that,
00:37:39.020 you know,
00:37:39.360 made their
00:37:39.720 family successful.
00:37:41.680 And then
00:37:42.360 Katie Couric
00:37:42.860 decided that
00:37:43.480 that would
00:37:43.780 make Ruth Bader
00:37:44.540 Ginsburg look
00:37:45.260 bad, so
00:37:45.700 she took
00:37:46.100 it out.
00:37:48.780 Now, the
00:37:49.480 reason I
00:37:49.860 didn't comment
00:37:50.360 on that
00:37:50.800 story is
00:37:51.440 that the
00:37:51.780 whole story
00:37:52.360 is in the
00:37:52.820 story.
00:37:54.360 Usually I
00:37:54.940 like to talk
00:37:55.400 about things
00:37:55.880 where I
00:37:56.980 can add a
00:37:57.800 reframe of
00:37:58.800 it or a
00:37:59.520 different point
00:37:59.940 of view or
00:38:00.320 something.
00:38:01.220 But the
00:38:01.880 Katie Couric
00:38:02.360 story, it's
00:38:02.920 all there.
00:38:05.220 She edited
00:38:06.040 a story to
00:38:08.120 create what
00:38:09.400 you might
00:38:09.860 call fake
00:38:10.380 news, but
00:38:11.760 I mean, it
00:38:12.120 was misleading
00:38:12.720 because she
00:38:13.240 edited it.
00:38:14.640 And that's
00:38:17.840 the whole
00:38:18.060 story.
00:38:19.140 So if you
00:38:19.840 want to see
00:38:20.320 another example
00:38:21.040 of the media
00:38:21.700 being something
00:38:22.960 you can't
00:38:23.480 trust, well,
00:38:24.260 there's one
00:38:24.580 for you.
00:38:27.100 Is that
00:38:27.700 unusual?
00:38:28.640 I don't
00:38:28.940 know.
00:38:29.960 I can tell
00:38:30.680 you that I've
00:38:31.360 been edited
00:38:31.920 to look
00:38:32.720 smarter.
00:38:36.120 I told
00:38:36.800 you, I
00:38:37.380 think I
00:38:37.640 mentioned
00:38:37.900 that the
00:38:38.480 Playboy
00:38:39.720 interview was
00:38:41.500 one of the
00:38:41.920 most professional
00:38:42.840 best interviews
00:38:44.120 I've ever been
00:38:44.880 involved in.
00:38:45.560 They did a lot
00:38:46.060 of fact-checking,
00:38:46.880 et cetera.
00:38:47.560 Now, the
00:38:47.840 Playboy
00:38:48.200 interview, they
00:38:49.600 do edit it to
00:38:50.540 make you look
00:38:51.020 good.
00:38:53.160 But what I
00:38:53.840 mean by that
00:38:54.420 is if you
00:38:55.640 say a sentence
00:38:56.420 that's kind
00:38:57.020 of clunky,
00:38:58.420 they will
00:38:58.880 re-edit your
00:38:59.520 sentence as
00:39:00.360 if you spoke
00:39:01.040 it perfectly
00:39:01.620 the first time.
00:39:03.220 Now, I
00:39:03.680 don't mind
00:39:04.100 that because
00:39:05.080 what they're
00:39:05.480 doing is just
00:39:06.040 clarifying what
00:39:06.780 you really
00:39:07.140 said.
00:39:08.060 They're just
00:39:08.420 doing a better
00:39:08.880 job of saying
00:39:09.500 it than you
00:39:09.960 said it.
00:39:10.300 So if they
00:39:11.000 fix your
00:39:11.460 words and
00:39:12.120 get rid of
00:39:12.800 a verbal
00:39:14.200 tick, say
00:39:16.280 for example
00:39:16.800 that I
00:39:17.840 use the
00:39:18.260 word like.
00:39:19.820 So let's
00:39:20.460 say they
00:39:20.920 ask me a
00:39:21.280 question, I
00:39:21.660 go, well
00:39:22.440 like, that's
00:39:23.360 like this or
00:39:25.600 that.
00:39:26.460 They might
00:39:26.860 get rid of
00:39:27.360 the word
00:39:27.640 like because
00:39:28.940 it didn't
00:39:29.200 add anything
00:39:29.820 and it just
00:39:30.180 makes me look
00:39:30.700 like an
00:39:31.040 idiot when I
00:39:31.580 talk that
00:39:31.960 way.
00:39:33.080 But the
00:39:33.620 content would
00:39:34.160 be the
00:39:34.400 same.
00:39:35.020 So Playboy
00:39:36.020 played it
00:39:36.920 completely straight
00:39:37.700 on content,
00:39:39.240 but they
00:39:39.620 did make me
00:39:40.080 look smarter
00:39:40.600 because they
00:39:41.640 just took
00:39:41.980 out my
00:39:42.280 verbal
00:39:42.580 ticks.
00:39:45.240 North
00:39:45.720 Korean army
00:39:46.340 video, that's
00:39:47.940 just theater.
00:39:51.740 Yeah, the
00:39:52.220 whole, the
00:39:52.600 fact that
00:39:53.620 Buttigieg is
00:39:55.660 on a two
00:39:56.380 month, I
00:39:57.240 guess it's a
00:39:57.800 maternity leave,
00:39:59.480 at the time
00:40:00.220 that we have
00:40:00.860 the biggest
00:40:01.240 problem in
00:40:01.800 the country
00:40:02.160 with his
00:40:02.880 department,
00:40:04.100 that's really
00:40:05.280 a bad look.
00:40:06.060 on one
00:40:07.840 hand, I
00:40:09.320 certainly am
00:40:10.740 happy that
00:40:11.280 parents can
00:40:11.860 take maternity
00:40:12.780 leave and
00:40:13.240 stuff and
00:40:13.660 paternity
00:40:14.340 leave, but
00:40:15.680 parental leave,
00:40:17.700 let's call it,
00:40:18.220 let's be less
00:40:18.780 sexist, but I
00:40:22.260 feel like this
00:40:23.020 should be an
00:40:23.520 exception.
00:40:25.320 I feel like
00:40:26.260 if that were
00:40:26.980 me, I
00:40:29.200 don't know if
00:40:29.700 a Zoom
00:40:30.400 calls with the
00:40:31.160 office is going
00:40:31.840 to be good
00:40:32.180 enough, but
00:40:34.260 they do need to
00:40:34.920 bond with the
00:40:35.440 baby, that's
00:40:35.940 important too.
00:40:37.060 I wouldn't
00:40:37.500 minimize that.
00:40:43.160 The content
00:40:44.000 is the same
00:40:44.600 and they
00:40:44.840 made Scott
00:40:45.340 look smarter.
00:40:46.460 Yeah, I
00:40:47.480 suppose that
00:40:47.860 would be, that
00:40:48.600 is mildly
00:40:49.540 fake news, I
00:40:50.440 would agree
00:40:50.780 with you, it's
00:40:51.340 mildly fake
00:40:52.060 news.
00:40:53.980 You were
00:40:54.600 very impressed
00:40:55.460 by his
00:40:55.900 McKinsey
00:40:56.460 pedigree.
00:40:57.760 I'm very
00:40:58.320 impressed by
00:40:59.020 his analytical
00:40:59.920 pedigree,
00:41:01.600 meaning that
00:41:02.380 he has the
00:41:03.280 ability to
00:41:04.140 look at the
00:41:04.760 numbers.
00:41:04.920 and figure
00:41:05.660 stuff out.
00:41:07.100 So that
00:41:07.580 part I'm
00:41:08.480 still in
00:41:08.880 favor of.
00:41:09.400 I think
00:41:09.660 McKinsey
00:41:10.380 pedigree is
00:41:11.120 strong, but
00:41:12.320 I don't
00:41:13.140 believe I
00:41:13.640 ever told
00:41:14.080 you that
00:41:14.380 his McKinsey
00:41:15.080 pedigree makes
00:41:15.940 him a good
00:41:16.300 leader.
00:41:18.060 Because
00:41:18.500 McKinsey
00:41:18.920 isn't about
00:41:19.380 leadership,
00:41:20.360 they're more
00:41:21.220 about
00:41:21.600 nerdishly
00:41:22.840 looking at
00:41:23.240 numbers and
00:41:23.760 strategy.
00:41:28.740 He should
00:41:29.420 have at
00:41:29.680 least named
00:41:30.120 his backup.
00:41:30.760 Well, of
00:41:31.140 course he's
00:41:31.500 got a
00:41:31.740 backup.
00:41:32.440 I'm sure
00:41:32.780 somebody's in
00:41:33.320 charge.
00:41:33.720 VAERS.
00:41:36.860 The VAERS
00:41:37.460 database, I
00:41:39.060 think we've
00:41:39.400 talked about,
00:41:40.240 we can't
00:41:40.960 trust the
00:41:41.360 information in
00:41:42.060 it, and
00:41:42.240 that's the
00:41:42.500 whole story.
00:41:43.600 But certainly
00:41:44.460 there's enough
00:41:45.140 reporting in
00:41:46.080 there that
00:41:46.580 it's a red
00:41:47.060 flag.
00:41:48.460 It doesn't
00:41:48.860 mean that the
00:41:49.600 vaccines are
00:41:50.300 dangerous.
00:41:51.040 If you think
00:41:51.580 the VAERS
00:41:51.960 database is
00:41:52.580 telling you the
00:41:53.000 vaccines are
00:41:53.560 dangerous, you
00:41:54.640 need to do
00:41:55.240 more research
00:41:55.820 about what the
00:41:56.320 VAERS database
00:41:57.100 is and is
00:41:58.560 not.
00:41:59.460 It is
00:41:59.760 definitely not
00:42:00.740 telling you the
00:42:02.300 vaccinations are
00:42:03.160 dangerous.
00:42:04.280 It definitely
00:42:04.820 is raising a
00:42:06.420 big flag that
00:42:07.260 says maybe you
00:42:09.000 should look at
00:42:09.360 this a little
00:42:09.900 bit closer.
00:42:11.040 It's definitely
00:42:11.400 doing that, but
00:42:12.520 it's not
00:42:12.740 confirming
00:42:13.160 anything.
00:42:17.020 Is
00:42:17.540 California moving
00:42:18.340 forward with
00:42:19.000 nuclear reactors?
00:42:20.100 I doubt it only
00:42:21.000 because we're
00:42:21.520 incompetent
00:42:22.180 politically.
00:42:27.380 Who's the
00:42:28.040 baby's dad?
00:42:28.800 I don't care.
00:42:33.160 All right.
00:42:41.620 Just looking at
00:42:42.100 some of your
00:42:42.660 comments.
00:42:45.020 Scott, let me
00:42:45.680 record a drum
00:42:46.420 intro for your
00:42:47.280 show.
00:42:48.540 Okay.
00:42:49.640 Go ahead and
00:42:50.320 record one and
00:42:51.320 send it to me
00:42:52.980 somehow.
00:42:55.760 But I have to
00:42:56.440 play it myself
00:42:57.120 ultimately.
00:42:58.040 But if you have
00:42:58.880 an idea for it,
00:42:59.560 I'd love to
00:42:59.880 the glow face
00:43:03.960 generation?
00:43:04.620 What's the
00:43:04.960 glow face?
00:43:05.920 The people on
00:43:06.620 devices?
00:43:09.340 How is
00:43:09.980 Boo today?
00:43:10.600 She's happy and
00:43:11.960 affectionate today.
00:43:13.120 Oh, send it on
00:43:18.080 Instagram.
00:43:18.560 That's perfect.
00:43:19.820 By the way, if
00:43:20.440 you want to get a
00:43:21.060 message to me that
00:43:22.260 I'm more likely to
00:43:23.360 see, my Twitter
00:43:26.160 size is, I
00:43:27.180 don't know, 600
00:43:27.700 and some thousand
00:43:28.540 followers.
00:43:30.180 But my
00:43:32.600 Instagram, I
00:43:33.220 think, is
00:43:33.560 17,000.
00:43:35.860 Most of them are
00:43:36.620 fake followers, I
00:43:37.840 think.
00:43:38.000 I think at least
00:43:39.660 half of my
00:43:40.180 Instagram followers
00:43:41.080 are a slightly
00:43:42.920 overweight woman
00:43:43.880 with large
00:43:44.660 breasts who has
00:43:45.340 posted one
00:43:46.040 picture and
00:43:47.120 says, hey,
00:43:48.880 hey.
00:43:51.260 I've got
00:43:52.100 scads of
00:43:53.280 those.
00:43:53.980 I think at
00:43:54.360 least a
00:43:54.720 thousand of
00:43:55.380 my 17,000
00:43:56.440 followers are
00:43:57.840 random woman
00:43:58.920 with one
00:43:59.480 photo going,
00:44:00.700 hey, hey.
00:44:02.840 Do you get
00:44:03.760 those two?
00:44:06.040 Obviously, they're
00:44:06.980 not real people.
00:44:08.200 I assume they're
00:44:09.040 just guys.
00:44:11.080 Generation Z is
00:44:14.980 the glow face.
00:44:15.800 I think glow face
00:44:16.620 refers to your
00:44:17.620 phone lighting up
00:44:18.820 your face, right?
00:44:21.020 Could it mean
00:44:21.580 something else?
00:44:23.140 I think that's
00:44:23.700 all it means.
00:44:28.140 Are you on
00:44:28.860 Facebook?
00:44:29.640 Yeah, but I
00:44:30.460 don't read all my
00:44:31.300 messages on
00:44:31.880 Facebook.
00:44:33.680 And I don't
00:44:34.500 accept friends on
00:44:35.640 my personal
00:44:36.080 account.
00:44:38.300 How many of
00:44:39.040 you are watching
00:44:39.560 this on the
00:44:40.080 toilet right
00:44:40.600 now?
00:44:41.460 We're being
00:44:41.920 asked.
00:44:42.480 Anybody?
00:44:43.820 How many are
00:44:44.540 on the toilet
00:44:45.000 right now?
00:44:48.620 Anybody?
00:44:49.360 Like right
00:44:49.780 now?
00:44:50.900 Who's on the
00:44:51.420 toilet right
00:44:52.140 now?
00:44:58.540 Well, at least
00:44:59.220 some of you were
00:44:59.840 for part of it.
00:45:00.900 All right, I
00:45:01.300 think that's a
00:45:01.940 good way to end
00:45:02.700 this show.
00:45:04.160 Possibly the
00:45:05.180 best thing that
00:45:05.760 will ever happen
00:45:06.300 to you today.
00:45:06.880 some of us
00:45:12.640 get embarrassed
00:45:13.200 easier than
00:45:13.880 you.
00:45:18.580 And Rick
00:45:19.160 says, I'm on
00:45:19.760 the couch, but
00:45:20.360 I got to pee.
00:45:21.160 That counts.
00:45:22.500 That counts,
00:45:23.100 right?
00:45:29.940 Quasi-bully
00:45:30.760 Tiffany Dover,
00:45:31.820 I don't
00:45:32.300 know who
00:45:32.600 she is.
00:45:42.080 Wow, some
00:45:42.740 doctors out
00:45:43.360 there in
00:45:43.640 Canada say
00:45:44.240 they will
00:45:44.520 lose their
00:45:44.920 license if
00:45:45.480 they say
00:45:45.780 anything
00:45:46.020 negative about
00:45:46.680 vaccines.
00:45:47.560 Sheesh.
00:45:49.700 Sheesh.
00:45:53.640 Oh, good.
00:45:54.480 Scott Opelt.
00:45:56.280 I hope things
00:45:56.820 work out for
00:45:57.380 you.
00:45:57.540 I don't
00:45:58.540 all right.
00:46:04.860 Delta, yeah.
00:46:05.620 Delta decided
00:46:06.360 to not mandate
00:46:07.420 vaccination.
00:46:09.120 Smart move.
00:46:10.440 I think smart
00:46:11.760 move.
00:46:14.060 Well, thank
00:46:14.960 you.
00:46:17.880 Please try to
00:46:18.800 stop cussing
00:46:19.480 again.
00:46:21.380 You know,
00:46:21.840 it's a
00:46:22.160 continuous
00:46:22.520 struggle.
00:46:26.620 Sidebar with
00:46:27.440 Viva.
00:46:27.680 Oh, I
00:46:28.340 am going
00:46:28.620 to do
00:46:29.000 Viva
00:46:30.060 and Barnes.
00:46:30.700 I think
00:46:31.160 it's, is
00:46:31.880 it this
00:46:32.180 week?
00:46:33.300 So I
00:46:33.820 did agree
00:46:34.240 to do
00:46:34.660 Viva,
00:46:35.280 Viva
00:46:35.880 and Barnes.
00:46:41.100 You've
00:46:41.540 had better
00:46:41.940 tweets?
00:46:42.480 Yeah, I'm
00:46:42.740 sure I
00:46:42.960 have.
00:46:48.740 Okay.
00:46:50.600 So
00:46:51.040 so the
00:47:00.940 clanking
00:47:01.480 is, so
00:47:03.560 Sticks
00:47:03.940 and Hammer
00:47:04.300 clanks his
00:47:05.540 coffee with
00:47:06.360 his spoon.
00:47:07.480 Well, I
00:47:08.020 don't use
00:47:08.780 anything in
00:47:10.140 my coffee,
00:47:11.340 so I don't
00:47:11.860 need a spoon.
00:47:13.120 I take my
00:47:13.720 coffee,
00:47:15.420 black.
00:47:15.880 Oh, you're
00:47:22.560 saying that I
00:47:23.020 interact more
00:47:23.620 on Twitter
00:47:24.040 than on
00:47:24.500 locals?
00:47:25.320 Actually, that's
00:47:25.980 not true.
00:47:26.420 I interact
00:47:26.880 with more
00:47:27.340 people on
00:47:28.960 locals, some
00:47:30.100 more individual
00:47:30.780 comments I
00:47:31.460 interact with.
00:47:32.340 But on
00:47:32.680 Twitter, I just
00:47:33.260 get more
00:47:33.580 engagement because
00:47:34.400 there are more
00:47:34.700 people.
00:47:36.100 And I
00:47:36.340 probably tweet
00:47:36.920 more.
00:47:38.320 I probably
00:47:38.740 tweet, obviously,
00:47:39.560 I tweet more.
00:47:40.760 But I interact
00:47:42.500 with more
00:47:42.860 individuals on
00:47:43.980 locals, actually.
00:47:44.720 At least I
00:47:46.640 try to.
00:47:49.980 DeSantis and
00:47:50.680 Tulsi, how
00:47:51.180 come no one
00:47:51.660 mentions Tulsi?
00:47:53.240 Well, we're
00:47:55.280 not in a
00:47:56.020 political race
00:47:57.520 yet.
00:47:58.340 If she were,
00:47:59.020 we would.
00:48:03.400 All right,
00:48:04.000 that's all for
00:48:04.380 now.
00:48:04.720 I will talk
00:48:05.160 to you
00:48:05.560 tomorrow.
00:48:08.200 How do you
00:48:08.540 avoid coffee
00:48:09.200 stains on your
00:48:09.900 teeth?
00:48:12.080 Well,
00:48:14.120 full
00:48:14.420 disclosure,
00:48:15.700 my teeth
00:48:16.620 are not
00:48:17.800 real.
00:48:19.460 So these
00:48:19.820 are, what
00:48:22.620 do you call
00:48:22.960 it?
00:48:23.140 They're not
00:48:23.600 real.
00:48:26.700 They cover
00:48:27.900 my real
00:48:28.420 teeth.
00:48:29.560 Yeah, they're
00:48:30.340 porcelain.
00:48:31.180 They're veneers.
00:48:31.780 I'm sorry,
00:48:32.100 that's the word.
00:48:33.000 They're veneers.
00:48:33.760 So I don't
00:48:34.240 know if the
00:48:34.600 veneers have
00:48:35.240 the same
00:48:35.720 risk of
00:48:36.500 stain.
00:48:41.420 Yeah,
00:48:42.020 they're veneers.
00:48:42.500 So with the
00:48:43.300 veneer, your
00:48:43.860 real teeth are
00:48:44.440 underneath, but
00:48:45.140 they've been
00:48:45.480 ground down.
00:48:46.460 So you'll never
00:48:48.300 be able to use
00:48:48.820 your real teeth
00:48:49.460 because they're
00:48:50.200 ground down to
00:48:50.980 fit the veneer
00:48:51.580 over it.
00:48:54.780 And that's
00:48:55.620 your answer.
00:48:56.280 Bye for now.