Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1564 Scott Adams： Weasels in the News Everywhere and I'll Show You Where They're Hiding

00:00:00.000 You know, I woke up today and I thought to myself, I wonder if Chicago is ready for the

00:00:11.280 simultaneous sip. And then I saw a comment go by just as I was thinking that it says Chicago is

00:00:16.560 ready. Good work, Chicago. Well, today is an amazing day for all of you. Not only are you

00:00:27.100 lucky enough to join us all here for the best thing that's ever happened. It's called Coffee

00:00:32.560 with Scott Adams. But the rest of your day is going to be pretty good, too. Pretty good.

00:00:39.500 And if you'd like to make this a little extra, I know you do. I know you. I know you. You'd like

00:00:45.900 a little extra. All you need is a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or gels, a steinocanteen jug or flask,

00:00:51.200 a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the

00:00:59.660 unparalleled pleasure. The dopamine here of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

00:01:05.660 It's called the simultaneous sip. Go.

00:01:07.860 Yes, I see a comment on locals. Wondering if in Chicago, when you do the simultaneous sip,

00:01:22.140 do you time it to the gunfire? Or do you just do it plain and let the gunfire do its own thing,

00:01:29.180 sort of syncopated? I always wondered about that. Well, in possibly the biggest news in the entire

00:01:36.620 world, although I might be biased, Hotep Jesus on Twitter has suggested that I need new kicks.

00:01:46.820 For those of you who are not up on the latest language, kicks means footwear. Footwear. I need

00:01:55.360 some new footwear. Because apparently, I'm unfashionable. And if we start from the ground up,

00:02:02.420 well, I could be 100 years old before we're done. But let's get the footwear right first.

00:02:09.980 Now, here's the problem. Do you know who makes stylish clothes for old white guys? 1.00

00:02:18.540 Anybody? Who makes, can you give me the name of the company that makes stylish clothes for old white

00:02:25.460 guys? That's right. Nobody. Yeah, that's correct. Nobody. Nobody. It's not even a thing. But

00:02:34.760 because I identify as black, I'm hoping that will give me some style advantage. Which I can say,

00:02:42.540 because I identify as black. If you said it, it would be racist. But I need all the help I can get.

00:02:49.260 So let's work on that. Top priority for the country. Rasmussen had a poll about gun ownership.

00:02:57.260 And can you guess what percent of households have a gun? Now, when I say households, I mean at least

00:03:04.360 one person has access to a gun within the home. What percentage of the total population do you think?

00:03:12.000 Or we could do it separately. What percentage of Republicans do you think? So Republicans were only 51%.

00:03:21.120 I thought it would be a lot more. Wouldn't you expect Republicans to be 75% plus? But even if you look

00:03:30.780 at the whole household, only 51% had guns. Dems are at 38%. This was the most surprising thing.

00:03:39.880 There isn't really that much difference between 51% and 38% when you're asking yourself, you know,

00:03:47.140 who likes guns? Democrats have a lot of guns. I'm not sure I quite understood that Democrats were so

00:03:55.260 gun heavy. But it explains a lot, doesn't it? It explains why gun ownership or gun rights remain robust.

00:04:04.520 There's just plenty of people who have guns. And then Rasmussen asked, people's opinion is that if the

00:04:12.480 federal government had a list of gun owners, how likely will they someday use that list to confiscate

00:04:18.580 your gun? 32% said very likely, and this is of all voters. And 21% said somewhat. So that's 53% think

00:04:30.440 it's very or somewhat likely that their guns would be taken away. So over half of the country is

00:04:38.620 concerned that if they're on a list, their gun will be taken away. I feel like that's a pretty reasonable

00:04:44.520 worry. You know, there's a lot of stuff that I'll push back on, but I do feel like this is quite

00:04:51.900 reasonable. And it's part of a larger trend, isn't it? Which is the more the government knows about you,

00:04:58.380 the more control they have. You know how knowledge is power, right? The more knowledge the government

00:05:05.020 has about you, the more power they have over you. And the less you can get away with. Right?

00:05:12.800 If they knew exactly how you did your taxes, they might want to talk to you.

00:05:18.440 So, and I think there's something about humans that we don't like to admit. But I'm going to admit it

00:05:29.420 on behalf of all humans. There are a number of perfectly legitimate reasons to want privacy from

00:05:36.420 your government. You don't want them to have too much power. You just don't want people in your

00:05:41.620 business, freedom, etc. Right? So there are just plenty of reasons to not want the government in your

00:05:47.460 business. But one of the big ones we never talk about is that most people are crooks. 0.51

00:05:55.480 We don't say that one. But the fact is, if the government knew what everybody was doing all the

00:06:01.180 time, we'd all be in jail. Pretty much everybody's breaking some crime. You know, even if you're just

00:06:08.120 speeding. You're doing something. Probably. You've probably defamed somebody. I mean, you know,

00:06:15.900 although that would require a lawsuit. But, yeah. And if you took it to the level of cheating on

00:06:23.940 taxes, pretty much everybody'd be in jail. Pretty much. Yeah. Ken says he celebrates the right of

00:06:34.240 liberals to own guns, but it doesn't work the other way. Yeah, that's true.

00:06:38.080 All right. So there's that. Apparently, school, according to Axios, had a report that 40% of school

00:06:50.660 districts and more than 1,000 districts, they use federal money to upgrade their HVAC systems or

00:06:57.620 their air handling systems and the filtration because of COVID. So 40% of schools did that.

00:07:05.120 But they have no idea if it makes a difference. And apparently, some of the schools are saying,

00:07:11.800 wait a minute, wait a minute. Before we finish installing this, can somebody tell us if this

00:07:16.740 works? Is there any evidence whatsoever that it changes the COVID situation? And the companies

00:07:23.600 putting them in, of course, don't have that evidence. And apparently, the air filtration industry

00:07:30.560 is totally corrupt. Did you know that? I guess we could have guessed. There are some industries

00:07:37.900 that you don't think about as being corrupt. For example, the food distribution industry.

00:07:45.920 Grocery stores. Grocery stores are just a criminal enterprise. You just don't know it. 0.96

00:07:50.320 Now, I'll talk more about that in the future. But the whole food industry is just thoroughly corrupt.

00:07:56.200 You know, I spent enough time there to see things that were just jaw-dropping. And I'm talking about

00:08:01.620 normal big companies that you would know the names of the company doing things so unethical

00:08:06.680 or maybe illegal. I don't know. But it's a really corrupt industry. But it turns out that the air

00:08:13.520 filtration industry is also just garbage. And they just make up test results or they test in a way 0.98

00:08:21.140 that's completely, you know, unrealistic, so that they can get good numbers. So I guess billions of

00:08:29.420 dollars have gone toward this thing that nobody knows if it works. I still think it probably does,

00:08:34.040 even if all it does is circulate the air better. So I'm going to be on the side that says,

00:08:40.380 or the prediction, I guess, that in the long run, we will find that airflow is all that matters.

00:08:45.580 Anybody want to take that bet? Here's my bet. In the long run, the only variable that will be

00:08:54.680 predictive of who had COVID and who was at risk will be airflow and that everything else will be.

00:09:02.520 And then vitamin D will probably be the most predictive of outcomes. But in terms of transmission,

00:09:09.420 I'll bet it's just airflow. I'll bet that's it. I'll bet that's it. When was the last time somebody

00:09:15.340 got COVID in a place that had good airflow? Can somebody tell me? Because these days we tend to

00:09:22.240 be fairly good at guessing where somebody got something, right? When was the last time you

00:09:28.500 heard somebody got it outdoors? Like never. When was the last time you heard that somebody got it

00:09:35.620 eating at a restaurant? Restaurants are actually pretty good airflow, right? They tend to have higher

00:09:42.920 ceilings. You know, they're built for lots of people in them. So I would imagine they have pretty

00:09:48.180 good airflow. The restaurants in California, nobody wears a mask during eating and you're all packed in

00:09:55.120 this room. But have you heard of a big problem with restaurants? You haven't, right? We would know by

00:10:03.300 now if people are getting this in restaurants, wouldn't we? Apparently they don't. And the only thing

00:10:09.520 that I can think of that would make sense for a restaurant is that the airflow is a little bit

00:10:13.820 better. I mean, if nothing else, people are coming and going, so the doors open a lot, right? But I

00:10:19.960 think they generally have pretty good airflow. So that's my prediction. It will be all about airflow

00:10:27.140 because of the airborne nature of this compared to other viruses. Article in Inside Sources by

00:10:38.380 Kenneth Raposa. He talks about the climate deal and how China basically wins. And until he laid this

00:10:46.940 out, I didn't realize how bad it was. But I'm just going to give you the facts without much spin.

00:10:53.900 I don't think there's any spin on this. Just the facts. China agreed to basically reduce some coal

00:11:05.340 use, right? So China agreed to reduce coal use by 2030. Do you think China will do that? So that's

00:11:13.800 China's part of the deal, is that they would reduce coal use by 2030. What happens if they get to 2030

00:11:21.120 and they decide not to? No penalty, right? No. China can just say they'll do it and then just not do it. 0.70

00:11:29.000 There's no penalty. So did we get anything from China except their promise, which is worth exactly 0.99

00:11:36.400 zero? I mean, laughably zero. I mean, we don't even think there's any chance they would keep their

00:11:42.500 promise, right? But it gets worse. So while China is going to do basically nothing, that's what they

00:11:50.000 agreed to do effectively. The United States is going to go really hard at solar panels.

00:11:57.460 So we're really going to, you know, increase our investment in solar. Do you know who makes solar

00:12:03.080 panels? China. Basically, Biden went over there and negotiated a deal where China would give us a

00:12:12.840 promise that they're not going to keep about coal, but we're going to keep our promise almost certainly

00:12:18.580 to vastly buy more stuff from China. Now, here's the thing. We buy the solar panels from China,

00:12:27.720 but who pays for the disposal of them? Because they're pretty toxic and hard to get rid of.

00:12:34.480 That's us. So China gets the money. They do nothing in return. And then we get the pollution and the

00:12:42.760 unreliable source of electricity. Now, when I say solar is unreliable, there are at least two

00:12:51.120 technologies that will change that. Number one would be something like the Tesla giga plants.

00:12:58.320 Apparently, if you build enough of these giga plants, you'd have enough storage to

00:13:03.140 use these less dependable sources and still have a battery source to, you know, work at night and

00:13:09.360 stuff. The other is hydrogen. Apparently, there've been some pretty big advances recently in hydrogen.

00:13:18.160 And hydrogen stores stuff fairly effectively, better than batteries, actually. So hydrogen storage can

00:13:24.200 last longer than a battery storage. And some big stuff happening in hydrogen. Hydrogen. So we might

00:13:31.520 actually, by brute force, get to a point where solar actually is more practical than it is right now.

00:13:39.460 But at the same time, nuclear is already there, right? So nuclear is where solar wants to be.

00:13:48.240 I don't know. Can solar get there? Maybe. But nuclear is already there.

00:13:51.740 Alex Jones, I guess you'd say he lost by default. This Sandy Hook family's lawsuit against him because

00:14:02.520 I guess he had been claiming that the Sandy Hook shooting massacre was actors. And it wasn't really

00:14:09.940 a real massacre that the people were actors. So the families that lost people in the actual real

00:14:16.440 massacre, that was not a giant hoax at all, sued. And I guess Alex Jones did not give them the documents

00:14:23.700 they need. So he wanted to keep his, I guess, probably private or financial documents private, which

00:14:30.400 meant he defaults. So he loses the lawsuit just by not cooperating. But they haven't decided on the penalty yet.

00:14:39.300 What do you think the penalty will be? And do you think Alex Jones would be able to pay it? I don't know

00:14:45.620 if there's any insurance that would cover this. I doubt it. How much do you think he's going to have

00:14:51.180 to pay? And will it put him out of business? Have they taken Alex Jones completely off the table?

00:14:58.880 And is it obvious to you that one by one, every Trump supporter from 2016 is being canceled?

00:15:05.600 No, I'm not saying that they don't deserve it. All right. It's not my job to defend somebody else's speech.

00:15:12.800 You know, they said stuff. They got sued. It's their problem, not mine.

00:15:18.280 But it does seem fairly consistent that everybody who is a Trump supporter is being targeted one way or another.

00:15:25.620 Now, let me ask you something. Has Tim Poole ever been targeted recently by a hit piece?

00:15:31.700 I bet he has, because I don't know that. Can anybody tell me? Has there been a hit piece on Tim Poole recently?

00:15:39.800 Because if there isn't, there will be, right? Oh, yes. So I'm saying yes, yes, big yes.

00:15:46.120 Yeah, so Tim Poole has also been targeted. So we've seen Joe Rogan. Now, I'm not sure I would call him a Trump supporter.

00:15:53.000 But just the fact that he's willing to, you know, deal in the middle of, you know, the reasonable middle, it makes him look dangerous, I guess, to the left.

00:16:04.000 What's fake news? What is fake news?

00:16:08.700 Somebody's saying that's fake news, but tell me what you think is fake news.

00:16:13.440 Oh, he says he has. Oh, you mean whether Tim Poole has been targeted?

00:16:20.460 Now, of course, Bannon's been targeted, etc.

00:16:24.660 Oh, not true about Alex. He provided everything.

00:16:27.920 Well, the court doesn't think so. The court says he didn't. That's all I know.

00:16:32.920 Yeah, Rogan is not a Trumper, for sure. But he can see, you know, he sees things through a non-political filter, which I think by itself is dangerous in this world.

00:16:49.560 All right, here's what I would like to see, just to cause trouble.

00:16:52.660 I would like to see a graph of which liberal pundits match which conservative pundits.

00:16:58.540 Do you know what I mean? Like, who on the left is their Alex Jones?

00:17:06.860 Who do you think that would be?

00:17:08.940 Who on the left? Somebody on MSNBC, right?

00:17:12.740 Who is the guy on MSNBC? There's a black guy on MSNBC who is an expert in maybe cyber or security or something like that.

00:17:24.760 What is his name?

00:17:25.580 And somebody will come up with it here in a moment.

00:17:32.380 You know who I'm talking about, right?

00:17:35.120 Nance, yes, Nance.

00:17:37.420 So Nance maybe is the Alex Jones.

00:17:40.940 But here's the graph I'd like to see.

00:17:43.140 So try to picture this.

00:17:44.680 Imagine a graph that's sort of a big upside-down U shape, right?

00:17:49.540 At the top of the U would be any pundits on the left or right, or maybe the middle, who basically are pretty close to center, right?

00:17:59.160 So I would put, for example, Smirkanish from CNN.

00:18:03.960 I know you're thinking, wait, that's CNN.

00:18:05.940 He can't be unbiased.

00:18:07.120 But he's relatively unbiased.

00:18:09.300 If you watch his content, you don't pick up anything that you pick up in the other CNN content.

00:18:15.960 So I'd put, like, Smirkanish at the top. 1.00

00:18:19.520 And then maybe you'd put a few other people.

00:18:21.940 Maybe Joe Rogan, somebody else.

00:18:25.160 So it would be a little bit subjective, of course.

00:18:27.220 But then, oh, Dave Rubin.

00:18:28.880 Dave Rubin's a good example.

00:18:30.000 But then as you go down to the more extremes, you know, with the Alice Jones here, who would be the one on the left?

00:18:38.560 You know, Joy Reid.

00:18:40.060 But anyway, wouldn't you like to see that?

00:18:43.820 Yeah, I guess Greenwald would be at the top, probably.

00:18:50.320 Anyway, that's the graph I want to see.

00:18:52.840 So let's talk about this Rittenhouse situation.

00:18:56.620 I think you're all following it.

00:18:57.820 And you know that the jury went home.

00:19:00.760 I don't know if they've started again.

00:19:02.780 Has the jury started again?

00:19:05.420 So my understanding is, and I would say this would be unconfirmed report.

00:19:09.760 Would you agree?

00:19:10.640 This is unconfirmed.

00:19:12.360 But we're hearing, you know, we're hearing the whispers.

00:19:17.500 Jack Posobiec is reporting on this.

00:19:20.960 That there are two jury members who are holding out because of concerns over their own safety.

00:19:27.820 How many, first of all, how many of you think that's true?

00:19:31.960 Do you think it's true that two jurors are holding out because they're concerned for their safety?

00:19:37.700 Now, be careful.

00:19:39.380 Be careful because you want to believe it's true, right?

00:19:42.000 So as soon as there's something that, a story that's a little too good, you should automatically be a little more alert that maybe it's too good for a reason, you know?

00:19:53.240 So I'm going to say you should remain skeptical about what's happening in the jury room because I don't know that there's any way to have a reliable report this early.

00:20:05.560 But I will say that Jack's sources are better than most.

00:20:12.860 So if I had to guess, you know, if you said, you know, you just have to put a bet on this, I would bet it's true.

00:20:20.920 That's where my bet would be.

00:20:22.300 But, you know, I'm going to remain 40% skeptical, I guess.

00:20:25.040 Now, what do you think of those two jurors' choice?

00:20:30.820 Let's call it a hypothetical until it's confirmed.

00:20:34.840 But suppose there were two jurors who presumably were going to vote to acquit.

00:20:41.560 Can we make that assumption?

00:20:43.560 Can we make the assumption that there were two holdouts?

00:20:46.940 It probably meant 10 wanted to acquit and 2 also wanted to acquit but didn't want to take the chance.

00:20:53.440 Is that your interpretation?

00:20:56.300 We don't know that to be true, but that's sort of a reasonable interpretation, right?

00:21:01.420 Now, what do you think of those two jurors?

00:21:03.980 In the comments, do you back them, meaning that their choice was right for themselves?

00:21:10.240 That's the only standard here.

00:21:11.700 Was their choice right for themselves?

00:21:16.700 I'm seeing some yeses.

00:21:18.300 I see a no.

00:21:20.640 Some people understand. 0.99

00:21:21.980 I see yeses, cowards. 1.00

00:21:24.900 Cowards. 1.00

00:21:29.480 Okay. 0.99

00:21:30.580 Can I make a confession?

00:21:32.860 Which I don't think will land me in jail.

00:21:36.120 I hope not.

00:21:39.400 I once got out of jury duty for the same reason that the alleged two people are holding out.

00:21:47.260 Imagine me on a jury.

00:21:52.040 Now, imagine that I was well-known at the time, and it was a case in which guns were involved.

00:21:59.920 I'll just be generic.

00:22:01.800 So guns were involved.

00:22:03.220 It was a dangerous situation.

00:22:04.560 That's what the trial was about.

00:22:05.700 Now, if I convicted somebody as part of a jury, what are the odds that my name would come out as one of the people who convicted a guy?

00:22:15.620 And it was a third strike, so this was the one that puts them in jail forever.

00:22:19.680 What do you think?

00:22:23.580 Now, all the other jurors could be reasonably anonymous, right?

00:22:29.000 So if I had been also reasonably anonymous, I wouldn't have any problem with it.

00:22:33.600 That's the benefit of being anonymous.

00:22:37.000 But I can't be anonymous.

00:22:39.200 I don't have the option of being anonymous.

00:22:40.800 So in my case, should I have been excused just automatically?

00:22:47.200 And the answer is yes.

00:22:48.760 I should have been excused because it would have put me at risk.

00:22:52.280 And the system doesn't require me to take that kind of risk, when there are other people who could do it without the risk.

00:22:59.020 So what do you think I did?

00:23:01.420 Do you think I waited for the court to decide how safe I would be? 1.00

00:23:06.760 Fuck no. 1.00

00:23:07.580 No, no, no, I'm not going to listen to the court to tell me how fucking safe I'm going to be, right? 1.00

00:23:17.420 That's my decision. 0.93

00:23:20.180 That's it.

00:23:21.540 There's no debate.

00:23:23.660 That's just my decision.

00:23:25.180 Same reason I'm against, you know, vaccination mandates.

00:23:29.560 You can't decide what my safety level is.

00:23:33.420 That's up to me.

00:23:34.180 Now, if the government is trying to keep me too safe, you know, like being a little too cautious, well, maybe I'd have some pushback on that, too.

00:23:43.800 But if the government is telling me to take a personal risk that is unnecessary, in other words, you could get the same result for the public with somebody who's not me, right?

00:23:54.940 Just some other juror.

00:23:56.040 I'm sorry, that's where the government and I part ways.

00:24:01.760 That's when I say, I'm sorry, I don't support this government, because you can't put me in danger personally.

00:24:08.320 Not personally.

00:24:10.420 If you ask me to volunteer, well, that's different.

00:24:14.680 You know, suppose the government said, you know, look, you're going to be in a little bit of extra danger, because people will know your identity.

00:24:19.900 So, you know, if you don't want to do it, that's fine, but if you volunteer, we'd love that.

00:24:26.160 Okay, then I'll be okay, because it's me volunteering.

00:24:29.020 But the government making me give up my identity, because that's what would happen.

00:24:34.500 No.

00:24:35.360 So let's just say that I got out of that trial on a...

00:24:41.680 Let's say that my reason for getting out of the trial was true, but it wasn't the only reason.

00:24:47.980 So I did give a reason to be excused, which didn't go over well with the court.

00:24:54.520 Well, I'll tell you my reason.

00:24:56.840 I told the court that I favored complete drug legalization.

00:25:02.180 And since drugs were part of the thing, they were like, okay, you're out of here.

00:25:08.800 So, and that was true enough that I wasn't lying.

00:25:14.940 All right.

00:25:15.300 Apparently, the Rittenhouse prosecution did not give the defense the high-quality version

00:25:22.840 of the drone footage, which would have looked very different from the enhanced version

00:25:29.980 or the low-quality that was shown in court.

00:25:35.340 Now, I don't know where the line is.

00:25:38.140 Apparently, prosecution has something like a total protection.

00:25:46.680 They can't be prosecuted.

00:25:48.360 That's true, right?

00:25:49.940 The prosecutors have absolute immunity.

00:25:52.800 Can somebody confirm that?

00:25:55.500 I saw that on Twitter.

00:25:56.600 It looked true. 0.63

00:25:59.620 They could be disbarred, sure, but there's no legal recourse, right?

00:26:04.820 They can just lie.

00:26:06.080 They can introduce fake evidence, right?

00:26:08.380 Am I wrong about that?

00:26:10.360 Is there...

00:26:11.500 I don't think it's qualified immunity.

00:26:13.200 I think it's absolute.

00:26:15.380 So that's actually the question, whether it's qualified or absolute.

00:26:20.160 I think it's absolute.

00:26:23.420 So, I think the prosecutor probably knew he could just make up anything.

00:26:27.760 Now, I would say that what the prosecutor did, by any normal standard,

00:26:32.260 would certainly qualify as a horrible crime.

00:26:35.220 Does anybody disagree?

00:26:36.640 Now, it might be a protected category if he's got immunity as a prosecutor.

00:26:41.700 And, by the way, I think prosecutors probably need immunity.

00:26:44.960 You know, I don't like it in this case, but, eh.

00:26:47.980 You know, if you had to create a system,

00:26:51.340 I think the system's better when the attorneys are not worried about going to jail.

00:26:56.100 So, I get why we have that law, but it's certainly bad in this case.

00:27:02.680 Anyway, I completely back the two jurors,

00:27:08.400 and I think they're heroes, frankly,

00:27:10.680 because I think those jurors need to stand up to a system

00:27:15.620 that apparently they're being doxed,

00:27:17.480 or they will be, pictures have been taken of them, etc.

00:27:20.560 And there have been threats.

00:27:21.700 I have a little problem with the ten who stayed,

00:27:25.940 or the ten who are willing to make a judgment.

00:27:28.780 I think the two who are refusing are the heroes here.

00:27:31.900 Does anybody disagree?

00:27:34.120 Now, I don't like the fact that this will hurt Rittenhouse.

00:27:41.520 I don't like the fact that Rittenhouse might not get an acquittal outright,

00:27:45.800 because I think he needs an acquittal to navigate the rest of his life, right?

00:27:51.620 If the only thing that ends this trial is, what's it called,

00:27:55.540 a mistrial with prejudice,

00:27:59.760 meaning that they wouldn't retry it,

00:28:02.300 he couldn't be retried,

00:28:03.540 but if you hear that somebody was convicted of murder,

00:28:08.960 I'm sorry,

00:28:09.620 if you hear somebody was accused of murder,

00:28:12.100 and the only way they got off was a mistrial,

00:28:16.100 are you going to hear the with prejudice part?

00:28:18.760 I mean, you don't want to hear those words, right?

00:28:20.340 You just hear it's a mistrial.

00:28:21.700 You say to yourself,

00:28:22.460 my God, he got away with murder.

00:28:25.040 Right?

00:28:26.320 I mean, you're going to think he got away with murder,

00:28:28.280 or at least everybody in the left will,

00:28:30.480 and that's not anything like what's happening.

00:28:32.860 That's the opposite.

00:28:34.240 Instead of calling it mistrial with prejudice,

00:28:38.040 you know what they should call it?

00:28:40.240 Extra innocent.

00:28:43.180 Am I right?

00:28:44.220 If you call it a mistrial, he sounds guilty,

00:28:46.880 in my mind,

00:28:48.400 even though it doesn't mean anything like that.

00:28:50.900 But in my mind, he sounds guilty.

00:28:52.720 Am I right?

00:28:53.380 Am I the only one who thinks that?

00:28:55.000 If you hear mistrial, don't you think guilty?

00:28:56.880 Yeah.

00:28:59.340 Here's what they should call it.

00:29:00.820 Extra innocent.

00:29:02.480 He's so innocent,

00:29:03.760 you don't even need a jury to decide.

00:29:07.500 He's so innocent,

00:29:09.000 that the judge can just say,

00:29:11.420 you know,

00:29:12.780 I'm just going to take care of this myself.

00:29:15.780 That's how innocent he is.

00:29:17.660 He's extra, extra innocent. 0.99

00:29:19.980 Don't call it a fucking mistrial with prejudice, 0.99

00:29:22.860 because that is prejudice, 0.99

00:29:25.000 and that's basically going to screw this young man

00:29:27.860 for the rest of his life.

00:29:28.940 He can't have this hanging over him.

00:29:32.660 And so that's my only problem with the jurors,

00:29:34.900 but let me back the jurors completely.

00:29:38.360 The jurors have the option,

00:29:40.200 because they are Americans living in a free country,

00:29:42.380 to put their own safety above the benefits to the defendant.

00:29:48.900 And while I hate it,

00:29:52.180 I hate it that they're in that position,

00:29:54.920 they have an absolute right

00:29:56.800 to put their own safety above the defendant.

00:30:00.180 Agree or disagree.

00:30:01.180 They have the complete right

00:30:03.800 without any criticism.

00:30:07.200 They will not be criticized for this,

00:30:09.520 to put their own safety above the defendant.

00:30:12.080 It's not their job.

00:30:13.380 It's not their job to protect this guy.

00:30:15.520 He's a stranger.

00:30:18.040 Right?

00:30:18.540 It's sad, but true.

00:30:19.980 Yeah.

00:30:20.240 I see some of you disagree,

00:30:21.660 and I respect that.

00:30:24.180 So those who disagree

00:30:25.980 and think those jurors should just,

00:30:27.760 you know,

00:30:28.660 man up or woman up,

00:30:30.160 whoever they are,

00:30:31.160 and give us a verdict and take the risk,

00:30:34.560 I get where you're coming from.

00:30:36.720 Like, I'm not going to reject that.

00:30:38.860 But my personal preference

00:30:40.880 is that those people

00:30:42.780 have their absolute freedom

00:30:44.100 to protect themselves.

00:30:45.700 And that the court system

00:30:46.900 is less important than that.

00:30:48.380 As important as it is.

00:30:50.260 You know, protecting the court system,

00:30:51.700 I think, is really important.

00:30:53.320 As I've said,

00:30:53.920 the court system is the jewel in the republic.

00:30:57.440 If you don't have a court system,

00:30:58.720 the rest doesn't matter.

00:31:00.160 You got off a jury?

00:31:03.420 Yes, I did get off a jury.

00:31:04.940 But I also served on a couple of juries.

00:31:07.860 So when I was a little less famous,

00:31:10.740 but still famous enough,

00:31:12.380 but people didn't recognize me by my face,

00:31:15.320 I did serve on a couple of juries.

00:31:17.200 And I recommend it, by the way.

00:31:18.260 If you've never served on a jury,

00:31:21.420 I think that you're missing out.

00:31:24.220 Because it's an experience

00:31:25.520 that binds you to the country

00:31:27.020 in a way that I've never felt.

00:31:29.300 I suppose if you joined the military,

00:31:31.760 you'd feel, you know,

00:31:32.740 maybe psychologically bound to the country

00:31:35.040 in like an extra way.

00:31:36.680 Seems reasonable.

00:31:37.460 But doing jury duty,

00:31:39.520 just the fact that you're serving

00:31:41.100 your citizen duty,

00:31:43.980 and seeing how the whole thing works,

00:31:46.340 like actually, you know,

00:31:47.160 breathing it and feeling it

00:31:48.900 and being part of it,

00:31:50.060 gives you a really different feeling

00:31:52.060 about the whole thing.

00:31:54.120 And the thing that I like best

00:31:55.780 is the seriousness

00:31:57.320 with which every person

00:31:59.120 took the process.

00:32:01.740 Everybody from the spectators

00:32:03.740 to the judges

00:32:04.440 to the defendants,

00:32:06.020 everybody,

00:32:06.820 were buying into a system

00:32:08.360 that they respected.

00:32:09.900 Even if they wanted, you know,

00:32:11.020 get out of jury service, of course.

00:32:13.760 You know, people need to take care

00:32:14.840 of themselves, too.

00:32:16.160 But you do get a new respect

00:32:18.520 for the system,

00:32:19.800 and you see everybody else

00:32:21.080 respecting it, too,

00:32:22.280 including, I think,

00:32:23.380 even the defendant.

00:32:25.040 So I have a lot of respect

00:32:27.320 for the legal system,

00:32:28.460 warts and all.

00:32:29.200 Well, Joy Reid is going

00:32:31.380 full racist, of course,

00:32:33.200 talking about something called

00:32:34.780 there's a thing

00:32:36.080 for white male tears. 0.82

00:32:38.200 As soon as they get caught, 0.53

00:32:39.380 they bring the waterworks.

00:32:40.940 So this is more of the

00:32:41.980 white fragility 1.00

00:32:43.140 and white people are defective 1.00

00:32:45.020 racist bullshit. 1.00

00:32:47.040 Joy Reid, you're a racist cunt, 1.00

00:32:49.780 and I think you should be 1.00

00:32:53.500 disrespected everywhere you go.

00:32:56.880 So I don't think,

00:32:57.860 I'm not really willing

00:32:59.260 to defend any of this anymore

00:33:01.020 in terms of free speech

00:33:03.620 and opinion and stuff.

00:33:04.940 When stuff is just flat-out,

00:33:06.580 just flat-out racist, 0.55

00:33:10.320 let's just call it what it is. 0.99

00:33:11.740 Joy Reid, racist.

00:33:15.140 I told you yesterday 0.67

00:33:16.700 that I've been challenged

00:33:19.940 about CNN's reach,

00:33:21.920 and I said,

00:33:23.540 if you think the CNN's ratings,

00:33:25.360 their ratings on TV,

00:33:27.080 has anything to do

00:33:28.220 with their reach,

00:33:29.300 you are mistaken.

00:33:30.880 Their reach is the website.

00:33:32.820 The CNN model,

00:33:34.060 as I understand it,

00:33:35.160 this is my interpretation of it,

00:33:37.140 is that they create content

00:33:38.440 on live TV,

00:33:40.200 and that's sort of just marketing

00:33:41.500 for the website.

00:33:43.380 It creates content,

00:33:44.640 and it's the marketing

00:33:45.400 for the website.

00:33:46.360 The website is

00:33:47.440 where they make the money,

00:33:48.840 if there's any money there.

00:33:49.880 I don't know.

00:33:51.240 But here's some numbers.

00:33:53.220 They have, by far,

00:33:54.340 the most visited news site.

00:33:56.680 By far.

00:33:58.280 And even Fox News

00:33:59.940 is way behind.

00:34:01.280 So their website

00:34:01.940 gets 379 million

00:34:03.900 monthly visits.

00:34:04.880 So that's not people.

00:34:06.180 That's visits,

00:34:07.700 but that's still a lot.

00:34:10.000 MSN gets 329.

00:34:12.620 So they're up in that category,

00:34:14.140 but not quite.

00:34:15.980 And then Fox News

00:34:16.980 is 266 million.

00:34:19.880 So Fox News

00:34:20.980 is quite a laggard

00:34:22.140 on the website.

00:34:23.760 Now,

00:34:24.540 correct me if I'm wrong.

00:34:28.060 Yeah,

00:34:28.640 I am wrong about that.

00:34:29.560 Never mind.

00:34:30.200 Cancel that.

00:34:31.700 But here's the sort of thing

00:34:34.500 that CNN is spreading

00:34:35.780 with their 379 million

00:34:37.480 monthly visits.

00:34:38.800 There's a clip

00:34:40.040 of one of their pundits,

00:34:42.000 Bakari Sellers,

00:34:42.980 and it's a 15-second clip

00:34:47.000 talking about Rittenhouse.

00:34:49.560 In 15 seconds,

00:34:51.420 Bakari Sellers told

00:34:52.700 four lies

00:34:53.940 about the trial.

00:34:56.220 And by lie,

00:34:57.400 I don't know

00:34:58.320 that he knew the truth.

00:34:59.400 So let's just say

00:35:00.180 it's inaccurate

00:35:00.700 because he can't read

00:35:01.720 his mind, right?

00:35:02.560 We don't know

00:35:03.180 his intention.

00:35:04.480 But the facts are,

00:35:06.340 fairly clearly,

00:35:07.380 he said four things

00:35:09.100 about it in 15 seconds,

00:35:10.420 and all of them

00:35:11.020 were untrue.

00:35:12.740 Now,

00:35:13.060 why do you think

00:35:13.800 a pundit for CNN

00:35:14.960 has four mistaken impressions

00:35:18.960 in,

00:35:20.760 I don't know

00:35:21.360 how many more he has,

00:35:22.400 but four of them

00:35:23.520 in this many seconds?

00:35:25.880 And I think the answer

00:35:26.980 is that he watches

00:35:28.260 the news on the left.

00:35:31.620 Presumably.

00:35:33.100 So he,

00:35:33.940 basically,

00:35:34.260 he's a victim

00:35:35.020 of fake news.

00:35:36.240 So he gets fake news

00:35:37.600 and then they put him

00:35:38.740 on TV

00:35:39.620 to spread the fake news

00:35:41.660 that he got

00:35:42.160 from his own fake news.

00:35:43.820 So he's not really

00:35:44.720 making news.

00:35:45.800 He's repeating

00:35:46.460 the fake news,

00:35:47.320 which they can treat

00:35:48.180 as making news

00:35:48.940 and make a clip out of it.

00:35:50.260 So it's this,

00:35:50.820 like,

00:35:50.940 circular fake news

00:35:52.380 engine they've got

00:35:53.540 built here.

00:35:54.500 Pretty impressive.

00:35:56.920 All right,

00:35:57.380 here's some fake news

00:35:59.660 about Bill Gates.

00:36:01.260 But this is a,

00:36:02.040 this is a double fake.

00:36:04.540 The news is fake

00:36:05.800 and so is the fact check.

00:36:08.220 It's a double fake news.

00:36:11.960 All right.

00:36:13.100 You won't believe this

00:36:14.300 unless you read it yourself.

00:36:16.600 I'm going to tell you

00:36:17.280 something so jaw-dropping.

00:36:20.100 Yeah,

00:36:20.680 maybe not

00:36:21.400 in today's world.

00:36:22.680 But you're going to have

00:36:23.520 to read it yourself

00:36:24.160 because you're not going

00:36:24.840 to think I'm interpreting

00:36:25.800 it correctly

00:36:26.400 until you see it yourself.

00:36:27.920 You'll think

00:36:28.440 I'm making this up.

00:36:30.320 So Reuters does

00:36:31.140 a fact check

00:36:31.760 on Bill Gates

00:36:32.900 and they set it up

00:36:34.920 this way.

00:36:36.020 They say in a recent

00:36:36.820 interview

00:36:37.320 that's circulating

00:36:38.900 on social media

00:36:39.740 that Gates said

00:36:41.080 that vaccines,

00:36:42.040 quote,

00:36:42.420 only slightly reduce

00:36:43.860 the transmissions.

00:36:46.580 And that became viral

00:36:47.840 because it sounded

00:36:48.600 like you were saying

00:36:49.260 the vaccines don't work.

00:36:51.480 But this is fact checked

00:36:53.840 as false

00:36:55.260 because it's out of context.

00:36:57.740 All right?

00:36:58.520 So watch the trick.

00:37:01.000 So you've got to

00:37:01.400 pay attention carefully

00:37:02.260 or you miss the trick,

00:37:03.660 which is why

00:37:04.340 it's a good trick

00:37:05.040 because you have to

00:37:05.680 pay attention carefully

00:37:06.520 and people don't.

00:37:08.160 So what Gates said,

00:37:09.880 and this part

00:37:10.460 is not in dispute,

00:37:12.040 he said that the vaccinations

00:37:13.240 only slightly reduce

00:37:14.820 the transmissions.

00:37:17.840 Now,

00:37:19.100 that was fact checked

00:37:20.360 as basically

00:37:22.940 not false.

00:37:27.960 But here's how

00:37:29.260 they fact checked it.

00:37:31.720 They said,

00:37:32.520 it is true

00:37:32.980 that current COVID vaccines

00:37:34.360 do not halt

00:37:35.160 the transmission

00:37:35.880 of the virus.

00:37:37.960 Okay.

00:37:39.080 Was Bill Gates

00:37:40.240 talking about vaccines

00:37:41.640 halting or not

00:37:42.800 halting the virus?

00:37:45.300 Not really.

00:37:46.740 I mean,

00:37:47.420 he says it

00:37:48.280 only slightly

00:37:49.480 reduces the transmission.

00:37:50.940 So he thought it,

00:37:51.980 so he agreed

00:37:52.940 that the vaccines

00:37:54.420 do not halt

00:37:55.280 the transmission.

00:37:55.920 So, so far

00:37:56.920 the fact check

00:37:57.540 just agrees with him.

00:37:59.180 They both agree

00:38:00.080 that it doesn't

00:38:02.320 stop transmission.

00:38:03.700 And now here's

00:38:04.280 their punchline

00:38:05.480 and the fact check

00:38:06.740 summary.

00:38:08.240 They say,

00:38:09.020 this is Reuters.

00:38:10.640 However,

00:38:11.240 they are highly effective

00:38:12.440 at preventing

00:38:13.140 severe disease.

00:38:15.080 Wait a minute.

00:38:16.740 That's not the topic.

00:38:19.100 That's not the topic.

00:38:21.420 Bill Gates

00:38:21.980 said nothing

00:38:22.520 about severe disease.

00:38:24.380 He talked

00:38:25.280 about transmission.

00:38:26.920 And to support

00:38:27.900 Bill Gates

00:38:28.580 instead of backing

00:38:30.640 him and saying,

00:38:31.160 oh yeah,

00:38:31.420 it's true

00:38:31.900 what he said

00:38:33.300 or that it's false,

00:38:36.260 they actually

00:38:36.920 changed the topic

00:38:38.060 for the fall.

00:38:39.120 At the end,

00:38:40.580 they changed it

00:38:41.240 from reducing

00:38:42.040 transmission

00:38:42.660 to preventing

00:38:44.080 severe disease.

00:38:45.180 And then they

00:38:45.580 fact-checked

00:38:46.220 the preventing

00:38:46.880 severe disease part.

00:38:49.200 What the hell?

00:38:50.500 If you didn't 0.97

00:38:53.420 read the whole

00:38:54.140 article,

00:38:54.740 you wouldn't

00:38:55.140 know that they

00:38:56.920 didn't fact-check

00:38:57.680 it.

00:38:57.940 They made up

00:38:58.700 something to

00:38:59.220 fact-check and

00:38:59.880 then they fact-checked

00:39:00.960 the thing they

00:39:01.360 just made up.

00:39:03.640 Unbelievable.

00:39:05.160 Like,

00:39:05.660 you know,

00:39:06.480 of all the fake

00:39:07.180 news, 1.00

00:39:07.800 fake crap, 1.00

00:39:08.660 fake fact-checking 1.00

00:39:09.720 I've seen,

00:39:10.540 this one just

00:39:11.140 like really stands

00:39:12.040 out as not even

00:39:13.520 trying.

00:39:15.020 Now,

00:39:15.620 if you go to

00:39:16.100 PolitiFact,

00:39:17.600 can somebody

00:39:19.180 tell me,

00:39:19.700 does PolitiFact

00:39:20.380 lean left or

00:39:21.280 right?

00:39:23.840 Is PolitiFact,

00:39:25.620 do they lean

00:39:26.100 right or left?

00:39:28.020 You're saying

00:39:28.640 left,

00:39:29.100 but I'm not sure

00:39:29.540 that's right.

00:39:31.220 You all think

00:39:32.000 left?

00:39:33.320 Oh,

00:39:33.640 okay,

00:39:34.040 maybe.

00:39:36.440 Now,

00:39:36.940 is that just

00:39:37.320 because you think

00:39:37.920 all fact-checkers

00:39:38.780 lean left?

00:39:40.520 All right,

00:39:41.060 I don't know

00:39:41.420 the answer to that,

00:39:42.080 so I'm going to

00:39:42.640 say I'm skeptical

00:39:43.300 that they

00:39:43.820 lean left,

00:39:44.480 but maybe

00:39:44.800 they do.

00:39:46.020 But their

00:39:46.700 fact-check

00:39:47.220 says that

00:39:47.820 a vaccinated

00:39:48.340 person is

00:39:49.220 significantly

00:39:49.800 less likely

00:39:50.600 to pass

00:39:51.040 the coronavirus.

00:39:52.280 So in other

00:39:52.640 words,

00:39:53.160 PolitiFact is

00:39:54.440 saying that

00:39:55.080 Bill Gates

00:39:56.120 was just

00:39:56.880 wrong,

00:39:57.940 and it's

00:39:58.240 fact.

00:39:59.100 So Bill Gates

00:39:59.760 says it only

00:40:00.320 slightly reduces

00:40:01.200 the transmissions,

00:40:02.740 but PolitiFact

00:40:03.520 says the

00:40:04.600 opposite,

00:40:05.420 that it

00:40:05.720 greatly reduces

00:40:06.820 transmission.

00:40:08.200 So,

00:40:09.300 who are you

00:40:09.860 going to

00:40:10.060 believe?

00:40:11.280 Are you

00:40:11.780 going to

00:40:11.960 believe

00:40:12.280 Reuters

00:40:12.780 that failed

00:40:13.800 to say

00:40:14.260 he was

00:40:14.640 wrong,

00:40:15.200 or PolitiFact

00:40:16.260 that did

00:40:16.680 say he

00:40:17.000 was wrong?

00:40:18.000 So you've

00:40:18.320 got two

00:40:18.680 fact-checks,

00:40:19.900 but they're

00:40:21.360 different.

00:40:22.940 So,

00:40:23.840 do we need

00:40:25.440 a fact-checker

00:40:26.120 for the

00:40:26.480 fact-checkers?

00:40:27.180 I feel

00:40:29.000 I feel like

00:40:29.180 the fact-checkers

00:40:30.340 themselves

00:40:30.680 need some

00:40:31.320 kind of a

00:40:31.700 rating,

00:40:32.280 but then

00:40:32.840 that would

00:40:33.100 just put a

00:40:33.560 fact-checker

00:40:34.080 above the

00:40:34.540 fact-checker,

00:40:35.140 and then

00:40:35.420 who checks

00:40:36.140 that person's

00:40:36.740 facts?

00:40:38.200 And we're

00:40:38.940 kind of

00:40:39.340 really flying

00:40:39.920 blind here,

00:40:40.580 aren't we?

00:40:44.580 I think

00:40:45.220 PolitiFact was

00:40:46.120 the one who

00:40:46.680 got to find

00:40:47.260 people hoax

00:40:47.860 right.

00:40:48.340 I think it

00:40:49.800 was the other

00:40:50.260 fact-checkers

00:40:50.920 that got it

00:40:51.300 wrong,

00:40:51.700 but I'm not

00:40:52.040 positive about

00:40:52.660 that either.

00:40:53.080 Well,

00:40:54.700 Representative

00:40:55.220 Cori Bush

00:40:56.260 tweeted

00:40:58.440 something that

00:40:59.560 never happened.

00:41:03.000 She says,

00:41:03.660 quote,

00:41:03.960 when we

00:41:04.280 marched in

00:41:04.840 Ferguson, 0.99

00:41:05.880 white supremacists 0.85

00:41:06.800 would hide 0.99

00:41:07.280 behind a

00:41:07.700 hill near

00:41:08.140 where Michael

00:41:08.680 Brown Jr.

00:41:09.220 was murdered

00:41:09.680 and shoot

00:41:10.600 at us.

00:41:11.600 They never

00:41:12.060 faced consequences.

00:41:14.780 And then

00:41:15.100 she said

00:41:15.440 something about

00:41:15.960 Kyle Rittenhouse,

00:41:17.180 except that

00:41:17.880 none of this

00:41:18.340 ever happened.

00:41:20.160 None of it.

00:41:21.560 She just 0.65

00:41:22.200 completely made

00:41:23.000 up white 0.99

00:41:23.480 supremacists 0.99

00:41:24.140 shooting at 0.94

00:41:24.820 them. 0.96

00:41:26.240 Who makes

00:41:27.020 that up?

00:41:28.140 Who makes

00:41:28.640 up white

00:41:29.120 supremacists 0.98

00:41:29.780 were shooting

00:41:30.300 at us?

00:41:31.660 Well,

00:41:32.320 Cori Bush

00:41:32.760 did.

00:41:33.640 Do you

00:41:33.940 think she

00:41:34.260 will lose

00:41:34.720 her job

00:41:35.160 over that?

00:41:36.720 No.

00:41:38.200 No.

00:41:39.360 So,

00:41:40.000 Cori Bush

00:41:40.460 is sort

00:41:40.900 of the

00:41:41.280 Alex Jones

00:41:42.260 of the

00:41:42.640 left in

00:41:43.280 this case,

00:41:43.760 I guess.

00:41:49.060 All right.

00:41:50.120 And there

00:41:51.160 is one

00:41:51.820 story in

00:41:52.360 the news

00:41:52.840 and I'm

00:41:53.560 not going

00:41:53.880 to tell

00:41:54.100 you which

00:41:54.380 one.

00:41:55.780 But this

00:41:56.540 is just

00:41:56.860 context.

00:41:58.600 All right.

00:41:59.140 So there's

00:41:59.460 one story

00:41:59.960 in the

00:42:00.200 news.

00:42:00.520 It may

00:42:00.740 be one

00:42:01.000 I talked

00:42:01.380 about.

00:42:02.320 It may

00:42:02.720 be one

00:42:03.020 I haven't

00:42:03.380 mentioned.

00:42:04.180 I'm just

00:42:04.540 going to

00:42:04.740 say that

00:42:05.060 one of the

00:42:05.720 major stories

00:42:06.420 in the

00:42:06.740 news is

00:42:07.620 totally

00:42:07.940 wrong.

00:42:10.400 Well,

00:42:10.960 totally

00:42:11.200 wrong in

00:42:11.660 the sense

00:42:11.980 that the

00:42:13.140 context is

00:42:13.860 completely

00:42:14.240 missing.

00:42:15.260 And they

00:42:15.500 don't know

00:42:16.120 the context,

00:42:16.900 but I do.

00:42:18.480 So there's

00:42:19.080 one of the

00:42:19.520 stories where

00:42:20.080 I know

00:42:20.420 some

00:42:20.660 context

00:42:21.160 that would

00:42:21.520 completely

00:42:22.460 change what

00:42:23.800 you thought

00:42:24.120 about the

00:42:24.500 story.

00:42:25.500 But as

00:42:26.720 in many

00:42:27.040 cases,

00:42:27.340 I can't

00:42:27.800 tell you

00:42:28.080 how I

00:42:28.380 know it.

00:42:28.800 So.

00:42:29.280 Well,

00:42:33.740 just one

00:42:34.120 story that

00:42:34.600 I happen

00:42:34.920 to know

00:42:35.780 the background

00:42:36.520 that apparently

00:42:37.380 the news

00:42:37.820 industry doesn't

00:42:38.540 know.

00:42:39.800 So.

00:42:44.680 It's time

00:42:45.360 to drug

00:42:45.780 test Congress.

00:42:46.920 All right.

00:42:47.260 So what

00:42:49.040 do you think

00:42:49.320 is going to

00:42:49.600 happen with

00:42:50.180 Rittenhouse?

00:42:53.280 Oh,

00:42:53.820 then why

00:42:54.180 say anything?

00:42:55.040 The reason

00:42:55.540 I tell you

00:42:56.280 that I know

00:42:57.140 things that are

00:42:57.660 not in the

00:42:58.040 news is part

00:42:58.740 of the

00:42:58.940 context is

00:42:59.840 to tell

00:43:00.320 you how

00:43:00.620 fake the

00:43:01.040 news is.

00:43:02.500 It's part

00:43:03.060 of the

00:43:03.340 Gelman

00:43:03.940 amnesia

00:43:04.640 concept that

00:43:05.920 if somebody

00:43:06.320 knows something

00:43:07.040 about a

00:43:07.420 topic,

00:43:07.840 they know

00:43:08.140 it's fake

00:43:08.520 news.

00:43:09.520 But if

00:43:09.860 you're not

00:43:10.180 an expert

00:43:10.620 in the

00:43:10.960 topic,

00:43:11.400 you can't

00:43:11.740 tell.

00:43:12.000 You're like,

00:43:12.240 oh,

00:43:12.420 that's probably

00:43:12.880 true.

00:43:14.040 It's funny

00:43:14.480 that all the

00:43:14.900 ones that I

00:43:15.340 know about

00:43:15.760 are fake,

00:43:16.300 but this

00:43:17.120 one isn't.

00:43:17.760 So I'm

00:43:18.120 just giving

00:43:18.500 you another

00:43:18.980 example that

00:43:20.740 there's a

00:43:21.080 major story

00:43:21.760 that literally

00:43:22.780 maybe only a

00:43:23.840 handful of

00:43:24.340 people in

00:43:24.700 the world

00:43:25.040 know is

00:43:25.520 fake.

00:43:26.320 I just

00:43:26.700 happen to

00:43:28.740 all right.

00:43:37.120 So what do

00:43:37.920 you think

00:43:38.120 will happen

00:43:38.460 with Rittenhouse?

00:43:41.100 How much

00:43:42.000 rioting do

00:43:43.180 you think

00:43:43.420 will happen?

00:43:45.100 Because I

00:43:45.800 feel like the

00:43:46.440 left might

00:43:47.460 know that

00:43:48.120 this is

00:43:48.640 too far.

00:43:50.840 What do

00:43:51.440 you think?

00:43:54.040 I'm going

00:43:54.700 to go with

00:43:55.220 very little.

00:43:57.220 That's going

00:43:57.740 to be my

00:43:58.060 take.

00:43:58.300 I think

00:43:59.000 there will

00:43:59.220 be mostly

00:43:59.740 pundits

00:44:00.320 talking about

00:44:01.000 it and

00:44:01.280 lying about

00:44:01.820 it like

00:44:02.280 what's his

00:44:05.240 name?

00:44:05.520 Bakari

00:44:05.860 Sellers.

00:44:06.780 I think

00:44:07.140 just the

00:44:07.500 pundits

00:44:07.820 will lie

00:44:08.200 about it.

00:44:09.040 I think

00:44:09.480 that the

00:44:09.800 500 National

00:44:10.680 Guard

00:44:11.060 threat

00:44:11.620 will be

00:44:13.700 enough.

00:44:14.340 And I

00:44:14.540 also think

00:44:15.160 that the

00:44:15.840 rioters

00:44:16.720 don't want

00:44:17.340 to make

00:44:17.740 Rittenhouse

00:44:18.740 look right.

00:44:19.480 if there's

00:44:21.980 rioting,

00:44:24.100 Rittenhouse

00:44:24.740 looks more

00:44:25.420 innocent.

00:44:26.940 You know

00:44:27.160 what I

00:44:27.320 mean?

00:44:28.180 The context

00:44:29.080 of rioting

00:44:29.700 would simply

00:44:30.180 make his

00:44:30.660 actions seem

00:44:31.460 more justified.

00:44:32.500 And I'm

00:44:33.780 not saying

00:44:34.180 I'm justifying

00:44:34.920 them.

00:44:35.640 I'm saying

00:44:35.980 that persuasion

00:44:37.680 wise it would

00:44:38.220 look more

00:44:38.600 justified.

00:44:39.480 So I think

00:44:39.940 the left

00:44:40.460 would be

00:44:40.880 smart enough,

00:44:41.700 at least the

00:44:42.120 organizers.

00:44:43.200 I don't think

00:44:43.940 any organizers 0.99

00:44:44.800 would be dumb 1.00

00:44:45.600 enough to 1.00

00:44:46.620 organize around

00:44:47.480 this.

00:44:48.420 Because I think

00:44:49.260 they know this

00:44:49.780 would be too

00:44:50.200 far.

00:44:51.320 Just too much 0.56

00:44:52.060 of a bullshitty

00:44:52.660 thing to take.

00:44:54.620 And I think

00:44:55.420 they could use

00:44:56.020 the excuse that

00:44:56.940 there's 500

00:44:57.780 National Guard

00:44:58.520 there.

00:44:58.800 Now, I do

00:45:01.600 think there

00:45:02.160 will be a

00:45:02.600 smattering of

00:45:03.760 just people

00:45:04.740 independently

00:45:05.500 saying, hey,

00:45:06.380 I think I'll

00:45:06.800 go down there

00:45:07.260 and complain.

00:45:08.280 But I don't

00:45:09.000 know that it

00:45:09.440 will be

00:45:09.720 organized by

00:45:10.880 anybody smart.

00:45:12.560 Not the way

00:45:13.260 BLM is 1.00

00:45:13.940 organized, not

00:45:14.740 the way

00:45:15.040 Antifa is

00:45:15.760 organized.

00:45:16.580 Because they

00:45:17.080 do have some

00:45:17.600 kind of

00:45:17.940 leadership that

00:45:19.680 seems to be

00:45:20.600 at least smart

00:45:21.640 enough to

00:45:22.040 know when

00:45:23.180 to play and

00:45:25.180 when to

00:45:25.460 hold them.

00:45:28.800 I give

00:45:31.960 the left

00:45:32.400 too much

00:45:32.840 credit.

00:45:33.280 Well, that's

00:45:34.200 how we can

00:45:34.560 find out.

00:45:35.520 Now, I've

00:45:36.020 told you

00:45:36.500 since the

00:45:37.240 beginning of

00:45:37.820 my political

00:45:39.260 commentary that

00:45:40.560 the only

00:45:41.020 credibility you

00:45:41.840 should give

00:45:42.220 me is what

00:45:44.600 I earn through

00:45:45.300 prediction and

00:45:46.640 that everything

00:45:47.060 else is just

00:45:48.000 entertainment.

00:45:49.480 And if I can

00:45:50.120 predict better

00:45:50.720 than other

00:45:51.060 people, then

00:45:53.380 you should give

00:45:54.020 me a little

00:45:54.460 more weight

00:45:55.060 than people

00:45:56.740 who are bad

00:45:57.160 at predicting.

00:45:57.560 And that's

00:45:58.700 all.

00:45:59.000 That's the

00:45:59.520 best I

00:46:01.020 can do.

00:46:02.620 So that's

00:46:03.380 my prediction

00:46:03.860 that the

00:46:04.540 organizers of

00:46:08.000 riots will

00:46:08.840 be too smart

00:46:09.640 to organize

00:46:10.640 this one.

00:46:11.440 So whatever

00:46:11.840 happens would

00:46:12.400 be unorganized

00:46:13.840 and smallish,

00:46:15.000 maybe opportunistic,

00:46:16.280 and that's

00:46:16.600 about it.

00:46:18.720 How does

00:46:19.280 follow the

00:46:19.800 money apply

00:46:20.480 to the jury

00:46:21.220 verdict?

00:46:24.300 Well,

00:46:25.140 there's no

00:46:26.060 motive stronger

00:46:27.340 than fear.

00:46:29.200 So fear

00:46:29.940 beats money.

00:46:31.740 Maybe it's

00:46:32.400 the only

00:46:32.700 thing.

00:46:33.400 I can't

00:46:33.800 think of

00:46:34.040 anything else.

00:46:34.700 Can you?

00:46:35.720 I think fear

00:46:36.500 beats money.

00:46:38.200 And there

00:46:38.980 may be some

00:46:39.440 identity stuff

00:46:40.260 that does,

00:46:40.780 but not as

00:46:41.360 much.

00:46:43.000 Lust and

00:46:43.740 sex, 0.98

00:46:44.220 yeah, 0.93

00:46:44.820 beats money.

00:46:46.360 Yeah,

00:46:46.580 maybe.

00:46:49.060 Does

00:46:49.540 Biden want

00:46:50.160 riots?

00:46:50.620 I don't think

00:46:51.080 so.

00:46:51.580 I think

00:46:52.020 riots would be

00:46:52.680 bad for

00:46:53.100 Biden.

00:46:53.340 I don't.

00:46:53.400 I don't.

00:46:53.440 I don't.

00:46:53.460 I don't.

00:46:53.900 I don't.

00:46:53.940 I don't.

00:46:53.980 I don't.

00:46:54.000 I don't.

00:46:54.020 I don't.

00:46:54.040 I don't.

00:46:54.520 I'm seeing

00:46:59.300 somebody on

00:46:59.980 local saying

00:47:00.600 that I live

00:47:01.120 in a

00:47:01.400 California

00:47:01.860 bubble,

00:47:02.900 so I give

00:47:03.640 the left

00:47:04.080 far more

00:47:04.640 credit than

00:47:05.340 it deserves.

00:47:07.100 Nobody deserves

00:47:08.000 any credit.

00:47:09.760 Nobody deserves

00:47:10.560 anything.

00:47:12.620 But I would

00:47:13.480 look,

00:47:14.020 but if you

00:47:14.440 have a

00:47:14.700 specific example,

00:47:16.380 that'd be

00:47:17.040 great.

00:47:17.580 Now,

00:47:17.800 if you're

00:47:18.120 saying that I

00:47:18.540 give the

00:47:18.840 left more

00:47:19.640 credit than

00:47:20.860 they deserve,

00:47:21.440 I feel like

00:47:22.520 that's exactly

00:47:23.180 what I'm

00:47:23.580 aiming for.

00:47:25.800 If you're

00:47:26.480 detecting I'm

00:47:27.180 giving them

00:47:27.580 more credit

00:47:28.160 than they

00:47:28.520 deserve,

00:47:29.260 that's exactly

00:47:30.280 what I'm

00:47:30.700 shooting for.

00:47:32.020 Because it's

00:47:32.700 the only way

00:47:33.140 I can be

00:47:33.660 credible when

00:47:35.460 I disagree

00:47:36.100 with them,

00:47:36.960 is by starting

00:47:38.280 with giving

00:47:38.760 them more

00:47:39.160 credit than

00:47:39.660 they deserve.

00:47:41.460 So I guess

00:47:42.100 I would accept

00:47:43.060 that criticism

00:47:43.760 as true,

00:47:45.060 but I think

00:47:45.960 you're wrong

00:47:46.460 that it's a

00:47:46.920 negative.

00:47:49.180 It's

00:47:49.620 intentional.

00:47:51.440 Soros. 0.78

00:47:57.680 Yeah,

00:47:57.880 I think,

00:47:58.760 who knows

00:47:59.460 how much

00:47:59.860 Soros is 0.99

00:48:00.620 behind anything.

00:48:01.560 I'm not

00:48:02.000 one of

00:48:02.320 the Soros

00:48:03.100 conspiracy

00:48:04.500 people,

00:48:05.160 but it's

00:48:05.540 certainly

00:48:05.840 true that

00:48:06.740 he donates

00:48:07.440 to causes

00:48:08.080 that you

00:48:09.080 may or

00:48:09.360 may not

00:48:09.640 like.

00:48:15.620 Exactly.

00:48:17.060 Somebody

00:48:17.620 wisely

00:48:18.080 saying on

00:48:18.600 YouTube

00:48:18.840 that if

00:48:20.180 you can't

00:48:20.980 land on

00:48:21.420 a target

00:48:21.940 exactly,

00:48:22.960 you have

00:48:23.320 to decide

00:48:23.760 whether

00:48:24.000 you're

00:48:24.220 going to

00:48:24.380 overshoot

00:48:24.840 or undershoot.

00:48:26.220 And when

00:48:26.460 I'm giving

00:48:26.840 credit to

00:48:27.500 the left,

00:48:28.100 I would

00:48:28.540 prefer to

00:48:29.080 overshoot

00:48:29.640 and give

00:48:30.700 them more

00:48:31.060 credit

00:48:31.480 strategically.

00:48:33.660 is wokeness

00:48:42.460 just mass

00:48:43.100 hysteria

00:48:43.620 drummed

00:48:44.000 up by

00:48:44.460 the left

00:48:44.920 media?

00:48:46.320 I think

00:48:46.960 wokeness is

00:48:47.840 a power

00:48:48.540 play,

00:48:50.000 and that's

00:48:50.940 the only

00:48:51.220 way I see

00:48:51.720 it.

00:48:53.080 A lot of

00:48:53.600 these things,

00:48:54.120 we couch

00:48:55.060 them in

00:48:55.400 terms of

00:48:55.800 what's fair

00:48:56.580 and good

00:48:57.000 and who

00:48:57.300 can get

00:48:57.640 away with

00:48:58.020 what,

00:48:58.260 but some

00:48:59.120 of these

00:48:59.360 things like

00:48:59.800 abortion

00:49:00.280 and gay

00:49:01.140 rights and

00:49:02.000 a lot of

00:49:02.800 stuff is

00:49:03.480 just a

00:49:03.860 power.

00:49:04.560 It has

00:49:05.000 nothing to

00:49:05.420 do with

00:49:05.660 what's

00:49:06.140 right or

00:49:06.480 wrong.

00:49:07.360 If the

00:49:07.900 people who

00:49:08.660 believe that

00:49:09.800 they're

00:49:10.220 oppressed

00:49:10.820 have enough

00:49:12.360 power,

00:49:13.600 then they

00:49:14.000 change

00:49:14.300 things.

00:49:15.480 So I

00:49:15.820 just see

00:49:16.120 stuff as

00:49:16.560 power dynamics

00:49:17.980 and nothing

00:49:18.340 else.

00:49:18.700 woke is

00:49:25.320 boundary

00:49:25.800 seeking

00:49:26.300 behavior

00:49:26.900 infantilism.

00:49:29.660 That is

00:49:30.440 an interesting

00:49:30.980 intellectual

00:49:31.900 comment,

00:49:33.600 which I'd

00:49:34.620 have to

00:49:34.860 think about.

00:49:36.220 I feel

00:49:36.700 like that

00:49:37.040 wasn't as

00:49:37.480 I don't

00:49:38.160 know,

00:49:38.300 I have to

00:49:38.560 think about

00:49:38.900 that.

00:49:39.360 Sounded

00:49:39.760 smart.

00:49:44.160 Blind 0.95

00:49:44.680 spot,

00:49:45.280 Scott.

00:49:45.600 What's

00:49:45.800 my blind

00:49:46.160 spot?

00:49:46.420 So that's

00:49:48.900 the kind

00:49:49.180 of comment

00:49:49.660 that just

00:49:51.860 doesn't

00:49:52.260 help.

00:49:54.380 Now I've

00:49:54.900 told you

00:49:55.160 before that

00:49:55.660 it's more

00:49:56.040 exciting to

00:49:56.620 be wrong

00:49:57.040 than right.

00:49:59.080 Does anybody

00:49:59.700 else have

00:50:00.060 that feeling?

00:50:01.500 You know,

00:50:01.920 if it's

00:50:02.440 about money,

00:50:03.120 you don't

00:50:03.380 want to be

00:50:03.700 wrong,

00:50:04.140 or health.

00:50:05.460 Let's say

00:50:05.960 two categories.

00:50:06.720 If it's

00:50:06.960 about money

00:50:07.400 or health,

00:50:07.820 you don't

00:50:08.080 want to be

00:50:08.460 wrong if

00:50:08.920 it's going

00:50:09.220 to cost

00:50:09.620 you money

00:50:09.940 or cost

00:50:10.300 you health.

00:50:11.140 But isn't

00:50:11.780 it more

00:50:12.080 exciting to

00:50:12.640 find out

00:50:12.980 you're wrong

00:50:13.480 about something

00:50:13.960 you thought

00:50:14.320 was true

00:50:14.720 all your

00:50:15.060 life?

00:50:16.420 I find

00:50:18.160 that exhilarating.

00:50:19.780 Because when

00:50:20.540 you find out

00:50:21.040 you're wrong

00:50:21.620 about something

00:50:22.160 you thought

00:50:22.560 was true

00:50:22.960 all your

00:50:23.320 life,

00:50:23.640 you just

00:50:23.920 got smarter.

00:50:25.560 Not only

00:50:26.240 about that

00:50:26.740 thing,

00:50:27.460 but about

00:50:27.880 how easily

00:50:28.480 you can

00:50:28.820 be duped.

00:50:30.040 That's

00:50:30.440 kind of

00:50:30.740 important.

00:50:34.700 Or

00:50:35.140 marriage.

00:50:39.420 So how

00:50:40.260 many of you

00:50:40.640 think,

00:50:41.200 changing the

00:50:42.140 topic,

00:50:42.560 because I

00:50:42.760 saw a

00:50:43.020 comment there,

00:50:43.780 how many

00:50:44.060 of you

00:50:44.200 think that

00:50:44.840 China is 0.85

00:50:47.680 in for a

00:50:48.200 big economic

00:50:48.980 reckoning

00:50:49.600 for any

00:50:51.640 variety of

00:50:52.160 reasons.

00:50:52.520 They've

00:50:52.760 got a

00:50:53.020 bubble,

00:50:53.840 they closed

00:50:57.380 the border,

00:50:59.080 I don't

00:50:59.380 know.

00:51:00.580 Yeah,

00:51:00.880 I feel

00:51:01.260 like China 0.66

00:51:03.280 has got a

00:51:04.680 big economic

00:51:05.300 bubble.

00:51:06.440 And here's

00:51:08.720 a dog that's

00:51:09.640 not barking.

00:51:10.200 Can somebody

00:51:12.020 tell me what

00:51:12.620 progress there

00:51:13.380 has been for

00:51:15.560 by Americans,

00:51:17.260 meaning

00:51:17.700 specifically about

00:51:18.780 creating

00:51:19.220 manufacturing plants

00:51:20.360 in the United

00:51:20.760 States.

00:51:21.720 Can anybody

00:51:22.280 tell me if

00:51:22.840 anything has

00:51:23.800 happened?

00:51:24.860 And here's

00:51:25.480 the way I'd

00:51:25.940 look at it.

00:51:26.700 How many,

00:51:27.440 let's say,

00:51:28.000 manufacturing

00:51:28.640 operations moved

00:51:30.640 into China

00:51:31.300 before the

00:51:31.860 pandemic,

00:51:32.200 and how many

00:51:34.580 American

00:51:35.280 manufacturing jobs

00:51:37.340 have gone to

00:51:37.840 China since

00:51:39.180 the pandemic?

00:51:41.280 What do you

00:51:41.980 think?

00:51:43.020 I feel like

00:51:43.940 the number

00:51:44.340 of companies

00:51:44.820 going into

00:51:45.560 China may be 0.96

00:51:46.420 zero.

00:51:47.800 But I would

00:51:48.560 love to know

00:51:49.200 what it was

00:51:50.040 before the

00:51:50.720 pandemic.

00:51:52.360 Was it 100

00:51:53.660 a month?

00:51:55.480 And what was

00:51:55.960 the number?

00:51:56.400 Because a lot

00:51:57.020 of them would

00:51:57.280 be smaller.

00:51:58.420 Was it three

00:51:59.360 big ones a

00:52:00.040 month that

00:52:01.760 could really be

00:52:02.560 important?

00:52:03.860 I just don't

00:52:04.380 know.

00:52:05.300 But don't you

00:52:06.040 think that that

00:52:06.520 story is lacking

00:52:07.760 in any kind of

00:52:08.780 coverage?

00:52:09.120 I would say

00:52:10.300 maybe the

00:52:11.140 biggest security

00:52:13.980 thing that's

00:52:14.880 going is how

00:52:16.340 much we can

00:52:16.860 pull our

00:52:17.360 manufacturing out

00:52:18.340 of China and

00:52:19.100 our supply chain

00:52:19.760 stuff.

00:52:20.480 So if we don't

00:52:21.120 have any

00:52:21.600 reporting on

00:52:22.820 whether we're

00:52:23.480 at least slowing

00:52:24.140 down our China 0.74

00:52:25.160 business, what

00:52:26.640 do we know?

00:52:28.080 If you don't

00:52:28.880 know if we're

00:52:29.400 slowing down or

00:52:30.480 sending

00:52:31.880 manufacturing to

00:52:32.860 China and

00:52:33.920 reversing it

00:52:34.580 ideally, if you

00:52:35.220 don't know that,

00:52:37.140 we don't know

00:52:37.680 anything.

00:52:39.120 Because everything

00:52:40.120 depends on that.

00:52:42.100 Really.

00:52:42.920 Just everything.

00:52:46.580 Yes.

00:52:47.200 If we don't

00:52:47.760 know it, it's

00:52:48.240 not being

00:52:48.600 managed.

00:52:49.140 That is

00:52:49.360 correct.

00:52:55.540 China is 0.85

00:52:56.660 number one in

00:52:57.360 slavery.

00:52:59.600 Yeah, you'd

00:53:00.340 have to be an 1.00

00:53:00.800 idiot to invest 1.00

00:53:01.800 in China at 1.00

00:53:02.340 this point.

00:53:03.280 I actually saw

00:53:04.080 an article

00:53:04.540 recently in a

00:53:05.380 major publication

00:53:06.180 arguing that

00:53:07.760 investing in the

00:53:08.520 Chinese stock

00:53:09.220 market might be

00:53:09.940 a good deal

00:53:10.500 right now because

00:53:11.540 it's depressed at

00:53:12.900 the moment.

00:53:14.080 To which I said,

00:53:15.920 what actual

00:53:16.580 American would 0.60

00:53:17.440 write that

00:53:17.900 article?

00:53:18.820 Because I think

00:53:19.260 it was written

00:53:19.600 by an American.

00:53:20.980 What American

00:53:21.840 writes an article

00:53:23.440 that says investing

00:53:24.320 in China seems

00:53:25.080 like it might be a

00:53:25.960 good risk reward

00:53:26.740 at the moment?

00:53:29.420 That sounds like

00:53:30.400 somebody paid by

00:53:31.420 China, doesn't it?

00:53:33.900 I mean, it

00:53:34.400 definitely doesn't

00:53:35.580 sound like something

00:53:36.500 an American would

00:53:37.240 write.

00:53:46.060 I've already

00:53:46.640 seen articles like

00:53:47.520 that, yeah.

00:53:49.000 All right.

00:53:51.220 That is all I

00:53:52.120 have for today.

00:53:53.340 I'm going to go do

00:53:54.040 some other things.

00:53:59.020 Huawei is just a

00:54:00.100 foreign intelligence

00:54:00.860 operation, yeah.

00:54:02.060 You know, I

00:54:02.580 invested in, I think

00:54:04.100 I told you this,

00:54:05.080 when Huawei was

00:54:06.240 having its problems,

00:54:07.440 I invested in

00:54:08.220 Ericsson, because

00:54:09.320 Ericsson is a

00:54:10.080 competitor for the

00:54:11.220 telecom equipment,

00:54:12.920 and I thought that

00:54:13.820 was a no-brainer.

00:54:15.600 I thought that

00:54:16.280 investing in

00:54:17.240 Huawei's competition

00:54:18.700 would just be the

00:54:19.600 easiest investment

00:54:20.620 of all, because

00:54:22.120 Huawei would be

00:54:23.460 prevented from

00:54:24.200 competing in

00:54:24.820 Europe, Ericsson

00:54:26.340 would not be,

00:54:27.720 there aren't many

00:54:28.340 competitors, so

00:54:29.160 Ericsson would just

00:54:29.760 make a ton of money.

00:54:31.020 But it went down.

00:54:32.200 My Ericsson

00:54:34.960 investment just, like,

00:54:35.860 went down.

00:54:38.480 What's happening?

00:54:39.800 Now, I don't have

00:54:40.380 visibility about that

00:54:41.340 industry at the

00:54:42.040 moment, so it was a 0.99

00:54:43.220 dumb investment. 0.99

00:54:44.380 It was more of a 1.00

00:54:45.020 political investment

00:54:45.820 than an investment

00:54:47.220 investment.

00:54:49.000 But, I don't know.

00:54:54.620 Oh, can I return

00:54:55.420 live if the verdict

00:54:56.380 comes down today?

00:54:57.520 I will consider

00:54:59.140 that, but it

00:55:01.560 depends where I am

00:55:02.340 and what I'm doing.

00:55:02.940 I've got a big

00:55:03.640 day today.

00:55:10.360 Invest in Nokia.

00:55:12.260 Is Nokia the

00:55:13.100 other one?

00:55:17.900 All right.

00:55:18.880 Everyone who's

00:55:19.580 thinking like you?

00:55:20.300 All right.

00:55:29.700 Somebody's saying,

00:55:31.000 look into the

00:55:31.640 concentration of

00:55:32.660 lottery winners in

00:55:33.900 Sandy Hook.

00:55:34.980 That should give you

00:55:35.680 enough to learn how

00:55:36.420 wrong you are about

00:55:37.240 the situation.

00:55:39.940 No, I don't think

00:55:40.940 you know me that

00:55:41.540 well.

00:55:42.680 I don't think the

00:55:43.660 number of lottery

00:55:44.340 winners in Sandy Hook

00:55:46.580 is going to convince

00:55:47.340 me of anything.

00:55:47.940 But, I don't

00:55:54.280 think so.

00:55:55.280 All right.

00:55:55.640 I think I'm going

00:55:56.160 to go.

00:55:56.860 Slow news today

00:55:57.800 until the Rittenhouse

00:55:59.240 verdict.

00:56:02.240 Oh, Erickson was

00:56:02.960 kicked out of China,

00:56:03.780 somebody says.

00:56:04.620 Interesting.

00:56:08.620 All right.

00:56:10.460 And I'll talk to

00:56:11.380 you again tomorrow.

00:56:13.040 Maybe today.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - November 17, 2021

Episode 1564 Scott Adams： Weasels in the News Everywhere and I'll Show You Where They're Hiding

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript