Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1629 Scott Adams： Biden's Disastrous Press Conference, Havana Syndrome, and More Ridiculousness

00:00:00.520 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to, that's right, the best thing that's ever happened to you in your entire life.

00:00:08.100 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams. It's famous, well, all over the world.

00:00:13.700 And you're probably here because you saw the description and realized that this would be the most amazing live stream,

00:00:22.120 even better than the best one you've ever had. It's true.

00:00:25.080 And all you need is a cupper, mugger, glass, tanker, gels, or stein, a canteen jug of flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:31.440 Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:33.620 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

00:00:38.360 It's the dopamine hit of the day.

00:00:40.220 It's the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:42.980 It's called the simultaneous sip. Go.

00:00:51.120 All right.

00:00:53.080 Well, for those of you who are my local subscribers, you know that last night I revealed to you the secret for authoring the simulation yourself.

00:01:05.280 Many of you are trying it.

00:01:07.460 If you're on YouTube, I'm sorry.

00:01:09.500 That was for local subscribers only.

00:01:11.880 Meanwhile, Rasmussen has a poll in which one of the questions was, they asked,

00:01:17.420 has Washington become more or less partisan in the past year?

00:01:21.280 Do you think that anybody's going to answer less partisan?

00:01:28.240 78% said more partisan.

00:01:32.040 And it's kind of weird that we've drifted into a place.

00:01:36.360 Was it Newt Gingrich, who was the first one to make this, I think, a change,

00:01:42.840 which is that one party would do nothing but stop the other one from succeeding?

00:01:47.160 And that's it.

00:01:49.460 Just, yeah, that's right.

00:01:51.120 25% say it's becoming less partisan.

00:01:54.560 Huh.

00:01:55.360 Approximately 25%.

00:01:56.840 Yeah, you caught that one before I did.

00:02:01.820 But was it Newt Gingrich?

00:02:03.780 Was that where everything changed?

00:02:05.540 Where he got the Republicans to hold tight?

00:02:07.940 It's about right, right?

00:02:12.080 So, I don't know.

00:02:14.580 It's like we have a government that no longer even pretends they're trying to do stuff.

00:02:19.620 They're only pretending like they're trying to win.

00:02:24.160 Tip O'Neill was tough, but he was a dealmaker, right?

00:02:27.360 Tip O'Neill was very much a dealmaker, I think.

00:02:31.960 Yeah, okay.

00:02:32.420 Let me ask you this.

00:02:37.120 In the comments, let's see where your current knowledge is.

00:02:41.200 Don't look at anybody else's comment.

00:02:43.480 So, before you see what somebody else says, tell me the daily number of deaths from COVID in the United States.

00:02:52.360 The current number, the daily.

00:02:54.520 How many people died, on average, in the past week in the United States?

00:02:58.320 Give me the number.

00:02:59.460 Let's see if you know the number.

00:03:00.480 Oh, very educated group.

00:03:04.400 Wow.

00:03:06.900 Very well informed.

00:03:10.220 Very good.

00:03:11.300 Yeah, it's around 1,500.

00:03:12.860 I think it's closer to 1,700, but I would take anything in the 1,000 to 2,000 range as well informed.

00:03:20.260 Surprising.

00:03:21.920 Congratulations.

00:03:23.800 Nicely done.

00:03:25.240 I like it when people who follow me are unusually well informed.

00:03:29.900 I don't think the general public could have answered as consistently as the comments are here.

00:03:36.120 I don't think so.

00:03:38.640 But here's my second question.

00:03:40.920 Of the roughly 1,700 dying per day, either from COVID or with COVID, that's still an open question.

00:03:47.760 But what percentage of them do you think are under 75 and reasonably healthy, meaning they don't have a comorbidity?

00:03:55.400 So on the 1,700, tell me the number that are under 75 and don't have, you know, let's say obesity or a comorbidity.

00:04:03.180 Well, you're just guessing now, aren't you?

00:04:07.060 Yeah, you're just guessing.

00:04:09.100 You don't know.

00:04:11.060 I don't know.

00:04:12.640 Do you know why you don't know and I don't know?

00:04:14.880 I don't think it's reported.

00:04:16.580 Now, the CDC does track by comorbidities and age, but I think they're doing it by a rolling month.

00:04:30.280 In coronavirus time, a month, that's like a lifetime, right?

00:04:36.640 In a month, you could have a whole new wave or you could have a whole wave disappear in a month.

00:04:41.820 So if you're looking at a rolling month, it's concealing any improvement.

00:04:47.360 Am I right?

00:04:48.120 And you also have to dig into each age group and stuff.

00:04:51.040 So it's almost as if it's intentionally concealed from you.

00:04:55.820 Does it feel that way?

00:04:57.380 Does it feel like the most relevant number is intentionally being concealed?

00:05:02.960 It's not hidden, hidden completely, like you could suss it down if you really worked at it.

00:05:09.140 But it looks like they're trying to not let you know what that is.

00:05:14.680 What is your obligation to comply to mandates in terms of the coronavirus?

00:05:20.160 What obligation do you have when your government is intentionally not giving you the most relevant data?

00:05:28.040 Yeah, zero.

00:05:28.800 Exactly.

00:05:29.920 Yeah, there is no obligation.

00:05:31.020 Whatever moral or ethical obligation you believed you might have had, this would be the sort of the CNN, Howard Stern view of things,

00:05:41.800 that, you know, you've got to be a good moral person to get vaccinated.

00:05:45.120 Well, if your government, who is asking this of you, is not going to give you the most relevant number,

00:05:52.520 which they have, they have the number, they're not giving it to you,

00:05:57.640 you have no obligation.

00:06:00.040 You have no moral obligation, no legal obligation, no obligation to your fellow citizens, no obligation.

00:06:06.420 You are free of obligation because of that.

00:06:09.460 And February 1, we are done.

00:06:15.840 The government might take a little while to catch up, but I think the pretty privileged people will lead us.

00:06:21.860 The people who are attractive will stop wearing masks, and then the rest of us will be able to do it.

00:06:29.720 And it makes sense that pretty people would go first, because people don't ask them to put masks on.

00:06:34.740 And secondly, it makes more sense for them to take a mask off.

00:06:40.740 You know, people like me, I actually benefit a little by keeping the mask on,

00:06:46.540 because you don't see this half of my ugly face.

00:06:50.480 But the pretty will lead us, as they should.

00:06:55.640 Well, so the Senate Democrats got defeated, as everybody knew,

00:07:02.160 trying to change the filibuster rule so that they could get, I guess, voting rights stuff, as they call it, passed.

00:07:10.320 And Senators Manchin and Sinema, once again, became the only ones that mattered.

00:07:19.500 One of my better predictions was that Manchin would actually be running the country,

00:07:25.720 because he was the only one willing to be a swing vote.

00:07:28.380 If you're willing to be the swing vote, you get to run the country.

00:07:32.160 And I felt like he was the only one.

00:07:34.720 And I think Sinema is a slightly different question, and I'll talk about that.

00:07:40.620 But why was nobody else smart enough to know that all they had to do was be flexible,

00:07:45.780 and they'd be in control of the United States?

00:07:48.520 He was the only one that figured that out.

00:07:51.020 Now, maybe he's the only one who had the flexibility to do it or something.

00:07:54.040 Yeah, that's true as well.

00:07:56.700 But it feels like it was an obvious play that he uniquely stands out in taking.

00:08:04.800 Now, Sinema, I can't say enough good things about the way she played this.

00:08:12.480 And Manchin, too.

00:08:13.180 So let me say this as, let's say, aggressively as I can.

00:08:20.800 I always protect the system over the individual result.

00:08:27.260 Never destroy the system to get an individual outcome.

00:08:31.660 That would be dumb.

00:08:33.100 And it seems like Sinema is essentially protecting the entire republic.

00:08:37.920 Because if you make this kind of a change for this one thing, well, then it's in play.

00:08:43.260 And it'll always be made for everything, and then everything just goes to shit.

00:08:47.900 Now, honestly, I just can't say enough good things about somebody who would be willing to go against their own party

00:08:57.240 to protect the republic.

00:09:01.860 To protect the republic.

00:09:03.340 How do you feel bad about that?

00:09:09.900 I mean, right now, if Sinema ran for president, I'd have a hard time not supporting her.

00:09:19.500 Because I'm always going to back the system over the individual decision.

00:09:24.960 Now, I don't know anything else about her, so that's not like some kind of a decision or something.

00:09:28.560 But this is serious presidential bullshit here.

00:09:32.560 Not bullshit.

00:09:33.600 Like, this is serious presidential quality.

00:09:38.480 That's what I want.

00:09:39.920 I don't care what her party is.

00:09:41.840 Because she, you know, she voted against her party. 0.99

00:09:44.360 So, I mean, that shows some independence.

00:09:47.040 Now, I, you know, with this crowd, I know it's hard to hear me say that I might back somebody on the left.

00:09:54.660 But let me state it, let me state it more definitively.

00:09:59.640 If it's the best candidate, I would back the candidate on the left.

00:10:03.860 I know you don't want to hear that.

00:10:05.460 But if it was the best candidate, I could do it easily.

00:10:08.360 It wouldn't be any problem at all.

00:10:10.040 But it'd have to be somebody who wanted the system to work.

00:10:12.840 Let me give you some more examples of what I think that would look like.

00:10:16.800 And I'm not suggesting that Sinema or Manchin would have these views, but it's one I'd like to see.

00:10:21.600 You know my view, that abortion will never be decided, because we'll always be fighting about it.

00:10:28.680 So if you can't decide what's right, but yet you have to decide, and you can't get everybody to agree, but you have to move on.

00:10:35.460 You have to get past it somehow.

00:10:38.760 That the default is to default to who decides.

00:10:41.600 It's the Thomas Sowell view, that if you can't decide what to do, because nobody will agree, you can still argue it.

00:10:52.200 You can still fight it all day long, and of course you should, if you think it's important.

00:10:58.300 But if you can't decide and get everybody on the same side, you have to default to protecting the system.

00:11:03.260 So who is the best deciders?

00:11:07.020 Well, I don't think the president should ever be involved in abortion.

00:11:11.280 That's my opinion.

00:11:12.600 And here's why.

00:11:14.180 Because the president of the United States should never have any say in who lives or dies, unless it's a war situation, really.

00:11:21.840 But that just shouldn't be the president.

00:11:24.380 States, somebody's got to make a decision.

00:11:27.260 So you want to drive those kinds of decisions as low down into the process as possible, as close to the individual and their doctor as you can get it.

00:11:36.420 Because that's a better system.

00:11:38.360 You know, it's more likely to be sustained.

00:11:40.860 So I think there are a whole bunch of things, like how we do omnibus bills, and how you do the veto, and how do you run elections?

00:11:50.060 Do you have a transparent election or not?

00:11:52.040 So there's just tons of stuff where I'd love to have a leader who says, you know what, we're never going to agree on this stuff.

00:11:59.280 So I'm not even going to make it my job to tell you what's right.

00:12:02.300 I'll just make it my job to make sure the republic stays strong and let you guys argue it out.

00:12:08.080 You know, once the public comes up with a decision, maybe 75% of you want the same thing, then the system will give it to you.

00:12:14.980 But I'm going to make sure the system is there so that when the public decides what it wants, becomes well-informed, forms a consensus, that that will happen within a structure that can support you.

00:12:27.320 I won't be the one who breaks the system so that even if you made a good decision or one you're happy with, it couldn't be implemented anyway.

00:12:35.860 So I feel like somebody could make that case and win on that.

00:12:39.040 But maybe not.

00:12:40.020 Maybe it's too intellectual.

00:12:40.960 The public doesn't like anything that they have to think about too much.

00:12:45.560 You know, they prefer operating under fear and, you know, hoaxes and that kind of stuff.

00:12:53.620 Here's some CNN fake news.

00:12:57.640 So here's how they handle the fact-checker with Biden.

00:13:01.320 So Daniel Dale at CNN does the fact-checking.

00:13:03.580 And to his credit, although the item on the CNN page was, it was small, I believe it was one sentence, just sort of hidden down at the bottom in the middle, that, by the way, by the way, we also did some fact-checking on Biden's press conference.

00:13:24.440 Yeah, there were, in fact, a number of false statements, but nothing to see here.

00:13:32.060 Just look away.

00:13:33.220 Look, it's Trump.

00:13:34.420 Look, look, over there.

00:13:36.140 It's Trump.

00:13:36.820 Look, everybody.

00:13:38.120 How can you believe that?

00:13:42.080 So that's what CNN's doing.

00:13:44.080 The old, don't look here.

00:13:45.760 There's nothing to see.

00:13:46.540 But then Daniel Dale goes on to say that, indeed, Biden said a bunch of things that weren't true.

00:13:53.760 You probably are aware of them all.

00:13:55.080 I don't need to have to go through them.

00:13:56.640 But he said a bunch of things that weren't true.

00:13:58.920 But then Daniel Dale was quick to say that Biden's lies, while dozens, dozens, dozens of lies, that Trump had thousands.

00:14:09.120 And that you could not compare the mere dozens of lies told by Biden.

00:14:17.920 I mean, it's just dozens.

00:14:19.540 How do you compare dozens to thousands?

00:14:24.100 Do you see any trouble with the way he is presenting that data?

00:14:29.680 Does any error in analysis jump out at you?

00:14:33.600 Yeah.

00:14:35.300 How many times has Biden spoken public?

00:14:39.120 Right.

00:14:41.880 Versus how many times did Trump speak in public?

00:14:45.540 And now let me ask you this.

00:14:47.400 When they say Trump told thousands of lies, or failed to fact-checking,

00:14:53.680 do they mean that he told thousands of individual different lies on different topics?

00:15:00.500 Is that what that means?

00:15:02.020 Did Trump really tell thousands of unique and different lies?

00:15:06.780 Or did he tell something closer to dozens of lies that he repeated more often because he talked more often and tweeted more often?

00:15:19.800 It seems to me that Daniel Dale is trying to get away with comparing one lie repeated three times, and count that as three, where if Biden doesn't speak in public as often, he gets a one because he only talked once.

00:15:37.420 Is that what happened here?

00:15:40.200 I think so, right?

00:15:41.940 Give me a fact-check.

00:15:43.900 That's exactly what happened here, right?

00:15:46.080 They compared dozens to thousands as if that was actually a fair comparison.

00:15:50.980 That's fake news.

00:15:53.740 I fact-check your fact-checkers and find you fake stamp.

00:15:59.260 Here's some more fake news.

00:16:02.320 Letitia James, the attorney general, says her office has uncovered, quote, significant evidence, quote,

00:16:12.860 indicating that the Trump organization used fraudulent or misleading asset valuations to obtain a host of economic benefits, including loans, insurance coverage, and tax deductions.

00:16:25.440 And Michael Cohen, who presumably was privy to any of those discussions, he says he was, you know, deeply in the inside.

00:16:32.860 He was Trump's attorney, and when asked on CNN to give an example of this egregious and illegal, very illegal asset valuation stuff,

00:16:44.240 what was the best example that Michael Cohen could come up with?

00:16:49.620 Because he did.

00:16:50.620 He came up with a pretty specific example of Trump inflating his property values.

00:16:55.740 What was the context in which Trump inflated his property taxes, not property taxes, his property values?

00:17:04.640 What was the context?

00:17:06.340 According to Michael Cohen, this is not me, Michael Cohen said the context was to make sure he looked better on the Forbes Fortune 500 list.

00:17:22.400 That was the argument.

00:17:23.760 That when he said what his net worth was for publicity, in Forbes, just for publicity,

00:17:33.660 that he allegedly inflated the values of his properties to say that he had a few billion more dollars.

00:17:40.360 But when he did other things that maybe were getting a loan or insurance,

00:17:46.020 he would give them something closer to the actual value because that's what you have to do.

00:17:53.760 Because that's the law.

00:17:57.080 Can you fucking believe that we got this far and that's all they have?

00:18:02.580 They don't have anything.

00:18:04.180 Well, according to Michael Cohen, who would be the closest to the actual reality,

00:18:08.540 according to Michael Cohen, they literally have fucking nothing.

00:18:12.760 That he lied to Forbes magazine.

00:18:14.880 Do you know that Forbes magazine also reports my net worth?

00:18:20.260 Do you think they got it right?

00:18:24.100 No.

00:18:25.240 How in the hell would Forbes know my net worth?

00:18:30.060 Think about it.

00:18:31.540 Let me think about it.

00:18:32.780 How in the world would anybody calculate my net worth?

00:18:36.340 Like they know what I've invested in in the last 30 years?

00:18:40.020 Really?

00:18:41.400 Forbes knows how I invested in the last 30 years.

00:18:46.060 It knows my, you know, my, what happened with my marriages.

00:18:51.940 It knows that.

00:18:53.100 Of course not.

00:18:54.880 So the Forbes Fortune 500 thing is publicity for Forbes.

00:18:59.320 And that's how you should see it.

00:19:01.220 I mean, it's fun.

00:19:02.120 It's like a horoscope, basically.

00:19:03.640 It's just entertainment.

00:19:04.320 So something that's just publicity for a magazine, which Trump wanted to get some publicity for himself.

00:19:12.300 So it's a double publicity situation, which everybody in the modern world understands as hyperbole.

00:19:19.840 I mean, that's how getting attention works.

00:19:22.580 You're a little hyperbolic PR.

00:19:25.000 And that was compared to the legal process where you're getting a loan or, you know, paying, you know, property tax or whatever.

00:19:32.940 Wow.

00:19:34.860 If that's all they have, this is one of the biggest hoaxes of all time.

00:19:39.760 Now, I'm not saying that is all they have.

00:19:42.160 But let me go down to another level.

00:19:45.520 Suppose you were trying to value your own properties to get a loan.

00:19:51.080 Okay.

00:19:51.840 You want to value your own properties to get a loan.

00:19:54.660 And you own a bunch of hotels.

00:19:55.700 One way to do it would be to take your cash flow and multiply it by a multiplier.

00:20:03.200 So you'd say, I've created this much cash flow or this much profit.

00:20:07.540 And you might multiply it by, say, five.

00:20:10.680 I'm not sure what the multiple is for real estate.

00:20:13.440 What's the multiple for real estate?

00:20:14.780 If you saw a commercial property that was giving off, I'll give an example, a million dollars a year in net profit, what would you pay for it if you were going to buy that?

00:20:25.740 Five times, right?

00:20:27.920 Somebody says eight.

00:20:29.660 Somebody says ten.

00:20:30.500 I don't think you'd pay ten.

00:20:32.240 Would you?

00:20:32.980 Would you ever pay ten?

00:20:34.260 But anyway, the point is there's a multiple.

00:20:36.160 It doesn't matter what the multiple is.

00:20:37.400 So you'd say to yourself, my net profit last year, I'll multiply it by five.

00:20:45.520 Now, could you support that number if somebody challenged you legally?

00:20:50.680 Would that be a supportable number?

00:20:53.340 Your most recent year is profits times five.

00:20:58.080 Would it?

00:21:00.220 Well, then you'd have to add the value of the property.

00:21:03.120 Right?

00:21:05.240 Because it's not just the, because you also own the property.

00:21:09.840 So then you'd subtract your loan values and blah, blah, blah.

00:21:13.120 So that would be one way to calculate it.

00:21:16.500 Now, suppose instead of taking the most recent year and multiplying it by five, you say to yourself, you know, every year is up and down.

00:21:23.020 It's unpredictable.

00:21:23.700 So instead of taking the most recent year as my most representative, I'll take an average of my last five years, or last three would be better.

00:21:33.720 I'll take an average of my last three years, and I'll multiply that by five.

00:21:38.280 And that might be very different than just taking the last year and multiplying it by five.

00:21:42.540 Is that legal?

00:21:44.240 Yeah.

00:21:45.020 Yeah.

00:21:45.440 Because you have a good reason for it.

00:21:47.460 It's legal if you have a good reason.

00:21:49.680 That's it.

00:21:50.400 That's the whole standard.

00:21:51.280 If an accountant or a lawyer can come in and say, well, here's my reason.

00:21:56.220 You don't go to jail for that.

00:21:58.080 It might be reversed.

00:22:00.120 But if an expert says it's a perfectly good reason, you disagree.

00:22:04.380 I get that.

00:22:05.820 But my reason was okay.

00:22:07.580 That's perfectly legal.

00:22:09.500 Now, suppose he said instead, I'm going to look at comparables.

00:22:13.620 I'm going to look at my property.

00:22:15.440 Compare it to other things nearby that sold recently.

00:22:18.360 Secondly, that's entirely subjective.

00:22:23.320 Because you have to decide what is comparable.

00:22:26.420 And there's never anything comparable.

00:22:28.780 You know, a specific hotel doesn't really have a comparable.

00:22:32.460 There's nothing just like it.

00:22:34.620 You know, you could do square footage and stuff, but it wouldn't be the same hotel, the same level of accoutrements, etc.

00:22:42.520 So you basically have a huge subjective ability to say, okay, I think my hotel is just like that one across the street.

00:22:53.340 But you could have said, no, it's not really like that one across the street.

00:22:57.520 I think it's more like the one down the road.

00:22:59.820 And then completely legally, you could give yourself an evaluation that could be way high or way low.

00:23:07.400 Completely legal.

00:23:08.760 There's nothing illegal about that.

00:23:10.760 You just have to be able to back it up.

00:23:13.360 Now, those are just a few examples.

00:23:16.360 But trust me when I say there are more ways to do this that are also completely legal.

00:23:22.780 And you can use different methods for different contexts.

00:23:25.340 So if you're doing it for PR, you can just make up some numbers.

00:23:29.440 It's totally legal.

00:23:30.840 If you're doing it for the bank, you better be able to back it up.

00:23:35.580 But it could be anything all over the place.

00:23:38.080 You know what?

00:23:38.460 You could even say this.

00:23:40.560 I believe this would be legal.

00:23:42.160 I would need an opinion on this.

00:23:44.500 But I believe Trump could say, I just got elected president.

00:23:48.800 So I think the value of my properties will go way up or way down.

00:23:53.840 And just say, well, you know, there is this external event.

00:23:58.280 Could have been, you know, climate change.

00:24:00.760 Could have been anything.

00:24:01.300 Some external event.

00:24:03.640 And this external event will make my properties be worth half as much.

00:24:07.840 Or twice as much.

00:24:09.720 Could he back that up?

00:24:11.860 Yeah.

00:24:12.660 Yeah.

00:24:13.060 You could back that up.

00:24:14.500 Because you say, look, we know that my property value will be wildly different because of all this attention as president.

00:24:21.100 So I don't think it's going up.

00:24:23.080 I'm going to cut it by half.

00:24:24.940 What actually happened to the values of his holdings while president?

00:24:29.360 Well, you know, the coronavirus killed everybody.

00:24:31.960 But before coronavirus, I think it was down, right?

00:24:36.100 So if he had predicted that the value of his property was half as much as before he became president, would that be illegal?

00:24:47.220 Half as much maybe.

00:24:49.000 That's a little too far.

00:24:50.120 But there's a great deal of subjectivity in these things.

00:24:54.680 And from what I've heard so far, they've got nothing on him.

00:24:57.460 Like literally nothing.

00:24:59.520 If they had anything, you don't think Michael Cohen would have given us that example?

00:25:04.220 Here's what it would look like to do it illegally.

00:25:07.580 To say, let's call this property worth a billion when you know it's worth three billion and you don't have any argument for why it would be worth one billion.

00:25:16.640 That would be illegal.

00:25:18.320 No argument.

00:25:18.960 If you have no argument for it, that's illegal.

00:25:22.460 It's not even alleged.

00:25:24.960 What I described is not even alleged so far.

00:25:28.500 At least publicly, we don't know.

00:25:31.420 All right.

00:25:32.300 Doc Anarchy on Twitter did a great thread on MKUltra.

00:25:37.080 And I didn't know that much about it.

00:25:40.060 I mean, I knew the basics.

00:25:41.520 But here's some things that he puts in a thread.

00:25:44.000 It's very recommended.

00:25:45.160 You read this.

00:25:46.360 So there were projects.

00:25:47.200 Bluebird and Artichoke began in 1951.

00:25:50.040 And this is in Doc Anarchy's words.

00:25:52.640 The CIA set out to determine if they could control the human mind.

00:25:57.420 And they used morphine addiction with forced withdrawal, hypnosis, and LSD.

00:26:05.220 So those are some of the things they tried to control minds.

00:26:08.600 And then Doc Anarchy says the project failed in usual government fashion.

00:26:14.440 In other words, they didn't find something that would control people's minds.

00:26:21.100 Uh-huh.

00:26:24.740 Didn't they?

00:26:25.580 Are you telling me that the reason they closed it down is because they didn't find something

00:26:31.520 that would control people's minds?

00:26:33.520 So they tested hypnosis.

00:26:36.060 And they concluded that you couldn't control minds?

00:26:40.340 No, that didn't happen.

00:26:42.600 Let me tell you what didn't happen.

00:26:44.860 What didn't happen is they tested hypnosis and found that it didn't work.

00:26:49.860 That didn't happen.

00:26:50.920 Now, I don't know if they thought it wouldn't work in the way they needed it to.

00:26:57.860 Because some of what they were testing is to see if you could change somebody in real

00:27:01.780 time, like, really quickly.

00:27:04.220 So hypnosis isn't necessarily going to work for that.

00:27:07.220 But if you were trying to move the masses, oh, yeah.

00:27:11.440 Oh, yeah.

00:27:12.420 Hypnosis and knowledge of persuasion in general would totally do that.

00:27:16.580 So I'm a little skeptical that they didn't find a way to do it, since one of the things

00:27:22.180 they listed would do exactly that.

00:27:24.380 But like I said, it wouldn't work maybe the hour that you tried it.

00:27:28.180 So anyway, read the rest of that thread.

00:27:33.280 It's shocking what horrible things the CIA did, allegedly, as part of that program.

00:27:40.160 So let's talk about the President Biden's press conference.

00:27:46.120 I'm going to lean into it with a Jonathan Turley piece on the voting rights thing.

00:27:52.100 So he has a piece in The Hill.

00:27:53.940 Now, if you're not familiar with Jonathan Turley, strong recommendation that you follow him

00:27:59.860 on Twitter and read anything he writes.

00:28:02.900 Basically, he's in this teeny, teeny group of people that anything he writes, you should

00:28:08.320 read it.

00:28:09.520 Just whatever it is.

00:28:11.360 Just read it.

00:28:12.220 Just trust me.

00:28:13.220 I'm not even going to make an argument for it.

00:28:15.060 Just trust me.

00:28:16.420 Just read anything he writes.

00:28:18.040 It's that good.

00:28:18.660 And he's talking about how Biden and the Democrats are pushing what he calls their own big lie.

00:28:26.720 Basically pushing for voting rights that rarely gets explained.

00:28:32.180 Why do you think it is that the news is not informing us what's in this alleged voting rights

00:28:38.420 bill?

00:28:39.600 Do you know why the public doesn't really know what's in there?

00:28:42.740 Because if they knew, they wouldn't support it.

00:28:46.740 So of course they don't know.

00:28:48.660 So by calling it a voting rights bill, it gives them, the Democrats, the ability to

00:28:52.960 say the Republicans are racist because they don't support voting rights.

00:28:58.180 But let me tell you what it looks like.

00:29:02.020 It looks like the voting rights thing is a cover for the Democrats planning to rig an election.

00:29:09.560 Now, I'm not saying any elections have been rigged.

00:29:12.760 I'm saying that the most obvious explanation for why this would be their top priority when

00:29:20.700 it's basically nobody's priority, if you actually look at what the problem is that they're trying

00:29:25.600 to fix, it wouldn't be anybody's priority, really.

00:29:28.480 And they're making it their top priority.

00:29:31.040 Why would they do that?

00:29:31.860 Now, of course, they have the news organizations to back them.

00:29:36.040 The only reason I could think of for why they would do this is to prime the public for them

00:29:43.620 stealing the next election.

00:29:44.860 Because if they've made the news all about stopping the Republicans from stealing elections, that's

00:29:53.740 how you cover your own shenanigans.

00:29:56.100 So you go first and make a really big deal about accusing the other side of what you're

00:30:02.400 planning to do in a month.

00:30:03.520 Now, I'm not saying that we could confirm that's what's happening, but I've never seen a clear

00:30:10.980 indication.

00:30:13.760 In fact, absent of any confirming or debunking information, and we'll never have that probably,

00:30:21.580 your starting assumption should be that the big lie, as Jonathan Turley calls it, the big

00:30:27.460 lie that the Republicans are trying to stop voting rights because they're going to rig an election,

00:30:31.960 that's almost a guarantee that they're telling you they're going to rig an election.

00:30:37.800 I mean, it's not 100%, but it's really close.

00:30:42.460 I don't know how else to interpret it.

00:30:44.520 Because we've seen this play so many times that now you recognize it, right?

00:30:48.620 They blamed Trump for colluding with Russia, and it made it invisible, cognitively invisible,

00:30:55.560 even when it was proven beyond any doubt, that the Democrats were working with Russia to change

00:31:04.460 the outcome of the election.

00:31:08.180 That's proven, guaranteed, documented, and nobody even disagrees with the facts.

00:31:12.740 And we still don't deal with it like we just saw Democrats colluding with Russia.

00:31:17.380 Your brain can't kind of hold that in there, because they did such a good job of making you think

00:31:23.640 that Russia collusion is just something Trump may or may not have done.

00:31:28.680 It's really effective.

00:31:30.860 I would say this is MKUltra. 0.61

00:31:35.820 I would say this is the output from MKUltra.

00:31:41.480 I believe if they studied hypnosis, they knew that they could do this, and now they're doing it.

00:31:48.240 This looks like exactly what one would learn if one were studying how to move crowds.

00:31:58.260 Now, again, there's a difference between moving an individual and moving a crowd.

00:32:01.700 It's a different technology.

00:32:04.480 But, I mean, it's right in front of us.

00:32:06.800 And, you know, I realize I'm in conspiracy theory.

00:32:09.560 We're in conspiracy theory territory, so let me say it this way.

00:32:14.060 We can't confirm what's happening.

00:32:16.920 I couldn't do that.

00:32:18.620 But I think given the history, you can't rule it out.

00:32:26.520 I mean, you have to almost act like it's the default assumption at this point.

00:32:33.000 So let me tell you some of the things that Jonathan Turley called out

00:32:35.980 about this so-called Voting Rights Act.

00:32:39.560 And here are things that Biden has said about it, according to Turley.

00:32:45.160 He falsely and repeatedly claimed, for example, that the Georgia law,

00:32:50.300 which he described as Jim Crow on steroids, sought to reduce hours to vote.

00:32:56.240 The law does the opposite.

00:32:58.860 It actually increases the hours to vote.

00:33:00.740 Just think about that.

00:33:04.200 The president of the United States, one of his biggest things is to stop this Jim Crow law on steroids in Georgia, 0.97

00:33:14.280 which is literally, demonstrably easy to fact-check, the opposite of what he said.

00:33:21.820 And it's not even an opinion.

00:33:26.180 Nobody would argue it if they just saw what the law said.

00:33:29.600 There's no difference of opinion.

00:33:31.660 But he says it anyway, because people aren't going to check what the law says.

00:33:36.000 Right?

00:33:36.180 So that's how it works.

00:33:38.860 He also says, now he's backed away from this, but he used to falsely claim, according to Turley,

00:33:46.020 that of questioning whether ballots would be counted, saying that not as to who can vote,

00:33:53.740 but who gets to count the vote that counts.

00:33:56.540 In other words, he used to be saying what Trump said,

00:33:59.020 that we can't trust our own elections because it's about who counts the votes.

00:34:02.680 Think about that.

00:34:05.440 At the same time he's trying to sell us that the 2020 election was completely fine,

00:34:11.280 he's also saying that who counts the votes is the only thing that matters.

00:34:15.220 But wisely, he backed off from that, for the obvious reasons.

00:34:23.560 Let's see.

00:34:27.720 Oh, and then he says that a lot of things that the Democrats have alluded to as problems

00:34:32.540 have actually been adjudicated in courts, and the courts found them to be bullshit.

00:34:38.860 So basically you have a law that's, as it's being described,

00:34:44.400 is completely misrepresented by the people promoting it,

00:34:50.040 and based on things that the court has found aren't even real.

00:34:53.140 And then one of the biggest ones is that it wants to avoid,

00:34:59.260 I guess it's trying to block voter identification with ID,

00:35:02.540 and 80% of the public is in favor of the thing they're trying to block.

00:35:07.720 80%.

00:35:08.160 Can you think of anything else that the public is in favor of by 80%?

00:35:12.700 And to this day, we have never met the one voter who wanted to vote

00:35:16.660 and couldn't figure out how.

00:35:18.480 Not one.

00:35:19.680 Not a single living human being has come forward and said,

00:35:23.880 you know, the way things are now,

00:35:26.480 I can't figure out how to vote, and I want to.

00:35:29.680 Not one.

00:35:30.300 So I think you have to see the voting rights thing as a complete fraud

00:35:36.220 and a diversionary tactic from a party that is losing badly.

00:35:41.760 Now let's talk about all the things that happened with his speech.

00:35:46.360 So I guess this gentleman, Clint Ehrlich, was on Tucker Carlson last night.

00:35:56.340 I didn't see it, but I saw his tweet thread about it,

00:35:59.180 and oh my God, you have to see this thing.

00:36:01.560 He did this beautiful tweet thread showing the crazy responses to,

00:36:06.340 I guess he was on Tucker and he was probably fact-checked me,

00:36:11.240 but I assume the context was that he was not in favor of going to war with Russia.

00:36:17.160 Was that fair to say?

00:36:18.520 Over Ukraine.

00:36:20.380 Right?

00:36:20.940 So I think Tucker and his guests were against going to war with Ukraine.

00:36:27.240 The reactions to that from the Democrats were just batshit crazy.

00:36:32.420 I mean, they're just crazy.

00:36:33.740 But you can see in them all of the tells for cognitive dissonance.

00:36:37.600 You've got the mind readers,

00:36:39.780 like their opinion is based on reading somebody's mind

00:36:42.060 and seeing something crazy in there that isn't there.

00:36:44.460 You've got the people who just insult them with no point.

00:36:48.480 They just insult them.

00:36:49.720 The ones who do the, oh, why don't you kiss Putin?

00:36:52.260 Well, if you love Putin so much, like, what?

00:36:56.540 What?

00:36:57.580 Why does not wanting to go to war with somebody

00:37:00.320 that you don't have a reason to go to war with,

00:37:02.660 how is that like you're in love with Putin and you're supporting him?

00:37:05.640 Like, these are just crazy comments.

00:37:08.700 And when you see them, you can see what I deal with every day,

00:37:11.540 which is if you say something reasonable in public,

00:37:15.260 it will trigger massive cognitive dissonance

00:37:18.100 and you get this kind of response.

00:37:19.820 But to see them all together is pretty fun.

00:37:22.700 All right, let's talk about his press conference, Biden.

00:37:25.300 I'm going to tell you what he did right first, okay?

00:37:29.560 So I was listening to it in my car,

00:37:32.000 and when you don't see Biden, you don't see him looking frail.

00:37:37.140 You just hear his voice.

00:37:38.540 So my first observation is he sounds better when you don't see him.

00:37:43.900 Have anybody noticed that?

00:37:45.040 If you just listen to his voice,

00:37:47.440 it's actually much stronger than the visual.

00:37:51.420 So part of me thinks, oh, you know, if you didn't watch him,

00:37:56.080 you might have a different opinion about how he did.

00:37:59.920 So that was my first thing, is that when I listened to him,

00:38:02.140 he was much stronger.

00:38:03.360 When he was doing his prepared stuff,

00:38:07.260 and he was defending some things he was being attacked for,

00:38:10.040 I thought he actually did a strong job.

00:38:12.080 I'm going to get to the things he did wrong,

00:38:13.600 and they're pretty massive.

00:38:15.080 But I want to start by saying that

00:38:17.160 I thought that his persuasion game,

00:38:22.420 if you don't count the gaffes, which were horrible,

00:38:25.500 but if you don't count the gaffes,

00:38:27.560 his persuasion game was really good.

00:38:30.560 It was really good.

00:38:32.020 I mean, there were prepared comments that he, you know,

00:38:35.080 people may have told him what to say, et cetera.

00:38:37.100 But let me give you some examples.

00:38:38.300 You're worried about inflation as, of course, you could.

00:38:41.860 So here's his defense to it, which I found, you know, incomplete,

00:38:46.220 but judged only as persuasion.

00:38:49.440 Not bad.

00:38:50.500 He had an answer for it.

00:38:52.580 He said that...

00:38:54.300 He said, what do you say about inflation?

00:38:58.000 Oh, he said, for example, that it's global.

00:39:01.220 And that's actually a pretty good argument.

00:39:03.720 If he says, wait, inflation is global,

00:39:06.420 then you think, oh, wait,

00:39:07.580 maybe it's not because of some of his own policies.

00:39:10.740 Now, of course it's because of some of his own policies.

00:39:13.820 But it's a really good defense that it's global

00:39:16.240 because he doesn't tell you what's the difference

00:39:19.160 between the global inflation and his.

00:39:22.760 So if you don't know that there's a difference,

00:39:24.400 and I don't, I didn't look it up,

00:39:26.140 it sounds convincing.

00:39:27.100 Oh, it's a global thing.

00:39:28.220 It can't be you.

00:39:29.240 So that's a good defense.

00:39:30.680 Forget about whether it's true.

00:39:31.800 I'm just saying if it's a good defense.

00:39:33.740 Then he said that cars are a big part of that,

00:39:36.500 and the cars are super expensive,

00:39:37.960 but it comes down to we can't get chips,

00:39:40.580 and that he's working hard

00:39:42.260 to bring chip-making back to the United States.

00:39:45.380 So there he actually turned a negative into a positive.

00:39:48.520 Oh, it's, you know, China won't give us chips. 0.84

00:39:51.320 And if you knew that it was China or Taiwan

00:39:54.100 or wherever they're coming from,

00:39:55.160 I don't even know where they're coming from, actually.

00:39:57.020 But we don't have them.

00:39:58.040 But you think, oh, this is going to be a reason

00:39:59.780 for us to build our own chips for a while.

00:40:02.300 It'll be expensive, but it'll just go away

00:40:04.000 because then we'll have cars.

00:40:05.780 So he turned that into a positive pretty well,

00:40:08.700 and then he blamed the pandemic for the rest.

00:40:10.580 So I'm not saying that he passes the fact check.

00:40:15.020 Right?

00:40:15.220 When I look at this thing, there are three levels.

00:40:18.160 I look at are the policies he said good?

00:40:20.240 Is he lying, you know, the fact check part?

00:40:24.780 And then is he persuading?

00:40:26.700 And they're all different.

00:40:28.060 On persuasion, he actually did a pretty good job

00:40:30.940 on the inflation question.

00:40:32.640 Now, the fact check, I don't think he passes the fact check,

00:40:36.860 but persuasion was pretty good.

00:40:40.880 Also, when he started talking about Russia,

00:40:44.420 he did a good job.

00:40:46.020 He completely screwed the pooch later.

00:40:48.520 We'll talk about that.

00:40:49.660 But when he first started talking about Russia,

00:40:51.840 he said very close to what I used to say,

00:40:54.720 that they're asking for...

00:40:57.160 He didn't say it this way, so I'm paraphrasing.

00:40:59.680 But he sort of said that they were asking

00:41:02.320 for reasonable things that we wouldn't bother

00:41:05.360 giving them anyway.

00:41:06.760 For example, we don't think Ukraine will ever be 0.78

00:41:10.460 uncorrupt enough to be in NATO,

00:41:13.120 at least for so long that you don't have to think about it.

00:41:15.900 So Russia wants a guarantee 0.78

00:41:18.380 that Ukraine won't join NATO,

00:41:20.520 and we don't think we want them in NATO anyway.

00:41:24.240 But there is a difference between being forced

00:41:26.420 to say you won't do something in the future,

00:41:28.960 you know, versus saying,

00:41:29.860 well, I wasn't going to do it anyway.

00:41:31.800 How hard would it be to make a deal

00:41:33.680 if we don't want to do the thing

00:41:36.780 they're asking us not to do?

00:41:38.020 It should be really easy to make a deal on that point.

00:41:42.200 Do you know how you do it?

00:41:43.700 You just say, oh, okay, we agree

00:41:45.300 not to allow Ukraine into NATO.

00:41:49.400 What happens if you change your mind someday?

00:41:52.960 You just break the agreement.

00:41:56.500 Right?

00:41:57.580 The only reason you would need to break an agreement

00:41:59.620 that was a military agreement

00:42:00.920 was for pretty serious military reasons.

00:42:03.720 If not having Ukraine and NATO worked out fine, 0.80

00:42:08.380 well, why would we break the agreement?

00:42:10.700 If it didn't work out

00:42:12.200 and it became a military necessity

00:42:15.400 to put Ukraine into NATO,

00:42:18.860 well, we would just break the agreement.

00:42:20.720 Because military agreements we break every day.

00:42:23.720 I mean, I'm exaggerating.

00:42:25.120 But anybody would break a military agreement

00:42:27.260 if keeping it made them susceptible.

00:42:30.740 Am I wrong?

00:42:31.260 Is there any country that would not break a treaty

00:42:37.000 if their national defense was legitimately at risk?

00:42:41.980 I don't think.

00:42:43.340 I don't think any country would.

00:42:44.660 So how could we not make a promise about Ukraine

00:42:47.440 that of course we could change

00:42:49.940 if the situation changes?

00:42:52.120 Of course you could change your mind.

00:42:53.920 So I thought that his take on that was spot on.

00:42:57.900 That how could we not make a deal on that?

00:42:59.840 Now, what was the second point?

00:43:01.880 Remind me.

00:43:02.560 Was it putting offensive weapons

00:43:04.260 or defensive weapons in Ukraine?

00:43:07.020 There was a second point about not just Ukraine,

00:43:10.680 but maybe the neighboring countries

00:43:12.920 putting offensive weapons there.

00:43:15.840 And I thought to myself,

00:43:17.000 do we really even need any of that?

00:43:19.620 Like, how militarily necessary is any of that stuff?

00:43:23.920 So when he described the fact

00:43:28.940 that there's actually no reason to be at war with anything,

00:43:31.940 I thought he was spot on.

00:43:33.500 Now, later he blew it.

00:43:35.980 We'll get to that.

00:43:37.660 I thought he also did a good job of,

00:43:39.820 in the beginning, showing that he was strong

00:43:41.520 and he was bragging about how long he would go

00:43:43.540 and he would go longer than the reporters themselves and stuff.

00:43:47.400 But I did detect, as others noted,

00:43:51.660 a little bit of sundowner toward the end.

00:43:53.700 Did anybody else detect that?

00:43:55.600 Did anybody watch the whole thing

00:43:57.220 so that you could see how he starts strong

00:43:59.480 and he's definitely weaker at the end?

00:44:02.560 Yeah, most of you could see it.

00:44:04.640 And at one point, somebody asked the question,

00:44:06.840 a reporter asked,

00:44:08.240 what do you do with the fact that even Democrats,

00:44:11.260 I don't know that this is true,

00:44:13.420 but I feel like the reporter said

00:44:15.180 that even Democrats think he was cognitively impaired?

00:44:20.300 And how did he answer the question,

00:44:22.860 why do even your own team think you're cognitively impaired?

00:44:27.240 And he said, I don't know, and took another question.

00:44:31.040 That was painful to watch.

00:44:33.880 Did you have the same impression?

00:44:35.840 It was a little painful to watch.

00:44:37.760 Because he didn't even have an answer

00:44:39.460 to why the people who know him best

00:44:41.900 think he's cognitively impaired.

00:44:44.420 That's, you know, I think the answer, I don't know,

00:44:48.860 might have been more honest than we give him credit for.

00:44:52.760 He might not be processing this right.

00:44:56.280 No, no.

00:44:58.580 All right, one of his biggest gaffes

00:45:00.860 was essentially, indirectly,

00:45:03.460 admitting that the 2020 election he won was unfair.

00:45:06.680 Now, the reason he wants to do voting rights

00:45:11.200 is that he believes that if he doesn't do this,

00:45:14.240 Republicans will use legal means

00:45:16.780 to win the election.

00:45:20.620 Legal means.

00:45:21.740 In other words,

00:45:22.760 whoever it is that controls the rules

00:45:25.140 in a local election,

00:45:28.300 you know, the state,

00:45:29.140 states in charge of the elections,

00:45:31.000 that the states,

00:45:35.360 if they don't pass the voting rights law,

00:45:37.940 the states could make legal,

00:45:40.520 completely legal changes

00:45:41.840 that would disadvantage Democrats

00:45:43.720 and therefore be unfair.

00:45:46.420 But doesn't that indicate

00:45:50.000 that that was the case in 20,

00:45:53.180 every other year before, right?

00:45:54.560 2020 and before.

00:45:56.640 Thank you.

00:45:57.280 I can go long today.

00:45:58.940 So it seems to me that although,

00:46:04.200 and here's the pushback on this point.

00:46:06.480 The pushback is that

00:46:07.720 the Republicans are contemplating

00:46:10.120 specific changes

00:46:11.200 that the Democrats know

00:46:13.060 would make things unfair

00:46:14.260 from their perspective.

00:46:16.480 But isn't it a matter of public record

00:46:20.740 that the Democrats

00:46:22.260 and maybe Zuckerberg's money,

00:46:25.300 I'm not sure if these are the same story,

00:46:26.660 don't we know for sure

00:46:28.080 that the Democrats used the pandemic

00:46:29.900 to get in place completely legally

00:46:33.440 a bunch of rule changes

00:46:35.560 that advantaged them

00:46:37.100 and maybe won the election?

00:46:39.560 So why would it be unfair

00:46:42.320 that the Democrats used

00:46:43.980 completely legal means

00:46:45.460 to manage an election

00:46:47.540 that did in fact change the outcome,

00:46:50.720 we would imagine?

00:46:51.660 But why is it suddenly unfair

00:46:53.460 if Republicans do exactly the same thing?

00:46:55.860 Now, it's not the same changes,

00:46:58.240 but they're a set of legal things

00:47:00.880 that you can do

00:47:01.980 to change the structure

00:47:03.020 of how the vote is taken.

00:47:04.840 Why is one unfair and one is fair?

00:47:07.060 To me, it seems like he just admitted

00:47:08.580 the 2020 election was rigged,

00:47:11.100 but legally.

00:47:12.860 Because he's not saying

00:47:14.060 that the Republicans

00:47:14.920 are planning to do something illegal.

00:47:17.240 That's not part of the accusation.

00:47:19.260 He's saying they're planning

00:47:20.200 to do something completely legal

00:47:21.860 that would disadvantage them.

00:47:23.740 I don't know.

00:47:26.920 To me, that's an admission

00:47:27.880 that his own election

00:47:28.900 was unfair.

00:47:32.140 Then he insulted his vice president.

00:47:34.940 Did you catch him

00:47:35.960 insulting his vice president?

00:47:38.260 I've never seen this before.

00:47:40.400 Actually, it's something

00:47:41.500 Trump would do, I suppose.

00:47:42.920 Because he would insult anybody.

00:47:44.940 But when asked how Harris

00:47:48.020 was doing on her job,

00:47:49.120 this is what he said

00:47:49.960 about being his running mate.

00:47:52.620 He said, she's going to be

00:47:54.240 my running mate, Biden said.

00:47:56.800 And then he went on to say,

00:47:58.460 without being asked,

00:47:59.520 he'd think, I think she's

00:48:00.540 doing a good job.

00:48:03.240 A good job?

00:48:05.940 She's going to be

00:48:06.640 his running mate,

00:48:07.800 and the best he could

00:48:09.240 come up with was good.

00:48:14.580 Is it just me,

00:48:15.800 or is this a situation

00:48:17.700 in which great

00:48:18.840 was the right word?

00:48:21.060 I'm pretty sure

00:48:22.280 that this called for

00:48:24.120 great or terrific

00:48:25.260 or amazing

00:48:26.700 or successful.

00:48:29.320 Do you know

00:48:29.820 what it didn't call for?

00:48:31.900 Good.

00:48:33.100 Hey, you're doing

00:48:33.860 a good job.

00:48:35.400 If your boss told you

00:48:36.620 you were doing

00:48:37.140 a good job,

00:48:38.820 would you go home

00:48:39.660 all happy?

00:48:40.200 I don't think

00:48:42.580 you would.

00:48:44.120 I don't think

00:48:44.600 you would.

00:48:45.620 I think you would

00:48:46.260 go home and say,

00:48:47.880 better take it up.

00:48:49.380 I don't even get a raise

00:48:50.540 for a good job.

00:48:53.120 All right.

00:48:53.880 Then the Russia gaffe, 0.86

00:48:55.120 which was the worst.

00:48:56.880 He said, quote,

00:48:58.320 talking about Russia

00:48:59.740 threatening to go

00:49:01.900 into Ukraine.

00:49:03.240 He said,

00:49:03.900 it's one thing

00:49:04.540 if it's a minor incursion

00:49:06.120 and we,

00:49:07.640 meaning in NATO,

00:49:08.820 end up having to

00:49:09.820 fight about what to do

00:49:10.940 and what not to do,

00:49:12.700 et cetera.

00:49:13.880 And they said,

00:49:14.700 but if they actually

00:49:15.540 do what they're

00:49:16.200 capable of doing,

00:49:17.520 it is going to be

00:49:18.240 a disaster for Russia 0.80

00:49:19.300 if they further

00:49:20.240 invade Ukraine. 0.89

00:49:22.280 And then somebody

00:49:23.060 thought, wait,

00:49:24.760 it's only going to be

00:49:25.560 a disaster if they

00:49:26.700 further invade them.

00:49:29.220 Wait, what?

00:49:31.220 If they,

00:49:32.100 if they do

00:49:33.640 a minor incursion

00:49:34.940 that NATO

00:49:37.300 might just be

00:49:38.100 arguing with each other

00:49:39.240 and nothing

00:49:39.700 would happen?

00:49:41.780 Did Joe Biden

00:49:42.660 just invite

00:49:43.520 Russia

00:49:44.740 to invade?

00:49:47.860 Now,

00:49:48.460 it looks like it,

00:49:49.760 doesn't it?

00:49:50.620 It kind of looks like

00:49:51.640 he's inviting them in.

00:49:52.900 Well, you know,

00:49:53.520 we'd just be arguing

00:49:54.260 about it.

00:49:54.800 I don't know what we

00:49:55.300 could do.

00:49:55.620 It's not a NATO

00:49:56.200 country anyway.

00:49:56.860 Now,

00:49:57.940 I don't think he meant

00:49:58.700 anything like that

00:49:59.500 because later when he

00:50:00.820 was asked to follow up,

00:50:01.820 he did follow up

00:50:02.620 correctly

00:50:03.120 by saying that,

00:50:05.000 you know,

00:50:05.300 there would be

00:50:05.660 massive financial

00:50:06.980 implications of an

00:50:08.160 invasion.

00:50:10.160 But, man,

00:50:11.340 the way he worded it

00:50:12.440 certainly suggests

00:50:13.540 that they would

00:50:14.580 tolerate a minor

00:50:15.620 incursion.

00:50:17.260 But here's the

00:50:18.240 context.

00:50:18.900 I think he only

00:50:19.780 means tolerate it

00:50:20.940 militarily.

00:50:21.800 Right?

00:50:23.580 But that's not

00:50:24.360 the threat.

00:50:25.720 I don't think he's

00:50:26.720 ever made a threat

00:50:27.520 that he would

00:50:28.240 respond militarily.

00:50:29.240 So, if he says

00:50:30.960 that NATO, you

00:50:32.000 know, might not

00:50:32.520 respond militarily,

00:50:34.280 I think that's

00:50:34.940 just true.

00:50:36.880 I think the threat

00:50:38.340 was always

00:50:38.740 financial.

00:50:40.200 And then he,

00:50:42.240 I thought he did

00:50:43.180 a good job,

00:50:44.580 almost a Trumpian-like

00:50:45.980 job,

00:50:47.060 of describing how

00:50:48.280 bad the

00:50:49.000 repercussions

00:50:50.160 would be

00:50:50.600 financially.

00:50:51.780 I think he did

00:50:52.400 that well.

00:50:53.620 Because there's

00:50:54.120 a real clarity

00:50:55.080 there,

00:50:55.840 which is,

00:50:56.380 if you do

00:50:56.860 this,

00:50:57.240 we will crash

00:50:58.820 your economy,

00:50:59.580 and he made

00:51:00.040 sure they knew

00:51:00.580 it wouldn't be

00:51:01.060 temporary.

00:51:01.940 He did a real

00:51:02.500 good job of

00:51:03.820 saying it wouldn't

00:51:04.380 be temporary.

00:51:05.040 We're going to

00:51:05.540 take you down

00:51:06.000 for decades,

00:51:06.660 basically.

00:51:09.880 I thought that

00:51:10.580 was pretty good.

00:51:11.300 But in the long

00:51:12.520 run, the gaffe

00:51:14.040 about minor

00:51:15.460 incursions,

00:51:16.440 that's really

00:51:17.680 hard to excuse.

00:51:19.460 That's a really

00:51:20.300 big mistake.

00:51:23.200 All right.

00:51:24.600 And Biden is

00:51:25.460 being hit with

00:51:25.980 his own

00:51:26.360 fine people

00:51:26.960 hoax,

00:51:27.440 which is,

00:51:28.040 in other words,

00:51:29.020 something taken

00:51:29.840 out of context

00:51:30.680 to make him

00:51:31.480 look bad.

00:51:33.140 The fine people

00:51:34.020 hoax was

00:51:34.660 caused by

00:51:35.660 removing the

00:51:36.740 clarifier in

00:51:37.720 Trump's speech.

00:51:39.840 And in this

00:51:40.640 case,

00:51:41.680 what Biden

00:51:42.940 said was in

00:51:43.680 a prior day,

00:51:44.620 he had said

00:51:45.020 something about,

00:51:45.880 let's see if I

00:51:46.320 can read the

00:51:46.800 exact quote.

00:51:48.760 He said,

00:51:49.320 at consequential

00:51:50.120 moments in

00:51:50.720 history,

00:51:51.960 they present

00:51:52.800 a choice.

00:51:54.120 Do you want,

00:51:54.560 I think this is

00:51:55.220 talking about

00:51:55.780 voting for or

00:51:56.600 against the

00:51:57.260 voting rights

00:51:57.900 bill,

00:51:58.500 so-called

00:51:58.920 voting rights?

00:51:59.520 He said,

00:52:00.300 do you want

00:52:00.700 to be on

00:52:01.880 the side of

00:52:02.460 Dr. King

00:52:03.100 or George

00:52:03.760 Wallace?

00:52:04.600 The president

00:52:05.340 said,

00:52:05.820 do you want

00:52:06.440 to be on

00:52:06.800 the side of

00:52:07.520 John Lewis

00:52:08.520 or Bull

00:52:09.220 Connor?

00:52:10.140 Do you want

00:52:10.800 to be on

00:52:11.140 the side of

00:52:11.640 Abraham Lincoln

00:52:12.380 or Jefferson

00:52:13.160 Davis?

00:52:14.500 This is the

00:52:15.240 moment to

00:52:15.620 decide to

00:52:16.200 defend our

00:52:16.680 elections,

00:52:17.680 to defend our

00:52:18.340 democracy.

00:52:18.840 And that

00:52:19.880 was characterized

00:52:20.600 by Fox

00:52:22.500 News as

00:52:23.420 saying that

00:52:24.500 if you

00:52:24.920 voted against

00:52:26.560 the Voting

00:52:26.940 Rights Act,

00:52:28.120 that Biden

00:52:28.500 thinks you're

00:52:29.200 comparable to

00:52:30.820 these segregationists,

00:52:32.680 these bad

00:52:33.180 people,

00:52:33.800 like Bull

00:52:34.280 Connor and

00:52:36.020 George Wallace.

00:52:37.440 Now, let me

00:52:38.440 give you a tip

00:52:39.060 on fake news.

00:52:41.800 The word

00:52:42.400 comparable.

00:52:44.220 Anytime you see

00:52:45.240 the word

00:52:45.600 comparable,

00:52:46.120 it's a lie

00:52:47.020 in this

00:52:48.400 context,

00:52:49.100 right?

00:52:49.460 In this

00:52:49.840 context,

00:52:51.020 comparable

00:52:51.380 means that

00:52:52.300 his enemies,

00:52:53.460 in this

00:52:53.660 case Fox

00:52:54.180 News,

00:52:55.040 made up

00:52:55.580 a hoax,

00:52:56.800 essentially a

00:52:57.980 mirror to

00:52:58.480 the fine

00:52:59.660 people hoax.

00:53:00.820 But, you

00:53:01.180 know,

00:53:01.340 payback is a

00:53:02.000 bitch, 1.00

00:53:02.600 and so they're

00:53:03.100 going to say

00:53:03.480 that what he

00:53:04.000 meant was

00:53:05.400 that if you're

00:53:05.860 against it,

00:53:06.480 you would be

00:53:07.460 comparable

00:53:08.120 to racists,

00:53:10.480 meaning that

00:53:10.980 you'd be a

00:53:11.400 racist, 0.77

00:53:11.900 you'd be

00:53:12.180 comparable.

00:53:13.640 Now, is

00:53:14.400 that what he

00:53:14.760 said?

00:53:16.120 Did Biden

00:53:17.720 ever use

00:53:18.180 the word

00:53:18.440 comparable?

00:53:19.320 No, he

00:53:19.700 didn't,

00:53:20.160 because that's

00:53:20.640 not what he

00:53:21.040 was talking

00:53:21.460 about.

00:53:22.480 He was

00:53:22.880 saying you'd

00:53:23.240 be on the

00:53:23.580 wrong side.

00:53:25.400 Is being

00:53:25.780 on the

00:53:26.100 wrong side

00:53:26.960 being comparable?

00:53:30.000 There were

00:53:30.400 many people

00:53:31.040 in, let's

00:53:32.300 use the

00:53:32.780 universal

00:53:33.380 reference,

00:53:34.720 there were

00:53:34.980 many people

00:53:35.500 in Nazi

00:53:36.060 Germany who

00:53:36.860 probably thought

00:53:37.500 they had to

00:53:37.920 play along

00:53:38.500 for their

00:53:39.580 own safety.

00:53:40.960 Were the

00:53:41.460 people who

00:53:41.900 were playing

00:53:42.380 along, or

00:53:43.080 had their

00:53:43.400 own reasons,

00:53:44.640 comparable to

00:53:45.280 Hitler? 0.62

00:53:46.120 No, no, but

00:53:48.540 they were on

00:53:48.920 his side, they

00:53:50.660 were on his

00:53:51.100 side, and

00:53:52.240 what they

00:53:52.540 were doing

00:53:52.840 wasn't even

00:53:53.320 illegal, I

00:53:54.060 mean, in

00:53:54.340 the end, you

00:53:55.540 know, a lot

00:53:56.220 of it wasn't

00:53:56.620 illegal, they 1.00

00:53:57.920 were just

00:53:58.160 taken aside.

00:53:59.220 So his

00:53:59.840 point is you

00:54:00.500 don't want to

00:54:00.860 be on the

00:54:01.240 wrong side of

00:54:02.000 history because

00:54:03.000 you don't

00:54:03.520 think you're

00:54:04.000 a racist and 0.80

00:54:04.620 you don't

00:54:04.920 want to be

00:54:05.300 accidentally

00:54:05.820 on their

00:54:06.220 side.

00:54:07.680 That is not

00:54:08.640 calling you

00:54:09.140 comparable to

00:54:09.800 a racist, I'm

00:54:10.880 sorry, this is

00:54:12.220 complete hoax,

00:54:13.900 Fox News, I'm

00:54:14.940 calling you

00:54:15.400 out, complete

00:54:16.500 hoax, and

00:54:17.600 anybody who

00:54:18.180 supported the

00:54:18.880 idea that he

00:54:19.660 was saying that

00:54:20.280 you're comparable

00:54:21.020 to these people,

00:54:22.580 that's a hoax.

00:54:24.460 Now, completely

00:54:25.860 fair, completely

00:54:27.800 fair hoax, because

00:54:29.180 it is the

00:54:29.980 compliment or

00:54:31.540 the mirror of

00:54:32.240 the fine people

00:54:32.840 hoax.

00:54:33.740 In the same

00:54:34.260 way that Trump

00:54:35.980 was not saying

00:54:37.040 that everybody

00:54:38.300 there was

00:54:39.040 marching with

00:54:39.920 Nazis, he was

00:54:41.720 saying that they

00:54:42.680 had their own

00:54:43.200 reasons for

00:54:43.780 being against

00:54:44.280 statues, so in

00:54:46.180 a way you

00:54:46.680 could say

00:54:46.960 they were on

00:54:47.240 the same

00:54:47.560 side, but

00:54:49.120 were they

00:54:49.500 comparable?

00:54:50.720 Really?

00:54:51.740 Was somebody

00:54:52.260 who just

00:54:52.600 thought history

00:54:53.220 is more

00:54:53.600 important than

00:54:54.340 offending

00:54:54.840 people, is

00:54:56.020 that person

00:54:56.500 comparable to

00:54:57.800 a neo-Nazi?

00:54:59.280 No, they're

00:55:00.580 not comparable.

00:55:02.000 So whenever

00:55:02.560 you see the

00:55:03.060 word comparable,

00:55:04.340 you are being

00:55:05.080 fake newsed, or

00:55:07.420 you should assume

00:55:08.700 it and look

00:55:09.840 for some details,

00:55:10.820 maybe not every

00:55:11.600 time.

00:55:11.820 But that word

00:55:12.800 comparable is a

00:55:13.860 really big flag

00:55:14.860 for bullshit. 0.72

00:55:17.380 If you're

00:55:18.400 wondering why

00:55:18.940 I'm so worked

00:55:21.220 up about that

00:55:21.920 word comparable,

00:55:23.040 it's because it's

00:55:23.840 been used against

00:55:24.620 me a lot of

00:55:26.380 times.

00:55:27.320 I can't tell you

00:55:28.280 how many times

00:55:28.940 people have made

00:55:29.760 the comparable

00:55:31.000 argument with

00:55:31.900 me when

00:55:33.500 comparable was

00:55:34.400 the wrong word

00:55:35.020 and not what I

00:55:35.720 said.

00:55:36.580 So absolute

00:55:37.740 disgusting fake

00:55:39.320 news that I

00:55:40.860 enjoy, because

00:55:41.960 it's the

00:55:42.320 payback for

00:55:42.860 the fine

00:55:43.240 people oaks.

00:55:45.020 Well, the

00:55:46.520 CIA has come

00:55:47.420 out and said

00:55:48.040 that Havana

00:55:50.520 syndrome and

00:55:52.020 that secret

00:55:52.560 sonic weapon

00:55:53.320 idea are not

00:55:54.960 the result of

00:55:55.880 sustained campaign

00:55:56.940 by hostile

00:55:57.620 power.

00:55:58.560 In other words,

00:55:59.240 the CIA has

00:56:00.120 looked into it

00:56:00.800 and decided that

00:56:01.920 there is no

00:56:02.580 sonic secret

00:56:03.680 weapon that

00:56:05.280 anybody can

00:56:06.080 detect.

00:56:06.560 How many

00:56:09.660 people do you

00:56:10.280 know who

00:56:11.040 told you on

00:56:11.640 day one that

00:56:12.920 this story was

00:56:13.800 obviously, and

00:56:15.460 every other day

00:56:16.040 after that,

00:56:17.200 obviously a fake

00:56:18.360 news and that

00:56:19.140 it was clearly

00:56:19.840 mass hysteria?

00:56:23.020 I only know

00:56:24.120 of me.

00:56:25.380 Now, there had

00:56:26.080 to be other

00:56:26.460 people, right?

00:56:27.380 There had to be.

00:56:28.460 But I only know

00:56:29.440 of me in terms

00:56:30.320 of a prominent,

00:56:32.020 let's say,

00:56:32.400 blue check or

00:56:33.080 more, in terms

00:56:34.820 of a blue

00:56:35.340 check Twitter

00:56:35.920 person, I

00:56:38.740 think I was

00:56:39.260 the only one

00:56:39.900 that I saw.

00:56:42.040 Now, somebody

00:56:42.420 said Glenn

00:56:43.580 Greenwald was

00:56:44.440 all over it,

00:56:45.180 and I don't

00:56:45.820 know if he

00:56:46.360 was, but I'd

00:56:47.520 be surprised if

00:56:48.260 he were not,

00:56:49.440 right?

00:56:49.820 Because he can

00:56:51.360 sniff that shit

00:56:51.980 out pretty fast.

00:56:54.000 So, and I'm

00:56:55.040 sure a lot of

00:56:55.540 you maybe thought

00:56:56.420 it was BS,

00:56:57.860 but was I the

00:56:59.220 most prominent

00:56:59.980 person who put

00:57:01.380 myself out there?

00:57:02.160 Because I put

00:57:03.560 myself way out

00:57:04.880 there, would you

00:57:05.700 agree?

00:57:06.700 I put myself as

00:57:08.140 far out on a

00:57:09.220 ledge as you

00:57:10.360 can be on a

00:57:11.140 topic as clearly

00:57:12.060 as possible,

00:57:13.360 emphatically, and

00:57:14.260 I followed up

00:57:14.960 about once a

00:57:15.640 month for, I

00:57:16.220 don't know, two

00:57:16.520 years or whatever

00:57:17.080 it was, to make

00:57:18.640 sure you knew

00:57:19.360 that every time

00:57:20.820 they said we

00:57:21.460 got more evidence

00:57:22.260 it's a secret

00:57:22.880 sonic weapon,

00:57:23.980 every time I

00:57:25.080 told you, nope,

00:57:26.800 nope, you're

00:57:27.620 seeing mass

00:57:28.100 hysteria.

00:57:29.280 Every time.

00:57:29.860 And can you

00:57:34.340 give me credit

00:57:34.820 for this one?

00:57:35.980 Now I realize

00:57:36.620 that I'm like

00:57:37.420 asking you to

00:57:38.240 praise me, I'm

00:57:39.580 not blind to

00:57:40.480 that, but in

00:57:42.080 the context of

00:57:43.080 what we do

00:57:43.660 here, we make

00:57:44.540 predictions and

00:57:45.960 then we see how

00:57:46.620 good we are.

00:57:48.180 I feel as if I

00:57:49.540 should make a big

00:57:50.340 deal about this

00:57:51.200 because this was

00:57:52.520 a very non-standard

00:57:55.040 prediction, one of

00:57:57.160 my best by far, and

00:57:59.920 it was based on a

00:58:00.660 reason.

00:58:01.620 The reason I

00:58:02.360 said Trump would

00:58:02.980 get elected in

00:58:04.120 2016 is that I

00:58:06.480 had a little extra

00:58:07.540 insight into the

00:58:08.440 persuasion level, so

00:58:11.940 that helped me make

00:58:12.640 that call.

00:58:13.700 With the sonic

00:58:16.700 weapon, it's the

00:58:17.580 same skill set.

00:58:19.100 If you know what

00:58:20.060 mass hysteria looks

00:58:21.080 like, you see them

00:58:22.280 right away.

00:58:23.540 If you haven't

00:58:24.420 studied mass

00:58:25.100 hysteria, you might

00:58:26.060 say, I don't

00:58:26.520 know, a lot of

00:58:27.580 people say this is

00:58:28.360 happening.

00:58:29.280 I've got doctors

00:58:30.060 saying it's

00:58:30.540 happening.

00:58:31.620 It looks like it's

00:58:32.320 happening.

00:58:32.880 But if you've

00:58:33.380 studied mass

00:58:34.000 hysteria, it's 0.65

00:58:34.780 just, you see it

00:58:35.740 like that.

00:58:36.760 It's really obvious.

00:58:38.500 So all I'm

00:58:39.480 claiming is not

00:58:40.320 magic powers.

00:58:41.320 I'm claiming that

00:58:42.060 if you had a

00:58:42.860 skill set in

00:58:44.520 persuasion, that

00:58:46.460 this would jump

00:58:47.220 out at you.

00:58:48.620 Now, I saw a

00:58:49.720 tweet from Mike

00:58:51.540 Cernovich saying,

00:58:52.760 you know, I

00:58:53.840 forget the

00:58:54.260 content, it's

00:58:54.720 basically something

00:58:55.400 like we should

00:58:56.540 have known it

00:58:56.960 was bullshit.

00:58:57.960 I would guess

00:58:58.960 that Cernovich

00:58:59.580 had this pegged

00:59:00.320 as bullshit

00:59:00.820 early on.

00:59:02.200 Why?

00:59:02.960 Because he has

00:59:03.560 a skill set in

00:59:04.520 persuasion.

00:59:06.580 Have you ever

00:59:07.340 heard Trump say

00:59:08.060 it was real?

00:59:10.120 Think about it.

00:59:11.580 Has Trump ever

00:59:12.800 said the secret

00:59:13.600 sonic weapon was

00:59:14.740 real?

00:59:15.020 I don't know,

00:59:18.420 but I'm going to

00:59:19.440 bet he didn't.

00:59:20.960 Do you know

00:59:21.360 why?

00:59:22.520 Because he knows

00:59:23.320 bullshit when he

00:59:24.020 sees it.

00:59:24.440 he's really

00:59:25.640 good at that.

00:59:26.840 He's good at

00:59:27.580 creating bullshit,

00:59:29.240 but he's really

00:59:29.900 good at spotting

00:59:30.660 it.

00:59:31.060 You know, takes

00:59:31.480 one to know

00:59:31.960 one sort of

00:59:32.620 thing.

00:59:33.180 I think he

00:59:33.900 spotted it on

00:59:34.620 day one.

00:59:35.580 I don't think

00:59:36.140 he even once

00:59:36.940 talked about it

00:59:38.420 like it was

00:59:38.860 real.

00:59:39.460 Did he?

00:59:42.080 Yeah.

00:59:43.440 So, I don't

00:59:45.460 know, I think

00:59:46.220 that's my best

00:59:46.880 work yet.

00:59:47.400 Let's talk

00:59:52.360 about trans

00:59:53.040 athletes.

00:59:54.360 I will

00:59:54.980 remind you

00:59:55.520 that my

00:59:55.860 take on

00:59:56.280 trans

00:59:56.640 athletes,

00:59:57.140 when I

00:59:57.380 wasn't just

00:59:57.780 being provocative

00:59:58.500 because sometimes

00:59:59.380 I was just

00:59:59.760 having fun,

01:00:01.440 was that

01:00:01.880 sports are

01:00:02.500 broken,

01:00:03.060 not the

01:00:03.400 athletes.

01:00:05.200 That the

01:00:05.800 thing that

01:00:06.140 needed to

01:00:06.500 get fixed

01:00:07.100 was not

01:00:08.380 what the

01:00:08.760 trans

01:00:09.240 athletes were

01:00:09.920 doing,

01:00:10.860 it's that

01:00:11.460 the sport

01:00:12.040 itself needed

01:00:12.680 to be

01:00:13.020 adjusted so

01:00:14.440 that people

01:00:14.880 were always

01:00:15.340 playing people

01:00:15.940 of comparable

01:00:17.180 ability,

01:00:18.520 however you

01:00:19.240 get there.

01:00:20.520 So the

01:00:20.820 NCAA just

01:00:22.000 announced a

01:00:22.620 big change

01:00:23.140 in their

01:00:23.460 trans policy

01:00:24.800 in which

01:00:26.020 each particular

01:00:26.740 sports national

01:00:27.840 governing body,

01:00:28.760 if you have

01:00:29.180 one, some

01:00:29.700 of them don't,

01:00:30.520 will be

01:00:30.840 responsible for

01:00:31.680 determining

01:00:32.200 transgender

01:00:32.900 athlete

01:00:33.500 participation.

01:00:34.940 Now, on

01:00:35.240 some level

01:00:36.540 they're just

01:00:37.280 kicking the

01:00:37.760 responsibility

01:00:38.260 to other

01:00:38.800 people,

01:00:39.500 but it

01:00:39.860 seems like

01:00:40.240 the essence

01:00:40.800 of it is

01:00:41.500 that each

01:00:42.100 sport will

01:00:42.700 decide how

01:00:43.260 much it

01:00:43.580 matters.

01:00:45.000 See what I

01:00:45.660 mean?

01:00:46.400 So, for

01:00:46.720 example, if

01:00:47.280 there's a,

01:00:47.840 I don't

01:00:48.040 know, a

01:00:48.980 skeet 0.66

01:00:49.700 shooting sport

01:00:50.620 and nobody

01:00:51.700 thinks that

01:00:52.240 gender makes 0.71

01:00:52.760 a difference,

01:00:53.760 then that

01:00:54.200 sport can

01:00:54.660 say, yeah,

01:00:55.220 trans, doesn't 1.00

01:00:55.820 matter, whatever

01:00:56.700 you want.

01:00:57.660 But if it's

01:00:58.480 a boxing, then

01:00:59.760 the boxing

01:01:00.220 commission could

01:01:00.940 say, oh,

01:01:01.680 the physicality

01:01:02.480 matters, so

01:01:03.880 we'll make

01:01:05.340 some adjustment.

01:01:06.300 Now, this is

01:01:06.820 not exactly

01:01:07.440 what I was

01:01:07.940 talking about

01:01:08.540 when I said

01:01:09.060 sports need

01:01:09.640 to be adjusted,

01:01:10.800 and at the

01:01:11.380 professional level

01:01:12.220 and NCAA

01:01:12.860 level, that's

01:01:13.640 different.

01:01:14.440 But it's

01:01:15.820 in the right

01:01:16.200 direction.

01:01:17.780 I think we

01:01:18.600 have to realize

01:01:19.360 that the

01:01:19.980 sports are

01:01:21.360 broken, not

01:01:22.220 the athletes.

01:01:24.000 Because just

01:01:24.680 put them with

01:01:25.200 people who

01:01:25.720 have the same

01:01:26.180 ability.

01:01:26.780 Why is that

01:01:27.180 a problem?

01:01:27.580 Why do we

01:01:29.280 have to have

01:01:30.180 this artificial

01:01:30.800 structure that

01:01:32.680 creates some

01:01:33.260 people who

01:01:33.740 get ribbons

01:01:34.880 and awards

01:01:35.380 and some

01:01:35.760 people don't?

01:01:36.480 I mean, it's

01:01:37.020 all kind of

01:01:37.420 random.

01:01:39.040 Somebody says

01:01:39.700 wrong.

01:01:40.680 Now, the only

01:01:41.560 issue that I

01:01:42.220 haven't solved

01:01:42.880 is how women 1.00

01:01:44.100 could still

01:01:45.720 protect their

01:01:47.460 sport.

01:01:49.000 Right?

01:01:50.200 So if you're

01:01:50.940 talking professional

01:01:52.000 sports, I actually

01:01:52.900 don't really care.

01:01:54.000 because professional

01:01:55.620 sports are just

01:01:56.220 for your

01:01:56.520 entertainment.

01:01:58.000 So if it's

01:01:58.480 just for your

01:01:58.920 entertainment, well,

01:02:00.800 let them work out

01:02:01.660 what's more

01:02:02.120 entertaining and

01:02:03.040 whatever they do.

01:02:04.380 But if you're

01:02:04.720 talking, let's

01:02:05.180 say, school

01:02:06.720 sports, let's

01:02:08.320 take this to

01:02:08.880 high school

01:02:09.300 sports, I

01:02:10.220 think in high

01:02:10.700 school, that's

01:02:12.820 not, it

01:02:13.160 shouldn't be

01:02:13.460 entertainment.

01:02:14.600 That should be

01:02:15.280 for the benefit

01:02:15.840 of the kids.

01:02:16.960 And the benefit

01:02:17.580 of the kids is

01:02:18.240 that everybody

01:02:18.640 gets to play a

01:02:19.440 sport that they

01:02:20.140 like with people

01:02:21.560 who are

01:02:21.880 comparable

01:02:22.360 ability.

01:02:24.740 Because it's

01:02:25.380 not entertainment.

01:02:27.340 I mean, not

01:02:27.740 primarily.

01:02:28.820 It's for the

01:02:29.640 kids.

01:02:30.400 So just give

01:02:31.000 them teams they

01:02:32.040 can play on,

01:02:32.680 however you

01:02:33.200 need to do

01:02:33.640 that, so

01:02:34.600 that nobody

01:02:35.240 gets hurt and

01:02:35.960 they play equal

01:02:36.780 abilities.

01:02:38.360 I think that's

01:02:39.180 where it's

01:02:39.400 heading.

01:02:41.040 Somebody says

01:02:41.760 Scott on sports

01:02:42.700 is out of his

01:02:43.300 league.

01:02:44.240 How hard is it

01:02:45.160 to understand

01:02:45.740 sports, really?

01:02:47.400 I mean, that

01:02:47.720 is such

01:02:48.120 cognitive dissonance.

01:02:51.560 Now, do you

01:02:52.600 imagine that I

01:02:54.700 didn't play

01:02:55.340 sports or

01:02:55.900 something?

01:02:56.620 I mean, I

01:02:57.020 played like

01:02:57.980 every sport.

01:02:59.220 I would play

01:02:59.800 three sports a

01:03:00.740 day, typically.

01:03:02.620 Three different

01:03:03.160 sports a day

01:03:03.900 when I was a

01:03:04.860 kid.

01:03:05.540 Yeah, everybody

01:03:06.700 understands sports.

01:03:08.060 There's nothing

01:03:08.500 mysterious about

01:03:10.060 it.

01:03:11.660 Why no trans 1.00

01:03:12.780 trying to play

01:03:13.360 men's sports?

01:03:14.240 Well, who

01:03:14.680 cares?

01:03:15.860 Who cares?

01:03:17.840 Who cares about

01:03:18.760 that question?

01:03:20.020 As long as

01:03:20.540 everybody's playing

01:03:21.200 on the team

01:03:21.760 that's comparable,

01:03:23.700 why does

01:03:24.040 anything matter?

01:03:25.760 So, I'm

01:03:27.920 not for or

01:03:29.260 against trans 0.99

01:03:30.460 playing in any

01:03:31.560 particular sport.

01:03:33.060 So, let me, I

01:03:34.860 don't know if

01:03:35.180 this is a

01:03:35.620 revision or a

01:03:36.640 clarification or

01:03:37.400 what it is.

01:03:38.200 I'm not in

01:03:38.880 favor of

01:03:40.180 automatically

01:03:40.760 saying any

01:03:42.520 trans person can

01:03:43.660 play on any

01:03:44.340 sport just

01:03:45.200 because they

01:03:45.540 want to.

01:03:46.840 Would you be

01:03:47.220 happy with that?

01:03:48.800 Which probably

01:03:49.440 sounds a little

01:03:49.920 different from

01:03:50.400 what I've said

01:03:50.780 before.

01:03:51.540 Would you agree

01:03:52.360 with this?

01:03:53.460 That I do not

01:03:54.460 support trans

01:03:57.060 people just

01:03:57.740 getting to

01:03:58.220 choose the

01:03:58.780 sport that

01:03:59.340 they play on.

01:04:01.380 I think the

01:04:02.160 sport needs to

01:04:02.820 decide, not the

01:04:03.820 trans player.

01:04:05.280 But the only

01:04:06.640 thing that I

01:04:07.120 add to that is

01:04:08.400 that the sport

01:04:09.080 needs to fix

01:04:09.860 itself so

01:04:10.620 everybody can

01:04:11.220 be accommodated.

01:04:11.960 Now, if you

01:04:14.700 couldn't do it

01:04:15.280 easily, then

01:04:16.860 maybe I

01:04:17.360 wouldn't be in

01:04:17.740 favor of it

01:04:18.300 because I

01:04:18.900 don't think

01:04:19.260 everything has

01:04:19.980 to change to

01:04:20.560 accommodate

01:04:20.980 everybody all

01:04:21.700 the time.

01:04:22.160 That would be

01:04:22.460 crazy.

01:04:23.440 But given that

01:04:24.240 this isn't

01:04:24.640 really a hard

01:04:25.140 change, you

01:04:26.620 know, intramural

01:04:27.720 sports already

01:04:28.540 solve it.

01:04:29.700 If you wanted to

01:04:30.520 play intramural

01:04:31.340 sports, you

01:04:32.100 would just find a

01:04:32.720 team that was

01:04:33.180 your ability and

01:04:34.460 you would just

01:04:34.780 play on it.

01:04:36.220 So trans don't 1.00

01:04:37.080 have any problem

01:04:37.660 with intramural

01:04:38.380 sports because I'm

01:04:39.700 pretty sure they

01:04:40.200 could just find a

01:04:40.840 team that they

01:04:41.400 fit on and

01:04:42.060 okay, and

01:04:43.620 play.

01:04:45.020 So I

01:04:46.380 will, I

01:04:47.900 think I can

01:04:48.440 support you this

01:04:49.200 far, which

01:04:49.860 should be all

01:04:50.340 you need.

01:04:51.780 This should be

01:04:52.260 all you need,

01:04:53.240 which is it

01:04:54.380 shouldn't be up

01:04:54.820 to the trans

01:04:55.420 athlete, it

01:04:55.960 should be up to

01:04:56.380 the sport.

01:04:57.300 Are we good

01:04:57.760 with that?

01:04:59.460 Would that be a

01:05:00.300 compromise where

01:05:01.120 you can be

01:05:01.560 comfortable with

01:05:02.180 my opinion?

01:05:03.620 It's not up to

01:05:04.500 the athlete, it's

01:05:05.180 up to the sport.

01:05:07.400 Now, did you

01:05:08.020 see what I did

01:05:08.560 there?

01:05:09.900 I favored the

01:05:10.820 system over the

01:05:11.780 decision.

01:05:12.880 When I started

01:05:13.660 this, I was

01:05:14.160 talking about

01:05:14.520 cinema supporting

01:05:16.040 the system over

01:05:17.120 this specific

01:05:17.740 decision.

01:05:18.840 I'm using the

01:05:19.660 same principle

01:05:20.600 here.

01:05:22.960 I want the

01:05:23.760 system to

01:05:24.580 work.

01:05:25.320 I don't really

01:05:25.800 care too much

01:05:26.320 about the

01:05:26.660 trans athlete

01:05:27.340 specifically.

01:05:28.860 You know, they

01:05:29.200 don't get the

01:05:29.640 choice of whatever

01:05:30.680 they do.

01:05:31.480 I mean, I care

01:05:31.920 about them having

01:05:32.500 a sports play.

01:05:33.540 That I want.

01:05:34.960 So let me be

01:05:35.480 clear about that.

01:05:36.200 I definitely

01:05:36.680 care that every

01:05:38.820 kid can have a

01:05:40.340 sport if they

01:05:40.860 want to.

01:05:42.040 That I care

01:05:42.660 about because

01:05:43.340 that's important.

01:05:44.720 But I don't

01:05:46.100 think they should

01:05:46.660 get their own

01:05:47.280 choice all the

01:05:47.900 time.

01:05:50.800 All right, ladies 1.00

01:05:51.560 and gentlemen, I'm

01:05:53.500 pretty sure this is

01:05:54.300 the best live

01:05:54.860 stream you've

01:05:55.400 ever seen in the

01:05:56.120 history of the

01:05:57.280 universe.

01:05:59.900 Oh, yeah, Biden

01:06:00.800 yelling at

01:06:01.320 reporters.

01:06:02.120 That's fine.

01:06:02.740 And it looks

01:06:04.600 like the Biden

01:06:07.640 administration is

01:06:08.620 the most failing

01:06:10.240 administration,

01:06:11.240 although you still

01:06:12.220 see arguments that

01:06:13.240 he's killing it and

01:06:14.300 things are doing

01:06:14.860 well.

01:06:15.460 You can definitely

01:06:16.180 always make an

01:06:16.720 argument that your

01:06:17.340 president is doing

01:06:18.960 well or poorly.

01:06:21.840 All right, is there

01:06:22.740 anything that I

01:06:23.280 didn't cover today?

01:06:24.380 Let me look at...

01:06:27.740 I thought there was

01:06:30.580 a way that I

01:06:31.260 should be able to

01:06:31.940 look at the super

01:06:33.000 chats after the

01:06:34.160 fact.

01:06:35.280 But why don't

01:06:36.080 they show up?

01:06:37.560 Is there a trick

01:06:38.260 to it?

01:06:39.880 I see it listed at

01:06:40.940 the top, but it's

01:06:41.540 not clickable.

01:06:43.440 That's that boomer

01:06:44.280 thing.

01:06:45.900 CRT, please.

01:06:46.640 What is there to

01:06:47.260 say about it that

01:06:48.180 we haven't already

01:06:48.640 said?

01:06:48.840 Okay.

01:06:53.920 Is the whisper

01:06:55.080 yell effective?

01:06:55.840 Yeah, the whisper

01:06:58.180 yell.

01:06:58.600 When Biden does

01:06:59.460 the whisper, as

01:07:00.880 hokey as it looks,

01:07:02.860 persuasion-wise, it's

01:07:03.720 actually pretty good

01:07:04.520 because you end up

01:07:06.020 talking about the

01:07:06.860 thing he emphasized.

01:07:08.380 So if Trump did it,

01:07:10.200 I'd say it was a

01:07:10.780 good technique.

01:07:11.540 I'll say the same

01:07:12.100 thing.

01:07:13.820 Yeah, so Carpe, I

01:07:15.320 saw your super

01:07:16.880 chats go by, but I

01:07:17.900 didn't want to

01:07:18.320 interrupt, and I was

01:07:19.980 trying to get back

01:07:20.640 to them.

01:07:21.380 And if somebody

01:07:22.120 could tell me, is

01:07:22.920 there...

01:07:24.040 Let me see if I've

01:07:25.300 got a...

01:07:25.820 problem down

01:07:26.240 here.

01:07:27.500 Top chats, super

01:07:28.820 chats.

01:07:29.520 Oh, okay, I

01:07:30.220 think I have it.

01:07:33.360 Wait.

01:07:36.360 No, that didn't

01:07:37.340 do anything.

01:07:38.100 That just made

01:07:38.540 all your chats go

01:07:39.240 away.

01:07:40.820 I had a super

01:07:41.640 chat, and nothing

01:07:43.260 happened.

01:07:45.180 That's interesting.

01:07:47.920 Well, somebody

01:07:49.280 could tell me how

01:07:49.800 to make that work.

01:07:50.400 It'd be great.

01:07:51.220 Okay, I'm going

01:07:51.940 to...

01:07:52.820 What do you think

01:07:55.240 Biden said they

01:07:55.920 didn't have

01:07:56.300 McCain anymore

01:07:57.280 to go to?

01:08:00.040 I didn't have a

01:08:01.280 thought about that.

01:08:04.040 All right, that's

01:08:05.000 all for now, and

01:08:05.680 I'll talk to you

01:08:06.340 tomorrow.

01:08:07.000 tomorrow.

01:08:07.800 Mm-hmm.

01:08:08.380 You

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - January 20, 2022

Episode 1629 Scott Adams： Biden's Disastrous Press Conference, Havana Syndrome, and More Ridiculousness

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript