Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1700 Scott Adams： Exploring The Rumor That CNN Plans To Start Reporting Real News

00:00:00.000 that's the sound of me not putting multiple papers on my desk yes my printer is still

00:00:14.400 being a problem but welcome to the best thing that ever happened to you we'll be going to

00:00:21.060 plan B oh my goodness is plan B not working doesn't seem that it is well we'll make this

00:00:31.620 work I swear to God well that's weird apparently I have at least two technical problems happening

00:00:40.380 at the same time I hope your day is better I just have to do something here now in order

00:00:48.520 to make the technology work perfectly it's going to require the collective affirmations of all of you

00:00:56.320 and I'd like you to join me now in something called the simultaneous sip because if I can

00:01:02.120 capture all of the goodwill and vibrations from all of you it might be enough to make my printer

00:01:09.640 work and we're going to test this out live all right I'm going to queue up my printer and then

00:01:17.000 I'm going to see if the simultaneous sip makes it work for the first time are you ready for this

00:01:23.100 experiment we're going to have to I'll tell you what I'll do since the printer will take a moment

00:01:28.840 to tell me whether it's working or not this could be exciting we'll do the simultaneous sip

00:01:35.260 simultaneously all right now before we know the answer all you need is a cup of margarita glass of

00:01:40.700 tanker chalice stein canteen ginger glass a vessel of any kind filled with your favorite liquid I like

00:01:44.900 coffee join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the I don't think it's working it's not working

00:01:53.500 but let's have the simultaneous sip anyway it's all we need go

00:01:58.500 now one of the questions you might ask yourself is Scott how do you handle the risk of embarrassing

00:02:14.680 yourself in a live setting to thousands of people and the answer is I don't really care

00:02:23.320 I've noticed over the years that when I have a really good plan and I'm really like I'm on point

00:02:33.740 and I think I'm nailing it sometimes people like it sometimes they don't and that I've also noticed

00:02:40.520 that if I'm completely unprepared and everything goes wrong sometimes it's great sometimes it's not

00:02:47.540 it's completely non-productive I'll tell you when I first learned that I first learned that I did I did reboot it

00:02:56.180 I rebooted it just before I went live the first time I learned that preparation doesn't seem to matter as

00:03:03.620 much as you think is when I started cartooning and I only had an hour to make a cartoon before I went to my day job

00:03:10.660 and if I didn't do one in that hour I'd fall behind deadline and I found that sometimes I'd come in there

00:03:17.680 and I'd have an idea and I'd have the full hour to develop it and it'd be pretty good sometimes not

00:03:23.280 and other times 55 minutes would go by and I'd have nothing but I had a rule that I always had to do

00:03:30.820 something the same rule the Beatles had by the way the Beatles had the same rule if they started a song

00:03:35.560 they had to finish it they couldn't wait till the next day they had to finish anything they started

00:03:40.160 so I had a analogous rule which is that I would have to do a comic within an hour no matter how many

00:03:48.500 minutes were left when I decided I had to charge through and finish it and I found that the the five

00:03:55.840 minute comics were exactly as popular as the one hour comics there was there was a difference in the

00:04:03.180 audience and that ladies and gentlemen is a lesson you don't really know what's going to work well

00:04:09.820 sometimes just winging it if you know what you're doing works too I however have three backups

00:04:18.440 I have my printed copy that's not working I have my phone as my backup for the digital copy which

00:04:28.260 apparently did not sync with my notes from my other system a second technical problem but am I am I

00:04:35.840 dissuaded by that no because unlike you I have a third backup which is already fired up right over

00:04:42.440 here so if you have enough devices and enough coffee you can make anything work it's true story number

00:04:50.700 one employment looks good weirdly so the new pandemic era a low of 3.6 percent unemployment that's actually

00:05:03.020 great isn't it so here's the interesting thing so this is in the the realm of predictions I've said

00:05:12.140 to you before that there's one economic measure that if that one is working you can kind of figure

00:05:19.980 that everything else will work out too maybe a little slower but if you can get one thing right

00:05:25.980 it's the most important thing to get right and that's employment because the difference between

00:05:31.360 having a job and not having a job is a gigantic difference it's it's adding to the system versus

00:05:37.120 subtracting from the system so every job is sort of a big increment in goodness so at the moment we

00:05:44.800 have actually a really good employment situation but here's the test to the prediction so remember the

00:05:54.040 the rule is sort of scott's rule i guess i didn't invent it but we'll say it's mine for now that if

00:06:01.480 you get employment right you know you don't have a lot of unemployment everything else will work out

00:06:08.360 now is that true if you've got pandemics and inflation and you know ukraine stirring things up and

00:06:15.800 supply chain problems well that's the test right this is sort of the the ultimate test of that

00:06:22.600 predictive variable and i'm going to stick with it so i'm going to stick with employment being the

00:06:29.880 most predictive thing if the employment numbers had been bad i would be panicking a little bit

00:06:37.640 gonna be honest gonna be honest if the employment numbers were going down

00:06:43.160 as fast as inflation was going up i'd be spinning in this chair right now

00:06:48.040 but when i see inflation going up i hate it i mean everybody's taking a bad haircut right now and you

00:06:55.320 know you can't all afford it so that's bad that's really bad but it's not as bad as unemployment would

00:07:03.640 be i mean not even close i don't think so let's uh track that and see if that still comes true so some

00:07:10.360 more fake news or is it there are reportedly seven hours of call logs missing from the white house

00:07:18.760 call logs said call logs too many times because uh it was january 6 and and trump was doing who knows

00:07:27.400 what because of those missing records but turns out there were no missing records in the sense of

00:07:34.200 deleted so nobody deleted anything the the records are an exact record of what they should be recording

00:07:42.760 it's just that they don't record every phone that's pretty much the whole story

00:07:47.480 so the story went from yesterday uh it's like a watergate situation with you know missing missing

00:07:55.160 call logs at the most suspicious time and then it morphed into oh it looks like he used some other phone

00:08:04.360 okay now if you are the president or any any ceo or any leader trying to let's say make sure there's

00:08:13.560 not a digital path to you wouldn't you just borrow somebody else's phone yeah i realize you so trump

00:08:20.920 was asked if he used a burner phone a kind of phone that um is not associated with a person it's just sort

00:08:28.440 of a short-term phone you use criminals use it drug dealers use burner phones uh cheaters use burner

00:08:36.040 phones that sort of thing so he he was asked that trump said he he didn't recognize the term or

00:08:43.720 he didn't know what a burner phone was and then john bolden threw him under the bus and said he talked

00:08:49.640 about burner phones with me so um is there a story here yeah like this this feels like a whole bunch of

00:09:00.920 nothing doesn't it suppose we know that trump used some other means of communication either directly or

00:09:09.720 indirectly you know you here's how i imagine it going the way i imagine it going is trump standing

00:09:16.920 next to somebody who has their own phone and saying can you call so and so and say this or that

00:09:25.080 i mean that's sort of the way i imagined it like i don't imagine that there are necessarily direct

00:09:30.760 phone calls from trump to somebody that would be you know implementing incriminating in any way

00:09:38.440 but who knows you know one of the things that uh trump has done so well for years is avoid digital

00:09:45.240 records he doesn't use email for example and that's that's gotta work in your favor as some level of

00:09:54.760 business you probably shouldn't write anything down at some point you should only whisper to people

00:10:02.280 you know in a secure location that's it nothing else the way putin probably does it

00:10:07.480 all right so here's my favorite story from this is on fox fox website uh so of course one of my

00:10:17.800 favorite things about the news is watching the fox news cnn you know battle with each other and how

00:10:25.400 they frame the other the other side because it's it's the one it's the one situation where you can be

00:10:31.560 fairly confident that they're not really hiding their bias which doesn't mean they're always lying

00:10:39.000 i'm just saying that you know they don't do it to inform you they do it for competitive reasons

00:10:45.320 and uh so this is hilarious according to fox news uh it's talking about how uh zucker uh the disgraced

00:10:53.640 they call him the disgraced x ceo so i think it's funny whenever anybody calls anybody else disgraced

00:11:04.760 as if there's anybody famous anymore who's not disgraced everybody's disgraced to somebody so does it

00:11:12.120 really mean anything to call somebody disgraced i mean i get it i know why they're they're saying it and

00:11:17.720 and and i uh i would agree with the description but you sort of a little bit overused i feel like

00:11:24.360 everybody's a little bit disgraced for one reason or another i'm sure i've disgraced myself a few times

00:11:30.680 i'm pretty sure i'll disgrace myself again before the end of the day uh anyway i love that word in

00:11:36.600 in politics and uh so here's how fox uh writes it in an attempt to restore cnn's credibility so that

00:11:45.880 this is making you think past the sale so you're supposed to uh just sort of agree that it's an

00:11:52.200 obvious fact that cnn has no credibility so according to fox news in an attempt to restore cnn's credibility

00:12:00.840 they talk about the new leader uh licked or light i don't know how to pronounce it is expected to

00:12:06.280 attempt to pivot back to straight news after zucker allowed the network to take on a partisan liberal

00:12:14.520 approach that has struggled to attract viewers during the biden era

00:12:22.760 i love how they say it now who exactly is expecting this so fox news is writing it like you know these

00:12:31.640 are facts you know if you didn't if you didn't stop and slow down to read the actual words you'd sort of

00:12:37.960 accept it as this is common knowledge that they're a disgraced network they need to restore their

00:12:43.880 credibility and the new guy is is at least thinking about he hasn't decided

00:12:52.440 he hasn't made the decision yet but he's definitely definitely may be thinking about reporting real news

00:12:59.160 so that's that's that fox news frames oh that that is funny

00:13:11.560 um do you remember as i do uh think back you know maybe a year or two do you remember when it was

00:13:20.680 popular to say that uh uh anybody would be better than trump you know anybody would be a better

00:13:29.000 president than trump and one of the reasons that people would uh defend biden you know i'd say you

00:13:35.160 know biden's too old what about you know forget about his policies can we really have a president that

00:13:41.320 old isn't that unsafe and people would say i swear to god they'd say anything's better than trump

00:13:49.480 but i'll bet they didn't think they'd get to test that hypothesis did they

00:13:55.240 turns out turns out we're testing the hypothesis

00:14:01.240 we're literally finding out if anything is is is absolutely anything better than trump

00:14:07.720 so you know normally you would think that you would say that as sort of a

00:14:13.880 a framing question you don't think that you get to actually scientifically test it

00:14:19.240 so we found the the first the furthest thing from something that you can get

00:14:25.080 here's something here's biden let's see let's see if anything is better than trump so far

00:14:32.920 so far so far i think trump is beating the furthest thing from something but maybe maybe i'm being

00:14:41.160 subjective about that maybe um so i've seen a few people speculate and i was having the same feeling

00:14:49.720 joel pollack said this uh and i'm seeing some other writers pick up on it that it seems like the

00:14:55.720 mainstream media is trying to get ahead of the hunter biden laptop story that they had been

00:15:02.440 suppressing and behind until now it seemed like somewhat of a sudden shift as if as if they've

00:15:11.960 been informed that something's coming meaning that they need to get ahead of it because it'd be a

00:15:18.280 little too embarrassing to have never mentioned it if for example and this is hypothetical if there's

00:15:25.800 an indictment coming down it's starting to look like uh foreshadowing doesn't it if this were a movie

00:15:33.720 script and you and you saw the uh let's say the protagonist of the movie if you saw them flipping

00:15:40.040 through the channels and all the news anchors started talking about this story for the first time and you

00:15:45.960 knew you knew that that was unusual wouldn't you see it as foreshadowing definitely it looks exactly like

00:15:53.640 it now i don't think it's the same reason i think it's maybe just that they're softening up the public

00:15:59.320 for what's coming maybe uh the other possibility is that the decision has come down to get rid of

00:16:07.000 biden so that he's not a risk for running because what if what if joe biden said he wants i mean he said

00:16:16.840 it publicly but what if he really said he's going to run again what would the democrat leadership do

00:16:25.800 if biden who is the president after all what if he said he wants to run again he could make it happen

00:16:33.720 could he not i think he'd get the he'd get the nomination i don't know i don't know that the

00:16:42.360 democrats could allow that to happen so it looks like the hit has been put on biden himself by the

00:16:48.200 democrats am i wrong i i feel like they put the hit on them they have to take him out so that they

00:16:55.080 have a chance of you know developing somebody who could be more of a longer-term leader under the

00:17:01.480 mold of whoever's molding whoever somebody's molding somebody over there i'm sure of it

00:17:07.960 yeah the 25th is knocking you say all right here's a question that i've been wondering you

00:17:15.960 you know you we keep hearing about the 50 former and current intel officials who signed the letter

00:17:22.200 saying that the hunter laptop thing was russian disinformation when they must have known

00:17:29.080 that it wasn't or they must have known that they couldn't know whether it was or it wasn't

00:17:34.680 now how do you get 50 people professionals to tell a horrendous lie in public and then sign it

00:17:46.520 what exactly were they getting in return

00:17:51.480 or or is it worse did somebody like john brennan i'll just pick him as a random name did somebody

00:18:00.120 just ask them to do it and then they just did is were all of those officials so afraid of whoever

00:18:08.280 asked them to do it that they knew that doing it was good for their careers and not doing it was bad

00:18:16.040 for their careers in other words were they blackmailed because that's what that is right now do you have to

00:18:23.960 say the words or are they all in the business where they know how things work remember schumer said they've

00:18:30.520 got a you know a thousand what a hundred ways from sunday or something to get back at you so do you think

00:18:38.040 that people in the intelligence world need to explicitly threaten anything they don't need to explicitly threaten

00:18:46.360 anything because they're all on the same page so somebody such as i'll just pick a name at random john brennan

00:18:53.560 if somebody at that stature were to ask them to do something that they didn't want to do and didn't

00:18:58.840 feel completely comfortable with would they feel that they had to do it anyway and isn't that blackmail

00:19:09.240 if you don't explicitly say i will get back at you is that necessary does the crime of blackmail require

00:19:17.800 an explicit threat actually i don't know the answer to that all right there must be there's probably

00:19:23.480 a hundred lawyers watching this right now if somebody's an attorney do you need uh the threats

00:19:30.200 or the blackmail threat spelled out or can it be so clear to anybody who would understand the situation

00:19:37.960 that it still counts as a crime because you've set up a situation where it's very clear

00:19:43.800 that blackmail is in play even if you don't say it that'd be hard to prove wouldn't it

00:19:52.840 oh that would be extortion somebody says i don't know about that

00:19:55.720 why pay blackmail if there's no threat because there's an implied uh cause and effect so it

00:20:04.440 doesn't have to be a threat you could just understand that under this situation this bad thing will

00:20:09.480 happen to you you just have to know it could happen that's all

00:20:12.440 all right give me an answer to that so it looks like russia is propping up the ruble but here are

00:20:21.240 a couple things that i learned uh one of the one of the reasons that the gas is still flowing from

00:20:27.000 russia and russia hasn't tried to use that as a weapon is that they don't have pipelines to sell it

00:20:32.680 anywhere else so just as europe is trapped by having to buy russian energy and russia is trapped

00:20:43.240 for the time being in accepting dollars and euros they want to accept rubles but they can't because

00:20:49.400 they're mostly operating on long-term contracts that were signed a while ago and here's the funniest

00:20:54.440 part apparently russia has decided to honor the deals during war i mean it's literally you know

00:21:02.520 economic war on top of military war and the very people that putin's at war with their their

00:21:10.360 energy companies are saying oh yeah we're going to honor the deal you know we're not going to just

00:21:15.000 change the deal and say you have to pay rubles no no that's a deal and i'm thinking really is that the way

00:21:21.000 it works do they follow the contract in this situation i don't know but i guess one of the

00:21:29.000 reasons they would follow the contract is that there's no reason to break it and the no reason

00:21:33.960 to break it is that they don't have options meaning they can't sell it anywhere else there's no other

00:21:39.800 pipelines they can't sell to china because they don't have the infrastructure to deliver it and it

00:21:45.480 wouldn't be easy to fix it it would take a long time so so russia is trapped and europe is trapped so

00:21:52.600 russia probably wants to use it as a weapon but can't because they don't have alternatives and europe would 0.95

00:21:58.440 like to use it as a weapon by not buying it but they can't because they don't have alternatives and

00:22:05.000 then biden's going to release this gas from the uh the the reserves the emergency reserves that every

00:22:12.520 expert everyone says will make no difference at all am i wrong literally every expert says this will make no

00:22:21.640 difference at all oh it might it might make a difference if there's an emergency

00:22:27.880 if there's an emergency you're going to miss it because he's might use a third of it or some some

00:22:32.360 big number and then we'll have to fill it back up at a higher price i mean it doesn't look like anything

00:22:39.640 it doesn't look like anything that biden's doing is right does it you know i'm sure i'm a little biased

00:22:45.800 there did you know all right we'll check your fake news because the fake news is not all on the other

00:22:52.440 side let me say it again you and i may have been victims of fake news too not just other people not

00:23:01.400 just other people and here's one that maybe we didn't all know you know we keep talking about this

00:23:07.480 uh keystone pipeline did you know that there are two keystone pipelines at least two uh one is

00:23:15.720 completely done and working fine so nothing happened with that one recently but the keystone xl is the

00:23:22.760 one that was going to be built but hasn't it's not close to per yeah it wasn't even close to being done

00:23:28.600 so therefore not when biden closed it down it shouldn't have made really any difference

00:23:34.200 that we should see now it could have made a difference in the long run globally a lot of

00:23:40.440 it wasn't even going to be domestic so there was you know basically um that story may be overblown

00:23:48.040 so for those of you saying hey look what biden did you know if he had kept that pipeline project going

00:23:54.280 you know or gas prices would be less or whatever uh but probably not probably not however

00:24:01.320 uh energy prices don't move on actual supply and demand as much as the expectation of supply and

00:24:11.080 demand which i hasten to say because i know i'm being watched by real economists the expectation of

00:24:17.880 supply and the actual supply are kind of a blended concept in economics you get that so it's it's a finer

00:24:27.320 point uh yeah i'm not sure it's useful for the general public but the the actual supply and the

00:24:34.840 expected supply don't really have much of a difference when you're pricing stuff

00:24:41.480 um okay you're welcome see i can adjust i can adjust so that adjustment is based on specific feedback

00:24:50.120 that i thought was useful and so when biden does things like uh any kind of energy project in public

00:25:01.800 what should be your first um thought hey people might expect less energy in the future so it changes

00:25:10.520 expectations changing expectations has an effect on effectively what we call the supply

00:25:17.560 and so collectively the things that biden did are signaling a lack of supply in the future

00:25:27.080 so it's not an actual supply change it's a uh an expected supply change and that could change the the price

00:25:35.320 so where trump did everything right psychologically

00:25:40.920 biden is doing everything wrong psychologically if you believe that wrong

00:25:44.520 means producing less energy domestically all right um i have a theory that all wars are going to be drone

00:25:54.200 wars from now on meaning that um the thing that will matter is how well your drones are performing

00:26:03.480 and how many you have and that that will be the dominant weapon because it has to be right

00:26:08.760 it kind of has to be you have to think there's a limit to manned aircraft right there has to be a limit

00:26:17.240 to how many human aircraft there can be because as the number of unmanned aircraft goes up they're all

00:26:23.880 they're all vulnerable and there there's no way that ground-based anything is going to compete with

00:26:32.920 drones if you have enough of them so you know of course there are ways to jam drones and blah blah blah blah

00:26:39.480 but ultimately there's going to be a somebody's going to take out the jammer and then the drones take

00:26:46.600 over blah blah blah so to me it seems that drones are going to be the thing that predict who wins

00:26:52.600 which also means economy in some ways or who who's supporting you with their own economy

00:26:56.840 and here's my take on ukraine going to the whiteboard um as some number of drones some number

00:27:07.000 whatever that number is ukraine wins meaning that let's see if i can get you a better picture here

00:27:16.280 meaning that the only thing that is going to predict what happens with ukraine next is how many drones

00:27:23.560 um have been delivered and how many of them can be you know actually used and we don't know that

00:27:30.680 number do we why is it that we don't know that number isn't that the single most important thing

00:27:40.600 because if they have enough drones of the right kind yeah and i'm talking about the small suicide

00:27:45.640 drones i'm not talking about the uh i'm not talking about the big ones the turkish ones that are very

00:27:50.840 expensive i'm talking about the small ones if they have enough of them um

00:28:00.520 they win right they win in the sense that at the very least russia can't um can't conquer them now

00:28:10.680 there's news that there was a uh russian uh let's see uh i think it was a fuel depot attack within russia

00:28:19.480 you know so over the border from ukraine and that the ukrainians did a helicopter attack

00:28:26.120 in the homeland of russia now there's a lot in that story number one

00:28:36.280 number one

00:28:40.040 if they're going after fuel that's more indication that it's a war of uh starving the army right denying

00:28:49.080 them food and ammunition and fuel now do you think you can do that with drones and helicopters

00:28:56.040 if you get the big stuff so i think isn't there sort of a an 80 20 rule at play here

00:29:03.000 that you don't have to eliminate all the fuel you have to eliminate some percentage of it right

00:29:10.120 you don't have to eliminate all the food just there's some percentage you have to eliminate that

00:29:15.160 they would just stop the army wouldn't because it would just distract them they just have to eat

00:29:21.240 so how many drones would it take to keep an army from retreating because here's what i'm most um

00:29:30.200 curious about does the lenski seem like the kind of guy who would take a draw you know would he go into

00:29:38.600 a battle and say i'll take a tie is there anything we've seen in his personality his career the way

00:29:45.400 he presents himself is there anything about him that says i think i'll i'll play for a draw

00:29:52.360 i don't think so so i'm at least open to the possibility that he's after putin and the way he's

00:29:59.080 going to do it is by destroying the russian military in ukraine and i think he can actually do it

00:30:06.040 it and all it takes is some number of drones because so here's the argument the argument is

00:30:12.520 this if ukraine can take out big fuel depots and obviously they can because i would think a fuel depot

00:30:20.200 is the most vulnerable thing there could be well what could be more vulnerable to drone attacks and

00:30:27.480 helicopter attacks than a fuel depot a fuel depot seems like it'd be the ultimate target so if you

00:30:34.840 take out the big ones can russia adjust enough with you know workarounds and small ones i mean they may

00:30:43.160 be you know three fuel depots away from stalling the entire army in ukraine making it impossible to get

00:30:51.320 out and what happens when they can't leave and they can't eat i think i think ukraine just starts

00:30:59.080 starving them and picking them off there there may be a play here that zelensky is actually going to

00:31:07.080 try to take over russia and actually just run the whole thing because i know it's crazy it's crazy but

00:31:15.000 think about this if zelensky could destroy the russian military don't you think putin's gone

00:31:23.160 how would he survive that if he actually destroyed it and i think he actually could now destroy it

00:31:30.840 doesn't mean literally again it means trapping it in the country and just keeping it there it's it's done

00:31:39.320 if it can't get out it's as good as dead it wouldn't have any purpose

00:31:43.400 so yeah so let me let me allow the following

00:31:52.440 i'm i'm probably not the military expert you need to be listening to can we agree on that can we agree

00:32:01.320 that for military uh military predictions i'm not really the one you should be listening to

00:32:08.920 all right we can all be on the same page in that now you understand that i i've confessed this before

00:32:16.760 that um i speak with more confidence than maybe you know my internal process

00:32:24.520 um is matched to because part of it is presentation so don't confuse the presentation which i do

00:32:31.160 confidently with my opinion of what's actually going to happen which is more of a statistical thing

00:32:37.000 statistically speaking i'd give this five to ten percent but that's bigger than you would right

00:32:46.520 i think you'd give it zero percent and i'm saying there's something happening here that makes me think

00:32:52.680 this all right let me let me defend the ten percent number one how hard is it with your opinions how

00:33:00.280 hard would it be to trap them in country to trap the military now that they're already degraded

00:33:05.800 and we know exactly the limited ways they can get out right if the roads are taken out or mined

00:33:13.400 or the ukrainians have enough drones to stop whoever's in the front of anything

00:33:19.000 i and they can take out the energy i think they can stall them

00:33:25.080 now somebody says the threat's a threat of nukes well i wonder about the strategy of not making the guy

00:33:30.200 who's trying to kill you angry i mean i get it i get it that if putin is pushed into a corner he might

00:33:37.000 use tactical nukes but i don't think so because i think using tactical nukes would end him for sure

00:33:44.040 wouldn't it or it would reduce his chances of survival and we don't actually think he's crazy do we

00:33:50.920 i mean yeah he'd have to be literally crazy to do that i think and i don't think we think he's

00:33:56.520 literally crazy that was more propaganda speaking of propaganda this is really interesting little

00:34:03.080 out of uh context here but uh stefan collinson who usually writes about trump and how bad trump is and

00:34:11.400 i always think of him as cnn's uh paid propagandist because he's an opinion an opinion writer so it's

00:34:19.240 it's fair to do what he does right it's just opinion and it's you know it's presented that way so so

00:34:25.480 i think that's fair as long as he's presenting it as opinion and he does but he's changed um

00:34:33.240 here's well let me just tell you what he said today it has nothing to do with trump

00:34:36.600 but just keep in mind that on cnn in my opinion so this is just my opinion he's sort of their go-to

00:34:44.200 propaganda guy you know go write some bad stories about trump sort of thing but now he's saying that

00:34:50.520 western intelligence agencies are waging a psychological war over ukraine he says directly

00:34:57.640 with russian president uh putin an expert at the genre who is now effectively taking a dose of his own

00:35:03.800 medicine sorry so stefan collinson is talking about how the western intel people are using as much

00:35:11.080 misinformation to get at putin as putin is using misinformation to get at us so they're playing

00:35:18.360 the same game and he says the united states and its allies are painting a picture of a bogged down

00:35:23.880 demoralized and dysfunctional russian military taking disastrous losses on the battlefield and are

00:35:29.640 simultaneously conjuring a vision of growing political tension inside the kremlin they claim

00:35:36.440 the russian leader is isolated poorly advised and lacking real intelligence on just how badly the war is

00:35:42.600 going now correct me if i'm wrong but did not stefan collinson just say and i don't think i'm over

00:35:51.640 interpreting this am i did he not just say that the message that is known to be he's characterizing it as

00:36:00.600 disinformation matches exactly cnn's um reporting on the war so is he not basically saying that cnn is part of

00:36:13.640 the disinformation campaign because what cnn is reporting is exactly what the intel people are telling

00:36:21.560 them which is hey we've got this secret insider information that uh putin is not getting good

00:36:27.480 information inside as if we know that as if we know that right and it's it's kind of weird meta

00:36:36.920 self-referential thing that's confusing me so the cnn guy whose job it is again in my opinion is to

00:36:46.040 write opinion pieces that are completely biased is writing an opinion piece in the context of fox news

00:36:54.440 saying that cnn may be trying to report straight news and collinson is reporting something that looks to

00:37:01.640 me like straight news and the straight news is that all the news people have been lying to you

00:37:08.440 because intelligence people have been feeding them bs which surely they knew surely surely the media

00:37:17.320 companies knew that they were getting propaganda surely the media companies know that when somebody says

00:37:24.440 hey we've got some information from uh putin's uh bathroom like he was scribbling a note while he was

00:37:32.200 on the toilet and we saw the note and it says that he's not getting good information from his generals no

00:37:38.200 we didn't no we didn't we the people who are in the media professionally who have done this for years

00:37:47.400 they know that when you hear in the context of war when you hear that there's trouble inside putin's inner

00:37:53.320 circle they know that's not real but did they report it to you as though it were not real did they report

00:38:00.920 it to you as something that is obvious propaganda it could be real but that you should judge it as

00:38:07.800 probable propaganda i don't believe they did if i'm wrong please correct me but i believe the media

00:38:15.480 reported these as if it was a report that you should take with some you know not a grain of salt necessarily

00:38:22.280 right so is it true what fox news is saying that cnn is going to start uh being straight with the news

00:38:33.080 and and actually tell you what's really happening

00:38:40.760 i don't know um

00:38:44.680 here's a question that i wonder about why have there been no ukrainian drone attacks in moscow

00:38:51.960 now when i say in moscow i mean not against civilian targets but there must be you know

00:38:57.160 government buildings that you could explode with a small suicide drone now you might say to yourself

00:39:05.880 scott scott scott it's not easy to get a ukrainian and a drone into russia to which i say can you really

00:39:14.520 tell the difference between the ukrainian and a russian there are no ukrainians that speak russian

00:39:21.080 really well i'm pretty sure there are pretty sure there are and you can't get a drone that would fit

00:39:29.080 and it literally would fit in a suitcase literally would fit in a suitcase and you can't get one of

00:39:34.760 those and one ukrainian within two kilometers of moscow to take out i don't know their polit

00:39:43.560 bureau or something or at least put a bomb there because all it would do really it wouldn't you know

00:39:48.440 ideally it would kill no civilians it would just make news don't you think that these citizens of

00:39:54.520 russia would start asking questions if government buildings start blowing up in moscow and i'm trying

00:40:00.840 to think why isn't that happening i'm not recommending it so again sometimes my my tone

00:40:07.640 gives you a misleading sense of my opinion my opinion is i don't know again i'm not a military expert

00:40:16.040 but it seems to me yeah if the only risk is the risk of nukes i don't think that would do it do you

00:40:25.160 do you think uh blowing up a few government buildings in moscow would cause putin to nuke anything

00:40:31.240 i don't think so i don't think so at all now again we also don't know right so do you want to take the

00:40:41.080 risk maybe not maybe not but if they're if zelensky is willing to do a helicopter attack in russian

00:40:51.000 territory which he just did actually the second time if they're willing to do that are they somebody

00:40:59.000 says false flag i don't know if you take out a depot that big as a that that would be the worst

00:41:04.920 false flag if you're going to pick a false flag that would be the worst one you could pick

00:41:11.240 all right um

00:41:14.840 here's some uh interesting things

00:41:19.960 or uh or are there

00:41:21.480 um the the hunter uh laptop story is funny jack pasavik uh has tweeted a number of times

00:41:32.680 that uh i don't know it's been some some long number of months since he offered the full copy of

00:41:39.640 hunter hunter's uh laptop you know a copy of the drive to the media including jake tapper at cnn and nobody's

00:41:47.720 ever nobody's ever taken him up on it what's that tell you now don't you think they'd at least want to

00:41:56.120 look at it even to report that it's fake don't not don't even care don't don't even want to get a copy

00:42:07.480 i don't know now um

00:42:10.440 i i also saw a glenn greenwald article about matt gates and how long has it been since the matt gates

00:42:22.280 allegations it's been a while right a year over a year right so it's been over a year and the only

00:42:32.200 part of the story that's been verified is the part of the story that matt gates sent which is that they

00:42:39.400 were being blackmailed that's now verified fact there have been no charges against matt gates it's been

00:42:48.200 a year so what do you make of that

00:42:57.080 um

00:42:59.800 yeah he got cancelled hard

00:43:01.400 you know you watch uh one person after another get taken out and you wonder who's next right

00:43:12.040 if you look at the landscape of all the people who were sort of um making a lot of noise for trump

00:43:17.400 in 2016 most of them seem to have been taken out by now now a lot of them made it easy sometimes they

00:43:26.040 make it easy but wow yeah jim jordan there's a hit piece on him as well i mean i don't know i don't

00:43:33.480 know what things are true and what are not so i i neither i neither condemn nor defend anybody who's

00:43:40.840 been accused of things i have no idea what they did or didn't do uh i'm just noting that they all have

00:43:46.680 hit pieces and they were prominent supporters of trump um now apparently i don't know if you knew this

00:43:59.800 but uh the ukraine i don't know if the ukrainians are part of this or just the uh the allies trying

00:44:07.160 to come up to some way some way to make a non-nato deal uh for ukraine so there'd be some kind of

00:44:15.080 security guarantee but it would not involve nato and i was trying to come up what would be the perfect

00:44:21.720 name for a uh let's say a security guarantee situation in which russia had already vetoed

00:44:31.640 nato as being that entity so it'd have to be something that's no no it's not nato no no it's

00:44:39.480 not nato it's something like it so i would call it nieto nieto not nato it's the one that was uh hey

00:44:55.240 that's not bad nieto

00:45:00.680 i'll leave you a moment to uh savor and relish that pun and you're welcome you're welcome

00:45:08.120 oh lord all right is there anything else that i have not covered is there any story

00:45:18.280 and please don't ask me about disney i don't know if there's anything i've cared less about than the

00:45:23.480 whole disney blah blah blah i don't care i don't know why now um i was a little surprised that uh you

00:45:34.680 were all here on time um it's a little surprising because once congress uh rolled back that whole

00:45:44.040 daylight savings time thing yesterday you know once they moved the clocks back last night i thought

00:45:49.800 today i'm going to wake up and like half of you aren't even going to show up at the right time

00:45:54.760 but apparently um many of you are on top of it and you adjusted your clocks last night

00:46:02.280 so that you would be on time for this and for for work 0.99

00:46:08.040 what what oh oh it's april fools april fools 0.98

00:46:16.360 somebody says my spirit animal is a tortoise 0.99

00:46:20.920 i don't quite know how to take that but i'd like to put this horrible thought in your mind

00:46:25.800 everybody reminds you of an animal you just haven't figured out which one yet and once you see it you

00:46:34.920 can't unsee it

00:46:39.560 uh

00:46:39.800 i uh i once described somebody as a uh a monkey in a human costume

00:46:47.240 and uh and by the way it was a caucasian human i was mocking just to see you don't think there's a racial

00:46:56.760 element to it because it wasn't and uh once you hear it it's all you can see it's all it's all you can

00:47:04.360 see after after you get that in your head

00:47:10.680 um

00:47:15.480 corona dropped off the map didn't it yes it did

00:47:22.040 all right so uh let's let's do a uh a vote here now remember reality can never be settled

00:47:31.320 apparently even science can't settle reality for us

00:47:35.480 so we've gone through the entire pandemic

00:47:38.840 and now we're sort of at the other end of it i think

00:47:42.200 was alex berenson mostly right or mostly wrong go alex berenson now remember he was banned by social

00:47:51.880 media for a lot of uh contrarian opinions in the comments was he mostly right or mostly wrong

00:47:59.320 i'm saying

00:48:03.800 mostly rights mostly

00:48:07.480 mostly right mostly right and what would be some examples of what you think he was mostly right about

00:48:17.080 what would be an example of something he was mostly right about lockdowns not working

00:48:22.200 but we all thought that

00:48:28.040 uh masks don't work natural immunity is good

00:48:35.880 masks weren't effective during omicron

00:48:39.720 vaccination leak lab leak

00:48:44.680 interesting all right

00:48:46.680 who do you think was the most accurate um predictor

00:48:56.120 let's say predictor uh during the pandemic

00:49:00.680 who is the most accurate predictor

00:49:04.280 on the on the locals uh network there's only two answers people are saying themselves and sometimes me

00:49:11.960 uh

00:49:16.520 uh joe rogan alex jones the youtube answers are completely different

00:49:22.280 trump tim pool

00:49:25.000 uh only one person on youtube says me

00:49:28.360 so that's the difference between the subscription network and the open network

00:49:31.960 yeah well you know here's the thing we're gonna have to we're gonna have to make do with the fact that it cannot be settled

00:49:42.360 is that that is so unsatisfying to me it's terribly unsatisfying

00:49:48.360 that it can't be settled i would i would say that my record is the best by far

00:49:53.400 because i'm pretty sure everything that alex berenson got right i got right

00:50:02.040 i'm pretty sure i can't i can't think of uh oh we disagreed on masks but not we didn't disagree on mandates

00:50:11.560 so i agreed that if they worked they didn't work well enough i mean once once we got past the first

00:50:18.040 you know initial phase so i think he was wrong about the science of masks but right that they

00:50:24.040 didn't make enough difference in the real world the way people actually acted

00:50:31.640 yes on locals people actually pay for my opinion as is being said on locals right now

00:50:37.080 and so they're more likely to think that they're paying for something that has value

00:50:42.360 so cognitive dissonance would cause people on a subscription network

00:50:45.960 to believe that you were more right than you actually are right that that bias should be

00:50:52.520 something you're actually feeling if you're paying for it

00:50:57.160 uh oh a number of deaths yeah

00:51:02.920 so a number of people say that i make every kind of prediction and then i can uh and then i can confirm

00:51:09.720 a right so how many would agree with that characterization of me that i'm someone who makes all kinds

00:51:15.800 of predictions i guess maybe on both sides of issues so then i can then i can claim i'm right

00:51:24.840 what would be an example of that i'm seeing enough yeses that i'm taking it seriously

00:51:29.960 but what would be there there are lots of yeses but lots of nos um what would be an example of that

00:51:36.200 there probably isn't i have to ukraine well but ukraine i took the i took the l on ukraine

00:51:47.240 that doesn't count if if i explicitly take the l then you can't say how do you how do you criticize

00:51:54.840 that if i make a clear prediction then say i was very wrong

00:51:59.080 i mean don't don't you know take yes for an answer

00:52:08.680 vp vice president

00:52:12.280 yeah you know i think it's fun to talk about having a prediction that's wrong

00:52:18.360 but that the reason you made it was still the right reason it just didn't work out

00:52:22.120 i mean i think that's fair that that's not really flip-flopping all right um

00:52:31.640 oh that one yeah that the the skirt one that's that's a longer conversation but that's probably the

00:52:41.240 best one that's probably the best example i'll give you that one all right uh and now ladies and gentlemen

00:52:52.120 i was lambasting berenson well i still disagree with him on all the things that i disagreed

00:52:59.320 when i lambaited when you say a lambastism i don't think that's true no i have said

00:53:05.000 from fairly early on i think you can confirm that i said that the alex berenson's are valuable

00:53:12.760 and that you need them like they could be right and they could be wrong but you need you need those

00:53:17.880 rogue doctors the mccullows and all that so i don't know if they're right or wrong

00:53:23.320 i'm not qualified pretty sure you're not either but um you definitely need the pushback that's like

00:53:30.520 that's a creative tension

00:53:33.880 oh does uh i'm being asked if michael schellenberger has a chance uh to win as an independent in california

00:53:42.200 and the answer is nobody else would so so let me let me be let me give you the the best answer i

00:53:53.320 can give you could michael schellenberger win what looks like you know an against all odds win of being

00:54:00.680 an independent and win in california and the answer is nobody else could nobody else could so if you're

00:54:08.280 saying to me scott you know nobody could do that i'll agree 99 99 99 with you nobody else could but

00:54:17.560 nobody else could have moved the needle on nuclear energy either

00:54:23.000 hear what i'm saying he he's already done things that didn't look possible so if somebody does things

00:54:29.800 that don't look possible yeah when do you bet against them all right and remember california is pretty

00:54:36.600 thirsty for solutions and you've never seen a more specific solution oriented candidate i'm pretty

00:54:45.720 sure somebody can correct me on that but for a major office say governor has there ever been somebody as

00:54:53.320 a prescriptive somebody who's literally written books describing the solution multiple books and

00:55:01.320 describing solutions specific to san francisco in in the latest book san francisco so we've never really

00:55:10.120 seen this now my understanding is that the way the california elections work uh is that there are so many people

00:55:18.440 registered as independent that if you actually got a good bite of the independence you would make it into some

00:55:25.320 kind of a runoff so because of the way our system works because of the dire hole that we're in

00:55:33.560 because there's never been a candidate who has a bona fide left-leaning history but settled on solutions

00:55:42.760 that are sort of you know just the ones that work so you could you could say he's the first democrat who

00:55:49.560 understood how anything works but you don't get elected that way but that's sort of what i think

00:55:56.440 he is like i've always said the ultimate candidate would be somebody who embraced democrat ideals

00:56:05.480 but republican techniques like systems because the thing the democrats always get wrong is the human

00:56:11.960 motivation but on top of that sometimes they get the science wrong too and he fixes both of those things

00:56:20.120 so the the schellenberger approach to basically everything is what do we know already works what do we know

00:56:29.400 doesn't work let's do more of the things that work that's it and who's on the other side of that exactly

00:56:39.000 right like what what's the counter argument to doing things that we can pretty well confirm work

00:56:45.640 and avoiding the things we can pretty be sure of don't work i don't know now the thing he does that

00:56:53.800 maybe will limit him is while he has a you know a serious history of caring about you know the planet

00:57:03.080 you know very left-leaning ideals that's how he started you know an activist in that um in that area and he's

00:57:11.080 definitely very concerned about the homeless and the you know the disadvantage because again that's

00:57:15.800 another huge focus of his work so who has been that focused on the on the problems and the the

00:57:24.680 victims who's been that focused on them at the same time has had practical solutions

00:57:31.000 exactly nobody so here's the problem with predicting

00:57:34.600 if you predict from the past you always miss a schellenberger if you predict from the past you

00:57:43.240 always miss a trump because the past never produced a trump if you always judged from the past you

00:57:50.520 couldn't have a joe rogan because nobody ever just started their own show with a camera and a microphone

00:57:58.280 and and suddenly they were the biggest media platform in the world or the country i guess

00:58:04.760 so you miss you miss all of the interesting stuff if you use the past to predict the future it just

00:58:11.800 doesn't and the whole history you know history repeats is a really limited mindset

00:58:17.960 you don't want to get trapped in that yeah it doesn't repeat but it rhymes exactly

00:58:25.320 oh yeah rush limbaugh was another person you couldn't predict that who would have predicted

00:58:29.560 the rise of rush limbaugh you wouldn't um

00:58:38.840 all right

00:58:42.440 and that by the way is all i have to say for today i think

00:58:45.960 i think this was by far uh the highlight of your experience today and i hope it gets better

00:58:54.200 because that would be amazing i mean imagine starting from this plateau and even getting better

00:58:59.880 come on come on and yes i want an entire day without talking about the slap and i think that

00:59:08.600 is a sign of the golden age youtube i'll talk to you tomorrow

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - April 01, 2022

Episode 1700 Scott Adams： Exploring The Rumor That CNN Plans To Start Reporting Real News

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript