Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1733 Scott Adams： The Persuasion Game With The Supreme Court Leak and Roe V Wade

00:00:00.860 Good morning, everybody. And my goodness, you are energizing me so much because of your awesomeness, your curiosity, your general sexiness, and that go-getter attitude. Wow. Am I impressed with all of you.

00:00:18.340 Now, would you like to take today's experience up to heretofore inexperienced, inexperienced, heretofore levels you've never experienced? Probably should have worked on that one in advance.

00:00:34.500 But I know you'd like to. Let's take it up a notch, and all you need is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or chels or stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:51.140 Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure. It's the dope meat hit of the day. It's the thing that makes everything better and makes everything go your way. It's called the simultaneous step, but it happens now. Go.

00:01:10.660 Never experienced? Yeah, I should have gone with never experienced. Heretofore never experienced? All right, we'll go with that.

00:01:21.140 Do I look sleepy today? Because that would be hypocritical of me, wouldn't it? Because I've been tweeting and talking and writing about how important it is to get sleep. And look at me. Clearly, clearly did not get enough sleep.

00:01:37.080 Now, am I a failure or a hypocrite? Because I preached to you about getting enough sleep, and clearly you can see that I'm not succeeding at this. What do you think?

00:01:51.560 Here's my take on it, and I'll give you an example from another domain. I like to go to the gym, and I have a system that I try to be active every day, one way or the other.

00:02:03.520 And so often I'll feel like, oh, I don't feel like going to the gym. But I'll get ready anyway. I'll force myself to do it because I've got a good habit going.

00:02:13.140 And I'll get to the gym, and I'll walk in the front door, and I'll walk toward the weight room, and I'll look at all the heavy objects I'll be lifting.

00:02:20.080 And I just stand there for a moment, and I say, nope.

00:02:24.920 I turn back around, and I walk directly out the door, get in my car and drive home, and declare victory.

00:02:33.580 Not failure. Total victory.

00:02:36.000 Because I don't have a goal of going to the gym.

00:02:39.540 I have a system.

00:02:40.920 The system is something that is sort of a programming I've created in myself to stay active every day,

00:02:48.220 and at least go to the gym or put my best effort into it.

00:02:52.060 Some days you really just don't have it.

00:02:54.480 But my system was so strong, it got me all the way to putting my foot on the floor of the gym, you know, miles away from my house.

00:03:03.160 Didn't have enough energy to complete the transaction, but my system was a complete success.

00:03:09.620 Over time, I'm going to go to the gym a lot more with a system that I will go there and turn around and go home.

00:03:17.040 Likewise, with sleep.

00:03:20.480 While I feel that I am not succeeding at the moment, I am doing something that is true to my system.

00:03:27.760 Here's like a little systems lesson.

00:03:30.140 I am continuously experimenting.

00:03:33.300 So I'm going through a cycle of, okay, what if I do this kind of betting?

00:03:38.620 What if I get rid of more light?

00:03:42.400 What if I set an alarm?

00:03:44.660 Oh, here's a trick that I've been trying lately.

00:03:47.600 Instead of setting an alarm to wake up, which I also do, but I rarely use my wake-up alarm.

00:03:53.200 I don't know the last time I used a wake-up alarm.

00:03:55.700 I set it, but I'm usually awake two hours before my alarm.

00:04:00.880 So I started setting a go-to-sleep alarm.

00:04:04.060 So the idea is that at 10 o'clock at night, my alarm goes off, and it's just sort of a, it probably doesn't make any difference in any given night.

00:04:15.400 But over time, it's going to train me.

00:04:18.140 It's going to be like a little annoying thing that happens at 10 o'clock every night.

00:04:23.260 And so sooner or later, at around 9.30 a night, if I just keep doing this, I'm going to start thinking to myself, that alarm's going to go off pretty soon.

00:04:32.340 It will just be one extra thing I'll test to see if it helps my sleep system.

00:04:40.000 So I'm going to keep chipping at it.

00:04:43.380 It'll make a difference.

00:04:44.020 There's a story that I didn't read any of the details of because I didn't want to ruin the irony of it, or not even irony.

00:04:53.440 Stop me from using that word, please.

00:04:55.560 Don't let me use irony again, because we don't agree what it means.

00:05:00.780 But there's a story that says that there's a tick, you know, a little bug, a tick, that makes you allergic to meat, and it's been discovered in D.C.

00:05:09.820 So if you get bit by this tick, you'll be allergic to meat.

00:05:15.780 Now, what would happen if this, like, this tick got everywhere?

00:05:23.460 What happens if everybody becomes allergic to meat?

00:05:27.680 Well, climate change would be much better, wouldn't it?

00:05:30.820 Well, did the climate change models, did they account for the fact that the farting cows might be affected by the tick?

00:05:42.500 And the tick that would make you not eat the meat would make you have fewer cows that would be far less?

00:05:48.840 Is that included in the long-term climate models?

00:05:53.900 Or just wondering.

00:05:56.460 Now, I only use this as an example.

00:05:58.220 I don't think this is actually a very big percentage of anything.

00:06:04.260 Let me check my security cameras.

00:06:06.020 They're going nuts here at the moment.

00:06:08.160 What the hell is attacking my house?

00:06:11.620 My dog is locked outside.

00:06:14.100 We'll take care of that later.

00:06:18.240 She's safe.

00:06:19.060 Don't worry.

00:06:19.480 She's in a gated area.

00:06:21.880 And it's warm.

00:06:23.940 So, what was I talking about?

00:06:26.760 Something about climate change.

00:06:29.520 Yeah, so the models don't include a tick, but they also don't include any one of 50 things that are going to look like they'll change everything.

00:06:37.780 You know, if you're looking at an 80-year climate model, nobody sees the allergic-to-meat tick.

00:06:45.460 Nobody calculated that in.

00:06:46.840 So, just remember, nobody can predict anything more than tomorrow.

00:06:52.340 Here's a little update on a story that this one might catch you by surprise.

00:06:59.120 You remember the NXIVM so-called sex cult story, which was not really a sex cult.

00:07:05.880 But that's another question, in which the so-called cult leader, Keith Ranieri, ended up being sentenced to prison.

00:07:16.220 But I think the worst of the charges were an underage girl, alleged sex trafficking or sex-related thing.

00:07:26.540 It was based largely on, let's see, I guess some stuff found on a laptop.

00:07:32.540 So, there were some images on a laptop and the dates on the images would show that the girl was underage and those images proved that there was something going on or strongly set the date of when something was going on.

00:07:48.360 And so, that was a big part of how he got convicted and why he's in jail.

00:07:54.540 And apparently, a former FBI forensic examiner looked at the evidence and concluded that it was falsified.

00:08:04.520 What?

00:08:07.100 It looks like maybe the...

00:08:08.820 I think the problem is that the dates on the images were altered.

00:08:12.780 And I guess you can tell somehow.

00:08:14.400 So, they're asking for a retrial, based on the fact that it's possible that law enforcement may have planted evidence about the worst of the charges.

00:08:29.920 Now, what would that make you think of the lesser charges, if, hypothetically, and this is a long way from being proven,

00:08:37.780 but what if you found out that the largest charge was fake?

00:08:41.360 Just what if?

00:08:44.540 I don't know if it's going to happen.

00:08:47.120 Now, yeah, I mean, that would certainly make you think twice about the lesser charges, wouldn't it?

00:08:52.620 And the next thing you'd have to wonder is, you know, is it a conspiracy or just like one person had a bone to pick?

00:09:02.060 Or is there some larger situation here that really needs to be looked at?

00:09:07.060 Because I think Keith Raniere made some enemies.

00:09:11.600 Because anybody who was, say, a family member of someone who had been brought into his world, they might have some problems with it.

00:09:19.360 Might be some jealous husband's situations.

00:09:21.820 You can imagine lots of people who would have a bone to pick with him and would maybe find some mechanism to do it.

00:09:29.280 Now, this is all speculative.

00:09:31.160 I'm not saying it's going to go one way or another.

00:09:33.340 I'm not supporting him or not supporting him.

00:09:35.440 And I don't know what's true and what isn't.

00:09:38.120 But we don't live in a world where you can believe law enforcement anymore, can you?

00:09:43.120 I hate to say it.

00:09:44.640 But really, can you trust any of your institutions?

00:09:48.620 Not automatically.

00:09:50.760 Now, I think that we're fortunate that most of our institutions are working well enough to keep the system together.

00:09:58.860 Somewhat.

00:09:59.340 I mean, we're still limping forward, okay.

00:10:02.200 But you can't look at law enforcement and say, well, automatically, they don't plant any evidence.

00:10:09.500 You know, they don't do anything illegal because they're law enforcement.

00:10:12.580 I mean, we're so beyond that innocence, aren't we?

00:10:16.300 I feel like when I was a kid, we were innocent enough that if the police said it was true, I'd say, well, I get that in the inner city some of the police are corrupt, but, you know, that would be the exception to the rule.

00:10:30.300 But now I think, ah, it could be anywhere.

00:10:31.900 There's just a perfectly good chance that any entity anywhere in the United States is corrupt, or that individuals within it are.

00:10:42.280 All right.

00:10:43.640 On the Locals platform, somebody suggested that I create my own disinformation panel.

00:10:49.120 And at first I laughed.

00:10:51.040 I thought, ah, ah, ah.

00:10:52.360 And I thought, well, why can't I?

00:10:56.180 Well, what would stop me from creating my own disinformation panel?

00:10:59.620 Let me tell you how I would do it.

00:11:03.060 Number one, we wouldn't have meetings.

00:11:06.380 That would be, you know, rule number one.

00:11:08.680 No meetings.

00:11:10.640 Number two, you'd be on the panel if I say you're on the panel.

00:11:16.240 So that would be the mechanism.

00:11:18.580 If I say, hey, you, you're on the panel.

00:11:21.560 You're on the panel even if you don't want to be on the panel.

00:11:24.180 You don't even have to agree to be on the panel.

00:11:26.600 You're just on the fucking panel.

00:11:27.800 So you're appointed to the panel, and you have no choice about it.

00:11:33.280 Okay.

00:11:33.820 So, for example, I might appoint Mike Cernovich to the panel, or Elon Musk to the panel.

00:11:43.740 And both of them might say, I don't want to be on your stupid panel.

00:11:47.100 I didn't agree to this.

00:11:48.200 And I'd say, that's not how it works.

00:11:50.100 I'm sorry.

00:11:50.940 That's not how it works.

00:11:52.260 You will simply be one of the, let's say, 12 people that I toss the ball to, in a communication sense, when there's a question of what's real and what isn't.

00:12:04.680 That's it.

00:12:05.280 So if one of those two people I had appointed to my disinformation panel against their wishes, if they tweeted something that said, I believe this is true or I believe this is not true, I would direct you to it, along with the other 11 people that I had appointed against their will to my panel.

00:12:26.680 So I might throw Matt Taibbi on there, Glenn Greenwald, you know, might throw them on there.

00:12:36.460 No, I wouldn't be on the panel myself.

00:12:38.520 I would not be on the panel myself.

00:12:40.240 I would be the chooser of people on the panel, but I would keep my own opinion out of it.

00:12:46.360 Now, I'm seeing some other names of people I would consider more political.

00:12:53.840 So I would pick people only who have a chosen ability to disagree with their own team.

00:13:02.440 You'd have to have that, right?

00:13:04.980 Yeah, Goffeld would be a good example.

00:13:07.140 So Russell Brand, good example.

00:13:10.220 Probably I'd pick Americans just to keep it, well, yeah, I probably would, just to keep it, you know, at least national.

00:13:20.480 So, what do you think?

00:13:22.700 What do you think?

00:13:23.340 Yeah, Dave Rubin, good example.

00:13:25.660 So I'll hold back on who those people would be, and you wouldn't have to like them.

00:13:31.300 It could be, you know, Alan Dershowitz, and then some of you say,

00:13:35.220 oh, we don't like him because of what you imagine he did or didn't do in some case.

00:13:40.980 And I'll say, oh, I don't care.

00:13:42.620 It's not about his personality.

00:13:44.240 It's about a demonstrated ability to reason through things

00:13:47.340 and to disagree sometimes with his own team.

00:13:50.080 If you have that going for you, good enough.

00:13:53.680 So I might create a disinformation panel.

00:13:57.860 I might actually do that.

00:14:02.700 Long COVID.

00:14:03.960 There's a new study, which, like all studies, is completely useless.

00:14:09.340 I say that without knowing anything about it, but this one seems a little more obvious than most.

00:14:14.420 And it's about long COVID, and it seems to have found that people who have long COVID

00:14:19.520 are as much as 10 points lower in IQ even after some time has gone by.

00:14:26.220 And they say it's having a long COVID infection could be, not for every person, of course,

00:14:32.640 but for an alarming number of people, the study would say it's almost like the cognitive decline

00:14:39.280 between the age of 50 and 70, to which I say, what cognitive decline between 50 and 70?

00:14:47.320 I'm almost 65, and I'm getting smarter every day.

00:14:49.940 I don't know what they're talking about.

00:14:52.780 Can you imagine how smart I'm going to be at 70?

00:14:54.980 My God.

00:14:56.900 And what I'm waiting for is when I reach 100, I am going to be so cognitively, cognitively,

00:15:04.960 my cognitively abilities should be amazing by 100 because they're so good now.

00:15:11.820 I mean, between 50 and 65, I feel like I've picked up 7 to 25 IQ points.

00:15:18.320 And I can say with complete certainty that my cognitively abilities are excellent now.

00:15:28.580 And I'd certainly notice them if they weren't.

00:15:31.680 So my smartification seems to be amplifying every moment that I'm alive.

00:15:37.740 So I don't understand that point.

00:15:39.820 But they do say you might lose 10 IQ points if you have long COVID.

00:15:44.220 But here's how they figured that out.

00:15:46.620 They compared people who had long COVID to people who had never been infected.

00:15:53.380 Huh.

00:15:53.820 Does that seem like the right comparison?

00:15:57.540 People who have never been infected to people who have been infected.

00:16:02.720 And then they determined that the people who have been infected generally had lower IQs.

00:16:08.580 And so their conclusion was it was the long COVID that was causing the drop in IQ.

00:16:14.140 Now, keep in mind, what they did not study is the same group of people before and after.

00:16:24.340 Now, that would have been a good study, wouldn't it?

00:16:26.620 Wouldn't you like to see that study?

00:16:28.580 The one right before COVID and right after?

00:16:31.460 Now, that would be an interesting study.

00:16:33.620 Do you know what would not be interesting or useful in any way whatsoever?

00:16:38.840 Comparing the IQs of two completely different people

00:16:41.500 and saying that the reason that this group has different IQ is because of this one variable.

00:16:48.100 I don't know.

00:16:49.360 I'm just going to put this out there.

00:16:53.000 Do you think that there might be a difference in IQ

00:16:55.420 in a broad range of activities in which you could define success and not success?

00:17:03.920 Are there too many fields in which a high IQ does not give you an advantage?

00:17:09.960 Not every person.

00:17:11.500 For example, not every person with a high IQ has a high income.

00:17:16.500 We're not talking about every person.

00:17:18.640 I'm just saying on average, because that's what a study does.

00:17:21.380 It's just an average.

00:17:23.160 So on average, do you think there would be any difference

00:17:25.320 between people who didn't get infected at all and people who did?

00:17:29.640 You don't think there would be an IQ difference between those two groups for a variety of reasons?

00:17:40.920 I'm not even going to get into it.

00:17:42.880 But if there's no IQ difference between the group that got infected on average,

00:17:47.400 again, just on average, not individuals, of course, just on average,

00:17:52.200 you don't think there's any difference.

00:17:54.280 Because if there's no difference between who got infected and who didn't,

00:17:59.160 based on how smart you are,

00:18:01.120 it would be the only human endeavor where that's the case.

00:18:04.360 I know that seems like an over-claim,

00:18:11.080 but can you come up with an example of the opposite?

00:18:14.960 Can you give me a counter-example?

00:18:16.420 Is there something else that humans do in large numbers

00:18:20.060 in which the smart people universally do worse, on average?

00:18:25.240 Again, just on average, not every person.

00:18:28.940 I can't think of one.

00:18:31.780 Vote.

00:18:34.120 Well, that feels like an opinion.

00:18:36.560 Voting feels like an opinion.

00:18:39.920 Right, IQ alone is not predictive of one individual.

00:18:44.700 We all agree with that, right?

00:18:46.700 Can we all agree that IQ doesn't predict what one person will do?

00:18:51.540 Of course, of course not.

00:18:52.800 There's too many other variables.

00:18:53.780 But, well, it can predict whether you'll be a rocket scientist, I guess.

00:19:00.300 Wouldn't you say?

00:19:03.820 Now, I'm not sure that...

00:19:05.680 The one thing that IQ doesn't seem to be correlated with is happiness.

00:19:11.180 Although I've never seen a study, but I'm guessing.

00:19:14.040 Do you think that IQ is correlated with happiness?

00:19:17.140 It might be opposite.

00:19:19.220 You know, the whole ignorance is bliss situation.

00:19:21.780 So, if you say to yourself,

00:19:24.980 all right, here, let me counter my own argument.

00:19:28.720 If the only thing that's important is your happiness,

00:19:32.940 some would argue,

00:19:34.680 and smart people are worse at having it,

00:19:38.040 what's the point of being smart?

00:19:41.160 If it decreases your odds of being happy?

00:19:43.880 It might.

00:19:44.720 I don't know.

00:19:45.540 You might be able to get more stuff,

00:19:47.260 but if the stuff doesn't make you happier, it didn't work.

00:19:51.580 All right.

00:19:54.420 Let's get to the good stuff.

00:19:56.360 Elon Musk tweeted this tweet.

00:19:59.060 Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

00:20:01.240 I assume he's talking about, you know, disinformation and Twitter and stuff,

00:20:05.020 but we don't know.

00:20:06.040 We don't know what he's thinking.

00:20:07.380 We only know what he tweeted.

00:20:09.040 Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

00:20:10.740 Now, let me tell you.

00:20:12.700 This man knows how to tweet.

00:20:16.000 Of all the tweeters I've seen,

00:20:17.820 and I've seen some good ones,

00:20:20.260 his tweet game is just crazy good.

00:20:23.620 And just the fact that everything he says

00:20:25.780 is a little bit provocative.

00:20:28.440 How does he do that?

00:20:30.460 How can everything you say be a little bit provocative?

00:20:32.980 But when he says sunlight is the best disinfectant,

00:20:40.300 immediately we ask,

00:20:41.940 how long will it take before CNN asks,

00:20:45.400 why is Elon Musk saying you should drink bleach?

00:20:49.660 Now, if that joke doesn't make sense to you,

00:20:52.180 your news sources have failed you miserably.

00:20:56.080 Right?

00:20:56.720 Because when Trump talked about light as disinfectant,

00:20:59.980 CNN literally turned it into

00:21:02.860 he's recommending drinking bleach.

00:21:05.620 Literally.

00:21:07.160 And so Elon Musk

00:21:09.660 basically wades right into this, like,

00:21:13.320 dangerous, edgy territory.

00:21:16.860 And he's not even making a point in that domain,

00:21:19.960 I don't think.

00:21:20.480 He just has a way of putting everything in a way

00:21:23.600 that makes your brain catch on fire,

00:21:25.380 which is definitely a skill.

00:21:27.540 It's definitely a skill.

00:21:29.340 All right.

00:21:29.980 Let's talk about Roe v. Wade,

00:21:31.480 and may we start with the following agreement.

00:21:35.180 Can we agree on the following?

00:21:38.080 None of you care

00:21:39.240 about my personal opinion about abortion.

00:21:42.640 Can we agree on that?

00:21:43.760 Because I'm not going to give it to you today.

00:21:46.980 But are you okay with that?

00:21:49.620 Because I want to talk about

00:21:50.640 only the persuasion element of it.

00:21:53.180 Let's see if I can do that.

00:21:55.440 Now, if you think you're detecting my actual opinion

00:21:58.420 because I say one side is more persuasive,

00:22:01.500 then you're misinterpreting today's livestream.

00:22:04.800 If I say one side is more persuasive,

00:22:06.880 it's just about the argument.

00:22:08.700 It doesn't mean anything about my personal opinion

00:22:10.940 of how things should be.

00:22:11.980 I don't think you need my opinion,

00:22:14.860 and I don't think you want my opinion,

00:22:17.400 but let's all agree that in our system,

00:22:20.040 I would have the right to speak,

00:22:22.340 and I would have the right to vote on it.

00:22:25.100 But there's no reason you need to know what it is,

00:22:28.760 and I don't want to influence you on it.

00:22:30.280 I don't want to influence you on it at all.

00:22:33.880 So let's just talk about the persuasion, okay?

00:22:37.300 Number one, more persuasion that we live in a simulation.

00:22:41.820 These are two weird things.

00:22:44.460 I just want to start with the weirdness of them

00:22:46.260 because it just doesn't look like it could be a coincidence.

00:22:49.600 It probably is.

00:22:50.920 But it doesn't look like it could be.

00:22:53.180 That's the fun of it.

00:22:54.020 In all literal truth,

00:22:59.340 it turns out that there's a horse medicine

00:23:01.600 that is exactly the same medicine

00:23:04.340 that is used for one of the pills for,

00:23:08.000 I guess you'd call it an abortion,

00:23:09.460 if you take the pill to...

00:23:11.600 Technically, that's what it is, right?

00:23:14.000 So the left is literally recommending horse medicine.

00:23:17.220 There's nothing you can even say about this, right?

00:23:30.480 Am I right?

00:23:31.840 There's nothing to say about it.

00:23:33.780 You just have to experience this and say,

00:23:36.600 is the simulation tapping us on the shoulder?

00:23:40.260 Because this feels like a prank at this point, doesn't it?

00:23:43.360 Doesn't this feel like somebody's playing a joke on you

00:23:45.540 to see how long it takes

00:23:47.040 before you realize that you're a simulation?

00:23:49.840 It's like, watch this.

00:23:51.640 We're going to make the other left

00:23:53.120 recommend horse medicine for people.

00:23:55.920 We'll see if they catch on.

00:23:58.680 If this doesn't tell you

00:24:00.200 that somebody's messing with us,

00:24:03.080 I don't know what will.

00:24:05.480 Okay, I do know what will.

00:24:07.840 Here's another one.

00:24:09.400 How many of you had never made this connection?

00:24:12.480 When we're talking about abortion,

00:24:14.080 we're talking about Roe versus Wade.

00:24:17.080 What do Roe and Wade have in common?

00:24:21.340 There are two things you do when the water rises.

00:24:25.080 You either got to row your boat

00:24:27.600 or you've got to wade through the water.

00:24:32.140 What does a fetus live in?

00:24:35.460 A bag of water.

00:24:36.580 I don't know that it means anything,

00:24:40.580 but what are the odds that this important case

00:24:44.260 would be two different things you can do in water

00:24:47.220 about a fetus that's in a bag of water?

00:24:52.940 Like just a coincidence?

00:24:54.780 I don't know.

00:24:56.000 I don't know.

00:24:56.700 But how many of you made the connection

00:24:58.200 that rowing and wading are just two things you do in water?

00:25:01.380 What were the odds of that?

00:25:02.560 I mean, just a coincidence,

00:25:05.320 but it just feels like we're being told something, right?

00:25:09.060 And I'm not saying we are.

00:25:10.120 It just gives you that weird feeling.

00:25:12.760 All right.

00:25:14.080 Question number one.

00:25:15.860 The leak of the draft opinion yesterday

00:25:20.020 before the news came out

00:25:22.160 that it had been confirmed as a legitimate real draft.

00:25:25.840 So the Supreme Court, Justice Roberts, Chief Justice,

00:25:29.960 confirms that the draft is 100% real.

00:25:33.500 Now, yesterday I said to you,

00:25:35.160 there's something sketchy about this.

00:25:38.340 And I said the possibilities were

00:25:39.900 it was a complete hoax,

00:25:43.680 another possibility is real,

00:25:45.580 and that's the actual opinion,

00:25:47.320 and that's the way it's going to go down.

00:25:49.400 And then the third option I floated was

00:25:52.120 that it's a real draft

00:25:54.460 but does not represent a real decision.

00:25:58.240 And that's what Justice Roberts said.

00:26:00.580 It's a real draft

00:26:01.580 that does not represent a real decision.

00:26:04.680 But you're saying to me,

00:26:05.880 Scott, Scott, Scott,

00:26:07.840 he's not going to write 98 pages

00:26:10.000 of a detailed decision

00:26:11.700 unless it's kind of a decision.

00:26:14.820 Like, I get that technically it might not be.

00:26:19.940 Technically.

00:26:21.320 But in reality,

00:26:23.300 is somebody going to write a 98-page decision

00:26:25.700 before the vote?

00:26:29.100 And the answer is yes.

00:26:32.840 Yes.

00:26:34.140 And here's how you should see this 98-page draft.

00:26:40.100 Number one,

00:26:42.540 it has to be seen as persuasion within the court.

00:26:46.480 If you want to persuade somebody,

00:26:48.300 write it down,

00:26:49.460 if you think your argument is strong.

00:26:51.700 That's how you persuade.

00:26:53.320 Now, if we know,

00:26:54.600 if we believe that the process is

00:26:56.380 that they haven't voted yet,

00:26:58.300 and if we believe that

00:26:59.680 there might be some changes in opinions,

00:27:02.440 one way you would get to a changed opinion

00:27:04.720 is to show somebody exactly

00:27:06.700 what they would be voting for.

00:27:08.380 not approximately,

00:27:10.640 but exactly what they would be voting for.

00:27:12.880 So that they can say,

00:27:14.260 okay, now that it's written down

00:27:15.760 as a majority opinion,

00:27:17.340 that is exactly what I'm voting for.

00:27:19.440 So my inclination to say yes

00:27:22.560 has now been confirmed.

00:27:24.460 My yes is a yes.

00:27:26.420 But other people might look at it and say,

00:27:30.600 okay, now that I see it this specifically,

00:27:33.460 I've got this problem with it,

00:27:35.300 and I just can't.

00:27:36.120 Now that I know exactly what I'm voting for,

00:27:38.660 I'm not for it.

00:27:41.300 So, having been one who had a job

00:27:44.380 of making business cases,

00:27:46.380 there are two reasons to explain

00:27:48.260 or to write a business case.

00:27:51.080 One of them is to get it approved or signed,

00:27:54.180 or in this case, it would be the decision.

00:27:56.300 That's one reason.

00:27:57.360 The second reason is to see

00:27:58.820 if your argument holds together.

00:28:01.500 And I've been through this process

00:28:02.940 a number of times.

00:28:03.680 There are times when I would be told,

00:28:05.980 okay, write this business case

00:28:07.500 to support why we should

00:28:09.380 or should not do this thing.

00:28:11.140 And then I would write the case

00:28:12.260 and it would come out the opposite

00:28:13.480 of what we thought we should do

00:28:14.820 because the numbers didn't work.

00:28:17.520 So it was the writing of the business case

00:28:19.540 that showed me that I wanted to do

00:28:22.200 the opposite of what I thought I wanted to do.

00:28:24.060 I would imagine that given the size of this issue

00:28:30.360 and how it will rip the country apart,

00:28:33.120 likely,

00:28:34.900 that the justices would write

00:28:37.140 a very detailed draft

00:28:38.840 at an earlier stage than normal

00:28:43.340 because this isn't a normal issue

00:28:46.160 and they would know that.

00:28:47.820 This is a destroy the republic issue.

00:28:50.280 Potentially.

00:28:51.140 It's that big.

00:28:51.740 So I think the justices would say

00:28:55.340 that this draft opinion

00:28:57.540 might not be like regular draft opinions.

00:29:02.440 This might be,

00:29:04.080 at least in some people's opinion,

00:29:07.440 something somebody might have wanted to leak

00:29:09.460 because a big part of what the Supreme Court

00:29:12.880 needs to balance

00:29:13.820 is will their decision destroy the republic.

00:29:17.240 Now, I don't know if that's actually written

00:29:19.100 into their job description,

00:29:21.020 but of course they're going to consider that.

00:29:23.420 Of course they will.

00:29:24.780 It doesn't matter if they're not supposed to.

00:29:26.840 Of course they will.

00:29:28.420 You would.

00:29:29.420 Anybody would.

00:29:30.780 So how would they know exactly

00:29:32.840 what the public opinion would be

00:29:35.340 unless there was something

00:29:36.500 that looked like a complete opinion

00:29:38.120 that was circulating?

00:29:40.380 Because remember,

00:29:41.380 one of the big questions is

00:29:42.680 how limited would this opinion be

00:29:44.960 and would it spread to these other topics?

00:29:46.840 We'll talk about that.

00:29:48.340 This detailed opinion answers that question.

00:29:51.720 And as Joel Pollack reported in Breitbart,

00:29:54.720 and I think he's the first one

00:29:56.140 to say this specifically,

00:29:58.500 I didn't see it anywhere else,

00:30:00.040 that if you read the draft opinion,

00:30:02.080 it specifically limits it

00:30:05.060 to this issue

00:30:06.800 and specifically excludes

00:30:09.260 anything you might try

00:30:10.280 to generalize it to.

00:30:12.160 So the question's been asked

00:30:13.340 and answered in the draft.

00:30:15.440 Isn't that important?

00:30:17.740 That's important.

00:30:18.960 Because Biden is out there

00:30:20.260 telling you exactly the opposite

00:30:21.940 of what the draft says.

00:30:23.620 So they have to say

00:30:24.880 the opposite of what the draft says

00:30:26.540 because their strongest argument

00:30:28.620 is arguing about something

00:30:31.380 that isn't there.

00:30:32.680 That's their strongest argument.

00:30:33.880 We'll talk about that in a minute,

00:30:34.900 the persuasion element.

00:30:36.800 So I would say that,

00:30:40.440 generally speaking,

00:30:41.400 that this specific draft

00:30:43.160 should not be viewed

00:30:44.360 like any other Supreme Court draft

00:30:47.740 and should not be seen

00:30:49.660 as automatically a reflection

00:30:51.320 of their opinion.

00:30:52.640 They could become so spooked

00:30:54.560 by the public reaction

00:30:56.360 that they don't change it.

00:30:59.480 My guess is that the court

00:31:01.220 is clearly leaning toward

00:31:03.080 the majority opinion.

00:31:05.440 We all believe that, right?

00:31:07.940 If you had to bet on it,

00:31:09.380 you'd bet that they're currently

00:31:11.440 leaning strongly in that direction.

00:31:14.560 But if they're watching

00:31:16.980 for the public reaction,

00:31:18.740 that is a whole new variable

00:31:20.140 that could easily swing a vote.

00:31:22.400 Easily swing a vote.

00:31:24.660 Easily.

00:31:25.040 And they, of course,

00:31:28.900 might try to,

00:31:31.400 and, of course,

00:31:32.360 the supporters will try

00:31:33.320 to frame it as a change

00:31:34.960 in or an improvement

00:31:36.440 in the system

00:31:37.440 of who decides,

00:31:38.900 moving it from the courts

00:31:40.140 to the states,

00:31:41.460 which is a more appropriate place

00:31:42.980 for local decisions.

00:31:44.560 So, no matter how hard

00:31:46.560 anybody tries to defend it

00:31:47.900 as an improvement

00:31:48.780 in the system,

00:31:50.240 it's going to look like,

00:31:52.200 and in a practical sense

00:31:53.540 it will be,

00:31:54.740 a removal of somebody's,

00:31:56.300 I'm not going to use

00:31:56.980 the word right,

00:31:57.860 but a removal of their ability

00:31:59.360 to do it without consequence.

00:32:01.500 So, people will be losing

00:32:02.620 something in their opinions.

00:32:04.260 Even though it's just

00:32:06.040 a system shift in theory,

00:32:08.440 it does change things in reality.

00:32:10.060 All right.

00:32:12.700 So, I'm going to say

00:32:14.420 that, in my opinion,

00:32:18.020 this could go either way still.

00:32:20.240 The actual vote

00:32:21.060 could go either way still.

00:32:22.760 And they're waiting to see

00:32:23.880 how big the outcry is.

00:32:25.300 How big will the outcry be?

00:32:26.680 Well, Rasmussen did a quick poll,

00:32:30.120 and so you've been hearing

00:32:31.220 that, what, 70% of the public

00:32:33.360 is in favor of abortion?

00:32:38.220 Here's Rasmussen's poll.

00:32:40.060 51% are in favor of abortion rights.

00:32:44.740 And 40% are pro-life.

00:32:48.160 So, the opposite.

00:32:49.440 So, that would be a clear advantage,

00:32:51.260 but nowhere near 70%.

00:32:53.000 Right?

00:32:54.920 And that still leaves

00:32:57.300 some undecideds.

00:32:59.460 But, if you look at it,

00:33:01.180 here's where it gets interesting.

00:33:03.020 If Rasmussen also asked

00:33:05.000 whether people approved

00:33:07.060 of the Supreme Court

00:33:08.180 overturning Roe,

00:33:10.060 48% approved of it,

00:33:12.740 and 46% opposed it.

00:33:16.440 So, if you look at

00:33:17.540 who's pro-abortion

00:33:18.400 versus pro-life,

00:33:19.560 there's a serious gap there,

00:33:21.780 you know,

00:33:22.000 a good 20% gap or so.

00:33:24.280 25%.

00:33:24.880 Yeah, 25% difference.

00:33:26.380 Um, but if you looked at

00:33:29.620 who wants to change

00:33:30.520 the existing situation,

00:33:32.120 it's almost a tie.

00:33:33.600 I think, statistically,

00:33:35.060 that probably is a tie.

00:33:36.480 48% to 46%.

00:33:37.600 So, the country is evenly split

00:33:39.920 about changing the situation.

00:33:43.060 Just evenly split.

00:33:45.260 That's a pretty serious problem

00:33:46.900 when it's one of the biggest issues

00:33:48.540 of life and death,

00:33:49.900 some would say.

00:33:51.400 You know,

00:33:51.640 that's one point of view.

00:33:52.580 Um, that's as hot a...

00:33:55.060 Yeah, you don't get

00:33:55.960 a hotter potato than that.

00:33:57.840 So, would the Supreme Court

00:33:59.240 be influenced

00:34:00.460 by the size of the revolt?

00:34:03.160 Um, and I would say yes.

00:34:05.840 So, here's,

00:34:06.860 here's the most contrarian take

00:34:08.700 you'll ever hear in your life.

00:34:11.120 You ready for this?

00:34:11.880 Because the leak,

00:34:15.500 as egregious as it is,

00:34:18.180 is helping the system.

00:34:24.820 I didn't imagine

00:34:26.220 that that would be

00:34:26.880 my opinion today,

00:34:27.920 because I just arrived at

00:34:29.040 that at this moment.

00:34:30.040 But when I look at

00:34:30.840 this whole situation,

00:34:32.340 obviously,

00:34:33.760 obviously,

00:34:34.720 the leaker needs

00:34:35.500 to face consequences.

00:34:36.900 Do we agree on that?

00:34:38.860 Can we agree that

00:34:39.600 there should be consequences?

00:34:40.640 You don't want

00:34:42.060 to encourage this.

00:34:43.480 You don't want this

00:34:44.300 to be a precedent.

00:34:45.280 It's the worst thing

00:34:46.000 in the world

00:34:46.460 for the system.

00:34:47.360 The system is definitely

00:34:48.280 damaged by this.

00:34:49.800 And you want to,

00:34:50.540 you want to do everything

00:34:51.260 you can to discourage this

00:34:52.540 in the future.

00:34:54.180 So, I'm anti-anti-anti-leak.

00:34:56.820 Absolutely anti-leak.

00:34:59.820 But maybe there's

00:35:00.860 an exception.

00:35:02.620 And it looks like

00:35:03.500 a human being,

00:35:04.460 at least one,

00:35:06.240 made a decision

00:35:07.220 to,

00:35:10.040 help the republic.

00:35:12.400 Maybe.

00:35:13.200 Maybe.

00:35:14.120 Maybe.

00:35:15.680 By doing something

00:35:16.940 deeply inappropriate,

00:35:20.880 according to almost everybody.

00:35:23.800 Because,

00:35:24.500 Elon Musk said,

00:35:27.000 sunlight is the best

00:35:27.920 disinfectant, right?

00:35:29.640 And when he said that

00:35:30.820 out of context,

00:35:31.740 didn't you agree?

00:35:33.040 You agreed, didn't you?

00:35:34.540 When you heard it

00:35:35.460 out of context,

00:35:36.760 sunlight is the best

00:35:37.760 disinfectant,

00:35:38.500 you said to yourself,

00:35:39.820 yeah, we want

00:35:40.580 transparency.

00:35:41.660 We want to know

00:35:42.380 what's going on

00:35:43.020 under the hood.

00:35:44.120 We'd actually like to know

00:35:45.260 what's happening

00:35:46.020 behind those closed doors.

00:35:47.260 We want to know

00:35:47.680 what people are thinking.

00:35:48.960 We want to know

00:35:49.660 everything we can

00:35:50.400 about everything.

00:35:51.960 Well, you just

00:35:52.860 fucking got it.

00:35:54.800 You just got

00:35:55.700 what you wanted.

00:35:57.240 You got some

00:35:58.060 radical transparency.

00:36:00.220 And some citizen,

00:36:02.240 and I'm really going

00:36:03.000 to piss you off now,

00:36:04.040 a patriot,

00:36:07.480 just gave it to you.

00:36:12.520 Sorry.

00:36:14.140 It's possible

00:36:15.040 that you're not

00:36:16.220 going to hate

00:36:16.660 whoever did this.

00:36:18.540 It's possible

00:36:19.340 you're not going

00:36:19.920 to hate them.

00:36:20.860 Because if I could

00:36:21.820 have scripted this

00:36:22.760 and chosen how

00:36:23.800 this would play out,

00:36:25.060 I would do it

00:36:25.760 just like this.

00:36:27.720 If I could cause

00:36:28.960 the situation

00:36:29.600 to unfold

00:36:30.440 in the best

00:36:31.240 possible way,

00:36:32.040 it would be

00:36:33.260 with the leak.

00:36:34.160 Not without a leak.

00:36:35.100 It would be

00:36:35.400 with a leak.

00:36:36.380 Because the leak

00:36:37.160 is doing exactly

00:36:38.300 what you'd want

00:36:39.040 the leak to do.

00:36:40.660 It's giving

00:36:41.300 the Supreme Court

00:36:42.320 the information

00:36:43.820 they need

00:36:44.500 to make the right

00:36:45.680 decision.

00:36:47.160 Now, I don't know

00:36:48.000 that they'll make

00:36:48.500 the right decision.

00:36:49.740 We'll disagree

00:36:50.540 no matter what they do.

00:36:51.820 But I'm saying

00:36:52.400 that it gives them

00:36:53.100 the maximum amount

00:36:54.080 of information.

00:36:55.120 Because they're going

00:36:55.720 to see what the

00:36:56.340 public reacts to.

00:36:58.640 They're going to see

00:36:59.220 what the law

00:37:00.180 looks like exactly.

00:37:01.160 We'll all become

00:37:03.320 far more educated

00:37:04.340 in the process.

00:37:05.680 This leak is going

00:37:07.040 to force us

00:37:07.760 to be educated

00:37:08.540 in the same way

00:37:09.800 that Trump

00:37:10.340 used to force us

00:37:12.140 to be educated

00:37:12.800 about shit

00:37:13.300 we didn't understand

00:37:14.060 before.

00:37:15.360 And suddenly we're like,

00:37:16.060 oh, God,

00:37:16.540 I guess I'm going

00:37:16.980 to have to go

00:37:17.340 understand this now

00:37:18.220 because I didn't

00:37:19.300 care about it before.

00:37:21.060 Like, how much

00:37:21.720 do you know

00:37:22.060 about immigration

00:37:22.860 that you didn't

00:37:24.900 know before Trump

00:37:25.740 was, I mean,

00:37:26.720 you knew it was bad,

00:37:27.420 but that was about it.

00:37:28.540 And now we're all

00:37:29.180 like immigration experts.

00:37:31.160 We can tell you

00:37:31.740 where the wall

00:37:32.340 needs to be built

00:37:33.120 and how much

00:37:33.660 it costs, right?

00:37:35.640 So this leak

00:37:37.680 is going to have

00:37:38.740 the same absolutely

00:37:40.880 positive effect

00:37:41.960 to the republic.

00:37:44.120 But here's where

00:37:45.640 we have to be smart.

00:37:48.140 Can we?

00:37:49.600 Are we wise enough

00:37:51.060 to treat this

00:37:52.760 as the exception

00:37:53.520 that it is

00:37:54.420 and should remain?

00:37:55.800 Can we say

00:37:57.820 that the Holocaust

00:37:58.520 is the only Holocaust?

00:37:59.580 that slavery

00:38:01.720 was the only slavery?

00:38:04.260 And that there's

00:38:04.760 some things,

00:38:05.480 and abortion

00:38:05.880 is one of them,

00:38:06.900 that just don't

00:38:07.600 have analogies.

00:38:09.440 They are simply,

00:38:10.360 they must be

00:38:11.000 one-offs.

00:38:12.020 They cannot be

00:38:13.100 forced into

00:38:13.640 the same system

00:38:14.500 in every way.

00:38:17.080 In most ways,

00:38:17.780 yes,

00:38:18.300 but not in every way.

00:38:19.960 There's some things

00:38:20.740 that just have

00:38:21.640 to be different.

00:38:22.280 And I would

00:38:24.020 prefer living

00:38:24.740 in a system

00:38:25.400 in which

00:38:26.780 somebody leaks

00:38:27.500 this.

00:38:31.520 Now,

00:38:32.800 that's probably

00:38:33.660 going to make

00:38:34.060 some of you

00:38:34.560 really mad,

00:38:35.240 and I would

00:38:35.620 actually respect

00:38:36.320 your opinion

00:38:36.840 on that.

00:38:37.960 If that bothers

00:38:38.700 you,

00:38:39.060 I completely

00:38:39.780 get that.

00:38:40.880 Because you have

00:38:41.580 two bad choices

00:38:42.400 here.

00:38:43.580 One choice

00:38:44.420 is to

00:38:44.980 protect the system,

00:38:46.540 and that impulse

00:38:47.500 is very strong

00:38:48.280 and very good.

00:38:48.820 I would like

00:38:49.860 to protect

00:38:50.320 the Supreme

00:38:50.820 Court and

00:38:51.440 the Republic

00:38:51.860 as much as

00:38:52.660 possible.

00:38:54.780 But sunlight

00:38:56.540 is the best

00:38:57.280 disinfectant.

00:38:59.200 I can't change

00:39:00.220 that.

00:39:01.120 I can't change

00:39:01.900 the fact that

00:39:02.480 if it's going

00:39:03.140 to be the

00:39:03.500 most important

00:39:04.140 decision in

00:39:04.940 the country,

00:39:05.680 I want more

00:39:06.640 information about

00:39:07.400 it, not less.

00:39:08.880 And boy,

00:39:09.320 did we get

00:39:09.660 more information.

00:39:11.060 We got all

00:39:11.720 the information

00:39:12.400 you're ever

00:39:12.920 going to want,

00:39:13.540 98 pages of it.

00:39:15.140 And a minority

00:39:15.920 opinion is still

00:39:16.680 coming.

00:39:17.100 We're going to

00:39:17.440 read that too,

00:39:18.040 or at least

00:39:18.780 we'll read

00:39:19.100 the summary.

00:39:20.680 So, I

00:39:21.980 can't, you

00:39:23.380 know, I guess

00:39:23.760 I was as

00:39:24.240 shocked and

00:39:24.720 offended as

00:39:25.340 every citizen

00:39:26.240 was and

00:39:26.900 should have

00:39:27.180 been yesterday

00:39:27.700 when they

00:39:28.440 heard the

00:39:28.760 story of a

00:39:29.240 leak.

00:39:29.660 It seemed

00:39:30.260 just so

00:39:31.600 wrong.

00:39:33.500 Like, it

00:39:34.020 offends, like,

00:39:35.180 just like at a

00:39:35.920 basic, like,

00:39:36.640 biological level

00:39:37.660 or something.

00:39:38.300 It doesn't even

00:39:38.800 seem intellectually.

00:39:40.000 It just seems

00:39:40.460 like a violation.

00:39:42.140 Like, you feel

00:39:42.700 almost physically

00:39:43.480 violated by that

00:39:45.100 leak, don't

00:39:45.700 you?

00:39:46.560 It's still

00:39:47.160 wrong.

00:39:48.040 Yeah.

00:39:48.600 And I'm not

00:39:49.600 saying that the

00:39:50.080 person who did

00:39:50.600 it should be

00:39:52.160 free of

00:39:52.540 consequence.

00:39:53.980 Because

00:39:54.380 whistleblowers do

00:39:55.740 take that

00:39:56.300 risk.

00:39:57.840 I believe that

00:39:58.940 somebody did it

00:39:59.580 because they

00:39:59.840 thought it was

00:40:00.200 good for the

00:40:00.700 country.

00:40:02.620 Now, you

00:40:03.460 might disagree.

00:40:05.160 But you

00:40:06.720 might disagree

00:40:07.640 whether it's

00:40:08.100 good for the

00:40:08.520 country.

00:40:09.040 But let me

00:40:09.440 ask you this

00:40:09.860 question.

00:40:10.320 Do you think

00:40:10.740 they did it

00:40:11.440 for purely

00:40:12.760 political reasons,

00:40:13.640 or do you

00:40:14.540 think the

00:40:14.980 person who

00:40:15.480 did it did

00:40:16.040 it for the

00:40:16.860 benefit of the

00:40:17.680 country, in

00:40:18.740 their opinion?

00:40:21.520 What do you

00:40:22.140 think?

00:40:23.480 I'm seeing a

00:40:24.300 mix, purely

00:40:24.980 political, purely

00:40:26.840 political.

00:40:28.000 Some saying

00:40:28.720 both.

00:40:30.740 Some say

00:40:31.500 scapegoating,

00:40:32.420 political.

00:40:33.160 So most people

00:40:33.880 are saying

00:40:34.180 political on the

00:40:34.920 locals platform.

00:40:35.960 Over on

00:40:36.580 YouTube,

00:40:38.140 political,

00:40:38.640 political,

00:40:38.920 both.

00:40:39.440 See, I

00:40:40.240 think whenever

00:40:41.280 you say

00:40:41.700 things are

00:40:42.100 done for

00:40:42.440 one reason,

00:40:43.220 you're wrong.

00:40:45.040 And I

00:40:45.420 don't even

00:40:45.660 know what

00:40:45.840 the topic

00:40:46.200 is.

00:40:47.360 If you

00:40:47.940 have a

00:40:48.200 complicated

00:40:48.640 topic, no

00:40:50.560 matter what

00:40:51.000 it is,

00:40:52.360 taxes,

00:40:53.920 employment,

00:40:54.800 abortion, no

00:40:55.740 matter what

00:40:56.140 the topic

00:40:56.480 is, if it's

00:40:57.120 complicated, and

00:40:58.560 you think that

00:40:59.140 somebody did

00:40:59.700 something for

00:41:00.240 one reason,

00:41:01.640 you're probably

00:41:02.160 wrong.

00:41:04.320 Because people

00:41:04.720 don't really do

00:41:05.600 things for one

00:41:06.220 reason.

00:41:07.360 Most things

00:41:08.020 have multiple

00:41:09.000 benefits and

00:41:10.280 multiple costs.

00:41:11.940 So my guess

00:41:12.840 is that somebody

00:41:13.580 was political,

00:41:15.180 yes.

00:41:16.500 I feel like

00:41:17.000 that's safe

00:41:17.680 to say.

00:41:18.280 It's definitely

00:41:18.820 a political

00:41:19.260 act.

00:41:20.980 Can we agree

00:41:21.480 on that?

00:41:22.340 Can we agree

00:41:22.900 that no matter

00:41:23.420 what else it

00:41:24.180 was, it's

00:41:25.240 100% political?

00:41:27.740 Maybe that's

00:41:28.400 the better way

00:41:28.800 to ask the

00:41:29.220 question.

00:41:29.800 Let's start

00:41:30.280 with a base

00:41:31.040 agreement that

00:41:31.640 it's political,

00:41:32.920 but on top

00:41:33.580 of that,

00:41:35.020 was it also

00:41:36.280 patriotic?

00:41:36.980 In my

00:41:38.760 opinion,

00:41:40.060 probably.

00:41:41.180 Because it's

00:41:41.580 probably somebody

00:41:42.200 who believes

00:41:42.740 their political

00:41:43.400 opinions match

00:41:44.900 patriotism.

00:41:46.300 That's a safe

00:41:47.160 assumption.

00:41:48.400 Don't you

00:41:48.660 think most

00:41:49.120 people believe

00:41:49.820 that their

00:41:50.200 own political

00:41:50.960 opinion is

00:41:52.360 compatible with

00:41:53.260 what they

00:41:53.660 would call a

00:41:54.160 patriot?

00:41:55.840 No.

00:41:57.860 It appeases

00:41:58.780 terrorists.

00:41:59.320 this is the

00:42:04.980 one issue,

00:42:06.800 and I guess

00:42:07.280 this is why

00:42:07.740 I'm not giving

00:42:08.260 you my

00:42:08.620 personal opinion

00:42:09.220 on abortion.

00:42:10.080 This is the

00:42:10.640 one issue

00:42:11.060 where I have

00:42:11.460 100% respect

00:42:12.720 for both

00:42:13.240 sides.

00:42:14.720 That's rare.

00:42:16.260 Meaning that

00:42:16.940 both sides

00:42:18.380 have a

00:42:18.800 different

00:42:20.240 assumption

00:42:20.820 starting point,

00:42:22.300 and then they

00:42:22.840 reason from

00:42:23.380 the different

00:42:23.860 assumption.

00:42:25.940 But their

00:42:26.800 reasoning isn't

00:42:27.400 bad.

00:42:27.740 they just

00:42:28.340 start with a

00:42:28.820 different

00:42:29.020 assumption.

00:42:31.940 All right.

00:42:33.720 Here's my

00:42:34.520 persuasion

00:42:35.100 analysis.

00:42:36.340 When the

00:42:37.060 left says

00:42:37.800 they're losing

00:42:38.440 the right to

00:42:39.060 abortion,

00:42:40.100 do you

00:42:40.380 recognize that

00:42:41.040 persuasion

00:42:41.560 play?

00:42:42.500 They're losing

00:42:43.440 the right.

00:42:45.640 What

00:42:45.920 persuasion

00:42:46.520 play is

00:42:46.940 that?

00:42:50.140 Fear,

00:42:51.080 yes.

00:42:52.080 Fear.

00:42:53.260 All right.

00:42:53.780 It's thinking

00:42:54.280 beyond the

00:42:54.780 sail.

00:42:55.700 Because the

00:42:56.220 question that's

00:42:57.660 being bandied

00:42:59.440 about is

00:43:00.360 whether the

00:43:00.860 Supreme Court

00:43:01.580 is the place

00:43:02.900 to make the

00:43:03.380 decision.

00:43:04.520 The Supreme

00:43:04.960 Court is not

00:43:05.520 deciding whether

00:43:06.160 abortion should

00:43:06.820 be legal or

00:43:07.440 illegal.

00:43:08.660 They're silent

00:43:09.380 on that.

00:43:10.020 They're only

00:43:10.380 deciding whether

00:43:11.080 the Supreme

00:43:11.620 Court is the

00:43:12.480 one to decide

00:43:13.060 it.

00:43:13.760 It would be

00:43:14.380 the states

00:43:14.840 to decide

00:43:15.440 it if they

00:43:17.200 bail out.

00:43:18.660 And here's

00:43:20.800 the other

00:43:21.040 part.

00:43:21.280 So the

00:43:21.540 first part of

00:43:22.140 the technique

00:43:22.620 is making

00:43:23.180 you think

00:43:23.620 past the

00:43:24.100 sail and

00:43:25.180 incorrectly

00:43:25.800 making you

00:43:26.500 think that

00:43:26.900 it's about

00:43:27.280 abortion

00:43:27.720 rights.

00:43:28.820 It's really

00:43:29.280 about who

00:43:29.860 decides.

00:43:31.340 The second

00:43:31.980 part of it

00:43:32.460 is that

00:43:33.880 we know

00:43:34.520 from studies

00:43:36.420 that people

00:43:37.480 are more

00:43:38.220 likely to

00:43:38.960 respond to

00:43:39.520 losing something

00:43:40.420 than to the

00:43:41.860 potential of

00:43:42.540 gaining something.

00:43:44.000 Do you all

00:43:44.420 know that?

00:43:45.900 It's people

00:43:46.660 will respond

00:43:47.380 more emotionally

00:43:48.080 to taking

00:43:48.700 something away

00:43:49.380 from you

00:43:49.880 that you

00:43:50.860 thought you

00:43:51.280 had than

00:43:52.560 to, oh,

00:43:53.160 I might get

00:43:53.740 a free

00:43:54.660 thing.

00:43:56.760 So loss

00:43:57.280 aversion is

00:43:57.800 always a

00:43:58.120 stronger one.

00:43:59.080 So persuasion

00:44:00.640 wise,

00:44:03.260 framing it as

00:44:04.080 losing the

00:44:04.620 right is a

00:44:05.100 really good

00:44:05.740 technique because

00:44:07.540 it activates

00:44:08.400 their side of

00:44:09.000 the thing.

00:44:11.060 All right.

00:44:12.560 Here's some

00:44:13.300 more persuasion

00:44:14.620 stuff.

00:44:15.900 Have you

00:44:21.960 noticed that

00:44:22.920 the people

00:44:24.300 who are

00:44:24.880 opposed to

00:44:26.140 abortion

00:44:26.560 can say

00:44:28.240 all of their

00:44:29.020 reasons in

00:44:30.040 public?

00:44:31.940 And clearly

00:44:32.520 and pretty

00:44:33.760 much they're

00:44:34.660 all the same,

00:44:35.580 right?

00:44:36.140 If I were to

00:44:36.980 characterize the

00:44:38.100 pro-life side,

00:44:39.980 they would say,

00:44:40.580 most of them

00:44:41.000 would say

00:44:41.280 something like

00:44:42.000 my religious

00:44:44.700 belief or

00:44:45.500 maybe even

00:44:46.020 my own

00:44:46.380 intuition says

00:44:47.820 that life

00:44:49.420 begins at

00:44:50.080 conception,

00:44:51.780 they just

00:44:52.320 have that

00:44:52.660 strong feeling

00:44:53.460 and that

00:44:54.740 life is

00:44:55.160 sacred and

00:44:56.780 that it

00:44:59.000 shouldn't be

00:44:59.340 ended for

00:44:59.880 any reason.

00:45:02.160 Now, you

00:45:02.800 can agree

00:45:03.220 with that or

00:45:03.660 disagree with

00:45:04.200 it, but

00:45:05.180 they all

00:45:07.500 have the

00:45:07.760 same argument

00:45:08.240 when you

00:45:08.600 say it's

00:45:09.520 basically the

00:45:10.060 same argument.

00:45:11.980 And it's

00:45:14.140 clean.

00:45:15.500 And it's

00:45:16.040 something that

00:45:16.620 people are

00:45:17.240 proud to

00:45:17.760 say in

00:45:18.100 public.

00:45:19.380 Am I

00:45:19.720 right?

00:45:20.360 I've never

00:45:20.940 heard anybody

00:45:21.480 who is

00:45:21.900 pro-life

00:45:22.960 who is

00:45:24.340 shy about

00:45:25.080 saying it.

00:45:26.780 Like, usually

00:45:27.340 people are

00:45:27.900 quite proud to

00:45:28.560 say that.

00:45:29.720 Now, compare

00:45:30.300 that to

00:45:30.980 what Biden

00:45:32.240 said about

00:45:33.260 the abortion

00:45:34.420 rights situation

00:45:35.260 and the

00:45:35.900 Supreme Court

00:45:36.360 thing.

00:45:37.400 He says,

00:45:38.240 in the tweet,

00:45:39.320 Biden said,

00:45:39.800 the draft

00:45:40.720 opinion calls

00:45:41.520 into question

00:45:42.200 the fundamental

00:45:43.280 right to

00:45:43.920 privacy, the

00:45:45.080 right to

00:45:45.440 make personal

00:45:46.020 choices about

00:45:46.760 marriage, whether

00:45:48.240 to have

00:45:48.600 children, and

00:45:49.780 how to raise

00:45:50.420 them.

00:45:51.120 These are

00:45:51.680 fundamental

00:45:52.160 rights for

00:45:52.700 Americans, a

00:45:53.400 critical part of

00:45:54.220 who we are.

00:45:55.820 Now, sometimes

00:45:57.780 I read tweets

00:45:58.640 before I read

00:45:59.340 who sent

00:45:59.780 them, and

00:46:00.580 this was one

00:46:01.120 of those

00:46:01.360 cases.

00:46:02.240 And when I

00:46:02.740 read this, I

00:46:03.340 got to the

00:46:03.740 part about how

00:46:05.120 this is going

00:46:05.600 to change your

00:46:06.240 fundamental choices

00:46:08.140 about marriage

00:46:08.840 and whether to

00:46:09.400 have children

00:46:09.860 and how to

00:46:10.220 raise them, I

00:46:10.700 thought, who's

00:46:11.840 the dumb fuck

00:46:12.520 who would say

00:46:12.920 that, like, in

00:46:13.680 public?

00:46:14.920 Like, who would

00:46:16.100 be so dumb

00:46:16.880 that they would

00:46:18.040 say that in

00:46:18.640 public?

00:46:19.760 That's just the

00:46:20.580 worst argument

00:46:21.160 ever.

00:46:22.420 I mean, especially

00:46:22.960 given the Joel

00:46:24.100 Pollack observation

00:46:26.760 that the specific

00:46:28.660 thing in question

00:46:30.160 eliminates these

00:46:31.520 possibilities.

00:46:32.800 This isn't even

00:46:33.460 on the table,

00:46:34.820 this stuff.

00:46:35.920 And if it were

00:46:36.580 on the table,

00:46:37.160 there would

00:46:38.260 be nobody

00:46:38.780 who favored

00:46:39.300 it, you

00:46:40.280 know?

00:46:40.540 Like, just

00:46:41.000 everybody would

00:46:41.620 be not in

00:46:42.240 favor of this.

00:46:44.800 So, what does

00:46:45.780 it tell you

00:46:46.360 when one side

00:46:47.360 of the argument

00:46:48.800 can tell you

00:46:50.120 in public,

00:46:50.960 proudly, what

00:46:51.600 their opinion

00:46:52.020 is?

00:46:52.940 And the other

00:46:53.580 side has to

00:46:54.480 use what I

00:46:55.080 call laundry

00:46:55.720 list persuasion.

00:46:57.480 Have we

00:46:58.060 talked about

00:46:58.520 that before?

00:46:59.880 Laundry list

00:47:00.560 persuasion is

00:47:02.220 where you hope

00:47:02.980 that if you

00:47:03.600 give ten

00:47:04.100 reasons,

00:47:05.280 somebody's going

00:47:06.000 to say,

00:47:06.380 you know,

00:47:06.680 I don't

00:47:07.540 know too

00:47:07.980 much about

00:47:08.420 this issue,

00:47:09.060 but if there

00:47:09.400 are ten

00:47:09.680 reasons,

00:47:10.920 ten reasons

00:47:11.700 is pretty

00:47:12.120 strong.

00:47:13.220 That's way

00:47:13.620 more than

00:47:13.980 nine, way

00:47:15.180 more than

00:47:15.500 three.

00:47:16.120 If this

00:47:16.640 were a two

00:47:17.180 reason situation

00:47:18.060 and I didn't

00:47:19.340 understand any

00:47:20.020 of those

00:47:20.320 reasons, I'd

00:47:20.940 say, well,

00:47:21.880 it's only two

00:47:22.440 reasons.

00:47:23.160 Maybe they're

00:47:23.540 not real.

00:47:24.540 But once I

00:47:25.280 see there are

00:47:25.820 ten reasons,

00:47:27.120 that I don't

00:47:27.740 understand one

00:47:28.620 of them in

00:47:29.240 any way

00:47:29.700 whatsoever,

00:47:30.840 well, I don't

00:47:31.680 need to understand

00:47:32.320 this topic,

00:47:33.060 do I?

00:47:33.660 Do I need to be

00:47:34.400 an expert to

00:47:35.360 count to ten?

00:47:35.940 I do not.

00:47:37.100 There are ten

00:47:37.600 reasons.

00:47:38.440 That's all I

00:47:38.940 need.

00:47:40.600 So that's what

00:47:41.200 laundry list

00:47:41.900 persuasion is.

00:47:43.000 It tries to

00:47:43.660 make the

00:47:44.000 argument by

00:47:44.800 quantity without

00:47:46.200 any regard to

00:47:47.620 whether any of

00:47:48.420 the reasons have

00:47:49.040 any merit

00:47:49.800 whatsoever.

00:47:50.960 So one side is

00:47:52.300 using a

00:47:53.260 persuasion tactic

00:47:54.380 which is designed

00:47:56.000 for weak

00:47:56.640 arguments.

00:47:57.980 It's designed

00:47:59.040 for weak

00:47:59.600 arguments.

00:48:00.040 But do the

00:48:02.500 people on the

00:48:03.260 pro-abortion

00:48:03.840 side have

00:48:04.560 weak arguments?

00:48:06.700 No.

00:48:08.180 They don't.

00:48:09.520 They have

00:48:09.960 strong arguments

00:48:10.860 that have one

00:48:11.840 weird quality.

00:48:13.700 You don't want

00:48:14.280 to say them

00:48:14.740 in public.

00:48:18.100 Sorry.

00:48:20.540 Their arguments

00:48:21.360 are strong

00:48:22.100 from just a

00:48:23.460 persuasion

00:48:23.920 perspective,

00:48:24.480 right?

00:48:24.760 I'm not giving

00:48:25.760 you my opinion

00:48:26.460 on abortion.

00:48:27.480 That's not in

00:48:28.080 any of this.

00:48:28.500 It's just a

00:48:28.960 persuasion.

00:48:30.660 If they said

00:48:31.580 their actual

00:48:32.280 argument, I

00:48:33.780 would say,

00:48:34.360 oh, that's a

00:48:35.400 pretty good

00:48:35.720 argument.

00:48:36.900 Would you like

00:48:37.380 to hear the

00:48:37.720 argument?

00:48:39.320 They value

00:48:40.220 their own

00:48:40.900 life and

00:48:41.520 freedom over

00:48:43.040 that of a

00:48:44.020 maybe baby.

00:48:46.620 Because to

00:48:47.420 the left,

00:48:48.220 their starting

00:48:48.720 assumption is,

00:48:49.540 well, this

00:48:50.340 fetus might be

00:48:51.100 a baby,

00:48:51.800 might not.

00:48:52.940 It's a maybe

00:48:53.540 baby.

00:48:54.860 And if they

00:48:55.540 were to say

00:48:55.940 their opinions

00:48:56.520 just cleanly

00:48:58.000 and clearly,

00:48:58.960 I would

00:48:59.340 respect them.

00:49:00.600 And they

00:49:00.780 would say,

00:49:01.100 you know,

00:49:01.820 it might be

00:49:02.360 a baby,

00:49:02.780 it might not.

00:49:03.360 I'm no expert

00:49:04.000 on babies

00:49:04.540 or life

00:49:04.980 or any

00:49:05.240 of that.

00:49:05.740 Maybe it's

00:49:06.140 a baby,

00:49:06.560 maybe it

00:49:06.880 isn't.

00:49:07.500 I just

00:49:07.940 value my

00:49:08.540 own freedom,

00:49:09.940 my own

00:49:10.280 economic

00:49:10.960 well-being,

00:49:12.400 and my

00:49:12.680 own choices

00:49:14.160 and my

00:49:14.840 body.

00:49:15.520 I just

00:49:15.980 put those

00:49:16.440 at a

00:49:16.680 higher value

00:49:17.420 than I

00:49:18.840 put a

00:49:19.900 potential

00:49:20.240 life.

00:49:22.720 That's a

00:49:23.280 strong argument.

00:49:23.880 Now,

00:49:26.600 you could

00:49:26.880 disagree with

00:49:27.840 it and you

00:49:28.160 could throw

00:49:28.580 up.

00:49:29.020 What do you

00:49:29.200 hear?

00:49:29.740 You could

00:49:30.220 say,

00:49:30.500 my God,

00:49:31.000 you're

00:49:31.220 valuing

00:49:31.720 things

00:49:32.080 differently

00:49:33.140 than I

00:49:33.540 value them

00:49:34.060 and that

00:49:34.340 is correct.

00:49:35.720 But remember,

00:49:37.260 what you're

00:49:37.600 disagreeing about

00:49:38.220 is the

00:49:38.540 assumption.

00:49:40.160 It's just

00:49:40.520 the assumption

00:49:40.980 you're

00:49:41.300 disagreeing

00:49:41.740 with.

00:49:42.220 The value

00:49:42.820 of the

00:49:43.380 maybe baby.

00:49:45.460 If you

00:49:46.020 think it's

00:49:46.480 life and

00:49:47.320 sacred,

00:49:48.220 you go one

00:49:48.820 direction.

00:49:49.620 If you think

00:49:50.160 it's,

00:49:50.480 well,

00:49:50.680 I don't even

00:49:51.120 know what

00:49:51.340 it is.

00:49:52.260 It's

00:49:52.500 something

00:49:52.760 that could

00:49:53.240 be or

00:49:53.840 maybe not.

00:49:55.180 Why should

00:49:55.640 I let my

00:49:56.360 life be

00:49:56.860 determined by

00:49:57.440 something that's

00:49:58.060 a maybe?

00:50:00.260 You could

00:50:01.060 imagine somebody

00:50:01.780 having that

00:50:02.200 opinion and

00:50:02.780 not having a

00:50:03.520 moral element

00:50:04.760 to it at

00:50:05.260 all.

00:50:06.560 And I

00:50:07.020 would actually

00:50:07.400 respect somebody

00:50:08.220 who said it

00:50:08.640 directly like

00:50:09.280 that.

00:50:10.080 I think it's

00:50:10.940 good for

00:50:11.320 women.

00:50:11.780 I'm a

00:50:12.100 woman.

00:50:12.500 I'd like to

00:50:12.900 have the

00:50:13.140 choice.

00:50:14.800 I'm not so

00:50:15.760 concerned about

00:50:16.580 the well-being

00:50:17.400 of something

00:50:17.900 that might

00:50:18.360 become a

00:50:19.300 baby,

00:50:20.160 in my

00:50:20.480 opinion.

00:50:21.120 Or might

00:50:21.580 not.

00:50:23.120 So,

00:50:23.840 this is a

00:50:24.600 weird discussion

00:50:25.480 because one

00:50:26.240 side can say

00:50:26.900 exactly what

00:50:27.660 they think

00:50:28.160 and exactly

00:50:28.820 what they

00:50:29.220 want.

00:50:30.100 One side

00:50:30.700 has to

00:50:31.180 use the

00:50:31.920 fog of

00:50:32.640 argument,

00:50:33.800 the laundry

00:50:34.220 list

00:50:34.500 persuasion,

00:50:35.640 because it's

00:50:36.040 just a

00:50:36.440 little bit

00:50:36.800 embarrassing

00:50:37.240 to say

00:50:37.720 you're so

00:50:38.100 selfish.

00:50:39.300 Now,

00:50:39.980 here's a

00:50:40.360 question for

00:50:40.840 you.

00:50:43.560 Is there

00:50:44.240 any

00:50:44.440 narcissism

00:50:45.280 that's

00:50:45.880 affecting

00:50:46.240 this

00:50:46.960 debate?

00:50:49.260 Possibly.

00:50:51.120 I don't

00:50:51.500 know,

00:50:52.080 but possibly

00:50:52.840 it seems

00:50:53.200 to affect

00:50:53.600 everything.

00:50:55.040 All right.

00:50:57.340 Then I

00:50:57.920 saw this

00:50:58.280 argument.

00:50:58.780 Somebody

00:50:58.960 said,

00:50:59.340 how would

00:51:00.920 you feel

00:51:01.280 if a

00:51:01.640 woman made

00:51:02.340 decisions

00:51:02.840 about a

00:51:03.380 man's

00:51:03.700 body?

00:51:04.460 Now,

00:51:04.720 this is

00:51:05.020 exactly why

00:51:05.720 I stay

00:51:06.100 out of it.

00:51:07.540 The reason

00:51:07.880 I stay

00:51:08.300 out of it

00:51:08.700 with my

00:51:09.100 personal

00:51:09.540 opinion is

00:51:10.680 because I

00:51:11.260 put myself

00:51:11.820 in the

00:51:12.900 place of a

00:51:14.260 birthing

00:51:14.560 human,

00:51:14.920 which I

00:51:16.400 call them

00:51:16.840 because I'm

00:51:17.480 woke and

00:51:18.680 you poor,

00:51:19.600 poor bastards

00:51:20.380 are wallowing

00:51:21.720 in the

00:51:22.000 past.

00:51:22.900 You still

00:51:23.360 call them

00:51:23.800 women.

00:51:24.260 I know.

00:51:25.040 I know.

00:51:25.520 But I

00:51:25.860 call them

00:51:26.200 birthing

00:51:26.540 people.

00:51:27.920 And since

00:51:29.380 I'm not a

00:51:29.860 birthing

00:51:30.100 person,

00:51:31.260 I would

00:51:32.160 not want

00:51:32.760 anybody

00:51:34.160 making a

00:51:34.660 decision about

00:51:35.440 me if I

00:51:35.820 were.

00:51:36.460 Likewise,

00:51:37.760 if women

00:51:38.680 were mostly

00:51:39.620 the ones

00:51:40.020 deciding on

00:51:41.020 vasectomies

00:51:43.340 or circumcision,

00:51:46.520 I'd have

00:51:46.920 something to

00:51:47.360 say about

00:51:47.720 that too.

00:51:49.100 So I do

00:51:49.580 think that

00:51:50.320 the closer

00:51:50.840 you are to

00:51:51.480 the topic,

00:51:52.120 the more

00:51:52.420 influence you

00:51:53.020 should have

00:51:53.420 over it.

00:51:55.240 I mean,

00:51:55.620 as a general

00:51:56.260 rule.

00:51:56.960 And since

00:51:57.280 I'm not a

00:51:57.860 birthing

00:51:58.180 person now

00:51:58.860 or later,

00:51:59.660 I think that

00:52:00.440 people who

00:52:00.840 are closer

00:52:01.380 to that

00:52:01.940 world should

00:52:02.520 be making

00:52:02.920 those decisions.

00:52:04.220 And I'll

00:52:04.520 kind of stay

00:52:05.020 out of it.

00:52:05.760 But this

00:52:06.360 question made

00:52:06.860 me laugh.

00:52:07.720 Can a woman

00:52:08.240 make decisions

00:52:09.000 about a man's

00:52:09.820 body?

00:52:10.680 And I

00:52:10.940 thought to

00:52:11.240 myself,

00:52:11.940 I think

00:52:13.200 that happens

00:52:13.760 to every

00:52:14.200 husband every

00:52:14.880 day.

00:52:16.960 Pretty sure

00:52:17.640 your wife

00:52:18.940 is making

00:52:19.320 a decision

00:52:19.860 about your

00:52:20.380 body every

00:52:21.940 damn day.

00:52:23.060 Because you

00:52:23.540 know what's

00:52:23.780 good for

00:52:24.140 your health?

00:52:25.400 Vigorous sex

00:52:26.320 with a loved

00:52:27.780 one.

00:52:28.460 That's really

00:52:28.880 good for your

00:52:29.320 health.

00:52:30.140 Everybody

00:52:30.460 agrees.

00:52:31.400 There's no

00:52:31.780 doctor who

00:52:32.240 would disagree

00:52:32.740 that making

00:52:33.640 love with

00:52:34.340 your spouse

00:52:35.140 and enjoying

00:52:36.460 it would be

00:52:37.000 good for your

00:52:37.420 health.

00:52:37.800 Am I right?

00:52:38.780 Am I right?

00:52:39.680 So every

00:52:40.480 day, if

00:52:41.520 you're married,

00:52:42.080 there's a

00:52:42.440 woman who

00:52:42.820 makes a

00:52:43.160 health

00:52:43.380 decision

00:52:43.860 about a

00:52:44.580 man's

00:52:44.860 body.

00:52:46.220 Now, it's

00:52:46.580 about her

00:52:46.880 own as

00:52:47.220 well.

00:52:47.820 I'll grant

00:52:48.220 you that.

00:52:49.260 But it's

00:52:50.920 pretty much

00:52:51.340 every day.

00:52:54.620 All right,

00:52:55.240 it's just a

00:52:55.820 joke.

00:52:57.260 Don't get

00:52:57.820 so technical

00:53:00.820 with me.

00:53:01.760 All right,

00:53:02.040 I know it

00:53:02.340 doesn't describe

00:53:02.980 your situation.

00:53:05.460 All right,

00:53:05.780 that is my

00:53:10.600 persuasion

00:53:11.160 take on the

00:53:12.340 debate, which

00:53:13.340 is really the

00:53:13.780 only thing

00:53:14.060 happening today,

00:53:14.840 it seems like.

00:53:16.760 Is there

00:53:17.320 anything else

00:53:17.880 you would like

00:53:18.400 an opinion

00:53:18.720 on on the

00:53:19.720 persuasion

00:53:20.620 element of

00:53:22.780 the debate?

00:53:27.240 Yeah, if you

00:53:28.100 separate the

00:53:28.840 child support

00:53:29.680 question from

00:53:30.560 the question of

00:53:31.220 having the

00:53:31.620 baby, then

00:53:33.200 yes, you

00:53:33.720 could take

00:53:34.060 men out of

00:53:34.500 it.

00:53:34.940 I 100%

00:53:35.920 think the

00:53:36.540 men should

00:53:37.140 decide about

00:53:38.200 their economic

00:53:39.280 impacts.

00:53:41.260 So I would

00:53:42.300 certainly weigh

00:53:42.820 in about who

00:53:43.640 should pay for

00:53:44.660 what, if you'd

00:53:46.220 like an opinion

00:53:46.680 on that.

00:53:48.220 So Dave

00:53:48.860 Chappelle got

00:53:49.440 attacked on

00:53:50.140 stage by

00:53:51.860 somebody who

00:53:52.440 apparently had

00:53:53.300 a gun and

00:53:54.340 a knife.

00:53:55.100 We don't know

00:53:55.880 the details of

00:53:56.720 that, but that

00:53:57.140 was the report.

00:53:57.700 He was at the

00:53:58.060 Hollywood Bowl.

00:53:59.720 Somebody jumped

00:54:00.760 on stage with

00:54:01.660 a gun and a

00:54:02.920 knife, but he

00:54:04.040 was apparently

00:54:04.480 unhurt.

00:54:06.220 Now, what do

00:54:07.320 we know about

00:54:07.840 the perpetrator

00:54:08.540 if he had a

00:54:09.840 gun and a

00:54:10.640 knife and he

00:54:12.060 got to Dave

00:54:12.700 Chappelle and

00:54:14.020 yet Dave

00:54:14.640 Chappelle was

00:54:15.140 unhurt?

00:54:16.400 Well, can we

00:54:16.960 conclude about

00:54:18.800 the person?

00:54:21.240 Not a

00:54:21.860 conservative,

00:54:23.280 because I

00:54:24.280 don't think a

00:54:24.820 conservative would

00:54:25.720 have missed.

00:54:28.440 Sorry.

00:54:30.400 Probably a

00:54:31.120 left-leaning

00:54:31.540 person.

00:54:31.920 I think that's

00:54:32.820 what you're

00:54:33.140 going to find

00:54:33.420 out.

00:54:34.180 Yeah, I'm

00:54:34.580 guessing

00:54:34.840 something about

00:54:35.600 the trans

00:54:37.280 community,

00:54:38.460 probably.

00:54:39.300 That would

00:54:39.580 just be a

00:54:39.960 guess, though.

00:54:41.940 And Chris

00:54:42.620 Rock was

00:54:43.140 actually in

00:54:43.700 the audience

00:54:44.220 because the

00:54:46.000 simulation.

00:54:47.560 I'm not

00:54:48.240 making this

00:54:48.740 up.

00:54:49.340 A comedian

00:54:49.900 gets attacked

00:54:50.660 on stage and

00:54:52.240 Chris Rock is

00:54:53.120 sitting in the

00:54:53.580 audience.

00:54:55.180 That actually

00:54:56.020 happened.

00:54:56.400 Yeah, it

00:54:59.680 wasn't Will

00:55:00.140 Smith.

00:55:00.740 We checked.

00:55:02.300 That's pretty

00:55:02.800 funny.

00:55:06.880 All right, I

00:55:09.660 saw a joke, but

00:55:10.480 I'm not going

00:55:10.820 to repeat it.

00:55:16.580 Chris Rock

00:55:17.320 asked if it

00:55:19.380 was Will

00:55:19.840 again.

00:55:20.580 Oh, did

00:55:20.880 he make that

00:55:22.140 joke?

00:55:22.540 That would

00:55:22.820 have been

00:55:23.000 hilarious.

00:55:23.380 That would

00:55:23.460 have been

00:55:24.380 hilarious.

00:55:26.400 All right.

00:55:30.220 Yeah, top

00:55:30.960 that.

00:55:32.400 What is my

00:55:32.840 opinion regarding

00:55:33.740 the timing of

00:55:34.680 the leak?

00:55:35.020 Oh, yeah, let's

00:55:35.720 talk about the

00:55:36.200 timing of the

00:55:36.640 leak.

00:55:37.080 You know, one

00:55:38.140 thing, let me

00:55:38.800 give a little

00:55:39.300 shout-out.

00:55:40.520 I was watching

00:55:41.080 The Five

00:55:41.760 yesterday,

00:55:43.060 discussing the

00:55:43.840 leak, and I

00:55:44.720 thought they

00:55:45.940 had, especially

00:55:46.640 Dana Perino,

00:55:47.380 had the best

00:55:47.940 takes on, you

00:55:49.920 know, the

00:55:50.360 things you

00:55:50.720 hadn't heard

00:55:51.120 yet that kind

00:55:52.220 of gave you

00:55:52.980 the best take

00:55:53.480 on that.

00:55:54.740 As far as

00:55:55.440 the timing of

00:55:56.020 the leak,

00:55:56.400 someone pointed

00:55:59.500 out online that

00:56:00.820 if it was

00:56:01.340 someone from

00:56:02.660 the left,

00:56:04.640 wouldn't it

00:56:06.340 be just as

00:56:07.020 good if they

00:56:07.720 waited until

00:56:08.340 July, because

00:56:09.940 it could have

00:56:10.360 come out in

00:56:10.760 July, and

00:56:11.500 then the

00:56:11.920 energy would

00:56:12.460 have been

00:56:12.660 through the

00:56:13.120 roof and

00:56:15.040 closer to the

00:56:15.760 election.

00:56:16.200 So it would

00:56:16.620 have been

00:56:16.840 maybe more

00:56:17.460 of an

00:56:17.700 election issue

00:56:18.440 if we

00:56:19.580 hadn't worn

00:56:20.440 it out before

00:56:21.060 the election.

00:56:22.320 So that's

00:56:22.660 one argument.

00:56:23.280 But I would

00:56:23.600 say somebody

00:56:24.340 could also

00:56:24.820 think you

00:56:25.300 wanted to get

00:56:25.840 a head

00:56:26.100 start, because

00:56:27.420 you might

00:56:27.680 need to

00:56:27.980 build a lot

00:56:28.540 of momentum

00:56:29.040 around it, so

00:56:29.880 it's the only

00:56:31.180 thing you're

00:56:31.580 talking about.

00:56:32.680 And the

00:56:33.220 sooner you

00:56:33.700 did this, the

00:56:35.020 sooner it

00:56:35.480 could erase

00:56:36.060 Biden's other

00:56:36.980 mistakes.

00:56:38.260 So I think

00:56:39.020 the smarter

00:56:39.520 argument is

00:56:40.360 that doing it

00:56:40.880 now was a

00:56:41.520 perfect time

00:56:42.260 if you're a

00:56:44.620 Democrat.

00:56:44.940 It was a

00:56:46.360 perfect time,

00:56:47.160 because it

00:56:47.480 not only

00:56:48.040 erased the

00:56:49.460 current headlines

00:56:50.280 that are all

00:56:50.820 negative, but

00:56:52.240 it's an issue

00:56:53.400 that can't

00:56:53.960 die, and

00:56:55.260 it's going

00:56:55.640 into the

00:56:56.060 summer, so

00:56:58.100 the protests

00:56:58.700 will start to

00:56:59.240 get organized

00:56:59.780 now, and it's

00:57:00.600 the right kind

00:57:01.060 of weather,

00:57:01.740 it's always

00:57:02.400 summer, right?

00:57:03.280 Summer is the

00:57:03.980 protest season, so

00:57:05.420 it's perfect for

00:57:06.120 the protest

00:57:06.540 season, you

00:57:07.160 wouldn't want

00:57:07.480 to be at the

00:57:07.880 end of the

00:57:08.280 protest season,

00:57:09.240 you want to

00:57:09.540 be at the

00:57:09.840 beginning.

00:57:11.400 So, but

00:57:12.680 then there

00:57:13.280 are other

00:57:13.600 motives.

00:57:14.660 If the

00:57:15.180 person doing

00:57:15.680 it was a

00:57:16.140 patriot, which

00:57:18.160 I think is a

00:57:18.700 distinct

00:57:19.020 possibility, then

00:57:21.460 they just

00:57:21.800 wanted the

00:57:22.120 country to

00:57:22.520 see it as

00:57:22.940 soon as

00:57:23.220 possible, and

00:57:24.680 that the

00:57:25.600 country's

00:57:26.960 reaction could

00:57:27.700 be included

00:57:28.840 in the

00:57:29.260 decision, maybe.

00:57:30.780 So that

00:57:31.180 would argue

00:57:31.620 for sooner

00:57:32.160 is better,

00:57:33.360 because then

00:57:33.920 it influences

00:57:34.900 the decision,

00:57:36.020 as opposed

00:57:36.540 to being

00:57:37.760 after the

00:57:38.260 decision.

00:57:39.300 So everything

00:57:40.080 argues for a

00:57:41.220 left-leaning

00:57:41.740 person to

00:57:42.400 have released

00:57:43.300 it.

00:57:44.400 The only

00:57:45.280 argument for

00:57:45.840 a right-leaning

00:57:46.280 person is if

00:57:47.080 it was an

00:57:47.740 inoculation, but

00:57:49.460 that would be a

00:57:50.040 bad play, because

00:57:51.480 the inoculation

00:57:52.360 would also be

00:57:53.840 wiping out all

00:57:54.800 the headlines

00:57:55.320 that were

00:57:55.700 already negative

00:57:56.600 for Biden.

00:57:57.580 If you were

00:57:58.180 on the right,

00:57:59.340 your best play

00:58:00.080 would be to do

00:58:00.800 nothing all the

00:58:01.560 time, because

00:58:02.920 you're already

00:58:03.300 winning.

00:58:04.880 So people on

00:58:06.180 the right don't

00:58:06.720 have an incentive

00:58:07.440 to make a big

00:58:08.560 play, right?

00:58:10.980 It's just, just

00:58:12.280 grind it out, and

00:58:13.260 you're going to

00:58:13.540 get everything you

00:58:14.300 want, it looks

00:58:14.980 like.

00:58:15.820 You know,

00:58:16.720 there's going to

00:58:17.680 be plenty of

00:58:18.180 surprises.

00:58:18.560 But it would

00:58:20.320 look as if the

00:58:21.820 Republicans should

00:58:22.620 just grind it

00:58:23.320 down and not

00:58:23.900 do anything

00:58:24.500 provocative.

00:58:25.780 Just coast, and

00:58:27.880 then take a

00:58:28.560 complete victory.

00:58:30.380 But Democrats

00:58:31.200 needed to pull a

00:58:32.740 rabbit out of the

00:58:33.460 hat.

00:58:34.540 Am I right?

00:58:35.820 This is definitely

00:58:36.920 rabbit out of hat

00:58:38.360 situation kind of

00:58:40.100 stuff.

00:58:41.400 So I would say

00:58:42.340 the argument is

00:58:43.060 strongly on the

00:58:44.280 side of someone

00:58:45.060 left-leaning

00:58:45.760 releasing it.

00:58:47.400 But I will not

00:58:48.880 rule out that

00:58:50.460 they were just a

00:58:51.500 patriot, and they

00:58:52.360 thought they were

00:58:52.780 doing the right

00:58:53.220 thing for the

00:58:53.680 country.

00:59:00.760 Rick Wilson

00:59:01.480 identified the

00:59:02.300 leak as fake

00:59:02.860 news, but claimed

00:59:03.660 it came from the

00:59:04.340 right.

00:59:05.180 Well, I think it

00:59:06.420 was too soon, and

00:59:08.500 so that's why I

00:59:09.220 avoided doing it.

00:59:10.680 Too soon to say

00:59:11.620 it was definitely

00:59:12.280 fake news.

00:59:14.200 And now we know

00:59:14.960 it's at least a

00:59:15.560 confirmed draft.

00:59:17.400 What do you

00:59:21.420 think about the

00:59:21.880 idea that Russia

00:59:22.580 is trying to

00:59:23.340 reinstall Trump?

00:59:25.020 Well, what could

00:59:27.440 Russia do about it

00:59:28.400 at this point?

00:59:29.240 If Trump runs, I

00:59:32.040 don't know that

00:59:32.820 Russia has any

00:59:33.560 impact on that.

00:59:36.140 You know, we're

00:59:37.080 not even talking

00:59:37.680 about Ukraine

00:59:38.300 anymore.

00:59:39.740 And by the way,

00:59:41.040 how many of you

00:59:42.100 have come around to

00:59:42.840 my point of view

00:59:43.560 that it looks like

00:59:44.320 the United States

00:59:45.160 thinks it can win,

00:59:46.840 just outright win

00:59:47.940 in Ukraine?

00:59:49.180 How many of you

00:59:50.080 think that that's

00:59:50.680 actually the way the

00:59:51.580 government is thinking

00:59:52.400 at this point?

00:59:54.440 Do you think so?

00:59:56.400 Yeah.

00:59:57.160 A few more yeses?

00:59:59.120 Because the longer

01:00:00.000 this drags on,

01:00:01.500 and with the more

01:00:02.440 firepower we put in

01:00:04.580 there, the more it's

01:00:05.980 going to look like we

01:00:07.680 must have planned to

01:00:08.440 win.

01:00:08.640 When was the last

01:00:14.920 time I was truly

01:00:15.700 shocked by something?

01:00:17.500 I can't tell you.

01:00:19.640 Because it was so

01:00:21.960 shocking that I can't

01:00:23.420 even tell you.

01:00:24.820 Can't even tell you.

01:00:27.260 But let me tell you

01:00:28.480 that the past few

01:00:30.960 years have been

01:00:31.680 pretty illuminating.

01:00:35.020 All right.

01:00:35.480 All right.

01:00:38.640 And by the way,

01:00:40.540 there are things I

01:00:41.460 know about most of

01:00:42.120 these stories that...

01:00:43.420 Oh, damn you.

01:00:49.780 Damn you.

01:00:51.820 I just...

01:00:52.420 Every once in a while

01:00:53.120 I'll see a comment

01:00:53.820 that's just so perfect

01:00:55.300 that I lose my

01:00:57.360 complete trade of

01:00:58.120 thoughts.

01:00:58.420 The disinformation

01:01:05.440 bill money is in

01:01:08.360 the Ukraine bill.

01:01:09.660 Great.

01:01:17.240 Over on the YouTube

01:01:18.920 platform, the

01:01:19.860 locals people can't

01:01:20.820 see it, but about

01:01:22.140 every fifth comment

01:01:23.400 refers to me as

01:01:24.720 clot.

01:01:25.200 Now, let me ask

01:01:28.780 you this.

01:01:29.220 How long do I have

01:01:30.520 to stay alive before

01:01:32.600 it will look like

01:01:33.440 maybe I didn't make

01:01:34.240 any mistakes in the

01:01:35.160 pandemic?

01:01:38.380 Is there any

01:01:39.360 standard for that?

01:01:40.480 Like, suppose I live

01:01:41.340 to 100 and I don't

01:01:42.220 have any clots.

01:01:43.760 Will you say,

01:01:44.360 well, you know,

01:01:46.560 you played it right.

01:01:48.780 Or there's no winning

01:01:50.080 in this, is there?

01:01:51.180 At what cost?

01:01:52.020 At what cost?

01:01:53.520 Exactly.

01:01:54.380 There's no way to

01:01:55.080 win, is there?

01:01:57.000 It's a no-win situation.

01:01:58.800 All right.

01:02:04.960 Most of the people

01:02:05.760 who call me Claw Adams

01:02:07.060 believe that I was

01:02:08.140 pro-vaccination.

01:02:11.940 But that's the way

01:02:13.660 it goes.

01:02:14.820 So people will

01:02:15.640 believe anything.

01:02:17.820 All right.

01:02:18.500 That's all for now.

01:02:19.220 I will talk to you

01:02:22.820 later.

01:02:23.640 See you tomorrow.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - May 04, 2022

Episode 1733 Scott Adams： The Persuasion Game With The Supreme Court Leak and Roe V Wade

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript