Episode 1809 Scott Adams： January 6 Was A Feature Not A Flaw. Propaganda Versus News
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 3 minutes
Words per Minute
146.32462
Summary
A story about Joe Biden falling off his bike is debunked, and the FBI director says the January 6th protests were bad, but can't they be wiped away? Plus, fake news, fake tweets, fake stories, and fake news again.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Good morning, everybody. I hope you're feeling great, because today is going to be a really
00:00:09.380
good day for most of you. For most of you, yeah. And showing up here at the live coffee
00:00:16.980
with Scott Adams, if you are live, is one of the best things that's ever heard. What?
00:00:23.880
Neil Peart scored higher than Max. Why is somebody mentioning Neil Peart when I was
00:00:29.140
just watching Neil Peart videos? How is that even possible? Literally, the last video I was
00:00:36.280
watching, and somebody's mentioning this obscure drummer. How is that even possible? Anyway,
00:00:41.920
sorry, I'm having a little simulation moment here. But if you'd like to take your experience up to
00:00:48.540
the stratosphere, all you need is a copper mug, a glass of tankard shells, a stein, a canteen jug,
00:00:54.000
a garflask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquids. I like coffee,
00:01:00.640
and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure. The dopamine to the day thing makes everything
00:01:06.640
better. Go. Neil Peart is no obscure drummer. You'll be a non-obscure drummer if you know
00:01:21.420
drummers. Well, the best fake news of the day, I'm going to say I fell for it. That'll be my story.
00:01:30.700
I totally fell for it. The story was that the place, and Zero Hedge tweeted this originally,
00:01:39.600
the place that Joe Biden fell off his bicycle on Google Maps, the name of that place is called
00:01:46.580
Brandon Falls. Brandon Falls, the exact place he fell off his bicycle. Now, when you saw that,
00:01:55.160
did you say to yourself, well, that's definitely true? Or did you say to yourself, that's a little
00:02:00.440
too on the nose? Well, my first reaction to that is, no, that's just somebody geotagged it, which
00:02:07.520
is a thing you can do. So it'll show up on the map, but that doesn't mean it's the name of the town.
00:02:13.420
But I tweeted that mofo anyway. Do you know why? Because for the three or four seconds it would take
00:02:21.000
before it got debunked, which it did. It took a few seconds, but it got debunked right away.
00:02:26.300
I wanted you to feel it was true. I'm not proud of that. But when I first read it,
00:02:35.460
I thought, oh, this is really funny, because it might be true. But then after about 10 seconds,
00:02:41.280
you say, no, that's just a geotag. But I tweeted it anyway, because I wanted you to have the same
00:02:47.460
experience. Then for a few seconds, you'd think, is that true? And it would just be like really
00:02:52.920
weird and fun. And then, you know, a minute later, you'd find out none of it was true. It was just
00:02:56.920
some, some joker geotagged it, which by the way, is funny enough, right? The fact that it was done
00:03:02.940
by a joker, and it's not real, is just as funny. So I thought, well, either way. But anyway, it wasn't
00:03:10.080
real. So Comey is writing in the Washington Post, why it's so important that all the January 6th
00:03:20.780
protesters be held accountable, you know, all the ones that broke laws, and that everyone should be,
00:03:26.640
you know, followed up on. I guess there are some FBI people that Comey is aware of, who are thinking
00:03:34.480
that maybe the, you know, the treatment of the January 6th people was a little harsh, compared
00:03:39.820
to how other protesters in other contexts have been treated. But Comey is saying, no, no, no, no.
00:03:47.100
And this is one of the things that Comey says, quote, he says, none of that matters, because surely
00:03:53.740
you agree on one thing, January 6th can't happen again. Really? Is that, do we agree on that?
00:04:04.480
I don't agree on that. I don't even agree that January 6th was bad, except for the violence,
00:04:11.900
and, you know, the violence was bad, of course. So everybody agrees the violence was bad. Don't
00:04:16.540
make that a thing. But what about the fact that there was a major protest at the Capitol,
00:04:22.740
and it was really dicey? Was that a feature or a flaw? Let me say something about America,
00:04:30.360
Mr. Comey, which is something you apparently don't know about your own country. It goes
00:04:36.580
like this. If something happens that the government does, if the government does something, let's
00:04:42.600
say an election, and the signal is that there's fraud, the signal. It doesn't mean the signal
00:04:50.700
is correct. There are lots of false signals. But definitely the signal from this election
00:04:55.480
was that there was something sketchy, and you ought to pause for a second and make sure
00:05:00.460
that everything's okay. That's what the protesters wanted. Now, ask me, do I not want that to
00:05:06.080
happen again? No, I do want that to happen again. But Scott, Scott, Scott, you say, people
00:05:13.160
got hurt. You want that to happen again? Yes, I do. Not the hurt part. But if it's part
00:05:19.480
of the package, yes, yes. Protests are dangerous. People get hurt. Let me say it unambiguously.
00:05:26.360
If the same situation arose again, where half, I'm going to say half the country, had deep
00:05:33.920
questions about the integrity of the election system, I want another January 6th. And I don't
00:05:40.900
care if it's the Democrats who are protesting a Republican victory. I don't care who the winner
00:05:48.380
was. That's not even on my radar. That's a whole separate question. But if you send the
00:05:54.060
American people a big, glaring signal of fraud, there's going to be a crowd. There's going
00:06:03.340
to be a crowd. That doesn't mean the signal is correct, right? Lots of stuff we see as signals
00:06:09.400
are just false. Probably half of them. Maybe most of them. Maybe most of the signals are false.
00:06:15.820
But you tell me that you send a signal this glaringly big that something might be wrong.
00:06:22.400
Might be. Because I haven't seen any proof that the election was rigged, personally. But
00:06:28.960
did it signal that something needed to be looked at? Yes. Yes, it did. In the eyes of a lot
00:06:35.980
of smart people who may have been suffering from confirmation bias, whatever. But a lot of smart
00:06:41.640
people looked at it and said, that we need to look into. That's a pretty big signal right
00:06:48.120
there. You don't just ignore that signal. So to Mr. Comey, let me say I could not disagree
00:06:56.100
more. What this country needs is more January 6th, not less. We need more of it. We need a
00:07:03.760
crowd to forum when it's obvious our government is sending signals of fraud. Has the Biden
00:07:10.780
administration sent any signals that they're not credible in dealing with China? Yes, they
00:07:17.480
have. The whole Hunter Biden laptop. Now, there hasn't been any protest over that that I know
00:07:23.900
of. But if a protest formed over that, and people got hurt, I would be in favor of that.
00:07:32.860
Not the people getting hurt, but a process in which people take higher risk because they
00:07:39.040
think there's a higher level problem. Yes. When people see a high level problem, or even maybe
00:07:44.800
a high level problem, and they take high level risk to address it, that's the country I want
00:07:50.720
to live in. Don't tell me you're taking that away. That's the reason I love this country.
00:07:57.220
It's like burning the flag. I've said this a million times, but I'm going to keep saying
00:08:00.880
it until everybody believes it. I don't want to salute a flag I can't burn. The fact that
00:08:08.480
you can burn it in public is why I glorify it. That's why I respect it. That's why I honor
00:08:17.620
the flag. Because you can burn that thing in public, and it gets stronger. Every time
00:08:23.700
you burn it, it gets stronger. Burn it today. You can burn it right in front of me. I know
00:08:30.020
a lot of you would be so offended if you saw a flag burning right in front of you. You
00:08:33.620
might try to put it out. You might get violent with the person who's doing it. You'd be so
00:08:37.760
offended. Not me. Not me. You can burn that flag right in front of me. You can put a whole
00:08:42.780
pile of flags, set them all on fire. And when you're done, that flag will be stronger. Because
00:08:50.080
it let you burn it up, and it didn't do anything. That's how it gets its power. The power of the
00:08:55.360
flag is you can burn it. Don't lose that. Don't lose that. That's a feature. All right.
00:09:03.500
And Comey says, we have a constitution and statues and blah, blah, blah. And the FBI's
00:09:12.300
job is to send the message that it can never happen again if we are to remain a nation under
00:09:17.340
law. No, Mr. Comey, it's going to happen again. Because we're America. You know, we got a lot
00:09:25.340
of flaws. We Americans got a lot, we got a lot to answer to, right? People got questions
00:09:32.380
about us? Okay. They're not all bad questions. We got a lot to answer to. But there is one
00:09:39.020
thing we're going to get right every time. Fuck around and find out. We'll get that right
00:09:45.960
every time. Fuck around and find out. That doesn't mean we're always right. But if you
00:09:52.720
fuck around, you're going to find out. It's just spilt into the American DNA. And most
00:09:57.000
countries, I think. You know, we're not that unique. Well, CNN has continued its two-prong
00:10:05.780
plan to destroy the planet while also telling you that it could be fun. Could be fun. Does
00:10:12.300
that sound like an exaggeration? The CNN is destroying the planet but simultaneously telling
00:10:19.380
you how you can have fun with it. Well, there was a story today about how, you know, we might
00:10:26.100
have energy problems and you might lose your AC during the summer. But CNN explains that you
00:10:32.320
can still have fun on hot days and then gives you a number of tips for not overheating. So
00:10:40.620
CNN and the like have pushed the climate change narrative until it caused people to overreact
00:10:50.340
and get rid of their own energy sources without replacements online. So CNN and others who have
00:10:59.720
gotten us to this place where we reviled the energy that could, you know, power our AC, they're
00:11:07.420
literally trying to sell you that everything's fine. Oh, yeah, it'll be 110 and you won't
00:11:14.220
have AC. But, you know, you can still have fun in the heat. You can still have fun in
00:11:18.900
that heat. Just, you know, don't overdo it. Here's some tips. Put a nice, put an ice cube
00:11:23.780
in your pants. Oh, that's right. Your freezer doesn't work. Just go send your electric car with
00:11:30.960
the AC on. As long as you don't have to recharge it. Yeah. So that's nice of them to destroy the
00:11:37.760
world and tell us how to enjoy it. Well, Janet Yellen says that we're working with South Korea
00:11:44.960
and probably some other allies to try to decouple from China and the rare earth materials because
00:11:52.960
China has a lot of that market and we depend on it apparently. So it's a bad thing to depend
00:11:58.700
on that because our whole tech industry and our military and everything else depends on
00:12:03.820
those rare earth materials going into products. But now we're going to decouple from China
00:12:09.140
and look into South Korea for chips and other stuff. And let me ask you this. How many of
00:12:17.520
you remember during Trump's first term, and it was early on before the pandemic. So how many
00:12:25.660
of you remember that before the pandemic, I was tweeting like an idiot that we should decouple
00:12:31.880
from China's economy? How many people remember me saying over and over again? And do you remember
00:12:38.500
the reaction I got? Does anybody remember the reaction from the public? Now, some of you
00:12:44.380
follow me were like, yeah, yeah, let's do it. But generally speaking, what would you say the
00:12:49.040
public reaction was? The public reaction was, that's not going to happen. That's never going
00:12:55.660
to happen. Scott, Scott, Scott. That's not going to happen. Well, it's happening. Now, it took
00:13:03.260
a pandemic to do it. But, you know, something was going to happen to wake us up. It just happened
00:13:09.760
to be that. Now, the idiot cartoonist was asking for decoupling. But we're decoupling.
00:13:18.080
That's happening. Now, here's a question to you. Take me out of the equation for a moment.
00:13:23.200
Which of our political leaders were also early on decoupling from China? Name somebody who's
00:13:30.940
running for president or might, you know, somebody whose name is in the mix. And Trump, right?
00:13:39.340
Trump, okay. Now, did Trump ever say decouple? Have you ever heard Trump say decouple? I don't
00:13:48.400
know if he's used that word. Somebody's saying Rand Paul. Rand Paul has said decouple? Has
00:13:55.540
Hawley? I haven't heard Hawley. The one I know is Tom Cotton. Can you confirm that? I think
00:14:05.780
Tom Cotton was the earliest and strongest voice of the, you know, high-end politicians. Well,
00:14:12.380
Tucker was, you know, not a politician. But of the people running for president, I think
00:14:17.260
it was Tom Cotton, right? So when you're deciding who to support here, I would just ask you to
00:14:24.820
remember who was right and who was vocally right. Yeah. Kyle Bass, of course, highly influential
00:14:32.440
on this. So give a thought to the fact that I think Tom Cotton had the right priorities
00:14:38.400
and saw it early. So we're watching the left try to explain Biden away. And it looks like
00:14:48.580
some of them have turned. We'll talk about that in a minute. But have you tried having
00:14:53.400
a conversation with a Democrat and asking how they feel about their Biden presidency? Have
00:15:00.980
you done that lately? You should try it. Just ask how they think they're doing and watch
00:15:09.100
the answer. Because I'm pretty sure there's nobody who thinks he's doing a good job. Like
00:15:15.300
actually. Don't you think? I'm pretty sure literally no one quietly, like in their private
00:15:22.560
time. I don't think anyone thinks he's doing a good job. I could be wrong, but I don't think
00:15:27.500
so. So watching somebody answer a question when you know they're lying is really useful.
00:15:33.940
Here's a tip for you. If there's somebody in your life that you suspect is a liar, don't
00:15:41.780
try to catch them on all their lies. Let them lie. Because when you let them lie, if you know
00:15:48.900
they're lying, this is the important part, you know they're lying, watch how they do it. Because
00:15:53.760
people lie in very specific ways. It's almost like a fingerprint. The way one person lies
00:15:59.580
is completely different than the way another person lies. And look for that. Once you notice
00:16:03.800
that, you're going to see the tell for lying and it'll be really obvious. But you have
00:16:08.740
to let them lie so you can see their method. I hate to tell you how many times I've done
00:16:14.000
this. Let people lie to me. You go, okay, all right, you're lying. So how are you doing
00:16:19.300
it? Okay. You've added a whole bunch of details. Okay. That's a technique. So the way some people
00:16:25.760
lie is they'll add characters and details and like whole events, like an entire imagined
00:16:32.440
event. But some people will never lie like that. That's just like too far. Other people,
00:16:40.660
the most they'll do is lie by omission, like leave out a little context, right? I would say
00:16:47.020
if you catch me in a lie, it's going to be that one. Here's a lie I never tell. A thing
00:16:59.020
didn't happen that did. Like I would never tell a lie that says a thing happened when it
00:17:04.280
didn't or did when it didn't. Like that's a direct lie. I don't tell those. Like I don't
00:17:09.760
know. Maybe there's some special case or something. But like that's a lie that I don't like to
00:17:15.560
cross. But if somebody asked me a question and I didn't feel like a complete answer, I
00:17:21.580
might leave out something. You know, very normal human behavior. You don't have to be proud
00:17:27.000
of it. Sometimes it's just easier. You know, sometimes it's just convenience. It's not a big
00:17:31.940
deal. So watch for people's technique. And those are just a sample. But if you look at
00:17:38.980
the way they lie, you can, you can find people's pattern and then you'll see it every time.
00:17:44.780
All right. But Jimmy Fallon had a really funny joke about Joe Biden's fist bump with the crown
00:17:54.540
prince of Saudi Arabia. Jimmy Fallon's joke is that it wasn't the fist bump. He was trying
00:17:59.960
to punch him as hard as he could. That's the best he could do. And, you know, it's Jimmy
00:18:07.600
Fallon's joke. So I'll let him have the joke. But I was imagining me telling the joke if it
00:18:13.780
had been me telling it. I think it would have been more physical. It would have been, you
00:18:18.180
know, Joe Biden winding up and the crown prince seeing it coming and saying, well, it looks like
00:18:24.780
he's going to punch me. I better stop that. So he puts his fist out. It's a good joke.
00:18:38.480
But are you surprised that, you know, somebody who would be left oriented, Jimmy Fallon,
00:18:45.120
would go right after him for how weak he is? But did you see CNN's top left page today?
00:18:53.420
I tweeted out a screenshot of just the top left part of CNN's page. Because the top left
00:19:00.920
is where they put the propaganda. Did you know that, by the way? All the propaganda goes in
00:19:06.720
the top left. Because that's what people read. When you read a website, you start at the top
00:19:13.400
left. And then you may someday get to the bottom right or the bottom, but probably not. Right?
00:19:19.840
You're probably going to read the top left. So when they want to support a narrative,
00:19:25.060
they don't just spread it around where it belongs. They put it in the top left. So you're damn well
00:19:30.220
going to see it. So the top left of CNN is negative Biden pieces today. There's even a negative Jill
00:19:38.260
Biden piece. If they're starting to shit on Jill Biden, Jill Biden. Right? Not Hunter, not Joe,
00:19:47.640
but Jill. All right. Now, let me put my personal line in the sand here. I don't make fun of first
00:19:57.820
ladies generally. And if someday there's a first gentleman, I'm not going to make fun of that person
00:20:04.640
either. Because they didn't run for office. Right? Yeah, I get that they're part of the deal. But when
00:20:12.460
they got married, they probably weren't thinking about running for office. So the spouses, I always
00:20:17.680
give the spouses a free pass. I don't care if it's Melania or Jill or even Hillary Clinton when she was
00:20:24.420
like, just leave them alone. Leave them alone. If they're trying hard, I'm good with that.
00:20:31.780
You know, put in a little effort. That'd be good. Put a little effort. Now, nobody can say
00:20:38.980
nobody can say that Jill Biden isn't putting in the effort. Am I right? She might be the hardest
00:20:46.280
working person in government and she wasn't even elected. So I'm not going to dump on Jill Biden,
00:20:53.280
you know, unless it's just funny or something. I might do that. But just let her, you know,
00:20:58.880
just understand, we didn't elect her. Right? She doesn't, she's not, she doesn't deserve,
00:21:05.020
well, nobody deserves anything. All right. Here's a question for you. If you had some word salad
00:21:12.820
and you wanted to keep it in a container of some sort, what is the right container for word salad?
00:21:19.860
Well, my answer is Kamala Harris's pantsuit. Kamala Harris's pantsuit. That's a little joke. I'm sorry.
00:21:29.860
But I feel as if almost every day we see a new clip of her babbling like an idiot.
00:21:37.620
How many babbling idiot clips can you create out of one person who doesn't really talk that much in
00:21:44.540
public? Makes me wonder if you could do that with me. So now I have, what, almost 700 hours of live
00:21:54.120
stream? In my 700 hours of live streams, do you think you could put together a compilation clip
00:22:00.620
where I'm babbling? Actually, I don't think so. I mean, I've been stoned on half of them. And I still
00:22:08.740
don't think you could put together a babbling clip. But imagine the babbling clip you could put together
00:22:14.300
with Kabbalah. So he says, Jill is guilty of exploiting Joe. No, that's mind reading. That's
00:22:24.160
mind reading. She may just find herself in this situation. Right? She just might be making the
00:22:29.840
best of the situation. I don't know. But I'm not going to accuse her of something based on me
00:22:34.100
reading her mind. That's not going to happen. All right. So MSNBC on-air news host,
00:22:44.000
type person, Katie Turr, is noting that there's no trust in the media. And sometimes she's wondering
00:22:50.580
if she's doing any good. Only 16% of Americans said they have a great deal or a lot of confidence
00:22:57.160
in newspapers in 2022. Only 16% have a great deal of confidence. And that's, you know, down since 2021.
00:23:06.340
This was according to Gallup. And Katie Turr complains that, you know, maybe she's not helping the world.
00:23:17.340
Well, Katie, most of Katie's news is on a network that doesn't even report real news. It's almost an
00:23:25.580
entirely propaganda network. And, well, you know, let me digress for a moment. I think the most
00:23:34.900
important part of this story is what kind of nickname did the cruel kids give Katie Turr,
00:23:40.580
T-U-R, T-U-R is her last name, in high school. Now, is that a married name? I don't know if it's a
00:23:48.760
married name. It might be a married name. That's not as funny. Well, no, it's not Turr. No, it's Katie
00:23:55.580
Turr. Turr. It's three quarters of a turd. Yeah, it's three quarters of a turd, but it's not a full
00:24:04.500
turd. And I think that has to be noted. So Katie, who is three quarters of a turd, in name only,
00:24:11.780
in name only, we're not insulting her. It's just her name. That's how, that's, I didn't make that up.
00:24:24.400
thinks, so Rasmussen poll asked voters, how many think that Joe Biden profited from China deals?
00:24:32.480
Now, we know that Hunter Biden profited from China deals. That's in evidence. But it's a little less
00:24:40.540
proven that Joe Biden made money from it. No, and I would say it's unproven at this point. I have not
00:24:48.600
seen evidence that would, you know, guarantee he made money. There's indications. Yeah, there are
00:24:54.700
suggestions. There are flags. There are flags and suggestions. There are signals. There are signals.
00:25:03.400
But there's not proof yet that I've seen. However, 62% of the public, according to Rasmussen poll,
00:25:11.260
believes that Biden made some money from China deals.
00:25:14.260
How often do you get 62% of anybody agreeing on anything? Did Trump ever have 62% of the public
00:25:25.540
have a negative thought about a single topic? You know, maybe, maybe the January 6th thing would
00:25:34.280
create that. But while he was in office, I don't know, I don't think he was ever that unpopular,
00:25:41.400
was he? All right. Here's something that... So the Democrats have this belief, and I don't know
00:26:00.380
what to do with it. The belief is that if you ask for an audit of an election that you think
00:26:06.960
was suspicious, your true intention is to become a dictator. Let me say that again. This is the
00:26:15.360
two plus two equals four that the Democrats have put together. If you insist on an audit of an
00:26:23.480
election that about half the country thinks isn't credible, and so you ask to check, is this really
00:26:29.240
credible? That means your inner thoughts are to become a dictator. So if you're working hard to
00:26:38.060
make sure that a vote was accurate and fair, that's proof that you want to be a dictator.
00:26:47.140
Democrats also have other things that are similar to that. So working hard to make sure that an
00:26:52.360
election was fair, that equals trying to be a dictator. But taking a drink of water is proof
00:27:07.920
Taking a ride in a car is proof that you don't believe airplanes exist. There are a lot of things
00:27:15.120
that you can prove in the Democrat way. If you water a plant in your house, that's proof that you have
00:27:23.080
cancer. If you take a walk in a nice summer day, that's proof you're a murderer. If you wake up and
00:27:32.680
stretch like this, like that, that's proof you're a pedophile. If you tell a joke,
00:27:45.120
if people laugh, that's proof you're probably Hitler. Now, I could go on, but I think you see the
00:27:53.780
pattern. Orange plus pineapple equals hammer. And that is who wants to run the country. No, I correct
00:28:05.720
myself. That is who is running the country. The people who say apple plus banana equals hammer
00:28:13.220
are in charge of the country. The Democrats. So that's happening.
00:28:21.320
I learned that from a brainwashed NPC today. Joe Rogan apparently is not on board with the Trump
00:28:28.860
train. Never has been. He was never a Trump supporter in terms of voting. But he's called
00:28:34.560
Trump on man-baby and thinks all of his energy comes from Adderall. Okay. Here's my question.
00:28:43.120
And I thought, I think I saw Cenk Uyghur saying, if Trump doesn't have the right wing, he can't
00:28:53.540
win. To which other people said, who are you calling the right wing? Are you calling Joe
00:28:59.660
Rogan who supported Bernie for president? The right wing? Let me give you another example
00:29:07.300
of Democrat thinking. If the guy who supported Bernie is right wing, there are other things
00:29:15.540
you can imagine that Democrats also think. If it's light out at 12 noon, that could be indication
00:29:24.800
that it's dark. I don't know. A lot of things are non-obvious, but the Democrats have explained
00:29:32.440
it to us. Well, what do you think, but more generally, what do you think of the prominent
00:29:39.920
prior supporters of Trump who may not be on board this time? I don't think Mike Cernovich is
00:29:46.660
on board, but I can't speak for him. He has complicated thoughts, so I don't try to summarize
00:29:51.620
them if I can avoid it. I'm not on board. So, yeah, who cares? Do you think it'd make
00:30:01.340
a difference? Do you think it would make a difference if some of the, let's say, I'm not
00:30:08.540
going to call myself charismatic, but I'll say other charismatic people who had some influence
00:30:13.940
may not be on board? What do you think? Scott just wants to win, somebody says. Is there
00:30:22.460
somebody who doesn't want to win? Somebody here is saying, if Cernovich is out, Trump has
00:30:29.000
no shot. What do you think? See, I think this might be one of those situations where the world
00:30:37.340
finds out, like, how it really works. Let me ask you that question. How many of you think
00:30:44.340
that Mike Cernovich being not on board with Trump would be enough to make it impossible
00:30:49.940
for him to win? What do you think? Or would it even have a big impact? You don't have to
00:30:55.700
say impossible. Most of you are saying no, but I think I asked my question wrong. Is the no
00:31:04.860
that he would have no impact or that Trump couldn't get elected? I don't know which way I ask the
00:31:10.240
question now. I don't know if the no is agreeing with the thought or disagree. No impact? No
00:31:19.300
impact. So most of you are saying small or no impact. So that would mean that your belief
00:31:24.560
is that Cernovich is not influential beyond maybe his, you know, his core supporters. Is
00:31:34.500
that what you think? How about me? Let's move to me. Let's say, hypothetically, and this
00:31:41.860
is probable, let's say that I'm not on board with Trump for another term. Would I have any
00:31:48.120
impact? Local says no. Mostly no. A few yeses, but mostly no. Not anymore. That would be
00:31:56.440
a good answer. Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. All right. So most of you believe that
00:32:01.680
my opinion, and I'll just use Mike Cernovich as an example, not important. Joe Rogan's opinion.
00:32:09.600
If Joe Rogan went from, you know, maybe, you know, disinterest in Trump to maybe outright
00:32:19.740
negative, would that make a difference? No impact. Interesting. So who do you think changes
00:32:29.660
public opinion? Who do you think moves the public opinion? Fox News? Do you believe that
00:32:36.960
you all are making up your own opinions? Tucker? Yeah. Oh, is Tucker going to be pro-Trump?
00:32:44.220
Oh, there's an interesting question. Will Tucker be pro-Trump? What has he, I don't think,
00:32:54.100
well, Tucker probably won't endorse somebody, but we would know by the way he covers it.
00:32:58.100
Yeah. What about Greg Gottfeld? How is he going to handle a potential Trump run? But, all right,
00:33:09.440
you tell me, who do you think, who do you think there was a non-politician who would be the most
00:33:15.260
influential on the question of whether Trump gets re-elected? Name the most influential non-politician.
00:33:23.800
Ben Shapiro? Ben Shapiro? Steve Bannon? Elon Musk? Well, Elon Musk, I wouldn't put in that list.
00:33:36.000
The Pope, Trump Jr., Elon Musk, Tucker, Rogan. Interesting. So, Barron Rothschild.
00:33:45.660
I'm going to give you a special credit for whoever said Barron Rothschild. I like that Soros or Rothschild
00:33:56.600
get thrown into every conversation. Levin? All right. A lot of you think it's Tucker,
00:34:04.500
but here's an interesting question. Do we know what Tucker's opinion would be on the second Trump run?
00:34:10.220
I don't think I know the answer to that. I mean, maybe he's, you know, not talking about it yet.
00:34:21.780
All right. I'm going to break some news for you. Want me to break some news? Tiny news. Little news.
00:34:31.380
So, yesterday, Russell Brand's producer asked me if I would appear on Russell Brand's podcast.
00:34:44.260
So, sometime in the next few weeks, Russell Brand and I will have a conversation,
00:34:50.480
probably on the topic of all things important and political, I guess. I don't know.
00:34:57.220
We'll decide what it is when we get there. Now, how do you think that's going to go?
00:35:04.960
What do you think? I mean, seriously, how do you think that's going to go?
00:35:11.220
I am so curious. I have to admit, this is the most excited I've ever been about a conversation.
00:35:19.300
And I would call it a conversation. It's not, I don't think it's an interview, per se.
00:35:25.320
But, I don't think I've ever been more excited. And you know why?
00:35:30.340
By the way, do you know why I'm excited about it?
00:35:35.860
This will be a good test to see how much, how well you know me.
00:35:42.240
I mean, neither of us have any guardrails, so it could go anywhere.
00:35:44.760
So, some people are saying it would be smart and funny, and in a perfect world it would be.
00:35:56.160
It's not just because he's smart. He is brilliant.
00:36:00.020
It's not just because he has 6 million viewers, but that's a big part of it.
00:36:08.080
Have you ever seen two open-minded people on a large platform have a conversation about politics?
00:36:37.700
I think Joe Rogan is maybe the best interviewer we have.
00:36:41.460
I would say he's in the top whatever, you know, maybe the best.
00:36:53.820
Joe Rogan's genius is that he makes stars out of his guests.
00:37:00.420
Johnny Carson's always a star, but what he does really well is he makes his guests the star.
00:37:06.380
Now, what I see in, and, you know, he has plenty of opinions too, but it's more about making the guests the star.
00:37:13.080
I think in the case of, in Russell Brand's case, I think his input, you know, is more central to the show.
00:37:29.820
Have you ever seen two people who actually maybe could understand some of the topics, who are open-minded and had a big platform and talked about the big issues in public?
00:37:51.220
I'm a big fan of Russell Brand, so, you know, it's exciting just because it's him.
00:37:56.160
But, you know, I've lived in this world long enough that celebrity contact isn't exciting too much on its own.
00:38:03.960
Like, I need a little extra to make it exciting.
00:38:06.040
And I believe that his ability to take a topic where it needs to go is damn near unparalleled.
00:38:21.060
So if you put this together, I don't know, it feels like matches and dynamite.
00:38:30.860
I don't know who's match and who's dynamite, but it's definitely a match and a dynamite.
00:38:38.860
We might, I don't know, but I feel like we're going to make a small tear in the fabric of reality.
00:38:53.140
Musk has, Elon Musk filed a counterclaim, lawsuit-type thing against Twitter.
00:38:58.040
And he's got his arguments that Twitter fired some high-level executives, and they weren't supposed to do that without checking with the potential buyer.
00:39:08.100
But what do you think, what do you think are the odds of Elon Musk prevailing in court or Twitter prevailing under the situation that you know about?
00:39:18.700
Which is that there may be some question about how many bots there are, and Elon Musk can't find that out, and it's material.
00:39:29.060
Now, whether or not the arrangement said something about, I'm not going to look into things, I still think such a material promise is important.
00:39:38.140
Like, I don't think they can just lie to you and say, well, you said you weren't going to look into it, so we just lied to you.
00:39:46.720
I mean, this is sort of an area of the law, like all the rest, that I have no real appreciation for.
00:39:54.120
But I'll tell you my feeling is that Elon Musk will prevail in court.
00:40:00.360
Now, he might end up buying the company, but it would be at a different price, and it would be after he found out how many bots were there.
00:40:08.160
But that would be a whole separate conversation.
00:40:12.860
Now, part of it is, I can't believe that Musk would have gotten himself into this situation without having an escape hatch.
00:40:21.380
Because he's not like the guy who doesn't think it through, right?
00:40:35.440
So I have a feeling that he has the stronger case and maybe knows it, and maybe there's nothing happening here that isn't going to work in his favor.
00:40:45.000
I feel like all that's happening is Musk is finding the lowest price for this asset, and once he finds it, he'll pull the trigger.
00:40:55.660
But I will put this prediction in a, not as a binary, like it's, you know, he buys it, it happens or not.
00:41:07.780
So I'll go with 60% chance that Musk wins and buys the company at a lower price, eventually.
00:41:14.680
I think walk away is a reasonable prediction, yeah.
00:41:23.340
It's entirely possible that Elon Musk has no interest in Twitter by now.
00:41:40.640
So on the Fox website, since I often point out CNN's fake news, I like to balance.
00:41:46.620
Do you believe there's any fake news on the Fox News website today?
00:41:51.720
Well, an article there by Tyler Olson on Fox News, he mentions this just in a throwaway line
00:42:02.580
about Biden making regular gaffes, ranging from the inane, like appearing to shake hands with a person who is not there.
00:42:16.140
As far as I know, Biden has never attempted to shake hands with a person not there.
00:42:21.580
He has, on at least two occasions, signaled with his open hand that he was asking,
00:42:27.880
should I walk over here, or do we go sit here, or you go first.
00:42:32.220
And then it gets clipped so you don't see that's what he's doing.
00:42:39.460
Now, the way it was worded was kind of interesting.
00:42:42.520
It's called a gaffe, which doesn't mean necessarily that you were stupid or wrong.
00:42:47.620
It means you did something that turned out poorly.
00:42:51.380
And one example is it appearing to try to shake hands with a person who's not there.
00:42:57.620
I think if you write that it appears he tried to shake hands,
00:43:01.940
you need to clarify that it appeared like that to people who saw the video and of context.
00:43:07.820
It didn't appear like that to me when I saw the full audio, or full video.
00:43:12.060
If you saw the full thing, it appeared he was motioning toward a chair.
00:43:25.960
As you know, the Pulitzer Committee had given Pulitzer Prizes for the New York Times and Washington Post writers
00:43:32.780
for their coverage of Russiagate, which turned out to be total bullshit.
00:43:38.940
So, I guess the Pulitzer Committee, the board, they had two reviews to find out if these Pulitzer awards were, you know, still something they would back.
00:43:54.400
So, the Pulitzer Committee has doubled down about giving the Pulitzer-wide review to writers who literally made up fake news
00:44:02.900
and sold it to the public and tried to destroy the republic.
00:44:07.580
And they got a Pulitzer for writing bullshit that nearly destroyed the country.
00:44:12.460
I'm wondering, is it too late for Hitler to get a Pulitzer from Mein Kampf?
00:44:21.880
Because I don't know that there's a time limit, right?
00:44:25.080
You could have written a book a long time ago and you still could get a Pulitzer, can it not?
00:44:30.820
So, I would say, you know, maybe they should consider that, since they obviously have no ethical or moral core whatsoever.
00:44:41.900
Here's a name of a politician who followed me on Twitter today, and so I followed back because I had to.
00:44:53.240
Sometimes there's a follow that you say, oh, I think I'll follow, this could be fun.
00:45:01.480
All right, he's running for Congress in Arizona, and he's a, if I can judge correctly from his profile picture,
00:45:10.540
I judge him to be a black American whose actual name is Walt Blackman.
00:45:20.840
So, if you're a Republican running for Congress, you're going to get all the Republican votes,
00:45:27.500
But if your last name is Blackman and you're a black man, aren't you going to get 20% of the Democrat votes automatically?
00:45:38.280
Just the fact that he's a black man who's called Blackman?
00:45:49.340
If Walt Blackman has any skills whatsoever, he will be your president someday.
00:46:01.280
I just followed him on Twitter today because he followed me.
00:46:08.240
Seems like the right age for building up his political resume.
00:46:14.340
But, if you just say he's a good-looking guy, he's about the right age, and he's a Republican, and his name is Blackman,
00:46:22.380
how in the world does he ever lose an election?
00:46:25.660
Like, you'd have to be terrible at campaigning to lose under those conditions.
00:46:31.700
Anyway, if you feel like it, give him a follow.
00:46:35.680
But, mark my words, you might hear from him again.
00:46:51.880
I think I was going to talk about something else, but it changed my mind.
00:46:57.240
I think that covers all the many fascinating things that I wanted to discuss today.
00:47:02.460
I'm hoping we'll see more imaginary evidence in the January 6th hearings today.
00:47:10.220
Imaginary evidence is the kind where the president says something like,
00:47:15.040
can I have a, can somebody bring me a Diet Coke?
00:47:19.340
And then somebody reports it as, he asked for a Diet Coke,
00:47:23.720
and that's mafia talk for overthrowing the country.
00:47:27.180
So, that's pretty much the quality of the evidence.
00:47:36.980
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is actually happening.
00:47:45.500
It's kind of a difficult thing to juggle at the moment.
00:47:48.900
Because there are two things that Steve Bannon has new that he has to add to his schedule.
00:47:53.880
One of the new things is he has to testify to Congress, which he's agreed to do.
00:47:59.420
So, he's got to work that into his schedule, testify to Congress.
00:48:03.060
At the same time, he has to work into his schedule the court case in which he's being charged
00:48:08.520
for not doing that, testifying to Congress voluntarily.
00:48:13.920
So, he's got to figure out how to balance his schedule to testify to Congress,
00:48:18.680
but also try to stay in a jail for being accused of not testifying to Congress,
00:48:25.340
Now, I understand there's a timing issue, and the Democrats have said,
00:48:31.060
oh, no, he has to be prosecuted because at one point he said no, and that's against the law.
00:48:38.860
So, even though at one point he said no, but even while the proceedings are still going,
00:48:43.260
so it's not too late at all, it's not too late, he agreed to do it,
00:48:52.880
So, your tax dollars are going to seat a jury to have a trial to convict a guy
00:49:00.580
for not doing the thing that he's actually doing at the moment.
00:49:05.420
Like, at the moment that the jury will be deliberating, you know, possibly,
00:49:11.300
they'll actually be deliberating whether they should punish him for not doing
00:49:15.980
the thing he's doing, doing in public, where everybody's watching, at the same time.
00:49:28.180
Now, I get there's a technical reason why he'd have to be charged
00:49:31.200
if you want it to be a complete asshole, right?
00:49:38.600
If the ban in trial turned into, you know, him being railroaded,
00:49:44.580
and a January 6th-like crowd surrounded the courtroom,
00:49:50.580
and there was violence that broke out, which nobody recommends,
00:49:56.080
would you say that was a good thing, a feature, or a flaw?
00:49:59.420
Would that be a feature or a flaw if a giant protest
00:50:04.560
with some actual danger broke out around the courtroom?
00:50:17.480
you're not going to talk Americans out of forming a crowd
00:50:24.400
And the signal that big is that we've just forgotten
00:50:32.540
and we don't care who we crush in the meantime.
00:50:40.720
So I'm not like some big, you know, Steve Bannon supporter.
00:50:58.260
And by the way, I would say exactly the same thing
00:51:05.800
for not doing the thing he's doing at the moment,
00:51:14.860
But, yeah, if a crowd forms around the courtroom
00:51:20.040
because it always does when there's a big crowd,
00:51:32.020
I think I've delivered the finest entertainment
00:52:05.300
Can you imagine someone trying to tell you what to do?
00:52:37.460
Can I provide guidance for how to provide friction
00:53:27.600
you could have two kids raised exactly the same.
00:53:48.800
is what's going to make the difference in that,
00:54:17.740
that are more cripplingly negative in this world
00:54:51.820
you're not really playing on a real field here.