Episode 1815 Scott Adams: The January 6 Hearings Have Cleared Trump. Will News Report It That Way?
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
147.30934
Summary
Scott Adams is back with the dopamine hit of the day: a new Bill Burr stand-up special. Also, a new conspiracy theory about the Democratic Party using fake Nazis to make their opponent look bad, and a suggestion for how to fix it.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of civilization, the thing that's
00:00:10.560
going to get your day off to a good start. It's the positive vibe that you can't find
00:00:16.380
anywhere else. Today's the day that you're going to feel a little bit better about, well,
00:00:21.560
just about everything, because that's the way it goes on Coffee with Scott Adams. And
00:00:26.180
all you need to guarantee this good day is a cup or mug or a glass, a tank or Chelsea
00:00:31.300
Stein, a canteen jug or flask. It's a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid.
00:00:35.620
I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure. That's the dopamine hit of the day.
00:00:46.540
Okay. Somebody's showing me a meme of a stamp of the simultaneous sip in a text. I don't
00:01:01.320
Oh, yeah. Yep. I don't know about you, but I felt it. I would like to make a media
00:01:14.140
recommendation. Recommendation for some content. You need to watch the Bill Burr stand-up special
00:01:22.300
on Netflix. He's got several of them. It's the newest one from Red Rocks. I'm about three-quarters
00:01:29.540
through it. And, oh, my God, is it good. It's so good. There are points within it where he's just
00:01:38.360
pissing off the audience, and you're not sure he could ever recover. And then he does. And then it
00:01:44.480
looks like he couldn't possibly recover from the thing he's saying now. And then he does. It's really
00:01:49.860
amazing. Watching him fly that close to the sun and not get burned up is really amazing. He goes
00:01:58.300
after everything and everybody. I think the real secret of it is that he is unrelenting. I think if
00:02:09.100
he went at these topics in a half-assed way, it wouldn't work. But the fact that he's just so
00:02:14.020
completely all in, you just say, all right, all right, and just entertain us.
00:02:21.500
Did you see the alleged Nazis who were protesting in favor of DeSantis in Florida? Yeah. Allegedly,
00:02:29.080
they were pro-DeSantis Nazis. Now, and of course, the Democrats fell for it. Do you know what the
00:02:38.280
budget is to get some fake Nazis or even some real ones to demonstrate in favor of your political
00:02:45.500
opponent to make your opponent look bad? What do you suppose would be the budget for that sort of
00:02:50.240
thing? Real expensive? Pretty sure you could get it under $1,000. You could get several people
00:02:58.900
for about $1,000 probably. Yeah, somewhere in that neighborhood. If you paid $5,000, you probably
00:03:04.660
should have negotiated better. But for a very low price, you could get people to dress up as Nazis
00:03:11.200
or actual Nazis, you know, neo-Nazis or whatever, and they'll stand there and hold a sign for your
00:03:16.540
opponent. Now, I have a suggestion. Since you know this Nazi trick is going to be used over and over
00:03:23.040
against the Republicans, the Republicans should form, or maybe, you know, not the politicians, but maybe
00:03:29.840
some PAC or interest group, form a Nazi dancing troupe. People who dress like Nazis, but they present
00:03:40.000
themselves as entertainment. So they're not trying to pretend to be Nazis. They're only actors who are
00:03:47.280
telling you they're actors, and it's a Nazi dancing troupe. And then you send them to every event that the
00:03:53.500
Democrats do. Now, even though they would be clearly labeled as entertainment, you know, they would not
00:03:59.960
be trying to present themselves as actual neo-Nazis, how many times do the Democrats have to see the
00:04:06.220
dancing Nazis attend their events before they feel uncomfortable with the whole idea?
00:04:12.260
I think that I think the Republicans could completely take this, you know, ridiculous political trick off
00:04:22.400
the map by going really hard at it themselves. Just just have a Nazi dancing troupe at every single
00:04:29.080
Democrat. You know, they'd have signs and they'd have like really good costumes, you know, like actual
00:04:36.060
actual like World War II Nazi costumes and shit. You know, maybe they'd do the goose step, maybe some
00:04:43.720
kind of a goose step dance, like Mel Brooks, yes. Very much like the Mel Brooks play. All right.
00:04:52.820
I'd like to remind you of bad shit, crazy things I've said that ended up being actually the general
00:05:01.020
understanding in the country after a certain point. Now, you can probably come up with several
00:05:06.280
examples yourselves of things I've said or predicted that were just batshit crazy. And then you wait a
00:05:13.040
year or two or maybe several, and it's the standard of thinking. Here's another one. Nobody understands
00:05:20.600
economics. Do you remember the first time I said that? And you probably heard it and you're like,
00:05:26.560
okay, that's a little hyperbole. Like, what's that mean? Or are you talking about something
00:05:31.120
specific? Now it's the headline. The headline in CNN is that the economists don't understand the
00:05:37.700
economy. It's the fucking headline, right? How many people thought it was ridiculous when I said that
00:05:45.580
the experts don't understand the economy? It sounded ridiculous, didn't it? But now it's common
00:05:52.320
understanding. How many times have I done that? Do you remember in 2015, I told you that Trump was
00:05:58.760
persuasive? And do you remember the response I got to that? He's not persuasive. Come on. He has,
00:06:09.120
what, 13% support even among Republicans, right? 13%. Come on. He's anything but persuasive. He's a big,
00:06:19.640
crazy clown. He doesn't know what he's doing. And now what's the headline today? The headline is that
00:06:26.880
Trump is so persuasive that he may have accidentally triggered something like an insurrection because he's
00:06:36.420
so persuasive and that the entire, more than half of the country believes the election was sketchy.
00:06:42.560
More than half of the country. That number has never been achieved or even close. That's all
00:06:50.200
Trump. That's all Trump. He is literally proven to be the most persuasive human in modern civilization,
00:07:01.860
I think. And people laughed at me when I said, you have no idea what's coming here in 2015.
00:07:08.060
You don't see this coming. Trust me. I have just the right skill set that I can, you know, I can look
00:07:14.960
through this little window. There it is. All right. So nobody understands economics. Specifically,
00:07:24.280
and this is one of those things you can do when you have no shame. Just try to imagine yourself doing
00:07:30.460
this. This is something that I did in public, in the most public way I did. I have a degree in economics
00:07:38.820
and I have an MBA. And I'm an adult who's lived in the world and watched the news closely for decades.
00:07:47.060
And the other day I tweeted that I don't understand the unemployment number. I don't even understand that.
00:07:54.520
What the hell is going on? How in the world could the economy be having so many problems and the
00:08:00.660
employment looks great? Now, many of you said, Scott, Scott, Scott, everybody knows it's because
00:08:05.920
people left the employment pool. I know that. That's not the part I don't understand. I get that
00:08:13.820
the employment is only of the people who are looking for a job. So fewer people say they're looking for
00:08:19.360
one. Well, you've got full employment. Yeah, I get that. That doesn't come close to explaining what
00:08:24.720
we're seeing. If that explained it, like fully, it's part of the story, of course. Of course it's part.
00:08:31.600
But there's something else going on here. And I don't know what it is. And I have a hypothesis.
00:08:37.880
And I would expect to win the Nobel for economics for the following hypothesis. And by the way,
00:08:45.200
I'm not even kidding. I'm not joking. I'm going to add a hypothesis to the body of economics
00:08:51.900
that I don't think you've seen that will explain all the things that don't make sense right now.
00:08:57.780
It goes like this. Economics assumes a, let's say, a small range of change. Economics assumes
00:09:10.280
that the world changes at a somewhat predictable, regular pace, or at least it's the same as it
00:09:16.980
was the last 10 years, right? Maybe modern days change faster than old days. But if the last 10
00:09:23.940
years would be a pretty good proxy for change. So everything that you know about economics,
00:09:30.280
every common assumption, is assumed that the base of, you know, all of our assumptions about
00:09:36.140
everything stay about the same. And that economics is just running on top of those assumptions.
00:09:42.380
But the pandemic, and I'm going to give Naval Ravikant the credit for, I think the first person
00:09:49.860
who observed this, his prediction was that the pandemic would make everything that was going
00:09:55.660
to happen anyway happen faster. And we're seeing it, right? So right now we have legacy systems,
00:10:05.960
companies that are operating at the same time as the replacement system for a short period of time.
00:10:12.880
What happens to employment numbers when you still have the old system, but you're bringing
00:10:19.200
up the new system? You need twice as many people because you still have the old system, but you've
00:10:24.880
now added the new system. For example, before the pandemic, mostly you got your food from the
00:10:32.540
grocery store. Is the grocery store still there? Yes, it is. Grocery store is still there. Still
00:10:39.800
employees about the same number of people. But on top of that, because it was so hard to go anywhere
00:10:45.680
during the pandemic, the food delivery business exploded. So now you have the entire grocery
00:10:53.200
industry just the way it was. But on top of it, you have what I think will be the long term
00:10:58.200
replacement industry, which is the food comes to you. Do you buy it? So that that would be an
00:11:05.000
explanation of why things could be falling apart. We could have, you know, recession, inflation, we
00:11:09.800
could have supply chain problems, we could have every problem that you're seeing. But at the same time,
00:11:16.740
we're in this weird situation where the pandemic said, wait, everything you're doing is fucked up.
00:11:21.040
You better start putting the new plan in place right away. And then we did. We did. So at least
00:11:28.380
part of it, I think, is the rapid acceleration of the baseline world. What do you think? Will
00:11:38.740
anybody accept that? And will you nominate me for the Nobel for economics? Do I have to do some
00:11:46.580
math to get that Nobel? I want the Nobel. I already invented, by the way, how many of you know, I
00:11:52.940
invented the concept of the confusopoly, which is now standard part of economic thought?
00:12:01.640
How many of you knew that? That I'm actually part of the economic literature? Now, a confusopoly
00:12:08.860
is a word I invented years ago. And it refers to the fact that businesses such as, let's say,
00:12:15.380
cell phone companies, and insurance companies, banks, to some extent, lots of businesses,
00:12:21.160
the reason that they don't need to compete with each other is that they've made their products
00:12:26.100
too complicated for you to know who's doing a better job. Imagine going to get your cell phone
00:12:32.260
if you knew for sure which was the better deal. You would just walk in and get the better deal.
00:12:38.900
Because cell phone coverage is kind of like every other cell phone coverage. But you don't.
00:12:43.380
When you go to buy a cell phone, it's like, well, this one's a plan. But this one has rollover
00:12:48.440
minutes. But this one, I can add a family member. You have no way to compare it. That's a confusopoly.
00:12:55.980
The way economics was supposed to work is that the free market would drive all the weak competitors
00:13:02.600
out of business. And eventually, you'd have one strong competitor. But that's not happening.
00:13:07.580
You have lots of competition, insurance and everything. And the way they compete is they
00:13:12.180
confuse the consumer so the consumer can't tell which product is better. And I believe
00:13:19.380
that they do it intentionally. Meaning that they're all quite intentionally making sure
00:13:24.080
that nobody can compare their products. I mean, I know that's the case. I'm not guessing.
00:13:29.360
That's definitely the case. So, before I explain that, that concept didn't exist in economics.
00:13:36.920
But if you Google it now, confusopoly, you'll see it's a standard concept.
00:13:43.360
So, how many of you thought that I would be famous for adding a concept to economics?
00:13:49.300
See, you didn't see that coming, did you? But it happened.
00:13:51.760
All right. Rasmussen did some polling on American voters and energy independence.
00:14:00.100
And found out that only 19% of those polled oppose a policy of encouraging U.S. energy independence.
00:14:07.560
In other words, 81% would like more of a Trump approach, you know, going for energy independence.
00:14:14.400
And only 19%, and remember, this includes Democrats.
00:14:19.440
Only 19% of the public wants something like what we have now, where we're not encouraging domestic energy.
00:14:35.100
53% of voters, and remember, this includes Democrats and independents and everybody else,
00:14:41.000
trust Republicans more to encourage U.S. oil and gas production.
00:14:49.440
If you took the assumption, even if you don't assume that you want that,
00:14:57.440
even if you said to yourself, I don't want more domestic energy production,
00:15:01.420
I don't know why you'd say that, but suppose you did,
00:15:04.400
wouldn't you still at least recognize that Republicans would do more of it?
00:15:08.780
How could you be so dumb that you think the Republicans and the Democrats would be roughly the same
00:15:16.820
when it comes to encouraging domestic energy production?
00:15:23.500
I mean, it would fly against literally 100% of all reporting from both sides.
00:15:27.060
18% of the public thinks there's not much difference between the two parties on the issue of energy.
00:15:41.200
That's a number I would have expected closer to, I don't know, maybe north of 20%.
00:15:47.600
I would have expected that closer to a quarter.
00:15:55.960
And 71% of likely U.S. voters think the U.S. government should encourage increased oil and gas production in the U.S.
00:16:05.300
How in the world does a Democrat get elected president in this atmosphere?
00:16:13.440
There's a really dangerous situation shaping up here, and I think you all see it, right?
00:16:18.820
Everything in the news and the polling suggests that there's no way a Democrat could win the presidency.
00:16:33.780
I mean, if it happened in this atmosphere, where every indicator is pointing toward, you know, a strong Republican win,
00:16:42.000
if it doesn't happen, and all these indicators stay so strongly in the other direction,
00:16:55.620
So as you know, the January 6th hearings have completely cleared Trump of any criminal behavior.
00:17:05.800
They have completely eviscerated the encouraged an insurrection narrative, completely gone.
00:17:11.880
Because I don't think anybody believes that there was a planned insurrection in which Don Jr. wasn't let in on it.
00:17:23.880
Not only did they disprove their own contention, that there was some planned insurrection,
00:17:28.820
but they disproved it in a way that's actually funny.
00:17:33.920
Somebody should have checked to see if Don Jr. was at least informed about this alleged insurrection.
00:17:39.000
Because if he had not been, and the evidence clearly shows that he didn't know anything about any planned insurrection,
00:17:49.180
None of the other evidence is even worth looking at.
00:17:52.260
You know, once you see that his own family didn't know anything about it, that's sort of it.
00:17:56.720
And then you say, but, but, but, but, but, Scott, but, but, but, but,
00:18:00.400
what about all those people in the administration who are helping him try to, you know, game the rules to take over?
00:18:11.040
Do you notice anything in common with those people who have been named,
00:18:15.040
who are, like, trying to find some scheme for him to keep power?
00:18:18.420
You know, playing with the electoral, the electors and stuff like that.
00:18:26.340
Don't you think the Democrats owe it to the United States to say,
00:18:32.280
that the people who did seem to be supporting the idea that there might be some legal challenge here
00:18:41.020
It's not their job to tell you what Trump should do ethically or morally or what's right for the country.
00:18:48.180
They are there to say, is there a legal argument, yes or no?
00:18:55.900
Because if the boss who's paying them says, is there a legal way that I could find this,
00:19:01.800
their job is to go find the best argument to support your preferences.
00:19:07.880
They came up with the best argument they could, but it was weak.
00:19:14.660
The best argument they came up with about, you know, changing electors or whatever,
00:19:22.140
If you can't convince Pence, that's a weak argument.
00:19:25.360
But that doesn't mean they shouldn't have done that.
00:19:28.260
And it doesn't mean that Trump shouldn't have asked.
00:19:31.120
Because in the process of leadership, you ask all the questions.
00:19:35.280
In fact, one of the biggest, I guess, criticisms of Trump
00:19:38.980
is we keep hearing stories where he asks crazy shit.
00:19:42.720
Like, can you stop a hurricane with a nuclear weapon?
00:19:53.840
Or no, can we send a missile into the cartels, basically?
00:19:59.580
Now, the answer he got back was, no, don't do that.
00:20:04.700
But you see that he always asks the edge question.
00:20:08.940
If you're a leader, and you're not asking the edge question,
00:20:18.360
here are all the standard things we've talked about.
00:20:21.560
Now, you better tell me why I can't do a non-standard thing.
00:20:25.300
Why can't I do something outside this box of options?
00:20:28.480
Tell me, if I go outside this box, tell me what's going to happen.
00:20:37.560
OK, now I'm thinking of something that's outside that box.
00:20:47.680
If the answer comes back, if you get outside this box,
00:20:59.160
Somehow the Democrats have made good, basic leadership,
00:21:13.680
And every time they describe Trump doing exactly what I want my leader to do,
00:21:17.880
as if it's a mistake, I always say the same thing.
00:21:35.080
and you can see that in a number of examples of the systems they prefer.
00:21:47.880
There's no such thing as leadership without a big variable about human motivation,
00:21:58.560
They work on your motivation to motivate you to do what they want.
00:22:05.240
So now that the January 6th hearings have shown that Trump clearly was not trying to do an illegal insurrection,
00:22:12.960
and clearly it was not planned, or at least there's no evidence of it.
00:22:17.760
And so what are the people who have bet everything on this and now lost the bet,
00:22:28.320
Do they say, wow, well, we looked, and I'm glad we looked.
00:22:35.020
And by the way, I agree there were some red flags.
00:22:42.960
You know, I had, I wish it had been done better, you know, in a different way.
00:22:49.160
But I think the Republicans ended up, they pursued what I would say is a risky strategy
00:22:54.920
by not supporting the, you know, members of the thing.
00:22:59.600
So, you know, McConnell withdrew their support because they didn't get the people on the committee
00:23:05.300
that they wanted, but those people were also implicated in the actual allegations.
00:23:15.080
So it was mostly gamesmanship and politics that Mitch McConnell decided not to participate.
00:23:22.580
So it was a show trial, and then the show showed that Trump basically was not guilty of the primary allegations.
00:23:30.900
So now they're backing up from, well, we didn't mean he planned an insurrection.
00:23:39.740
Oh, well, McCarthy, I'm sorry, let me correct that, being corrected.
00:23:44.900
It was McCarthy, not McConnell, who pulled down or participated in the hearings.
00:23:56.320
But whenever I see a clever political thing, I think I'm biased toward thinking it was McConnell.
00:24:01.200
I mean, you can hate that fucker as much as you want, but he knows how to do this stuff.
00:24:07.980
No matter what you think of Pelosi, don't you ever have this feeling,
00:24:11.820
God damn it, she does get some stuff done for her side, right?
00:24:20.220
As old as they are, they do get stuff done, for their team anyway, even if you wish they wouldn't.
00:24:27.420
So now, since the main insurrection, planning an insurrection thing has been completely debunked,
00:24:34.400
does the news go back and say, well, we checked it out, they were serious allegations,
00:24:40.200
and there were some red flags there, we checked it out, we found nothing.
00:24:45.200
So, let's go on with our lives, glad we checked.
00:24:52.840
They will show you no evidence until you saw it.
00:24:59.280
They will prove by looking for it and not finding it, if you can call that proof.
00:25:03.840
They will show that there's no evidence whatsoever of their allegations,
00:25:07.300
and then at the same time, they'll tell you that they found them,
00:25:11.380
and there were plenty of them, and oh my God, there's so many, I can't even get into them.
00:25:19.580
Now, we don't have to guess if that can happen, because we watched it.
00:25:24.640
And it's happening right in front of us in real time.
00:25:29.280
When it was shown that there was no evidence for Russia collusion,
00:25:33.780
instead of just saying, whoops, you know, there were some signals there,
00:25:36.940
but I'm glad there's none there, glad we checked.
00:25:39.900
Instead, they made it sound like Russia interference in the election
00:25:44.500
was really sort of the same story, and really it's been proven to be true,
00:25:52.500
Ask a Democrat if Trump was colluding with Russia,
00:25:57.540
and they'll say yes, and it was shown, it was proven.
00:26:03.520
And then they'll describe that the Russians had some memes,
00:26:13.920
And then they'll say that Russia collusion was...
00:26:20.200
If you didn't know what cognitive dissonance is,
00:26:30.620
But mostly, they actually believe their own story,
00:26:33.820
because the brain can't hold the fact that they were that wrong
00:26:39.140
So the brain allows them to be right by just redefining stuff.
00:26:46.680
but I've decided that if America ever split up,
00:26:50.560
you know, we're talking about red state, blue state kind of thing,
00:26:56.840
you would have the Republican part of the country
00:27:10.540
The blue part, I believe, would start a new system
00:27:20.860
which is to change the definition of normal words
00:27:44.640
and that by changing the definition of that word,
00:27:55.620
and we're going to change the definition of insurrection
00:28:03.360
All they did is change the definition of an insurrection
00:28:08.500
Now, you say to yourself, well, that's a one-off.
00:28:15.060
Because, right, as I'm being prompted in the comments,
00:28:33.900
which was the opposite of what was in evidence.
00:28:38.060
What was in evidence is they were talking about an audit.
00:29:00.220
And the Democrats turned that into lying and cheating.
00:29:07.360
And how about protests got turned into insurrection?
00:29:23.300
which is two consecutive quarters of negative growth,
00:29:30.460
and that it must be looked at in a holistic way
00:29:36.800
But now they need to change the definition of recession
00:30:29.840
I don't even feel like I need to talk about it, do I?
00:30:33.100
Because anything I say, your head is already there.
00:30:40.080
This will be our first simultaneous heavy sigh.
00:31:14.640
A majority of Americans say the U.S. government is corrupt.
00:31:22.960
say it may soon be necessary to take up arms against it.
00:31:40.600
Some gigantic percent of Republicans, obviously, are saying that.
00:31:43.540
Now, again, here's the context that the news always leaves out.
00:31:49.900
When was the last time you were in a group of Republicans
00:31:53.040
who did not say they might have to take up arms against the government?
00:31:58.540
I think the proper context for a study like this is,
00:32:08.060
say we might be getting close to needing to take up arms
00:32:12.460
Again, it's the operating system of Republicans.
00:32:29.340
it would be someone who thinks that at any minute
00:32:31.520
they're going to have to shoot their own government
00:32:53.860
There's nothing more basic to the Republican personality
00:33:44.360
I would like to thank the January 6th Committee