Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1838 Scott Adams： Trump Flushes Lizard Cheney Down The Dynasty Toilet, HOAX List Is Up To 14

00:00:01.000 Good morning, everybody. Welcome to another greatest moment of your life. It's just one

00:00:08.080 after another now. And today will be special. It'll be incredible. Lots of stuff happening.

00:00:14.440 It's all fun. And if you'd like to enjoy this experience at the maximum rate, well, all

00:00:22.800 you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tanker, a chalice, a canteen jar, a flask, a vessel

00:00:29.160 of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled

00:00:36.960 pleasure. It's the dopamine hit of the day. The thing that makes everything better. It's

00:00:43.300 called the simultaneous sip. It happens now. Go. Somebody emailed me the other day that

00:00:57.080 they have a coworker whose actual natural name is Brandon Fell. It's probably not the only

00:01:06.120 one. It sounds like it might be a common name. Brandon Fell. Well, that's his name. All right.

00:01:12.080 I didn't put this in my notes, so I'm going to say this first. I just saw a tweet by Corey

00:01:17.700 DeAngelis saying that Arizona, and I think they're their first state, now has opened up

00:01:24.700 their program that money can follow students so they can do homeschooling and charter schools

00:01:30.520 and whatever. And it's live. Apparently the program is live now. So parents can take the

00:01:38.660 funding that would have gone to the public school and take it with them to a private school.

00:01:42.080 That's amazing. Now, this is the best of America, in my opinion. This is a system that's working

00:01:50.560 exactly the way it should be. The states are the laboratory. Arizona wanted to go first.

00:01:57.460 And I don't know, maybe in a year or two years, we'll have a pretty good idea how it worked out.

00:02:03.440 Maybe two years is short. I don't know. But we'll have some indications.

00:02:06.460 Now, is this the best idea in the world or the worst idea? We don't know. That's the beauty of it.

00:02:14.140 I think it's a good idea. Seems like it would be. Competition and all that. But, you know,

00:02:19.820 unintended consequences, so we'll see. But that is a really, really big moment in the, let's say,

00:02:30.360 the integrity of the republic. Because as you know, our school systems are our biggest weakness right

00:02:37.300 now. If we're miseducating the youth, we're not going to have a good outcome. And fixing that's the

00:02:43.480 biggest, I think, the biggest challenge we have. And not that it's hard to do. It's just the most

00:02:50.060 important thing to do. Because if you get everybody on the same page and they're educated and they're

00:02:54.280 doing a good job, well, everything else seems to work out a little bit better. So that's all good

00:02:59.620 news. More good news. Oh, my God, it's just all good news today. The Marvel has now started to stream

00:03:08.580 the She-Hulk. So this is your Marvel Hulk movie in which the new Hulk is a woman. You still have the

00:03:16.200 build Hulk. You know, the obsolete, patriarchal male Hulk. But we have a new, improved, woke Hulk

00:03:24.720 called She-Hulk. And I think this is starting off a good, sort of a good pattern. I'd like to see 1.00

00:03:32.740 more of this. Because here they've got the pronoun for the Hulk, like, right in the title of the movie,

00:03:38.480 so you can't get it wrong. Don't you think they should do that with all movies going forward?

00:03:44.120 Like, Captain America? You know, it could be, like, He-Captain?

00:03:52.880 Yeah, I feel like we should just, you know, what about, what are some other movies?

00:04:00.280 Like that, yeah, we should just put the pronoun in front of all of them. He-Iron Man? Or maybe

00:04:05.880 they? Yeah, so instead of Iron Man, it would be Iron They? Or could it be Iron Woman?

00:04:14.120 But my problem with this whole thing is, is that it's not really woke enough. Is, this

00:04:22.300 is 2022. Am I, am I wrong? Did I get the, did I get the year wrong? It's 2022. Now, I realize

00:04:30.720 it takes years to actually get a movie made. But I feel like this is already somewhat out

00:04:36.700 of step with the times. It's not nearly woke enough, is it? So I'm going to skip She-Hulk.

00:04:43.620 I'm not going to, this will be actually the first Marvel movie that I'm not watching. Because

00:04:47.900 just out of principle, I'm going to wait for LGBTQ plus Hulk. I want to, I want a Hulk that's 1.00

00:04:54.180 either disabled or has something, a little extra flavor. Like just being a woman, a little bit 1.00

00:05:03.400 boring in 2022. If somebody said, oh, I invited somebody to the party. You say, who'd you invite?

00:05:10.120 A woman. You'd be like, oh, that's a little boring. But also she's bringing a man. You're 1.00

00:05:17.400 like, God, that's boring. A man and a woman. Give me a little LGBTQ action, a little flavor, 1.00

00:05:25.320 please. I like a little spice in my movies. And She-Hulk is just not getting it done in 2022. 1.00

00:05:31.220 You got to ramp it up, ramp it up a little bit. Well, I have a category of humor that I love,

00:05:38.220 which I'm going to share with you. It's called the shortest dismissive insult. For some reason,

00:05:46.440 I love it when somebody can get the crispest, you know, the most cutting insult in the smallest

00:05:52.480 number of words. I'll give you an example. For example, if you were to say that Brian Stelter

00:06:00.720 of CNN is the poor man's Jeffrey Toobin. That's good, right? Yeah. Brian Stelter is the poor man's

00:06:09.460 Jeffrey Toobin. Come on. You love that. I know you do. I know you love that. Right? It's a good

00:06:15.200 category of humor. But here's one from somebody on Twitter named Het Puniza Paradij, which I think I

00:06:24.560 nailed it. I think I nailed that last name. But he tweets about the She-Hulk movie. And I just love

00:06:32.200 this. So this is one, two, three, four, five words. Are you ready for five words that sum up the

00:06:40.340 She-Hulk movie without ever having watched it? This is what Het gives us. This is Green Karen. 0.95

00:06:47.940 Try to forget you ever heard that. Good luck. You'll never be able to see She-Hulk again without 0.99

00:07:01.700 thinking Green Karen. Is that the funniest thing you've seen in a while? Green Karen. Oh, God.

00:07:12.860 We'll get to Liz Cheney and all the fun stuff. So yesterday I fell for a hoax, which is not the

00:07:22.300 first time. Because you see stuff, when you see stuff on Twitter that looks like what you think

00:07:30.200 you expect, it's real easy to fall for it. So I fell for one yesterday for, I don't know, about a

00:07:36.020 minute or two before somebody said, hey, that's a hoax. So I took it down and confessed that I'd

00:07:41.500 fallen for a hoax. So it was somebody had published the so-called Rules for Radicals.

00:07:47.840 How many of you heard of the Rules for Radicals? So this is from the 60s or something. And

00:07:54.500 allegedly these Rules for Radicals tell the left, yeah, it's Alinsky's work, tell the left how to

00:08:02.800 manipulate and, I guess, gaslight the public until they can get what they want. So the eight rules

00:08:10.720 that I saw that I retweeted were fake ones. And the fake ones had stuff like, you know,

00:08:18.420 run up the debt and bankrupt the country. And I thought to myself, now let me make a confession

00:08:25.280 here. This would be my second confession of error in five minutes. I got a lot of them

00:08:31.080 today. So my second confession is that although people talk continuously about the rules for

00:08:41.340 radicals, I believed without doing research, so here's my confession part, and you can judge

00:08:48.140 me, you can judge me unfairly for this, if you like, or even fairly, I never bothered to

00:08:55.460 look into them. So it's one of these things you hear all the time. Oh, these Rules for Radicals,

00:09:01.320 they're using those rules again. And for whatever reason, I was so sure that those rules were complete

00:09:08.920 bullshit that I never bothered to look at them. I just dismissed them as, you know, more just 0.98

00:09:15.080 political talk. But I finally had to look at them because I had accidentally tweeted the fake

00:09:20.480 ones, because I thought the fake ones were proving my point. The fake ones looked like

00:09:25.180 bullshit. And sure enough, they were. They were actually hoax. They were fake ones. So 1.00

00:09:30.220 I looked at the real ones. What do you think? Are the real ones, are the real ones like really

00:09:36.580 powerful work? Or are they just bullshit? What do you think? Are the real Rules for Radicals 0.99

00:09:44.260 most powerful plans for taking over countries? Or just a bunch of bullshit? Well, I looked 1.00

00:09:50.960 at them, and as far as I can tell, it's just generic stuff. Let me run through them quickly.

00:09:57.280 I'll do this just quickly. But this is the most generic stuff I've ever seen. There's nothing

00:10:01.760 here. To me, it's completely empty. But it could be that these were, maybe these were groundbreaking

00:10:09.160 ideas when they came out in the 60s. Is that possible? But in 2022, there's nothing on here

00:10:14.960 that's even interesting. These are just completely normal things. Let me give you the idea. Number

00:10:20.440 one, power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have. That's called bluffing.

00:10:28.380 Did you need the Rules for Radicals to know that pretending to have more power than you do 0.99

00:10:33.160 is a good thing? Well, what did that add? Literally every human knows that bluffing can

00:10:40.100 be a good thing. Number two, never go outside the expertise of your people. Well, isn't that

00:10:47.060 a little bit commonsensical? You should stay with what you know instead of talking about

00:10:51.760 things you don't know, because that would embarrass you. Or it's not going to be as effective.

00:10:56.840 Isn't that the most basic thing you would ever do in any domain, is to stay within your expertise

00:11:02.320 of your people, not necessarily your own. But then three is, whenever possible, go outside

00:11:08.380 the expertise of the enemy. In other words, if you have some knowledge or expertise they

00:11:14.420 don't have, use it against them. Did you need to be told that? Who wouldn't do that automatically?

00:11:20.940 If you have some expertise and your opponent does not, wouldn't you take advantage of that?

00:11:26.560 Did you need to read rules to find out to do that? These are the most ordinary, basic

00:11:32.100 things anybody would do. How about make the enemy live up to its own book of rules? Well,

00:11:37.480 what's the most common thing that politicians do? They accuse the other of being a hypocrite, 0.99

00:11:42.360 making the other one live up to their own rules. The claim of hypocrisy is the most empty, 0.97

00:11:49.800 useless thing that anybody ever used. There's no power in any of this stuff. This stuff is all

00:11:54.700 inert. So far. Then it says, ridicule is man's most potent weapon. You know, so you should use

00:12:00.780 ridicule and mock your opponents. That's what everybody does. That's what everybody does and

00:12:07.140 always has. Both sides mock their opponents. What insight did we get by having this on the list?

00:12:15.340 How about a good tactic is one your people enjoy? Did you need to be told that? That people will do

00:12:22.060 things they like to do more than things they don't like to do. Was that like an innovation in the

00:12:29.100 60s? How about seven? A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Well, everybody knows you need

00:12:36.400 to keep your energy high. Duh. Keep the pressure on. Duh. That's everybody on every topic all the time.

00:12:46.860 The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself. Yes, fear works as persuasion.

00:12:54.120 Did you need to know that scaring people works? Who in the world needed to tell you that?

00:13:00.620 How about the major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a

00:13:06.700 constant pressure upon the opposition. So you should have an organization that keeps the pressure on.

00:13:11.740 Again, did you need to know that if you're organizing, you need an organization?

00:13:19.660 There's nothing here. How about the last one?

00:13:25.140 If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through

00:13:29.920 into its counterside, which is based on the principle that every positive has its negative.

00:13:36.220 All right. So first of all, it's just a bunch of word salad, obvious stuff about if you push a

00:13:42.740 negative hard enough, it'll make a difference. Well, everybody knows that. If you, if you accuse

00:13:48.820 your opponent of something long enough and hard enough, this starts, starts working. That's both

00:13:55.540 sides all the time. Number 12, wait, is there two 12s? No. Number 12, the price of a successful

00:14:01.780 attack is a constructive alternative. All right. Well, that doesn't even mean anything.

00:14:08.000 The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Literally means nothing.

00:14:14.740 Number 13, pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. So here he's saying, you know,

00:14:21.560 if you have a, if you have a political policy topic, you should put a person on it so you can attack the

00:14:29.320 person, which is what everybody does. Every one of these rules for radicals is what every politician

00:14:36.220 does in every situation. There isn't a single thing here that's even the least bit interesting.

00:14:42.460 Am I wrong? Did you hear anything on this list that you said, oh, now we're in trouble?

00:14:49.840 They've seen these rules. This is completely nonsense. It's completely useless twaddle.

00:14:57.340 And I can't believe anybody would need to read these to know to do these things.

00:15:03.380 Demonize your opponent? Oh, it's very good that somebody told me to do that. I never would have

00:15:09.100 thought of that. This is literally NPC programming. Because every NPC, in other words, somebody who

00:15:18.340 didn't even have a complete brain, would know to do this stuff. All right. So I'm going to stick

00:15:24.460 with my, it was bullshit. I'm seeing people compare Kamala Harris to the boss from Dilbert. 0.99

00:15:32.740 I told you eventually every story comes back to me, even if I don't want it to. I want to see if I

00:15:37.940 can find her latest word salad. It's a beauty if you haven't heard it. Pretty sure I can find it.

00:15:47.300 We know that we really are quite behind in terms of maximizing our collective understanding about how

00:15:56.020 we will engage on the technology of today. And what we can quickly and easily predict will be

00:16:02.740 the technology over the next decades. So to maintain our position as the United States of America on this

00:16:09.480 issue, it is critical that we work together to understand where we are, to recognize and have

00:16:16.920 the courage to speak truth about what is obsolete, and then to partner to ensure that we are speaking

00:16:23.920 the same language with the same motivation, inspired by the opportunity of it all, but then doing the work

00:16:32.880 of updating how we've been talking and thinking about our exploration in space. We know that we really

00:16:41.280 are quite... Now, do you think it's fair to compare her to the pointy-haired boss in the Dilbert comic strip?

00:16:51.840 Do you feel that maybe that's not too far off, is it?

00:16:57.480 Wow. You know, it's funny because every time I see one of these clips, I think to myself,

00:17:07.160 well, she's going to tighten up her speaking after that, you know, because she's not going to want

00:17:11.860 to do this word salad again. But didn't you hear that her speechwriter quit? Can you do a fact check?

00:17:18.220 Didn't her, or was it her communications head or a speechwriter? Like whoever was in charge of

00:17:23.800 helping her speak better, quit? And I'm thinking, how could you ever get another job after that?

00:17:30.960 Imagine putting on your resume, Kamala Harris's speechwriter.

00:17:36.940 It sounds like a punchline, doesn't it?

00:17:41.440 I mean, seriously. Imagine looking at, you know, you've got a job applicant.

00:17:45.800 Yeah, let's see, your last job was, let me see, you were Kamala Harris's speechwriter.

00:17:50.840 I think we're done here. The door's over there.

00:17:57.980 All right. Germany has decided to postpone closing its last three nuclear plants. Now,

00:18:05.120 this is an update on a story. They had already decided to keep open some other ones, but now

00:18:11.420 I think three more. So Germany is really getting a lot of religion on nuclear power, as they should. 0.98

00:18:19.000 And Michael Schellenberger and his team did a lot of persuasion on this one. So they get the win.

00:18:27.440 They get the win.

00:18:30.360 All right. So Liz Cheney lost her primary to a Trump-endorsed candidate. I guess she won about,

00:18:38.580 she lost about two to one. It wasn't even close.

00:18:40.700 So she had won her prior elections by overwhelming majorities, but she just got slaughtered. 0.99

00:18:48.580 Now, how is the news covering it? Well, CNN says that it's more a sign that it's Trump's party

00:18:56.280 and that eight of the ten Republicans who voted to impeach Trump ended up losing or having to retire

00:19:05.040 or something. Okay. So that's CNN's thing. And I'm thinking, is it 100% because Liz Cheney

00:19:15.240 wanted to impeach Trump? Is that the only problem with Liz Cheney, is that she went after Trump? 1.00

00:19:25.260 Because to me, it looks like there's some Liz Cheney problems here that have to be addressed.

00:19:30.660 I'm not sure that she did anything but some kind of weird personal vendetta to self-aggrandize.

00:19:43.080 I mean, there's nothing about what she did that even seems laudable at all.

00:19:49.480 She was trying to do the, I'm above it all, and I'm better than you Republicans.

00:19:53.660 It completely failed because she ended up being a puppet for one of the biggest hoaxes.

00:20:00.660 So the January 6th thing, I'm just going to call a hoax, because I think that's fair enough, 0.99

00:20:06.820 at least in terms of it being an organized insurrection. That part's a hoax.

00:20:12.200 And so she basically got taken down by the Democrats.

00:20:17.680 The Democrats basically attached her to their giant hoax, and they guaranteed that she was 0.99

00:20:22.680 going to lose her job, which was, I suppose, maybe kind of clever of them in some weird way.

00:20:30.240 But to me, Liz Cheney, of course, she will keep on the fight. They always say that. 0.95

00:20:35.320 But I feel like she's Captain Ahab and Moby Dick.

00:20:39.420 I feel like she's just chasing her own personal white whale that happens to be an orange whale in this case,

00:20:45.400 great orange whale, and God, I want to say a word I don't want to say, but I'm not going to do it.

00:20:56.140 Let's just say that Liz Cheney may have come across as not a person that you want to support.

00:21:03.820 That's the best I can do.

00:21:05.000 Well, CNN did this great gaslighting piece as part of their ongoing hypnotizing of the public.

00:21:16.360 This seems to only work on their base.

00:21:18.580 So listen to this.

00:21:19.420 So CNN attended a hackers convention in which part of the hacker convention was

00:21:25.740 they had access to a bunch of voting machine hardware and software.

00:21:30.120 And then the hackers were going to look for vulnerabilities in the voting machine software.

00:21:36.500 Now, how do you think CNN would cover a story about hackers looking for vulnerabilities in voting machines?

00:21:45.800 How would they handle that?

00:21:47.060 Because it would be counter to their narrative to say that the voting machines have vulnerabilities.

00:21:53.240 But on the other hand, that is the main context of the story

00:21:57.320 because the hackers did, in fact, find vulnerabilities.

00:22:01.500 Now, there wasn't much detail about those vulnerabilities,

00:22:04.340 but even CNN reported, yes, we found vulnerabilities.

00:22:09.360 Here's how CNN reported it.

00:22:11.960 Hey, hacker guy whose only expertise is hacking,

00:22:16.780 were there any vulnerabilities?

00:22:18.520 Yes.

00:22:19.740 Did you find any evidence that those vulnerabilities were exploited to change the election?

00:22:24.640 Hacker guy says, no, no, absolutely not.

00:22:29.000 No evidence that anything bad happened in the election.

00:22:31.900 Absolutely not.

00:22:34.160 What's wrong with that?

00:22:37.720 Here's what's wrong with it.

00:22:40.580 How are they going to find evidence that the election had been hacked

00:22:44.220 by looking at unconnected machines sitting on a table?

00:22:49.660 How is he going to look at a clean voting machine with no data on it

00:22:54.500 and determine that the election had been rigged

00:22:57.300 by looking at a machine that may not have ever been part of the voting process? 0.94

00:23:02.840 Ridiculous. 0.72

00:23:04.100 But the way they presented it was that he was talking with some authority 0.89

00:23:07.700 that they had told that they could determine through their hacking skills

00:23:11.940 that these were, that had not been hacked.

00:23:14.940 So it wasn't, so they could determine for sure that it was hackable

00:23:19.060 and that seems to be, you know, something nobody's arguing about.

00:23:25.260 But then they went to the point where they fooled you into thinking

00:23:28.440 this guy could tell that nothing had happened in the actual election

00:23:33.140 by looking at a piece of equipment

00:23:35.280 which in all likelihoods had never been near an election.

00:23:39.080 It probably was an extra one that the voting company gave them.

00:23:43.180 Well, let me ask you that.

00:23:45.440 Where do you think they got them?

00:23:47.200 Do you think they got the spare voting machines from, let's say, counties that used them?

00:23:53.280 Did they go to a county and say,

00:23:54.640 do you have an extra that we can just use and take apart?

00:23:58.520 Maybe. I don't know.

00:23:59.760 Or do you think it's more likely they went to the voting machine companies themselves

00:24:03.300 and said, could you give us a blank that we can play with?

00:24:08.040 And if it came from the voting machine companies themselves,

00:24:12.400 would it necessarily look exactly like the ones that were in the election?

00:24:17.600 And let me ask you this.

00:24:19.780 Do you think there's one version of voting machine out there?

00:24:23.620 Isn't there all kinds of different software versions?

00:24:28.300 What software version got tested?

00:24:30.500 Because I imagine that every voting machine had exactly one version of software on it.

00:24:34.500 Don't you think that there are dozens of software patches and versions all along the way?

00:24:42.120 They probably saw the most recent software, wouldn't you say?

00:24:46.920 I assume that these had software on them, of course.

00:24:50.780 So did the hackers see the software version that was in the election,

00:24:56.380 or did they see the most modern software version,

00:24:59.700 which one assumes might have some patches of it, who knows, updates?

00:25:04.300 There is absolutely nothing about this that tells you whether or not the election was rigged.

00:25:10.840 It just tells you that it was totally possible.

00:25:14.440 And here's the story that makes me crazy.

00:25:17.920 What is the most likely way an election would be rigged electronically?

00:25:22.940 What is the most likely way?

00:25:24.820 Is the most likely way an outside hacker gets into the system?

00:25:30.400 Is that the most likely way?

00:25:32.940 It's not.

00:25:34.100 But we keep talking about it like it is.

00:25:36.520 The most likely way, by a factor of, I don't know, 100 to 1?

00:25:42.260 20 to 1?

00:25:43.660 I mean, it's not even close.

00:25:45.560 The most likely way it would happen was an insider.

00:25:49.280 Now, what can they tell us?

00:25:50.800 Did the hackers test any insiders?

00:25:52.580 Did the hackers put any devices into the skull of all the employees who have access to the data

00:26:00.900 and say, we checked your brain, and we don't see that you did anything?

00:26:04.600 There's no way to check that.

00:26:06.600 So the biggest risk, we completely ignore, because we don't have a way to check.

00:26:11.960 Right?

00:26:13.000 So we look at the shiny object.

00:26:15.360 Oh, hackers.

00:26:17.200 Hackers are trying to break in, but...

00:26:19.580 Meanwhile, the biggest risk is always just some guy or some woman.

00:26:26.980 Always.

00:26:28.000 It's always the biggest.

00:26:29.000 It doesn't mean it happened.

00:26:30.040 It just means that's always the biggest risk.

00:26:33.820 All right.

00:26:36.040 So that...

00:26:36.900 It's amazing that that happens right in front of us.

00:26:39.580 So I had some vague understanding that that whole Gretchen Whitmer, a governor, might-be-kidnapped plot by the extremists.

00:26:52.220 And I didn't know the whole story, but apparently the story is that it was a complete setup by one FBI agent,

00:26:59.300 whom probably coerced some others.

00:27:01.100 But primarily one FBI agent who had some outside security business interests seemed to have been trying to create the impression

00:27:10.160 that the extremist risk was higher than it was, probably for his own income.

00:27:15.660 Meaning it wasn't some kind of an FBI plot.

00:27:19.120 It was one guy in the FBI who looked like he could make some money by, you know, making it look like there's a threat,

00:27:24.960 and then he could presumably pay to take care of the threat that he had created.

00:27:30.760 So they did everything they could to convince some regular people who did not want to kidnap anybody to get involved in this plot.

00:27:39.160 And now, because it's in a court, we have really good evidence, proof, you could say, because it's gone through the court system,

00:27:48.660 that an FBI agent was behind a whole fake hoax kidnap plot.

00:27:56.560 That really happened.

00:27:59.180 That's not something made up.

00:28:01.880 And part of the story, which is interesting, is that the FBI, one FBI did talk to the local police when the protests happened

00:28:10.500 and asked them to stand aside and let the protesters enter the Capitol building.

00:28:15.640 So at the same time that we're wondering if the January 6th thing had anything sketchy about it,

00:28:25.400 we see an exact model in the real world of what people suspected was happening with January 6th.

00:28:34.260 Now, I'm not going to allege that January 6th was an FBI operation.

00:28:38.780 So I don't have that information.

00:28:41.040 But when you look at one that was an FBI operation and you look at the parallels,

00:28:47.100 you have to start asking some questions.

00:28:51.140 But there is one part that you shouldn't lose sight of,

00:28:54.380 that this Lansing, Michigan, kidnap plot,

00:29:03.220 the kidnap plot really seems to be run by one person as opposed to the FBI.

00:29:11.040 So there's no evidence that I've seen that the FBI as an organization was trying to do this.

00:29:17.620 It seemed more like one person.

00:29:19.660 So you'd have to take that to the January 6th protest and say to yourself,

00:29:24.480 could it be that one or more persons is all it took to make it look like an FBI plot?

00:29:32.840 It wouldn't take much if it only takes one or two people to motivate other people to look like a plot.

00:29:40.960 So given that that happened, it's hard for me to imagine that you could completely dismiss the possibility that the FBI was involved.

00:29:50.380 Again, I don't have any information that would suggest they were.

00:29:55.460 Well, suggest is the wrong word.

00:29:57.420 I don't have any proof that they were.

00:30:00.060 But man, it goes right to the top of your possibility list, doesn't it?

00:30:05.320 It goes right to the top of the possibility list.

00:30:09.000 Rasmussen did a poll on asking people if they trusted lawyers.

00:30:12.180 And only 35% of American adults trust lawyers.

00:30:17.300 But here's the fun part.

00:30:19.300 Of the people who had actually hired lawyers and had experience with lawyers,

00:30:23.780 the more experience you had with a lawyer, the less you trusted lawyers.

00:30:28.880 So if you had never hired a lawyer, you were more likely to trust them.

00:30:32.400 So that tells you something.

00:30:39.240 But I feel like people trust their own lawyer more than they trust other people's lawyers.

00:30:45.780 I generally trust my own lawyer.

00:30:48.400 But I always think the other lawyers are, I can't trust them.

00:30:51.400 But, of course, it's a system where you're not supposed to trust the other side.

00:30:56.380 All right.

00:30:58.380 Elon Musk made some news by saying that he was basically in the middle.

00:31:02.840 Politically.

00:31:03.800 So he was on the right side of the Democrats and the left side of Republicans.

00:31:09.340 Meaning he's in the middle.

00:31:11.860 And then he also announced he's buying Manchester United,

00:31:15.200 the most famous soccer team in the world.

00:31:19.300 Soccer club.

00:31:22.320 But here's a...

00:31:23.900 If somebody would like to take over America, let me tell you how to do it.

00:31:28.760 All right.

00:31:28.980 Here's...

00:31:29.820 If you want to actually take over America, 0.61

00:31:32.400 you want to do it Joe Manchin style.

00:31:35.140 You want to have a situation where the Democrats and the Republicans are so close

00:31:39.880 that a third party would always determine who won.

00:31:44.300 So you create the third party.

00:31:46.600 And here's what you could...

00:31:47.460 Now, third parties have existed.

00:31:49.500 But the problem with third parties so far

00:31:51.580 is that they're obviously left or obviously right.

00:31:55.780 Am I right?

00:31:56.500 So you could always tell who they're taking votes away from.

00:32:00.840 So if you always know who the third party is going to take votes from,

00:32:04.700 let's say the Green Party takes from the left,

00:32:07.500 then you don't really have power except to be a spoiler.

00:32:10.620 You want to be like Joe Manchin where nobody knows which way you're going to go.

00:32:16.980 So here's what I would call a center party if I were to create one to run the world.

00:32:22.360 I would call it the common center party.

00:32:25.320 The common center party.

00:32:28.940 What does common center remind you of?

00:32:32.060 Common sense.

00:32:33.700 Your brain just goes to common sense.

00:32:35.460 And what does the center generally represent?

00:32:39.520 Common sense.

00:32:41.380 And the center is where most people believe they are.

00:32:44.700 And they believe it's common.

00:32:46.720 And they believe that they'd like you to know it's common.

00:32:49.800 If you belong to the biggest group in America

00:32:52.780 and you're being ignored

00:32:55.460 because the far left and the far right get all the attention,

00:32:58.640 you probably want people to know,

00:33:00.320 hey, we're here, we're common, we're in the middle.

00:33:04.140 So if you called yourself the common center party

00:33:07.720 and started a political party

00:33:09.580 and you made sure that sometimes you leaned left

00:33:12.520 and sometimes you leaned a little right,

00:33:14.700 you would have a Joe Manchin situation

00:33:16.640 where you could control politics.

00:33:18.620 All you need to do

00:33:19.960 is cannibalize one side a little bit harder than the other

00:33:24.160 and you could determine who the president would be.

00:33:27.360 So let's say you wanted Trump to lose.

00:33:31.820 You wanted Trump to lose.

00:33:32.960 If you're in the center, then you say,

00:33:34.840 okay, the center wants to have stronger immigration.

00:33:40.440 So suddenly, all the people who think Trump is too extreme,

00:33:44.380 but they like strong immigration policy,

00:33:47.820 they go, oh, the center party, you know, that's for me.

00:33:51.540 And then that center party could make the left win

00:33:53.960 because they'd take away too many of the votes from the right.

00:33:57.660 But it could go the other way.

00:33:58.740 So you could have somebody who's in the left,

00:34:02.140 but I'm going to do it with nuclear energy.

00:34:06.100 Like, ah, huh.

00:34:10.700 Presumably.

00:34:11.340 No, these are just examples.

00:34:13.920 But presumably, you could manage your campaign

00:34:17.260 intentionally to take a little more from the left

00:34:20.480 or a little more from the right.

00:34:21.960 And in so doing, you would become Joe Manchin

00:34:24.600 and you would run the country effectively

00:34:26.960 because you'd get to decide who the president was.

00:34:30.700 Am I wrong?

00:34:33.240 Now, it would split the party

00:34:34.780 if you were exactly identical to both sides.

00:34:37.900 But the whole thing here is to be Joe Manchin

00:34:40.560 and to clearly push one way

00:34:42.900 or clearly push the other way

00:34:44.180 when you want to influence things.

00:34:45.460 Yeah, we'll see.

00:34:50.700 My last point, I have to save for the locals' platform 0.99

00:34:54.420 because it's an idea

00:34:56.560 which would be too dangerous in the public.

00:35:00.280 Too dangerous.

00:35:03.180 True story.

00:35:05.060 So after I turn off YouTube this morning,

00:35:08.020 I'll give the locals' people a little extra. 0.98

00:35:13.060 Oh, no, I love you, too.

00:35:14.040 I love you, too, on YouTube.

00:35:17.460 How many of you saw the clip

00:35:19.160 that was taken out of my recent cast?

00:35:24.460 It was just a clip about the hoax pattern.

00:35:27.740 Seems to be getting a lot of uptick.

00:35:29.320 I saw Jack Posobiec tweeted it,

00:35:32.300 a number of other people.

00:35:33.600 I feel like it's making a difference.

00:35:35.340 Do you?

00:35:38.000 Does anybody think that by calling out the hoax pattern,

00:35:41.980 I feel like it could make a difference?

00:35:45.460 Yeah, there's something powerful about writing it down

00:35:47.660 because I've been, well, lots of people

00:35:50.480 have been pointing out that the Democrats

00:35:52.120 use the same pattern over and over,

00:35:54.200 but it's not until you write it down

00:35:55.760 or make a picture of it

00:35:57.000 that it becomes potent.

00:36:00.060 So maybe that's the part I did.

00:36:02.200 I just made a picture, and that made it potent.

00:36:06.200 All right.

00:36:11.980 You wish I still blogged.

00:36:14.020 Yeah.

00:36:15.700 I kind of wish I did, too.

00:36:17.480 I do think that maybe my blogging

00:36:19.480 has more impact because it's more portable.

00:36:23.100 If I say something in a blog post,

00:36:25.480 it gets passed around more easily.

00:36:28.820 All right.

00:36:29.620 That's all for now.

00:36:32.320 Oh, the two hoaxes that I added to the...

00:36:35.220 Oh, and let me ask you this.

00:36:37.180 Do you think my list of...

00:36:38.360 Now it's 14.

00:36:39.980 My list of 14 hoaxes,

00:36:42.360 do you think that that's making a dent?

00:36:46.600 I think it might be.

00:36:48.600 Now, the trouble is it's not being fully exposed

00:36:51.240 to the other side.

00:36:56.140 And, yeah.

00:36:59.760 So my real problem is

00:37:01.260 I don't really break through to the other side.

00:37:03.440 But on Twitter, you can see that

00:37:05.040 when I paste the hoax,

00:37:07.460 that people immediately just sort of collapse.

00:37:11.200 And you'll see a number of people say,

00:37:13.200 every one of those things is true.

00:37:15.760 And I think to myself, really?

00:37:18.520 Really?

00:37:18.960 Really?

00:37:20.180 There's even one person

00:37:21.440 who thinks everything on the list

00:37:22.700 actually really happened?

00:37:24.020 And they'll say that in public.

00:37:26.240 And I think, well, okay.

00:37:28.220 You can't find one thing on that list,

00:37:30.400 even the things that the court has shown as hoaxes.

00:37:33.560 Okay.

00:37:36.420 All right.

00:37:38.280 YouTube,

00:37:39.340 I'm sure this is the finest thing

00:37:40.660 you've seen this morning.

00:37:41.800 It will stay with you

00:37:42.940 for the rest of your days.

00:37:44.040 But I got a little talking to do

00:37:47.320 to the locals people.

00:37:49.120 I'm going to go do that.

00:37:51.180 And let me just,

00:37:54.180 one technical note.

00:37:56.060 If you listen to the podcast

00:37:57.640 and you saw it was all chopped up,

00:38:01.100 or you listen to the,

00:38:03.500 I guess it's the podcast that was chopped up.

00:38:06.020 For reasons that I don't understand yet,

00:38:08.220 some of my content can't be downloaded

00:38:11.560 from YouTube.

00:38:14.160 On most days,

00:38:15.960 it can be downloaded

00:38:17.520 and then turned into podcasts,

00:38:19.680 you know, the audio part.

00:38:21.140 But for reasons I don't yet understand,

00:38:23.900 YouTube will block some all day long.

00:38:26.360 There'll be technical glitches

00:38:27.520 and you can't download it.

00:38:28.460 I don't know if this affects everybody

00:38:31.460 or just my account.

00:38:34.660 But those that seem the most,

00:38:36.380 let's say, impactful,

00:38:39.480 and this is anecdotal,

00:38:41.000 but the ones that seem most impactful,

00:38:43.160 like, you know,

00:38:44.180 the hoax pattern,

00:38:46.320 I feel like those are highly correlated

00:38:48.160 with when I get a technical glitch

00:38:49.920 so that I can't transmit it.

00:38:53.700 I also had two tweets yesterday

00:38:56.180 that under normal days

00:38:58.440 would have been close to 1,000 retweets,

00:39:00.920 but capped out at, like, 100 or 200.

00:39:04.100 And they were both pretty dangerous.

00:39:06.780 Dangerous in the sense that

00:39:08.060 they questioned the narrative.

00:39:10.520 And to me,

00:39:12.720 it looks like they were just obviously throttled.

00:39:15.760 But, of course,

00:39:16.680 we're deep into confirmation bias territory, right?

00:39:19.920 My confirmation bias says

00:39:21.720 if I do a tweet that I think is good

00:39:24.180 but other people don't,

00:39:25.340 I'm going to think it was throttled

00:39:27.180 instead of thinking it was a bad tweet.

00:39:29.660 So I have to, you know,

00:39:31.020 I have to keep a little bit of honesty

00:39:33.480 on my, on myself.

00:39:36.520 So I don't know.

00:39:37.840 I'll tell you it looks exactly

00:39:39.560 like it's being throttled.

00:39:41.440 But I don't know.

00:39:42.540 There's no way to know that.

00:39:44.980 All right.

00:39:47.000 And that, ladies and gentlemen,

00:39:48.680 is all I have for YouTube.

00:39:51.220 And I'll be talking to locals in a minute.

00:39:53.180 Bye for now.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - August 17, 2022

Episode 1838 Scott Adams： Trump Flushes Lizard Cheney Down The Dynasty Toilet, HOAX List Is Up To 14

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript