Real Coffee with Scott Adams - December 05, 2022


Episode 1948 Scott Adams: Fake News Out Of China, Fake News in NYT, I'm Starting To See A Pattern


Episode Stats


Length

1 hour and 2 minutes

Words per minute

141.2906

Word count

8,899

Sentence count

646

Harmful content

Misogyny

10

sentences flagged

Hate speech

26

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

In this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, we talk about artificial intelligence (AI) and the future of education, and how it's going to change the world. Plus, I talk about why I don't want to own a car.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Da, da, da, da, da, da, da, da, da, da, da, da, da.
00:00:04.780 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of civilization.
00:00:09.600 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
00:00:11.140 There's never been a finer moment in your life.
00:00:14.500 I know, you'd probably like the birth of your children, maybe your wedding day,
00:00:18.320 but those are nothing compared to this experience.
00:00:21.500 And if you want to take it up to yet another level, and I know you do,
00:00:24.340 all you need is a copper mug or a glass, a tanker, chalice, or stein, a canteen jug or flask,
00:00:30.280 a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
00:00:33.760 I like coffee.
00:00:35.500 Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day,
00:00:39.120 the thing that makes everything better.
00:00:42.360 It's called the simultaneous sip, and it's going to happen right now.
00:00:44.600 Go.
00:00:49.760 Ah, yeah, that's good.
00:00:51.880 That's good.
00:00:55.720 Well, let's talk about some things.
00:01:00.560 A Twitter user named Peter Wang.
00:01:05.780 Stop it.
00:01:08.180 That's his actual name.
00:01:09.580 Don't make fun of him.
00:01:11.100 Just because his first name and his last name are a penis, 0.55
00:01:15.220 Peter Wang, that is no reason to mock him.
00:01:18.700 That's not kind.
00:01:20.340 Don't do that.
00:01:21.880 Because that's not what this is about.
00:01:24.000 But Peter Wang had a very good tweet,
00:01:26.920 which was neither about his Peter or his Wang.
00:01:31.120 But he said, quote,
00:01:32.800 I just had a 20-minute conversation with ChatGPT,
00:01:36.360 that's an artificial intelligence that's available to the public,
00:01:41.360 about the history of modern physics.
00:01:43.420 If I had this shit as a tutor during high school and college, OMG.
00:01:48.740 I think we can basically reinvent the concept of education at scale.
00:01:54.080 College as we know it will cease to exist.
00:01:57.580 AI will be your only user interface to everything, including education.
00:02:01.300 Yes.
00:02:03.540 Yes, Peter Wang, you have nailed this.
00:02:08.420 The only thing I want for education is AI.
00:02:11.120 Now, you say to yourself, but Scott, AI will not be as good as a human teacher who's reacting and all that.
00:02:21.000 To which I say, you are right on day one.
00:02:25.620 What happens on day two of AI versus all the human teachers?
00:02:34.380 On day two, AI, or well, not technically day two, but let's say year two.
00:02:39.960 On year two, AI has already tried 3,000 different ways to explain something.
00:02:49.200 And it tracked who got the best test results based on which way it chose to explain the same topic.
00:02:56.500 Once it found out that people got much better test results when it explained it this way,
00:03:01.740 it starts doing it that way from now on.
00:03:04.380 Maybe testing a little bit just in case it can do even better.
00:03:07.720 What did the human teachers do?
00:03:09.960 During that year, when the AI went from, I'll just guess what will work, to, oh, I have great data,
00:03:16.320 and I know exactly what worked, and this gets better test results.
00:03:19.340 What did the human teachers do differently?
00:03:23.980 They introduced some gender reassignment classes or something.
00:03:30.500 I don't know.
00:03:32.040 But I'll tell you what they didn't do, is know exactly what worked and what didn't,
00:03:36.800 and then change to what worked.
00:03:39.960 But AI did.
00:03:42.220 By year three, no human classroom would be able to compete with AI.
00:03:48.580 Because AI would have tested, you know, very completely, all the way through test scores,
00:03:54.280 to know what worked and what didn't, and then it would be over.
00:03:56.480 The only interface I want for anything is AI.
00:04:00.480 I don't want to do a Google search where I open a web page, and there's a little box.
00:04:07.040 I've got to find the box and type in my little thing and type it right.
00:04:10.580 I don't want any of that.
00:04:12.260 I want to be walking to my car, which is a self-driving car, and I want to say,
00:04:17.880 huh, I wonder when the next Warrior game is.
00:04:20.520 Hey, when's the next Warrior game?
00:04:22.460 Our next Warrior game will be Tuesday at 7 o'clock.
00:04:25.940 That's what I want.
00:04:27.140 I just want to say it and have the answer appear in my earpiece.
00:04:32.320 And yeah, it won't be my car, right?
00:04:33.820 I won't own the car and I'll be happier.
00:04:38.700 I don't think any of you quite understand how right Klaus Schwab is about not owning things and being happier.
00:04:48.360 If he's the one who said it, I think he did.
00:04:52.380 Let me give you a little insight from being rich.
00:04:56.580 You ready for this?
00:04:57.340 So I've experienced not having money, you know, the first part of my life, and I've experienced having lots of money.
00:05:07.180 And one of the things I like most about going on vacation is what?
00:05:13.020 What do you think is one of the things I like most about being on vacation?
00:05:18.560 Getting away from my money.
00:05:21.940 Because my money brought all these complications.
00:05:24.880 I've got a car that's breaking down.
00:05:27.380 I've got 600, you know, pieces of appliances that are not working at my house.
00:05:32.820 I've got leaks.
00:05:34.100 I've got shit.
00:05:34.900 I've got mail coming in.
00:05:36.440 I've got to clean the house.
00:05:37.980 I've got a dog.
00:05:40.420 It's all because of money, right?
00:05:42.640 When I go on vacation, I'm not actually escaping my own money.
00:05:46.280 It's a vacation from my money.
00:05:48.900 So if you're telling me that, you know, I want to own a lot of things, like being in my name,
00:05:54.320 because that's what will make me happy,
00:05:55.640 you've never experienced going from poor to rich.
00:05:59.380 If you've ever gone from poor to rich, you know your shit doesn't make you happy.
00:06:03.720 All right?
00:06:04.180 You're still going to buy it because you can, right?
00:06:07.000 I was watching a video of Andrew Tate by, I don't know, one or three new Bugattis or something.
00:06:17.600 He's got some big fleet of expensive cars.
00:06:21.380 And he looked very happy.
00:06:23.140 He seemed very happy when he was doing it.
00:06:24.740 But I think only the buying it and the talking about it makes him happy.
00:06:29.260 And maybe driving it two or three times.
00:06:31.140 But then after he gets through his happiness and then is parked with his other Bugattis, 0.93
00:06:37.600 does it still make him happy?
00:06:39.980 Or is it a little bit of work to have maintenance and, you know, storage and everything for yet another car?
00:06:48.080 I don't know.
00:06:49.160 Yeah, maybe it does work for him.
00:06:50.520 He seems to have a good system.
00:06:52.560 But if you believe that having a lot of stuff makes you happier, I guarantee you it doesn't.
00:06:59.060 You'll still get them.
00:07:00.820 Like, I'm not saying I'm going to stop buying things I want.
00:07:04.100 I mean, I just bought an electric guitar that clearly I did not need.
00:07:09.500 And I liked it.
00:07:10.420 I really enjoyed it.
00:07:11.000 Every time I look at it, it makes me happy.
00:07:13.220 But it's also a pain in the ass, right?
00:07:15.380 It adds a whole bunch of complexity to my life.
00:07:19.540 All right.
00:07:21.040 Yeah, AI will be everything.
00:07:23.580 I've got a question about the Snowden and Assange issues.
00:07:28.440 About Assange mostly.
00:07:30.640 But the question is whether they should be pardoned.
00:07:35.800 Why wouldn't we have a trial?
00:07:38.260 Is the belief that our justice system is so unfair that we can't have a trial that the whole country watches?
00:07:48.600 Because that's what I...
00:07:50.480 Yeah, I've seen a lot of yes.
00:07:52.320 So, now, I agree with you that our justice system can be biased and not get us the best answers.
00:08:00.020 But we use it for everything else.
00:08:03.860 Like, why would you make an exception for this one thing?
00:08:08.100 Don't you think the government itself would be on trial?
00:08:12.640 You know, here's my take.
00:08:18.380 I don't know the whole details of what Assange and Snowden did.
00:08:23.880 I haven't really heard the argument from, let's say, whoever wants to prosecute them, the CIA, etc.
00:08:30.780 So, I mean, I've heard the basic argument that it put people at risk and it was theft of materials and stuff.
00:08:37.460 And then the counter-argument is it was just journalism.
00:08:39.720 So, I'd like to see this case played out in public.
00:08:46.500 Now, I get that you don't trust that this specific case would be handled right.
00:08:51.800 However, I feel like if the whole country is watching,
00:08:56.080 it's a lot harder for anybody to, you know, play fast and loose with the rules.
00:09:00.940 So, as much as I don't want to see somebody put at risk if they have not committed any crimes,
00:09:10.600 I don't know what they have done.
00:09:13.180 Like, I'm a little hesitant to go full pardon without knowing exactly the whole details of the arguments.
00:09:20.760 But I'd like to know the arguments.
00:09:24.800 So, you're saying that government on trial would be a closed-door trial.
00:09:29.040 I'm seeing somebody shouting at me that it would be a closed-door trial.
00:09:32.680 Do you think it could be?
00:09:34.500 Do you think that you could put Assange on trial and say,
00:09:38.140 we're going to show some things to, let's say, the jury,
00:09:41.040 but the public can never know these things because they're secret?
00:09:46.000 Well, if that's the case, then there's no way to have a fair trial.
00:09:50.760 Because I think transparency would be pretty important.
00:09:54.500 Now, that would be interesting.
00:09:55.640 I would think that that would be a Supreme Court situation
00:09:59.340 because that would not be equal justice, would it?
00:10:03.140 I would argue that equal justice requires some amount of transparency for the entire public,
00:10:09.280 not just the people involved in the trial.
00:10:12.140 But, of course, there are plenty of cases where you do have to have that privacy.
00:10:17.520 So, I don't know.
00:10:19.240 Well, I'm biased toward having the trial
00:10:22.220 because I think it's terribly unfair to Assange
00:10:26.420 if it turns out no crimes were committed.
00:10:29.220 It's terribly unfair.
00:10:31.560 But, but,
00:10:34.400 he put himself in a position where he was trying to create a public good
00:10:38.160 and put himself at risk.
00:10:41.020 Would you agree that he knew he was doing that?
00:10:43.660 That Assange knew he was taking a risk,
00:10:45.460 he was doing it for the public good,
00:10:48.340 and maybe his own reasons too.
00:10:50.040 But, and I think this is more of that.
00:10:54.100 I would like, you know, I hate to put other people at risk.
00:10:57.940 You know, he should make his own decisions.
00:10:59.720 But he did make his decision to be in this domain.
00:11:02.120 And if a little bit more risk on Assange
00:11:05.680 could produce yet more benefit of the kind
00:11:09.300 that even Assange would like us to have,
00:11:11.820 I don't know.
00:11:13.920 I don't know.
00:11:14.940 It would be,
00:11:15.240 it would be real interesting
00:11:17.200 to have the trial.
00:11:20.820 I understand the argument for just pardoning him.
00:11:23.780 I totally get it.
00:11:24.720 But I feel like there's more benefit the country could get
00:11:28.940 by just knowing more about this situation.
00:11:32.540 All right.
00:11:35.020 The Iran protests,
00:11:37.100 apparently the New York Times is reporting fake news on this.
00:11:42.220 So Iran has this thing called the Morality Police Unit. 0.84
00:11:47.200 I guess they're the ones that make sure the women are wearing their 1.00
00:11:49.740 proper headgear and stuff.
00:11:51.960 And they were the sparking point that caused the protests
00:11:58.020 because they arrested some woman and she died in custody,
00:12:01.900 I think is the story.
00:12:03.420 So the protests are raging.
00:12:05.940 And they started with, you know,
00:12:10.720 being against the morality of police,
00:12:12.620 but I think it generalized now to the regime.
00:12:15.540 So now the protests are as much about the regime
00:12:18.860 as they are about this specific problem.
00:12:20.700 So what the regime is doing, wisely,
00:12:24.780 is they're saying,
00:12:25.700 oh, oh, now that it's about the entire regime,
00:12:28.760 maybe we could go back and solve that little problem
00:12:30.960 you were complaining about.
00:12:32.480 You know that morality police problem?
00:12:34.200 Let's get back to that.
00:12:35.900 Let's not overthrow the whole regime.
00:12:39.580 Let's just go back and talk to that thing. 0.98
00:12:41.360 We weren't going to talk about it before,
00:12:42.960 but maybe we can talk about it now
00:12:44.940 because you seem to be protesting so much.
00:12:46.860 So Iran apparently said they would sort of reconsider
00:12:50.660 or they've suggested that they're going to put this morality police unit on pause
00:12:57.300 or suspend them.
00:12:59.280 The New York Times, I guess, reported that like it's true.
00:13:02.220 And I think people who are a little more wise about Iran,
00:13:08.880 including the Washington Post,
00:13:10.540 are reporting it as something they said they'd do,
00:13:13.660 which is a big difference.
00:13:16.760 Something they say they'll do versus something they'll do.
00:13:20.240 Big difference.
00:13:21.760 Big difference.
00:13:23.060 So we'll see if that works out.
00:13:24.460 But it looks like the regime is pretty worried about their survival
00:13:30.080 or they wouldn't be giving up anything, would they?
00:13:34.540 It seems like the regime is pretty hard-nosed about this morality stuff.
00:13:41.360 I mean, it's pretty central to the whole theme.
00:13:44.080 I can't see that they would back down on the morality stuff
00:13:47.080 unless they genuinely thought the entire regime could be overthrown.
00:13:53.220 So we might be closer to a total overthrow.
00:13:56.780 Now, here's the most interesting story.
00:13:58.920 It's a few days old, but maybe you didn't see it.
00:14:02.160 When Iran played the U.S. in the World Cup a few days ago
00:14:07.380 and the U.S. won,
00:14:11.420 the Iranian protesters cheered the defeat of their own team
00:14:16.260 because they viewed their team as really being a tool of the regime,
00:14:21.000 not really a team for the people of Iran.
00:14:24.860 And so they were actually chanting and cheering
00:14:27.760 America's victory over an Iranian soccer team.
00:14:32.300 Did you ever think you'd see that?
00:14:34.120 And you know how the Iranians like to do the death to chant? 1.00
00:14:45.320 You know, death to America, death to Israel. 1.00
00:14:48.400 You know, it's always death to somebody.
00:14:50.580 Everybody's chanting, death to somebody.
00:14:52.900 And I just had this image in my head
00:14:54.880 of the Iranian protesters chanting,
00:14:58.060 death to ourselves, death to ourselves, yay America. 0.99
00:15:02.960 And I thought, who predicted that?
00:15:07.960 Like, show me somebody who predicted
00:15:09.580 that the Iranian population would be chanting
00:15:12.420 death to ourselves this time.
00:15:14.660 They didn't literally say that,
00:15:16.480 but, you know, there was a sense of it.
00:15:20.000 Could it be that the combined actions of, you know,
00:15:29.880 the several administrations that have had this weird
00:15:33.540 hands-on, hands-off approach to Iran,
00:15:36.700 could it be that it worked?
00:15:39.160 Could it be that the young population of Iran
00:15:43.140 is so pro-American that, you know, giving the,
00:15:48.560 even though the sanctions are a hard touch,
00:15:51.340 I think the Iranian people came to see it
00:15:53.200 as a war against their regime and not against them.
00:15:57.840 I don't know how that could have been better.
00:16:00.760 Name me any American outcome,
00:16:02.600 or even Israeli outcome.
00:16:04.960 Name me a better outcome
00:16:06.240 than the citizens protesting their own government
00:16:09.460 and being in favor of the United States.
00:16:12.380 I mean, at least, you know,
00:16:14.240 specifically in terms of the World Cup.
00:16:17.460 But you have to think that generalizes, right?
00:16:20.140 They're not going to do that
00:16:21.100 unless they've got some general good feeling
00:16:22.780 about the United States.
00:16:23.900 And the Iranian protesters are directly asking
00:16:26.940 for U.S. support for the protests.
00:16:30.360 So maybe, maybe just staying the course,
00:16:36.240 putting that consistent pressure on Iran,
00:16:38.700 but not going too far,
00:16:41.960 could it be that it was exactly the right play?
00:16:46.040 I mean, when was the last time you ever heard me say that?
00:16:48.800 And could it be that it was exactly the right play
00:16:51.420 across multiple administrations,
00:16:56.560 you know, both Democrat and Republican?
00:16:58.540 Because I don't think it hurt
00:16:59.940 to have a little Trump tough love
00:17:02.860 in between some Democrat administrations.
00:17:08.280 I don't know.
00:17:09.020 It looks like it might have been exactly the only thing
00:17:11.960 that could have got us to this place
00:17:14.320 that maybe is a better place.
00:17:16.420 Maybe.
00:17:18.000 You never know.
00:17:20.440 All right.
00:17:22.240 There's news out of China
00:17:23.760 that manufacturing orders
00:17:26.560 for Chinese manufacturers are down 40%.
00:17:29.860 Now, this is widely reported.
00:17:34.340 Manufacturing orders down 40%.
00:17:36.600 I'm going to call bullshit on that.
00:17:40.100 Yeah, that sounds like bullshit.
00:17:42.180 And here's why.
00:17:44.800 And see if anybody has the same background for this.
00:17:49.140 Number one, remember, I've got a degree in economics
00:17:52.240 and, you know, an MBA.
00:17:54.220 So on economic stuff, I'm a little bit better than guessing.
00:17:58.420 You know, there's a lot of domains
00:17:59.900 in which I'm pretty much guessing.
00:18:01.860 But in economics, I'm not totally guessing.
00:18:04.620 I've got a little bit of insight there.
00:18:06.260 And I also did a lot of financial reporting for years
00:18:10.420 in my corporate life.
00:18:11.340 So you get this, you get a feel about numbers
00:18:14.060 that usually you can call bullshit on stuff
00:18:17.740 before you know why.
00:18:20.100 Like, you can just look at it and say,
00:18:21.500 no, I don't know why this number is wrong,
00:18:25.080 but that number isn't wrong.
00:18:26.720 I mean, that number is wrong.
00:18:27.640 So I saw two different numbers.
00:18:30.260 One is that something like there's a 21% decrease
00:18:35.360 in U.S. orders or something.
00:18:38.520 And I would believe a 20-something decrease
00:18:41.220 in business in China.
00:18:43.580 That feels about right.
00:18:45.180 But a 40% collapse?
00:18:47.760 If this were true, and the manufacturing orders
00:18:52.180 for all of China's manufacturing,
00:18:54.960 if that were down 40% suddenly,
00:18:58.780 there wouldn't be any other news.
00:19:01.700 There wouldn't be any other news.
00:19:03.860 We would be in a global depression
00:19:05.600 at a scale we've never seen ever.
00:19:10.260 Am I right?
00:19:11.340 Is there anybody who knows enough about economics
00:19:13.640 and, you know, they have enough, let's say,
00:19:17.160 facility with numbers
00:19:18.880 that that 40% number seems obviously wrong?
00:19:23.360 Wouldn't you agree?
00:19:24.000 To me, that seems obviously wrong.
00:19:26.500 Like, way wrong.
00:19:28.260 Now, my...
00:19:29.940 So I'll make another...
00:19:31.620 Here's another very outside the mainstream...
00:19:36.240 Outside the mainstream prediction.
00:19:40.080 My prediction is just the data's wrong.
00:19:43.020 That's all.
00:19:44.180 My prediction is the data's wrong.
00:19:46.180 Now, apparently, there are multiple entities
00:19:48.720 who are confirming it.
00:19:51.180 You know, it's not just one company with data.
00:19:52.940 But that's not good enough for me.
00:19:55.780 That number is so obviously wrong.
00:19:59.040 It's just really obviously wrong
00:20:00.340 that there's something that might be affecting
00:20:03.800 all of the reporting.
00:20:05.800 I don't know what it is.
00:20:08.000 But there's no way 40% is true.
00:20:11.320 Would you buy the...
00:20:12.880 Do you buy the premise
00:20:14.200 that if that number were true,
00:20:16.960 the whole world economy
00:20:19.140 would have collapsed by now?
00:20:20.640 It just can't happen that fast.
00:20:25.060 So, I mean, we're going by feel here, right?
00:20:29.920 We're just going by experience and by feel.
00:20:33.900 My experience and my feel
00:20:36.440 is that number can't be real.
00:20:38.600 Can't be.
00:20:39.520 I wouldn't want it to be real.
00:20:41.220 I want us to pull out of China
00:20:43.220 as quickly as possible,
00:20:44.460 but that's faster than possible
00:20:46.600 in my opinion.
00:20:48.920 So, I don't want to go that fast.
00:20:50.680 I just want to make sure it's happening.
00:20:53.380 All right.
00:20:58.180 Yesterday, midday,
00:21:00.300 I was already commenting to friends
00:21:02.780 that Ye was being too quiet
00:21:05.340 and I didn't think we could go a day
00:21:07.920 without some new controversy.
00:21:11.380 Well, he did not disappoint.
00:21:14.480 So, by the end of yesterday,
00:21:16.600 Ye had used Instagram
00:21:17.600 to post a lengthy message
00:21:19.580 in which he said,
00:21:20.960 I'm sort of paraphrasing it here,
00:21:22.660 but he said,
00:21:23.820 am I the only one...
00:21:25.120 This is Ye talking about Elon Musk.
00:21:27.260 He goes,
00:21:27.720 am I the only one who thinks
00:21:28.940 Elon could be half Chinese?
00:21:30.840 That's the first sentence.
00:21:37.860 His first sentence.
00:21:39.520 Am I the only one who thinks
00:21:40.580 Elon could be half Chinese?
00:21:42.740 Now,
00:21:45.020 is he insulting China
00:21:47.420 or Chinese people?
00:21:50.180 Or is he complimenting them?
00:21:51.700 Let's finish.
00:21:53.660 All right.
00:21:54.260 He goes,
00:21:54.600 am I the only one who thinks
00:21:55.600 Elon could be half Chinese?
00:21:57.660 Have you ever seen his pictures
00:22:00.220 as a child?
00:22:01.960 Now,
00:22:02.380 I have not seen his pictures
00:22:03.340 as a child,
00:22:04.120 but I don't know.
00:22:05.300 Does he look Chinese?
00:22:08.060 Which is hilarious
00:22:09.020 because it's going to make me
00:22:10.400 look for his pictures
00:22:11.380 as a child.
00:22:12.640 You know I'm going to look
00:22:13.460 for those pictures now, right?
00:22:14.980 I have to see it
00:22:15.900 because I, you know,
00:22:17.400 I just have to see it now.
00:22:19.760 And then Ye goes on,
00:22:23.080 take a Chinese genius
00:22:24.600 and meet them
00:22:25.820 with a South African supermodel
00:22:30.000 and we have an Elon.
00:22:31.640 And then,
00:22:32.020 if this wasn't bad enough,
00:22:34.400 he goes,
00:22:34.960 they probably made
00:22:35.760 10 to 30 Elons 0.99
00:22:36.960 and he's the first
00:22:38.180 genetic hybrid that stuck.
00:22:41.360 And then he goes,
00:22:42.160 well,
00:22:42.380 let's not forget about Obama.
00:22:43.920 And then he makes
00:22:44.320 an Obama joke,
00:22:45.740 like Obama was a hybrid as well.
00:22:50.660 Now,
00:22:51.600 do you see the pattern?
00:22:55.140 Do you notice the pattern yet?
00:22:56.380 So this was the audio
00:22:58.760 that's from my earlier presentation
00:23:01.400 where I talked about
00:23:02.640 the pattern of Ye is picking, 0.90
00:23:04.860 you know,
00:23:05.200 whatever is the most outrageous
00:23:07.180 thing you could say
00:23:08.200 and then saying it,
00:23:10.020 but he's also consistently
00:23:11.380 doing the following thing.
00:23:13.600 He's consistently treating groups 0.75
00:23:16.100 like you can talk about them
00:23:18.340 as if they're one group
00:23:19.460 without the obvious knowledge
00:23:21.620 that all the individuals
00:23:23.260 are individual.
00:23:23.940 Now,
00:23:25.400 he just did it again
00:23:26.320 and he just slipped it through
00:23:28.300 because you're thinking
00:23:29.520 about Elon
00:23:30.060 and you're thinking,
00:23:32.080 basically,
00:23:33.000 you're thinking
00:23:33.600 about the accusation
00:23:36.660 that Elon
00:23:37.180 might be half Chinese.
00:23:39.580 But you also say to yourself,
00:23:41.240 wait a minute,
00:23:42.380 did he just say that
00:23:43.600 Chinese people
00:23:45.480 are smarter than average?
00:23:48.520 He didn't really say that,
00:23:50.120 but, you know,
00:23:52.700 the sort of Chinese genius
00:23:54.540 reference
00:23:56.280 kind of said it,
00:23:57.680 kind of said it.
00:23:59.040 Now,
00:23:59.620 what do we do
00:24:00.440 with the fact
00:24:00.960 that once again
00:24:02.060 he has created
00:24:03.960 a group of people
00:24:04.960 like they're one entity,
00:24:07.180 you know,
00:24:07.380 like the Chinese people 0.98
00:24:09.180 are extra smart?
00:24:10.520 What do you do with that?
00:24:14.500 Yeah.
00:24:15.760 He's basically
00:24:16.600 already pushed you
00:24:17.420 past the Overton window.
00:24:18.700 He just treated
00:24:21.140 an entire group
00:24:22.200 of people
00:24:22.600 like they were one thing
00:24:23.700 and you didn't even notice.
00:24:27.240 Because he's done it
00:24:28.240 to such an extent
00:24:29.380 that now he can just
00:24:31.340 make you think past it
00:24:32.920 and you don't even notice.
00:24:34.880 You don't even notice.
00:24:36.040 If you don't think
00:24:36.820 he's making his point,
00:24:38.660 you're missing the show.
00:24:40.560 He's totally making his point
00:24:42.040 that he can say
00:24:43.700 whatever the fuck he wants
00:24:44.940 as long as
00:24:46.300 he's willing to pay for it.
00:24:48.700 And he's willing
00:24:49.920 to pay for it
00:24:50.560 with his whole career.
00:24:53.200 So as long as
00:24:53.920 he's willing to pay for it,
00:24:54.900 he gets to be
00:24:55.500 the only person
00:24:56.120 with free speech.
00:24:57.220 And he's going
00:24:58.020 right at it.
00:24:59.240 He's going right
00:24:59.960 at the third rail
00:25:00.940 and he's just standing
00:25:01.700 on it
00:25:02.160 and just like daring you
00:25:03.800 to question him
00:25:05.160 because he's ready
00:25:06.040 for the fight.
00:25:07.420 And he actually
00:25:08.320 has the
00:25:08.920 high ground argument
00:25:11.060 in a weird way.
00:25:12.360 It seems
00:25:13.080 completely opposite.
00:25:14.060 But he has somehow
00:25:15.940 completely unexpectedly
00:25:18.540 taken the high ground,
00:25:20.080 which is,
00:25:21.280 if it's freedom of speech,
00:25:22.520 he can say unpleasant things
00:25:24.100 if he believes them.
00:25:28.420 Nobody's ever accused him
00:25:29.560 of lying.
00:25:30.600 Has anybody ever accused
00:25:31.660 Ye of lying?
00:25:33.060 We just think
00:25:33.840 we don't like his opinion.
00:25:35.460 It's a little dangerous.
00:25:37.640 But so is a lot of free speech.
00:25:39.540 Pretty dangerous.
00:25:40.140 Now what did Elon say
00:25:42.040 in response to
00:25:43.820 you know,
00:25:46.600 being accused,
00:25:47.700 maybe accused
00:25:48.640 is even the wrong word
00:25:49.600 because that's like
00:25:50.140 a biased word.
00:25:51.360 Let's say the suggestion
00:25:52.600 that he's half Chinese.
00:25:55.680 Well, Elon
00:25:56.440 is,
00:25:58.820 I don't know if you've noticed,
00:25:59.860 he's smart.
00:26:01.660 So what did Elon say
00:26:02.920 when he was accused
00:26:03.820 of being,
00:26:05.180 maybe,
00:26:05.560 accused is the wrong word
00:26:06.760 because then it sounds like
00:26:08.080 I'm saying that
00:26:08.780 that's somehow a bad thing.
00:26:10.140 And that's the opposite
00:26:10.960 of the point.
00:26:12.860 The point being
00:26:13.780 it would be potentially
00:26:14.700 a good thing.
00:26:16.280 So the suggestion,
00:26:18.740 he took it as a compliment.
00:26:20.560 He said,
00:26:21.320 I take it as a compliment.
00:26:23.240 Is that the right answer?
00:26:25.520 Oh, yes.
00:26:27.520 Oh, yes.
00:26:29.340 You know,
00:26:29.680 the thing about,
00:26:30.720 the thing about Musk
00:26:32.560 that you don't notice,
00:26:33.740 here's more dog not barking stuff.
00:26:37.200 You know,
00:26:37.600 you always notice
00:26:38.560 when anybody makes a mistake.
00:26:39.940 Right?
00:26:41.080 It just stands out.
00:26:42.540 The thing you don't notice
00:26:43.800 about Musk
00:26:44.620 is how often
00:26:46.000 he doesn't make a mistake.
00:26:48.400 Like where other people
00:26:49.580 could have easily
00:26:50.160 stepped in it
00:26:50.940 and he'll just,
00:26:52.800 boop, 0.99
00:26:53.340 just misses it.
00:26:54.640 That when you watch
00:26:55.460 how often he doesn't
00:26:56.560 make a mistake
00:26:57.260 that a smart person
00:26:58.760 could have made,
00:27:00.220 that's where
00:27:00.840 his real genius is.
00:27:02.260 A little of that
00:27:02.660 in engineering,
00:27:03.380 I guess.
00:27:04.320 But,
00:27:05.380 like,
00:27:05.900 when you notice
00:27:06.740 how deftly
00:27:08.200 he handles these things,
00:27:11.140 like the way
00:27:11.580 he handled
00:27:11.980 his ex-wife's comment
00:27:13.440 with just the little,
00:27:14.880 the little,
00:27:16.360 the little weird icon,
00:27:18.720 it was just perfect.
00:27:20.120 All right.
00:27:20.240 Again,
00:27:21.140 there were a hundred ways
00:27:22.520 he could have done
00:27:23.080 that wrong.
00:27:24.340 But he picked
00:27:25.060 the one way
00:27:25.620 that wasn't wrong.
00:27:27.020 And he does that
00:27:27.600 fairly consistently.
00:27:29.800 All right.
00:27:35.640 Were you aware,
00:27:37.640 all right,
00:27:37.820 how many of you
00:27:38.340 know the following facts?
00:27:39.680 Tell me,
00:27:40.380 who owns
00:27:40.880 the New York Times?
00:27:41.880 Go.
00:27:42.100 Who owns
00:27:43.820 the New York Times?
00:27:44.620 This is a test
00:27:45.280 of general knowledge.
00:27:48.880 Big family,
00:27:49.980 some people saying
00:27:50.660 a big family.
00:27:51.820 Somebody says Murdoch.
00:27:53.320 Somebody says Mexico.
00:27:55.880 Somebody says
00:27:56.520 Carlos Sims.
00:27:58.460 The answer is
00:28:00.100 not Bezos,
00:28:02.420 not Salzberger.
00:28:03.780 The answer is
00:28:04.560 the richest guy
00:28:05.620 in Mexico,
00:28:07.920 Carlos Sims.
00:28:09.740 Now,
00:28:10.000 does he own
00:28:10.440 all of it?
00:28:11.720 Or,
00:28:12.360 like,
00:28:12.640 a controlling
00:28:13.540 interest?
00:28:14.500 Yeah.
00:28:17.700 Carlos Sims.
00:28:18.680 If you haven't
00:28:19.240 heard of him,
00:28:19.720 he's like
00:28:20.140 the big billionaire,
00:28:21.640 one of the richest
00:28:22.220 guys in the world.
00:28:23.600 And he owns it.
00:28:25.680 Now,
00:28:26.180 that's the first question.
00:28:27.280 Carlos Sims
00:28:27.920 owns the New York Times.
00:28:29.340 Okay.
00:28:30.660 Now,
00:28:31.200 I want to see
00:28:31.760 if you can answer
00:28:33.000 the second question.
00:28:34.580 Who was
00:28:35.360 a famous,
00:28:36.220 notable investor
00:28:37.220 who invested
00:28:39.160 in Hunter Biden's
00:28:40.780 entities?
00:28:44.500 Carlos Sims.
00:28:45.680 Yeah,
00:28:45.840 same guy.
00:28:47.300 So,
00:28:48.020 the same billionaire
00:28:48.800 who owns
00:28:49.520 the New York Times,
00:28:51.180 which is very
00:28:51.860 friendly to Biden,
00:28:53.920 is also investing
00:28:55.080 in
00:28:56.580 Hunter Biden's
00:28:58.060 entities.
00:29:00.880 Now,
00:29:01.460 can you give me
00:29:02.200 a fact check on that?
00:29:03.100 I just saw it
00:29:03.640 on social media
00:29:04.380 yesterday,
00:29:05.080 and other people
00:29:05.700 were mocking me
00:29:06.560 for not already
00:29:07.160 knowing that.
00:29:08.220 But somehow,
00:29:08.740 I missed that.
00:29:09.680 That somehow
00:29:10.220 had slipped by.
00:29:10.880 Yeah.
00:29:12.600 And now,
00:29:13.780 tell me,
00:29:14.140 how many of you
00:29:14.640 did not know
00:29:15.560 of that connection?
00:29:18.520 Tell me if you
00:29:19.260 didn't know
00:29:19.920 of both of the
00:29:21.160 connections,
00:29:22.300 that the same
00:29:23.400 person owned
00:29:23.900 the New York Times
00:29:24.840 as invested
00:29:25.520 with Hunter.
00:29:27.920 Some of you knew,
00:29:29.380 but only a few.
00:29:31.480 Right.
00:29:32.340 And somehow,
00:29:33.100 that slipped by me.
00:29:34.080 Now,
00:29:37.460 here's what,
00:29:38.360 here's what you
00:29:39.640 can learn
00:29:40.140 when you spend
00:29:40.800 a little time
00:29:41.260 behind the curtain,
00:29:42.260 as I like to call it.
00:29:43.740 When you see the news,
00:29:45.300 the news reports
00:29:46.300 what happened,
00:29:47.860 generally.
00:29:48.500 They try a little bit
00:29:49.660 to tell you why,
00:29:50.500 but they don't get
00:29:51.100 that right.
00:29:52.340 But sometimes,
00:29:53.440 they can at least
00:29:53.940 get right what happened.
00:29:56.540 Right.
00:29:56.840 The part that they
00:29:57.740 never report
00:29:58.420 is the personal
00:30:00.740 connections
00:30:01.360 and the business
00:30:02.220 connections below
00:30:03.140 the hood.
00:30:04.080 So if you open up
00:30:05.120 the hood,
00:30:06.320 everything is a
00:30:07.020 different story
00:30:07.660 because you can see,
00:30:09.040 oh, this billionaire
00:30:09.940 runs this politician
00:30:12.240 but also owns
00:30:14.420 this entity
00:30:15.060 and then this politician
00:30:17.000 said something good
00:30:18.220 about this entity.
00:30:19.600 Oh, now it makes sense.
00:30:20.940 It's just the politician
00:30:21.880 working for their boss.
00:30:24.140 Right.
00:30:24.380 So it's a whole
00:30:24.980 different picture
00:30:25.700 as soon as you know
00:30:26.460 who knows who
00:30:27.200 and who's investing
00:30:28.660 with who
00:30:29.220 and all that stuff.
00:30:30.140 Completely different.
00:30:31.540 Everything you think
00:30:32.480 you know about the news,
00:30:33.380 it's all wrong
00:30:34.500 because of that.
00:30:36.840 Because you don't know
00:30:37.940 who knows who
00:30:38.740 and who just had coffee
00:30:40.540 with who
00:30:41.020 and who's talking about
00:30:42.440 starting a business
00:30:43.240 with whom
00:30:43.940 and all that.
00:30:45.240 Who's married to him.
00:30:46.180 Yeah, marriages.
00:30:47.300 Marriages are a big part of it.
00:30:50.760 Wall Street Journal,
00:30:51.920 to its credit,
00:30:52.820 did report on the
00:30:54.260 Hunter laptop story
00:30:55.500 both before the election.
00:30:57.340 credit.
00:30:58.860 All right.
00:31:00.580 Wall Street Journal.
00:31:02.160 Give them a little
00:31:03.100 sitting ovation.
00:31:05.420 Credit where credit is due.
00:31:07.480 We spend a lot of time
00:31:09.700 on this live stream
00:31:10.700 mocking the news organizations.
00:31:14.180 But in this case,
00:31:15.620 the Wall Street Journal
00:31:16.380 got the correct story
00:31:17.840 at the correct time.
00:31:19.520 They were not bamboozled
00:31:20.720 and they did not try
00:31:21.640 to fool the country.
00:31:23.240 So, good on them.
00:31:25.480 My highest praise
00:31:27.340 for just doing the job
00:31:29.000 they're supposed to do.
00:31:30.420 And now,
00:31:32.300 open up the hood.
00:31:35.260 Oh, wait.
00:31:37.040 What's under the hood?
00:31:39.440 Murdoch.
00:31:41.060 Yeah.
00:31:41.640 So, it's really a story
00:31:42.440 about one guy.
00:31:44.340 Right?
00:31:44.740 It's not really a story
00:31:45.840 about the Wall Street Journal.
00:31:47.400 It's a story
00:31:48.180 about one guy
00:31:48.900 who allowed his publication
00:31:50.260 to write that story.
00:31:51.160 That's about
00:31:53.120 basically what happened.
00:31:54.740 But,
00:31:55.160 to his credit,
00:31:56.360 he did allow
00:31:56.920 real news to come out.
00:31:58.500 So, that was a service
00:31:59.660 to the country.
00:32:03.140 And here's something
00:32:04.220 that the Wall Street Journal
00:32:05.460 reported.
00:32:06.160 So, this is the editorial board.
00:32:08.080 And they said,
00:32:09.040 we now know,
00:32:10.520 and know is the key word.
00:32:12.960 So, this is the Wall Street Journal
00:32:14.280 saying,
00:32:14.820 we know this.
00:32:16.140 We're not guessing.
00:32:17.920 We now know
00:32:18.900 that the Clapper-Brennan claims
00:32:21.240 were themselves disinformation
00:32:23.100 and that the laptop
00:32:24.640 was genuine
00:32:25.360 and not part of
00:32:26.640 Russian operation.
00:32:28.400 CBS News recently
00:32:29.960 waddled in
00:32:31.960 two years later
00:32:32.920 with a forensic analysis
00:32:34.620 of its own
00:32:35.380 and concluded
00:32:36.120 it is real.
00:32:37.520 Now,
00:32:37.960 I would like to give
00:32:39.060 a second sitting ovation
00:32:40.500 to the board
00:32:43.740 at Wall Street Journal
00:32:45.200 for using the word
00:32:46.500 waddled
00:32:47.180 in the sentence.
00:32:49.100 CBS News
00:32:50.160 recently waddled
00:32:51.820 in two years.
00:32:53.380 Okay,
00:32:53.960 that was the right word.
00:32:55.580 Now,
00:32:56.800 let me give you
00:32:57.500 a little writing tip.
00:32:59.140 This is in my mind
00:33:00.480 because I was
00:33:01.360 just writing this tip
00:33:02.760 somewhere else
00:33:03.360 in my upcoming book.
00:33:06.020 One of the filters
00:33:07.500 I use for writing
00:33:08.560 is that
00:33:09.980 if I'm writing
00:33:10.580 a humor piece,
00:33:11.760 first I'll write it
00:33:12.840 just to say
00:33:13.760 what I want to say
00:33:14.560 and then I'll go back
00:33:16.120 and I'll change
00:33:16.700 the words
00:33:17.260 into the funny versions.
00:33:19.440 So,
00:33:20.040 here you can see
00:33:21.040 instead of
00:33:21.760 CBS News
00:33:23.680 recently
00:33:25.320 entered the conversation,
00:33:28.800 waddled
00:33:29.400 would be the word
00:33:30.500 that you put in
00:33:31.040 if you're trying
00:33:31.480 to make that funny.
00:33:33.220 Now,
00:33:33.680 here's the second part.
00:33:35.000 If you're not writing
00:33:35.980 a humor piece,
00:33:37.140 and this was not
00:33:37.780 a humor piece,
00:33:39.580 use just one
00:33:41.320 in like maybe
00:33:43.860 the page,
00:33:44.920 just one funny word
00:33:46.660 that sticks out
00:33:48.140 like waddled
00:33:48.780 will make your brain
00:33:51.100 spend a whole bunch
00:33:51.900 more time
00:33:52.640 on their point.
00:33:54.580 So,
00:33:54.960 that one word
00:33:55.880 bought them
00:33:57.500 40% more attention.
00:34:01.400 One word.
00:34:02.520 And so,
00:34:02.840 that's my writing tip
00:34:03.640 for you.
00:34:04.820 If you're writing humor,
00:34:06.760 go back and look
00:34:07.460 for all the funny words
00:34:08.540 you could replace
00:34:09.340 with your ordinary words.
00:34:10.860 If you're writing
00:34:11.780 for a serious point,
00:34:12.920 one good waddle, 0.60
00:34:15.520 you know,
00:34:15.740 one good interesting word
00:34:17.080 can really
00:34:18.640 put a little
00:34:19.940 flavor
00:34:20.760 on a good point
00:34:21.900 without detracting
00:34:23.300 it into humor.
00:34:24.620 So,
00:34:25.320 very good tip there.
00:34:26.720 And also,
00:34:28.040 by the way,
00:34:28.740 if you'd like to become
00:34:29.640 a better writer,
00:34:30.960 you should read
00:34:31.820 good writers.
00:34:33.740 The Wall Street Journal
00:34:34.500 is very famous.
00:34:36.080 Very famous.
00:34:37.540 Damn it.
00:34:39.300 They're famous.
00:34:40.460 Get rid of the very. 1.00
00:34:41.280 The Wall Street Journal
00:34:42.860 is famous
00:34:44.120 for good writing.
00:34:46.140 If you want to learn
00:34:46.800 how to write well,
00:34:48.320 read the Wall Street Journal.
00:34:50.500 All right.
00:34:53.160 But,
00:34:53.880 here's my question.
00:34:56.000 How do Clapper
00:34:56.800 and Brennan
00:34:57.500 ever show their face
00:34:58.720 in public again
00:34:59.660 now that the
00:35:01.300 Twitter files
00:35:02.120 revelations
00:35:03.080 have come out?
00:35:04.660 How do they ever
00:35:05.860 appear in public again?
00:35:07.680 Now,
00:35:09.720 everything they did,
00:35:10.640 as far as I know,
00:35:11.600 is legal, right?
00:35:13.460 Because lying to the public
00:35:14.700 is legal.
00:35:17.040 You know,
00:35:17.400 it would be too much
00:35:18.480 of a problem
00:35:19.080 to arrest everybody
00:35:20.540 who lied.
00:35:21.160 So,
00:35:21.400 you can't really have
00:35:21.940 a law like that.
00:35:23.160 So,
00:35:23.640 it was probably
00:35:24.160 completely legal.
00:35:26.040 But,
00:35:26.600 can you think of
00:35:27.280 any examples
00:35:27.920 where the things
00:35:28.740 that would be legal
00:35:29.680 for every citizen
00:35:31.360 except somebody
00:35:32.900 who maybe
00:35:33.320 had some job?
00:35:34.260 That's a thing,
00:35:36.740 right?
00:35:37.600 Aren't there examples
00:35:38.720 where,
00:35:39.440 you know,
00:35:41.300 something is legal
00:35:42.540 for me,
00:35:44.040 but maybe it
00:35:44.620 wouldn't be legal
00:35:45.420 for an ex-person
00:35:48.260 of Congress?
00:35:49.680 You know,
00:35:49.900 there's talk about
00:35:51.300 limiting Congress
00:35:52.360 from,
00:35:53.580 let's say,
00:35:54.420 doing some kind
00:35:55.000 of lobbying
00:35:55.540 for a few years.
00:35:57.220 But,
00:35:57.600 that wouldn't apply
00:35:58.320 to the rest of us,
00:35:59.300 right?
00:35:59.620 It would be a law 0.95
00:36:00.280 just for a person
00:36:01.020 of a certain job.
00:36:02.680 Here's a law
00:36:03.440 I would like.
00:36:05.260 I think that
00:36:06.380 if leadership,
00:36:08.020 not rank and file,
00:36:09.520 but if leadership
00:36:10.460 of our intel agencies
00:36:13.260 run an intentional hoax,
00:36:15.460 even if they're
00:36:16.040 ex-leaders,
00:36:17.140 if they're ex-leaders too,
00:36:18.860 if they run
00:36:19.480 an intentional hoax
00:36:20.700 for the purpose
00:36:22.280 of changing
00:36:22.860 an election outcome,
00:36:24.460 that should be
00:36:25.260 the death sentence.
00:36:28.040 Now,
00:36:28.700 I'm not recommending
00:36:30.080 anything happen
00:36:31.860 to Clapper and Brennan.
00:36:33.060 As far as I know,
00:36:35.060 what they did
00:36:35.780 was legal.
00:36:37.080 And I'm a stickler
00:36:38.760 for the Constitution.
00:36:40.620 No matter how
00:36:41.380 disreputable it was,
00:36:43.200 no matter how awful
00:36:45.520 it was,
00:36:46.060 and it was as bad
00:36:46.940 as anything
00:36:47.340 I've ever seen,
00:36:48.480 it was legal.
00:36:50.360 And I'm never going
00:36:51.800 to leave that standard.
00:36:53.320 Right?
00:36:53.440 If it's legal,
00:36:54.480 you don't touch them.
00:36:56.060 But we really need
00:36:57.200 to reassess the law.
00:36:59.260 Let's make a law
00:37:00.200 that says if something
00:37:01.040 like this happens again,
00:37:02.080 it's the death sentence.
00:37:04.120 Because it's not
00:37:05.660 like regular people.
00:37:07.520 When your own
00:37:08.240 intel agencies
00:37:09.100 turn on your country, 0.65
00:37:11.040 that's got to be
00:37:11.720 the death penalty.
00:37:13.560 Right?
00:37:13.800 That's not
00:37:14.380 the Department
00:37:16.440 of Agriculture
00:37:17.380 lost some money.
00:37:19.340 That's not
00:37:20.180 the head of,
00:37:22.560 you know,
00:37:23.560 HUD
00:37:24.140 expense some things
00:37:27.560 he shouldn't have
00:37:28.140 expensed.
00:37:29.760 This is the worst
00:37:31.360 thing that anybody
00:37:32.140 could do.
00:37:33.160 Because our trust
00:37:35.100 in our system
00:37:35.840 is very importantly
00:37:38.900 connected to trust
00:37:40.020 in our intelligence
00:37:40.740 agencies.
00:37:42.000 You can't separate
00:37:42.820 that.
00:37:43.720 So having the heads,
00:37:45.500 not just people
00:37:46.320 who work for
00:37:46.960 intelligence,
00:37:47.960 but having the very
00:37:48.760 heads of them
00:37:49.500 run a hoax
00:37:51.460 against the American 0.78
00:37:52.300 people that changed,
00:37:53.500 probably,
00:37:54.140 had an effect
00:37:55.180 on the election
00:37:56.060 outcome,
00:37:57.260 that's as bad
00:37:58.240 as any kind
00:37:59.760 of treason
00:38:00.340 I can imagine.
00:38:01.700 It was short
00:38:02.180 of actual
00:38:02.640 physical violence.
00:38:05.380 Yeah,
00:38:05.680 it's a violation
00:38:06.580 of oath,
00:38:07.860 even if they're
00:38:08.540 out of office,
00:38:09.220 I think.
00:38:09.980 So,
00:38:10.520 let me ask you,
00:38:11.640 how many of you
00:38:12.620 would approve,
00:38:13.900 not retroactively,
00:38:15.760 that's no fair,
00:38:17.240 you can't punish
00:38:18.220 those two guys,
00:38:19.340 because they
00:38:19.660 followed the law,
00:38:20.900 unfortunately,
00:38:22.200 but how many
00:38:23.420 would agree
00:38:23.920 with making
00:38:24.420 that the death
00:38:25.100 penalty
00:38:25.480 if it happened
00:38:26.440 again?
00:38:27.660 Leadership only,
00:38:28.580 not rank and file.
00:38:30.980 Yeah.
00:38:33.540 I mean,
00:38:34.180 if treason,
00:38:35.820 treason is still
00:38:36.680 the death penalty,
00:38:37.340 right?
00:38:39.880 That hasn't
00:38:40.540 changed,
00:38:40.920 has it?
00:38:41.800 I mean,
00:38:42.640 if treason is
00:38:43.500 the death penalty,
00:38:44.380 how is this
00:38:44.920 different?
00:38:45.980 And to me,
00:38:46.420 it looks like
00:38:46.840 treason.
00:38:47.660 Now,
00:38:48.000 the difference,
00:38:48.380 of course,
00:38:48.800 is that it
00:38:49.380 wouldn't be
00:38:49.780 treason in
00:38:50.660 favor of a
00:38:51.360 foreign country,
00:38:52.980 but if it's
00:38:56.440 overthrowing
00:38:57.020 an election,
00:38:57.540 it's not that
00:38:58.160 different.
00:39:00.620 All right.
00:39:02.720 Did you know
00:39:03.600 that there
00:39:04.280 were two
00:39:05.320 Antifa groups
00:39:06.300 that had,
00:39:07.620 until recently,
00:39:08.340 been allowed
00:39:08.860 to operate
00:39:09.740 with abandon
00:39:11.300 on Twitter?
00:39:11.980 One of them
00:39:14.140 is the
00:39:14.740 Antifa
00:39:15.620 Feces Group
00:39:16.560 and the other
00:39:17.080 is the
00:39:17.420 Antifa
00:39:18.000 Urine Group.
00:39:19.820 I'm using
00:39:20.300 the technical
00:39:21.720 names.
00:39:22.820 And each of
00:39:23.580 them were
00:39:24.100 dedicated
00:39:24.660 toward getting
00:39:26.060 their people
00:39:26.760 to collect
00:39:27.780 their own
00:39:28.180 feces and
00:39:28.920 urine to
00:39:30.040 use in
00:39:31.160 protest and
00:39:31.820 throw at 1.00
00:39:32.240 people and
00:39:33.380 leave in
00:39:33.740 places.
00:39:35.660 So Elon
00:39:36.700 Musk,
00:39:37.160 I guess,
00:39:37.580 banned them.
00:39:40.780 So,
00:39:41.980 if you
00:39:43.360 wondered
00:39:43.680 what is
00:39:44.980 the purpose
00:39:45.620 of Antifa,
00:39:49.480 it's
00:39:50.100 apparently
00:39:50.780 to produce
00:39:51.640 so they're
00:39:53.700 not useless.
00:39:55.020 You know,
00:39:55.140 you think of
00:39:55.700 Antifa as
00:39:56.360 like not
00:39:56.780 part of
00:39:57.180 capitalism
00:39:57.740 because what
00:39:58.760 are they
00:39:59.020 producing?
00:40:00.340 Well,
00:40:00.640 they're not
00:40:00.900 producing
00:40:01.260 any products.
00:40:02.120 They don't
00:40:02.300 make any
00:40:02.700 iPhones.
00:40:04.160 But apparently
00:40:04.860 the Antifa
00:40:05.740 people,
00:40:06.180 they do eat
00:40:06.720 food that
00:40:07.420 was purchased
00:40:09.060 with the work
00:40:09.800 of other
00:40:10.180 people.
00:40:11.320 And then
00:40:11.560 when that
00:40:11.920 food that
00:40:12.360 was purchased
00:40:13.100 with the
00:40:13.700 work of
00:40:14.120 other people
00:40:14.640 are put
00:40:15.440 into their
00:40:15.840 bodies,
00:40:16.260 then they
00:40:16.500 can manufacture
00:40:17.260 it into
00:40:17.740 a valuable
00:40:18.500 component,
00:40:20.820 either Antifa
00:40:21.980 feces or
00:40:23.500 Antifa urine.
00:40:24.700 And those
00:40:25.160 two things are
00:40:25.840 valuable commodities
00:40:26.820 and protests
00:40:27.600 as part of the
00:40:28.520 democratic process.
00:40:29.840 So if you
00:40:30.300 thought that
00:40:30.740 Antifa was
00:40:31.540 worthless,
00:40:32.740 you're so
00:40:33.180 wrong.
00:40:33.960 They're like
00:40:34.300 little factories
00:40:35.020 for making
00:40:35.680 protest materials,
00:40:39.240 Antifa feces.
00:40:39.960 Now, if
00:40:40.900 you'd like
00:40:41.200 to get
00:40:41.440 a good
00:40:42.760 jar of
00:40:44.440 Antifa
00:40:44.900 feces for
00:40:45.640 your protest,
00:40:47.100 they don't
00:40:47.920 have a
00:40:48.180 website now
00:40:49.340 because they're
00:40:50.800 off Twitter.
00:40:51.500 Well, they
00:40:51.840 probably have a
00:40:52.240 website, so I
00:40:53.780 think you
00:40:54.060 could find
00:40:54.420 them.
00:40:55.200 So it
00:40:55.640 makes a
00:40:56.020 good gift.
00:40:57.220 If you're
00:40:57.560 looking for
00:40:57.960 a gift for
00:40:58.760 somebody in
00:40:59.300 your family
00:40:59.780 who leans
00:41:00.680 left, and 0.91
00:41:02.120 you're thinking,
00:41:02.560 oh, they
00:41:02.940 have everything,
00:41:03.820 what they
00:41:04.200 don't have
00:41:04.840 would be a
00:41:06.640 big jar of
00:41:07.320 Antifa
00:41:07.720 feces to
00:41:09.020 use at
00:41:09.360 their next
00:41:09.700 protest, and
00:41:10.900 maybe they
00:41:11.560 need that.
00:41:12.740 So that's
00:41:13.120 something you
00:41:13.400 could do.
00:41:14.640 Has anybody
00:41:15.300 noticed a
00:41:16.140 more racist
00:41:17.580 getting back
00:41:18.300 on Twitter?
00:41:21.080 I've noticed
00:41:21.840 it a little.
00:41:22.920 Have you?
00:41:24.780 Like, just a
00:41:25.460 little.
00:41:26.160 But it was
00:41:26.560 like, I felt
00:41:27.460 like it was
00:41:27.880 fleeting, and
00:41:29.300 hasn't really
00:41:30.000 affected my
00:41:31.120 consciousness
00:41:31.560 since then.
00:41:33.000 So what I
00:41:34.120 noticed when
00:41:34.880 Musk first 1.00
00:41:35.860 took over is
00:41:37.640 that there
00:41:37.960 were some
00:41:38.260 people who
00:41:38.720 wanted to
00:41:39.500 immediately
00:41:39.920 test the
00:41:40.800 limits.
00:41:42.220 So some
00:41:42.800 racist said
00:41:43.580 some racist
00:41:44.040 stuff.
00:41:46.300 Maybe they
00:41:47.000 got kicked
00:41:47.600 off, maybe
00:41:48.140 they didn't,
00:41:48.720 but maybe
00:41:49.060 they got
00:41:49.380 bored.
00:41:50.620 I don't
00:41:50.840 know.
00:41:51.680 It doesn't,
00:41:52.620 I would say
00:41:53.160 my overall
00:41:54.000 Twitter experience
00:41:55.000 is kinder and
00:41:56.380 gentler.
00:41:57.800 What would
00:41:58.200 you say?
00:41:59.480 But the
00:42:00.220 left might
00:42:00.700 say it's
00:42:01.120 because it's
00:42:01.940 people who
00:42:02.360 agree with
00:42:02.840 you that got
00:42:03.360 back on
00:42:03.780 there.
00:42:03.940 so far
00:42:06.400 Twitter does
00:42:08.280 not set my
00:42:09.120 stomach on
00:42:10.160 fire like
00:42:10.660 it used to
00:42:11.060 every single
00:42:11.660 day.
00:42:13.060 Like, my
00:42:13.720 brain would
00:42:14.320 just be on
00:42:14.760 fire from
00:42:15.520 something I
00:42:15.980 saw on
00:42:16.340 Twitter like
00:42:16.940 every day.
00:42:18.240 Usually it was
00:42:18.840 some Trump
00:42:19.500 related thing.
00:42:20.700 But that
00:42:21.120 hasn't happened
00:42:21.540 in a long
00:42:21.880 time.
00:42:27.720 Who has
00:42:28.440 blocked more
00:42:29.060 people, Sam
00:42:29.840 Harris or
00:42:30.340 Scott?
00:42:30.660 Do you
00:42:31.800 think that
00:42:32.380 you could
00:42:33.440 embarrass me
00:42:34.080 into blocking
00:42:34.780 fewer assholes?
00:42:36.980 Do you
00:42:37.420 think that
00:42:37.780 there's
00:42:38.000 something you
00:42:38.460 say here
00:42:38.920 about free
00:42:39.440 speech that
00:42:40.060 would make
00:42:40.860 me want to
00:42:41.480 listen to a
00:42:43.000 greater percentage
00:42:43.720 of assholes
00:42:44.360 compared to
00:42:45.720 nice people
00:42:46.340 who have
00:42:46.580 something useful
00:42:47.140 to say?
00:42:48.520 You know,
00:42:48.740 there's somebody
00:42:49.780 over on
00:42:50.220 YouTube who's
00:42:50.700 trying to
00:42:51.040 shame me into
00:42:51.800 unblocking
00:42:52.640 people that
00:42:53.760 I wanted to
00:42:54.740 block.
00:42:56.460 No, I
00:42:57.220 wanted to
00:42:57.560 block them.
00:42:58.640 And you
00:42:59.740 know that I
00:43:00.220 also block
00:43:00.720 my supporters,
00:43:01.560 right?
00:43:03.120 I block
00:43:03.820 my supporters
00:43:04.380 on Twitter
00:43:04.840 who say I'm
00:43:05.420 finally waking
00:43:06.080 up.
00:43:07.440 Because you're
00:43:07.980 not my
00:43:08.340 supporter.
00:43:11.060 That's the
00:43:11.620 last thing I
00:43:12.200 want to hear
00:43:12.540 from you.
00:43:13.640 So I do
00:43:14.120 block people
00:43:14.640 for saying
00:43:15.000 that.
00:43:15.200 I don't
00:43:15.460 block them
00:43:15.900 on locals
00:43:16.940 because they're
00:43:17.360 usually joking.
00:43:18.480 On locals,
00:43:19.120 I know you're
00:43:19.500 joking.
00:43:20.600 But on
00:43:21.180 Twitter, you're
00:43:22.000 not joking.
00:43:22.680 So I block
00:43:23.160 those.
00:43:23.920 And by the
00:43:24.280 way, if you
00:43:24.880 do joke about
00:43:25.600 it on Twitter,
00:43:26.120 I'm still going
00:43:26.500 to block you
00:43:27.060 because I can't
00:43:28.060 tell the
00:43:28.340 difference.
00:43:30.220 I was
00:43:39.700 looking at
00:43:40.040 the Twitter
00:43:40.600 terms of
00:43:41.200 service, and
00:43:43.380 I was
00:43:43.700 wondering
00:43:43.940 specifically
00:43:44.680 about Elon
00:43:47.120 Musk's 0.98
00:43:47.940 suspending
00:43:48.980 of yay.
00:43:50.660 Now, yay
00:43:51.380 got suspended
00:43:52.120 because of
00:43:52.800 that logo,
00:43:53.740 right?
00:43:54.160 It looked
00:43:55.700 like the
00:43:56.040 Star of
00:43:56.460 David with
00:43:57.100 a Nazi 0.56
00:43:57.860 logo on the
00:43:58.520 inside.
00:44:00.440 What do
00:44:00.940 you think
00:44:01.280 the logo
00:44:01.820 was supposed
00:44:02.500 to represent?
00:44:05.360 Interpret the
00:44:06.640 logo in your
00:44:07.480 opinion.
00:44:08.780 It was a
00:44:09.720 swastika.
00:44:10.680 Okay?
00:44:11.100 Anything else?
00:44:12.820 So you
00:44:13.180 saw some
00:44:14.180 violence,
00:44:14.700 maybe?
00:44:16.180 Maybe some
00:44:16.720 suggested
00:44:17.180 violence?
00:44:18.480 But what
00:44:18.800 about the
00:44:19.220 Star of
00:44:19.620 David part?
00:44:20.280 Was that
00:44:20.600 just to
00:44:21.120 further
00:44:21.700 insult the
00:44:22.500 Jewish
00:44:22.740 community by
00:44:24.100 doing the
00:44:24.840 most offensive
00:44:25.500 mashup you
00:44:26.200 could possibly
00:44:26.740 do?
00:44:26.960 Was it
00:44:27.960 art?
00:44:28.380 Some
00:44:28.540 people say
00:44:28.920 it's
00:44:29.040 art.
00:44:33.760 Here's
00:44:34.200 how I
00:44:34.600 interpreted
00:44:35.080 it.
00:44:36.060 Now, I'm
00:44:36.440 not saying
00:44:36.800 my
00:44:37.020 interpretation
00:44:37.480 is correct,
00:44:39.300 but that's
00:44:41.320 how art
00:44:41.780 works,
00:44:42.300 right?
00:44:42.860 If you
00:44:43.160 look at
00:44:43.440 art,
00:44:43.780 people
00:44:43.980 interpret
00:44:44.360 it
00:44:44.540 differently.
00:44:45.120 So I'll
00:44:45.380 tell you
00:44:45.620 my
00:44:45.800 interpretation.
00:44:47.100 When I
00:44:47.460 saw it,
00:44:47.760 if you
00:44:47.960 look at
00:44:48.180 the larger
00:44:48.580 context
00:44:49.140 of what
00:44:49.660 yay is
00:44:49.940 doing,
00:44:51.080 a Nazi 0.56
00:44:53.080 symbol
00:44:53.580 surrounded by
00:44:54.460 star of
00:44:55.080 David,
00:44:56.200 says to
00:44:57.140 me that
00:45:00.120 yay would 0.73
00:45:00.640 like to
00:45:01.020 bring
00:45:01.220 together the
00:45:02.620 people who
00:45:03.060 are least
00:45:03.480 likely to
00:45:04.080 ever come
00:45:04.500 together.
00:45:06.080 That's what
00:45:06.640 it looked
00:45:06.860 like to
00:45:07.140 me.
00:45:08.080 Now, you
00:45:08.380 might say,
00:45:08.800 Scott, that's
00:45:09.420 the stupidest. 0.90
00:45:10.820 But that's
00:45:11.180 what I, but
00:45:12.240 that was how I
00:45:12.860 interpreted it.
00:45:13.660 That was
00:45:14.080 actually my
00:45:14.700 first impression.
00:45:16.080 My first
00:45:16.940 impression was
00:45:17.660 it was the
00:45:18.140 opposite of
00:45:18.940 hate.
00:45:19.260 it was,
00:45:21.040 hey, even
00:45:22.920 the worst
00:45:23.600 people should
00:45:24.680 at least be
00:45:25.780 able to
00:45:26.040 come together.
00:45:27.260 And I'm
00:45:27.500 going to
00:45:27.640 take the
00:45:28.020 two most
00:45:28.840 objectionable
00:45:30.300 things, at
00:45:31.200 least together
00:45:31.740 that are
00:45:32.000 objectionable,
00:45:32.820 not individually
00:45:33.820 in one
00:45:34.840 case, and
00:45:38.420 I'm going to
00:45:38.800 make you
00:45:39.280 think about
00:45:40.060 could the
00:45:41.120 worst, least
00:45:42.600 likely people
00:45:43.480 ever find a
00:45:44.820 way to come
00:45:45.200 together.
00:45:46.180 Now, if you
00:45:46.840 say to
00:45:47.140 yourself,
00:45:47.500 well, Scott,
00:45:49.540 that couldn't
00:45:50.020 possibly be the
00:45:50.880 message, he
00:45:53.440 was sitting
00:45:53.880 next to
00:45:54.580 Nick Fuentes.
00:45:57.140 He's a
00:45:57.960 black rapper
00:45:58.720 who's partnered
00:46:00.340 with Nick
00:46:01.160 Fuentes.
00:46:02.560 He literally
00:46:03.460 is his
00:46:04.060 logo.
00:46:05.580 He's the
00:46:06.220 star of
00:46:06.640 David with
00:46:07.260 a swastika.
00:46:10.420 Now, you
00:46:12.140 know, in a
00:46:12.980 general sense,
00:46:14.460 the comparison
00:46:16.040 there is
00:46:16.580 unfair, I
00:46:17.240 know.
00:46:17.760 But you
00:46:18.260 see what I'm
00:46:18.640 doing.
00:46:20.260 So, if my
00:46:21.840 interpretation, my
00:46:23.360 interpretation was
00:46:24.440 that it was a
00:46:25.380 very challenging
00:46:28.280 way to say we
00:46:29.440 need to figure
00:46:29.960 out how not to
00:46:30.900 be enemies about
00:46:31.800 everything.
00:46:33.300 That's what it
00:46:34.000 looked like.
00:46:35.820 Now, Elon
00:46:36.420 Musk interpreted
00:46:37.260 it as a sign
00:46:38.320 of hate.
00:46:39.420 So he took
00:46:39.900 him off.
00:46:40.680 And so I
00:46:41.000 wondered, what
00:46:41.420 does the Twitter
00:46:43.200 terms of service
00:46:44.080 say?
00:46:44.380 Well, did you
00:46:45.580 know that the
00:46:46.920 terms of service
00:46:47.780 of Twitter
00:46:48.480 specifically
00:46:49.340 prohibit hate
00:46:51.520 symbols being in
00:46:53.000 your profile?
00:46:54.180 Did you know
00:46:54.660 that?
00:46:55.640 You can't put a
00:46:56.580 hate symbol in
00:46:57.140 your profile?
00:46:58.720 Now, it's not
00:46:59.780 prohibited in
00:47:01.700 your feed, which
00:47:03.280 makes sense.
00:47:04.140 Because you could
00:47:04.940 put a hate image
00:47:05.780 in your feed because
00:47:06.940 you're talking about
00:47:07.840 it.
00:47:08.140 See the point?
00:47:11.000 That doesn't mean
00:47:11.540 you're necessarily
00:47:12.020 supporting it because
00:47:13.080 other people tweeted
00:47:14.120 Ye's symbol and
00:47:15.900 they were not kicked
00:47:16.700 off because they
00:47:17.180 were talking about
00:47:17.880 it.
00:47:18.600 But if you put it in
00:47:19.380 your profile, you're
00:47:20.180 saying, this is me.
00:47:21.440 I associate with
00:47:22.600 this symbol.
00:47:23.380 So that's banned.
00:47:25.460 Now, did Ye put his
00:47:26.800 symbol in his profile?
00:47:29.420 I don't think he did.
00:47:31.320 Did he?
00:47:32.060 He may have tried.
00:47:34.320 No?
00:47:35.000 It was only in his
00:47:35.700 feed.
00:47:36.020 So which Twitter
00:47:38.400 terms of service
00:47:39.500 would apply to
00:47:40.560 that?
00:47:42.060 None.
00:47:43.400 That I'm aware
00:47:44.320 of.
00:47:45.320 Well, did it
00:47:46.540 incite violence?
00:47:48.480 Because inciting
00:47:49.560 violence is your
00:47:50.340 interpretation.
00:47:51.940 My interpretation
00:47:52.640 was it was a call
00:47:53.900 to unity, even
00:47:56.420 with the people who
00:47:57.220 were the least
00:47:57.840 likely ever to
00:47:58.780 find unity.
00:48:00.080 The number one
00:48:01.080 least likely group
00:48:02.080 to find unity.
00:48:03.720 That's what I
00:48:04.540 saw.
00:48:04.740 So why does
00:48:06.460 one person,
00:48:08.240 Elon Musk,
00:48:09.580 why does his
00:48:10.300 opinion of a
00:48:11.480 symbol that had
00:48:12.220 never existed in
00:48:13.480 that full mashup
00:48:14.460 form, well, I
00:48:15.780 guess it had
00:48:16.120 existed with the
00:48:16.860 railians, but 0.66
00:48:18.180 that's a different
00:48:18.640 story.
00:48:19.860 Why does one
00:48:20.840 person get to
00:48:21.480 decide that's a
00:48:22.160 hay symbol, where
00:48:23.500 if I had been the
00:48:24.180 head of Twitter, I
00:48:25.120 would have said,
00:48:25.640 no, no, no,
00:48:26.000 that's ambiguous,
00:48:27.460 and it's in the
00:48:28.040 feed, it's not in
00:48:28.880 the profile.
00:48:29.380 Well, so if it's
00:48:30.620 ambiguous, and it's
00:48:32.200 in the feed, terms of
00:48:34.340 service don't touch
00:48:35.060 it.
00:48:38.200 You say it's not
00:48:39.180 ambiguous?
00:48:44.280 I told you I
00:48:45.420 interpreted it a
00:48:46.840 different way.
00:48:48.120 How can you argue
00:48:49.140 it's not ambiguous?
00:48:50.820 Do you think I'm
00:48:51.420 lying to you?
00:48:52.720 Do you think that I
00:48:53.480 really didn't
00:48:53.980 interpret it that
00:48:54.680 way?
00:48:54.800 No, I actually
00:48:56.860 literally did.
00:48:59.560 So, you can't
00:49:00.460 argue that it's not
00:49:01.280 ambiguous, I just
00:49:02.260 told you I have a
00:49:02.900 different view of it
00:49:03.660 than you do, thus
00:49:04.980 proven ambiguous.
00:49:07.980 Now, you can say
00:49:08.760 that most people
00:49:09.360 don't see it as
00:49:10.000 ambiguous, and
00:49:10.880 that's why Musk
00:49:11.940 could ban it, and
00:49:12.780 everybody agreed
00:49:13.380 with him.
00:49:14.020 I agree with you
00:49:14.840 that most people
00:49:15.560 would not see that
00:49:16.300 as ambiguous.
00:49:17.180 I agree with
00:49:17.640 that.
00:49:18.820 But it is
00:49:19.500 ambiguous, because
00:49:20.820 I disagree, so
00:49:21.740 that's a fact.
00:49:24.800 Yeah, if you buy
00:49:25.360 Twitter, you get
00:49:25.960 to decide the
00:49:26.720 content.
00:49:27.520 All right, so
00:49:27.920 here's my bottom
00:49:28.800 line on this.
00:49:31.600 If you own
00:49:32.500 Twitter, you have
00:49:34.660 more than one
00:49:35.380 master you have to
00:49:36.340 serve.
00:49:37.920 One master is
00:49:38.920 Twitter.
00:49:39.880 It's a company, it
00:49:40.840 needs to run as
00:49:41.800 an entity that can
00:49:44.200 survive.
00:49:45.440 But you're also a
00:49:46.660 human being.
00:49:47.560 You're a citizen of
00:49:48.640 Earth and a citizen
00:49:49.560 of this country.
00:49:50.700 So you have a
00:49:52.200 different responsibility
00:49:53.160 that's even bigger
00:49:54.780 than your own
00:49:55.400 company, which
00:49:56.720 is to the
00:49:59.220 citizens.
00:50:01.360 I think Musk
00:50:02.620 made the right
00:50:03.500 citizen decision.
00:50:08.020 In other words,
00:50:08.940 he saw something
00:50:10.340 that could be
00:50:11.040 hate, that most
00:50:12.760 people interpreted
00:50:13.920 it as hate, and
00:50:15.380 he took an
00:50:16.060 anti-hate stand.
00:50:17.940 And as a
00:50:18.440 human, very
00:50:20.000 good.
00:50:21.220 Very good.
00:50:21.740 I support Elon
00:50:23.940 Musk as a human
00:50:24.960 being who took a
00:50:26.700 strong and fairly
00:50:28.580 rapid stand against
00:50:30.820 what looked like
00:50:31.820 hate.
00:50:33.760 As a human being,
00:50:35.760 A+.
00:50:36.220 As a protector of
00:50:39.420 free speech, a
00:50:41.260 little less clear.
00:50:44.120 So when I said the
00:50:45.300 other day that he
00:50:46.320 fucked up on this
00:50:47.960 decision, Elon, I
00:50:50.300 do think it's
00:50:50.960 wrong on a
00:50:52.860 freedom of speech
00:50:53.760 level.
00:50:56.060 How many
00:50:56.640 agree with my
00:50:57.360 take that he
00:50:58.000 was wrong on a
00:50:59.120 freedom of speech
00:50:59.960 level?
00:51:03.580 A number of
00:51:04.320 people agree.
00:51:06.120 All right.
00:51:08.120 Now, do you
00:51:08.780 think freedom of
00:51:09.460 speech in this
00:51:10.160 case should have
00:51:11.860 overridden what I
00:51:13.160 think is a
00:51:13.820 genuine good
00:51:15.900 intention to
00:51:16.920 keep people
00:51:17.460 safe?
00:51:18.880 Do you think
00:51:19.440 freedom of
00:51:19.880 speech should
00:51:20.260 have been the
00:51:21.020 higher standard?
00:51:24.760 Okay?
00:51:25.060 I think reasonable
00:51:25.820 people can say,
00:51:26.800 yes, it should be
00:51:27.380 the higher standard.
00:51:28.400 So I respect that
00:51:29.560 opinion, and I'm
00:51:31.800 not going to
00:51:32.340 disagree with it,
00:51:33.740 but I'm going to
00:51:34.640 say that I also
00:51:35.460 respect somebody
00:51:36.600 who would put
00:51:38.260 humanity above a
00:51:41.020 concept.
00:51:43.180 I respect anybody
00:51:44.420 who would put a
00:51:45.100 I just might
00:51:46.480 have, I might
00:51:47.280 have chosen
00:51:47.960 differently, I
00:51:49.260 might have, but I
00:51:50.980 do respect that
00:51:51.760 opinion on a
00:51:52.580 human level, but I
00:51:54.060 don't think it's
00:51:54.780 technically the
00:51:55.400 right freedom of
00:51:56.160 speech decision.
00:51:59.960 Yeah.
00:52:00.800 Now, and then I
00:52:02.020 would be especially
00:52:02.800 happy if someday
00:52:04.220 Ye clarifies what
00:52:06.420 he was up to, and
00:52:07.760 it turned out to
00:52:08.560 be, you know, an
00:52:09.460 acceptable
00:52:09.980 clarification, and
00:52:11.440 then he was let
00:52:12.040 back on, then I
00:52:13.940 think the loop
00:52:14.780 would be complete,
00:52:15.720 and I would be
00:52:16.200 happy with
00:52:16.640 everybody's
00:52:17.180 performance.
00:52:18.600 I'd be happy with
00:52:19.520 everybody.
00:52:20.500 I'd say, okay, you
00:52:21.620 did what you
00:52:22.400 thought you needed
00:52:22.980 to do, you had
00:52:24.180 good intentions, we
00:52:25.860 fought it out, and
00:52:27.280 here we are, and
00:52:28.300 maybe we learned
00:52:28.920 something in the
00:52:29.480 process.
00:52:30.540 So that's the most
00:52:32.240 optimistic thing I
00:52:33.320 can say.
00:52:33.660 And there's not
00:52:39.580 much else going
00:52:40.160 on.
00:52:41.480 Can we get some
00:52:42.500 new news, please?
00:52:45.520 Could we have
00:52:46.400 something else going
00:52:47.260 on?
00:52:49.620 Well, Ye did
00:52:50.780 mention loving
00:52:51.800 everybody, yes, but
00:52:54.620 he didn't complete
00:52:56.060 the circuit and
00:52:58.160 say how loving
00:52:59.020 everybody can be
00:53:01.040 made compatible with
00:53:02.160 the things he's
00:53:02.680 been saying and
00:53:03.260 tweeting, yeah, he
00:53:04.120 hasn't quite done
00:53:05.360 that.
00:53:06.560 Intentionally.
00:53:07.520 I think
00:53:07.920 intentionally, because
00:53:08.660 he would know how
00:53:09.200 to do that, of
00:53:09.940 course.
00:53:16.600 Someone should
00:53:17.360 announce for the
00:53:18.040 presidency.
00:53:20.880 How many of you
00:53:21.760 think that Trump
00:53:23.140 can still win?
00:53:26.500 How many of you
00:53:27.340 think Trump can
00:53:28.440 win?
00:53:28.760 I would say that
00:53:33.960 he's not
00:53:34.460 demonstrating a
00:53:35.400 will to win.
00:53:38.400 If he were
00:53:39.120 demonstrating a
00:53:40.020 will to win, I
00:53:40.960 think that I
00:53:41.780 would say, well,
00:53:43.260 you can never
00:53:43.840 count him out, and
00:53:45.520 no obstacle is too
00:53:46.560 big, and if he
00:53:48.440 survived, grab him
00:53:49.820 by the pussy, and 1.00
00:53:50.760 all the legal
00:53:51.360 challenges, and two
00:53:53.520 impeachments.
00:53:54.140 If he survived all
00:53:55.200 of that, and he
00:53:57.660 still had the
00:53:58.220 fight in him, then
00:53:59.900 I wouldn't count him
00:54:00.980 out.
00:54:02.240 But the evidence
00:54:04.420 suggests he doesn't
00:54:05.280 have the will, for
00:54:08.280 whatever reason.
00:54:09.000 And I don't think he
00:54:09.800 has the family support
00:54:10.780 either, and that
00:54:11.300 probably makes a
00:54:12.000 difference.
00:54:12.920 So I don't think he
00:54:13.900 has the will to push
00:54:14.760 through it.
00:54:15.740 I think he might be
00:54:17.040 able to get the
00:54:18.560 nomination, but he
00:54:20.420 doesn't have any chance
00:54:21.200 of winning in a
00:54:21.760 general.
00:54:23.160 I don't think.
00:54:24.620 That's my prediction.
00:54:27.860 Now, if he runs in
00:54:30.540 the primary, I don't
00:54:31.460 think DeSantis will
00:54:32.380 run against him, even
00:54:34.820 though DeSantis could
00:54:35.780 beat him in the
00:54:36.260 primary, because DeSantis
00:54:38.040 would be so wounded by
00:54:40.400 the fight that, I
00:54:42.200 don't know, it would
00:54:42.700 be like a, what do
00:54:45.000 you call it, a
00:54:45.620 Pyrrhic victory, the
00:54:47.220 kind where you win, but
00:54:48.240 in the long run, you
00:54:49.020 wish you hadn't, because
00:54:49.820 you got so crippled in
00:54:50.880 the winning, that you
00:54:52.520 end up dying in the
00:54:53.400 long run.
00:54:56.520 So I guess the real
00:54:57.640 question is whether
00:54:58.720 Trump goes ahead and
00:55:00.700 gets into the primary.
00:55:03.740 What do you think?
00:55:04.940 Do you think Trump
00:55:05.600 will actually run in
00:55:07.500 the primary all the
00:55:08.400 way through to
00:55:09.040 nomination?
00:55:13.740 It would be his 0.74
00:55:14.760 character to not
00:55:15.840 quit, wouldn't it?
00:55:17.120 It would be within his
00:55:18.100 character to not quit.
00:55:19.500 And it would be good
00:55:20.220 for true social
00:55:21.120 probably, so probably
00:55:23.340 just for his business
00:55:24.180 interests, he probably
00:55:25.020 has to play it.
00:55:26.480 So I think he's going
00:55:27.340 to get into the
00:55:30.740 primaries.
00:55:33.620 Now, here's another
00:55:34.740 wild card.
00:55:36.800 We imagine Trump at
00:55:38.380 full speed, but when
00:55:40.040 we think of DeSantis, we
00:55:41.380 think of him running
00:55:42.160 his state.
00:55:44.080 When you think of
00:55:44.960 those two things, you
00:55:45.780 think of Trump winning
00:55:46.820 easily, right?
00:55:47.680 Trump at full strength
00:55:49.540 versus mostly we've
00:55:52.200 seen a governor at
00:55:53.180 full strength as just
00:55:54.140 a governor.
00:55:56.180 But what we haven't
00:55:57.340 seen is DeSantis going
00:55:58.800 full strength at
00:55:59.760 Trump.
00:56:01.280 What would that look
00:56:02.300 like?
00:56:04.060 Because I don't think
00:56:05.540 anybody's ever done a
00:56:06.480 good job of going
00:56:08.700 after Trump.
00:56:09.900 Because the left goes
00:56:11.080 after him with hoaxes.
00:56:12.820 And the right says,
00:56:13.740 okay, that's just a
00:56:14.700 hoax.
00:56:15.640 Okay, that's just
00:56:16.300 fake news.
00:56:17.580 Okay, that's just
00:56:18.360 leaving out context.
00:56:20.660 So when the left goes
00:56:21.840 after him, you just
00:56:22.620 dismiss it because it's
00:56:23.680 just silly.
00:56:24.780 They're usually missing
00:56:25.740 the point.
00:56:26.280 They're lying.
00:56:27.380 But if DeSantis goes
00:56:28.660 after Trump, it's going
00:56:30.760 to be on solid
00:56:31.900 Republican argument.
00:56:35.660 And that we haven't
00:56:37.860 seen.
00:56:38.820 We haven't seen any
00:56:39.960 conservative make the
00:56:40.940 good argument against
00:56:42.080 Trump.
00:56:43.300 But DeSantis could, I
00:56:45.220 think he could bring it
00:56:46.000 home.
00:56:46.680 So you don't know what
00:56:47.720 kind of impact that
00:56:48.520 would have.
00:56:50.260 Here's the other thing
00:56:51.180 you don't know.
00:56:52.240 What kind of advisors
00:56:53.500 DeSantis would have.
00:56:56.600 Because if you're
00:56:57.380 looking at DeSantis,
00:56:58.500 his native ability is
00:57:00.000 very high.
00:57:00.520 But you also don't
00:57:02.280 know who's advising
00:57:03.440 him.
00:57:05.460 If his advisors also
00:57:07.180 go up to the
00:57:08.000 presidential level,
00:57:09.240 he gets maybe even
00:57:11.180 better advisors.
00:57:12.360 You don't know what
00:57:13.340 that turns him into.
00:57:14.840 You could turn into
00:57:15.660 anything.
00:57:17.780 So, I don't know.
00:57:18.840 It would be, I think
00:57:21.120 it would be a
00:57:21.680 disservice to the
00:57:22.760 people of Florida if
00:57:24.660 DeSantis ran.
00:57:25.500 because they're
00:57:26.520 pretty happy with
00:57:27.220 their governor and
00:57:27.900 it would, you know,
00:57:29.320 take him out of the
00:57:29.940 job for a long time.
00:57:32.240 So, Trump's advisors
00:57:35.000 have been either bad
00:57:37.720 recently or he doesn't
00:57:39.500 have any or he's
00:57:41.500 ignoring them.
00:57:44.800 Yeah.
00:57:46.040 So, we'll see.
00:57:48.880 All right, ladies and
00:57:49.740 gentlemen, is there
00:57:50.360 anything I've missed?
00:57:51.340 Any big story that's
00:57:52.380 happening that I forgot
00:57:53.500 to talk about?
00:57:56.460 I don't think so.
00:57:58.440 The World Cup?
00:57:59.920 Well, what about it?
00:58:05.740 U.S. lost, right?
00:58:08.040 To, who did we lose
00:58:10.300 to?
00:58:12.580 We lost to
00:58:14.120 Netherlands, the Dutch. 1.00
00:58:17.460 Did you watch the U.S.
00:58:19.440 play the Netherlands?
00:58:21.360 The U.S. looked like a 0.87
00:58:22.700 high school team playing
00:58:23.820 a professional team.
00:58:25.500 Every time the U.S.
00:58:28.600 team, like, would have
00:58:29.540 the ball and you say,
00:58:30.760 oh, here's the part in
00:58:32.480 soccer where the U.S. 0.99
00:58:34.680 team makes these clever
00:58:36.260 passes and beats their
00:58:38.240 defender and does
00:58:39.840 something you didn't even
00:58:40.700 think was possible and
00:58:41.740 then they make an attack
00:58:42.660 on the goal.
00:58:44.000 And then you'd watch the
00:58:44.940 Dutch just, like, take 1.00
00:58:45.820 the ball away from them.
00:58:47.460 Like they weren't even
00:58:48.320 playing somebody at the
00:58:49.200 same level.
00:58:49.680 You saw that too, right?
00:58:54.000 Yeah.
00:58:54.280 As soon as you turned it
00:58:55.240 on, you said to yourself,
00:58:56.360 uh, these don't look like
00:58:58.460 the same level at all.
00:59:01.180 Not at all.
00:59:01.860 North Carolina substations
00:59:11.580 attack.
00:59:13.760 So there's a story about
00:59:15.380 a bunch of power
00:59:17.160 substations in North
00:59:19.520 Carolina that were 0.98
00:59:21.040 attacked as if it were
00:59:22.180 some organized attack.
00:59:23.520 But, I don't know, that
00:59:28.380 sounds more like
00:59:29.540 individuals, yeah, that
00:59:31.280 sounds like drunk
00:59:31.940 rednecks or something.
00:59:33.320 That doesn't sound like
00:59:34.180 the beginning of a
00:59:34.900 revolution to me.
00:59:39.780 Uh, oh, Kyle
00:59:43.140 Rittenhouse is going
00:59:44.140 viral after asking if
00:59:45.480 Twitter files will reveal
00:59:46.940 any hidden censoring
00:59:48.820 against him.
00:59:50.380 You think Kyle
00:59:51.320 Rittenhouse was
00:59:51.980 censored?
00:59:53.520 Or accounts
00:59:56.360 talking about him?
01:00:00.160 I don't know.
01:00:03.800 I didn't notice it.
01:00:06.740 Uh, I saw
01:00:07.580 massive
01:00:08.740 tweeting, uh,
01:00:10.940 on his,
01:00:12.760 you know, in his favor.
01:00:14.360 You didn't see massive
01:00:15.820 pro-Rittenhouse tweeting?
01:00:17.740 Like, it was everywhere.
01:00:20.100 Like, I didn't see any.
01:00:21.320 Um, so I'm not saying
01:00:23.640 it didn't happen
01:00:24.300 because what we know
01:00:25.620 now suggests that it
01:00:26.880 did.
01:00:27.680 It suggests that every
01:00:28.920 major topic probably
01:00:30.080 had a little bit of
01:00:30.820 that problem.
01:00:32.920 But, I didn't notice it.
01:00:36.100 Oh, you were, you were
01:00:37.600 suspended for tweeting
01:00:38.680 free Kyle?
01:00:39.700 No, you weren't.
01:00:41.460 Nobody was, no one was
01:00:42.960 suspended for hashtag
01:00:44.520 free Kyle.
01:00:45.320 Well, that didn't
01:00:46.680 happen.
01:00:47.480 So, don't tell me that
01:00:48.380 happened because that
01:00:49.060 didn't happen.
01:00:49.500 Um, so, I'm going to
01:01:03.260 tell the, uh, locals
01:01:04.240 people, uh, something,
01:01:05.860 uh, dog and tree
01:01:08.180 related after I get
01:01:11.380 off of YouTube
01:01:11.900 because I can't tell
01:01:12.900 the YouTube people.
01:01:14.540 I, I give the locals
01:01:15.840 people their subscribers.
01:01:16.880 So, I give them the, the
01:01:18.560 secret stuff that so far
01:01:20.620 they have not shared
01:01:21.380 outside of locals.
01:01:22.460 Which, by the way, do
01:01:24.260 you know how amazed I
01:01:25.160 am?
01:01:26.280 So, this will amaze
01:01:27.380 you, YouTube people.
01:01:29.140 So, I've got over 6,000
01:01:31.000 subscribers on the
01:01:32.920 locals platform.
01:01:34.620 And I often ask them
01:01:36.280 not to tell anybody the
01:01:38.160 things that I'm telling
01:01:38.960 them.
01:01:39.600 And so far, I don't
01:01:40.440 think it's ever happened.
01:01:41.900 I, I can't think of one
01:01:43.320 example where I told
01:01:44.880 somebody on locals, you
01:01:46.080 know, don't tell
01:01:46.600 anybody, and that it
01:01:47.800 actually got on Twitter.
01:01:48.880 I haven't seen it once.
01:01:50.480 And I'm, I am so
01:01:51.600 impressed.
01:01:52.640 I am so impressed
01:01:54.020 about that.
01:01:54.960 The odds of that are
01:01:55.920 just shocking.
01:01:58.360 Yeah.
01:01:58.980 And, and, um, I think
01:02:02.260 I have sort of the
01:02:03.060 perfect size of a
01:02:05.220 subscriber base because
01:02:06.420 it's still very personal.
01:02:08.200 You know, I see the
01:02:08.780 same characters and we
01:02:09.920 interact.
01:02:10.620 If it were 100,000, I
01:02:11.980 don't think it would be
01:02:12.620 nearly as fun.
01:02:14.280 You know, 6,000 is a
01:02:16.420 really good number.
01:02:17.580 Under 10, I think I'd
01:02:18.600 like to keep it for
01:02:19.320 sure.
01:02:21.360 All right.
01:02:22.200 Um, YouTube, I'm
01:02:23.260 going to say goodbye
01:02:23.860 and, uh, Spotify and
01:02:26.620 all you folks and I'll
01:02:27.820 talk to locals a little
01:02:28.840 bit.
01:02:29.040 All right.