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

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,

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,

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.

00:11:47.200 I guess they're the ones that make sure the women are wearing their

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.

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?

00:14:45.320 You know, death to America, death to Israel.

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.

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

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,

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

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

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,

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,

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.

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

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,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript