Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1966 Scott Adams： I Explain How The J6 HOAX Is Being Played On American Public, & Lots More

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of civilization, I like to call it.

00:00:08.620 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams. There's never been a finer thing in the history of humankind.

00:00:13.880 And if you'd like to be part of this amazing journey, all you need is a cuppa, a mug, or a glass, a tank, or a chalice, or a sign, a canteen, a jug, or a flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:24.280 Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:27.300 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine, the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:33.700 It's called the Simultaneous Sip. Go.

00:00:43.360 I saw a suggestion here that you could be either sipping or ripping.

00:00:51.760 That is acceptable. You can sip or you can rip. Either one is good.

00:00:57.300 So, do you ever see something in the news that you accept uncritically, and then time goes by, and you just think about it when you're out of the fog of war, and you say to yourself,

00:01:13.360 I don't think that was ever true.

00:01:17.200 My classic example is, the news has reported for decades that moderate drinking is good for you.

00:01:25.340 I remember I used to believe that.

00:01:27.560 And then, you know, years go by, and one day I was sitting there thinking,

00:01:30.580 that's not true.

00:01:32.580 That's almost certainly not true.

00:01:37.640 And how in the world did I ever believe it? 0.98

00:01:40.720 Because on its surface, it's ridiculous. 0.98

00:01:43.120 Is it not? 0.99

00:01:44.020 It's a little bit ridiculous on the surface. 0.84

00:01:47.060 Now, that doesn't mean that unusual things can't happen. 0.62

00:01:51.220 Unusual things do happen.

00:01:53.460 Sometimes you get surprised.

00:01:54.920 But if this one is one of those surprises, I'll be really surprised, right?

00:01:59.520 It's clearly just the alcohol industry wants you to think it's good for you.

00:02:04.260 Like, it could not be more clear that those studies are, you know, based on industry influence.

00:02:11.020 But here's one that I've been accepting uncritically, and so have you, that goes like this.

00:02:18.340 That the so-called vaccinations, we'll always put them in quotes to make you feel good.

00:02:24.900 The so-called vaccinations are the first time science has developed a way to give somebody a,

00:02:32.160 let's call it a medication of some kind, that mostly kills the healthy people.

00:02:40.020 And the sick people do fine. 0.98

00:02:42.940 But if you're a young, healthy man, it's going to kill you.

00:02:48.340 You think that's true?

00:02:51.400 Is the vaccinations, are the vaccinations, like, so different from anything that we've ever experienced

00:02:59.480 in the history of the world, that we've developed the one thing that kills strong people and not weak people.

00:03:06.940 It kills stronger people sooner than weak people.

00:03:10.300 So if you're a 90-year-old frail grandmother, that thing won't hurt you at all. 1.00

00:03:15.320 But if you're 18 and you play a sport, it'll fucking kill you. 0.99

00:03:20.640 Now, I'm not saying that's true. 0.99

00:03:22.400 That's not true, right?

00:03:24.060 I'm doing an exaggeration to make a point.

00:03:27.100 Now, I'm not going to rule out that it's possible, right?

00:03:31.160 If I said it's impossible, I'd be crazy.

00:03:34.200 Because there are a difference.

00:03:35.260 You can imagine, for example, that high testosterone, just to pick one example, right?

00:03:41.400 If high testosterone doesn't work well with the mRNA, you've got everything you need, right?

00:03:48.640 That would explain it, right?

00:03:50.340 There's a difference in young men.

00:03:52.340 Testosterone.

00:03:53.360 Now, likewise, if it only affected young women, you'd say, oh, hormonal.

00:03:59.360 Something hormonal that's special about that case.

00:04:01.640 But I'm going to ask you the question again.

00:04:04.900 Give me another example of a medication that is more dangerous to the healthiest people.

00:04:13.400 Is there any other example of that in the history of all medications?

00:04:20.180 Well, you say Lipitor, but they wouldn't give it to young people.

00:04:24.740 Viagra?

00:04:26.680 Is Viagra an example?

00:04:28.320 But you wouldn't give it to young people. 0.57

00:04:29.620 Well, fentanyl, no.

00:04:33.400 Statins?

00:04:33.980 I don't think so.

00:04:34.820 Chemo.

00:04:36.180 You think chemo is more dangerous if you're healthy than if you're near death.

00:04:44.000 I don't know.

00:04:45.080 So I'm not going to say it's not true, right?

00:04:50.240 But let me give you an alternative hypothesis.

00:04:54.480 So one hypothesis is we keep seeing that young men are dying suddenly, right?

00:05:02.940 So that's a true statement.

00:05:05.180 I don't know what the reality of the statistics are, but it's a true statement that we're observing

00:05:11.000 it, right?

00:05:12.000 And some people say that the statistics back it up.

00:05:15.340 I'm not sure I trust any pandemic statistics.

00:05:17.360 But at the moment, it's a general sense that young men especially seem to be dying at a

00:05:25.540 really rate.

00:05:26.200 All right? 0.99

00:05:26.860 Do you want me to fuck up your brain really good? 0.99

00:05:30.160 Because you think you kind of understand the situation, right? 0.99

00:05:32.980 Watch this.

00:05:36.840 An old man comes into the ER, has a heart attack, and dies.

00:05:43.280 He's been vaccinated.

00:05:45.820 A young man comes into the ER.

00:05:49.220 He has a heart attack, and he dies.

00:05:51.640 Both vaccinated.

00:05:53.800 What's the story?

00:05:55.980 The story is only young people are affected by the vaccination.

00:06:00.000 Why?

00:06:00.780 Because old people die all the time. 1.00

00:06:03.940 Right?

00:06:05.720 If an unhealthy person dies, you say that's because they were unhealthy.

00:06:10.800 If a young person dies, you say it's because they got a vaccination.

00:06:15.160 Could it be that the way we count them is the old people dying is invisible because there 1.00

00:06:21.380 are lots of reasons they could die.

00:06:23.120 If a young person dies, there's only one reason you see.

00:06:26.640 Could it be that old people and young people are both dying at the same rate from

00:06:32.300 side effects of the vaccination, which is different from saying it's dangerous on balance, right?

00:06:38.300 I can say without reservation that vaccinations of any kind have side effects.

00:06:45.200 Some people die from medications that are a good idea.

00:06:48.860 So we don't have to argue whether there's more deaths compared to COVID.

00:06:53.880 That's a separate conversation.

00:06:55.280 There are deaths.

00:06:56.800 But are we counting the deaths the same?

00:06:59.800 Would you notice an old person dying from the vaccination, or would you say, well, they were old?

00:07:04.720 He had some cholesterol.

00:07:06.980 So that's why he died, right?

00:07:11.340 Now, I'm not saying that's the full explanation, because I think maybe there's also a difference

00:07:16.540 between young women and young men dying.

00:07:19.840 And I would think that if there's a difference between young men and young women, it now comes

00:07:25.660 you're both dealing with young people, so that's not hidden by the fact that some old 0.75

00:07:31.200 people might be dying too.

00:07:32.220 So I'm not sure that that's fully explaining what's going on, but it might be part of it.

00:07:37.800 It might be that you just can't tell what old people are dying from, because you have 1.00

00:07:41.640 five options.

00:07:43.020 And if a young person dies, you look around and go, well, what else could it be, right?

00:07:47.860 Even if it is something else, you're still going to say, what else could it be? 0.93

00:07:53.840 Did that fuck up anybody's brain?

00:07:55.400 All right, I don't want to name a name, unless he wants me to, but since we didn't talk about 0.97

00:08:05.900 it.

00:08:06.200 So I heard this yesterday from a solid source who said, you know, maybe it's just the way

00:08:12.580 we count them.

00:08:13.500 Maybe we just don't notice when the old people are dying. 1.00

00:08:15.880 And apparently this is a line of thinking that's out there.

00:08:19.580 I'm not inventing this.

00:08:21.200 It's a line of thinking that's out there already.

00:08:22.840 But here's why this should have rocked your brain.

00:08:29.040 It looked like a really clear situation, didn't it?

00:08:32.360 It looked like it was just cut and dried.

00:08:34.900 Cut and dried.

00:08:35.800 The data is clear.

00:08:36.800 These young people are dying. 1.00

00:08:38.540 For some reason, it's not affecting the old people.

00:08:40.820 That could be exactly what's happening.

00:08:43.280 It could be exactly what's happening.

00:08:45.500 I'm not going to deny that that could be.

00:08:47.860 I'm just saying that if you haven't considered the other alternative,

00:08:50.420 you should.

00:08:53.460 That's all.

00:08:55.400 All right.

00:08:57.880 I have a tip for NPCs on Twitter.

00:09:01.840 So the people who are not real people, they're just sort of like robots who act like people.

00:09:07.280 If somebody describes something, I would like to describe this situation.

00:09:13.020 That's different than defending it, right?

00:09:19.240 So if I describe the Holocaust, I'm not actually in favor of it. 0.92

00:09:25.260 Now, most of you already knew that.

00:09:28.340 But if you describe something like what's good about it and what's bad about it,

00:09:33.180 the pros and the cons, if you do that on Twitter, that's called defending it.

00:09:37.940 If you see somebody say that you're defending something when you know you're not,

00:09:45.840 don't argue with them.

00:09:47.520 Those are NPCs.

00:09:49.440 That's just an NPC thing.

00:09:51.560 When I get comments like that, my only reply is just NPC.

00:09:56.300 Gone.

00:09:57.340 Do not argue with somebody who's clearly an NPC.

00:10:00.160 Now, I use the NPC metaphorically or not, literally.

00:10:08.980 I saw that because Bill Ackman, famous investor Bill Ackman,

00:10:13.040 was speculating on why somebody like SBF would do something criminal

00:10:19.440 when simply owning a big crypto exchange would have probably made him a billionaire.

00:10:24.260 So why would you do something illegal when doing something legal that's available to you,

00:10:30.660 that's right in front of you, is perfectly fine.

00:10:33.340 And he used the Madoff example.

00:10:36.300 So Madoff was rich.

00:10:39.740 He didn't need to steal anything.

00:10:42.100 But he did anyway.

00:10:43.840 And so here's his speculation.

00:10:45.900 No, not greed.

00:10:47.260 Not greed.

00:10:48.340 Greed is a good hypothesis.

00:10:50.540 Greed is a good hypothesis.

00:10:51.780 But this is Bill Ackman's addition to the conversation.

00:10:55.840 It might be about covering up embarrassment.

00:10:59.200 It's not a bad theory.

00:11:01.460 And the covering up embarrassment theory is that if you're an investor

00:11:05.980 or you owned a crypto exchange,

00:11:08.520 if you lost a bunch of money, you don't want to tell people.

00:11:12.820 And because you're an optimist, you say,

00:11:14.360 all right, if I do this or that, I can cover it up and they'll never know.

00:11:18.400 So you do this or that, but it's the wrong situation.

00:11:22.900 You can't do it.

00:11:23.780 So you don't cover it up enough.

00:11:26.180 So I think that, yeah, greed is enough, right?

00:11:29.700 Follow the money.

00:11:30.660 Greed is enough.

00:11:31.620 That can explain the whole thing.

00:11:33.280 But I don't think it's crazy to say that both of them were trying to cover up a loss.

00:11:39.380 And the embarrassment of the loss is also a huge incentive.

00:11:44.900 And then somebody said, why are you defending SBF?

00:11:49.980 And I'm thinking, defending?

00:11:52.940 All he's doing is offering one hypothesis to describe a guy who did a heinous crime.

00:11:58.540 It's still a heinous crime.

00:12:00.880 Like, who's defending anybody?

00:12:02.960 That's the opposite of defending.

00:12:04.500 It's just describing and throwing out a perfectly reasonable alternative hypothesis.

00:12:11.380 How often do you see this happening?

00:12:13.740 You just describe something and somebody says, why are you defending that?

00:12:18.780 All right, I get that every day.

00:12:20.060 All right, I'm still a single-issue voter on fentanyl,

00:12:24.100 meaning that I'm not going to support anybody for president or senate

00:12:28.740 unless they have a real plan that, at least on paper,

00:12:34.000 looks like something worth trying, right?

00:12:36.280 At least it has to look good on paper.

00:12:38.320 You know, I would forgive if it doesn't work.

00:12:41.200 You know, that's what real life is about.

00:12:42.900 You try things, you adjust.

00:12:45.060 But I asked this question, and I said on Twitter,

00:12:49.120 that I'm a single-issue voter on fentanyl,

00:12:51.760 and I said, if no one has a plan on fentanyl,

00:12:55.620 I'll just vote against all incumbents.

00:13:00.220 That's my default.

00:13:01.780 Just vote against all incumbents.

00:13:05.300 And I said, has anyone attempted to join me?

00:13:07.800 In other words, to only vote based on the best fentanyl plan.

00:13:13.860 62% said that they would consider being a single-issue voter on fentanyl.

00:13:21.360 Did you expect that?

00:13:22.640 I thought it was going to be 10%.

00:13:25.600 I didn't think it was going to be 62%.

00:13:28.640 Now, here's the logic of why to make that a single-issue vote.

00:13:35.620 Because I think everybody can see at this point

00:13:38.140 that the government is no longer responsive to the citizens.

00:13:41.640 Would you agree that both sides think that at this point?

00:13:45.420 Like, the omnibus bill just proves the government

00:13:48.140 is not responsive to the citizens.

00:13:49.600 And how do you change that?

00:13:54.500 Now, you can't change it if we vote for candidates

00:13:58.100 based on how much we like them.

00:14:00.280 Oh, that one's funny, or that one's a Republican,

00:14:02.780 or that one's a Democrat, or that one's too progressive,

00:14:06.160 all that stuff.

00:14:07.240 You'll never get anywhere.

00:14:09.260 You've got to say, look, here's a minimum standard

00:14:12.660 for you to be in office.

00:14:13.840 If you don't meet the minimum standard

00:14:15.980 of having a plan for the biggest problem,

00:14:19.260 just a plan.

00:14:20.140 It doesn't even have to be a good one.

00:14:21.580 Just have a plan that looks like it would work on paper

00:14:24.140 for the biggest issue.

00:14:26.440 If you don't meet that bar,

00:14:28.640 don't ask me about anything else.

00:14:31.840 That's like the ticket to the show.

00:14:34.920 You've got to tell me what you're going to do

00:14:36.340 for the biggest problem that's our immediate biggest concern.

00:14:39.060 If you can't even answer the question,

00:14:41.940 I'm not going to ask you about your other issues.

00:14:44.940 I have no interest, no interest in any other opinion you have.

00:14:49.940 Because I know you're not real, right?

00:14:52.880 If you don't have anything to say about fentanyl that's useful,

00:14:56.720 you're not real.

00:14:59.360 It's not even like I'm supporting or not supporting a candidate.

00:15:02.200 That's not even a candidate.

00:15:05.080 That's not even a candidate, right?

00:15:07.520 So, anyway, if it turns out that I can move enough people

00:15:14.320 who would say they would vote on a fentanyl plan,

00:15:16.620 it would really force the politicians to compete on it. 0.99

00:15:21.380 I'd like politicians to think I can move a million people.

00:15:27.360 You realize that there were over 100,000 OD deaths this year.

00:15:33.060 Now, maybe three-quarters of fentanyl.

00:15:34.720 So, let's take the last five years.

00:15:37.700 How many people do you think died of fentanyl the last five years?

00:15:41.780 Maybe a quarter million?

00:15:44.080 A quarter million?

00:15:45.640 Something like that, because it's going up the last few years.

00:15:48.240 So, let's say a quarter million in the last five years.

00:15:50.940 It's close to 100,000 this year.

00:15:53.200 That's just this year.

00:15:54.240 But five years, let's say a quarter million.

00:15:55.900 How many people were affected by a quarter million people dying?

00:16:02.260 Well, at least a million.

00:16:04.020 At least a million.

00:16:05.000 Because of family members and spouses and stuff, right?

00:16:07.660 So, at least a million.

00:16:09.460 There are one million people, at least, in the United States who are probably adults.

00:16:15.300 There's probably a million who are just adults who vote.

00:16:17.560 If I can get all a million of them to say, you know what, I'm so mad about this, I don't care about anything else, then we can get a fentanyl policy.

00:16:29.080 But if everybody says, well, fentanyl is my most important thing, but I still have to look at the overall situation, then you get nothing.

00:16:37.720 You get nothing.

00:16:38.980 And that's what you deserve.

00:16:40.780 You would deserve nothing.

00:16:42.160 You would deserve no response from your government.

00:16:47.560 If you keep doing what you're doing, you deserve what you keep getting.

00:16:52.900 Do something different.

00:16:54.840 You've got to do something different.

00:16:56.540 The politicians are not doing anything different.

00:16:59.740 Right?

00:17:00.460 You know, they're just trivial things around the edges.

00:17:02.820 So, we're going to have to do something different.

00:17:05.440 And we're going to have to make it a death sentence to not have a fentanyl policy.

00:17:09.420 You know, a political death sentence, not an actual one.

00:17:13.160 Yeah.

00:17:15.700 So, January 6th, Hoax Committee has done their big write-up.

00:17:23.540 And here's one of the big outcomes from it.

00:17:26.440 They could not confirm that Trump ever tried to grab the steering wheel of the beast, you know, the presidential limousine.

00:17:34.280 That was one of the biggest stories.

00:17:35.960 And when they asked the people who, one was in the room and one was the actual driver, the person who was the alleged witness to the story that it happened said he doesn't have any memory of being a witness to the story that it happened.

00:17:50.080 And the person who was driving said he didn't see anything like that.

00:17:55.180 It was a hoax.

00:17:58.060 It was a hoax.

00:17:59.840 Now, that's what the January 6th Committee determined factually.

00:18:04.400 And it's, of course, it's helpful to Trump.

00:18:10.780 But we talk about both sides here, right?

00:18:14.260 So, I'm not just, I'm not going to only talk about the parts that make Trump look better.

00:18:19.640 I'm also going to say what the January 6th Committee said that make him look like he committed a crime, right?

00:18:29.400 So, I'd like to now give you the summary of the January 6th's crimes that Trump did.

00:18:41.400 Blah, blah, word salad.

00:18:43.720 There, I'm done.

00:18:47.380 Now, I've got a little test for you.

00:18:50.640 If you have any Democrat family members, ask them to summarize in a very, like, clean, tight way.

00:18:58.200 Ask them to summarize the actions that Trump did that were illegal.

00:19:04.540 Ask them to just explain it.

00:19:07.240 Watch what happens.

00:19:09.320 You know what's going to happen?

00:19:11.200 Well, if you wonder how your family is going to handle that question, try looking at how CNN handled it.

00:19:17.360 They had a very lengthy article about the January 6th outcome, and they couldn't explain why Trump did a crime.

00:19:27.200 It wasn't in the article.

00:19:30.200 In other words, we know what crimes they say he did by the name of the crime.

00:19:35.800 Insurrection and disturbing a public event and stuff like that.

00:19:40.020 But what CNN failed to do, and I'll bet all of your relatives will fail to do, is connect the actions of Trump to how they're those crimes.

00:19:51.560 Isn't that the obvious thing you'd see in an article about that?

00:19:55.820 Oh, they charged him with X.

00:19:58.700 Here's the three pieces of evidence they used to support that charge.

00:20:03.360 Wouldn't you expect CNN to explain it that way?

00:20:06.420 Here's the charge.

00:20:07.280 Here's what the investigation found he did.

00:20:11.500 Now you can see that the things he did really fit into that charge.

00:20:16.140 They won't do it.

00:20:17.700 Because it can't be explained.

00:20:20.120 The narrative actually doesn't hold together if you try to summarize it.

00:20:24.320 The way that they're trying to sell this is, it's a big old tapestry of a thousand witnesses.

00:20:33.100 My God, it's not so simple.

00:20:34.560 You can't really try to simplify this.

00:20:37.220 It's a big complicated web of collusion of the people who made phone calls that we think were thinking their motives the day of.

00:20:45.540 There was this memo, and what about the other memo?

00:20:48.040 And there was a phone call.

00:20:48.980 And what about the lawyer and the person who wasn't Trump, who had some bad ideas, but because he wasn't Trump and had bad ideas, maybe Trump had those same thoughts?

00:20:59.140 I mean, seriously. 0.98

00:21:01.300 You are going to laugh your fucking ass off if you ask a Democrat to explain what Trump did to support the charges. 0.99

00:21:09.200 I think this is the closest they can get. 0.99

00:21:12.440 It was an official proceeding.

00:21:15.260 Congress was in an official proceeding.

00:21:17.640 And that Trump did things that contributed to slowing it down.

00:21:22.600 What do we call that in America?

00:21:25.180 Is there another name for that?

00:21:27.020 When a large group of concerned citizens gather in one place with the intention of interfering with the gears of society.

00:21:37.740 Let's see.

00:21:38.800 Like sometimes they'll interrupt traffic.

00:21:41.520 Traffic.

00:21:42.500 Sometimes they'll interrupt public events.

00:21:47.640 Public events.

00:21:48.980 Sometimes this group of concerned citizens will maybe interrupt a business commerce.

00:21:57.640 You know, maybe you're trying to do business and they block access to the business.

00:22:01.700 Do we have any name for that?

00:22:04.380 Oh, yeah, yeah.

00:22:05.300 It's called freedom of speech.

00:22:07.480 Freedom of speech.

00:22:08.300 Yeah.

00:22:08.740 That's right.

00:22:10.320 That's right.

00:22:11.400 Trump executed his freedom of speech.

00:22:14.640 So, go to jail for that.

00:22:16.920 Now, did I deny that he was trying to delay a public event or a public proceeding?

00:22:24.840 No.

00:22:25.460 No, I'm not going to deny that.

00:22:27.180 That's exactly what he was trying to do.

00:22:29.840 Explicitly, publicly, totally transparently, he was trying to delay a public event for the purpose of improving the outcome.

00:22:40.880 And he should be banned from politics forever because he tried to delay for one day an event to try to improve its outcome.

00:22:52.080 Now, separately, separately, he was also trying to get some electors to be like a different slate of electors or something like that.

00:23:05.620 Is that illegal?

00:23:08.520 Is it illegal to press the limits of the law based on your interpretation of it?

00:23:16.660 I don't think so.

00:23:20.640 I think that's just a different interpretation.

00:23:24.640 And if he has some legal basis for it, he'd be fine.

00:23:30.940 But suppose there's no legal basis for it.

00:23:33.980 And all he did was try to get a separate system to replace the valid one.

00:23:39.340 What then?

00:23:40.580 Well, then it matters if he genuinely thought the election was rigged.

00:23:44.840 If he genuinely thought it was rigged, he would be protecting the system.

00:23:49.940 I'm not saying he should have done it.

00:23:52.300 Because remember, describing something is not defending it.

00:23:57.980 Because if you think that my description of what happened is defending it, well, you're missing the plot.

00:24:02.900 I'm simply describing it.

00:24:04.100 So, but then when you look into the actions of the lawyers that were involved, and, you know, they're talking to electors and all that, how much of that was Trump himself?

00:24:17.460 Versus people on the staff talking to people to see if they could line up with his plan?

00:24:25.300 No.

00:24:27.080 See if you can get a Democrat to succinctly describe what he did that doesn't sound like an ordinary protest.

00:24:34.580 See if you can do it.

00:24:37.740 Yeah, you're going to trigger them into word salad.

00:24:40.000 It will just be like this spinning weird thing.

00:24:42.880 And don't bother even debating it.

00:24:45.340 I just want you to see if you can trigger the cognitive dissonance.

00:24:48.320 That's your challenge.

00:24:49.860 See if you can trigger cognitive dissonance simply by asking somebody to summarize how Trump's actions actually relate to the charges.

00:24:59.060 See what happens.

00:24:59.780 And also watch the news coverage to see how they can't do it either.

00:25:04.660 They can't connect the dots.

00:25:07.900 All right.

00:25:08.580 But you will believe, the Democrats will come to believe that the dots have been connected.

00:25:13.380 All right.

00:25:14.380 Because you know that's how it works.

00:25:19.060 So, let's talk about Twitter's economics.

00:25:23.400 I'm a little worried that even Elon Musk can make Twitter profitable.

00:25:27.500 Here's just some real gross numbers.

00:25:30.640 So, these are not too accurate.

00:25:32.540 You know, this is like within a billion or so.

00:25:35.360 So, Twitter was, before Musk, would get about $5 billion in income and lose about a billion.

00:25:46.240 All right.

00:25:46.840 So, they get $5 billion coming in, but overall they'd lose a billion dollars because they spent more than they made.

00:25:52.620 Close to 90% of that, some 80%, some percent, was from advertising.

00:26:02.200 All right.

00:26:02.720 So, they're already losing a billion per year.

00:26:05.360 And the current report in the Wall Street Journal is that Musk may have lost 75% of his advertisers, which were more than 80% of all the revenue.

00:26:15.480 Now, that doesn't mean they won't come back, but at the moment they're on hold.

00:26:20.020 So, he's not getting any of that revenue.

00:26:22.060 So, he's probably going from $5 billion revenue, mostly from advertisement, maybe down to two.

00:26:31.720 Two.

00:26:32.100 Which would make his losses go from a billion to, you know, he's also saving money on staff and stuff.

00:26:38.540 So, let's say he's doubled his loss.

00:26:41.520 Best case scenario.

00:26:43.380 He's losing $2 billion a year on a running basis.

00:26:46.400 So, if he's losing $2 billion a year, how do you make that up?

00:26:50.540 Let's say he has $8 per month subscription service.

00:26:54.720 What percentage of Twitter's quite a few people do you think would actually use it?

00:27:05.400 What percent do you think would pay the $8 for the extra benefits?

00:27:10.500 I say 20%.

00:27:11.880 I'm looking at all of your guesses.

00:27:15.780 Would you agree that 20% is somewhere in the range of your guesses as well?

00:27:19.820 I'm seeing 10 to 25.

00:27:21.680 But let's say 20, just to work through the numbers.

00:27:25.760 So, I did a quick calculation, and if 20% of Twitter users started paying $8, it'd be about $300 million per year.

00:27:34.740 Not even close to covering the loss.

00:27:38.680 Right?

00:27:39.240 Because he needs to make up probably something in the $2 to $3 billion a year range,

00:27:43.480 unless the advertising comes back.

00:27:45.780 And the subscription won't come close.

00:27:49.780 Now, he's got other ways to make money.

00:27:51.760 He can improve the advertising model so you can buy directly from Twitter.

00:27:55.420 Maybe that gets him some more.

00:27:56.920 He can add a payment system, which is a separate revenue.

00:27:59.840 There may be a number of other ways to do it.

00:28:03.580 But at the moment, I don't see how he gets there.

00:28:08.620 The only way he's going to do it is he has to get back all the advertisers he lost,

00:28:12.800 plus a bunch of new ones, plus the $8, or he's not going to be close to servicing his debt.

00:28:20.120 And also remember, also remember that I'm using old Twitter's financials.

00:28:27.000 That's before massive debt.

00:28:30.180 So, the expenses at Twitter are way higher, because they have to service the debt,

00:28:36.660 because Musk had some debt part of that.

00:28:39.320 So, I don't see how the numbers can work.

00:28:42.580 You can see why Musk is panicking.

00:28:45.540 I mean, this is much closer to a total startup than it is to trying to recover a healthy company.

00:28:54.940 Can he sell the buildings?

00:28:59.100 Well, even if he, I don't know what assets they have,

00:29:02.000 but I don't think it's going to help him cover his run, his running losses.

00:29:06.580 You know, that wouldn't be the answer.

00:29:09.220 So, I don't know.

00:29:10.220 I still think he has a good chance of pulling it off,

00:29:12.640 but it won't be a straight down the middle ad subscription,

00:29:16.780 or a straight down the middle, hope those advertisers come back.

00:29:19.920 He's going to have to pull a rabbit out of the hat.

00:29:22.480 But, who better, right?

00:29:24.160 Who better?

00:29:24.940 All right.

00:29:27.780 My theme today is incoherent Republican opinions.

00:29:34.440 If you're new to the live stream, if I criticize Republicans,

00:29:39.860 does that mean I hate them compared to Democrats?

00:29:44.180 Nope.

00:29:44.900 It means I show the costs and the benefits of everything, including Republicans.

00:29:50.320 Now, let me do a little check with you.

00:29:54.040 You all know that if I were doing this, you know, these live streams, just for the money,

00:30:00.880 I'm smart enough to know I just have to pick a team and agree with it, right?

00:30:05.660 Just pick a team.

00:30:07.080 Doesn't matter which one.

00:30:07.980 Any team I pick, I'll make way more money, because if I just agree with my team, they all feel good,

00:30:14.000 we all get dopamine, and I trade dopamine for money, and I make untold millions.

00:30:19.540 And you know that I choose as a philosophical, ethical preference to not do that, because it would require me to do something that would feel like lying by omission.

00:30:32.960 It would be lying by omission, but it would be a lie, in my opinion.

00:30:36.000 It would cross my ethical boundary. 0.99

00:30:37.680 So, I'm going to tell you where Republicans are really fucked up at the minute, right? 0.97

00:30:44.340 And you're not going to like it, and it's going to be painful. 0.97

00:30:48.240 And some of you will never speak to me again.

00:30:52.520 But, I like to think that I'm developing a number of strong mental people who can handle this in its proper context, right?

00:31:02.940 There's nothing wrong with any of you.

00:31:05.760 So, starting with, you're all normal, right?

00:31:10.120 Whatever confusion or cognitive dissonance I'm going to talk about has nothing to do with IQ,

00:31:15.460 nothing to do with your intentions, your ethics, nothing to do with your knowledge.

00:31:22.500 You're fine.

00:31:23.880 It's just a thing that happens to people, okay?

00:31:26.720 And it goes like this.

00:31:27.920 For the longest time, border security was a high Republican priority, and not so much for the Democrats.

00:31:37.620 And the argument was very clean and very persuasive.

00:31:41.920 You can't let unlimited people into your country, because it would be bad economically. 1.00

00:31:47.580 And some argued, and I'm not going to embrace the argument, I'll describe it.

00:31:51.980 Some argued it would hurt the cultural character of the country in a way that could be fatal.

00:31:59.780 But now time goes by.

00:32:01.700 And by the way, I embrace that argument.

00:32:04.220 I embrace the argument from five years ago that the border should be airtight,

00:32:10.300 and then we should have economists decide who gets in and under what circumstance.

00:32:15.180 But you shouldn't have it random.

00:32:16.680 You shouldn't have other countries deciding what our immigration policy is.

00:32:19.920 That's the way it is now.

00:32:20.900 Right now, Central America decides what our immigration policy is by deciding whether they come here or not.

00:32:28.120 That's it.

00:32:29.220 If they decide to come here, that's our policy. 0.99

00:32:31.440 If they decide to stay home, well, that was our policy.

00:32:34.620 So it's not even up to us anymore.

00:32:36.540 So I was completely on board with the Republican view.

00:32:41.040 Two things that I have learned recently, and I think most of you as well.

00:32:45.680 Number one, our internal population growth has stalled, and no country can survive a declining population.

00:32:57.540 It's economically, it's a disaster.

00:32:59.760 Everybody would agree with that.

00:33:01.440 There's no debate on that, right?

00:33:03.220 So we went from a situation where immigration was unambiguously a drain on the system, and I agreed with that completely. 1.00

00:33:12.260 Because we were already creating our own babies.

00:33:14.900 Why do we need extra babies when we have plenty of babies, right? 1.00

00:33:18.320 Now we don't have enough babies, and it's one of our biggest problems.

00:33:21.540 The only way we can solve it quickly is with immigration. 0.98

00:33:27.360 Now what do the, what do the, what do the, yeah, goodbye, see?

00:33:31.400 See, so there's a, there's a goodbye already.

00:33:35.960 So this will be, the people who are weak won't be able to even handle the conversation.

00:33:42.320 If you're strong enough to at least hear the, hear the full conversation, and then you disagree,

00:33:47.920 well, then I'd say you might be a strong thinker.

00:33:50.300 But your mind would be very weak if you can't even get to the end of the conversation. 0.55

00:33:54.980 That would be an embarrassing level of mental weakness, I would think.

00:33:59.420 So let me get to the end, and then you can disagree with me.

00:34:02.440 There'll be plenty of room for that, okay?

00:34:05.120 So at the moment, we don't have a short-term way to solve population without immigration.

00:34:13.040 Does everybody agree with that?

00:34:15.080 There's not a short-term way to do it.

00:34:16.760 Because you can't instantly have more babies, right?

00:34:20.300 There's just a time difference.

00:34:22.420 Now, would you also agree, this is my audience, for my audience, yes or no, your preference is Americans have more babies, right?

00:34:32.660 And so, the smarter thing to do would be to increase the incentive for babies, to make it easier to have a baby, right?

00:34:46.480 And more economical, right?

00:34:48.480 Okay.

00:34:50.620 All on the same page so far?

00:34:54.120 Population's a problem, it has to be solved.

00:34:56.220 Only two ways to do it, but we prefer doing it with population growth from our own people.

00:35:01.440 We're all the same, right?

00:35:05.120 Now, let's just talk about the cultural difference.

00:35:08.640 Five years ago, you said, oh, bringing all these people from below the border will change the nature of the country in a negative way. 0.96

00:35:16.220 And then you find out that the people coming from South America, or Central America, are more American than you are.

00:35:26.920 Not legally, but they are religious conservatives.

00:35:32.460 And they're really serious about it.

00:35:35.640 And they come here because work is like a high priority and family.

00:35:39.840 It's like God, family, and work.

00:35:42.880 They're conservatives.

00:35:44.740 Now, they might be socially, you know, liberal in some issues, right?

00:35:49.140 But they are more American than the Americans. 0.51

00:35:53.580 If you wanted to destroy Americans' culture, there are definitely cultures that you could import that would change the nature of it. 0.89

00:36:04.300 For example, if you had massive, let's say massive Muslim immigration, the Islamic system is different enough that it might improve our system, it depends on your point of view, or it might destroy it because it's too different, doesn't integrate as well. 1.00

00:36:24.800 But, I mean, that would be a reasonable conversation.

00:36:27.360 Does that make it better or worse?

00:36:28.560 But it would make it different.

00:36:29.440 It would make it different than what America has been, right?

00:36:33.700 Now, I'm not saying that you should, you know, ban Islamic immigration.

00:36:38.160 I'm saying that if you think that our culture would be affected negatively by the awesome people coming illegally from the South, I think you have to rethink that.

00:36:50.180 Because they're the people you want.

00:36:52.320 They're the people who are taking a risk.

00:36:55.080 They're culturally conservative.

00:36:56.720 They're going to have lots of kids, probably, until they become rich as well.

00:37:01.500 Then it decreases.

00:37:04.520 So, here's where the Republicans fall off the rails into complete cognitive dissonance.

00:37:12.140 And I apologize in advance.

00:37:13.560 I don't mean to insult you if it's happening to you.

00:37:17.560 There's no way to increase our birth rate.

00:37:22.420 That can't be done.

00:37:23.540 Our entire system is incentivized against it.

00:37:27.880 You would have to change women working to change it. 1.00

00:37:33.600 Is that going to happen?

00:37:35.660 I mean, you can say you want it to happen, but there is no possible way to get there from here.

00:37:41.700 That's a one-way trip.

00:37:43.540 We took a one-way trip.

00:37:44.800 We have to deal with what we have now.

00:37:46.920 You can't go back to there.

00:37:48.020 So, here's where Republicans, their opinion is literally absurd on immigration.

00:37:57.260 And five years ago, it was the only smart one.

00:38:00.240 In fact, a year ago, I was completely...

00:38:03.560 I lost the signal here.

00:38:05.080 Even a year ago, one year ago, I was 100% in favor of the Republican view of immigration,

00:38:12.600 based on the wrong assumptions.

00:38:14.500 The wrong assumption was that we didn't have a population problem, but we do.

00:38:19.360 So, now I learned that.

00:38:20.540 That changes everything.

00:38:22.180 Economically, that changes everything.

00:38:24.400 And then I learned that the people coming from Central America are more American than I am.

00:38:29.740 Again, not legally.

00:38:31.760 But in their cultural sensibilities, they're more American than I am.

00:38:37.380 Honestly.

00:38:38.440 Honestly, more American than I am.

00:38:39.940 And so, I don't worry about that.

00:38:43.720 So, I'm not worried about the cultural influence.

00:38:47.640 And let me also tell you that if...

00:38:50.840 You know that I live in California.

00:38:53.300 So, I am surrounded by the Hispanic community.

00:38:57.680 It's like, you know, you breathe it, you live it.

00:38:59.760 You know, there are days when I'm speaking to more people who came here after they were born than before.

00:39:06.720 Very common in California.

00:39:08.380 You can spend more time with people who came here after they were born.

00:39:13.740 Well, I'm surrounded with, you know, lots of diversity in many ways, but not every way.

00:39:21.220 So, here's my line in the sand or my assertion.

00:39:28.620 The Republican view on immigration is a few years behind, and because of that, it's absurd.

00:39:38.820 It's absurd.

00:39:40.200 There is no way to increase natural birth rate.

00:39:45.040 Now, if somebody has a way that sounds good, then I would consider that, and I would also be willing to completely reverse my opinion.

00:39:54.460 Right?

00:39:55.000 If you said, Scott, Scott, Scott, it's kind of easy.

00:39:58.080 You just, all you have to do is change the financial incentive of marriage and kids, and governments can do that.

00:40:05.020 They can change tax rates and stuff like that.

00:40:07.260 So, you just do it.

00:40:08.960 You know that, right?

00:40:10.440 You just change the incentives and you're good to go.

00:40:12.720 Like Australia, right?

00:40:15.720 Australia did that.

00:40:17.080 So, Australia has, I think they still have this deal where they were trying to increase birth rate, and they offered $5,000 to have a baby and 18 months of leave, paid leave.

00:40:31.880 And do you know what happened when they offered a pretty solid financial incentive to have a baby?

00:40:38.000 What happened?

00:40:39.760 What happened?

00:40:41.900 No, birth went up.

00:40:43.700 Birth rate went up.

00:40:44.900 Do you know why it went up?

00:40:47.620 Because financial incentives work.

00:40:51.220 That's why.

00:40:52.860 Financial incentives work.

00:40:54.640 Do you know what happened next?

00:40:56.400 After it went way up, what happened next?

00:40:58.520 Just guess.

00:41:01.640 What happened next?

00:41:02.580 Kept going up?

00:41:04.600 Flattened out?

00:41:06.100 Or it went down?

00:41:08.520 Well, it turns out that you very quickly run through all of the people that care about $5,000.

00:41:16.940 That's it.

00:41:17.620 That's the whole story.

00:41:18.720 The total population of Australians who could be persuaded by $5,000 was, you know, this much.

00:41:25.840 And every one of them took the $5,000.

00:41:27.940 Do you know why?

00:41:29.780 Do you know why they took the $5,000?

00:41:33.560 We're going to have a baby anyway.

00:41:37.400 The government doesn't know if you changed your mind.

00:41:41.000 The government doesn't know you weren't going to have a baby and then you changed your mind because of the money.

00:41:45.420 It was just people who were going to have a baby anyway.

00:41:47.960 So they said, all right.

00:41:49.520 I was this close to having a baby anyway.

00:41:51.780 So I'll have it this year instead of next year.

00:41:54.500 Because if I knew I was going to have a baby next year or I wanted to, why wouldn't I do it this year when I can get paid?

00:42:01.400 Next year, I don't know.

00:42:02.440 This might go away.

00:42:03.160 So based on that story, do financial incentives work?

00:42:09.520 Yes or no?

00:42:10.880 Based on that story, do financial incentives work for increasing birth rate?

00:42:14.880 The answer is yes, unambiguously, they work.

00:42:20.020 This was just not enough, right?

00:42:22.420 So don't confuse whether it works with whether it wasn't enough to work.

00:42:27.640 Clearly, it wasn't enough to work.

00:42:29.940 Would you agree?

00:42:31.240 Suppose they had said, if you have a baby, we'll give you $50,000 a year for 18 years.

00:42:36.820 How many babies would people have? 1.00

00:42:39.520 Unlimited fucking babies. 1.00

00:42:41.840 Financial incentives work every time. 1.00

00:42:43.620 There's like no exception to that.

00:42:46.520 Every time.

00:42:47.520 The reason that the $5,000 didn't work, it just wasn't enough.

00:42:50.640 That's all.

00:42:51.580 All right.

00:42:52.880 If we can agree that financial incentives definitely work for raising the birth rate, why don't we do it?

00:43:02.100 Why don't we do it in America?

00:43:04.300 Because we can't afford to pay $50,000 per baby times 18 years.

00:43:08.580 Or anything close to it.

00:43:10.900 Or anything that would do more than what Australia did.

00:43:15.360 Let's say we said $20,000.

00:43:18.420 Let's say we just killed Australia in terms of incentives.

00:43:22.260 Australia, you failed at $5,000?

00:43:24.880 Watch this.

00:43:25.400 $20,000 to have a baby.

00:43:30.160 What would happen?

00:43:32.420 Everybody who was moved by $20,000 would have extra babies if they were going to do it anyway.

00:43:37.840 And then the next year, you would have run out of people who cared about $20,000 to have a baby.

00:43:43.140 Because you know what a baby costs? 1.00

00:43:44.980 A million fucking dollars. 1.00

00:43:46.180 All the people who are good at economics would say, $20,000? 1.00

00:43:53.260 Like, I'll do it if I was going to have a baby anyway, but I'm not going to have an extra baby to get $20,000 today and pay a million dollars over time.

00:44:03.500 Right?

00:44:03.920 So the only way you could get most people that have more babies is to basically pay for their college and their upbringing.

00:44:12.720 You'd have to guarantee free college, free food, free private schools, what else?

00:44:21.580 I don't know.

00:44:22.460 And they'd have to have rides back and forth without your trouble.

00:44:26.060 Anyway, how many of you accept my explanation that the current Republican view is absurd because the conditions changed but their opinion did not?

00:44:40.540 Who accepts that the Republican view is absurd?

00:44:47.500 Now, what would not be absurd is if they were offering what Australia was offering.

00:44:52.900 Right?

00:44:53.040 Now, if the Republicans were saying, let's close that border, but we'll do what Australia did, we'll offer $5,000, even though it didn't work, you know what I'd say about that?

00:45:05.140 Well, at least it's a plan.

00:45:07.260 See, that would be a difference between a plan that maybe doesn't have that much of a chance of working.

00:45:12.860 That's different.

00:45:14.280 I'm saying that the Republican view is absurd, that it doesn't even make sense.

00:45:19.480 It's not something you could evaluate because it's absurd.

00:45:23.040 I could evaluate $5,000 per new mother, and then I could say, well, you know, look at Australia.

00:45:30.400 That might suggest it won't work or it's not enough.

00:45:33.320 That's still rational.

00:45:35.340 You get that, right?

00:45:37.200 If the Republicans had an actual plan of any dollar amount, that would be a rational thing that you could say may or may not work.

00:45:45.900 But it's all rational.

00:45:47.560 At the moment, the Republicans have a view that's formed on something that doesn't exist.

00:45:54.260 It's based on assumptions that we all clearly know are not real.

00:45:57.400 I love watching the reactions to this.

00:46:02.160 This one's tough, isn't it?

00:46:03.960 Is anybody having a tough time with this one?

00:46:06.800 Has anybody developed a negative feeling about me in the last 10 minutes?

00:46:14.020 Because this is just too far for you to go.

00:46:16.800 The locals people are all friendly or so.

00:46:19.620 So, good.

00:46:23.160 It looks like my audience filtering is doing a good job, meaning I'm attracting people who can handle the costs and benefits, right?

00:46:32.780 I don't have to pretend I'm just on some team.

00:46:35.520 Good.

00:46:36.500 I applaud you.

00:46:37.820 Seriously.

00:46:38.500 By the way, I have great appreciation.

00:46:41.620 It's the end of the year, so I'm going to do more appreciation stuff.

00:46:45.040 I would like to say how much I appreciate that the people who have been drawn to me so far are very unusual.

00:46:53.520 You're not like the rest of the public. 0.99

00:46:55.340 And I'm not just blowing the smoke up your ass. 1.00

00:46:56.920 It's true. 1.00

00:46:57.360 It's obvious.

00:46:58.340 Do you think I could have gotten this reaction from the general public?

00:47:02.020 People were very...

00:47:04.100 This group was very accepting of something that's completely opposite of their worldview 10 minutes ago.

00:47:11.920 You handled that really well.

00:47:13.120 So that's a sincere compliment.

00:47:16.040 All right.

00:47:20.000 Let's see what else is going on.

00:47:22.380 Did you see the video clip of one of the Maricopa officials testifying in that Carrie Lake lawsuit where she's challenging the election result?

00:47:33.940 Well, and the Maricopa County attorney argues that part of the reason that there was a delay at the machines or a delay on Election Day was certainly part of it was some machines didn't work.

00:47:50.520 And the process had some problems. 0.95

00:47:51.520 But the Maricopa County attorney argues that voters who waited until Election Day to vote, when they knew they had the option of voting remotely, if they all waited, if too many of them waited until Election Day, it was their own damn fault. 0.75

00:48:09.060 Well, just let that sink in.

00:48:13.960 He said that in public without being embarrassed.

00:48:18.960 Now, I get the point, like, we all get the point, right?

00:48:24.860 It's true that if Republicans had played the game the same as Democrats, maybe we would have gotten a different outcome.

00:48:32.860 He is, however, ignoring the lack of trust in the mail-in ballot process, completely ignoring that.

00:48:40.040 So Republicans had a reason.

00:48:41.040 So Republicans had a reason. 0.94

00:48:42.040 It wasn't stupid. 0.98

00:48:44.040 They had their reason for voting on Election Day. 0.93

00:48:48.040 Now, it didn't work out.

00:48:50.040 It didn't work out.

00:48:51.040 But they had a reason.

00:48:52.040 So again, this is a rational decision. 0.98

00:48:55.040 And I don't know I could be more insulted than this guy's opinion that it was their own damn fault that they voted on Election Day. 0.98

00:49:07.040 On Election Day. 1.00

00:49:09.040 It was their own damn fault. 1.00

00:49:11.040 Because they voted on the day that people vote. 1.00

00:49:13.040 On Election Day.

00:49:15.040 Now, what does that look like to you?

00:49:19.040 Like, why does a guy say that in public?

00:49:22.040 Can he not tell?

00:49:23.040 Does he not know how that sounds?

00:49:26.040 Do you think that's what's happening?

00:49:28.040 He actually couldn't tell what that sounded like to other people.

00:49:32.040 What?

00:49:34.040 All right.

00:49:36.040 All right.

00:49:37.040 So I guess we're going to the decision now.

00:49:39.040 The judge is deliberating with himself, or however that works.

00:49:43.040 And so the judge will have a decision pretty soon.

00:49:47.040 When do we expect a decision?

00:49:49.040 Before Christmas?

00:49:51.040 Needs five days, somebody said.

00:49:55.040 All right.

00:49:56.040 So maybe next week after Christmas.

00:49:58.040 All right.

00:49:59.040 Based on what you saw, if you're following this, for the people who followed the trial, what do you think will be the outcome?

00:50:08.040 Will it be something that addresses Carrie Lake's concerns, which would include either reversing it or holding another election?

00:50:18.040 Or will they say, oh, you made some good points, but I'm not going to change anything?

00:50:26.040 I feel like nothing's going to happen.

00:50:29.040 Don't you?

00:50:31.040 Does anybody think something surprising is going to happen there?

00:50:36.040 Now, the reason I say that is because while problems have been discovered, I don't think they found a smoking gun, did they?

00:50:46.040 The smoking gun would be like a memo that says, make sure you change these ballots so they don't work.

00:50:53.040 But as far as I know, nothing was demonstrated for intent.

00:50:56.040 Am I right?

00:50:58.040 There's no demonstration of intent?

00:51:01.040 Did anybody see it?

00:51:03.040 We've seen obfuscation, yes.

00:51:08.040 We've seen them answering questions like weasels and avoiding questions.

00:51:13.040 So we've seen all manner of weaselish behavior. 0.97

00:51:16.040 But that would be common to any, you know, government entity.

00:51:20.040 So weasely behavior is just that sort of baseline.

00:51:23.040 But am I wrong that they didn't demonstrate intent?

00:51:27.040 And if no intent has been demonstrated, it's not even in evidence, is it?

00:51:32.040 I don't believe any evidence was even presented of intent, was it?

00:51:36.040 So what I'm talking about is how the trial will end, but I saw your comment.

00:51:47.040 Yes, governments are guilty until proven innocent.

00:51:50.040 That's the way we should treat it, exactly.

00:51:53.040 But the court is not operating on that basis.

00:51:57.040 Yeah.

00:51:58.040 Now, I believe there's also a difference in fact, right?

00:52:04.040 I believe the right believes that the facts are there were lots of machines affected.

00:52:09.040 And I believe that the left believes that the testimony showed it was only a few.

00:52:14.040 Did I, am I perceiving that right?

00:52:18.040 That everybody who's a Republican believes it's been demonstrated that like lots of machines were affected.

00:52:25.040 But the Democrats, based on information that came out of the trial, would believe it was only a few.

00:52:31.040 I don't know which is, I don't know which is true.

00:52:34.040 So I'm not saying what's true.

00:52:36.040 I'm saying, is that the beliefs of the two groups?

00:52:39.040 That's accurate, right?

00:52:41.040 The, the two, two movies, two different realities.

00:52:44.040 One thinks lots of machines were affected, and the other says it was just a few.

00:52:49.040 Yeah.

00:52:50.040 Now, the presumed tampering, I don't think that's a strong point.

00:52:53.040 Because, you know, I heard the point is, only, it would have to be an administrator who did it.

00:52:59.040 Therefore, it had to be intentional.

00:53:01.040 Does that make sense to you?

00:53:03.040 Does that logically hold?

00:53:04.040 It had to be an administrator.

00:53:06.040 Therefore, it had to be intentional.

00:53:09.040 In what world does that make sense?

00:53:11.040 In what world is that logical?

00:53:15.040 We know somebody did it, therefore you know his intention.

00:53:18.040 That doesn't track.

00:53:20.040 If you know somebody did something, the only thing you know is they did something.

00:53:24.040 That's not a sign of intention.

00:53:27.040 You'd need a lot more than that.

00:53:29.040 Because an accident would look just like that, right?

00:53:32.040 Have you ever, have you ever unintentionally clicked the wrong box on a user interface?

00:53:37.040 Everybody has, right?

00:53:39.040 If the accidental hypothesis is still alive, that's all you can do, right?

00:53:50.040 Now, I'm not saying that there was no crime here.

00:53:54.040 And I'm not saying that there was no intent.

00:53:56.040 I'm asking you if the trial demonstrated it.

00:53:59.040 Did they meet the burden of proof?

00:54:01.040 I don't think they did.

00:54:02.040 Did they?

00:54:03.040 I haven't seen it.

00:54:05.040 So, I'll confess I'm not fully informed about all the ins and outs of the trial.

00:54:10.040 But nothing, I'm seeing somebody say I'm factually wrong.

00:54:16.040 Well, what's, what's the, what's the wrong part?

00:54:23.040 What's the wrong part?

00:54:24.040 Because I'm only talking about what evidence was presented.

00:54:30.040 I'm not talking about what's true.

00:54:33.040 So you don't know if I'm wrong about what's true because you haven't heard it, that opinion.

00:54:39.040 They try to establish doubt, not intent.

00:54:42.040 Is that how it works?

00:54:45.040 Do you think the judge would say, well, I don't know if they had intent or not, therefore

00:54:50.040 we'll act as if they did?

00:54:52.040 That doesn't seem like a strong argument.

00:54:55.040 I think, I think if you don't find intent, you didn't find the crime.

00:54:59.040 It has to be that.

00:55:00.040 I mean, that's innocent until proven guilty, right?

00:55:05.040 Is there a pattern of disregarding for the truth?

00:55:09.040 Well, that doesn't help.

00:55:12.040 Oh, that's what they tried to achieve is a, is a reasonable doubt.

00:55:16.040 Now, was there argument that if there's reasonable doubt, that's enough reason to redo the election?

00:55:22.040 Is the argument that, okay.

00:55:26.040 So the argument would be a substantial public doubt in the outcome would require a redo.

00:55:33.040 Just the existence of obviously questionable activities, but not proof of intent.

00:55:39.040 Does that seem like a strong case to you?

00:55:44.040 It doesn't to me.

00:55:46.040 Because the court is always going to weigh upsetting the system versus justice, right?

00:55:54.040 Justice isn't the only thing that they're trying to do.

00:55:57.040 The judge will also try to protect the system, because that's the bigger interest.

00:56:01.040 And I think the interest of the system is to move on.

00:56:04.040 I hate to say it.

00:56:06.040 Because I don't like that.

00:56:08.040 Like, that's, that's not my preference.

00:56:11.040 If there's a problem, I'd like to, you know, root it out.

00:56:14.040 But I think, unfortunately, I think we've already moved on.

00:56:18.040 And the courts just say, well, you know, if nothing fell apart so far, let's not break something.

00:56:25.040 So I saw Mark Elias, famous attorney on the Democrat side.

00:56:33.040 And he knows what he's talking about, I think.

00:56:35.040 And he predicted that, that the lawsuit will amount to nothing.

00:56:40.040 And I had to retweet him.

00:56:42.040 I mean, I didn't want to do it, but I had to retweet him and agree with him.

00:56:45.040 I didn't, didn't see it.

00:56:47.040 I didn't see the, the way they could win.

00:56:50.040 But I could be wrong.

00:56:52.040 Now, is the judge a Republican or Democrat?

00:56:55.040 I think somebody said Republican.

00:57:00.040 Do we now?

00:57:01.040 Or, or appointed by judges Republican, somebody says.

00:57:06.040 Do you think that will matter?

00:57:09.040 Do you think a Republican judge would see some intent or, or think that the system, I guess intent isn't really the question.

00:57:17.040 Do you think a Republican judge would say, yes, let's, let's throw out the result?

00:57:23.040 I don't know.

00:57:26.040 I'm going to bet against it.

00:57:27.040 I could be wrong on this one, but I'm going to bet against it.

00:57:30.040 Um, when I talked about the omnibus bill, where they throw all the different bills into one big bill so that nobody's responsible for anything.

00:57:42.040 Um, when I complained about Congress not doing his job, I got pushed back on Twitter.

00:57:48.040 Well, Trump didn't do anything about it.

00:57:51.040 What do you make of that?

00:57:54.040 I criticized Congress as a group that obviously includes both Republicans and Democrats.

00:58:00.040 And the pushback I got is Trump didn't reject any of the bills.

00:58:04.040 So he ran up the debt too.

00:58:06.040 Did it sound like I was defending Trump?

00:58:09.040 Like, that's a different conversation.

00:58:12.040 But as long as we're on that conversation, um, my view is that Biden and Trump and our prior presidents are all the same on this.

00:58:21.040 Because Congress traps them such that it's, you know, the last minute.

00:58:27.040 And if the president doesn't sign this big abortion of a bill, then it looks like the president's fault.

00:58:33.040 So you do that to a Republican, they do what they have to do.

00:58:36.040 You do it to a Democrat, they do what they have to do.

00:58:38.040 So to me, yes, you could extend the argument to say that Trump didn't fix it.

00:58:45.040 Granted.

00:58:46.040 And Biden didn't fix it.

00:58:48.040 Granted.

00:58:49.040 And nobody fixed it.

00:58:51.040 But maybe there's a reason.

00:58:52.040 It's because it's unfixable at the presidential level.

00:58:55.040 If Congress wants to trap them, to give them something, you know, they just can't say no to because the public will wonder why the lights went off.

00:59:05.040 What are they going to do?

00:59:07.040 So if we don't change the incentive, don't blame the president.

00:59:11.040 Republican or Democrat.

00:59:13.040 Don't blame Biden.

00:59:14.040 Can't blame Biden.

00:59:16.040 Now, is it practical?

00:59:18.040 Now, this is another one of those Republican cognitive dissonance problems.

00:59:24.040 So I believe the Republicans have an absurd view of this omnibus.

00:59:29.040 If they believe that the president should have vetoed it.

00:59:33.040 Or that Trump would have.

00:59:35.040 Right?

00:59:36.040 That's sort of absurd.

00:59:37.040 Once the president gets trapped, they just do what all trapped people do.

00:59:40.040 It's not going to change.

00:59:44.040 All right.

00:59:46.040 And I said you shouldn't judge them.

00:59:48.040 And one of the fascinating things about Twitter, as I often point out, is that I never know who's paying attention.

00:59:56.040 So I got a response from Justin Amash, who's recently retired from Congress.

01:00:02.040 Independent, I believe.

01:00:04.040 And he said that you should rank the presidents on this dimension.

01:00:09.040 Because a president can shape what gets to his desk.

01:00:12.040 So in other words, the president can say, don't send me anything I'm not going to sign.

01:00:17.040 And that that would effectively empower the president.

01:00:20.040 What do you think?

01:00:21.040 Is that real?

01:00:23.040 That the president can say, I won't sign this.

01:00:25.040 So don't even send it to me.

01:00:27.040 That's not going to work in the real world.

01:00:30.040 No.

01:00:31.040 You don't think anybody would have thought of that before?

01:00:35.040 Seriously.

01:00:36.040 Nobody thought of that.

01:00:37.040 There was no president who ever said, I've got an idea.

01:00:40.040 I'll just tell them to send me something I can sign.

01:00:44.040 Problem solved.

01:00:46.040 You don't think anybody thought of that?

01:00:49.040 Come on.

01:00:51.040 It is purely absurd to imagine that the president can fix that.

01:00:55.040 It's absurd.

01:00:57.040 It's not right or wrong.

01:00:59.040 It's absurd.

01:01:02.040 Now, okay.

01:01:04.040 Reagan did it.

01:01:06.040 Reagan did it.

01:01:07.040 Did he?

01:01:09.040 So Reagan brought down the debt?

01:01:13.040 So Reagan reduced the debt?

01:01:15.040 No, he didn't.

01:01:17.040 No, he didn't.

01:01:18.040 He basically agreed to sign something he shouldn't have signed,

01:01:21.040 something that raised the debt, because he didn't want to do that.

01:01:24.040 Like, he made it look like, maybe he made it look that way,

01:01:28.040 but I think Congress sent him what they could send him,

01:01:30.040 and it's always going to be that way.

01:01:32.040 Newt did it.

01:01:33.040 Newt did it.

01:01:37.040 Do you think it could be done today?

01:01:40.040 I'm going to reject all of your historical precedents,

01:01:44.040 because I don't think that today's environment allows anybody to work together in that fashion.

01:01:50.040 Because I think in Reagan's day, people still worked together.

01:01:54.040 And Reagan actually was nice to Democrats, wasn't he?

01:01:58.040 Like, he would say funny, insulting things about leftists.

01:02:01.040 But he was basically very polite, and I think he worked well with Democrats.

01:02:06.040 We don't have that.

01:02:08.040 We don't have that.

01:02:09.040 So to imagine that we could do what they did in those days

01:02:14.040 is to ignore that everything's changed in terms of how the media has split us.

01:02:19.040 Mostly the media.

01:02:21.040 All right, so I don't think that Congress will change

01:02:25.040 no matter what threats they get from the president.

01:02:27.040 Because what would Congress care about?

01:02:29.040 Does Congress care if he doesn't sign it?

01:02:32.040 Not really, because then it's the president's problem.

01:02:35.040 And they're like, well, we tried.

01:02:38.040 We gave you a bill.

01:02:39.040 You didn't sign it.

01:02:40.040 That's on you.

01:02:44.040 Here's a logic test that turned into more than a logic test.

01:02:50.040 I noted that people can't tell the difference

01:02:54.040 between things that have already happened

01:02:56.040 and things that might happen in the future.

01:02:59.040 Now, as weird as that sounds,

01:03:01.040 like that doesn't even sound like any human has that kind of thought process.

01:03:06.040 But when I ask somebody, what is the bigger risk,

01:03:09.040 fentanyl coming into the country now,

01:03:12.040 or the risk that Russia would nuke the United States?

01:03:16.040 And I say, it's a logic test.

01:03:18.040 Compare those two risks.

01:03:20.040 And a number of people alarmingly said to me,

01:03:23.040 Russia's nuclear weapons have killed zero Americans.

01:03:28.040 Fentanyl has killed lots of them.

01:03:30.040 Therefore, fentanyl is more dangerous.

01:03:33.040 How many would agree with that?

01:03:35.040 Fentanyl has killed lots and will continue to.

01:03:38.040 Russian nukes have killed nobody.

01:03:40.040 Therefore, Russian nukes are not a risk.

01:03:43.040 And fentanyl's a big risk.

01:03:46.040 People are agreeing with that.

01:03:48.040 All right.

01:03:49.040 So for the people agreeing with it,

01:03:50.040 you're comparing a real thing to a risk.

01:03:54.040 And you know that's absurd, right?

01:03:56.040 It's absurd to compare a real thing,

01:03:59.040 real deaths from fentanyl,

01:04:00.040 to a potential risk that you don't really know

01:04:03.040 if it'll happen or not.

01:04:04.040 Now, there's a technique for doing it.

01:04:07.040 And the technique is called expected value, right?

01:04:11.040 I try to teach you this every now and then.

01:04:14.040 Now, an expected value calculation would be like this.

01:04:17.040 Let's say you said there's a 1% chance 0.54

01:04:20.040 that Putin would kill 100 million Americans.

01:04:24.040 1% chance. 0.99

01:04:27.040 1%.

01:04:28.040 But that would be a million people

01:04:30.040 if you multiplied 1% times 100 million.

01:04:33.040 And this is called an expected value calculation.

01:04:36.040 This is how you compare a risk that hasn't happened

01:04:39.040 to another risk that hasn't happened.

01:04:41.040 Or even one that you know the risk.

01:04:43.040 All right.

01:04:44.040 It's the same thing.

01:04:46.040 So the way you would compare it is,

01:04:48.040 if you imagine there's a 1% risk,

01:04:50.040 you say, well, I would value that as a million deaths,

01:04:53.040 plus, you know, whatever the long-term consequences.

01:04:57.040 And fentanyl, you could say, well,

01:04:59.040 there's probably 75,000 dead this year.

01:05:02.040 Nothing's changing.

01:05:04.040 75,000 next year.

01:05:06.040 So my guess is that fentanyl will kill a million Americans

01:05:10.040 before we figure out some way to reduce it, right?

01:05:14.040 So I would rate the risk of fentanyl over the next several years

01:05:18.040 as one million American deaths.

01:05:20.040 I would rate the risk of nuclear war very low.

01:05:24.040 Very low.

01:05:25.040 1%.

01:05:26.040 And the 1% would be some kind of weird miscalculations 0.94

01:05:31.040 and misunderstandings and accidents.

01:05:33.040 And, you know, somebody saw something on radar that wasn't there.

01:05:36.040 You know, just an accident, basically.

01:05:38.040 Because no rational person would launch a nuclear war.

01:05:41.040 But, so let's say I think it's 1%.

01:05:43.040 So those would be equal.

01:05:45.040 Same risk.

01:05:47.040 Now, if you said fentanyl is killing real people

01:05:52.040 and Putin will never use his nukes,

01:05:56.040 that's not really rational.

01:05:59.040 Because you know what else Putin would never do?

01:06:02.040 Invade Ukraine. 0.99

01:06:05.040 An enormous miscalculation.

01:06:08.040 So is there a risk that the guy who just made

01:06:12.040 an enormous military miscalculation,

01:06:15.040 it just happened?

01:06:17.040 Is he a person who could make another giant military miscalculation?

01:06:22.040 Well, I would say the evidence suggests

01:06:25.040 he's a guy who makes massive military miscalculations.

01:06:28.040 Yes.

01:06:29.040 He does that.

01:06:31.040 So if you think the odds of a nuclear skirmish

01:06:35.040 with the United States,

01:06:36.040 while there's a hot war with the United States

01:06:39.040 and while mainland Russia is being attacked by our proxy,

01:06:44.040 like Ukraine is actually attacking bases and depots

01:06:49.040 and stuff inside Russia.

01:06:51.040 If you don't think that gives you any risk

01:06:53.040 of a nuclear miscalculation,

01:06:56.040 I don't know that that's good thinking.

01:06:59.040 You can say it's less than 1%.

01:07:01.040 But if you think it's zero,

01:07:03.040 you know, it's hard to back that.

01:07:07.040 All right.

01:07:08.040 But there was a more alarming thing that I realized

01:07:14.040 as I was asking this question,

01:07:15.040 which has nothing to do with that specific risk-reward thing.

01:07:19.040 It goes like this.

01:07:21.040 This is going to make you really mad.

01:07:24.040 Have you noticed that the news stopped talking

01:07:26.040 about nuclear war with Russia?

01:07:28.040 Just sort of stopped talking about it.

01:07:31.040 And have you noticed that the odds of it are actually higher?

01:07:35.040 Because the war has continued.

01:07:37.040 It's, you know, Russia's losing.

01:07:38.040 It looks like some dispute that.

01:07:41.040 And there are attacks on their territory

01:07:44.040 and their economy is crashing

01:07:46.040 and it doesn't look like they have a path out.

01:07:49.040 It doesn't look like there's a way out.

01:07:51.040 So he's desperate.

01:07:53.040 He miscalculates. 0.99

01:07:54.040 He's going to be dead soon. 0.69

01:07:56.040 Pretty dangerous situation.

01:07:59.040 But why is it that the media stopped talking about nuclear war?

01:08:04.040 Because remember in the beginning, that was all the talk, right?

01:08:07.040 It's like, oh, he might be pushed into launching the nukes.

01:08:11.040 Right?

01:08:12.040 Stopped.

01:08:13.040 Why did it stop?

01:08:17.040 There's only one reason.

01:08:19.040 Yes.

01:08:20.040 Yes.

01:08:21.040 American intelligence services

01:08:24.040 have asked the media to stop talking about nuclear war.

01:08:28.040 Because they can't get enough public support to, you know, fund Ukraine

01:08:33.040 if the public thinks that that will lead to a nuclear war. 0.98

01:08:36.040 It just fucking stopped. 0.95

01:08:39.040 The reason that people said they weren't worried about nuclear war with Russia 0.99

01:08:44.040 is because the media assigned that opinion to them.

01:08:47.040 There's no evidence that would support that opinion.

01:08:50.040 The media stopped talking about it and the people said,

01:08:52.040 well, I guess there's no risk there.

01:08:55.040 How many of you noticed before I brought it up that the nuclear war talk went to zero?

01:09:01.040 Who noticed that?

01:09:03.040 It didn't do it by itself.

01:09:05.040 The news never stops talking about danger if it's like real and present

01:09:09.040 and it's related to the story.

01:09:11.040 You're telling me that the news suddenly doesn't care about scaring its audience

01:09:16.040 so they'll click more?

01:09:18.040 Like suddenly they've abandoned their business model of scaring you.

01:09:23.040 Just on this.

01:09:25.040 That didn't happen.

01:09:26.040 No.

01:09:27.040 This is clearly the government's thumb on the media saying,

01:09:30.040 like, just back off on the nuclear stuff.

01:09:32.040 Because we've got a lot of weapons to put into Ukraine

01:09:35.040 and you're not helping us at all.

01:09:37.040 Am I right?

01:09:39.040 Does anybody disagree that we must be seeing massive brainwashing happening right now?

01:09:46.040 Now, here's the tough part.

01:09:48.040 Here's the tough part.

01:09:50.040 Do I think we shouldn't be doing it?

01:09:53.040 No.

01:09:54.040 I think we should.

01:09:56.040 Because you have to brainwash your own public to be effective in international affairs.

01:10:01.040 It's just a requirement of being effective, unfortunately.

01:10:05.040 So it's definitely happening and it definitely has to happen.

01:10:10.040 And I would say they're doing a good job.

01:10:12.040 They are actually convincing us that that risk is low.

01:10:15.040 Now, I don't think that's terribly dishonest

01:10:18.040 because I do think the risk legitimately is in the 1% range.

01:10:22.040 But 1% is still a lot when you're talking about nuclear war.

01:10:26.040 Still a lot.

01:10:28.040 Yeah.

01:10:29.040 All right.

01:10:31.040 We know now that, this is in evidence,

01:10:35.040 that Twitter was working with our intel people, our military intel,

01:10:41.040 and they were colluding to use fake accounts to influence other countries.

01:10:47.040 That's a real thing.

01:10:50.040 Now, do you think that applies to TikTok?

01:10:53.040 By the way, I think I conflated my TikTok and my fentanyl conversation.

01:10:59.040 There's a reason for that.

01:11:00.040 It's because I called it digital fentanyl, so they get conflated.

01:11:04.040 But the argument is the same.

01:11:07.040 All right.

01:11:09.040 All right.

01:11:10.040 Well, we know that TikTok, and ByteDance is their owner,

01:11:14.040 they have confessed that they were tracking Forbes journalists

01:11:19.040 as part of a covert surveillance campaign

01:11:21.040 because the Forbes journalists were saying bad things about TikTok.

01:11:25.040 And so they used their private information to surveil them.

01:11:30.040 TikTok did that.

01:11:32.040 Now, so we know that our government uses an American social media network,

01:11:40.040 probably all of them, but we know one for sure, to influence other countries.

01:11:46.040 And yet we allow China to provide TikTok in this country when the most obvious thing in the world is that they're doing what we're doing, 0.82

01:11:57.040 and we see an actual confirmed example where they were surveilling American journalists.

01:12:03.040 Exactly what people were worried about.

01:12:05.040 Confirmed.

01:12:06.040 Exactly what we were worried about.

01:12:09.040 Now, tell me again why TikTok hasn't already been banned in the United States.

01:12:15.040 Literally nobody in government is on the side of keeping them.

01:12:19.040 Nobody.

01:12:20.040 But not banned.

01:12:22.040 How do you explain that other than the government is simply not doing what we pay them to do?

01:12:28.040 They're not saying no, and they're not saying yes to the biggest risk that I can see.

01:12:36.040 Right?

01:12:37.040 If they said, here's our bad argument for why, I'd say, well, I don't like that argument, but at least you did your work.

01:12:43.040 But they're not even saying no.

01:12:45.040 They're not saying yes to ban it.

01:12:47.040 They're not saying no.

01:12:48.040 They've just put it in a committee to talk about forever until the next administration, I guess.

01:12:57.040 Scott's perception whispering is great thought vaccinating.

01:13:02.040 Okay.

01:13:06.040 TikTok ban on government devices is in the omnibus.

01:13:10.040 On government devices.

01:13:12.040 Yeah, banning it on government devices is like 1% of the problem.

01:13:16.040 Good.

01:13:17.040 It's good.

01:13:18.040 Yeah.

01:13:19.040 I'll accept that because it shows that they're thinking right.

01:13:22.040 But it also shows that they understand the risk and they've decided not to deal with it.

01:13:28.040 Right?

01:13:29.040 If they're banning it on government systems, they understand the risk.

01:13:33.040 But if they're not banning it for the public, it means they're choosing not to work on it.

01:13:39.040 They're choosing not to work on it.

01:13:41.040 I assume the reason is they would lose voters.

01:13:43.040 Can you think of another reason?

01:13:45.040 They would lose young voters, but also they would lose their own way to influence people through TikTok. 0.74

01:13:52.040 Yeah.

01:13:54.040 So I said this the other day.

01:14:01.040 I'm not positive it's true, but it feels true.

01:14:04.040 That if everything you think, if everything Trump has been accused of, let's say in just the last two years, if it's all true, whatever's the worst thing about him, if it's all true, he would still be the least corrupt person running for president.

01:14:21.040 Here's my argument.

01:14:25.040 Is it my imagination that all of the systemic corruption is Democrats?

01:14:32.040 Because every example seems to be Democrats. 0.98

01:14:35.040 Give me an example of a Republican, Republican systemic, like, you know, they're all rotten. 0.79

01:14:43.040 Like the way we imagine the FBI is all rotten. 0.61

01:14:46.040 Or Twitter was rotten.

01:14:49.040 Now, don't go back to Watergate.

01:14:51.040 You have to stay today.

01:14:52.040 You have to stay today.

01:14:53.040 You have to stay today.

01:14:54.040 So only current events.

01:14:55.040 Don't go into history.

01:14:57.040 Only current events.

01:14:58.040 Where are the Republicans clearly corrupt?

01:15:04.040 Not as individuals, but like collectively working together.

01:15:12.040 Are you saying the omnibus, but I think that's just incompetence and hiding.

01:15:17.040 That doesn't feel like.

01:15:19.040 See, I'm talking about stuff that only Republicans are doing.

01:15:23.040 So don't tell me about stuff that all the Congress is doing as a whole, like the omnibus.

01:15:28.040 So I'll get you, I will stipulate that that's not good work by the Republicans.

01:15:34.040 Can we stipulate that?

01:15:36.040 Stipulate that the Republicans failed the country or their party on the omnibus.

01:15:41.040 I think that's clear.

01:15:42.040 Stipulated.

01:15:43.040 They failed their party.

01:15:46.040 Yeah.

01:15:47.040 All right.

01:15:49.040 Well, here's what I think about Trump.

01:15:52.040 You know, his tax returns seem to be a big nothing so far.

01:15:57.040 All that foreign Russian stuff he was accused of seems to be nothing.

01:16:02.040 They've interviewed everybody that knows him in any way whatsoever to find out if he did

01:16:07.040 anything wrong.

01:16:08.040 And unless there's something that comes up that puts him in jail the next six months,

01:16:13.040 he'll be the most vetted person.

01:16:16.040 But also he would be, hypothetically, the leader of the Republican Party, which recently

01:16:23.040 doesn't have any scandals.

01:16:25.040 Am I missing any scandals?

01:16:28.040 Am I just forgetting something?

01:16:30.040 Like, am I biased?

01:16:32.040 Do I have, like, mental blindness to something that they've done?

01:16:35.040 They've failed, but that's different.

01:16:38.040 Failing is different than running, like, a corrupt conspiracy.

01:16:45.040 Mitch McConnell.

01:16:46.040 So some people say Mitch McConnell is too friendly to China, but I'm not sure there's

01:16:52.040 any smoking gun to that.

01:16:53.040 Is there some specific thing he did?

01:16:56.040 Maybe there is.

01:16:57.040 So that was hard to tell because, you know, there are a lot of variables in that stuff.

01:17:04.040 Matt Gaetz, fake scandal, yeah.

01:17:08.040 But when Republicans, hear me out.

01:17:13.040 True or false, when Republicans get in trouble, it's usually that one Republican who did something

01:17:19.040 bad.

01:17:20.040 When Democrats get caught, there's like a whole conspiracy going on.

01:17:24.040 Like, from, you know, Hillary Clinton, to the Democrats, to the FBI, the Department of

01:17:29.040 Justice, the intel organizations.

01:17:31.040 There's nothing on the Republican side like that, right?

01:17:35.040 Is that true?

01:17:36.040 There's nothing on the Republican side that's anywhere near anything like that.

01:17:39.040 So, if Trump is totally vetted and they don't find any crime, just whatever sketchiness you

01:17:47.040 already know about is true, you know, so you take Trump University into consideration,

01:17:52.040 you just consider every bad thing he's done and every bad thing he's currently being accused

01:17:57.040 of, not the past, but currently.

01:17:59.040 If all of it's true, he's the cleanest candidate that would be in the race.

01:18:05.040 Because the other ones would be Democrats, right?

01:18:07.040 Now, if you said, well, what about DeSantis?

01:18:10.040 I'll give you that, but I don't think he's running.

01:18:12.040 If he runs, then I'll revise my opinion, right?

01:18:15.040 But, I think it's going to be Trump against the Democrats and he would be the least corrupt

01:18:21.040 choice.

01:18:22.040 Now, I don't support him for president.

01:18:25.040 You know, let me be clear about that.

01:18:28.040 Because of age, right? 0.80

01:18:30.040 I've said it forever and I'm not going to be a hypocrite. 0.93

01:18:33.040 I've said it forever.

01:18:35.040 There's some age that's too old and now he's crossing into that territory.

01:18:39.040 Now, could I change my mind?

01:18:42.040 Yes.

01:18:43.040 Here's how.

01:18:44.040 Number one, if he gets nominated anyway and he's running against somebody who's clearly 0.96

01:18:48.040 a loser, well, what are you going to do?

01:18:51.040 And if there are no obvious signs of age-related problems, you know, if he goes through a grueling 0.98

01:18:57.040 election circuit and he still looks fine, I still don't think you should have a president

01:19:04.040 that age because things happen quickly, but I'd have to rethink my position.

01:19:09.040 I would rethink my position.

01:19:11.040 I would also rethink it if he was the first one that came up with an actual workable fentanyl

01:19:16.040 plan.

01:19:18.040 If Trump comes up with a fentanyl plan and nobody else does and it sounds like it could

01:19:22.040 work, then he has my full support.

01:19:26.040 I don't think he's going to do it and the reason is that it would sound too scary because

01:19:31.040 the only thing you can do is basically send the military into Mexico.

01:19:35.040 There's nothing else you can do.

01:19:37.040 I don't think there's another way to do it.

01:19:40.040 And I don't think Trump can say that out loud because it's going to sound like he wants

01:19:44.040 to attack a brown country as usual. 1.00

01:19:47.040 All right.

01:19:48.040 So that's where I get accused of supporting Trump, even though I don't, because I could.

01:19:57.040 You know, whatever you say about Trump, his positives still remain.

01:20:02.040 Like, you know, he added a lot of negatives around January 6th and with his treatment of

01:20:07.040 the election, et cetera.

01:20:08.040 So he's added a lot of negatives, but most of his positives didn't change.

01:20:13.040 The things he can add to the process are still there.

01:20:19.040 Don't take the bait.

01:20:20.040 Which bait?

01:20:29.040 All right.

01:20:31.040 I wonder if he were thinner, would it make a difference?

01:20:33.040 Yes, it would.

01:20:35.040 But he would look older.

01:20:37.040 So Trump would have a disadvantage on TV, I think, if he lost weight.

01:20:42.040 Because you look older, you know, the weight covers some wrinkles and stuff.

01:20:49.040 I regret not buying a Trump card, so do I.

01:20:52.040 So in retrospect, I guess that Trump NFT was a...

01:20:56.040 I wish I'd bought one.

01:20:59.040 That's true.

01:21:05.040 Has he lost weight?

01:21:06.040 Probably.

01:21:07.040 Yeah.

01:21:08.040 I think he probably did lose weight.

01:21:10.040 I think it's easier to lose weight when you're not running, when you're not present.

01:21:17.040 All right.

01:21:18.040 That's all for now, YouTube.

01:21:20.040 I'll talk to you later.

01:21:21.040 And I'm going to spend a little more time with my local subscribers.

01:21:25.040 And we'll see you tomorrow.

01:21:27.040 Probably the best live stream you've seen forever.

01:21:30.040 I think we're waiting for you tomorrow.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - December 23, 2022

Episode 1966 Scott Adams： I Explain How The J6 HOAX Is Being Played On American Public, & Lots More

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript