Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2227 Scott Adams： News, Coffee And Persuasion

00:00:00.000 Why is this in the way? We can fix that. There we go. Looking better right now.

00:00:16.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.

00:00:21.000 If you'd like to take this experience up a few notches, well, this is the place to do it.

00:00:26.000 And all you need is a cup or mug or a glass of tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:33.000 Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.

00:00:36.000 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:43.000 It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now. Go.

00:00:47.000 If you are on YouTube right now and you're saying to yourself, hey, why can't I comment?

00:00:57.000 It's because it occurred to me that the commenters were not organic.

00:01:06.000 It didn't look like organic people.

00:01:08.000 It looked like a bunch of people coming over to say anti-Semitic things, which probably had something to do with depressing my channel.

00:01:17.000 So on YouTube, you can't make a comment, but it's streaming simultaneously on the locals platform.

00:01:25.000 I'll make it private after we're done because I talk to the subscribers privately.

00:01:30.000 But you can also watch it on Twitter right now. It's live streaming at the same time.

00:01:36.000 So if you go to my Scott Adams says profile, you should see it right up there at the top.

00:01:41.000 Streaming live. So YouTube, too many bad people were commenting, so you don't have an option there.

00:01:48.000 All right. Speaking of bad people, Amazon shows my hardcover book being out of stock.

00:01:56.000 That is probably not the case.

00:01:59.000 Now, why I'm having so much trouble doing the simplest thing in the world,

00:02:04.000 which is listing a book on Amazon.com and selling it, well, I will leave that to your speculation.

00:02:10.000 It has nothing to do with the fact that I have a political presence, I'm sure.

00:02:17.000 No, actually, in 2023, you have to assume that anything that you suspect is true.

00:02:23.000 So it doesn't mean it is true.

00:02:26.000 But whenever there's anything that looks sketchy and it's not transparent,

00:02:30.000 you can't really tell what's going on and what isn't, assume it's just as bad as you think.

00:02:35.000 And you'll be right about 75% of the time.

00:02:38.000 All right.

00:02:43.000 Let's talk about the news.

00:02:45.000 There's a gigantic lithium discovery in the Nevada-Oregon border.

00:02:50.000 And apparently it would be the biggest one in the world.

00:02:56.000 So you remember you were all worried about running out of lithium?

00:03:01.000 And do you remember that Elon Musk once casually said, there's plenty of lithium.

00:03:07.000 You're not going to run out.

00:03:09.000 Do you remember that?

00:03:11.000 And we all thought, no, no, all the news is telling me we're running out.

00:03:16.000 How could this one person, this Elon Musk guy we've never heard of, why does he think we might have plenty of it?

00:03:23.000 Well, it turns out the world is just full of it.

00:03:26.000 It's more of a mining problem.

00:03:28.000 But we'll see if we can make a difference there with this new finding, if it's real.

00:03:35.000 It's a preliminary report, so it may not be as big as they hope, but it looks like it's promising.

00:03:41.000 So I saw, speaking of Elon, a lot of the news is about Elon Musk today.

00:03:45.000 I saw him talking about his robot business, you know, the Tesla robots, which he sure will work.

00:03:53.000 Like, he doesn't have any doubt that they can build a proper robot that's got, I guess, AI and some lithium batteries, probably, that last a long time.

00:04:05.000 So, but here's what Elon said, that I think I said the same thing earlier, not that I beat him to it, it was just sort of an obvious thing.

00:04:15.000 That if his robots work, and he believes they will, and so do I, it will be his biggest business.

00:04:25.000 That the robots are the big business.

00:04:28.000 All the other things are like, they're like a warm-up to the real business.

00:04:33.000 He thinks he might be able to sell 10 billion robots.

00:04:40.000 10 billion robots.

00:04:44.000 I don't know how many Teslas are sold every year.

00:04:47.000 How many Teslas are sold per year?

00:04:49.000 A million or something?

00:04:51.000 I have no idea what the number is.

00:04:54.000 But it's nowhere near 10 billion, that's for sure.

00:04:57.000 Somebody says, well, less than half a million?

00:05:02.000 Yeah.

00:05:03.000 So there will be way more robots than there will be cars, which makes sense.

00:05:07.000 Because there will be robots working, and robots doing security, and robots doing all kinds of stuff.

00:05:14.000 So yes, that's why, if you look at Tesla as a car company, you would be missing a lot.

00:05:21.000 Because it's sort of an energy company, as well as a robot company.

00:05:27.000 And if you had to bet on cars, robots, or energy, cars would be the third one on that list for me.

00:05:36.000 All right, so we'll see.

00:05:41.000 So the New York Times is reporting that universities are publicly posting their criteria for assessing DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion.

00:05:55.000 Apparently, Berkeley will give you a lower score if you are applying.

00:06:02.000 If you say you prefer to, quote, treat everyone the same.

00:06:08.000 If you say you'll treat everyone the same, you get a low score on DEI.

00:06:14.000 Is that mind-boggling?

00:06:19.000 So I'm going to, I'm publicly announcing right now that I'm renouncing my Berkeley degree.

00:06:25.000 I don't want to be associated with that college whatsoever.

00:06:28.000 So I disavow, is that a thing?

00:06:31.000 Can you disavow your degree?

00:06:33.000 I don't want them to mention me as an alum in any way.

00:06:37.000 Not that they would at the moment, since I'm disgraced.

00:06:40.000 But they used to feature me as one of their, like, famous alums.

00:06:45.000 I don't want, I don't want anything to do with the name of that college or anything else.

00:06:49.000 I disavow Berkeley as a legitimate institution.

00:06:55.000 It's just a racist entity now.

00:06:57.000 I don't want to have anything to do with racist entities like Berkeley.

00:07:04.000 All right.

00:07:05.000 I have a persuasion suggestion for Vivek Ramaswamy.

00:07:10.000 Now, he's really, really good at persuasion.

00:07:14.000 And he's really, really good at communicating.

00:07:16.000 But there's one little, just a little tweak I keep hoping to see him make.

00:07:22.000 Just, it's just the smallest tweak.

00:07:24.000 When he talks about climate change, he has a, he has a killer approach, best I've seen.

00:07:30.000 In which he says over and over again that more people are dying from cold weather than warm.

00:07:35.000 And if you don't net that out, you don't really know what you're even talking about.

00:07:39.000 It's crazy to say that more people died of heat, which is also true.

00:07:44.000 Unless you say fewer people died of cold, which we don't know is true or not in any given year.

00:07:51.000 But generally speaking, cold is the bigger problem than heat.

00:07:56.000 Now, Vivek pointed this out in a tweet in which he, there was some news about people in Europe dying from the heat.

00:08:04.000 At the same time, people in Europe are being discouraged from using air conditioning.

00:08:10.000 So part of the problem is that not everybody has air conditioning when the heat is going through the roof.

00:08:16.000 So Vivek says, quite reasonably, you know, if you want fewer people to die, maybe a little more air conditioning.

00:08:24.000 Because the air conditioning is not contributing to, you know, the problem as much as the direct deaths of the people are important.

00:08:32.000 Now, here's what I would do when I made that claim.

00:08:36.000 So I've seen him make it live in front of a number of people.

00:08:40.000 If he's talking to a news person, I would make the claim, as he does, that more people are dying from cold than warmth.

00:08:49.000 And it's not even close. It's, I don't know, 10 to 1 or something.

00:08:52.000 So, but once you made the claim, here's the persuasive part.

00:08:56.000 Usually, do you know what happens usually when he's talking to a host who believes that climate change is an emergency?

00:09:04.000 And he makes the claim that more people die from cold than warmth.

00:09:08.000 Do you know what the host always does?

00:09:10.000 What does the host always do?

00:09:13.000 Every time.

00:09:15.000 Next question.

00:09:20.000 They won't engage it.

00:09:23.000 They never engage his point.

00:09:26.000 Have you seen it?

00:09:28.000 Watch it.

00:09:30.000 You look for any clip.

00:09:32.000 He'll say more people die from cold than warm.

00:09:35.000 And the host will get you the big doe eyes. 0.98

00:09:41.000 Next question.

00:09:42.000 Right?

00:09:43.000 You watch for that.

00:09:45.000 Here's what I would suggest that he do instead.

00:09:49.000 Make your point and say, you know, 10 times more people die from the cold, or whatever the statistic is, and say, by the way, I would encourage you to do a fact check on that.

00:10:01.000 Because I know a lot of people watching are wondering if that's even true.

00:10:05.000 So you would be doing your viewers a service if you could do a fact check on that.

00:10:10.000 Just check me.

00:10:11.000 It's my primary claim.

00:10:13.000 It's my main claim.

00:10:15.000 You know, I have other things to say about climate change, but it's the primary point.

00:10:20.000 So it would be great if you could fact check it for your audience.

00:10:25.000 Imagine saying that.

00:10:27.000 What does your host do?

00:10:29.000 Well, yeah, well, next question.

00:10:36.000 That's what's going to happen.

00:10:38.000 You're going to get next question.

00:10:40.000 Don't know what to do.

00:10:42.000 So that's my suggestion.

00:10:44.000 I mentioned this before, but because it keeps working, it's worth mentioning again.

00:10:51.000 Trump said in his speech that his black support quadrupled or quintupled after his mugshot came out.

00:11:00.000 Now, I don't think anybody thinks that's true, or even close to true.

00:11:05.000 But because he said it, CNN has to fact check it.

00:11:10.000 So they have Daniel Dale come on, and he's like, no, no, no way.

00:11:16.000 There's no way that black support quadrupled or quintupled.

00:11:21.000 Do you love the fact that he said quadrupled or quintupled?

00:11:25.000 That's technique.

00:11:27.000 He's trying to make you think, well, was it quadrupled, or was it really close to five times?

00:11:33.000 The answer is, of course, it was nowhere near any of those.

00:11:37.000 But in the process of debunking him, Daniel Dale, the CNN debunker guy, the fact checker, he says, oh, no, the facts do not support that.

00:11:48.000 We checked five polls that came out after the mugshot, and only four of the five were up.

00:11:53.000 Only four of the five were up.

00:11:58.000 Now, he's careful to point out, accurately, that the amount that four out of five are up is within the margin of error.

00:12:09.000 What does the public hear?

00:12:14.000 Do you think that the average CNN viewer hears, oh, it's within the margin of error?

00:12:21.000 Okay.

00:12:22.000 Okay.

00:12:23.000 So now that I know it's within the margin of error, it's like the same as saying there were no polls at all.

00:12:29.000 Do you think the average CNN viewer says that?

00:12:32.000 Or do they say, four out of five polls say he's up with blacks?

00:12:37.000 It's very much like their trick of doing a correction long after the lie, because nobody reads the correction.

00:12:50.000 So Trump could just put this out there and make them talk about four out of five polls say he's up,

00:12:56.000 and the public's going to just hear four out of five polls.

00:12:59.000 Now, why does Trump make this claim?

00:13:03.000 Let's test you.

00:13:04.000 Why does Trump make the claim that he's way up, way up with black voters?

00:13:11.000 Is it because he wants to be fact-checked?

00:13:15.000 Well, here's the answer I'm looking for.

00:13:18.000 He's trying to make it true.

00:13:20.000 He's not talking about it as if it's true, although he is, right?

00:13:25.000 Talking about it as if it's true is how you make it true.

00:13:30.000 Suppose you could be any kind of person.

00:13:35.000 Let's say you're an Elbonian voter, and you're a low-information Elbonian voter.

00:13:41.000 You're not really paying attention to politics.

00:13:43.000 It's not your thing.

00:13:44.000 You're just getting on with your life.

00:13:46.000 But you catch a news report that says that Trump is way up with Elbonians,

00:13:52.000 but there's some controversy about whether it's four or five times,

00:13:55.000 or just four out of five polls.

00:13:58.000 And you're barely paying attention.

00:14:00.000 You're like, whoa, I guess a lot of people like me must be liking this Trump guy.

00:14:06.000 Better take a second look.

00:14:08.000 And then you get into the voting booth and you really don't know anything,

00:14:11.000 and you haven't paid attention.

00:14:12.000 You're like, well, I hear a lot of people are liking Trump.

00:14:16.000 A lot of Elbonians apparently changing their mind on him.

00:14:20.000 So I haven't looked into why, but I like to be on the team with my other Elbonians.

00:14:26.000 So whatever the Elbonians are doing, I think I'd like to do that.

00:14:30.000 So because politics is team sport, Trump is basically saying that, hey,

00:14:38.000 people that you would identify are flocking to me.

00:14:42.000 That's what makes people flock to him, if they imagine other people are doing it.

00:14:48.000 Because, yeah, it's just a bandwagon herding the cattle kind of thing.

00:14:53.000 And it would work with any group.

00:14:54.000 It has nothing to do with being black.

00:14:56.000 Any group, if you say they're flocking to you, it's more likely to happen.

00:15:01.000 So Trump is right on point with his persuasion, but not his fact-checking, per usual.

00:15:07.000 Here's a little bit of a trend we're seeing.

00:15:14.000 So on The View, as Colin Rugg points out in a tweet,

00:15:20.000 I'm talking about migrants, the ladies of The View. 0.99

00:15:24.000 And here are a couple of quotes, just so you can see how silly they are. 0.97

00:15:30.000 Quote number one, talking about all the migrants in New York City. 0.97

00:15:34.000 They need to be resettled elsewhere.

00:15:37.000 This is the ladies of The View. 0.89

00:15:40.000 Migrants need to be resettled elsewhere. 1.00

00:15:42.000 They need to spread out.

00:15:44.000 They need to be spread out where this is a massive country.

00:15:49.000 That's right.

00:15:51.000 So, everybody was fine when it was just the southern states being destroyed by it.

00:15:57.000 But as soon as some of that pain went north, oh!

00:16:00.000 Oh! 0.60

00:16:01.000 It turns out that the people who were all into their sanctuary-ness,

00:16:06.000 there was a limit to that, wasn't it?

00:16:08.000 And the limit was, the moment it bothered them,

00:16:12.000 the moment it bothered the ladies on The View personally, 1.00

00:16:15.000 because they have to walk down the streets.

00:16:17.000 Now it's not acceptable anymore.

00:16:20.000 But they also have this, Joy Behar wanted to get in on this conversation,

00:16:25.000 and so she said,

00:16:26.000 it's only going to get worse with global warming and climate change,

00:16:30.000 because people can't live in certain parts of this world.

00:16:36.000 Yeah. 1.00

00:16:38.000 It's a level of stupidity that is beyond comment. 1.00

00:16:47.000 Like, what do I even say about that? 1.00

00:16:50.000 Like, I could say all the obvious things about it,

00:16:52.000 but you're already thinking them, so what's the point of saying them?

00:16:55.000 Right? 1.00

00:16:56.000 These are the dumbest people who have the biggest platform. 1.00

00:17:01.000 Why do the dumbest people have the biggest platform? 1.00

00:17:04.000 But the theme I'm going for is the following. 0.99

00:17:07.000 Maybe those Republicans were right about a few things after all.

00:17:12.000 So you see the ladies on The View now realize that 0.98

00:17:15.000 Democrat immigration policy is obviously a disaster.

00:17:19.000 Obviously.

00:17:21.000 Here's another one.

00:17:23.000 You know about the New Mexico Democrat governor

00:17:26.000 who wants to suspend the Second Amendment,

00:17:28.000 and at least for 30 days you wouldn't be able to have,

00:17:33.000 what is it, concealed or open carry or something?

00:17:36.000 And they couldn't even get these two people to agree.

00:17:42.000 So here's two people who tweeted their opposition to the New Mexico governor,

00:17:48.000 essentially suspending the Second Amendment on her own. 0.95

00:17:52.000 One of them is David Hogg.

00:17:54.000 David Hogg, one of the most famous anti-gun survivors of the mass shooting,

00:18:00.000 and one of the most notable voices for gun control,

00:18:05.000 and he says directly, you know, no bueno.

00:18:08.000 We're not overturning the Second Amendment.

00:18:12.000 Even Hogg.

00:18:14.000 Even Hogg says that.

00:18:16.000 Ted Lieu, famous critic of all things Republican, gets on Twitter, same thing.

00:18:23.000 I like gun control, but no, we're not overthrowing the Second Amendment.

00:18:28.000 Too far.

00:18:30.000 So even your vocal but not crazy people.

00:18:36.000 Now, do you remember it wasn't long ago that you all gave me a hard time when I said Ted Lieu's not crazy?

00:18:42.000 Do you remember that?

00:18:44.000 It was only like within the last month, wasn't it?

00:18:47.000 Where I was telling you that you can't judge Ted Lieu like, you know, Adam Schiff or Swalwell or something.

00:18:54.000 He's in his own little category.

00:18:56.000 He's partisan.

00:18:57.000 He's very partisan. 0.99

00:18:59.000 But he's not fucking crazy, as this tweet proves. 0.99

00:19:04.000 Right? 0.94

00:19:05.000 So he's showing you that he has an independent mind and there is such a thing as too far.

00:19:10.000 And I appreciate that.

00:19:11.000 So give a shout out to Ted Lieu and also to David Hogg.

00:19:16.000 While I would largely disagree with their other views on stuff,

00:19:21.000 good citizens right now.

00:19:25.000 On this item, just good citizens.

00:19:28.000 All right.

00:19:29.000 And even Cenk Uygur, you know, from the Young Turks,

00:19:35.000 he's saying over and over again on Twitter,

00:19:37.000 and I think he's just doing a good service for the country doing this,

00:19:41.000 that Biden's too old and the Democrats need to get,

00:19:44.000 they need to figure this out really quickly.

00:19:47.000 Because Cenk doesn't think that Biden can win.

00:19:51.000 I don't know about that.

00:19:53.000 Maybe he can win.

00:19:55.000 But you're seeing a lot of Democrats coming out against Democrats,

00:20:01.000 and, you know, a lot of whispers about they're not happy about Biden,

00:20:05.000 more whispers about they're not happy, you know, with Harris being the backup.

00:20:09.000 So are we seeing any kind of a trend?

00:20:15.000 Or are these little anecdotes just kind of a coincidence?

00:20:18.000 Because it feels like the utter insanity of the, you know, the leftist,

00:20:24.000 you know, the farthest left opinions are now being a little bit obvious even to Democrats.

00:20:29.000 And their sense of team play is being challenged.

00:20:33.000 You know, why would you want to be on this team?

00:20:36.000 Some might be asking themselves.

00:20:39.000 Well, Gavin Newsom says, oh, he's not running.

00:20:42.000 He's not running.

00:20:43.000 Let me give you his actual tweet.

00:20:46.000 And I want you to look for, read between the lines,

00:20:49.000 and then I'll tell you what I think has happened and will happen.

00:20:53.000 All right?

00:20:54.000 Because we're all just a match, but we're going to speculate.

00:20:57.000 So I'll read you his actual quote.

00:20:59.000 So Newsom said, in answer to the question,

00:21:02.000 well, I think the vice president is naturally the one lined up.

00:21:08.000 The vice president, Harris, is naturally the one lined up.

00:21:12.000 Now, is that what you say when you're giving a full-throated endorsement to somebody on your team?

00:21:19.000 Well, I think the vice president is naturally the one lined up.

00:21:26.000 So naturally lined up.

00:21:29.000 Because, you know, if you're picking the next president,

00:21:32.000 the one thing that you're really concerned about is who's naturally lined up.

00:21:38.000 That's your big tell, isn't it?

00:21:40.000 All right.

00:21:41.000 So he goes on.

00:21:42.000 And the filing deadlines are quickly coming to pass.

00:21:47.000 Huh.

00:21:48.000 And I think we need to move past this notion that he's not going to run.

00:21:53.000 Let me read that again, and you tell me what attitude you're picking up from it.

00:21:58.000 And the filing deadlines are quickly coming to pass.

00:22:02.000 And I think we need to move past this notion that he's not going to run.

00:22:07.000 Why did he need to mention the filing deadlines are quickly going to pass?

00:22:13.000 That feels like it didn't belong there, right?

00:22:16.000 It feels like a little sour grapes.

00:22:19.000 A little sour grapes?

00:22:20.000 Are you picking up a little bit of dissatisfaction?

00:22:24.000 I am.

00:22:26.000 It's an interesting way he's wording it, isn't it?

00:22:30.000 Yeah. 1.00

00:22:31.000 It's you better call me in the next 10 minutes or you're really fucked. 1.00

00:22:36.000 Right? 1.00

00:22:37.000 That's what I hear.

00:22:38.000 You've got 10 minutes to call me.

00:22:40.000 I don't think you're going to do it.

00:22:42.000 And good luck.

00:22:44.000 Because I'm your only hope, basically.

00:22:47.000 And I can't read his mind.

00:22:49.000 But when I read his words, that's what I'm hearing.

00:22:52.000 Right?

00:22:53.000 So I can only be responsible for what I'm receiving.

00:22:56.000 I'm not responsible for what he is thinking or saying.

00:22:59.000 And then he says, President Biden is going to run.

00:23:05.000 And we're looking forward to getting him reelected.

00:23:09.000 Hmm.

00:23:10.000 Is that what you say about a really strong candidate?

00:23:15.000 He's going to run.

00:23:17.000 Okay, that's a ringing endorsement.

00:23:19.000 He's going to run.

00:23:20.000 And we're looking forward to getting him elected.

00:23:24.000 That's a lot about not Biden, isn't it?

00:23:28.000 He talked about process.

00:23:30.000 So instead of saying we have the greatest candidate,

00:23:32.000 of course, he's going to run.

00:23:34.000 He talks about the process.

00:23:37.000 Read between the lines.

00:23:39.000 He obviously doesn't think Biden is qualified.

00:23:42.000 Obviously.

00:23:43.000 And he says, I think there has been so much wallowing in the last few months

00:23:48.000 and hammering in this respect.

00:23:50.000 But we are gearing up for the campaign.

00:23:52.000 We are looking forward to it.

00:23:57.000 We're looking forward to it.

00:24:00.000 We're not looking forward to Joe Biden being president.

00:24:04.000 We don't think he has the qualifications

00:24:06.000 because maybe that would be the time to mention it.

00:24:08.000 If somebody is going to be your candidate

00:24:13.000 and you're going to support them,

00:24:15.000 you don't have any good words to say.

00:24:17.000 How about this would be the way to say it

00:24:20.000 if you were not planning to run

00:24:22.000 and you were happy with the current situation?

00:24:24.000 Here's how you'd answer that.

00:24:26.000 Well, I don't know why anybody would be looking to run.

00:24:29.000 We've got the strongest team we've ever had.

00:24:31.000 We've got Joe Biden who's done 10 great things.

00:24:34.000 He'll probably do 10 more great things.

00:24:36.000 I just talked to him yesterday.

00:24:38.000 And if you think he's got any cognitive disabilities,

00:24:41.000 I mean, I talked to him personally.

00:24:43.000 I can tell you he doesn't.

00:24:44.000 He's looking strong.

00:24:45.000 And Kamala Harris, she doesn't get enough credit for all the things she's done. 1.00

00:24:49.000 But she's in every meeting.

00:24:51.000 She's part of the process.

00:24:52.000 And she is ready to take over any time. 0.93

00:24:55.000 But you don't have to worry about it

00:24:57.000 because Joe Biden is so healthy.

00:24:59.000 I can assure you, I talked to him personally.

00:25:01.000 He's fine.

00:25:02.000 He's raring to go.

00:25:04.000 He wants to get out there.

00:25:05.000 His staff is holding it back a little bit.

00:25:07.000 But they can barely keep up with him.

00:25:09.000 Right?

00:25:10.000 That's what you say when you think you have a coherent president

00:25:15.000 with a capable vice president candidate

00:25:17.000 and you're backing him.

00:25:19.000 Here's what you don't say.

00:25:22.000 Looking forward to getting him reelected.

00:25:25.000 Gearing up for the campaign.

00:25:27.000 We're looking forward to it.

00:25:30.000 He's not a happy guy.

00:25:33.000 Do you hear it too or is it just me?

00:25:36.000 To me, he sounds like he tried and failed.

00:25:39.000 Here's my further interpretation.

00:25:42.000 This is purely speculative.

00:25:44.000 Not reading any minds and I don't have any inside information.

00:25:48.000 What it feels like to me is that Gavin has been maneuvering to be the substitute.

00:25:54.000 And it didn't work.

00:25:57.000 And I think that the only person who's saying no is Joe Biden himself.

00:26:02.000 And he has the ability, even as cognitively declined as he is by his position,

00:26:07.000 he can simply say no.

00:26:09.000 And I think that Biden is saying no because he needs to stay president to stay in a jail

00:26:15.000 and to keep Hunter out of jail and the rest of the family.

00:26:19.000 Well, mostly just Hunter, I guess.

00:26:21.000 Now, to me, it seems obvious that even a Gavin Newsom knows that Biden is only running

00:26:27.000 to protect himself and his family.

00:26:29.000 And this has nothing to do with the country.

00:26:31.000 Because the fact that even Gavin Newsom couldn't say a frickin' positive word, except that Kamala is next in line

00:26:42.000 and they're looking forward to getting him reelected,

00:26:45.000 not a single positive word about either one of them.

00:26:49.000 There's no way he's a happy camper.

00:26:51.000 And there's no way that the Democrats are happy that he's running.

00:26:55.000 I think the Democrats do not want Biden running.

00:27:00.000 And I think the conversation has probably gotten pretty tense.

00:27:04.000 And I think it looks like Biden's going to run out the clock.

00:27:07.000 So if Biden runs out the clock and other people don't file

00:27:11.000 because he's just sort of keeping them from filing,

00:27:14.000 you know, he could have a stroke the day after the filing deadline passes.

00:27:19.000 He's still going to be your candidate.

00:27:22.000 All right.

00:27:25.000 So I saw an alarming video from an influencer on Twitter, but also TikTok.

00:27:34.000 A TikTok influencer, a young guy named Chris Mowry.

00:27:37.000 He was talking excitedly in his car on camera about how good Bidenomics is.

00:27:43.000 Because you know what?

00:27:45.000 If there's one thing that young, maybe 20-something looking guys care about

00:27:53.000 to do TikTok videos, they're really deeply into Bidenomics.

00:27:59.000 But thank you to Community Notes on Twitter, I mean X,

00:28:03.000 for noting that his talent agency is paid by the DNC.

00:28:08.000 Now imagine you're on TikTok and you see this influencer say,

00:28:12.000 oh, Biden economics, Bidenomics is so good.

00:28:15.000 So good.

00:28:16.000 Inflation is coming down.

00:28:17.000 Manufacturing is up.

00:28:19.000 Job's good.

00:28:20.000 And he's just really excited about it.

00:28:23.000 If you didn't know that he was being paid by the Democrats,

00:28:28.000 literally paid to say this, you would think it was real.

00:28:32.000 Wouldn't you?

00:28:34.000 Of course you would.

00:28:36.000 And if you thought that other people like you thought that Biden was great,

00:28:41.000 you wouldn't put much thought into it.

00:28:43.000 You'd like, well, he thought about it.

00:28:45.000 You know, this guy thought about it and I'm like him.

00:28:47.000 You know, I've got a lot in common with this person I follow.

00:28:50.000 So if he likes Biden, maybe I like Biden too,

00:28:53.000 because I'm not going to look into it.

00:28:55.000 Economics are boring.

00:28:56.000 And if a TikTok influencer says Bidenomics is working well,

00:29:00.000 well, case closed.

00:29:02.000 A TikTok influencer told me.

00:29:04.000 I'm sure he looked into it in some depth.

00:29:07.000 So what a service these community notes do.

00:29:12.000 And imagine that you don't see them on TikTok.

00:29:14.000 TikTok just thinks this is a real opinion.

00:29:17.000 Speaking of real opinions, an interesting development

00:29:21.000 with our favorite person on the X platform, Rob Reiner.

00:29:26.000 We all know Rob Reiner from TV and movies.

00:29:30.000 Very successful actor slash producer.

00:29:34.000 And we also know that he's very active on the X platform.

00:29:38.000 Very anti-Trump. 0.73

00:29:40.000 And have you ever said to yourself, man, that guy seems crazy. 0.69

00:29:45.000 And man, it's like he's impervious to new information.

00:29:50.000 And man, it's like he fell for every hoax.

00:29:55.000 How could one person fall for every hoax?

00:29:59.000 And so it didn't really seem right, did it?

00:30:02.000 It seemed like, is there something wrong with him? 0.84

00:30:05.000 Does he have some kind of mental problem? 1.00

00:30:08.000 Or did Trump once steal his girlfriend when they were teenagers? 1.00

00:30:14.000 Like, what's going on?

00:30:16.000 It just, like it didn't seem right.

00:30:19.000 Right?

00:30:21.000 Well, in comes Mike Benz, B-E-N-Z.

00:30:27.000 A real good follow.

00:30:28.000 He's at Mike Benz with a Z, cyber.

00:30:31.000 All one word, Mike Benz, cyber.

00:30:34.000 I highly recommend you follow him, if it's only for this.

00:30:39.000 So here's what he said.

00:30:41.000 And it was to look into the impact on the election in 2016.

00:30:50.000 And on his organization were three CIA chiefs who were his advisors.

00:31:00.000 Do you see it now?

00:31:03.000 And so let me read Mike Benz's tweet on this.

00:31:09.000 So Mike had said, before he knew there was any connection, he had said that, in his opinion, his experience, that Reiner was talking like a CIA asset.

00:31:20.000 And that there's a way that they talk.

00:31:23.000 And he describes it humorously as like a cocaine-fueled, almost psychopath, immune to new facts.

00:31:33.000 You know, just seems like pure propaganda.

00:31:36.000 So he noticed the tell in Rob Reiner's tweeting that he just tweets like he's a CIA agent.

00:31:45.000 And he does a little bit of research, and it didn't take much, to find out that he's actually friends with most of the CIA top guys.

00:31:54.000 They're his advisors on this board that he created.

00:31:57.000 Now, so here's Mike Benz describing it.

00:32:02.000 He says, quote, this is in a tweet, you can literally smell it on these people.

00:32:07.000 There's a CIA-speak, frenzied energy of a man on cocaine, endlessly and wholly unaccountable bleeding about democracy, verbal State Department print shop.

00:32:21.000 In other words, just saying what the State Department would want you to say.

00:32:25.000 And a psycho's lack of remorse.

00:32:30.000 And then he says, he runs an organization with three CIA chiefs who all serve as his advisors.

00:32:37.000 And then he notes, as a Hollywood producer.

00:32:42.000 Why is there a Hollywood producer who's good, who's got advisors in the CIA and he's running some kind of a political investigation that happens to be bad for Trump?

00:32:55.000 All right, so Rob Reiner, as Mike says, no background in national security or foreign affairs, just a humble little Hollywood producer who just so happens to have three chiefs of the Central Intelligence Agency in his ear.

00:33:08.000 How about that?

00:33:10.000 But it goes further.

00:33:13.000 Three of the CIA directors serving us as advisors are also on something called the Atlantic Council.

00:33:20.000 The Atlantic Council.

00:33:21.000 Michael Morell, Michael Hayden, Leon Panetta.

00:33:26.000 Hmm.

00:33:27.000 The Atlantic Council.

00:33:29.000 I wonder if they have any funding.

00:33:31.000 Oh, yeah.

00:33:32.000 So Mike did some research, found out that the Atlantic Council, they're sponsored by who's this company?

00:33:39.000 I don't know if you've heard this company before.

00:33:42.000 Burisma. 0.97

00:33:43.000 Burisma. 0.97

00:33:44.000 Have you heard of them before?

00:33:47.000 Burisma. 0.97

00:33:48.000 It's a Ukrainian company.

00:33:50.000 Nobody's ever heard of it.

00:33:51.000 But I guess they're one of the sponsors of this Atlantic Council that has a bunch of CIA related people on it who are also on Rob Reiner's board, his advisors.

00:34:06.000 So, I'm not going to make any direct accusations myself.

00:34:13.000 I'll just point you to Mike Benz's good work here.

00:34:18.000 How much of this surprises you?

00:34:21.000 Are you surprised?

00:34:23.000 Does it explain everything?

00:34:26.000 It explains everything, doesn't it?

00:34:29.000 Have you heard that the CIA, historically, directly and with a lot of energy, and successfully controlled Hollywood?

00:34:41.000 Controlled how their movies looked and made sure it was all, you know, very patriotic and American and we said bad things about the bad guys and stuff like that.

00:34:50.000 And, of course, you'd want to join the military because it's awesome.

00:34:54.000 So, if you were going to influence Hollywood, how would you do it?

00:35:02.000 Where would you start?

00:35:05.000 I would start with the directors.

00:35:08.000 Do you know why?

00:35:10.000 The famous directors?

00:35:12.000 Well, number one, everybody's heard of them, you know, so that they would seem like the smartest people.

00:35:17.000 You know, nobody thinks actors are smart.

00:35:21.000 Even sometimes they are, but you don't think of it.

00:35:24.000 But you think the directors are smart, don't you?

00:35:27.000 And you also know that if you cross a director, you're not going to get work.

00:35:34.000 So, the directors are the choke points for Hollywood.

00:35:38.000 You just need to get a few directors.

00:35:41.000 See what I'm talking about?

00:35:43.000 If you get a few of the big directors, then all of the, anybody who might someday want to work with them, or somebody that they know, because the directors know each other, they don't want to get on a blacklist.

00:35:57.000 So, if you're an actor, you're going to fall in line immediately.

00:36:00.000 As soon as the big directors have an opinion, you're just going to fall in line.

00:36:05.000 So, the CIA only needs to influence half a dozen big directors, and they get the whole industry.

00:36:14.000 Am I wrong?

00:36:16.000 Does that make sense?

00:36:18.000 That there's a choke point, and it's not the actors, right?

00:36:21.000 You don't need to get Tom Cruise, because nobody believes actors, but directors have a different level of, you know, assumed capability and intelligence, because they've done something that's more like running a business.

00:36:34.000 You know, what smart people do.

00:36:36.000 So, it's probably exactly what it looks like.

00:36:43.000 All right, now that you've heard this, I'm going to say one other name.

00:36:47.000 This is not an accusation.

00:36:50.000 All right, because I have nothing to back any kind of suspicion.

00:36:55.000 You ready?

00:36:58.000 Stephen King.

00:37:00.000 Now, I have no indication that he has any connection with any intel people.

00:37:13.000 None whatsoever.

00:37:14.000 There's no evidence, no evidence to suspect that he's anything but a person tweeting with an opinion.

00:37:21.000 However, he's got a new book out that apparently is so bad.

00:37:29.000 Let me, it was described as pure cringe, and there's a MAGA character in the book who dies of COVID for not being sufficiently vaccinated.

00:37:44.000 The Stephen King book.

00:37:46.000 Yep.

00:37:47.000 Do you think he wrote that?

00:37:50.000 Well, let me just say that there are a number of famous writers who, when they reach a certain point in their career, are still producing as much or more than they used to, because maybe they don't write all of it anymore.

00:38:07.000 So, I don't know if he wrote it.

00:38:09.000 That's unknowable.

00:38:10.000 And I'm not saying he didn't.

00:38:11.000 I'm just saying it's unknowable for a person like that.

00:38:18.000 But I don't know.

00:38:20.000 Doesn't it raise some questions in your mind?

00:38:23.000 Have you ever asked yourself, why does Rob Reiner tweet the same way Stephen King does?

00:38:30.000 Have you noticed that they, the vibe is just the same?

00:38:37.000 Yeah.

00:38:38.000 Now again, I want to be crystal clear.

00:38:40.000 I'm not accusing Stephen King of anything, because I have no information that would be, you know, suggest that.

00:38:47.000 I'm just saying that you can't trust anything anymore.

00:38:51.000 You just can't trust anything.

00:38:53.000 All right.

00:38:55.000 Here's something I did that probably will cause me more trouble than it has already.

00:39:02.000 I tweeted that whoever controls the media controls the country.

00:39:08.000 And at the moment, it looked like the ADL controlled the media.

00:39:12.000 Would you say that's a fair statement based on what we know about the ADL trying to crash advertisers for the X platform?

00:39:24.000 And it appears that that's exactly what they do.

00:39:26.000 Their business model, so to speak, is they pressure news entities to cover the news in a way that they want.

00:39:35.000 And if you don't do it, you're an anti-Semite.

00:39:40.000 And the anti-Semitic thing comes out, like, really easily.

00:39:44.000 Just anything they don't like, well, that's a trope.

00:39:47.000 That's a little bit of a trope right there.

00:39:50.000 Now, immediately after tweeting this, I was accused of being anti-Semitic.

00:39:57.000 Do you know why?

00:40:00.000 Because people assumed that what I meant, certainly didn't say it and wasn't even thinking it,

00:40:05.000 was that the ADL is a Jewish organization, and the media are Jewish, have a lot of Jewish owners,

00:40:11.000 and therefore that what I'm really saying, my secret, you know, racist dog whistle, 0.93

00:40:15.000 is that the Jews are behind everything. 0.97

00:40:18.000 So that's what I was accused of.

00:40:21.000 What part did I mention Jews?

00:40:24.000 Where was that?

00:40:27.000 I'm talking about Democrats.

00:40:31.000 There are Democrats in the ADL.

00:40:33.000 The Democrats, you know, the head of the ADL used to work for Obama and one of the Clintons,

00:40:39.000 I forget which one, right?

00:40:41.000 He's just a dyed-in-wool total...

00:40:44.000 Is that dyed-in-wool?

00:40:46.000 What does that even mean?

00:40:47.000 He is just a total Democrat.

00:40:50.000 The Jewish part doesn't have anything to do with anything, except they like calling people anti-Semitic a lot. 0.57

00:40:55.000 So, you know, I spend half of my days arguing with the trolls on YouTube

00:41:04.000 that what they think is this major Jewish kind of conspiracy could be 100% explained,

00:41:13.000 their observations could be completely explained,

00:41:16.000 by the fact that Jewish people are good at school and they value education.

00:41:22.000 So, are we surprised that there's a high percentage of them in the best kind of jobs?

00:41:28.000 Of course not.

00:41:30.000 That should be exactly what you would say.

00:41:32.000 Is that the people who valued education got the jobs that you need a good education

00:41:38.000 and they're the good ones, the good jobs.

00:41:41.000 So, if you could run a TV news network, or a network, don't you think that would be a good job?

00:41:50.000 Wouldn't you want that?

00:41:54.000 Yeah.

00:41:55.000 So, this is another case where I didn't mention...

00:41:59.000 Now, you're not going to believe this next part,

00:42:02.000 but I wouldn't bring it up just to lie about it.

00:42:06.000 Right?

00:42:07.000 It wouldn't make sense.

00:42:08.000 I would just sort of let it go.

00:42:09.000 So, I'm going to bring it up.

00:42:11.000 That's my only evidence that I'm not lying.

00:42:13.000 That, you know, if I were, I'd rather, like, not discuss it.

00:42:18.000 But I swear to God, it never once occurred to me that anybody would interpret that as anything about Jewish people.

00:42:25.000 Like, it actually was not in my mind.

00:42:27.000 I was like, oh, ADL is influencing the news.

00:42:30.000 The news influences what you think.

00:42:32.000 That's all I was thinking.

00:42:33.000 But they turned it into, I'm an anti-Semite.

00:42:36.000 Now, do you recognize that play?

00:42:40.000 Who was the anti-Semite in this story?

00:42:44.000 The one who literally never even occurred to them that there was any element of it in the story?

00:42:49.000 And there isn't, in my opinion.

00:42:51.000 Or the people who immediately looked at me and thought I'm an anti-Semite.

00:42:57.000 It's the people who accused me.

00:42:59.000 Right?

00:43:00.000 The people who accused me are in a racial model.

00:43:03.000 And I just wasn't there.

00:43:05.000 So, I didn't even recognize.

00:43:06.000 When they first said that, I was like, what are you talking about?

00:43:09.000 Like, I had to piece it together after the fact.

00:43:11.000 It's like, oh, you're saying that because I said, okay.

00:43:15.000 Yeah.

00:43:16.000 The people who are guilty on the Democrat side will accuse you of the thing they're doing.

00:43:22.000 Even as they're doing it.

00:43:24.000 Like, they were doing it, actively doing it, while accusing me of doing it.

00:43:28.000 And I didn't even know what the topic was.

00:43:30.000 I didn't even know we were talking about Jewish people.

00:43:32.000 You know, when did that come up?

00:43:34.000 All right.

00:43:35.000 So, that's your situation.

00:43:39.000 So, I tweeted because it seems like the government is going after Elon Musk in too many different ways.

00:43:47.000 You know, they're going after him with the ADL, which in my opinion is operating like a quasi-government entity.

00:43:54.000 It's not technically, but it's operating like a wing of the Democrats.

00:43:58.000 He's being sued for, if I understand this, not hiring immigrants while it would also be illegal to hire immigrants for his rocket company.

00:44:11.000 Because the government says you can't hire anybody who's not a U.S. citizen.

00:44:15.000 So, he doesn't.

00:44:16.000 And then he's being sued for discriminating against non-U.S. citizens.

00:44:21.000 Now, that doesn't even sound like a real lawsuit. 0.98

00:44:25.000 Yeah, it just sounds like fuckery. 0.91

00:44:27.000 So, I tweeted just as I was just thinking about it. 0.97

00:44:31.000 I said, are the Democrats trying to jail Musk?

00:44:34.000 And I said, it looks that way to me.

00:44:37.000 It's starting to look like they just want him in jail because he's too powerful.

00:44:41.000 And Elon Musk actually replied to that, which is not the tweet I would have expected him to reply to.

00:44:51.000 Just hold this in your mind.

00:44:54.000 So, yeah, I don't think he's replied to anything I've tweeted since I got canceled.

00:45:00.000 I think he tried once and then he got piled on and it wasn't worth it.

00:45:04.000 I mean, I can't read his mind, but I'll just tell you that he made one positive comment about not canceling humor. 0.99

00:45:12.000 And he got, you know, a lot of shit for that. 0.97

00:45:16.000 So, he hasn't commented on anything I've tweeted for nine months or whatever, whatever it's been. 0.99

00:45:23.000 But this is what he did.

00:45:25.000 And it was about whether the Democrats are trying to jail him.

00:45:28.000 And what he said was, in his tweet, something strange is going on.

00:45:33.000 Imagine knowing what he knows, right?

00:45:36.000 Because we know just what's in the news.

00:45:38.000 But he knows, like, what's actually happening in his daily experience.

00:45:43.000 And he's even saying something strange is going on.

00:45:46.000 Like it doesn't look organic, whatever's happening.

00:45:49.000 And it makes you wonder if the intelligence people have decided to take him out, which is what I worry about.

00:45:57.000 Yeah.

00:45:59.000 But you might be worried about it, too.

00:46:03.000 All right, let's talk about this story about Shokin.

00:46:08.000 This is actually getting more interesting.

00:46:11.000 So, remember the Ukraine's prosecutor, General Viktor Shokin.

00:46:16.000 So, the story, as most of you know, Biden said he got the guy fired.

00:46:21.000 And he was proud of it.

00:46:23.000 And then when it was found out that Hunter was, you know, working for Burisma.

00:46:31.000 And that there was some note, there was some thinking that the prosecutor was a problem for Burisma.

00:46:37.000 So, really, that's the reason that he was removed.

00:46:39.000 And it wasn't because of any other reason.

00:46:42.000 Now, so, Miranda Devine of the New York Post found some documentation that showed that the European Commission,

00:46:55.000 actually it praised Ukraine's prosecutor general Shokin for his efforts to fight corruption,

00:47:01.000 nine days after Vice President Joe Biden demanded his ouster.

00:47:07.000 So, while Biden was demanding his ouster, the people he said were on his side were praising him for a job well done

00:47:17.000 because he met his anti-corruption goals.

00:47:20.000 So, now, you can't let that story sit, right?

00:47:26.000 So, I retweeted that story, Miranda Devine's story.

00:47:32.000 And immediately, I saw sources that contradicted it.

00:47:36.000 So, one of them, for example, was from Andres Bacchus, who's always been a real good source and data checker and fact checker of lots of different topics.

00:47:48.000 But he said that the idea that there was anything, you know, sketchy going on there has been debunked.

00:47:58.000 And he showed me a source that referred to all the people who did want that guy gone.

00:48:04.000 Do you know what the source was?

00:48:07.000 A Ukrainian publication I've never heard of.

00:48:10.000 A Ukrainian publication.

00:48:13.000 So, I said, your source is a Ukrainian publication?

00:48:18.000 And he mocked me.

00:48:21.000 Oh, yeah, sure, it's my source that's a problem, right?

00:48:26.000 And I thought, well, that's weird.

00:48:28.000 Kind of weird.

00:48:30.000 So, I thought, well, maybe there are other sources.

00:48:33.000 And sure enough, there was.

00:48:34.000 FT, Financial Times.

00:48:36.000 So, FT had an article in which they went down and it mentioned a whole bunch of people, diplomats, who did, in fact, want him fired.

00:48:47.000 So, by the time you're done with the article, it's like, you know, this diplomat wanted him to fire that diplomat.

00:48:53.000 You know, this source, this official.

00:48:55.000 So, it was a whole bunch of people who wanted this victor, shook, and fired, just like Biden said.

00:49:00.000 Do you want to know the names of the people?

00:49:03.000 There are quite a few mentioned.

00:49:06.000 No names.

00:49:08.000 No names.

00:49:09.000 Yeah.

00:49:10.000 There's a diplomat, unnamed.

00:49:13.000 But there's also the other diplomat, who agrees with the first diplomat, unnamed.

00:49:20.000 There's an official, unnamed.

00:49:25.000 There's an organization that is named.

00:49:28.000 But the person in the organization, not named.

00:49:31.000 The entire story was about all the sources that were on the same team.

00:49:37.000 And none of them had names.

00:49:39.000 Now, you say to yourself, but Scott, but Scott.

00:49:42.000 Sometimes people like to be anonymous.

00:49:44.000 These are the people who agreed with the official Biden administration policy.

00:49:52.000 You tell me that they're not going to say that they still agree?

00:49:55.000 If they thought he was, if these were real diplomats, and they really disagreed, or they really agreed, why would they need to be anonymous?

00:50:09.000 And why would they, they didn't, you know, there's no indication they asked to be anonymous.

00:50:13.000 But FT didn't list their names.

00:50:16.000 Do you think they didn't want to be listed for agreeing with the policy that the Biden administration thinks was the right policy?

00:50:23.000 Why would they have a problem with that?

00:50:26.000 Why in the world would that need to be anonymous?

00:50:28.000 And they weren't even called anonymous.

00:50:31.000 They were just called a diplomat.

00:50:34.000 It didn't even say they want to be anonymous.

00:50:37.000 They were just referred to as this diplomat, that diplomat.

00:50:41.000 Now, if you read that article and you were not a sophisticated consumer of news, you would be pretty sure that everybody wanted that guy gone.

00:50:52.000 If you are a more sophisticated consumer, you say, it's a news article about people who said the correct thing that agreed with the administration.

00:51:03.000 They're ambassadors, which are the people who say out loud the things that are the right thing.

00:51:10.000 That's what they do.

00:51:12.000 And yet none of them did.

00:51:14.000 You would immediately spot this for what it is.

00:51:18.000 You see it, right?

00:51:19.000 I mean, I don't have to explain it anymore.

00:51:21.000 It's obvious what's going on.

00:51:22.000 So let me read Andres Backhouse's comment.

00:51:30.000 So this was his comment to the Miranda Devine story that suggested that maybe not everybody agreed on his firing. 0.71

00:51:39.000 So Andres says, quote, I'm always saddened when I see people falling for dumb stuff.

00:51:47.000 Like the claim that the EU was satisfied with Viktor Shokin and didn't want to see him ousted. 0.99

00:51:53.000 It's such a dumb, obvious lie. 0.98

00:51:55.000 Do you see it? 1.00

00:51:59.000 Andres is like a PhD in economics.

00:52:06.000 The reason that I followed him for so long and quoted him so often is that he never talks like this.

00:52:14.000 He doesn't talk like this.

00:52:17.000 He says, well, here's a better source.

00:52:20.000 Or that source is sketchy because of this reason.

00:52:24.000 Maybe you should look at this one instead.

00:52:27.000 But on this one thing, it's very personal.

00:52:31.000 Oh, it's very sad.

00:52:33.000 It's sad that you people would agree.

00:52:34.000 And then the best source that he gave was an obscure Ukrainian publication to support his point.

00:52:40.000 Like, what's going on?

00:52:45.000 Now, it could be as simple as he, you know, he's pro Ukraine.

00:52:49.000 You know, if you live in Germany, maybe you've got some pretty strong feelings.

00:52:53.000 I imagine you would.

00:52:54.000 But I'll tell you, it's really hard to know who's giving you straight information and who's not.

00:53:01.000 All right.

00:53:04.000 Are you following the story of Ashton Kutcher and Danny Masterson, who was on that 70s show?

00:53:14.000 So one of the stars of that 70s show, Danny Masterson, I guess he got convicted of, I don't know how many rapes and sexual abuses or whatever.

00:53:28.000 Two. 0.65

00:53:29.000 Two rapes.

00:53:30.000 And got 30 years, somebody's saying.

00:53:33.000 So it was pretty serious.

00:53:34.000 And apparently the evidence was pretty strong.

00:53:37.000 But both Ashton Kutcher and Mila, what's her last name?

00:53:44.000 Mila Kunis.

00:53:47.000 I guess they'd been asked early on, maybe by the family of Danny Masterson, to write character references.

00:53:54.000 Which they did.

00:53:56.000 And basically they only talked about, you know, the person they knew.

00:54:02.000 So they were not aware of anything he might or might not have done.

00:54:05.000 So they weren't really talking to that.

00:54:06.000 They were just talking about him in the positive way because their interactions with him were positive.

00:54:11.000 And they just put on a video with more contrition than I've ever seen from any two people saying,

00:54:18.000 uh, sorry.

00:54:21.000 We didn't know about that stuff.

00:54:25.000 What do you think about that?

00:54:29.000 Well, I would like to offer the following suggestion.

00:54:34.000 If somebody asks you to write a character reference for somebody, I think your best choices are this.

00:54:44.000 Either don't do it, which is hard to do if it's somebody you've known and, you know, had a good relationship with.

00:54:50.000 Or, if you do it, definitely don't apologize for it.

00:54:55.000 Definitely don't apologize.

00:54:58.000 The apology looked worse than whatever they wrote.

00:55:01.000 I would have just said this.

00:55:03.000 Look, I was asked to give a character reference based on what I know, not based on what I don't know.

00:55:09.000 I said what I know.

00:55:11.000 That's everything that everybody asked of me.

00:55:14.000 Everybody asked me, just tell us what you know.

00:55:18.000 I did.

00:55:19.000 So if you've got a problem with that, it has nothing to do with the crime, because I didn't know anything about that.

00:55:25.000 If you have a problem with people having input that is useful to the process, you better make your case.

00:55:33.000 But I'm not going to apologize for saying what I knew and not saying things I didn't know.

00:55:39.000 But now we have evidence that a jury has found to be conclusive, and I'm going to respect the jury's opinion on that.

00:55:47.000 I don't take back what I said, but it's obvious that there was more to this person than what I understood.

00:55:54.000 No apologies.

00:55:56.000 That's how I'd play it.

00:55:58.000 The apology thing makes them look a little guilty of themselves in some way that I think is unfair,

00:56:03.000 because I doubt they knew what was going on.

00:56:06.000 But you never know.

00:56:07.000 You never know.

00:56:08.000 But there's no reason to think that they did anything wrong.

00:56:12.000 All right. 0.71

00:56:14.000 That, ladies and gentlemen, concludes the best darn live stream you've seen all day. 0.50

00:56:23.000 Is there any story I missed that matters? 0.58

00:56:29.000 I can't see the least person to work with.

00:56:32.000 Maybe.

00:56:35.000 It's the best ever.

00:56:37.000 All right.

00:56:38.000 YouTube.

00:56:39.000 I hope you found a place to comment if you wanted to.

00:56:44.000 And maybe the trolls will go away.

00:56:47.000 Oh, yeah.

00:56:48.000 There's a Rufo story.

00:56:50.000 Is it Christopher Rufo?

00:56:53.000 What?

00:56:54.000 He's being accused of what?

00:56:59.000 Something crazy.

00:57:03.000 Oh, yeah.

00:57:04.000 So if you see Vox, V-O-X, writing a story about an individual, it's not true.

00:57:13.000 So there are some publications which you don't need to read it to know it's not true.

00:57:17.000 Vox is not a credible outlet.

00:57:20.000 There's a negative story about me and the Daily Beast today or yesterday I mentioned.

00:57:25.000 And do you think that the Daily Beast accurately described me?

00:57:31.000 No, they called me a right-wing or a far right-wing guy or something.

00:57:38.000 The very first sentence about me wasn't true.

00:57:41.000 Like, they're not even on the same planet when they start and then they go on from there.

00:57:46.000 No.

00:57:47.000 Anything in the Daily Beast about people is not true.

00:57:50.000 Anything in Vox about people, no.

00:57:52.000 No.

00:57:53.000 Rolling Stone.

00:57:55.000 These are not real entities.

00:57:57.000 These are not entities where you read a story and go, oh, maybe.

00:58:01.000 Maybe yes, maybe no.

00:58:02.000 It's always no.

00:58:04.000 Huffington Post.

00:58:05.000 These are not...

00:58:07.000 There's another one.

00:58:11.000 I can't remember them at the moment.

00:58:13.000 Yeah, Vanity Fair, Salon.

00:58:17.000 These are not real publications.

00:58:19.000 Publications.

00:58:20.000 Washington Post.

00:58:22.000 Yeah.

00:58:23.000 The Atlantic.

00:58:24.000 Right.

00:58:25.000 Yeah, those are the ones to stay away from.

00:58:27.000 I'll add those to my list of publications that you should stay away from.

00:58:33.000 We're not believe.

00:58:34.000 Say, Atlantic.

00:58:38.000 Vox.

00:58:40.000 What was the other one?

00:58:41.000 Daily Beast.

00:58:42.000 One of my critics came at me today and said, oh, so you think these sources are not good.

00:58:58.000 So I guess you like Fox News.

00:59:01.000 To which I said, they advertised TikTok.

00:59:06.000 You'd have to know nothing about me to think that I was okay with that.

00:59:15.000 All right.

00:59:20.000 It says, Putin invaded likely due to Biden's Afghanistan debacle.

00:59:25.000 Nobody knows.

00:59:27.000 Nobody knows.

00:59:28.000 All right.

00:59:29.000 That's all for now.

00:59:30.000 Thanks for joining YouTube.

00:59:31.000 I will talk to you later.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - September 10, 2023

Episode 2227 Scott Adams： News, Coffee And Persuasion

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript