Episode 2399 CWSA 02⧸29⧸24
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 10 minutes
Words per minute
144.9688
Harmful content
Misogyny
20
sentences flagged
Hate speech
40
sentences flagged
Summary
In this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, we talk about a new kind of AI, persistent characters, and why you should get married to someone you don t already have a relationship with. Plus, a new study that says married people are a lot happier than people who are not.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Good morning to everybody except for racist YouTube. I'd like to welcome you to
00:00:11.520
Coffee with Scott Adams, the best thing that's ever happened to you. And if you'd
00:00:15.000
like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can even understand,
00:00:18.600
all you really need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stein,
00:00:21.720
a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I
00:00:26.160
like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine at the
00:00:30.480
day, the thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip.
00:00:35.040
It happens now. Go. Happy leap year. It's especially hard for dyslexics. I'm gonna
00:00:48.660
power through it. As you know, February 29th is not even a real day, so any crimes
00:00:53.880
you commit today don't count. So go nuts. Well, let's talk about the
00:01:00.240
simulation. Apparently Midjourney says they're hoping to release what they call
00:01:05.880
new consistent character features. Consistent character. Now what I think
00:01:11.700
that means is that if you create a character, it won't create a whole new
00:01:18.500
character if you want to create a new scene. So the problem with the old AIs is
00:01:24.500
you can say, show me a movie of Scott walking down the street. And then it would.
00:01:30.080
And then you'd say, now show me the next scene where Scott turns the corner. It
00:01:35.660
can't do that because it would do a whole new me, a whole version of the city
00:01:40.740
differently. There wouldn't be any continuity. But if you can make the
00:01:45.240
characters consistent, it means I think you can have them pick up where they left
00:01:51.660
off. Now that's not as important as what I call, in a short story I'm working on
00:01:58.920
right now, persistent characters. So a consistent character would be that one
00:02:04.680
that doesn't change every time you update the scene. But a persistent one would be
00:02:10.040
in a video game in which when you leave the game and log off, the character still
00:02:15.900
lives its life. That's common. And when a character can live its life even when
00:02:22.920
nobody's watching, maybe even have experiences to talk about later within the
00:02:27.380
realm of its world, it's a very small leap to programming that character to think
00:02:33.860
they're real. And then you're all going to see that we're in a simulation. Because once
00:02:39.800
you see that we can build one, and we can, that we very clearly have all of the
00:02:45.600
technology to build a simulation. Now you're going to say to me, but Scott, the
00:02:50.840
characters in the simulation that the simulation that we would be able to build
00:02:54.720
today would see these enormous flaws in their universe, right? That they'd see all
00:03:02.300
these mistakes and things that don't quite fit together. Because we're not really so
00:03:06.180
good that we could build a universe that would be all consistent. For example, how
00:03:13.080
would we even have enough computing so that we remember everything in history? And if
00:03:18.620
you and I have a disagreement, you know, we both saw the same history somehow. Way too
00:03:23.980
complicated. Couldn't possibly do it. But you know what we could do? We could very easily
00:03:29.300
program the persistent characters to believe they're seeing a consistent environment when
00:03:35.860
they're not. We can give them cognitive dissonance. So if you and I have a different
00:03:42.280
memory of what happened 10 minutes ago, they don't have to solve it. That would be hard.
00:03:48.480
Making everything consistent would be beyond our ability. But to program a character who lives
00:03:55.360
forever within the digital world, and then its mind has been programmed to believe that
00:04:00.340
everything looks fine. They see all the detail even though it's not there. They believe there's
00:04:05.300
something beyond what they can see, even though there isn't. And their history would be created
00:04:10.120
on demand. So in other words, they would never see the new forest until they walked in that
00:04:15.860
direction and entered it. If the forest is created as they enter it, which I'm pretty sure our reality
00:04:22.540
is the same way, then it means it also created history. Because the forest had to start as acorns
00:04:28.780
and seeds before it grew. So it's creating a history on demand. We are at that point in history
00:04:38.400
where we can create creatures who believe they're living in a real world, but we can show that they
00:04:44.480
are definitely not. And that's who we are. We'll figure that out. Well, there's a new study that says
00:04:50.600
married people are a lot happier. What do you think I'm going to call that? Could it be?
00:04:56.660
Backwards science. Backwards science. Well, let me see. I'm thinking about getting married.
00:05:08.240
Let's see. I got a couple choices. Angry bitch. Angry, complaining, unhappy bitch. Depressed,
1.00
00:05:17.420
unhappy, complaining bitch. Oh, whoa. There's a happy one. Will you marry me? I know we just met.
1.00
00:05:25.520
But honestly, my options are kind of low. I know. I mean, just think we just met. But I don't want
00:05:31.760
to lose you. You're the first one I met. So how about we get married? No, I would say that this
00:05:39.260
looks like backward science to me because it seems kind of obvious that people who are happy and
00:05:45.440
healthy are more likely to get somebody to marry them and be happy about it. Do you disagree?
00:05:52.100
Great. Let's do another one. There's another study. It's published in The Hill that marijuana is very
00:06:02.860
correlated with a 25% higher risk of heart attacks and, oh, 42% higher risk of stroke. Whoa. Whoa.
00:06:12.340
So I guess that's true. Should we learn a few things about how to evaluate science when it's in the news?
00:06:22.380
Okay. Number one, if you didn't know anything about even the topic of the study, what are the odds
00:06:29.200
chances is true? You don't even know the topic? Give me the odds. 50%. 50%. You're starting with only a 50%
00:06:39.160
because a half of all studies can't be reproduced. Turns out that they're just bad studies.
00:06:45.120
So moment one, there's only a 50% chance it's true. Now, do you think that this study was a
00:06:54.880
randomized controlled study that the highest level of scientific rigor? No, it was not. It was
00:07:03.640
observational and it was asking people how they feel. Hey, do you smoke marijuana every day? Yes,
00:07:11.120
I do. Do you ever have any heart disease? Well, as a matter of fact, I did. That's the lowest level
00:07:17.760
of credibility. So if you're starting with something that is only 50% likely to be true
00:07:23.980
before you even know what the topic is, and then you look at those things, the 50% that at least could
00:07:30.440
be true, and you say, it wasn't one of those good studies like a randomized controlled placebo.
00:07:37.640
There's maybe only 25%. So I would say by its nature of being a study and also not being the good
00:07:49.380
kind, best case, 25%. Now, here's another rule of thumb that you'll find quite useful. If a scientific
00:07:59.820
study does not agree with observation, it doesn't mean the science is wrong, because our observations
00:08:08.840
can be faulty, but you'll have much more comfort if they're compatible. For example, I believe
00:08:17.360
that smoking cigarettes is more likely to give you lung cancer. And indeed, I know some people who had
00:08:24.780
lung cancer and all but one of them smoked cigarettes. So they're the science and my observation, perfect.
00:08:31.900
I believe that eating a lot of desserts and sugary food will make you gain weight. Science says so.
00:08:38.660
And then I observe my friends. Oh, yeah, the people who eat the most of that kind of food, they gain weight.
00:08:44.000
Very compatible. Do you know anybody who smokes marijuana every day and died of a heart attack?
00:08:49.760
I've never even heard of it. I'm sure it happens. I'm sure it happens. It must happen, right? Because
00:08:58.440
heart attack is pretty common. I've never even heard of it. Or a stroke. Never even heard of it.
00:09:04.820
Now, that's the lowest level. That's a very low level of certainty, right? Because I don't know
00:09:09.980
everybody. I don't know if they smoke every day, right? But I can say that I can't observe it in the
00:09:15.980
real world. Would anybody agree with that observation? That if it's a 25% difference,
00:09:24.260
that feels like enough I would have noticed. Wow, those marijuana smokers are dropping like flies.
0.90
00:09:30.420
25% is big enough to notice in the real world. But I don't. But I don't.
00:09:37.860
Here's the next thing you should look at. Is there anything in the world that's happening
00:09:42.640
that would cause somebody who has money, let's say an industry type of person, maybe somebody in the
00:09:49.640
corporate world, who would want to do a fake study for any reason? Well, is it true that drinking is
00:09:59.400
down among young people? And marijuana is up? Is that true? I believe that's true. Now,
00:10:07.360
if you were the alcohol industry, and you wanted young people to think, you know, maybe that alcohol
00:10:15.080
is a little safer than you thought compared to the marijuana. Because, you know, a lot of kids say,
00:10:20.320
well, the marijuana is safe, the alcohol is not. But maybe the drug, maybe the alcohol industry would
00:10:26.700
like you to believe it's a little closer than you thought you'd risk. Now, that's kind of unfair,
00:10:34.240
isn't it? To blame the alcohol industry for fake studies. I mean, that's pretty unfair.
00:10:40.900
Have they ever done anything like that before? Did we spend 30 years imagining that the studies
00:10:49.000
that said alcohol is good for you, as long as you're moderate about it? And recently we found
00:10:55.040
out that none of that was true. Who do you think funded those studies? The ones that said alcohol
00:11:00.800
is good for your health. Who do you think? When I was a kid, scientists and doctors were saying the
00:11:08.620
cigarettes were good for your health. Because of probably some studies that might have been funded
00:11:14.660
by the cigarette people. I don't know, but probably. So yes, we have one possibility that alcohol use is
00:11:24.060
down. And if you suspected that people are terrible, like they always have been, you would
00:11:29.660
say, huh, who funded the study? So I clicked the link to go look at the study. Do you think it says
00:11:36.120
who funded it? Do you think that's part of the write-up in the medical journal? Who gave us the
00:11:41.880
money? And even if it did say who gave you the money, do you think you'd know the real source?
00:11:46.520
Because it'd be pretty easy to hide who's giving you money. So I'm not saying that there's any
00:11:53.280
direct evidence that the alcohol industry is trying to make marijuana look worse. I'm just saying it
00:11:59.440
would be normal. It would be normal to expect it. Because remember, the alcohol industry isn't one
00:12:06.480
person. It's a whole bunch of individual actors. Any of them could have made the decision to fund the
00:12:11.880
study. All right. Is there anything else, though, in the atmosphere, something in the news that would
00:12:18.720
make somebody want to fake a study? I'm not saying it's fake. I'm saying, is there anything that would
00:12:24.640
make somebody want to fake it? Okay. Is there anything else in the news about, let's say, excess
00:12:32.860
heart disease and strokes? Have you seen anything like that in the news lately? Oh, yes.
00:12:40.560
Yes. There's a massive concern that excess deaths are up, and we don't know why. We don't know why.
00:12:48.840
And some people say it's because of the vaccinations, although I think the excess deaths started before
00:12:54.640
the vaccinations, so I'd need a fact check on that. But if you were the big pharma industry
00:13:00.500
and you thought that people were looking at all-cause mortality and they saw too many heart attacks
00:13:09.580
and strokes and they were going to blame you for it, because you're the ones who rolled out those
00:13:15.260
vaccinations, what would you do if you had dark money to fix things? Well, if it were me, I would
00:13:24.200
confuse the topic by saying, you know, you're right. Young people are having a lot of heart disease,
00:13:30.580
but at the same time, marijuana use among young people is way up. It's all being legalized in
00:13:37.520
states. I feel like, you know, you really can't sort that out. You know, the young people do a lot
00:13:43.400
of marijuana and they have more heart disease lately, but it's probably the more marijuana.
00:13:51.540
You know, there are lots of things going on. It'd be hard to, it's going to be hard to sort out what the
00:13:55.260
actual cause is. Now, I'm not accusing them because I have no direct information. I'm simply telling
00:14:03.120
you how you should look at a study. You should always look who funded it and you should ask
00:14:10.280
yourself, is there anybody who would benefit not just a little bit, but is there anybody who would
00:14:15.680
benefit enormously, like staying in a jail and making a billion dollars? That's a pretty big benefit
00:14:22.720
for doing something that would be sketchy if they did, hypothetically. All right. Here's another
00:14:30.460
one. Do you believe that when they did this study, and it was people, you know, just reporting their
00:14:37.700
own experience, do you think that they only talked to the recreational users? Or did they talk to people
00:14:46.340
who use it medicinally in addition to the people who use it recreationally? What do you think?
00:14:52.720
Well, my guess is that they asked both of them. And what could you imagine would be true about a
00:15:01.840
group of people who use a medicine every day? Would it be true that people who choose to use a
00:15:08.500
medicine every day are among the most healthy people in the world? Or would there be something
00:15:15.100
about that group, the medicine every day group, that might tell you they've got a little bit of
00:15:20.940
maybe less healthy situation in general? And did the study tell you if they broke out the people that
00:15:29.180
they, that are not medicine takers to see if the recreational users are dying at this higher rate?
00:15:35.740
No. All right. So I don't know if the study is good or not. I'm saying that if you didn't know how to
00:15:45.260
look at it with that filter, all those different filters, you'd be a little bit, you know, maybe easier
00:15:52.860
to fool. There's a story, I don't know if it's true yet, but allegedly the company Panera Bread
00:15:58.940
negotiated maybe with Governor Newsom to be exempt from the new minimum wage law, $20 minimum wage.
00:16:08.300
And that's after the owner reportedly donated to Newsom for the New York Post. Now, I think I'd
00:16:15.820
wait a little bit to find out if there's any more details on that, but that would be a direct bribe,
00:16:20.720
wouldn't it? I don't know if it's illegal, but in a common sense way, that would just be a bribe.
00:16:30.480
I don't know what else you'd call it, if it's true. So imagine the amount of opposition research
00:16:37.060
on Newsom that you haven't seen yet. Just, just hold in your mind how much the Republicans must be
00:16:45.840
holding back, you know, just in case they need it. Because they don't need to destroy them until
00:16:50.560
they need to destroy them, and it's too early. So I just feel like there's some group of Republicans
00:16:55.980
who really have the good stuff, like the really good stuff. And they're just like, oh, hold, hold.
00:17:03.840
I don't know how much longer we can hold. But I would say if they slot Newsom in at the last minute
00:17:11.420
for Biden, you're going to see an opposition research drop like you've never seen in your life.
00:17:22.180
It's going to be one for the ages. That's just a guess. It's just a guess. I think it's going to
00:17:26.820
be one for the ages. Keep in mind that Newsom's ex-wife is on the Trump team. If there's anybody who
00:17:38.600
knows where the bodies are buried, I mean, just think about it. What could she tell you or any
00:17:46.920
ex-wife? Just say any ex-wife. What could an ex-wife have on opposition research that nobody else
00:17:55.700
would know? All right. There's a rich guy, Jan Shramek. He was a former Goldman Sachs guy. He's
00:18:05.800
trying to build this whole design from scratch home in California. He needs some kind of ballot
00:18:12.660
approval to get the zoning or whatever. But it's between San Francisco and Sacramento. And it would
00:18:19.760
have 20,000 homes. And they'd build all the transit infrastructure and school and jobs and stuff. Now,
00:18:26.980
Reid Hoffman and Lorena Powell Jobs is also behind this. So it looks like a very Democrat thing,
00:18:37.020
which is irrelevant to the story in this case. But I've been telling you for some time
00:18:42.180
that the biggest economic driver that's not robots, and maybe not AI, will be designing towns from
00:18:50.020
scratch. Designing them from scratch. Do you know how much better a city or a town could be if you
00:18:57.180
designed the whole thing from scratch? Your transportation would be almost zero. Oh, by the
00:19:02.820
way, there's a place like that. You should look into Estonia. Estonia is a little over a million people.
00:19:10.380
And they're very high tech. So everything you need to do in the government in Estonia, you can do on
00:19:17.640
your phone, including paying taxes. You just have an app. So they basically automated the government.
00:19:25.620
They just automated it. You just do stuff on your app, and it's all you need.
00:19:29.500
And transportation in Estonia is free and perfect. You can easily go anywhere, all free. So they don't
00:19:42.780
have much traffic problem, and the pollution is way down. Now, Estonia had the advantage of probably
00:19:49.780
coming after World War II, and maybe it's a smaller place and whatever. But in a way, they're not a
00:19:56.600
perfect example of designing from scratch. But they are a good example of designing, right? So
00:20:04.040
apparently they have a real high education and a lot of, you know, engineer techie people, and they
00:20:09.020
just decided to design it correctly. And look what happened. Apparently it's a pretty good lifestyle
00:20:16.300
there. So designing towns from scratch is the biggest thing, and I hope this works. We know now that
00:20:24.220
Hunter said he was either high or drunk when he did the famous phone call with his Chinese guy.
00:20:31.480
He was trying to shake down for money, and he said, I'm sitting here with my father. He's not going to
00:20:36.940
like it. And that was the $5 million shakedown. And apparently he still got the money. He got the
00:20:43.700
money. And I guess one of the people he was trying to shake down was this guy, Ho. That was his last name,
00:20:52.840
Ho. So I don't know who is the best negotiator in the whole world. Some people say Trump is good at
00:21:03.320
negotiating. He is. But Hunter is the first person I've ever heard of who ever got a Ho to give him
00:21:13.840
money. Yeah. Yep. In my entire life, I've never had a Ho give me a diamond. Not even one time. And I've
00:21:26.000
tried. I'd be like, hey, Ho, got any diamonds? Maybe like a bunch of bad words I can't say. And I'd say,
00:21:35.680
if I were Hunter Biden, I could get that diamond from you, Ho. But no, I don't have his negotiating
00:21:43.040
skills. So what I think, and by the way, he did that while high and drunk. It's sort of like,
00:21:51.000
you know, sort of like doing the dance backwards in high heels. You know what I mean? I mean,
00:21:57.160
that's a higher level of difficulty. He got a diamond from a Ho, and he negotiated while he was high,
0.81
00:22:03.240
either high or drunk. And he was so inebriated, he doesn't even remember. I don't know. Was I high
00:22:07.860
or was I drunk? But got it done. So here's what I think. I think we should send him over there to
00:22:14.380
negotiate with Putin. And, you know, give him six shots of whiskey in a blunt and see if he can make
00:22:22.140
some peace. Because we don't have a negotiator like that anywhere. He's our best guy. Oh, if you don't
00:22:31.900
think Hunter's our best negotiator, please. You're the same people who think Joe Biden isn't the very
00:22:40.060
best person the Democrats have for president. You know, that's not true. So grow up, will you? Just
00:22:48.020
grow up. Well, I guess the thing we call the president, that dried bundle of sticks, soaked in
00:22:57.280
hobo piss that we call Joe Biden, is going to go down to the border and check it out. He's going
0.98
00:23:02.920
down to Brownsville. Going to Brownsville. I'm pretty sure that's what he says every time he goes
00:23:11.500
to the bathroom. All right, I'll be back. Got to go to Brownsville. Anyway, he did not contact the
00:23:21.800
Union, the Border Patrol Union. And so the Border Patrol Union, in response to him going down there
00:23:27.420
today, says, keep our name out of your mouth today. They posted, keep your name out of our mouth
00:23:35.300
today. Because they're afraid that Biden is going to say that the union supports what he requested for
00:23:43.340
border funding. And so keep our name out of your mouth today. Well, Putin has threatened in some
00:23:55.860
speech, you know, nuclear war against the United States if we keep supporting Ukraine. And he asks,
00:24:03.260
you know, what are you, crazy? Don't you know we have nukes that can nuke you? What are you doing?
00:24:06.840
But although Putin is a, let's say he's a formidable leader with a nuclear arsenal and a war that he seems
00:24:17.900
to be winning. But I feel like it's kind of a kind of a close comparison between Biden and Putin. For
00:24:28.120
example, Biden was just on one of those evening shows that's a non-Gottfeld one. You've heard of
00:24:36.000
those. If you watch any late night TV, there's, there's Gottfeld. And then there's like these
00:24:42.640
miscellaneous ones with people who are all the same people. I think they're different people.
00:24:48.140
There's like one is called a Seth and there's a Jimmy and maybe another Jimmy. Are there two
00:24:53.900
Jimmys and a Seth? Something like that. But on one of those shows, Biden, because he can't speak and
00:25:02.300
deliver a joke, they did an elaborate setup where the Biden could get a laugh by simply putting his
00:25:08.860
sunglasses on. So he was, he was asked if he was embracing the, the, what is it? Dark Biden meme,
00:25:19.760
you know, where he acts all awesome and his eyes glow and stuff like that. And to make his case,
00:25:24.820
he put on his sunglasses and that was sort of the punchline. So they literally had to craft the
00:25:30.820
situation where one of the Jimmys or the Seths does all the work to set it up. And all Biden had to do
00:25:37.600
was take out his sunglasses and put them on. It went like this.
00:25:42.820
It was less than awesome. Did the audience love it? Oh,
00:25:57.680
that's my seal impression. Yeah. Seal impression.
00:26:07.060
Well, Biden needs no cognitive test. According to his doctors, he's just fine. And I like to point
00:26:19.820
out that I think he's found the dementia sweet spot, the dementia sweet spot. And this is something we
00:26:26.880
can all aspire to. I want to find that place where I'm still smart enough to be the leader of the entire
00:26:34.240
Democratic Party, but not capable enough to stand trial for my crimes. Sweet spot.
0.57
00:26:44.020
Yeah. It's inspiring if you think about it. He hit that. That's called sticking the landing.
00:26:52.460
Well, Mike Benz, who has miraculously not been assassinated yet. Hmm. That's weird. Uh,
00:26:59.380
but there's more to the story besides the fact that he hasn't been assassinated by the CIA yet.
00:27:04.280
Um, he says, if you guys think Russiagate is over again, you've seen nothing yet.
00:27:09.000
Russiagate 3.0 is going to be the mother of them all. If the Ukraine aid is denied,
00:27:15.120
I would not rule out the blob. That's the security state and the Democrats and permanent people,
0.94
00:27:21.120
et cetera. Uh, the blob burning the entire Republican Party to the ground.
00:27:25.400
Then in its ashes, installing a Nikki Haley. Huh? Well, that's pretty scary. So I guess the idea
00:27:36.860
would be to, you know, jail Trump and, uh, basically take out the Republicans one way or the other and
00:27:43.800
just have a one party system and a complete coup. Now, the only thing that makes me safe, feel safe,
00:27:50.920
is that there aren't any members of the Democratic Party who have any history of using, let's say,
00:27:58.860
the CIA to overthrow countries. What? Are you telling me that there are Democrats and our security,
00:28:08.720
um, apparatus has experience overthrowing countries like with the coups and stuff? Really?
00:28:16.440
Well, how many times have they done it once? 80 times? Oh my God, I should have done more research.
00:28:24.920
80 times? Well, but not in any countries that matter, right? It's like a little, you know,
00:28:30.980
Mauritania and Lusupalaka and Krakpapapapa, you know, basically places you can't, what? Ukraine.
00:28:39.980
Ukraine? My God. 2014, the United States and the Democrats took over an entire country?
00:28:51.160
Wow. So, well, it looks like they can do that. Well, I don't know how much we should worry about
00:28:57.960
this, but it does look possible. I would say that Mike Benn's statement would have looked insane
00:29:05.880
five years ago. It would have looked just insane. Today, it's kind of a coin flip. Now, I think we'll
00:29:14.020
be fine because I'm an optimist, but is it possible that there would be literally a coup in the United
00:29:20.280
States? I don't think so because they already own it. The coup already happened. The coup happened a
00:29:27.840
long time ago. What they do to keep Trump out of office might be just details, but no, they're
00:29:33.460
already firmly in charge. Will they lose the illusion that we have a democracy and the vote
00:29:40.360
counts and all that? They might. So, really, what you're talking about is them just dropping the
00:29:46.060
illusion that voting matters. That might happen. We might lose the illusion that voting matters.
00:29:54.160
All right. Trump did a video in which he called Biden a mental midget and says he's making up
00:30:06.320
stories about him forgetting his wife's name and he explained why that was a fake news. And I kind of
00:30:13.020
liked it because the way Trump did it, he did it with real high energy. Yeah, his usual, but even
00:30:19.560
even really more commanding. So, a lot of it was just showing how commanding he is compared to the
00:30:27.000
competition. You know, he didn't say that, but you could see that he was putting the energy emphasis
00:30:32.860
into it. But that was good. And persuasion-wise, that was good stuff. And the mental midget thing is
1.00
00:30:38.320
very quotable, so that's good stuff. The part where you have to explain why it was fake news is not
00:30:45.780
ideal, but it's better than not doing it. So, anyway, that was a good play.
00:30:55.860
Corinne Jean-Pierre talked about the lack of a cognitive test for Biden and said, quote,
00:31:03.000
folks need to understand that the president passes a cognitive test every day.
00:31:07.740
So, why do we even have them? It makes you wonder why we have them, if you're passing it every day.
00:31:13.960
Anyway, there's nothing they won't tell you that doesn't sound stupid.
00:31:20.180
All right, here's the story, and I want you to see if you can determine what's really going on.
00:31:27.240
All right? So, the story is that there's going to be a new election security task force.
00:31:34.780
Well, that sounds good, doesn't it? An election security task force. Finally,
00:31:39.120
finally, an election security task force. Now, maybe we'll have some, you know, confidence that
00:31:46.100
the election was done correctly. That's good news. Election security task force. Did I ever tell you
00:31:55.260
that if you only know what is happening, you don't know anything? But if you know who, you know
00:32:02.980
everything? Well, maybe we should dig into this a little bit, because the what sounded great.
00:32:09.000
I like having an election security task force. That's exactly what I want. Let's see who's in
00:32:14.220
charge of it. Democratic Governor Shapiro of Pennsylvania. Okay, so the Democrats are going
00:32:24.720
to decide what is fair. Okay, that's terrible. That's terrible. But at least we don't have to worry
00:32:32.420
that he's somehow, you know, working with, because this would be terrible. Imagine if he were working
00:32:38.620
with some kind of intelligence group or CIA. I mean, I'm not suggesting that. I'm just saying that
00:32:46.960
would be terrible, because that would be the worst case scenario, wouldn't it? Imagine that. Imagine if
00:32:52.960
it's a Democrat, so he's already biased. But then on top of that, the people that we imagine would
00:32:59.800
be rigging in elections, you know, intelligence type people. That if he were in any way associated
00:33:07.060
with them or working with them, that would make this story look pretty bad. Let's see. I read this
00:33:12.540
story in NBC News. NBC News. So is there anybody here who doesn't make that connection?
00:33:22.960
So I listen to Glenn Greenwald, who's always saying that NBC News is the primary CIA outlet where
00:33:36.580
they put their stories out. So you've got a CIA identified outlet that most of the country doesn't
00:33:41.860
know that. And you've got a Democrat saying he's going to do election security. You should assume
00:33:47.700
that that that really means the opposite. It looks a lot more like protecting fraud than detecting it.
00:33:54.540
So remember my rule. If you only know what is happening, you don't know anything. If you know who is
00:34:03.800
involved, you know everything. Allegedly. Speaking of rigging, an Illinois judge just ruled that Trump
00:34:19.900
should be removed from the state ballot, citing the insurrectionist ban. Let's see if you can guess.
00:34:29.660
Is there anybody here who is not up on that story? For only the people who are not up on the story,
00:34:36.900
what would you guess is the demographic of the judge? If you guessed black Democrat judge,
00:34:45.400
you'd probably be right on. Right. Now, am I saying that there's something wrong with black women?
1.00
00:34:52.660
No. If you're hearing that, you're hearing the wrong story. Am I saying there's a clear correlation
00:35:01.480
of black women, judges, attorney generals, prosecutors, going after Trump in what looks
00:35:09.860
like a weaponized prosecution? Yes. The correlation is unmistakable. Couldn't possibly miss it. Is that me
00:35:18.240
saying there's something wrong with black women? No. You could replace the black women in the story
1.00
00:35:25.900
with anybody and get the same result under the condition that the person you replaced them with
00:35:33.920
had also been told that they're stopping Hiller and specifically somebody who's bad for them in
00:35:40.880
particular. So let's say you spent seven years telling the country that if you're an Elbonian,
00:35:49.200
Trump hates you. Oh, he's so prejudiced against Elbonians. And not only that, if you're an Elbonian
00:35:55.680
woman, he's probably raped you a few times. Am I right? And if he hasn't gotten around to you yet,
00:36:02.980
well, it's only because he's going twice on E.G. and Carroll. He's going to get around to it,
00:36:07.500
all that raping and pussy grabbing. So you're an Elbonian woman and every day you wake up and the
1.00
00:36:13.620
news tells you that you've got somebody who's a candidate who's a Elbonian pussy grabbing
0.99
00:36:20.760
prejudice against Elbonians. And he might be Hiller. He's not just a little prejudice. He might be
00:36:28.040
Hiller level prejudice. All right. Now you're a judge and you're an Elbonian woman and you become a
00:36:35.160
judge. And by weird coincidence, the very person who's the monster against all Elbonians,
0.98
00:36:42.420
especially the Elbonian women, he hasn't gotten around to raping yet. What are you going to do?
00:36:48.840
Do you use your power to stop Hiller or do you let history judge you because you allowed that monster
00:36:55.500
to go to get into office and start discriminating, probably rounding up and raping every Elbonian
0.98
00:37:02.080
woman he can find? What is the more ethical and moral way to go? I would argue that this black female
1.00
00:37:11.760
judge did the most moral and ethical thing you could do under the circumstances, which is that
00:37:18.000
her illusion is that she's stopping Hiller. Likewise, the prosecutors in all of the cases against him,
00:37:25.960
the AGs and the prosecutors, who are black and especially women, again, nothing wrong with being
1.00
00:37:32.000
black, nothing wrong with being a woman. That's fine. It's just that that demographic was targeted to be
1.00
00:37:38.440
brainwashed extra hard because the Democrats need to keep them, you know, keep them in the Democrat fold.
00:37:45.840
So with no malice or bad feelings for the black female judge,
0.99
00:37:57.660
And she has been targeted by the brainwashers to act exactly the way she act. Clearly,
0.58
00:38:05.620
clearly a non-legal ruling and just trying to stop Hiller. So when this is retold, people will say,
00:38:13.840
my God, what did that cartoonist say about black people today? But you all heard me, right?
0.86
00:38:19.120
It's not about being black. It's not about being a woman. It's about that group being targeted by
1.00
00:38:26.180
her own dark forces to be brainwashed a little extra hard. And it worked. You think brainwashing
00:38:33.840
doesn't work? Of course it does. That's why there are two parties. Of course it does.
00:38:40.020
So I would expect that to get reversed, but who knows? Speaking of the Supreme Court,
00:38:49.580
they've decided to take up the case of whether the president has blanket immunity while in office.
00:38:56.920
Now, I'd like to give you Rachel Maddow's take on this, if I could. Rachel Maddow talking about the
00:39:07.060
Supreme Court taking up the case. I think there were some words in there, too. But I can't pretend
00:39:22.420
it's not mental illness anymore. You just have to watch any video of Rachel Maddow. It is obvious
00:39:31.740
mental illness. It's not a difference of opinion. Now, hold on.
00:39:40.100
Do I think that Rachel Maddow has something wrong with her? Actually, no. It might surprise you.
00:39:48.820
I think she's very smart, and I think she probably means well for the country.
00:39:53.040
Are you surprised? She's very smart, like super smart, way smarter than me, and means well for the
1.00
00:40:00.700
country. I'm almost positive. I mean, but she is in a demographic group which has been targeted
00:40:09.860
by the brainwashers to believe that she and she alone, with her influence, can stop Hitler
0.62
00:40:19.980
from coming to office and rounding up the entire LGBT community and putting them in jail.
0.98
00:40:27.960
What would you do if you had been brainwashed into thinking Trump was Hitler and that he had
00:40:36.960
some special problem with women and LGBTQ? What would you do? Well, if it were me, I would do what
00:40:44.960
she is doing. I would be really, really upset emotionally that he could be coming to office
00:40:52.260
again. That would bother me a lot if I had been brainwashed like she is. So I think she's within
00:40:59.680
her brainwashed state, she's acting completely morally and ethically, I think. It's just that
00:41:09.140
she's in a brainwashed state. So when we watch it, it's obvious mental illness. It's obvious.
00:41:14.960
But, you know, maybe her viewers can't tell the difference because they're in the same state.
00:41:25.020
Anyway, well, she's not the only one talking about it, of course. There are others such
00:41:31.940
as Chris Hayes, her co-worker there on MSNBC. And he said this, quote, that the Supreme Court
00:41:40.440
order to saying that they would hear the case was a clear, unmistakable sign from the MAGA majority
00:41:47.020
of the Trump-created court that they are with him. Does that feel like a reasonable interpretation?
00:41:56.100
Who in the world thinks that the members of the Supreme Court that Trump nominated are MAGA?
00:42:04.500
Are you kidding me? I didn't think there's even one person who thinks that. And of course, he's confusing his viewers
00:42:12.480
because his viewers don't know the difference between a conservative judge
00:42:22.460
You know, they share a conservative worldview, but it's only the conservative part.
00:42:30.480
You know, whatever the MAGA energy is, is purely political.
00:42:34.660
You know, a lot of it is about personality. Honestly, it's about personality.
00:42:38.440
It's a lifestyle. You know, there's a whole bunch going on,
00:42:41.980
whatever makes the MAGA supporters, which I don't identify with, frankly.
00:42:46.920
I like them. I just, I'm not one of them. I'm not a hat wearer.
00:42:50.700
But to, to paint the Supreme Court as a MAGA majority, do you feel like that's setting up
00:43:01.160
for, let's say, a coup? Because the only thing protecting us from the Democrat terror
00:43:10.260
is the Supreme Court. So if they don't get rid of the Supreme Court, they can't do anything
00:43:15.660
that they want to do. They're going to end up with a Trump presidency if they don't get rid of it.
0.94
00:43:20.720
a warning sign that the Democrats are ready to take down the court,
00:43:32.760
they could do before the end of the year, couldn't they?
00:43:44.700
all of their plans to get rid of Trump could just disappear with one order.
00:44:00.520
there's still be a process to put them through.
00:44:03.300
But he wouldn't be able to get them affirmed, though, right?
00:44:05.340
He would need more, more support from the Republicans.