Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2472 CWSA 05⧸12⧸24

00:00:00.000 this. I spend a lot of time at Starbucks just working and I get to watch all the orders that

00:00:08.400 people are putting in and picking up and at some point I realized that Starbucks is basically a

00:00:14.700 liquid candy store for women. Now men do buy things at Starbucks. Do you know what the men

00:00:21.320 buy at Starbucks? Coffee. Do you know what the women buy? A big old cup of sugar that has, you know, 1.00

00:00:33.880 any variety of names. But the women are just coming in for liquid candy and the men are coming 1.00

00:00:40.800 in for probably something closer to coffee. Anyway, it's a pretty big difference.

00:00:46.420 The Ninth Circuit has ruled, according to Breitbart, they have a story here about

00:00:53.320 that even a felon has the right to possess a firearm for self-defense. So a three-judge panel

00:01:00.480 in the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, said that this guy, Stephen Duarte, has a right.

00:01:07.940 Now I was not terribly interested in this specific case, but you know how everything is related to

00:01:14.560 everything. And I'm trying to figure out, is the Ninth Circuit the one that is famously liberal?

00:01:23.860 Can you give me a fact check on that? In the back of my mind, I'm thinking, is that true? That the

00:01:30.620 Ninth Circuit is famously considered a liberal court or do I have that wrong? I'm seeing some confirmation

00:01:38.520 of that. Now, why would you, why would you expect a liberal leading court to say that a felon could

00:01:46.200 have the right to own a gun? That's, you'd typically expect it to go the other way, wouldn't you?

00:01:53.900 Is there anything that would make you think that maybe there's something else going on with this

00:02:00.280 story? Is there a case of a certain son of a president who was also a felon who also wanted a

00:02:07.920 gun? Do you think it's a coincidence that this famously liberal court just decided that the very

00:02:15.540 specific crime that Hunter Biden seems to be guilty of, it's the one time they go against their liberal

00:02:21.740 bias? Well, I guess they're pretty pro-gun when there's a felon who's a Democrat that has one. 0.79

00:02:31.040 I don't know. That's just my own conspiracy theory, but it does stand out as sort of a flag,

00:02:37.340 doesn't it? Doesn't it make you think maybe that's just all about Hunter? It's hard not to have that

00:02:43.880 connection in your head, even if it's unrelated. Now, I think the answer is right, by the way.

00:02:49.040 I don't disagree with the ruling. It's hard for me to say that just because you're a convicted felon

00:02:54.420 that you shouldn't have a gun. I think it should depend on what you got convicted for,

00:03:00.100 maybe. If you were using a gun to shoot people or rob them, well, maybe that would be a case that

00:03:07.240 you've given up your rights to have a gun. But if you were a felon for something that wasn't violent,

00:03:12.240 maybe just stole some money or something, or in the case of Hunter, I feel like that's a little bit

00:03:23.240 too much infringement of their rights to take away their right to bear arms. Who agrees with me? Are

00:03:30.420 you on the same page? That it might be, if you did a violent crime with a gun or even a violent crime,

00:03:36.500 I suppose, you can imagine how the court would take your right away because it takes your other

00:03:41.880 rights away. It could put you in jail. All right. Well, all right. There's a, uh, there's a Boeing

00:03:49.940 whistleblower. Another one has come forward. There's a, and, uh, oh, update. He's been killed.

00:03:56.320 He's been killed. No, I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. That's not funny. It's not funny that

00:04:02.880 whistleblowers get killed all the time. But, uh, Mario, uh, lawful is reporting that, uh,

00:04:10.180 Santiago Paredes, who worked for spirit, uh, Aerosystems, he's, uh, this Boeing's largest supplier

00:04:16.980 and he was a quality control person. They called the showstopper. We're always slowing down

00:04:22.480 production because he tried to address safety concerns. And he, he says things like, quote,

00:04:28.720 I was finding a lot of missing fasteners, a lot of bent parts, sometimes even missing parts

00:04:34.400 and I'll never fly again. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, uh, air travel is no longer in part of

00:04:42.760 my life. Now that the person in charge of quality says that bad parts were just marching in at the

00:04:49.620 factory like crazy, but, uh, he's still alive. He might be the bravest person in the history

00:04:56.180 of whistleblowers. Do you know what, do you know what I don't do? Um, let me write something down

00:05:06.460 here. Take care of business later. Let me just do this. All right.

00:05:19.620 Taking care of a little business there. Anyway, he's a pretty brave whistleblower. Uh, personally,

00:05:27.800 if the first two whistleblowers die in suspicious circumstances, if it's me, I don't really blow

00:05:35.740 any whistles after the first two go down. Well, what's your number of whistleblowers before you'll

00:05:40.940 be disappointed? You know, you'll decide not to do it. I'm like two is my maximum. Now, some people

00:05:51.760 will be like, okay, the last 27 whistleblowers were slaughtered. I think I, I like my chances,

00:05:58.760 but not me, not me. If two whistleblowers die, I just shut up. I just say, shut up. 0.97

00:06:08.540 Well, uh, president, uh, former president Trump came out and said he was not suggesting, 0.95

00:06:14.260 we're not considering Nikki Haley as a vice presidential running mate. Now I would like to

00:06:22.480 mock everybody who believed Axios reporting about the two, uh, anonymous sources that said he was

00:06:29.720 considering Nikki Haley. How many of you believed that when you read it? Because I'd be disappointed

00:06:37.200 that I taught you nothing. Two anonymous sources that are going to say something bad about a Republican

00:06:44.800 that's coming from a Democrat source and on its surface looks ridiculous. Put all that together 0.92

00:06:53.260 on its surface. It sounds ridiculous that you would consider Nikki Haley, right? Just on the surface, 0.87

00:06:58.800 it sounds ridiculous. Comes from a well-known, you know, a very Democrat source. And there are two 0.92

00:07:07.440 anonymous people talking about it. That is every signal for a fake news. That's everyone.

00:07:14.800 You got them all right there. And sure enough, I told you it was fake news and it took about a

00:07:20.960 minute and a half to confirm it. So the only thing about that that's interesting is if you fell for

00:07:26.320 that ever, then you missed the really big signals. But that one was glaringly, obviously fake.

00:07:35.120 Well, apparently president Biden has signed the tick tock ban bill, uh, which is more of a divestment

00:07:42.880 bill. Divest it from China. But China says they don't want to divest it and they're going to fight

00:07:47.600 it in a course. So we don't know what will really happen. I would say that it is, uh, far too soon.

00:07:53.760 I'm going to cover up the comments with just the locals. Oh, that's perfect. If I put my, uh,

00:08:00.880 on my phone separately, I look at the comments just from locals. So I can, and it covers up perfectly the,

00:08:08.000 uh, the trolls because I don't have the trolls on locals. Perfect. So if you want me to see your

00:08:14.400 comments, uh, then you should be a member of, uh, locals. If you like the comment just so other

00:08:20.960 people can see it, then you can be in there with the trolls. I don't have a way to stop the trolls

00:08:27.200 with this setup. Anyway, um, tick tock bill got banned. So I went to grok the AI on X. And I said,

00:08:37.440 who was the first public figure who recommended banning tick tock? Do you know what it said?

00:08:44.640 It said me now it may have been prompted by that, by some, some, uh, tweets.

00:08:53.280 I don't know if I was really the first one, but, uh, it did. It looks like, um, something's

00:09:01.760 going to happen. I wouldn't, I think it's too early to celebrate anything because first of all,

00:09:07.120 it's just taking it out of China's control and putting it in our CIA's control. I think, 0.82

00:09:12.640 I mean, that, that seems like the plan. So it's not like you got more freedom,

00:09:17.040 but at least, uh, it's not an adversary who's controlling it. Now you're being brainwashed by

00:09:21.840 your own people who are trying to rob you completely different. I feel much better when

00:09:26.480 I get mugged, mugged by a family member. All right. But let me see how many things do you think that

00:09:36.080 the situation in Israel changed in my opinion? And let's see if you agree. I don't think there's

00:09:42.560 any way that would have been the TikTok ban would have succeeded, uh, except for TikTok

00:09:50.080 favoring the Palestinian cause over Israel. Do you all agree that that, that was decisive?

00:09:56.560 And obviously so, right? Wouldn't you say? Because it went from, wow, this TikTok ban's kind of crazy,

00:10:02.400 anti-free speech. And it went to, oh, let's get rid of this right away.

00:10:06.160 Okay. That was entirely because of the October 7th and so much Palestinian support on TikTok, 0.91

00:10:12.800 right? So I would say that the TikTok ban, which is a really big deal, you know, should it actually

00:10:20.160 happen? Um, and that was entirely Israel's influence. Now, when I say Israel's influence, 0.93

00:10:27.680 I don't mean that there weren't Americans who wanted it too. And for the same reason,

00:10:32.880 they were planning. And I don't mean that it was only people who were citizens of Israel,

00:10:38.480 because there had to be, you know, a ton of Jewish Americans who said,

00:10:42.720 maybe this isn't good for us. Maybe we should do something different.

00:10:47.360 So I'm in favor of it, but we should, we should note that, uh, the October 7th thing probably was a big,

00:10:53.920 big push there. How about the presidential elections of 2024? In my opinion, the, uh,

00:11:02.240 the TikTok situation and the protests and really the whole Gaza situation largely guarantees that 0.97

00:11:09.520 Trump's going to get elected. Do you disagree? Because I think Trump just screwed the pooch so hard 0.98

00:11:18.560 that the pro-Israel base in America is just changed his mind. I mean, even the news looks like it changed 0.95

00:11:26.640 on a dime that the news went from, you know, Trump is the worst monster in the world to, well, you know,

00:11:34.320 he had a point about the border and, you know, it does seem that, uh, his numbers are looking really 0.51

00:11:41.520 good. And it does seem that, you know, it seems like the entire tone of everything changed.

00:11:48.320 As soon as Biden was not completely on board with everything Israel wanted,

00:11:52.320 uh, the news coverage really changed. I mean, it seemed to, to me. So I think that Israel will be 0.99

00:11:59.920 the driver of who wins the 2024 election. Lots of variables there, but that seems like the biggest

00:12:05.600 one at the moment. But what about this? Uh, what about Ukraine funding? Do you think Ukraine would have

00:12:12.480 been funded if they hadn't tied it to Israel, to Israel's funding? I say, no, I'm not sure that Ukraine

00:12:21.760 would have been funded. So the October 7th probably got rid of TikTok, probably determined our next

00:12:30.320 president and probably determined the fate of the war in Ukraine. Am I wrong? Which of those things were

00:12:40.960 not, um, very much influenced by the October 7th and all the, the blowback after that?

00:12:51.440 I'm seeing some disagreement in the comments, but I'm not sure exactly what you're disagreeing with.

00:13:00.560 All right. Yeah. I mean, Israel, obviously Israel's not the only influence on these things, but to me,

00:13:06.960 they look like they were, uh, decisive, meaning that these were all issues that were very decisive.

00:13:12.720 They're, they're very evenly split. But as soon as October 7th happened, boom, three issues went in

00:13:20.160 the direction that you'd expect. Well, I would like to, um, say that my best predictions are the ones that

00:13:31.200 seemed impossible when I made them. Yeah. Here are some, you know, um, I don't make any claim that

00:13:38.000 I'm good at predicting things that are sort of ordinary. An ordinary thing would be a president

00:13:44.080 decides on a vice president for a running mate. That's sort of an ordinary thing. I'm not really

00:13:49.600 good at predicting who the vice president will be. So if it's ordinary business, I'm no better than anybody

00:13:55.200 else guessing what's going to happen, but I've had some really weird ones where I predicted the

00:14:00.720 impossible. All right. Not really impossible, but listen to some of these predictions. So the famous

00:14:08.160 one of course was that, uh, in 2016, Trump would win. So, you know, that kind of put me on the

00:14:15.440 predicting map a little bit, but not, not long after that, I also predicted that, um, or I was advocating that

00:14:24.080 during the pandemic, when it first started that we should shut down travel to China. Do you remember

00:14:30.720 when you, if you did, if you first heard me say that we should shut travel from China,

00:14:36.400 just until we figure out what's going on. Did you think that was impossible?

00:14:42.000 I kind of thought it might be impossible because we'd never done it before, but we did.

00:14:47.040 Um, banning TikTok looked impossible in 2018 when I said I was going to get a band.

00:14:54.960 Here it is. Did you think that was going to happen? I don't think there's anybody who thought I was

00:14:59.840 going to get TikTok banned, but did I? Well, no. In the, in the end, you know, in the final decision,

00:15:07.760 I had no influence at all. However, here's a little influence trick. You can't decide to do something

00:15:16.800 or not to do something until the something is in the air. Well, let me say it again. You can't decide

00:15:23.920 to do or not do a thing until you're thinking about it. It has to be in your head. And I think

00:15:31.200 that what I did was make it possible to think about banning TikTok, where it wasn't really possible to

00:15:38.480 think about it until somebody talked about it enough. I think if you talk about it enough,

00:15:43.600 it moves it from the unthinkable to the thinkable. And once it becomes thinkable,

00:15:50.160 then other people can decide on their own, maybe for their own reasons that they want to ban it,

00:15:54.720 but they won't do it until it's thinkable, right? It has to be on the option set.

00:15:59.920 So I believe that what I did was I put it on the option set. I wanted one other people who did that.

00:16:05.520 There were others. What about the idea of attacking the cartels with the military?

00:16:13.200 That's another example. I don't know if that's going to happen, but we have reports that Trump

00:16:17.920 was asking questions about special forces. I think that we have a working arrangement with

00:16:24.720 the cartels with our military and intelligence. So I don't think there'll be any military action

00:16:30.160 against them. And I don't think that Trump has been fully briefed that the United States uses the

00:16:36.400 cartels for our own interests. Talk about more about that as we get. So, but now it's, it's being

00:16:45.520 considered. So once again, it was something that you couldn't really decide to do or not do because

00:16:51.680 it wasn't even a thing, but I'm one of the people who kept saying it and saying and saying it until

00:16:56.880 you could at least think that it was thinkable and it had to become thinkable. It had to become

00:17:02.960 thinkable. Now you can think it.

00:17:05.360 How about the, remember the embassy's secret weapon? And when the CIA said, oh, it's definitely a secret

00:17:12.960 weapon. And everybody in the news said it's a secret weapon. And a hundred percent of the world

00:17:16.880 said it's a secret weapon. And I said, that's not a secret weapon. And it turned out, as far as we know

00:17:23.600 at the moment, no secret weapon. So those were, those are my weirdest predictions because all of

00:17:29.920 them seemed impossible when I made them. And we'll see if I can do any more of that. Let's see.

00:17:38.160 Ontario, the wait is over. The gold standard of online casinos has arrived. Golden Nugget online

00:17:45.440 casino is live, bringing Vegas style excitement and a world-class gaming experience right to your

00:17:50.960 fingertips. Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting signing up is fast and simple. And

00:17:56.640 in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots and top tier

00:18:01.640 table games. Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots that can turn

00:18:06.800 any mundane moment into a golden opportunity at Golden Nugget online casino. Take a spin on the slots,

00:18:13.520 challenge yourself at the tables, or join a live dealer game to feel the thrill of real-time action,

00:18:18.480 all from the comfort of your own devices. Why settle for less when you can go for the gold

00:18:23.280 at Golden Nugget online casino. Gambling problem? Call Connex Ontario, 1-866-531-2600. 19 and over,

00:18:32.080 physically present in Ontario. Eligibility restrictions apply. See goldennuggetcasino.com

00:18:36.880 for details. Please play responsibly. Well, Trump was in Wildwood, New Jersey, a perfect name for a

00:18:44.120 place to have the biggest rally in all of history. His supporters say it could be a hundred thousand

00:18:50.120 people. Democrats, of course, are going to say it's far less than that. But suppose it's 50,000.

00:18:58.520 Suppose it's 50,000.

00:19:02.120 Might be. But a hundred thousand would be crazy.

00:19:05.560 Trump said that Biden is a total moron and the whole world is laughing at him. 1.00

00:19:13.800 Correct. Do you think there's anybody, any of the leaders of the other countries who are not 1.00

00:19:18.600 laughing at Biden? And don't you think that every single leader thinks Trump is a more capable leader

00:19:26.040 than Biden? I'll bet. I'll bet there's not a single world leader who thinks Biden is a better leader than

00:19:34.200 Trump. And do you remember when everybody thought, oh, no, they're going to laugh at that clown. 0.99

00:19:40.760 They're going to laugh at that clown. Well, look who's getting the last laugh now. 0.94

00:19:45.880 No. Well, Trump, in his classic Trump way that I always tell you, he gets right. He can summarize

00:19:57.000 better than anybody can summarize. He can brand better than brand. He has exactly the right nicknames

00:20:03.560 and words. And here he says again, just listen to the sentence. He supports Israel's right to win

00:20:10.760 its war on terror. And we're done. That's perfect. That's just perfect. He supports their right to

00:20:22.280 win its war on terror. How in the world do you argue with that statement? How in the world do you argue

00:20:31.240 with it? Now, of course, you know, Biden might say the same thing. You know, if asked, he might say,

00:20:37.880 of course, I support the right to win. But then he would add lots of caveats like, oh,

00:20:42.840 but we don't want to pay for the big bombs. And, you know, yes, but only if you do it the way we

00:20:47.720 think is approved. And yes, but if you do it at the greater loss of life of the IDF to save some

00:20:54.600 civilians, which I'm not saying is a bad idea. I'm just describing. It gets all murky and it doesn't

00:21:03.720 sound like you quite support him, does it? But if you just say, boom, I support Israel's right to

00:21:11.720 win its war on terror. Any questions? No, that pretty much clears everything up. Now, why can't

00:21:21.720 we have a president who can be that clear? You know, why does it have to be a gray area with Biden?

00:21:27.000 We could have no gray areas. We could just have clarity. He's offering that. Well,

00:21:35.160 Zero Hedge is reporting that consumers' sentiment about Bidenomics is cratered,

00:21:42.760 going through the floor. So the University of Michigan has this latest report card on Bidenomics.

00:21:50.440 And it's really, really super, super unpopular. Total disaster unexpectedly plunged from 77 to 67.

00:22:01.160 However, they did also change their method of polling. So here's why you can't really trust any news

00:22:11.560 report. So you start reading the thing and it sounds like, wow, there's this sudden tremendous drop in

00:22:19.000 support for Biden. But by the time you get to the end, they talk about how they moved from phone

00:22:25.720 polls to online polls. And then they got a big different answer. That's the story. Duh. No,

00:22:34.760 the story is you polled differently. The story is not people change their minds. This story should say

00:22:42.120 a difference in how they polled got a different answer.

00:22:44.600 It shouldn't say there's some kind of cratering or plunging of people's opinions. No, they just

00:22:51.240 changed how they polled. You should say nothing about it. You should just not even report it. It

00:22:58.360 actually becomes non-newsworthy because there's nothing to compare it to. If you had a comparison,

00:23:05.240 it'd be newsworthy. But if they get rid of their own ability to compare it to their last poll,

00:23:10.440 I think you got to wait for the one after that and the one after that.

00:23:17.400 All right. North Carolina's, this is in the Federalist, North Carolina's early voting locations

00:23:23.640 illegally favor Democrats. Well, how would you do that? Suppose you had a law that says you can put

00:23:29.160 all these early voting, I guess they're ballot pickup places, and you could put them around your state,

00:23:36.200 and that was all legal. And the law said that you can't put them in places that would be

00:23:42.120 super biased. In other words, you can't only put them in the Republican areas

00:23:46.920 or only put them in the Democrat areas. Obviously, that would bias the outcome.

00:23:51.880 So what did the Democrats do? They put them all on college campuses. 0.96

00:23:55.640 The exact thing you don't want anybody to do. Now, because the college campuses are overwhelmingly 1.00

00:24:04.440 Democrat, and if they have most of the ballot boxes and students are lazy, they're more likely

00:24:10.280 to vote by, I would imagine, they're more likely to vote by mail. And so there's a court case to

00:24:17.960 challenge that. Now, I'm going to put this in the category of if there's any way to make anything

00:24:26.040 cheat in elections, one of the teams is going to do it. It's not just Democrats, right? If it's cheatable

00:24:34.360 and you have any legal maneuvering or you think you can get away with, they're all going to do it.

00:24:39.240 See, the stakes are way too high. When you have lots of people involved and the stakes are high,

00:24:45.240 rigging is guaranteed. We act like maybe it happened. I think that's the funniest thing.

00:24:55.000 We have a system designed that guarantees cheating. It guarantees it. We make the outcome

00:25:03.080 super, super valuable. You know, President of the United States, control of the Congress,

00:25:07.640 really, really, really valuable. Maybe the most valuable thing

00:25:10.920 of all things because it controls so much money, you know, American money. So anyway,

00:25:25.400 well, I'm going to bail out of that point because it wasn't important. So yes, so we've got lots of

00:25:30.840 situations where if you can cheat, people would be expected to cheat. That's all I'm going to say.

00:25:35.960 If you've got a design that compensates people and doesn't punish them if they get caught,

00:25:41.640 or they think they can not get caught, it's guaranteed. Guaranteed. So you don't even need

00:25:49.160 to talk about the details. You have a system that if you just said, here's my system on paper,

00:25:55.880 and then I'm just going to implement this and then run it year after year, you could predict what would

00:26:00.520 happen. It's the design. It guarantees bad outcomes. All right. Let's talk about hypocrisy in the news.

00:26:10.840 So at the Stormy Daniels trial, you know, you've got Trump who's in trouble for not that he did

00:26:18.360 anything with Stormy, but rather the way he recorded the expenses as legal expenses. And it's being

00:26:26.200 being pointed out, pointed out, I think Jonathan Turley and others have said this, that when Hillary

00:26:32.600 Clinton paid to fund the Steele dossier, she hid that by calling it a legal expense. 0.90

00:26:38.360 So as far as I can tell, it's exactly the same accused crime. And it's all established facts.

00:26:52.360 Isn't it all completely the same? Hiding your expenses as a legal expense when it was really

00:26:59.640 something else. I heard, who is the dumb person arguing this? Oh, I made the mistake of turning 0.99

00:27:07.080 on the, on the TV and the Young Turks was on. And one of the young, one of the guests of the Young

00:27:13.640 Turks, or maybe he's a host, I don't know. It wasn't Cenk, but it was somebody else. He was saying,

00:27:19.000 oh, what was it? He was saying it was different. Anyway, he was doing an analysis of the case

00:27:30.760 that was so pathetically irrational that I wondered if his, his viewers knew it.

00:27:38.280 But I'll remember in a minute. So we've got the, Hillary did basically the same thing that 1.00

00:27:42.600 Trump's on trial for. Will anybody mention that on the left? No, the left has no idea.

00:27:47.800 Do you think, how many Democrats would know that Hillary even had paid for the Steele dossier and

00:27:55.240 that it was all fake and that it was a legal expense? How many people even know that on the,

00:28:00.840 on the left? Probably nobody. I'll bet you can't even find anybody who knows that. Even one person.

00:28:07.800 So they can get away with hypocrisy if nobody knows it. And now we've got the situation of Boxgate.

00:28:13.960 So that was the Stormy trial. But on the Boxgate trial, the Mar-a-Lago boxes, Jack Smith

00:28:20.120 apparently has admitted to altering some evidence, some documentary evidence.

00:28:27.160 So you know that story that some things were, some cover sheets were added in that makes it look like

00:28:34.840 it was more classified than it was. And maybe some stuff came from the, from the GSA. And so this whole

00:28:42.840 story is getting muddled. But turns out that if you really look at some of the charges that were given

00:28:50.040 the January 6 people, they were the same charges that Jack Smith has admitted to doing, which is

00:28:57.000 is altering evidence in a, you know, a government process.

00:29:03.000 So that's pretty sketchy.

00:29:08.440 Oh, so the, uh, the young Turk was arguing that, uh, Trump was guilty 0.99

00:29:15.640 because the only reason he was trying to hide his expenses

00:29:20.440 were for legal reasons or no for, for personal reasons.

00:29:27.240 And that there was some other case and a Democrat was, um, only doing it.

00:29:34.520 So somehow he imagined that, uh, Republicans only do things for personal reasons.

00:29:40.200 Uh, no only do it for political reasons, but Democrats were doing it for other reasons. 0.76

00:29:45.640 I mean, it was just completely not as confused as my explanation of it. But let's just say,

00:29:52.120 if you're watching the young Turks to figure out what's going on, you'd be pretty confused.

00:29:57.000 So I guess there were some, uh, famous people attended, uh, the stormy trial,

00:30:01.240 the last day of it on Friday, I think Judge Jeanine was there and, uh, Joy Behar. I think they were

00:30:08.040 there at the same time. Imagine being in the same room with Judge Jeanine and Joy Behar.

00:30:13.160 I think if they touched, there would be like an explosion. It would be like matter and anti-matter

00:30:20.600 kind of thing. Joy Behar, uh, manages to go to this and her only take, uh, her takeaway was that

00:30:27.960 Trump is more orange in person. That's really all they have. Have you noticed that they've completely

00:30:34.840 given up on policy arguments that there's total capitulation that they're down to,

00:30:42.040 he scares me and he's more orange than I thought? That's all they have. He scares me for reasons I

00:30:50.200 can't articulate. And, uh, he's much more orange than I imagined and he's selfish here. Here's also the 0.79

00:31:00.200 dumbest thing that Democrats say. They say that, uh, Trump is only in it for himself. 0.99

00:31:07.400 Well, first of all, how could you possibly know that? That's mind reading. Secondly,

00:31:14.520 it doesn't matter because the presidency is the only job where you could be in it completely for yourself,

00:31:21.800 but it's all transparent. What did you do? Did you, did you build a wall just for yourself?

00:31:30.040 Well, maybe it was good for you politically, but a lot of us people, a lot of us wanted a wall.

00:31:35.960 So how in the world does the president do something completely selfish and make it work?

00:31:41.720 I don't know how you could do that. If the president isn't doing public things for the public good

00:31:49.080 that are obviously for the public good, then that, that president loses, they get a bad reputation,

00:31:55.400 they get impeached, they don't get a second term. The only way a president can do a good job for

00:32:01.480 themselves is to do an amazing job for the public. So if you put a, a big old narcissist in the job,

00:32:10.440 whose main interest is looking good, that person's going to do the best job because they really,

00:32:17.560 really want to look good. And the only way you can do it is by doing a good job. There's no other way

00:32:22.200 to do it. So there, there's just complete nonsense in terms of the, of the complaints about Trump at this

00:32:32.360 point. Um, and wokeness was showing a list of, uh, different countries, uh, and showing that a new

00:32:42.680 survey says seven out of 10 Europeans believe that their country is accepting too many migrants.

00:32:48.280 So these are the numbers of countries who by over 70% say their own country is accepting too many 1.00

00:32:55.960 migrants over 70%. 70%. There are very few topics where you can get the public to be 70% or more on one

00:33:07.640 side. And in Greece it's 90%. In Ireland it's 78%, right? But these are all over 70%. Greece,

00:33:15.240 Cyprus, Ireland, Austria, Germany, Bulgaria, Poland, Italy, France, Spain, and Sweden.

00:33:20.840 So every one of them has a major incentive to stop the immigration and it's not happening.

00:33:29.320 So does democracy work anywhere?

00:33:35.160 If you've got a 70 plus majority in a really simple issue, let in more people, don't let in 1.00

00:33:42.920 more people. You know, everybody can understand the entire issue. There's no complication there

00:33:47.640 whatsoever. And you and your citizens can't get that three out of four. In Germany, 77% of citizens

00:33:55.880 want to stop of immigration or slow down. Can't get that done. So do you think that democracy works? 1.00

00:34:04.200 Obviously not. It couldn't be more obviously. Now I know we're, you know, we're not a democracy.

00:34:10.360 We're a republic with democratic principles, et cetera. But it seems very clear that if you have

00:34:17.480 a Soros-like bag of money that you can find the weak spots in the system and then exploit the

00:34:24.360 weaknesses. And the weaknesses might be you just have to buy, you know, X number of politicians.

00:34:30.760 That's it. It might be cheap to get. And then it doesn't matter what the voters think

00:34:35.560 if you get the right politicians in your pocket. So I will say again that the United States is not

00:34:42.120 any kind of a democracy and not any kind of a republic with democratic principles.

00:34:47.400 We are a criminal organization and have been for a long time. I will say also provocatively,

00:34:53.800 it's the best form of government because democracies don't last. But a criminal organization might.

00:35:00.680 All right. So, yeah, we probably need to do something about that. Well, here's again Jonathan Turley.

00:35:12.680 He's one of the many people noticing that the New York Times has an editorial in which they're

00:35:17.160 turning against cancel culture. Oh, finally, they're turning against cancel culture.

00:35:23.320 How about that? I wonder if anything happened recently that would cause the New York Times to

00:35:31.960 change their stance on cancel culture. Yes. Turns out that the October 7th and all the Israel stuff 1.00

00:35:40.360 and this from their editorial is not gone unnoticed on campuses, but also by members of Congress

00:35:47.640 that and by the public writ large, that many of those who are now demanding the right to protest

00:35:53.320 have previously sought to curtail the speech of those whom they declared hateful.

00:36:00.920 Oh, did the New York Times just figure out that curtailing free speech has a downside?

00:36:09.880 They're just figuring that out. Oh, oh, so if you curtail the speech of just the people you don't like,

00:36:17.480 that's not going to work out for you in the long run, is it? Because you're going to end up,

00:36:21.800 you know, just curtailing everybody's free speech pretty quickly.

00:36:26.360 So is this a case of the New York Times just slowly evolved in their thinking? No,

00:36:34.600 no, this is because of Israel. Again, you know, the Israel on October 7th and the protests.

00:36:41.240 So even America's view on cancel culture just changed because of Israel and Israel's situation. 0.98

00:36:54.520 Now, in the prior conversation, I was saying to you, it helps to make the unthinkable thinkable.

00:37:02.360 So, and I saw in your comments, some of you were giving me credit for attacking ESG.

00:37:06.920 ESG. ESG did become a dirty word. And in order for that to happen, and DEI is now a dirty word for

00:37:15.000 at least half the country or more. And that only happens if somebody goes first. Because again,

00:37:22.520 it was sort of unthinkable that you would say in public you were opposing those things because you

00:37:27.000 get canceled. And now some of us got canceled. And we're still here. So now it's thinkable.

00:37:35.640 So now you see, you know, it's fairly widespread opinion that DEI is just racism. And now you can say that.

00:37:46.360 Well, The Economist, which is a publication,

00:37:52.120 has a report that gangs are gaining ground in Latin America. And this is why iron fist policies

00:37:58.440 won't beat them back. Huh. Does El Salvador know that the iron fist policies won't work? Because it

00:38:06.760 seems to be working really well there. Why do you suppose that The Economist would run an article

00:38:13.160 saying that iron fisted policies against the gangs, let's call them the cartels, won't work?

00:38:20.440 Well, Mike Benz gives us one hypothesis. He says, once you understand The Economist is a blob

00:38:28.440 rag, oh, a blob rag. In other words, The Economist is part of the large, you know,

00:38:36.040 CIA intelligence censorship, you know, blob. So basically, they're not an independent source of news,

00:38:44.040 that they're influenced, according to Mike Benz, by the big influencers who run everything.

00:38:50.920 And he says, once you understand The Economist is a blob rag, and narco gangs are an instrument of blob 0.95

00:38:57.560 paramilitary control over Latin America's internal politics, headlines like this will make a lot more

00:39:04.200 sense to you. Oh, there we go. Yes. So if you know the players, everything makes sense.

00:39:16.440 So suddenly, a blob publication, according to Mike Benz, is now a little bit more pro cartel than you

00:39:25.320 would expect them to be. Well, that could be because our intelligence people are pro cartel,

00:39:31.160 in the sense that they need them to control Latin America countries. And in return, what do you think 0.66

00:39:36.520 we do? Open our borders and let them get away with fentanyl? Of course. Yeah. Well, once you see it,

00:39:44.760 it's hard to unsee it, because that's got to be the reason that we're not fighting militarily against

00:39:50.840 the cartels. They've got to be on our side, in the worst possible way they're on our side. But there's

00:39:57.160 no other explanation for it. I think it's obvious. And it explains fentanyl for sure.

00:40:03.240 All right. The Biden administration just granted some kind of sanctions relief to several Arab nations

00:40:09.320 to buy military stuff from us at the same time that they were denying some of the military aid to

00:40:17.880 Israel. Now, I don't think that these things are necessarily a problem or even related,

00:40:23.720 except by coincidental timing. But talk about the worst possible look to be the Biden administration,

00:40:30.920 elections coming up. You've denied the bombs to Israel. At the same time, you're saying, you know,

00:40:37.400 Lebanon, Yemen, and Qatar, you can buy our defensive weapons. Sure. Of course you can. No problem.

00:40:43.720 Yeah. It's not a good look. It's not a good look.

00:40:49.560 Now, I would like to ask you this provocative question. Have you seen the opinion? And I think

00:40:54.520 comic Dave Smith is maybe one of the most notable ones of this opinion, but other people have it as

00:41:01.400 well. And the idea is that Israel was playing a clever game in which they were pretending to support 0.77

00:41:09.880 Hamas's control of Gaza. But really, it was a cynical play to keep them as terrorists so that 0.62

00:41:20.120 later they could grab their land. How many of you subscribe to that view? That Netanyahu always knew

00:41:28.760 that backing Hamas would lead to more terrorism and that he did it anyway because he knew that at some 0.85

00:41:35.880 point it would give Israel cause to act and grab all their land and control everything. 0.77

00:41:42.600 Do you believe it? I'm looking at your comments. I'm seeing no's and yes's.

00:41:47.320 So it doesn't look like people are embracing it too hard. But here's my question. How would

00:41:54.280 anything look different if what Netanyahu was doing was simply giving them what they asked for?

00:42:02.360 How would it look different? Because here's what I think is true. I think that Netanyahu gave them

00:42:12.440 what they were asking for, which was self-rule and apparently they wanted Hamas in Gaza. I think he

00:42:19.640 gave them what they wanted. But at the same time, I think he knew it would blow up. Is that wrong?

00:42:26.040 Because what was he supposed to do? Was he supposed to not give them what they wanted?

00:42:33.640 And that would make everything better? So I think that the comic Dave Smith view

00:42:41.240 could be simultaneously true and irrelevant at the same time. I don't know if I'm saying that right. It

00:42:47.960 could be true that Netanyahu knew that supporting Hamas would lead to something not exactly October 7,

00:42:57.480 but that it would cause an ongoing situation where they would never have to have a two-state solution.

00:43:03.480 Do you believe that he knew that supporting Hamas would make a two-state solution deeply unlikely?

00:43:09.000 I think so. Probably. But what was he supposed to do? Was he supposed to not give them what they asked for?

00:43:19.880 Or was giving them only part of what they asked for and they would have asked for more things like

00:43:25.160 water rights and things like that. But is it wrong to give them some of what they asked for?

00:43:32.040 If you know that in the long run, it might give you more power. I don't know. I don't know if there's

00:43:39.720 any difference. If you put me in that situation, do you know what I would have done? The same thing

00:43:45.560 Netanyahu did, allegedly. I would have said, look, we can't defeat Hamas. There's no public support for

00:43:51.800 that, like militarily. We can't change it. The people in Gaza want this Hamas situation. So if you can't 0.97

00:44:00.360 change it, but you can support it in the sense that maybe there's some financial or capital or

00:44:09.480 something that allowed them to get a little more freedom or control than they might have had otherwise,

00:44:16.920 what was he supposed to do? I would have given Hamas a little bit of freedom and I would have 0.99

00:44:25.080 waited for it to blow up. And then in chaos, I would take as much as I could of whatever was

00:44:32.200 takeable. I would have done that. Now, does that make me a bad person? Because basically the situation

00:44:39.800 I see is that the Palestinians and Hamas in particular keep doing things to give land to Israel.

00:44:48.920 I mean, every time they bomb something else, the odds of a two-state solution go down.

00:44:57.080 So what are you going to do? What are you going to do?

00:45:01.800 So, anyway, I don't think Comic Dave Smith is wrong that Netanyahu knew what would happen

00:45:11.320 by supporting Hamas. Will you agree with me that far? That anybody smart would have known exactly 0.98

00:45:18.520 how this would turn out? Not exactly October 7th-ish, but that it would be a continuous

00:45:24.120 no-two-state solution. So I'm not sure you can condemn it when there wasn't any choice.

00:45:34.520 If the thing that's best for Netanyahu and best for Israel is also the only thing you could do,

00:45:42.360 can you blame him for doing the only thing you can do? What else could he have done?

00:45:47.480 It wouldn't have helped them to keep their thumb on Gaza forever. 0.97

00:45:56.360 Yeah. In the end, I think it will be a very different place. So Israel is saying that directly.

00:46:07.000 All right, ladies and gentlemen, because it's Mother's Day and I know you want to go off and

00:46:11.960 do good things with your mother. I'm going to make this a little bit shorter today.

00:46:16.120 Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Don't prevent your enemies from making mistakes. That is correct.

00:46:23.160 That is correct.

00:46:29.640 Billions in defending against Gaza.

00:46:34.440 So I'm saying that they also spent billions in defending against Gaza, and then it looked like 0.68

00:46:40.360 there was no defense against Gaza.

00:46:46.440 No, Scott, because Israel also invested billions in defending against Gaza.

00:46:51.880 The failure was a complex event.

00:46:55.320 Well, I think the defensive failure probably was just incompetence.

00:47:01.080 I mean, why would you assume it was more than that?

00:47:06.200 It doesn't seem to me like you could really close an entire border with Gaza if somebody was really 0.60

00:47:12.040 motivated to breach it. You could close a border against a handful of people trying to get across.

00:47:19.560 Maybe. You're not going to close it if thousands try to go at the same time. That's not a thing.

00:47:30.520 So anyway, happy Mother's Day to everybody. I'm going to talk to the locals people privately.

00:47:35.880 Let's see if I can get my technology to do what I want, which is to get private with the local supporters

00:47:42.600 only. And the rest of you I'll see tomorrow. Same time, same place.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - May 12, 2024

Episode 2472 CWSA 05⧸12⧸24

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript