Episode 793 Scott Adams: Impeachment Super Bowl, TDS Update, NYT's Endorsement, Sleep Tricks
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
147.98438
Summary
In this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, host Scott Adams talks about the ongoing saga of whether or not the Senate will vote to impeach the President, Alan Dershowitz's defense of the president, and what it means for the country.
Transcript
00:00:22.520
Yep, you need a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or chalice or stein,
00:00:33.920
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day,
00:01:00.000
I have more African-American followers for my Periscope than you might imagine.
00:01:09.440
For some reason, I seem to speak to that community, which is good.
00:01:19.540
Senate Majority, some of the things in the news.
00:01:22.400
Mitch McConnell is reportedly close to finalizing a rule for impeachment in the Senate that after
00:01:31.340
some evidence is presented, there would be some sort of a safety valve where they can vote
00:01:39.560
You kind of see where things are going, don't you?
00:01:45.780
I think where we're heading is that the Senate is setting up a situation where they might hear perhaps
00:01:52.680
Dershowitz's argument about the constitutionality and then say, well, okay, that's all we need to know.
00:02:00.840
Well, if it's not an impeachable offense, we don't need to know the details.
00:02:07.120
We don't even need to know if he did it, didn't do it, lied about it.
00:02:12.220
If it's not impeachable, that's the end of the story.
00:02:25.280
He's going to say, it doesn't matter if the facts are true or false.
00:02:28.680
If everything that's alleged is true, it still doesn't matter.
00:02:36.780
But I saw an interview with one of the impeachment managers for the Democrats,
00:02:43.620
And you're probably sick of me talking about how good Alan Dershowitz is no matter what the topic is.
00:02:54.640
Whenever he's on one of the news programs, doesn't matter what, doesn't matter which topic,
00:03:00.000
I've been telling you this for three years, that as soon as you hear him talk,
00:03:05.520
you feel like the conversation is over because he just puts the nail in the conversation.
00:03:10.820
And you say, well, I could argue with that, but no, I can't argue with that.
00:03:19.480
So he's like the Godzilla of constitutional lawyers.
00:03:25.940
And he's going to be up against this other team of the Democrats, including Representative Jason Crow.
00:03:31.680
And he was on one of the news shows, I think, yesterday.
00:03:36.680
And he mentioned how the president was guilty of bribery.
00:03:41.880
And the interviewer says, why do you think it is that bribery isn't one of the allegations?
00:03:46.920
So this guy, who's one of their best lawyer defenders, is talking about the president and bribery and that he's asked, why do you think that's not one of the charges?
00:03:59.520
And he ended up giving this absurdly incompetent answer about, well, you've got to look at the big picture and consider all the context of the things and the impeachment and it's important to the world.
00:04:15.740
And he couldn't answer the question of why he seemed to be unaware of what the actual impeachment charges even were.
00:04:26.860
But then he goes on as he's digging his hole to put himself in.
00:04:34.320
He goes on to say that if the president is not impeached on these charges, which people acknowledge are not crimes.
00:04:44.600
I mean, they're not crafted as criminal charges.
00:04:48.160
If he's not impeached for this, no president could ever be held accountable.
00:04:56.960
If it's not a crime and it's not criminal-like, which I think is what Dershowitz will argue, that the founders were OK if it wasn't technically a crime, as long as it was in the same basket,
00:05:10.900
as long as you could look at it and say, well, maybe it's not technically a crime, but it ought to be a crime, it's crime-like, then that would still be impeachable.
00:05:22.080
But what if it's just the president doing his job?
00:05:25.540
Wouldn't we want to live in a world where if the president doesn't commit a crime, and he doesn't commit, according to the people who judge these things,
00:05:39.060
and he doesn't also commit something that's crime-like, do you want him to be held accountable for just doing the job in a different way than you would?
00:05:48.280
So, I would say that Representative Jason Crow does not have a strong game, at least if we judge it just by this one interview.
00:05:57.980
It was sort of a D-minus in public interviews, one of the worst you'll ever see.
00:06:10.580
You could ignore all the other lawyers involved, I think, and just say, all right, that match-up tells you a lot.
00:06:17.120
All right, the New York Times, apparently the New York Times endorsement for president means a lot, some say, probably does.
00:06:30.120
And instead of endorsing one person, they've decided on a, let's say, a balanced path, to be kind, a balanced path,
00:06:39.580
where they endorse two people, Elizabeth Warren and Klobuchar.
00:06:44.820
And the reason he is, they wanted to endorse one who's sort of a progressive and one who's sort of moderate,
00:06:50.940
and those are the two they thought were the best of their respective bunches.
00:06:55.140
As Ian Bremmer asked in his tweet, where he pointed out, it sort of makes the whole concept of endorsement not make any sense.
00:07:06.520
If you're endorsing people who are basically opposites, what does it mean?
00:07:12.460
Can you endorse people who have literally opposite views?
00:07:16.140
One wants something very progressive, and the other wants something moderate.
00:07:22.300
They're not quite opposite, but they're really different.
00:07:28.240
In the New York Times endorsement, they called down Bernie for being too old and maybe not healthy enough.
00:07:34.640
So they mentioned his heart attack and his age is 79,
00:07:37.320
and they're suggesting he's just not physically a good risk.
00:07:48.360
And it suggests that Biden is too timid to get their endorsement.
00:07:53.140
So I think the New York Times is trying to warn people away from the oldest of the candidates,
00:07:59.780
which is sort of an adult-in-the-room sort of thing to do.
00:08:05.340
I kind of like it in the sense that, you know, it's not that I like the specific recommendations,
00:08:12.680
but I do like the fact that they're trying to be the adults in the room.
00:08:34.600
And I feel as though the people who were grasping to Biden and Bernie
00:08:45.500
Because a child would say, well, let's just ignore the most important fact,
00:08:57.480
And you could argue that, you know, Trump and Elizabeth Warren are pushing that zone.
00:09:03.780
But that would be an argument about pushing the boundary.
00:09:08.300
As opposed to Biden and Bernie, who I think you could just unambiguously say they're too old.
00:09:15.000
If they were on my team and I love them both for president, I'd still say the same thing.
00:09:21.360
It has nothing to do with their policies, their personalities or anything else.
00:09:25.820
There is a biological factor that if you're going to be the adult in the room,
00:09:31.560
thank you, New York Times, for being the adult in the room,
00:09:42.160
And certainly Bloomberg's got that issue as well.
00:09:50.480
By way of full disclosure, I do have a bet on Predict It, the betting site,
00:09:58.760
that the Democratic nominee, the nominee will be a woman.
00:10:05.200
So I placed that bet a few months ago, I guess.
00:10:09.240
And it wasn't just that it would necessarily be, you know, Harris back when I was thinking
00:10:14.960
that she would be the top of the ticket incorrectly.
00:10:17.980
But anyway, I've got that bet out there, so I'll just let that hang.
00:10:28.040
Let me give you a Trump derangement syndrome update.
00:10:33.900
I always think it's fascinating to be in one movie
00:10:38.240
and then sort of look over and see what the other people are thinking.
00:10:42.540
So let me give you just a flavor of some of the things coming from the anti-Trump world.
00:10:52.680
Famous advisor to Bill Clinton and a very vocal Democrat and pundit.
00:11:03.220
I think Trump and Trumpism is the greatest threat this country has faced
00:11:15.600
The greatest threat this country has faced since the fall of communism.
00:11:19.800
Now, the first thing you need to know is that this is a weird sentence.
00:11:25.720
Because what does he mean since the fall of communism?
00:11:28.980
Because I thought we were happy about the fall of communism.
00:11:33.180
So if this is the biggest threat since that thing we were happy about,
00:11:40.100
But I'm going to be, I'll be generous in my interpretation of this sentence
00:11:44.380
and say that he was using the fall of communism just as a time period,
00:11:52.720
Under that structure, he's just saying that Trump and Trumpism
00:11:57.660
is the greatest threat this country has faced since several decades.
00:12:02.160
I think the LGBTQ community would like to talk to him about AIDS.
00:12:13.900
How about our wars and our potential nuclear threats from North Korea?
00:12:22.720
I feel like we've had some bigger threats since we've had bigger threats than mean,
00:12:31.620
old, terrible Trump who gave us the biggest economy, defeated ISIS.
00:12:43.980
Like it's the biggest problem to our entire country?
00:12:49.240
Let's say that, I saw somebody mention global warming in the comments.
00:12:56.080
Let's say that that's about, let's say one of the elements of this comment
00:13:03.220
I'm sorry, no, bad for the environment because of climate change.
00:13:15.500
It's not the United States who's causing climate change.
00:13:24.840
So what exactly is this greatest threat to the country?
00:13:32.060
So it just sounds a little crazy from our perspective.
00:13:38.600
So remember that James Carville's worry about Trump is not what he's already done.
00:13:48.040
So he's been president for three years, and Carville doesn't say,
00:13:57.300
Instead, he says, it's the biggest threat, meaning the future.
00:14:02.300
So I guess what he's done so far wasn't so bad,
00:14:06.080
but in the future, in the future which you can't measure.
00:14:13.520
The president is doing well on things you can measure.
00:14:19.440
He's the biggest risk in the world for the imaginary future,
00:14:27.580
So here's another comment from Trump's derangement syndrome world from Omarosa.
00:14:38.620
She was a controversial employee for Trump and quit,
00:14:47.440
and she quit that, or didn't make it to the top, I guess.
00:14:55.920
doesn't grasp that his ignorance is destroying our country.
00:15:02.720
Which part of the country is getting destroyed?
00:15:07.660
Is there some part of our country getting destroyed that the news isn't reporting about?
00:15:12.180
Where exactly is the country getting destroyed?
00:15:19.800
Virginia Heffernan, another anti-Trumper, is writing in the L.A. Times.
00:15:26.620
And I just have to read this one paragraph because there's just a lot in here.
00:15:31.520
So I'm taking this out of a larger anti-Trump article.
00:15:46.340
meant to be consumed by the general public who reads the L.A. Times
00:16:26.500
you know, unless you have some strategy about it,