Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 818 Scott Adams： Coming in HOT. There Will be Cursing

00:00:00.680 Bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum 1.00

00:00:11.100 bum bum bum bum hey everybody come on in. 0.71

00:00:16.000 It's time for coffee with Scott Adams.

00:00:18.860 There will be cursing yeah a little bit later there will be cursing.

00:00:25.120 I know I know I know I said I wouldn't do it anymore.

00:00:27.920 or it's bad for my monetization,

00:00:31.300 and it's certainly inappropriate in many situations.

00:00:40.800 But some days, you just have to do it.

00:00:44.160 But we'll get to that.

00:00:45.520 First, the good news.

00:00:47.720 You can enjoy the simultaneous sip.

00:00:50.240 It's that great feeling that starts your day.

00:00:52.720 And all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass,

00:00:55.180 a tank or a chalice or a stein,

00:00:56.300 a canteen jug or a flask,

00:00:57.360 a vessel of any kind.

00:00:58.520 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:01:00.120 I like coffee.

00:01:01.540 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure,

00:01:04.040 the dopamine hit of the day,

00:01:05.100 the thing that makes everything better.

00:01:07.480 It's called the simultaneous sip.

00:01:09.880 Go.

00:01:13.860 Ah, good morning, San Ramon.

00:01:16.980 Neighbor, good to see you.

00:01:21.500 So, I want to start with some good news.

00:01:26.360 And a positive thing.

00:01:28.780 Oh, we're going to get to the coronavirus.

00:01:31.380 We're going to get to Roger Stone.

00:01:35.240 But let's do some good news first.

00:01:38.320 So, yesterday I got a package in the mail.

00:01:40.880 And I want to tell you about how that went.

00:01:44.500 This is a marketing story.

00:01:46.240 It's a persuasion lesson.

00:01:48.700 Okay?

00:01:49.420 So, I get something in the mail and I open it up

00:01:52.580 and it's this box.

00:01:54.240 There's something in it.

00:01:55.340 It's something sort of heavy.

00:01:58.120 So, I think, huh, what could it be?

00:02:00.000 Now, the first part of the story is,

00:02:02.580 this is a really good box.

00:02:05.300 It's not quite Apple computer quality

00:02:08.880 where you're opening your iPhone

00:02:10.640 and it's like an essential experience.

00:02:13.360 But it's not bad.

00:02:14.880 It's not bad.

00:02:16.080 It's sort of a smooth thing

00:02:18.080 and it just sort of slid open pretty well.

00:02:21.660 And I open it up

00:02:23.000 and there's some packing in there

00:02:25.700 and I have to sort of dig around in the packing.

00:02:28.980 And I start taking out items.

00:02:31.580 And the first one I see is this.

00:02:33.900 WD-40.

00:02:34.720 I'm like, what?

00:02:36.720 Why is somebody sending me WD-40?

00:02:39.500 And then the next thing I take out is this tape.

00:02:43.480 It's a black electrical tape.

00:02:46.800 What?

00:02:48.280 And then the next thing is these goggles.

00:02:54.680 What?

00:02:56.460 Right?

00:02:57.020 And then I get to the real meat of it,

00:03:00.780 this book.

00:03:01.960 It's called Friction by Roger Dooley.

00:03:04.520 Now, you'll see that I just did his podcast

00:03:07.960 and it's in my Twitter feed.

00:03:11.680 You can find the link to it.

00:03:13.340 So, my interview with him.

00:03:15.040 Now, I talk about friction all the time on the podcast

00:03:17.620 and I think Roger Dooley was,

00:03:21.900 that may have been one of the reasons

00:03:23.400 he wanted to talk to me

00:03:24.460 and interview me.

00:03:25.800 And he sent me his book.

00:03:28.360 Now, here's the payoff here.

00:03:32.240 A lot of people send me books.

00:03:34.980 I try to discourage it

00:03:36.360 because my house would actually just be full of books.

00:03:39.580 Because if you can imagine

00:03:40.660 how many authors would like me to mention their book.

00:03:43.520 And, you know,

00:03:44.700 it's a common practice to send a book out to other people.

00:03:48.460 Now, I don't know,

00:03:50.120 hundreds of people over my career,

00:03:51.800 hundreds and hundreds have sent me books in the mail.

00:03:56.640 And usually it's just wrapped in a mailer

00:03:59.420 and you open it up

00:04:00.580 and there'll be a little note on the inside.

00:04:02.880 And I don't pay much attention to them

00:04:06.460 and I don't read them generally.

00:04:08.960 And then I have something I don't want to throw away,

00:04:11.020 but eventually I do.

00:04:13.480 So generally, everybody fails at that task

00:04:16.760 of getting my attention.

00:04:18.840 But this one caused me to stop and focus.

00:04:21.520 And it gave me things I can't throw away.

00:04:24.160 I'm not going to throw this away, right?

00:04:26.960 And it's a size I wouldn't buy.

00:04:28.920 I actually have WD-40 in the garage,

00:04:31.320 but I don't have this size.

00:04:32.900 So every time I see this,

00:04:34.600 I'm going to say,

00:04:35.060 oh, that's that Roger Dooley book, Friction.

00:04:39.260 And then because the book is called Friction,

00:04:42.920 he's got something about friction in there.

00:04:45.940 And then the goggles,

00:04:47.120 there was a little note,

00:04:48.380 a very nice little note that came with it

00:04:50.140 from Roger explaining that the goggles

00:04:52.380 are so you can see the friction, et cetera.

00:04:54.320 Now, it's a book, I think,

00:04:57.500 that involves persuasion and friction.

00:05:00.520 I haven't dug into it yet.

00:05:02.500 I hear good things about it.

00:05:05.100 Got great reviews.

00:05:07.580 And here's my point.

00:05:09.940 Look how different the level of marketing skill was

00:05:14.160 in this example compared to basically everybody else.

00:05:18.520 Everybody else.

00:05:19.840 So it was quite memorable.

00:05:21.980 Let me promise you,

00:05:23.220 I'm never going to do this again.

00:05:25.760 I'm never going to open a cleverly packaged book

00:05:29.840 and then show it on Periscope.

00:05:31.920 So if you're an author

00:05:32.980 and you just said to yourself,

00:05:35.060 aha, now I know what to do.

00:05:37.460 I can get some attention

00:05:38.480 if I send a cleverly packaged book.

00:05:41.620 It only works once.

00:05:42.960 I'm never going to do this again.

00:05:45.200 Don't send me another cleverly packaged book.

00:05:47.760 It's not going to work.

00:05:49.320 All right.

00:05:49.800 But this was a great job.

00:05:50.980 Roger Dooley,

00:05:52.940 if your book is as good as your marketing,

00:05:55.420 you should all read that book.

00:05:56.760 All right.

00:05:57.460 Let's talk about the coronavirus first.

00:06:01.740 There are 570 confirmed cases of it outside of China.

00:06:06.400 But there should be,

00:06:11.180 let's say there's a 2% death rate.

00:06:14.180 So that would be around 11 people

00:06:16.040 who should have died outside of China 0.97

00:06:18.220 who were not actually just people

00:06:21.860 who were in China just recently.

00:06:24.780 And I'm still waiting

00:06:26.740 for the reports of non-Asian deaths.

00:06:31.540 I think there was an 80-year-old

00:06:34.040 who died recently.

00:06:35.660 Not sure that counts

00:06:36.740 because any kind of a flu

00:06:38.260 can take out an 80-year-old.

00:06:40.420 So we still have that open question

00:06:43.420 whether there's something about this virus

00:06:45.740 that has a preference for,

00:06:48.420 the speculation is that there's something

00:06:49.980 about the receptors in the lungs

00:06:52.640 of Asian men in particular,

00:06:55.260 more so than women. 0.90

00:06:57.920 But we'll see.

00:06:59.040 So I would say that's just an open question.

00:07:00.560 I'm still waiting.

00:07:02.020 And the absence of confirmation

00:07:04.140 that it's affecting everybody equally

00:07:06.560 is starting to get noticeable, isn't it?

00:07:10.560 So we'll wait for that.

00:07:13.960 Think a little bit into the future

00:07:15.600 and see how we're going to handle

00:07:17.300 the next pandemic.

00:07:19.340 So I hope we're doing a good job on this one.

00:07:21.360 But think a little bit in the future

00:07:22.540 and imagine the technology that we'll have.

00:07:27.140 China in particular, of course,

00:07:28.780 will have the ability to remove,

00:07:30.440 and already have,

00:07:31.680 remove all sense of privacy.

00:07:34.680 So the Chinese, basically, 0.96

00:07:36.240 they're losing their privacy.

00:07:38.020 In the United States,

00:07:39.840 I'm going to guess

00:07:42.020 that our penetration of cell phones here

00:07:44.040 is probably higher,

00:07:45.580 smartphones,

00:07:46.720 than China,

00:07:48.040 if you look at the entire country of China.

00:07:49.720 So our country,

00:07:52.440 in theory,

00:07:53.380 already has the technological ability,

00:07:56.340 maybe not the will

00:07:57.640 and maybe not the legal authority,

00:07:59.860 but certainly the technological ability

00:08:01.880 exists for our government

00:08:03.840 to immediately know

00:08:05.520 where everybody who has a phone is.

00:08:09.440 Imagine,

00:08:10.380 so that's the first thing.

00:08:11.820 So in the future,

00:08:12.520 we'll know where everybody is.

00:08:13.640 And in theory,

00:08:15.520 that would be enough

00:08:16.280 to tell you

00:08:16.840 who is associating with who

00:08:18.460 and you could quickly

00:08:19.760 clamp down on a pandemic

00:08:21.300 because you say,

00:08:22.260 oh, this little cluster.

00:08:24.540 Send a text to their phones

00:08:26.080 and tell them to wait there.

00:08:29.500 That's just an example.

00:08:31.100 So most of them wait there,

00:08:32.720 some of them don't,

00:08:33.860 but you can still follow them

00:08:35.160 if you catch up to them.

00:08:36.360 But also,

00:08:39.340 what if a technology

00:08:40.640 like that Clearview app

00:08:42.980 someday in the future

00:08:44.900 could identify somebody

00:08:46.540 who recently traveled to China?

00:08:49.160 Because I assume

00:08:50.540 that in some databases somewhere,

00:08:53.040 there must be records

00:08:54.080 of who traveled where.

00:08:57.380 I don't know where

00:08:58.040 those records exist,

00:08:59.900 but you have to think

00:09:00.680 that any plane coming in

00:09:02.220 from the United States,

00:09:03.580 we probably have

00:09:04.720 some kind of accounting

00:09:05.700 of where they came from, right?

00:09:07.940 I mean, that seems obvious.

00:09:09.640 So suppose you have

00:09:10.480 the Clearview app

00:09:11.600 which identifies faces of people

00:09:14.140 and puts an identity on them.

00:09:16.580 At the moment,

00:09:17.560 it's being used by law enforcement.

00:09:20.320 And maybe you can assume

00:09:21.620 that it's always only used

00:09:22.980 by law enforcement,

00:09:24.000 but I assume that kind of app,

00:09:25.920 if it's not that one,

00:09:27.000 some other one,

00:09:27.700 will be generally available.

00:09:29.720 Imagine having your

00:09:31.480 augmented reality glasses on,

00:09:34.940 Snapchat is making one.

00:09:37.220 I think Google's got one.

00:09:38.360 I'm sure Apple has one.

00:09:40.320 And you're walking down

00:09:41.420 a public street,

00:09:43.000 and you've got something

00:09:44.280 like the Clearview app technology

00:09:46.820 that can recognize faces

00:09:48.200 and put identities to them.

00:09:50.100 And then,

00:09:51.380 only if there's a pandemic,

00:09:53.520 and remember this part,

00:09:55.160 because this is the part,

00:09:56.160 if you don't catch this part,

00:09:58.300 you'll have a totally

00:09:58.960 different idea of it.

00:09:59.860 only in an emergency,

00:10:02.000 and only in a pandemic,

00:10:04.040 let's say,

00:10:04.580 this is just hypothetical,

00:10:05.640 we're just brainstorming here.

00:10:07.080 Let's say the government

00:10:08.000 of the United States says,

00:10:09.220 oh, in this one case,

00:10:11.680 we're going to let

00:10:12.340 that facial recognition app

00:10:14.160 have access also

00:10:16.160 to the database

00:10:17.560 of who's just been in China.

00:10:19.640 So imagine walking down the street,

00:10:22.140 crowd is going by,

00:10:23.580 and one of the people

00:10:24.640 in the crowd

00:10:25.140 is just glowing.

00:10:27.600 It just has an aura around them.

00:10:29.540 And that's how

00:10:30.080 your augmented reality

00:10:31.180 has identified

00:10:31.900 that it's recognized the face

00:10:34.360 and matched it to a database

00:10:36.160 and found out

00:10:37.300 that person just came from China.

00:10:39.780 You'd keep your distance, right?

00:10:41.900 You walk into a coffee shop,

00:10:43.400 you look around,

00:10:43.960 you're like, whoops,

00:10:45.660 sitting at that table,

00:10:47.500 I'm out.

00:10:48.860 So I don't know

00:10:50.240 if this would work.

00:10:51.800 I don't know

00:10:52.640 if the violations of privacy

00:10:56.680 might be so extreme

00:10:58.020 that we'd never do it.

00:10:59.800 Maybe the entities involved

00:11:01.400 would never be able

00:11:02.160 to coordinate.

00:11:03.580 You can see lots of reasons

00:11:04.960 why there would be obstacles

00:11:06.340 to this,

00:11:07.400 but the technology is all there.

00:11:10.200 All the technology is there.

00:11:12.040 And all it's going to take

00:11:13.420 is one pandemic

00:11:14.560 that's like the bad one.

00:11:17.620 I don't know

00:11:18.540 if coronavirus

00:11:19.640 will rise to the level of,

00:11:22.220 you know,

00:11:23.460 big enough to change

00:11:25.420 how we do business.

00:11:26.460 I'm not sure if it will.

00:11:28.100 It might.

00:11:29.680 But I think there's a guarantee

00:11:31.680 that someday our phones,

00:11:33.160 our apps,

00:11:34.040 will allow us

00:11:35.220 to avoid contamination

00:11:36.840 and tamp down on it.

00:11:39.040 I think that's a guarantee.

00:11:40.820 I would say

00:11:41.360 if you fast forward

00:11:42.320 10 years,

00:11:44.060 pandemics will be handled

00:11:45.220 by app.

00:11:46.660 That would be my prediction.

00:11:49.100 All right.

00:11:50.000 Of course,

00:11:51.060 not the app alone,

00:11:52.340 but the app would be

00:11:52.940 a big part of it.

00:11:53.740 All right.

00:11:56.460 Bill Barr is reviewing

00:11:57.820 the Roger Stone sentence

00:11:59.660 because nine years

00:12:00.880 seemed like a lot.

00:12:02.260 Should have been closer

00:12:03.040 to two or three,

00:12:03.940 say some people.

00:12:05.160 But apparently,

00:12:06.060 according to Trey Gowdy,

00:12:07.500 there's some kind

00:12:08.780 of enhancements

00:12:09.720 that were added to that.

00:12:11.040 Had something to do

00:12:11.920 with what Stone did.

00:12:14.100 Maybe,

00:12:15.580 I don't know the details,

00:12:17.040 but there's some kind

00:12:18.100 of enhancement

00:12:18.840 that allowed the judge

00:12:20.980 to give him nine years.

00:12:22.520 That seemed excessive

00:12:23.760 to pretty much

00:12:25.000 everybody who didn't

00:12:26.720 hate the president.

00:12:28.640 So Barr is looking into it

00:12:30.260 and the president

00:12:30.920 weighed in on it.

00:12:32.480 Now,

00:12:32.980 what do you think

00:12:33.920 about the president

00:12:34.720 weighing in on

00:12:35.780 a question

00:12:36.940 in the justice system?

00:12:38.820 Well,

00:12:39.380 all the smart people

00:12:40.260 say the same thing.

00:12:41.240 Trey Gowdy said this.

00:12:42.820 Probably everybody

00:12:43.480 will say this.

00:12:44.340 Doesn't matter

00:12:44.860 if you're Republican

00:12:45.560 or Democrat.

00:12:47.200 There's a general sense

00:12:48.460 that you don't want

00:12:50.360 the president

00:12:51.020 to be putting his finger

00:12:52.260 on the scale.

00:12:53.700 The Justice Department

00:12:55.020 should do its thing

00:12:55.920 and the president

00:12:57.240 should just stay quiet

00:12:58.760 and let it play out.

00:13:01.580 I agree with that

00:13:03.180 99% of the time.

00:13:07.180 But 1% of the time,

00:13:09.060 or some small number,

00:13:11.180 there's going to be

00:13:12.540 a violation of justice

00:13:15.700 so blatant,

00:13:19.080 so obvious, 0.95

00:13:21.060 so disgusting, 0.80

00:13:23.500 so divisive 0.98

00:13:25.540 to the country

00:13:26.780 that it would be

00:13:28.420 an abdication

00:13:29.700 of responsibility

00:13:30.820 for the president

00:13:32.120 not to step in.

00:13:33.800 It would be

00:13:34.420 a miscarriage

00:13:35.080 of justice.

00:13:37.820 So if your president

00:13:39.420 steps in

00:13:41.220 on the extreme case,

00:13:43.460 one that is

00:13:44.120 clear to everybody

00:13:45.440 watching it,

00:13:46.100 and I think it is,

00:13:46.960 and I'll talk a little bit

00:13:47.900 about why it's so clear,

00:13:49.760 but I think it's clear

00:13:50.700 to everyone

00:13:51.900 who sees it

00:13:52.920 that there's something

00:13:54.080 wrong with that,

00:13:55.240 the nine-year thing.

00:13:56.660 All right?

00:13:57.220 And it looks,

00:13:57.780 there are at least

00:13:58.300 two things wrong with it.

00:13:59.360 One is the

00:14:00.020 extremeness of the,

00:14:02.280 or the degree

00:14:03.540 of the penalty

00:14:04.980 more than,

00:14:06.100 you know, 0.84

00:14:06.400 some pedophiles

00:14:07.820 and bank robbers get.

00:14:10.420 But beyond that,

00:14:12.460 we're now learning

00:14:13.340 that at least

00:14:14.400 one of the jurors,

00:14:16.120 and I think it was

00:14:17.020 the jury foreperson,

00:14:19.320 was not only

00:14:20.240 an attorney,

00:14:21.700 which you say

00:14:22.360 to yourself,

00:14:23.000 what?

00:14:24.020 But somebody

00:14:24.660 who ran for office

00:14:25.640 as a Democrat

00:14:26.440 is an anti-Trumper

00:14:28.380 and was pushing

00:14:29.580 online on social media

00:14:30.920 the Russia collusion.

00:14:33.380 exactly the person

00:14:35.780 you don't want

00:14:36.520 on a trial

00:14:37.240 for Roger Stone.

00:14:39.640 I mean,

00:14:39.900 I don't know

00:14:40.280 how a lawyer

00:14:40.760 gets on a jury

00:14:42.100 to begin with.

00:14:43.060 I mean,

00:14:43.460 that alone

00:14:44.120 is already

00:14:45.060 a little,

00:14:45.840 you know,

00:14:46.460 a little flag.

00:14:48.060 But,

00:14:48.380 you know,

00:14:48.760 I think in some cases

00:14:49.640 lawyers do serve,

00:14:51.460 but if you're

00:14:52.320 a known anti-Trumper

00:14:54.140 and you've got

00:14:55.260 a long history of it

00:14:56.380 and it's documented

00:14:57.500 and you're an attorney

00:14:59.680 and they make you

00:15:01.160 the foreperson,

00:15:01.840 how is that

00:15:04.100 not the most obvious

00:15:05.760 miscarriage of justice

00:15:07.060 you've ever heard of?

00:15:09.620 Yeah,

00:15:10.220 that's somebody

00:15:10.620 reminding me

00:15:11.580 in the comments

00:15:12.160 that jury foreman

00:15:13.740 was tweeting

00:15:14.440 anti-Trump stuff

00:15:16.120 during the trial.

00:15:19.180 During the trial.

00:15:20.860 Now,

00:15:21.280 here's something

00:15:21.760 I'm going to add

00:15:22.440 to the mix.

00:15:23.900 I've served

00:15:24.740 on jury trials

00:15:25.660 and in one case

00:15:27.940 in my 20s,

00:15:29.200 I was selected

00:15:30.580 as the jury

00:15:31.400 foreperson.

00:15:33.080 Now,

00:15:33.280 it's funny

00:15:33.940 the reason

00:15:34.380 I was selected.

00:15:35.780 The reason

00:15:36.340 I was selected

00:15:36.920 is I'm the only

00:15:37.520 person who wore

00:15:38.160 a suit

00:15:38.660 to every day.

00:15:42.160 And the reason

00:15:42.560 was I was going

00:15:43.460 to work

00:15:44.000 before and after

00:15:45.040 that at a bank

00:15:46.120 and I was just

00:15:47.160 fitting in,

00:15:48.000 you know,

00:15:48.200 the jury trial

00:15:49.080 in the middle

00:15:49.560 and then I would

00:15:50.100 just walk back

00:15:50.820 to work

00:15:51.240 because it was

00:15:51.680 pretty close to work.

00:15:53.160 So I was wearing

00:15:54.040 my work clothes

00:15:54.720 which back in those

00:15:55.820 backward times

00:15:56.460 was a suit.

00:15:57.080 so the other

00:15:58.320 juror said,

00:15:59.340 well,

00:15:59.800 there are 11 of us

00:16:01.100 in casual clothes

00:16:02.600 and there's this guy

00:16:04.300 in a suit

00:16:04.980 so who are we

00:16:08.240 going to pick

00:16:08.600 for the jury

00:16:09.080 foreperson?

00:16:10.160 How about

00:16:10.740 suit guy?

00:16:11.960 So I became

00:16:12.720 the jury

00:16:13.180 foreperson

00:16:14.100 because I

00:16:15.000 accidentally

00:16:15.520 wore a suit.

00:16:16.960 Accidentally

00:16:17.440 meaning coincidentally.

00:16:19.640 And as you

00:16:21.740 all know

00:16:22.240 because I

00:16:22.600 mention it

00:16:22.980 too often,

00:16:24.540 even by then

00:16:25.460 I was a trained

00:16:26.820 hypnotist.

00:16:28.700 What kind of

00:16:29.580 fair trial

00:16:30.480 do you get

00:16:31.200 if your jury

00:16:33.260 foreperson

00:16:33.860 is a trained

00:16:34.580 hypnotist?

00:16:36.080 Well,

00:16:36.620 I've said this

00:16:37.160 before.

00:16:38.160 I don't know

00:16:39.040 that the other

00:16:39.560 11 people

00:16:40.240 were necessary

00:16:41.060 because things

00:16:42.740 were kind of

00:16:43.460 going to go

00:16:43.900 the way I

00:16:44.400 wanted them

00:16:44.880 to go.

00:16:45.840 How do you

00:16:46.340 think it

00:16:46.640 turned out?

00:16:47.920 Things went

00:16:48.680 the way I

00:16:49.180 wanted them

00:16:49.680 to go.

00:16:50.940 It didn't

00:16:51.640 start that way.

00:16:53.020 You know,

00:16:53.320 on the first

00:16:54.440 vote,

00:16:55.560 it was very

00:16:56.360 different

00:16:56.840 from how

00:16:58.080 it ended

00:16:58.500 up.

00:16:59.820 And if

00:17:00.240 you're

00:17:01.100 guessing

00:17:01.440 that it

00:17:01.980 ended up

00:17:02.860 very similar

00:17:04.420 to what

00:17:04.940 the hypnotist

00:17:05.720 who was also

00:17:06.380 the jury

00:17:06.840 foreperson

00:17:07.420 wanted it

00:17:07.960 to end

00:17:08.220 up as,

00:17:09.240 well,

00:17:09.620 you would

00:17:09.860 be correct.

00:17:11.040 Was that

00:17:11.420 a fair

00:17:11.780 trial?

00:17:12.980 Well,

00:17:13.320 I think

00:17:13.680 it was

00:17:13.880 fair because

00:17:14.580 the result

00:17:15.440 was a

00:17:16.740 hung jury

00:17:17.260 and I

00:17:18.820 don't think

00:17:19.200 that they

00:17:19.540 tried it

00:17:20.000 again because

00:17:20.480 it was

00:17:20.680 something like

00:17:21.140 six and

00:17:21.600 six.

00:17:22.520 So I

00:17:22.980 don't think

00:17:23.360 you normally

00:17:23.840 try a case

00:17:24.500 again.

00:17:25.360 It was a

00:17:25.900 drunk driving

00:17:26.560 case.

00:17:27.440 I don't

00:17:27.660 think you

00:17:27.960 try it

00:17:28.220 again if

00:17:28.560 it's a

00:17:28.760 hung jury

00:17:29.160 six and

00:17:29.620 six,

00:17:29.980 but maybe

00:17:30.280 there's

00:17:30.500 some

00:17:30.660 exception

00:17:31.080 to that.

00:17:33.840 Just so

00:17:34.460 you know,

00:17:34.820 there were

00:17:35.020 some

00:17:35.220 extenuating

00:17:35.800 circumstances,

00:17:37.080 et cetera,

00:17:37.500 so it

00:17:37.720 wasn't as

00:17:38.100 clear as,

00:17:39.180 it wasn't

00:17:39.580 an obvious

00:17:40.160 guilty thing

00:17:41.820 as you

00:17:42.120 might imagine.

00:17:42.600 so here's

00:17:45.800 the thing.

00:17:46.760 If you

00:17:46.980 put a

00:17:47.480 trained

00:17:47.920 attorney who

00:17:49.600 is also

00:17:50.100 a Trump

00:17:50.700 hater on

00:17:52.120 a jury,

00:17:53.080 does an

00:17:53.820 attorney have

00:17:54.500 more influence

00:17:55.420 than the

00:17:56.060 other people

00:17:56.540 on the

00:17:56.880 jury?

00:17:57.340 Yeah,

00:17:57.520 of course,

00:17:58.360 of course.

00:17:59.420 A trained

00:18:00.000 attorney is

00:18:01.740 going to have

00:18:02.100 more influence

00:18:02.740 on the other

00:18:03.260 jurors.

00:18:04.040 I would

00:18:04.880 listen to

00:18:05.300 an attorney

00:18:05.740 if I were

00:18:06.440 on a

00:18:06.900 trial in

00:18:08.080 a jury

00:18:08.460 and somebody

00:18:09.720 I knew

00:18:10.360 to be

00:18:10.980 an attorney

00:18:11.440 or this

00:18:12.120 is just

00:18:12.480 as good.

00:18:13.580 Somebody

00:18:13.940 who simply

00:18:14.440 presented

00:18:15.120 themselves

00:18:15.800 in a way

00:18:17.200 an attorney

00:18:18.120 would,

00:18:18.560 meaning that

00:18:19.060 they spoke

00:18:20.060 knowledgeably

00:18:20.820 about the

00:18:21.320 law,

00:18:22.320 added some

00:18:22.840 context,

00:18:23.980 they were

00:18:24.260 persuasive,

00:18:25.100 they were

00:18:25.320 clear,

00:18:26.140 all the

00:18:26.520 things you

00:18:26.820 would expect

00:18:27.280 from a

00:18:27.720 professional

00:18:28.240 attorney.

00:18:29.220 I wouldn't

00:18:29.820 even need

00:18:30.180 to know

00:18:30.460 they were

00:18:30.720 an attorney,

00:18:31.600 but I

00:18:32.100 would imagine

00:18:32.560 that they

00:18:32.920 would influence

00:18:33.440 me just

00:18:33.900 by being

00:18:34.320 good at

00:18:35.760 communicating

00:18:36.300 and persuading.

00:18:37.060 So I

00:18:39.760 would think

00:18:40.280 that you

00:18:41.640 could throw

00:18:42.160 out the

00:18:42.500 trial for

00:18:43.100 no other

00:18:43.620 reason,

00:18:44.220 and it

00:18:44.480 would be

00:18:44.720 perfectly

00:18:45.120 legitimate

00:18:45.600 than the

00:18:46.780 fact that

00:18:47.160 we've

00:18:47.360 discovered

00:18:47.720 that the

00:18:48.600 jury

00:18:49.120 foreperson

00:18:49.760 was exactly

00:18:51.060 the last

00:18:51.660 person you

00:18:52.100 want.

00:18:53.160 Exactly

00:18:53.720 the last

00:18:54.320 person you

00:18:54.820 want.

00:18:55.580 Now,

00:18:56.640 had it

00:18:57.060 gone the

00:18:57.460 other way,

00:18:58.800 let's say

00:18:59.200 there was a

00:18:59.740 jury

00:18:59.960 foreperson

00:19:00.540 who was

00:19:00.900 an attorney,

00:19:02.100 but was

00:19:02.800 pro-Trump,

00:19:04.440 and then

00:19:05.000 let's say

00:19:05.420 that the

00:19:06.040 result was

00:19:08.040 innocent.

00:19:08.820 Twelve

00:19:09.260 people in

00:19:09.920 the end

00:19:10.320 decided to

00:19:11.640 acquit.

00:19:12.620 Let's say

00:19:13.300 they had

00:19:15.660 decided to

00:19:16.180 acquit,

00:19:17.000 but the

00:19:17.540 foreperson

00:19:18.180 was also

00:19:19.000 kind of

00:19:20.520 questionable

00:19:21.260 in terms of

00:19:22.160 bias,

00:19:22.940 but questionable

00:19:23.480 the other

00:19:23.880 way.

00:19:24.480 Would that

00:19:24.920 be okay

00:19:25.380 with me?

00:19:26.740 Yeah,

00:19:27.000 it would

00:19:27.140 be.

00:19:27.780 It would

00:19:28.120 be.

00:19:28.740 Because

00:19:29.260 our system

00:19:30.620 is designed

00:19:31.500 to have a

00:19:32.720 very high

00:19:33.380 threshold

00:19:33.920 for putting

00:19:34.940 people in

00:19:35.480 jail.

00:19:36.040 It's a

00:19:36.880 high

00:19:37.100 threshold.

00:19:38.280 So if

00:19:38.580 the jury

00:19:39.540 foreperson

00:19:40.200 can convince

00:19:40.960 all the

00:19:41.560 other people,

00:19:42.660 in my

00:19:43.260 extreme

00:19:43.580 example,

00:19:44.080 they all

00:19:44.360 agree in

00:19:44.720 the end,

00:19:45.860 I think

00:19:47.040 that probably

00:19:47.600 means the

00:19:48.140 case wasn't

00:19:48.800 that strong.

00:19:50.700 I don't

00:19:51.480 think anybody

00:19:52.400 could turn

00:19:53.420 11 jurors

00:19:54.620 if it was

00:19:55.680 a slam dunk.

00:19:56.980 If the

00:19:57.520 evidence was

00:19:58.140 just,

00:19:59.020 here's the

00:19:59.420 guy on

00:19:59.820 video,

00:20:01.420 here are

00:20:01.880 the three

00:20:02.220 witnesses

00:20:02.660 who were

00:20:03.360 part of it.

00:20:03.760 If it's

00:20:04.100 that kind

00:20:04.480 of a

00:20:04.660 case,

00:20:04.960 here's his

00:20:05.340 DNA,

00:20:06.040 if it's

00:20:06.900 that kind

00:20:07.240 of a

00:20:07.440 case,

00:20:08.220 it doesn't

00:20:08.620 matter how

00:20:09.020 persuasive

00:20:09.540 the foreperson

00:20:10.240 is.

00:20:10.880 But if

00:20:11.160 there's a

00:20:11.440 little bit

00:20:11.720 of judgment

00:20:12.260 involved,

00:20:13.340 a little bit

00:20:13.920 of gray

00:20:14.300 area,

00:20:15.100 or let's

00:20:15.480 say that

00:20:15.960 the attorneys

00:20:16.540 on both

00:20:16.940 sides sort

00:20:18.180 of fought

00:20:18.600 to a tie,

00:20:19.620 it looked like

00:20:20.660 they both

00:20:21.020 made a good

00:20:21.500 argument,

00:20:22.480 in those

00:20:22.940 cases,

00:20:24.000 a super

00:20:24.920 influential

00:20:25.460 person on

00:20:26.040 the jury

00:20:26.500 is going

00:20:28.520 to determine

00:20:28.960 the outcome.

00:20:30.060 You heard

00:20:30.640 it from

00:20:30.880 me.

00:20:31.080 Trump was

00:20:36.340 asked what

00:20:36.960 impeachment

00:20:37.400 taught him

00:20:38.020 and he

00:20:38.760 gave the

00:20:39.100 best answer

00:20:39.600 I've ever

00:20:39.960 said.

00:20:40.840 He said

00:20:41.260 that Democrats 0.99

00:20:42.040 are crooked, 0.97

00:20:42.960 thanks for

00:20:43.340 coming.

00:20:45.080 I just

00:20:45.800 shortened what

00:20:46.960 he said

00:20:47.380 into my own

00:20:48.080 words,

00:20:48.800 but essentially

00:20:49.280 he said,

00:20:49.720 what did you

00:20:50.400 learn from

00:20:50.780 impeachment?

00:20:51.320 Well,

00:20:51.560 I learned

00:20:51.880 that Democrats 0.98

00:20:53.400 are vicious 1.00

00:20:54.080 and crooked 0.99

00:20:54.840 and no more

00:20:56.640 questions,

00:20:57.100 thanks for

00:20:57.420 coming.

00:20:57.620 It was

00:20:58.360 kind of

00:20:58.700 the best

00:20:59.000 answer I've

00:20:59.480 ever seen

00:20:59.980 for that

00:21:00.960 kind of a

00:21:01.340 question.

00:21:02.440 All right,

00:21:02.680 but we're

00:21:02.880 not done

00:21:03.180 with Roger

00:21:03.600 Stone.

00:21:04.180 That was

00:21:04.420 just in

00:21:05.000 my notes

00:21:05.400 in the

00:21:05.640 wrong

00:21:05.780 place.

00:21:07.360 So can

00:21:08.520 somebody

00:21:08.940 fact-check

00:21:09.700 me on

00:21:10.080 this?

00:21:11.900 I first

00:21:12.900 noticed

00:21:13.420 the reporting

00:21:14.420 about this

00:21:15.200 Roger Stone

00:21:16.200 juror from

00:21:18.300 Mike Cernovich.

00:21:20.380 And then

00:21:20.780 not too long

00:21:21.600 after that I

00:21:22.220 saw lots of

00:21:22.780 tweeting and

00:21:23.460 other news

00:21:24.100 sources and

00:21:25.240 now it's

00:21:25.620 headline news

00:21:26.320 everywhere.

00:21:27.620 Did

00:21:28.500 Cernovich

00:21:28.880 break this?

00:21:30.640 And are

00:21:30.880 they not

00:21:31.560 giving him

00:21:32.040 credit again?

00:21:32.760 Because that's

00:21:33.080 happened,

00:21:33.440 right?

00:21:34.380 Have there

00:21:35.280 not been

00:21:35.680 other situations

00:21:36.480 where Mike

00:21:37.820 Cernovich broke

00:21:38.620 a story,

00:21:39.700 became a

00:21:40.200 national story,

00:21:41.120 and then they

00:21:41.620 don't give him

00:21:42.760 credit for it

00:21:43.420 because it's

00:21:43.960 Mike Cernovich?

00:21:45.660 I'm seeing some

00:21:46.640 confirmation here.

00:21:47.900 I think that's

00:21:48.760 the case.

00:21:49.780 And every time

00:21:50.340 I would read a

00:21:50.940 story, I'd

00:21:51.820 start it out and

00:21:52.400 say, okay,

00:21:53.700 somewhere in the

00:21:54.440 first, maybe

00:21:55.040 the second

00:21:55.520 paragraph, it's

00:21:57.080 going to say

00:21:57.500 something like,

00:21:58.180 you know, Mike

00:21:58.680 Cernovich broke

00:21:59.400 this story, and

00:22:00.200 then I finished

00:22:00.860 the story, and

00:22:01.460 it's like, where's

00:22:04.620 Mike?

00:22:05.920 So that's an

00:22:07.480 open question.

00:22:10.340 So I tweeted

00:22:11.220 this morning,

00:22:12.660 what's the

00:22:13.240 difference?

00:22:15.060 I'm asking a

00:22:15.960 lawyer.

00:22:16.260 So this is an

00:22:16.820 actual question.

00:22:17.700 It's not a, I'm

00:22:20.040 not trying to win

00:22:21.120 a point.

00:22:21.660 I'm actually

00:22:22.800 asking the

00:22:23.380 question, and it

00:22:24.060 was in my

00:22:24.460 tweet, and I

00:22:25.840 asked, is

00:22:26.640 there any

00:22:27.040 lawyer who

00:22:27.860 can explain

00:22:28.360 to me whether

00:22:29.860 the, is it

00:22:31.560 accurate to say

00:22:32.320 Brennan and

00:22:32.940 Clapper broke

00:22:33.900 the same or

00:22:34.700 equivalent laws

00:22:36.400 as Roger Stone?

00:22:38.000 Now, I keep

00:22:38.740 hearing pundits

00:22:39.540 say something

00:22:40.360 like that on

00:22:42.040 social media and

00:22:43.000 on TV news, but

00:22:45.060 is that accurate?

00:22:45.700 I think I

00:22:47.920 would have to

00:22:48.300 know a lot

00:22:48.700 more about

00:22:49.240 their individual

00:22:49.940 cases and a

00:22:50.880 lot more about

00:22:51.400 the law and a

00:22:52.340 lot more about

00:22:52.900 the precedent to

00:22:54.340 even know the

00:22:54.920 answer to that

00:22:55.380 question.

00:22:56.760 But somebody's

00:23:00.300 clarifying that

00:23:01.240 the juror outed

00:23:02.320 herself on CNN,

00:23:04.080 but Mike is the

00:23:05.160 one who looked

00:23:05.740 into her social

00:23:06.740 media record and

00:23:09.220 found out there

00:23:09.920 was a problem.

00:23:10.580 So that sounds

00:23:11.460 right, but let's

00:23:12.760 just say I don't

00:23:13.520 know all the

00:23:13.920 details there, but

00:23:15.260 I suspect that

00:23:18.340 Mike Cernovich is

00:23:19.120 not getting the

00:23:19.720 credit that is

00:23:20.960 completely due, but

00:23:22.100 we'll wait and

00:23:23.860 see.

00:23:26.620 So I don't know

00:23:27.420 the answer to

00:23:27.920 that.

00:23:28.760 Did Brennan and

00:23:29.600 Clapper actually do

00:23:31.020 something that's the

00:23:32.780 same as what Roger

00:23:33.840 Stone did, or does

00:23:35.180 it just remind us

00:23:36.280 of it, but one is

00:23:38.160 legal and one is

00:23:39.060 not?

00:23:40.060 Because I don't

00:23:40.580 know the answer to

00:23:41.280 that, and I'd

00:23:41.840 really like to,

00:23:42.640 because that will

00:23:44.040 determine how it

00:23:44.840 pissed off I am.

00:23:46.900 That will determine

00:23:47.980 how angry I am.

00:23:50.100 Now, as somebody

00:23:50.640 said, cases are not

00:23:53.200 related, meaning I

00:23:55.020 shouldn't look at

00:23:55.680 some unrelated case

00:23:57.080 of Clapper and

00:23:58.760 Brennan and say,

00:23:59.620 well, therefore I

00:24:01.360 draw judgment about

00:24:02.340 this Roger Stone

00:24:03.260 thing.

00:24:03.500 I'm not doing

00:24:03.920 that.

00:24:04.900 I'm only trying to

00:24:05.960 decide how mad I

00:24:06.860 should be, because I

00:24:08.320 can certainly compare

00:24:09.360 them to find out how

00:24:11.040 mad I should be.

00:24:11.840 I don't think that

00:24:13.180 either of them should

00:24:14.400 be entered as

00:24:15.320 evidence in the

00:24:16.540 other trial or

00:24:17.320 anything like that,

00:24:18.640 but I'm a citizen.

00:24:20.540 I can watch both of

00:24:21.860 them, and I can say

00:24:23.220 one is different from

00:24:24.180 the other, if they

00:24:24.940 are.

00:24:26.680 So I think it's fair

00:24:27.840 to know that question,

00:24:28.860 and I believe the

00:24:29.600 public is owed that

00:24:30.620 answer.

00:24:31.680 The public is owed

00:24:34.200 that answer.

00:24:35.440 We really need to

00:24:36.460 know that.

00:24:36.980 because if you

00:24:39.180 listen to the, let's

00:24:40.440 say, the right-leaning

00:24:41.940 media, it's being

00:24:44.180 described as probably

00:24:46.480 the most grotesque

00:24:47.780 miscarriage of

00:24:49.580 justice I can ever,

00:24:52.400 I don't know, since

00:24:53.180 OJ, your mileage may

00:24:56.400 vary, but what's worse

00:24:57.900 than this?

00:24:59.240 Is it true?

00:25:00.320 Is it true that

00:25:01.120 Brennan and Clapper

00:25:01.840 made the same, broke

00:25:04.040 the same, or some kind

00:25:05.200 of equivalent law, and

00:25:07.100 yet they're getting

00:25:07.700 away with it, and

00:25:08.380 nobody's even indicting

00:25:09.380 them?

00:25:09.660 Is that what's

00:25:10.460 happening?

00:25:11.700 Or do I just not

00:25:12.980 understand the law, and

00:25:14.740 there's something about

00:25:15.480 their situation which is

00:25:16.660 not nearly as serious

00:25:18.600 in terms of how the

00:25:19.740 law treats it as the

00:25:21.300 Roger Stone case?

00:25:22.400 I don't know.

00:25:23.600 It's a question.

00:25:27.220 So, here's what's

00:25:31.760 different about this

00:25:32.580 case.

00:25:32.940 Of course, everybody

00:25:33.580 is asking if Trump

00:25:36.380 will pardon Roger

00:25:37.280 Stone and General

00:25:39.360 Flynn, similar

00:25:40.720 situations in terms

00:25:41.820 of pardons.

00:25:43.340 And I'm watching

00:25:45.780 social media start

00:25:47.380 to erupt, and I'm

00:25:49.740 going to ask you

00:25:50.220 this.

00:25:51.420 Is the president

00:25:52.260 really going to make

00:25:53.060 that decision?

00:25:54.980 Or is social media

00:25:56.660 in the process of

00:25:57.820 making the decision,

00:25:59.280 and the president

00:26:00.300 will follow that

00:26:01.300 decision?

00:26:01.720 Which one of those

00:26:03.500 things is happening

00:26:04.200 right now?

00:26:05.360 The way it will be

00:26:06.880 reported is that the

00:26:08.280 president made the

00:26:09.060 decision to either

00:26:09.920 pardon or commute

00:26:12.320 or not.

00:26:13.400 So that's the way

00:26:14.560 we'll understand it.

00:26:16.140 But I don't know if

00:26:16.980 that's what's

00:26:17.360 happening.

00:26:18.400 I suspect that part

00:26:20.100 of the reason the

00:26:20.740 president is waiting

00:26:21.560 is that there's more

00:26:23.260 information that could

00:26:25.300 be very important to

00:26:26.600 that decision.

00:26:27.220 This information

00:26:29.320 about the juror is

00:26:30.180 important.

00:26:30.820 I don't know if

00:26:31.260 there are any

00:26:31.600 appeals that matter.

00:26:35.140 And it could be

00:26:35.840 that because it's

00:26:36.600 an election year,

00:26:38.680 I hate to say this,

00:26:40.400 but there's a good

00:26:40.960 chance that the

00:26:41.620 president is saying

00:26:42.500 to himself, you

00:26:43.920 know, I don't want

00:26:44.460 him to go to jail.

00:26:45.380 Here, I'm just

00:26:45.880 speculating.

00:26:46.500 I can't read the

00:26:47.100 president's mind,

00:26:47.860 obviously.

00:26:48.680 But if I put myself

00:26:49.960 in that position,

00:26:50.660 this is what I'd be

00:26:51.620 thinking.

00:26:52.800 If I pardon him

00:26:53.860 right away, even

00:26:55.900 though I want to,

00:26:57.480 it's an election

00:26:58.320 year.

00:26:58.900 And then this will

00:26:59.400 be used as a club

00:27:00.400 against me.

00:27:01.260 You can see the

00:27:01.820 Democrats are already

00:27:02.760 framing this as the

00:27:05.560 president becoming a

00:27:06.540 dictator and

00:27:07.380 interfering with

00:27:08.220 justice.

00:27:08.960 And what will he

00:27:10.580 do if he'll do

00:27:11.340 this?

00:27:13.680 And so I wonder,

00:27:17.660 I hope he's not

00:27:18.440 waiting for the

00:27:20.560 election to be over

00:27:21.500 so that he can do

00:27:22.980 it after the

00:27:23.800 election.

00:27:24.400 Let's say he

00:27:24.860 thinks he's going

00:27:25.420 to win.

00:27:25.900 And then he can

00:27:27.160 pardon anybody

00:27:27.820 he wants and he

00:27:28.560 doesn't have to

00:27:28.980 worry about

00:27:29.340 re-election.

00:27:30.740 Maybe that's part

00:27:31.780 of the decision.

00:27:32.940 I don't know.

00:27:34.300 But the suggestion

00:27:35.380 has been made that

00:27:36.940 there's a perfect

00:27:37.600 time to do this.

00:27:39.300 And I concur.

00:27:42.140 Super Tuesday.

00:27:44.580 Super Tuesday,

00:27:46.480 if he's going to

00:27:47.480 do it, would be

00:27:49.580 my pick.

00:27:50.200 And I'm going to

00:27:52.420 ask this directly.

00:27:53.360 Mr.

00:27:54.580 President, would you

00:27:56.720 use Super Tuesday

00:27:57.780 to counter-program

00:28:00.200 the Democrats, who

00:28:01.840 are going to get a

00:28:02.280 lot of attention

00:28:02.800 that day, and do

00:28:04.160 your pardons?

00:28:05.540 Just totally put a

00:28:08.860 shiv into the

00:28:09.940 Democrat-leaning

00:28:12.760 news media, because

00:28:14.740 I think they've earned

00:28:15.600 it in this situation

00:28:16.820 in particular.

00:28:18.960 And Super Tuesday

00:28:21.240 is coming up, what,

00:28:23.360 in the first part of

00:28:24.420 March?

00:28:24.920 I don't have the

00:28:25.680 exact date on that.

00:28:27.120 But it's coming up.

00:28:28.500 Now, I don't know the

00:28:29.880 timing of when Stone

00:28:31.220 would have to report

00:28:32.160 to prison, or even if

00:28:34.660 all the legal paths

00:28:37.000 have been exhausted.

00:28:37.960 I don't know how that

00:28:38.480 works.

00:28:38.760 I don't know enough

00:28:39.400 about the legal

00:28:39.960 process, or his

00:28:41.140 case.

00:28:43.200 But could the

00:28:44.440 President wait that

00:28:45.300 long without him

00:28:46.960 spending a day in

00:28:47.800 jail?

00:28:48.080 I don't know.

00:28:49.460 Would the President

00:28:50.420 let him spend a few

00:28:51.680 days in jail, and

00:28:53.480 then do it?

00:28:54.240 I don't know.

00:28:55.320 But the President

00:28:56.020 was asked directly

00:28:57.060 whether he was

00:28:58.300 considering pardoning

00:28:59.840 Roger Stone, and I

00:29:02.400 don't have his exact

00:29:03.140 words, but the

00:29:03.800 President's answer

00:29:04.580 was something like

00:29:05.520 somebody's saying

00:29:06.460 March 3rd in the

00:29:07.360 comments for Super

00:29:08.220 Tuesday, but

00:29:09.320 confirmed that for

00:29:10.080 me.

00:29:12.040 And the President

00:29:12.960 gave this answer,

00:29:15.540 and I'm paraphrasing,

00:29:17.080 it wasn't his exact

00:29:17.860 words, he said

00:29:18.820 something like, I'm

00:29:19.620 not ready to talk

00:29:20.440 about that yet.

00:29:22.760 If somebody is not

00:29:24.540 considering a pardon,

00:29:26.540 how do they answer

00:29:27.760 the question, are

00:29:28.640 you considering a

00:29:29.520 pardon?

00:29:31.320 Well, the only way

00:29:32.300 you answer the

00:29:32.900 question, are you

00:29:33.840 considering a pardon,

00:29:34.980 if you're not, is

00:29:37.000 no.

00:29:38.220 Right?

00:29:39.800 So anything that

00:29:40.840 isn't no, I'm not

00:29:42.360 considering this, I'm

00:29:43.300 not going to be

00:29:43.800 involved.

00:29:45.000 Anything that's not a

00:29:46.000 no is literally he's

00:29:48.360 considering it.

00:29:49.380 So the President has

00:29:50.620 essentially confirmed by

00:29:52.920 his choice of words that

00:29:54.560 he's at least open to the

00:29:55.700 conversation, and

00:29:57.020 common sense tells you

00:29:58.420 he would be.

00:29:59.920 Now let me ask you

00:30:00.900 this.

00:30:01.220 what would feel more

00:30:05.100 delicious than

00:30:08.060 pardoning both Stone

00:30:09.960 and General Flynn

00:30:12.320 just for revenge?

00:30:15.900 Because, you know, I

00:30:17.040 don't think revenge, I

00:30:19.040 think revenge is

00:30:19.840 underrated.

00:30:21.180 There are certainly

00:30:22.120 situations where a

00:30:23.340 little bit of revenge,

00:30:24.980 I'm not talking about

00:30:25.880 killing somebody, but in

00:30:27.640 a political sense,

00:30:28.560 revenge, it would feel

00:30:31.120 like revenge, wouldn't

00:30:32.060 it?

00:30:32.500 Because you know that

00:30:33.460 the Democrats really,

00:30:34.940 really want some kind

00:30:36.320 of a scalp.

00:30:37.740 They want it bad.

00:30:39.800 Yeah, throw Assange in

00:30:40.980 the mix too.

00:30:41.960 Let's pardon Assange too

00:30:43.180 and really make it

00:30:44.600 interesting.

00:30:45.520 Now Manafort, I have a

00:30:46.720 different opinion on.

00:30:48.120 I'm sure they went after

00:30:49.220 him for political reasons,

00:30:50.520 but what they found was

00:30:51.540 real crime.

00:30:52.560 Manafort stole from

00:30:54.260 me, and he stole from

00:30:57.280 you if you're a

00:30:58.080 taxpayer, because what

00:30:59.420 Manafort did was avoid

00:31:00.540 taxes on very large

00:31:02.540 amounts of money.

00:31:03.760 If somebody criminally

00:31:05.780 and obviously and

00:31:07.080 intentionally avoids

00:31:09.000 taxes, well, part of

00:31:12.120 that debt accrues to me

00:31:13.300 and you if you're a

00:31:14.160 taxpayer.

00:31:15.240 So Manafort stole from

00:31:16.740 me and you.

00:31:19.160 I don't have the same

00:31:20.280 feeling about a pardon

00:31:21.120 for him.

00:31:22.540 I'm not sure I would

00:31:23.620 care either way, but

00:31:25.100 Manafort did a different

00:31:26.620 level of badness.

00:31:30.180 Geraldo Rivera asked

00:31:32.460 this provocative

00:31:33.560 question.

00:31:36.620 So apparently there

00:31:37.760 were four high-level

00:31:38.800 federal prosecutors who

00:31:41.380 resigned over the fact

00:31:45.460 that President Trump

00:31:46.940 tweeted about, and A.G.

00:31:49.540 Barr was mostly about

00:31:51.840 Barr.

00:31:52.520 He demanded a reviewer

00:31:53.720 the recommendation of a

00:31:54.760 nine-year sentence.

00:31:57.020 And it's important to

00:31:58.300 note that Roger Stone is

00:31:59.320 67 years old.

00:32:00.660 So a nine-year sentence

00:32:01.920 is at least potentially a

00:32:05.480 life sentence.

00:32:07.020 And here Geraldo continues

00:32:09.600 with what I thought was a

00:32:11.180 really good point.

00:32:12.380 He says, which begs the

00:32:13.780 question, why were four

00:32:16.200 high-level federal

00:32:17.520 prosecutors even assigned

00:32:19.160 to this lame,

00:32:20.960 crimeless case?

00:32:21.780 Why were there four

00:32:24.080 high-level attorneys on

00:32:26.000 this case?

00:32:27.340 Now, I wouldn't have

00:32:28.340 known to ask that

00:32:29.020 question, but I think

00:32:29.800 Geraldo knows what he's

00:32:30.720 talking about in terms of

00:32:31.860 the legal system.

00:32:33.000 He's a lawyer.

00:32:34.540 And you have to ask

00:32:35.580 yourself, is that another

00:32:36.760 gigantic flag that this

00:32:38.260 was not legitimate?

00:32:39.560 That they were going to

00:32:40.380 do everything they could

00:32:41.480 to get this one person

00:32:43.640 the maximum sentence?

00:32:45.160 It looks crooked based on

00:32:50.300 how they staffed it.

00:32:51.640 It looks crooked based on

00:32:53.680 who they allowed on the

00:32:54.740 jury.

00:32:55.540 And it looks crooked based

00:32:57.840 on the degree of the, at

00:33:00.160 least the initial nine-year

00:33:03.540 sentence.

00:33:04.880 And I'm thinking that is

00:33:07.080 three really strong pieces of

00:33:10.000 evidence that this was a

00:33:11.240 crooked process.

00:33:12.220 Under those conditions, do

00:33:15.400 you want your president to

00:33:16.740 stay, let's say,

00:33:17.680 traditional?

00:33:19.200 Traditional?

00:33:20.040 Should he remain traditional

00:33:21.600 and just say, you know,

00:33:23.620 it's traditional that a

00:33:25.420 president not get involved

00:33:26.840 with the justice system?

00:33:28.640 Yeah, I might, even if I

00:33:29.680 had a problem with it, it's

00:33:30.520 traditional.

00:33:31.520 It might, it might lack

00:33:33.140 decorum.

00:33:34.860 Should a president, you

00:33:36.420 know, depart from good

00:33:38.500 decorum to weigh in on a

00:33:41.100 justice case?

00:33:43.580 Well, here's what I think. 1.00

00:33:47.560 Fuck them. 1.00

00:33:49.320 Fuck your decorum. 1.00

00:33:51.680 Fuck your tradition. 1.00

00:33:54.120 Fuck your, this is the way 1.00

00:33:55.900 presidents do it. 1.00

00:33:57.660 Fuck everything. 1.00

00:33:59.200 And fuck you if you 1.00

00:34:00.480 disagree. 1.00

00:34:01.860 This is a complete

00:34:04.040 travesty of justice.

00:34:07.440 It's obvious to all of us.

00:34:08.740 Let's not pretend it's not 0.98

00:34:10.920 fucking obvious. 0.99

00:34:12.280 It's fucking obvious. 0.99

00:34:14.060 I want my president to 0.99

00:34:15.940 weigh in.

00:34:17.200 I want my president to

00:34:18.760 interfere with

00:34:19.880 travesty of justice. 1.00

00:34:23.120 Fuck your tradition. 1.00

00:34:24.220 Fuck the way your 1.00

00:34:25.180 president is supposed to 1.00

00:34:26.300 act. 1.00

00:34:27.280 Fuck everything you're 1.00

00:34:28.360 going to say about this. 1.00

00:34:29.380 Fuck every one of you if 1.00

00:34:30.540 you disagree. 1.00

00:34:31.760 Most of you agree, so I'm

00:34:33.200 not talking to you. 0.96

00:34:33.860 No fucking way should 0.99

00:34:37.320 this president stay out of 1.00

00:34:38.860 this.

00:34:39.960 Now, I certainly want him to

00:34:41.100 stay out of, you know, the

00:34:42.760 legal system in general, of

00:34:44.960 course.

00:34:45.760 But this is not like every

00:34:47.220 other case.

00:34:48.280 This is obviously publicly

00:34:51.080 corrupt.

00:34:53.720 Obviously and publicly 0.52

00:34:55.580 corrupt.

00:34:57.280 If my president won't weigh in, 0.95

00:34:59.440 I don't care who the

00:35:00.080 president is, if my president

00:35:02.040 won't weigh in on a case

00:35:04.080 that's obviously and 1.00

00:35:06.380 publicly corrupt, well, fuck 1.00

00:35:09.380 the president, too. 1.00

00:35:10.960 Fuck him. 1.00

00:35:11.980 If he won't do that little 1.00

00:35:13.060 thing that the country

00:35:15.720 certainly deserves, certainly

00:35:18.400 ought to get it.

00:35:19.860 Now, here's my prediction.

00:35:23.720 You elected the right guy.

00:35:27.100 I don't see any possibility,

00:35:29.280 honestly, I don't see any

00:35:31.920 possibility that Trump will

00:35:34.000 not pardon Stone.

00:35:36.100 I assume

00:35:36.760 Maniford, I'm sorry, not

00:35:37.940 Maniford, I assume Flynn will

00:35:39.720 get a pardon, too.

00:35:40.840 Maybe there's some different

00:35:41.980 issues there that need to be

00:35:43.440 played out before that

00:35:44.740 happens. 1.00

00:35:46.000 But, oh yeah, and fuck the 1.00

00:35:48.600 media, too. 1.00

00:35:49.280 Thanks for suggesting that. 1.00

00:35:51.920 All of you fucking assholes in 1.00

00:35:53.800 the media who are trying to 1.00

00:35:55.460 make Roger Stone go to jail so 0.99

00:35:57.600 you can jerk off to it. 1.00

00:35:59.680 Fuck you. 1.00

00:36:01.080 Fuck all of you. 1.00

00:36:01.980 You know this is just for 1.00

00:36:02.940 pleasure.

00:36:03.960 This is a pleasure

00:36:05.040 prosecution.

00:36:06.120 This is a feel-good

00:36:07.240 prosecution.

00:36:08.420 It's corrupt. 1.00

00:36:09.820 And fuck anybody who thinks 1.00

00:36:11.120 that this is the way this 1.00

00:36:12.760 country should run.

00:36:18.880 Man.

00:36:19.360 So, if there's still anybody

00:36:24.020 out there who says that

00:36:26.060 having this juror who is an

00:36:27.760 attorney and a documented

00:36:30.000 Trump hater who is tweeting

00:36:32.760 against Trump during the trial,

00:36:35.040 if anybody thinks, well, you

00:36:37.280 can't say some people are more

00:36:38.760 persuasive and so this person

00:36:41.340 will sway the jury, I give you

00:36:43.640 this analogy.

00:36:45.320 You've got a pickup basketball

00:36:46.720 game in the park.

00:36:48.220 It's you and some of your

00:36:49.240 friends.

00:36:50.160 None of you are professional

00:36:51.300 basketball players.

00:36:52.060 You're just having a pickup game

00:36:53.280 in the park.

00:36:55.360 Michael Jordan walks up in his

00:36:56.880 prime.

00:36:57.660 Not retired Michael Jordan,

00:36:59.560 but in his prime, Michael

00:37:00.640 Jordan, he says, can I play?

00:37:03.180 And you say, oh, all right.

00:37:06.000 And Michael Jordan joins your

00:37:07.660 team.

00:37:09.100 Who wins?

00:37:10.460 Which team wins?

00:37:11.400 The team of people who play

00:37:13.440 basketball on the weekend

00:37:14.320 sometime?

00:37:15.320 Or the team that plays on the

00:37:17.500 weekend sometimes and has

00:37:19.200 Michael Jordan on the team?

00:37:21.120 It's Michael Jordan's team.

00:37:23.140 He wins every time in the

00:37:25.700 playground.

00:37:27.380 That is the degree of

00:37:28.940 difference between having your

00:37:30.400 jury foreperson, a trained

00:37:32.180 attorney, or a trained

00:37:34.800 hypnotist.

00:37:36.220 If you have that situation,

00:37:38.720 you just added Michael Jordan

00:37:40.640 to the jury, and you made the

00:37:42.600 other 11 people irrelevant.

00:37:44.580 You could trade them in.

00:37:45.600 You could switch them out.

00:37:46.580 It doesn't matter if they have 0.83

00:37:47.440 functioning brains.

00:37:48.660 It doesn't matter what their 0.63

00:37:49.460 bias is.

00:37:50.160 It doesn't matter.

00:37:51.600 Because add Michael Jordan to

00:37:53.820 your pickup basketball game, and

00:37:55.280 you know how it's going to go.

00:37:57.220 So it's a travesty of justice.

00:37:59.980 It's horrible.

00:38:00.980 Let's talk about other 1.00

00:38:01.860 assholes. 1.00

00:38:02.600 John Kelly is talking out about 1.00

00:38:05.260 Trump's, in his opinion, not

00:38:08.180 succeeding with North Korea.

00:38:10.600 And John Kelly, who is being a 0.99

00:38:13.340 bit of an asshole here, says that 0.99

00:38:15.540 he predicted that North Korea 1.00

00:38:18.780 wasn't going to be serious, and

00:38:20.200 they were just going to stall for

00:38:21.280 time.

00:38:22.480 And so therefore, and he thinks he

00:38:24.000 could have maybe had an impact on

00:38:27.360 that, I guess.

00:38:27.920 No, I guess he didn't have an impact,

00:38:29.220 so he wouldn't say that.

00:38:31.700 Here's what's missing from that

00:38:32.980 analysis.

00:38:33.400 President Trump removed the

00:38:36.620 reason for North Korea and the

00:38:40.000 United States to even care who has

00:38:41.600 what weapons.

00:38:42.880 He removed the reason.

00:38:45.480 Are we at war with North Korea?

00:38:47.940 No.

00:38:49.000 Does North Korea think we're going to

00:38:50.540 attack any minute, and therefore

00:38:51.960 they need to get ready?

00:38:53.440 Probably not.

00:38:54.920 I think Trump convinced them that we

00:38:57.280 have no interest in attacking them.

00:38:59.160 Why was Kim Jong-un rattling his

00:39:01.820 saver and aiming his nukes at us and

00:39:03.920 testing nukes?

00:39:05.280 Well, because he thought we might

00:39:06.800 attack him.

00:39:08.420 Trump basically solved the problem

00:39:10.620 without solving the problem.

00:39:12.400 He took away the reason.

00:39:14.100 If you're not bright enough to see

00:39:15.740 that he took away the reason, I'm not

00:39:18.200 sure you should be talking in public.

00:39:20.580 So, John Kelly, that was not your

00:39:23.500 finest moment.

00:39:24.360 All right.

00:39:29.740 So, I think that's a, oh, one other

00:39:33.760 interesting tidbit.

00:39:36.940 So, Adam Schiff, his district is, you

00:39:40.260 know, hugely, solidly Democrat.

00:39:42.840 It's here in California, Southern

00:39:44.100 California, not my district.

00:39:46.260 But he has a challenger, I've mentioned

00:39:48.240 before, Jennifer Barbosa.

00:39:49.880 And she's running as an independent.

00:39:52.960 Now, her argument is that you need to

00:39:54.620 be an independent to have a chance

00:39:57.040 against Schiff, because he has the

00:39:59.980 vast majority of Democrats.

00:40:01.920 Well, there are far more Democrats in

00:40:03.740 the area than anything else.

00:40:05.860 In fact, there are only 16% GOP in

00:40:10.740 Schiff's area.

00:40:12.640 But there are 30% independents.

00:40:16.300 Now, I don't know how independent

00:40:18.240 independents are, all right?

00:40:20.160 I'm not sure that real independents 1.00

00:40:22.300 exist, but let's say they do.

00:40:26.500 And the reason I say that is that most

00:40:28.340 independents reliably vote one way or

00:40:30.840 the other.

00:40:31.680 It's sort of an exception if they ever

00:40:33.580 cross lines, or if they ever vote a

00:40:37.200 different way.

00:40:37.840 Let's say it's a surprise.

00:40:41.000 So, if you add the 30% independence and

00:40:43.540 the 16% of GOP, you get 46%.

00:40:47.360 If she could cleave off enough Democrats 0.99

00:40:50.740 who are mad at Schiff for one reason or

00:40:52.460 another for not doing his job and just

00:40:55.440 playing around, trying to...

00:40:57.700 Basically, he's playing Moby Dick, and

00:41:01.660 he's just trying to harpoon the great

00:41:03.920 white whale, but it's not happening.

00:41:06.860 So, I'm just calling her out because I

00:41:10.120 think the country would be better off

00:41:11.900 without Adam Schiff in government.

00:41:13.660 I don't really care if it's another

00:41:16.560 Democrat who gets elected.

00:41:18.340 I mean, I'm not anti-Democrat or

00:41:22.000 anything, but Adam Schiff, he's a

00:41:25.280 character, and he's done more harm to

00:41:27.640 the country than, I think, anybody.

00:41:31.840 Anybody?

00:41:32.440 Would that be true?

00:41:33.480 Could you reasonably say that Adam Schiff

00:41:36.880 has done more damage to the United States

00:41:39.160 than anybody else alive at the moment?

00:41:45.720 Can anybody think of anybody who did

00:41:47.740 more damage to the United States than

00:41:50.600 Adam Schiff?

00:41:51.320 Who's still alive?

00:41:52.840 Anybody?

00:41:53.780 I'd like to see some suggestions.

00:41:55.620 I assume there are people who have done

00:41:56.900 worse, but I can't think of one.

00:42:01.060 I mean, he's really driven the world,

00:42:02.820 the country apart with one hoax after

00:42:05.260 another, that I don't know what could be

00:42:07.720 more destructive than that.

00:42:10.000 Does anybody have a suggestion?

00:42:12.680 It's a serious question.

00:42:14.360 No matter if you're Democrat or

00:42:15.880 Republican, you'd have to agree that he

00:42:18.720 pursued a Russia collusion hoax and a

00:42:22.640 Ukraine case that never really was going

00:42:25.520 to go anywhere, and he wasted all of our

00:42:27.820 time and made our government ineffective and

00:42:29.960 deepened the divide, added fake news to the

00:42:34.480 mix, is there anybody who did more damage to

00:42:39.340 the United States than Schiff?

00:42:42.200 I mean, honestly, that's just an honest

00:42:43.860 question.

00:42:44.260 I can't think of anybody.

00:42:46.300 Pelosi, I think, was sort of carried away

00:42:50.320 by the stream.

00:42:51.640 I don't know that Pelosi, her options were

00:42:55.780 limited by the situation.

00:42:57.740 It feels like it was mostly Schiff.

00:43:00.240 Now, you could throw Nadler in there, but I

00:43:03.040 think Nadler by himself would have been less

00:43:06.400 effective and therefore done less damage.

00:43:08.380 I think for all of his flaws, of which I see

00:43:13.560 many, Schiff was a very, let's say, energetic and

00:43:19.600 disciplined and passionate and well-spoken

00:43:24.400 advocate for his evil position.

00:43:26.880 He had lots of skill that went into pursuing

00:43:32.360 something that shouldn't have been pursued and

00:43:34.180 all ended bad.

00:43:35.340 So his judgment is terrible, or his bias is

00:43:38.400 terrible.

00:43:38.860 It could be one or the other.

00:43:40.860 And so give a thought to Jennifer Barbosa.

00:43:45.400 If you're thinking of donating, you could probably

00:43:47.680 find her easily.

00:43:49.360 Just Google Jennifer Barbosa, B-A-R-B-O-S-A for 0.73

00:43:56.840 Congress.

00:43:57.820 She'll pop right up.

00:43:59.220 And I'm sure she has a page for donating.

00:44:01.380 But if anybody wants to reduce the chance of more

00:44:05.460 Schiff, that would be one way to do it.

00:44:08.660 Okay.

00:44:12.680 All right.

00:44:13.300 I'm looking at your comments.

00:44:14.700 What about AOC?

00:44:20.360 The whistleblower, blah, blah, blah, blah.

00:44:23.180 All right.

00:44:23.620 I think I've said what I need to say.

00:44:26.700 I hope my swearing was just right.

00:44:30.300 And I hope we see a return to justice.

00:44:34.460 And let me say, as a supporter of this president, by

00:44:38.240 the way, for context, I think I've supported every

00:44:41.700 president.

00:44:42.060 It didn't matter what team they were on.

00:44:45.600 When somebody becomes the president, I'm almost

00:44:48.080 automatically a supporter.

00:44:49.860 Because I think that's the way it should work, regardless

00:44:52.960 of which team they're on.

00:44:55.180 Your mileage will differ, but that's fine.

00:44:58.020 So I'm a supporter of the president.

00:45:00.200 And if he pardons, I'm going to be far more enthusiastic about

00:45:08.260 supporting him for re-election.

00:45:09.840 I mean, I would do it anyway.

00:45:10.840 I'm sure I'll support the president for re-election.

00:45:13.700 But it would make a difference to me.

00:45:15.900 I would feel differently.

00:45:17.360 I would have a different energy about it.

00:45:19.480 And if there's blowback from the pardon or commuting the

00:45:23.440 sentence, whatever it is, if there's blowback, I will be a

00:45:27.680 tireless patriot to try to reduce the impact of that.

00:45:33.940 So that's where I'm at.

00:45:36.960 I hope some of you are on the same team.

00:45:40.480 And, well, thank you.

00:45:44.900 Somebody's saying nice things about me.

00:45:46.660 Always appreciate it.

00:45:48.960 What about coffee?

00:45:50.040 We already had our sip.

00:45:52.660 All right.

00:45:53.200 That's all for today.

00:45:54.040 I will talk to you all tomorrow.

00:45:55.140 You're welcome.

00:45:55.380 All right.

00:45:55.800 All right.

00:45:55.980 Well, you're welcome.

00:45:57.520 Let's get started.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - February 13, 2020

Episode 818 Scott Adams： Coming in HOT. There Will be Cursing

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript