Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 976 Scott Adams： The COVID-19 Cure, Biden's Raisen-Brain, the ＂Worse Than Watergate＂ Guy

00:00:00.000 Well, I'm here. Where are you?

00:00:10.000 Ah, there you are. There you are right there.

00:00:13.000 I knew you'd be here quickly.

00:00:15.000 Good, good morning.

00:00:18.000 Are you ready to cure the pandemic?

00:00:21.000 I am.

00:00:24.000 We might need a few things to do that.

00:00:26.000 We might need a breakthrough therapeutic, a cure, a vaccine maybe.

00:00:32.000 But until we have those things, and I'm sure that they're near,

00:00:37.000 we can get a head start on it with a little thing I call the simultaneous sip.

00:00:41.000 Yes, it will boost your immune system.

00:00:44.000 You think it won't?

00:00:46.000 Well, you're no doctor.

00:00:48.000 Okay, some of you are doctors.

00:00:50.000 But I think you'll back me on this.

00:00:53.000 A simultaneous sip will boost your immune system,

00:00:56.000 probably protect you from, I don't know, cancer, coronavirus,

00:01:02.000 strikes from meteors, pretty much everything.

00:01:05.000 Well, that's why you don't get your medical advice from cartoonists.

00:01:08.000 But all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass or a tank or a chalice or a stein,

00:01:12.000 a canteen jug or a flask or a vessel of any kind.

00:01:14.000 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:01:16.000 I like coffee.

00:01:18.000 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure,

00:01:21.000 the dopamine hit of the day,

00:01:23.000 the thing that makes everything better, 1.00

00:01:25.000 including the damn pandemic. 0.99

00:01:26.000 It's called the simultaneous sip. 0.99

00:01:28.000 And it happens now.

00:01:30.000 Go.

00:01:31.000 All right, I have a fun game for you to play.

00:01:41.000 Are you ready?

00:01:42.000 It goes like this.

00:01:44.000 Find a Biden supporter online.

00:01:48.000 Challenge them to make the following definitive statement.

00:01:53.000 I challenge you to say publicly here on Twitter that you believe Joe Biden is mentally competent.

00:02:04.000 Now, you say to yourself,

00:02:06.000 well, that's no problem.

00:02:07.000 They're just going to say, sure, he's mentally confident.

00:02:10.000 Right?

00:02:12.000 Not anymore.

00:02:14.000 Not anymore.

00:02:16.000 I tried this with a guy online.

00:02:21.000 And I just said that directly because he made some comment about, you know, Biden being better than Trump.

00:02:26.000 I forget what it was.

00:02:27.000 And it was right after I,

00:02:29.000 oh, it was after I tweeted yet another Biden blowing his sentence clip,

00:02:36.000 which is ironic because I blew my sentence describing Biden losing his mind and blowing his sentence.

00:02:43.000 It doesn't mean I'm crazy.

00:02:46.000 Not yet.

00:02:47.000 Not yet.

00:02:48.000 And so somebody on Twitter, you know, made the comment that Trump's no better and showed a clip where Trump is mashing some words,

00:02:59.000 which of course we all do.

00:03:01.000 And so I thought to myself, does he really think that looks the same?

00:03:06.000 Because you could do a mash up, a mash up of anybody, you know, who speaks a lot in public getting their words wrong.

00:03:15.000 All right. Everybody knows you can do that.

00:03:17.000 But does that look the same as the Joe Biden stuff?

00:03:21.000 Can you really look at me honestly and say, yeah, it's just the same thing.

00:03:26.000 Everybody misses a word now and then.

00:03:28.000 Put them all together.

00:03:29.000 It's going to look pretty bad.

00:03:31.000 So I just said, can you state directly here on Twitter that you believe that Joe Biden is mentally capable?

00:03:40.000 What do you think he did?

00:03:42.000 He might have changed the subject.

00:03:45.000 Actually, he actually said directly he still prefers Biden.

00:03:50.000 So without answering the question, do you think he's mentally capable?

00:03:55.000 He actually said he still prefers Biden.

00:03:57.000 I'm thinking, you know, especially since this was done in public on Twitter, that would have been the ideal time to say, oh, he's he's mentally capable.

00:04:08.000 Duh.

00:04:09.000 You know, I wouldn't be I wouldn't be supporting the guy for president of the United States that is, you know, have his finger on the nuclear button unless I thought he was mentally capable.

00:04:20.000 I mean, oh, duh.

00:04:23.000 And we're actually in a situation that is so divorced from anything that's sensible or just makes any sense at all that people are literally and in public preferring the guy that they can't even say.

00:04:39.000 They can't say in public that he's mentally capable and they want to put him in front in charge of the nuclear arsenal.

00:04:46.000 Well, I'm not even making this up.

00:04:50.000 I'm not making this up.

00:04:51.000 So you have to try this this technique if you run into any perfect situations online.

00:04:58.000 Let me know how it goes.

00:04:59.000 So the latest I think there are three different clips of Biden just going off the rails at just the last 24 hours.

00:05:10.000 The best one, of course, is when Biden saying we've lost eighty five thousand jobs.

00:05:16.000 No, no, it's tens of millions of jobs.

00:05:22.000 It's eighty five thousand lives.

00:05:25.000 If you can't tell that he then he starts going in and millions and millions of things.

00:05:31.000 And he's just completely off the he's off the tracks.

00:05:36.000 So I watch it and I actually don't know.

00:05:40.000 Like, did he actually momentarily think that it was eighty five thousand jobs we lost?

00:05:47.000 It makes you wonder if he actually thought it for a moment or or did you just mash the jobs and the death numbers?

00:05:54.000 It looked bad, whatever it was.

00:05:57.000 But then also yesterday, I think Trump is on the way to having one of the best weeks anybody ever had.

00:06:09.000 But Biden also said that he doesn't remember Tara Reid, but he advised that if women believe her, that they probably shouldn't vote for him.

00:06:20.000 What? What?

00:06:26.000 It's the it's everything that you shouldn't say all in one sentence.

00:06:30.000 The first part where he says Biden says he doesn't remember her.

00:06:34.000 He doesn't remember her.

00:06:37.000 She worked for him for a while.

00:06:39.000 She doesn't remember him.

00:06:41.000 I'm not sure that helps him.

00:06:43.000 Do you think it helps Joe Biden that he has a memory problem?

00:06:47.000 Because isn't the first thing you think when he says, I don't remember her.

00:06:51.000 Do you say to your do you say to yourself?

00:06:53.000 Oh, well, there's so many people who have worked for him over the years.

00:06:56.000 He meets a lot of people.

00:06:58.000 Yeah, that seems reasonable.

00:06:59.000 Just some rando in his office.

00:07:01.000 He wouldn't remember her.

00:07:03.000 Or does your brain immediately go to?

00:07:06.000 Wow.

00:07:07.000 What else has he forgotten?

00:07:09.000 Right? 0.52

00:07:10.000 Because of his age and his brain is in question.

00:07:13.000 Well, the first thing you think is, well, he may have forgotten her, but he's pretty quick 0.97

00:07:20.000 to deny that he didn't have sex with a woman he doesn't know existed.

00:07:26.000 Because if you can forget she existed, maybe there are other things you could have forgotten,

00:07:33.000 if you know what I mean.

00:07:36.000 Now, the part that Joe does well, I would say, is that his denial of this does seem unambiguous.

00:07:44.000 Have you noticed that?

00:07:45.000 If I'm being fair, if we're being fair, his denial is pretty darn good.

00:07:51.000 You know, I have to say, you know, his accuser is very credible.

00:07:59.000 And remember, credible doesn't mean true.

00:08:02.000 It just means that everything about her seems consistent and believable.

00:08:06.000 So I would say I would put complete credibility on the claim.

00:08:11.000 But at the same time, it could also be true that the denial can be credible.

00:08:16.000 Right?

00:08:17.000 You could have a credible claim and a credible denial, and they could both be solid gold credibility.

00:08:23.000 Only one of them could be true, but they could both be credible.

00:08:27.000 I got to say, Biden's denial of this, given that he's not the most clever with words,

00:08:35.000 you would expect that if it was a fake denial, in other words, if he had an actual memory of it,

00:08:42.000 and he was just lying, I feel like his words would reveal it.

00:08:47.000 Because he's just not that good with concealing his, you know, words,

00:08:52.000 or concealing his thoughts in clever words.

00:08:55.000 Every time I talk about Biden not being able to talk clearly,

00:08:59.000 it just totally ruins my fluency.

00:09:01.000 I know that's going to happen again.

00:09:04.000 It gets in your head.

00:09:06.000 But anyway, I would rate the quality of Biden's denial really good.

00:09:16.000 Really good.

00:09:17.000 Only from this perspective.

00:09:19.000 He says it clearly and confidently, and he doesn't leave any wiggle room when he denies it.

00:09:27.000 He also says, and this helps his denial, he says that it's on a character.

00:09:32.000 So even though he says that, you know, he doesn't remember it, he's saying, you know,

00:09:37.000 I would certainly remember assaulting somebody in a hallway, basically, you know,

00:09:41.000 which seems a fair thing to say, right?

00:09:44.000 It's like, okay, that's so on a character.

00:09:46.000 I don't have to remember or not remember.

00:09:48.000 That's just not me.

00:09:50.000 It would be like, it would be like if somebody accused me of eating a steak last week,

00:09:57.000 and I say, I don't remember that.

00:10:00.000 They can't really come back to me and say, all right, well, you said you don't remember,

00:10:04.000 but I remember it.

00:10:05.000 So, you know, there it is.

00:10:08.000 No, because I don't eat a steak.

00:10:11.000 So given that I haven't had a steak in 30 years, I don't have to remember if I had a steak last week.

00:10:20.000 I know I didn't, so I can know it without having a memory.

00:10:24.000 Biden has a similar situation, you know, from his telling of it, right?

00:10:29.000 I'm not saying I'm getting in his head, but from his telling of it, that's a pretty good denial.

00:10:34.000 It's like, okay, that's like you're describing a person who's a whole different person.

00:10:39.000 I don't have to remember to know I didn't do that.

00:10:42.000 You know, I can tell you with confidence I've never sexually molested anybody in a hallway, right?

00:10:49.000 I mean, I know that about myself.

00:10:51.000 Do I have a memory of all the times I've been in a hallway?

00:10:55.000 Not really, but I know who I am, and I didn't eat a steak last week,

00:11:01.000 and I didn't sexually molest anybody in the hallway of the Capitol.

00:11:05.000 I want to be specific about the hallway there.

00:11:08.000 All right, I have this great enduring curiosity about this, and I wonder if you do too.

00:11:17.000 Are the people who have been lying to us about the Russia collusion thing

00:11:23.000 and now are trying to lie to us that the Obamagay thing is no big deal at all,

00:11:28.000 are they self-aware?

00:11:30.000 Do you have an opinion on that?

00:11:32.000 And I'll throw out some names in particular.

00:11:36.000 Jennifer Rubin, Maggie Haberman, and Carl Bernstein, the worse than the Watergate guy.

00:11:44.000 I'll just use them as my three example people.

00:11:48.000 Do you think there's any self-reflection going on?

00:11:51.000 And I actually don't know.

00:11:52.000 This is a legitimate question.

00:11:54.000 I'm not even sure which way I lean on this.

00:11:57.000 Do you think that in their quiet times they say to themselves,

00:12:01.000 oh my God, I wonder if the country realizes that we lied to them for three years,

00:12:08.000 misled them deeply, and we're still doing it?

00:12:12.000 Do you think so?

00:12:14.000 Because somebody says I've spoken to them.

00:12:20.000 All three of them?

00:12:22.000 That would be weird.

00:12:24.000 I'm looking at your comments because I'm actually very interested in seeing your opinion. 1.00

00:12:29.000 So, some say they're believers, unaware, mental illness, they're all nuts. 1.00

00:12:37.000 Three horrible people, that sums it up. 1.00

00:12:40.000 Part of the swamp, they're sick. 0.99

00:12:43.000 So, look at your opinions, they're just all over the place.

00:12:47.000 Self-loathing, not a chance.

00:12:49.000 Two movies on one screen, either way is bad.

00:12:55.000 No, they don't care, yes.

00:12:57.000 Alright, so your answers are all over the place.

00:13:00.000 So, you're about where I am, which is, it's just hard to tell.

00:13:04.000 But, I want to see if you get this impression.

00:13:09.000 You know, we're all stereotypers, and we're all biased.

00:13:14.000 You know, we try not to be.

00:13:16.000 So, you try not to put your bias on the news, but you can't really help it.

00:13:22.000 And, I'll tell you, if I watch, let's say historically, not talking about the last year or anything,

00:13:28.000 but historically, if I watched a Republican on the news,

00:13:33.000 and let's say the Republican was saying something I didn't like,

00:13:36.000 what was my feeling about that Republican?

00:13:40.000 Well, usually my feeling was, oh, that's coming from, you know, some religious base that, you know,

00:13:46.000 I'm not buying into all that or something.

00:13:48.000 So, I would often think, oh, they're starting from some philosophical starting place

00:13:53.000 that I don't buy into, so therefore it makes sense that we don't have the same opinion on a few things.

00:13:59.000 All right?

00:14:00.000 So, when I see a Republican, I'm just, okay, they got this philosophy or religion or something,

00:14:06.000 and it's incompatible with this.

00:14:07.000 All right, I get that.

00:14:09.000 But, when I see a lot of the Democrats, let's say the anti-Trumpers in particular,

00:14:14.000 I'm not going to say Democrat, I'll say anti-Trumpers.

00:14:17.000 When I see the anti-Trumpers, such as Carl Bernstein and Haverman and Jennifer Rubin and some of the hosts on CNN,

00:14:30.000 such as Don Lemon, what is your just impression of those people?

00:14:40.000 Is your impression that they're coming at it with a different philosophy and that's why your opinion doesn't match?

00:14:48.000 Is your opinion that they're coming at it as basically criminals who are just making stuff up to make money

00:14:55.000 and they know it's not true?

00:14:56.000 I mean, it wouldn't be illegal, but, you know, sort of a fraudulent intent.

00:15:01.000 Does it register that way with you?

00:15:04.000 Or do you register it as mental illness?

00:15:08.000 Because, so I'm going to give you my opinion, which is that it registers as mental illness,

00:15:14.000 which is different from saying it's mental illness, all right?

00:15:18.000 So, I'm not going to give you a diagnosis.

00:15:20.000 I'm not a doctor, right?

00:15:22.000 Even though my medical opinion has so far been better than the experts on the coronavirus,

00:15:29.000 but that's probably just a coincidence.

00:15:31.000 We're not going to say that that's a trend that should continue.

00:15:34.000 But when I look at a lot of the anti-Trump critics, the way it registers to me,

00:15:42.000 and I'm going to be careful with my language, right? 0.98

00:15:45.000 I'm not saying that they have mental problems.

00:15:48.000 That would be totally irresponsible.

00:15:50.000 I'm not going to say it.

00:15:52.000 I'm going to say it feels like it.

00:15:54.000 So, I can only talk about myself.

00:15:56.000 So, this is just a comment about my self.

00:16:01.000 When I watch the anti-Trumpers on TV, not all of them, some of them are perfectly reasonable people, 0.95

00:16:06.000 but there's a class of them, you know, the really hardcores, that read to me like mental illness. 0.86

00:16:14.000 Now, you are aware from your own life that, and by the way, when I say mental illness,

00:16:24.000 I don't mean there's necessarily something organically wrong with them,

00:16:27.000 but rather that they're troubled by whatever the situation is.

00:16:31.000 So, let's just say troubled in a way that would be a mental distress of some sort.

00:16:36.000 It doesn't necessarily have to have a name on it.

00:16:38.000 Like, you know, I'm not saying it's bipolar or something that has a name.

00:16:46.000 That's my take.

00:16:48.000 I wonder if anybody else has that.

00:16:50.000 Answer this question.

00:16:52.000 Do you, do you receive them, just your human sensors?

00:16:58.000 Do you read them as mentally having a problem, or as just lying?

00:17:03.000 Or just, or maybe they're right.

00:17:05.000 You're wrong.

00:17:06.000 Who knows?

00:17:11.000 Alright, just looking at your comments as they come in, they're a little out of time.

00:17:16.000 Alright.

00:17:17.000 And is it a coincidence that Carl Bernstein hasn't been on television?

00:17:22.000 I suppose he's hiding in his basement and may not have all the technology he needs.

00:17:27.000 But has Carl Bernstein been on CNN since Obamagate became Obamagate?

00:17:34.000 Have we seen him since then?

00:17:36.000 Because I have to wonder if they feel comfortable putting him on.

00:17:43.000 Wouldn't you love to know what the conversation is at CNN, privately?

00:17:47.000 Wouldn't you love to know what the producers at CNN and the on-air talent are talking to themselves about right now?

00:17:55.000 Right?

00:17:56.000 Wouldn't you love that?

00:17:58.000 Because I feel like I know what Fox News is saying, you know, the producers and stuff.

00:18:04.000 Because I feel like what they're saying ends up on the page.

00:18:08.000 Right?

00:18:09.000 Right?

00:18:10.000 So, don't you feel like you know exactly what the producers and on-air people at Fox News think?

00:18:18.000 Because I think they just put it on the air.

00:18:20.000 You see it.

00:18:21.000 But are the CNN people putting on the air what they think?

00:18:27.000 Because it doesn't look like it.

00:18:29.000 Maybe it is.

00:18:30.000 It doesn't look like they're trying to put on the air the things they actually internally think to be the truth.

00:18:37.000 It feels like they must be in some kind of weird world.

00:18:43.000 Here's the fun part.

00:18:45.000 It's a big organization.

00:18:47.000 There must be people in CNN who are on both sides, internally.

00:18:51.000 There must be people who say, okay, okay, we just have to say we were wrong about this for three years.

00:18:58.000 I mean, this is embarrassing.

00:19:00.000 We should just admit we were wrong for three years.

00:19:03.000 And then there's probably some other producer saying, we don't have to do that.

00:19:07.000 We don't have to do that.

00:19:09.000 Because the Republicans don't watch this station.

00:19:12.000 The only people who watch it are the ones who are going to believe anything we tell them.

00:19:15.000 We'll just tell them we weren't wrong.

00:19:17.000 We'll just say, that didn't happen.

00:19:19.000 We weren't wrong.

00:19:20.000 It'll be fine.

00:19:21.000 Watch this.

00:19:22.000 And then they just act like it didn't happen.

00:19:24.000 And it's fine.

00:19:26.000 It totally works.

00:19:28.000 They can literally create any reality they want,

00:19:31.000 so long as they know their people are walled off from the rest of the competing opinions.

00:19:37.000 And they are.

00:19:40.000 All right.

00:19:42.000 Who is it?

00:19:43.000 Jennifer Rubin, who is still saying the walls are closing in on Trump's lawless presidency.

00:19:48.000 And I guess there's clips of her saying the walls are closing in all through the Russia collusion stuff.

00:19:54.000 It's so absurd now in an entertaining way that I can't do anything but laugh at it.

00:20:03.000 If you're not watching CNN just for the jokes, well, you're missing a good show.

00:20:10.000 Well, I buried the lead.

00:20:12.000 Buried the lead, as they say.

00:20:14.000 Here's the biggest story of the day, if you haven't heard it.

00:20:19.000 I don't know.

00:20:20.000 Maybe you've already heard this.

00:20:21.000 This is the first news you're getting.

00:20:24.000 So there's a cure for coronavirus.

00:20:28.000 Just let that sit there for a minute.

00:20:31.000 Bum bum bum. 0.92

00:20:32.000 Bum bum bum. 0.92

00:20:34.000 Bum bum bum. 0.92

00:20:35.000 Oh, I should say more about that.

00:20:37.000 Yes.

00:20:38.000 There's a cure for coronavirus.

00:20:40.000 Maybe.

00:20:41.000 Maybe.

00:20:42.000 But it's only a cure on Fox News.

00:20:46.000 If you go to CNN, there's no story about this.

00:20:49.000 So what did I tell you when there are two networks, and one has a story that says this is totally true, and the other one, not so much?

00:21:00.000 Well, it means you shouldn't believe it yet.

00:21:02.000 I'd let this one age a little bit because it's brand new news.

00:21:06.000 I think it's news from probably yesterday afternoon.

00:21:10.000 But it's a California-based biopharmaceutical company called Sorrento, California, representing.

00:21:19.000 You know, if you want some smart people, come to California.

00:21:23.000 We've got a lot of problems in California.

00:21:25.000 We've got your hypodermic needles on the streets.

00:21:30.000 We've got your taxes.

00:21:31.000 We've got your immigration problems. 0.98

00:21:33.000 We've got your homelessness.

00:21:34.000 We've got lots and lots of problems in California.

00:21:36.000 But the other thing we have, we've got some smart people here.

00:21:40.000 We've got some smart, smart, smart people in California.

00:21:44.000 And some of them are at this company, Sorrento, and they have made the following claim.

00:21:50.000 So Sorrento Therapeutics will announce their discovery, I guess today, of the STI-1499 antibody, which is a good one.

00:21:59.000 I don't know.

00:22:00.000 If you're keeping track of your antibodies, this is the good one.

00:22:04.000 The STI-1499.

00:22:06.000 Oh, yeah.

00:22:07.000 That's a good antibody right there.

00:22:09.000 So I guess it's a company that had millions of antibodies sort of in their library for just this sort of reason,

00:22:16.000 so that they could run their tests against, I don't know if it's computer simulation or actual tests,

00:22:22.000 but they were probably computer simulation, just guessing.

00:22:25.000 But they ran their tests against all their existing catalog of millions of antibodies,

00:22:31.000 and they found this one that's sort of a superstar.

00:22:35.000 And what it does is it wraps around the coronavirus.

00:22:40.000 It just puts a wrapper around it, and it can't infect you, and it just gets passed from your body.

00:22:46.000 Do you believe it?

00:22:48.000 Yeah, San Diego company.

00:22:51.000 But here's the thing that just caught me by surprise.

00:22:55.000 If you're a legitimate traded company, you've got to keep some credibility, right?

00:23:02.000 What would be worse than making a claim that you knew was just BS?

00:23:07.000 And then, you know, three weeks later, everybody knows you lied.

00:23:11.000 You're a public company.

00:23:13.000 What's that going to do to your stock price?

00:23:15.000 Remember, this is a billion-dollar company.

00:23:17.000 So, you know, it's a serious company, billion-dollar company.

00:23:21.000 At least that's what somebody offered to buy them several months ago, a billion dollars.

00:23:28.000 And this is the exact quote from the company.

00:23:33.000 We want to emphasize there is a cure.

00:23:38.000 Not a therapeutic.

00:23:41.000 Not a vaccine.

00:23:43.000 When have you ever heard a legitimate American biotech company say in direct language,

00:23:51.000 we want to emphasize there is a cure.

00:23:55.000 There is a solution that works 100%, Dr. Henry Gee, founder and CEO of Sorrento Therapeutics, told Fox News.

00:24:03.000 If you have the neutralizing antibody in your body, you don't need the social distancing.

00:24:12.000 You can open up a society without fear.

00:24:19.000 They found there was one particular antibody, blah, blah, blah.

00:24:22.000 Now, if this guy's lying, well, he could be wrong and not lying, right?

00:24:28.000 He could be maybe just optimistic.

00:24:31.000 But how unusual is it for a CEO to make a claim of 100% cure?

00:24:39.000 He used the word cure, and he said 100%.

00:24:46.000 Have you ever seen that?

00:24:48.000 Ever? 0.59

00:24:49.000 Now, this guy is either so far out on a branch that he's just a nut.

00:25:02.000 Because even if you were 99% sure, you wouldn't say 100%.

00:25:09.000 You just wouldn't.

00:25:10.000 I mean, nobody responsible would say 100%.

00:25:13.000 Unless, unless they actually believed it.

00:25:17.000 Nobody responsible, and we don't know if he's responsible, right?

00:25:22.000 We don't know this guy.

00:25:23.000 He could be like the biggest bad guy in the world.

00:25:26.000 We don't know.

00:25:27.000 So if he was the biggest bad guy in the world, yeah, he could make a crazy claim.

00:25:32.000 Apparently, some big companies have made crazy claims already and gotten in trouble.

00:25:36.000 So it wouldn't even be the first pharmaceutical biotech company during coronavirus to make a claim that wasn't true.

00:25:46.000 So it wouldn't be the first time.

00:25:49.000 So if you're evaluating this, you'd have to say, why is it only news on Fox News?

00:25:54.000 That's your first red flag.

00:25:56.000 You know, why isn't there more widespread coverage of this?

00:26:01.000 Is it just because CNN doesn't want to give you any good news about coronavirus?

00:26:05.000 I hope not.

00:26:06.000 I doubt that would be the case. 0.55

00:26:09.000 Is it because the claim is so, so ridiculous, meaning ridiculously optimistic, that CNN just said, I don't know about this. 0.85

00:26:22.000 It could be they're just better at news. 0.72

00:26:24.000 I hate to say it, but you can't rule out the fact that Fox News bit on something and the CNN reporters are saying that's that's a big claim.

00:26:35.000 You know, I'm not going to write that.

00:26:37.000 You know, if you would not use the word cure, fine, we'll write a story about it.

00:26:42.000 If you had not said a hundred percent.

00:26:45.000 OK, fine.

00:26:47.000 We'll write a story.

00:26:48.000 It's promising.

00:26:49.000 We do that all the time.

00:26:50.000 But it could be that these claims are so absurd.

00:26:55.000 Maybe true.

00:26:56.000 But they're absurd sounding in our brains at the moment that that the other news organizations just went.

00:27:03.000 Ah, I don't even know if we can.

00:27:06.000 I don't know if we can report that.

00:27:14.000 Yeah.

00:27:15.000 So it might be just a time lag.

00:27:17.000 Maybe take a little while before they report on it.

00:27:19.000 But I'm going to tell you, this is highly, highly unusual for anybody at that level to make that kind of claim is either it's either career suicide.

00:27:32.000 Right.

00:27:33.000 Because this founder, he's he's got a billion dollar company.

00:27:37.000 So basically, you know, he's a super rich guy unless he messes up and he didn't need to do this.

00:27:44.000 Right.

00:27:45.000 Remember, this is a company already successful and a founder who's probably already worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

00:27:52.000 He doesn't need anything.

00:27:54.000 There's nothing he needs. 0.97

00:27:56.000 Would he get in front of the world, risk his entire company, his entire fortune on a lie this this ridiculous?

00:28:06.000 Now, of course, there's also the possibility he's not lying, but he's also not right.

00:28:11.000 Yeah.

00:28:12.000 I mean, that's the obvious possibility.

00:28:15.000 But.

00:28:16.000 Full disclosure, don't take any advice from me.

00:28:23.000 I'm financial stuff.

00:28:25.000 You really shouldn't.

00:28:26.000 I've had a number of situations where I've been right guessing on some financial stuff, but probably as many when I'm wrong.

00:28:34.000 So, you know, I feel like I get the politics right more often than not.

00:28:39.000 But don't take my advice on finances.

00:28:41.000 Really don't.

00:28:42.000 Except for general concepts like diversification.

00:28:45.000 But just for full disclosure, I bought their stock this morning.

00:28:49.000 Stock in Sorrento.

00:28:51.000 Now, you should not buy stock in Sorrento if you think it's an investment.

00:28:56.000 It's not anything like an investment. 0.97

00:28:59.000 It's just something that dumb people like me will do because, I don't know. 0.98

00:29:05.000 I guess I just wanted to bet on optimism. 0.99

00:29:08.000 If you told me, was that a smart thing to do?

00:29:11.000 No.

00:29:12.000 No.

00:29:13.000 It is not smart, not even close to smart, to put your actual hard earned money on a news story about one company making a claim in a context where lots of companies are making claims.

00:29:25.000 And most of them are not true.

00:29:28.000 But, I just found myself wanting to bet on optimism today.

00:29:33.000 Sometimes, sometimes you just want to bet on optimism.

00:29:37.000 The stock has already gone up so much before I bought it that I can't even imagine it will be a good idea.

00:29:44.000 You should be hearing me in a week saying I wish I hadn't done that.

00:29:47.000 That's what I would expect.

00:29:49.000 But I just want to bet on optimism today.

00:29:51.000 I want to go into the weekend field that way.

00:29:54.000 All right.

00:29:55.000 All right.

00:29:57.000 So, here's the fun part.

00:30:01.000 When these various states are being reviewed for how they're doing with their reopenings, the early indications seem to be there's not any problem with the early opening places.

00:30:13.000 There doesn't seem to be a big change yet.

00:30:16.000 But, it's too early.

00:30:18.000 And there are lots of other factors.

00:30:20.000 Such as, summer.

00:30:23.000 What may be the reason that the southern states that are opening up earlier are getting a good result?

00:30:30.000 Because it's warm.

00:30:32.000 What if it's just warm?

00:30:34.000 So, we will never know why something worked and why it didn't.

00:30:39.000 But we will all be sure we did.

00:30:41.000 Everybody who's bias is that we should open up quickly.

00:30:44.000 We'll look at the states that opened up quickly.

00:30:47.000 And they're going to say, well, it's right in front of you.

00:30:50.000 Look, they opened up quickly.

00:30:52.000 It went fine compared to the other states.

00:30:54.000 No better, no worse.

00:30:56.000 So, therefore, we were right all along when we said you should open up early.

00:31:00.000 That's what people will say.

00:31:02.000 There will be no reasonable basis for that opinion.

00:31:06.000 Because we won't know, probably never, we won't know what worked.

00:31:13.000 We'll never know.

00:31:14.000 When this is all done, for the rest of time, smart people will say, okay, you got it wrong.

00:31:21.000 The real reason it didn't go wrong in Florida, let's say it doesn't.

00:31:25.000 The real reason was the weather turned.

00:31:28.000 The real reason was they dealt with things differently.

00:31:31.000 The real reason was the people social distanced on their own.

00:31:35.000 The real reason was, you know, it's going to be like that.

00:31:38.000 The real reason was people stopped shaking hands.

00:31:41.000 You'll never know why something worked or even if it worked.

00:31:45.000 I don't think we'll ever be able to tease it out of the data.

00:31:48.000 But, man, people are going to be sure.

00:31:50.000 People are going to be sure they see stuff in that data that they don't see.

00:31:55.000 And so I just said on Twitter this morning, you know, it's called the anecdotal data.

00:32:01.000 And somebody said to me, Scott, Scott, Scott, Florida, you know, they closed late.

00:32:08.000 They opened up early.

00:32:10.000 They don't have any problems.

00:32:12.000 Is that anecdotal?

00:32:14.000 Is it anecdotal, Scott, that Florida not only closed late, but they opened early, meaning that they were open more than other states.

00:32:23.000 And they still have, you know, acceptable death rate.

00:32:26.000 Is that just anecdotal, Scott?

00:32:29.000 To which I say, yeah, that's what it means.

00:32:33.000 That's like literally the definition of anecdotal.

00:32:38.000 That's exactly anecdotal.

00:32:41.000 That lacks a rigorous scientific analysis.

00:32:46.000 That's anecdotal.

00:32:49.000 And still the fascinating two-movie situation with this Obamagate unmasking.

00:32:58.000 This is a really interesting one.

00:33:01.000 So on CNN, the Obamagate thing is nothing but gaslighting and conspiracy theory, and there's nothing to it.

00:33:08.000 On Fox News, it's bigger than Watergate, and it's this giant conspiracy to spy on a political campaign using the organs of government.

00:33:19.000 The worst thing ever.

00:33:21.000 Which one's true?

00:33:23.000 Can't both be true.

00:33:25.000 Well, I'm going to be on the side of saying that the walls are closing in.

00:33:30.000 Doesn't it feel like that?

00:33:33.000 It feels like the walls are closing in on the Obama administration bad people who did whatever they did with FISA and spying on Flint.

00:33:45.000 But, at the same time, I'm going to say those walls have not completely closed in.

00:33:52.000 So if you think that you see the direct evidence of the crime, it's not there yet.

00:33:59.000 It's not there yet.

00:34:00.000 Do I expect that we'll ever see it?

00:34:02.000 I don't know.

00:34:03.000 Because sometimes you never see...

00:34:05.000 There might not be any indication of what people were thinking, which is really the entire accusation.

00:34:10.000 The accusation is what were they thinking?

00:34:13.000 Because if we found out, you know, if we found the documents to say why they wanted to unmask and why 39 people needed it,

00:34:19.000 what if there's a good reason on there?

00:34:22.000 Could be, right?

00:34:24.000 39 people had to fill out legal paperwork that could be discovered to say why they needed to know that Flynn was the other person on the transcript.

00:34:35.000 They must have written down reasons.

00:34:38.000 How bad are those reasons?

00:34:40.000 Do they just leave those boxes blank?

00:34:42.000 Or do you think they said something like, in the context of my work, I need to know where we are vis-a-vis Russia?

00:34:52.000 That's it.

00:34:53.000 That's all they have to say.

00:34:55.000 Anyone who unmasked, whether they're a diplomat or Obama's chief of staff, who you automatically think, well, what do they have to do with any of this?

00:35:05.000 But since the issue was the very nature of the relationship between the United States and Russia, basically everybody in the government who had some kind of an official role had a reason to know that.

00:35:18.000 Now, I don't know how common it is that they would unmask to get a little bit of data about something.

00:35:24.000 You know, that stuff we'll learn.

00:35:27.000 So, it does seem to me highly, highly unusual, based on what we know.

00:35:35.000 So again, if you're asking my opinion, it sure looks guilty.

00:35:40.000 It sure looks like a coup.

00:35:43.000 But I don't have the direct evidence yet, and I'm going to hold off for it.

00:35:47.000 You don't need to.

00:35:49.000 All right.

00:35:50.000 A new study suggests that COVID-19 cases could be cut as much as 80% if people wore masks.

00:35:59.000 What?

00:36:00.000 80%?

00:36:02.000 First of all, do you believe that?

00:36:04.000 Do you believe that if everybody wore masks, and I'm assuming that the hypothetical here is that you'd wear them as soon as you woke up, right?

00:36:12.000 You know, just everywhere.

00:36:14.000 Do you think it would cut coronavirus spread by 80%?

00:36:21.000 Because, I'll bet that's not far off.

00:36:25.000 Yeah, I don't know if it's 80% or 60% or 50%, but it does feel to me, if the people who were infected were wearing them, why wouldn't it reduce it?

00:36:36.000 I mean, it just feels like you should.

00:36:39.000 So, how far we've gone from masks don't work.

00:36:44.000 Could you...

00:36:45.000 Imagine you were the Surgeon General, and you wake up in the morning, and you're the guy who's famous for saying in public, don't get a mask, masks don't work.

00:36:55.000 And then you wake up, and it's still the crisis.

00:36:58.000 You're still in the middle of it.

00:36:59.000 People are dying by the thousands.

00:37:01.000 And you say, yeah, actually, if you had not told people that, it might have cut the spread down by 80%.

00:37:08.000 What?

00:37:09.000 What?

00:37:10.000 I'm the Surgeon General, and I gave people advice, the wrong advice, and if I had given them the right advice, it would have reduced infections by 80%.

00:37:21.000 Well, it wouldn't have, because we didn't have enough supply.

00:37:24.000 But in theory, this is some of the worst medical advice of all time.

00:37:30.000 If you had to guess what was the worst medical advice of all time, well, probably back when they said smoking was good for you, that was probably the worst medical advice of all time.

00:37:41.000 But I would say second place would be that masks don't help you in an infection.

00:37:48.000 Really, that had to be the second worst advice.

00:37:51.000 All right.

00:37:56.000 I keep seeing more and more things that vitamin D is going to be important.

00:38:02.000 I got my vitamin D supplements.

00:38:05.000 So I was holding off, you know, I was just using the sun and everything, and I still just ground the sun.

00:38:12.000 But I didn't know if I wanted to also supplement, but I thought that the risk reward of that was good.

00:38:20.000 So I'm going to do, you know, maybe 1,000, 2,000 units a day.

00:38:25.000 So that would be way under a level that I would have to worry about having too much of it, but it would be probably protective in a general way, not necessarily a coronavirus way, but in a general way.

00:38:37.000 Vitamin D apparently is good for you.

00:38:40.000 Mitch McConnell conceded Thursday that he was wrong to claim that Obama had left no kind of coronavirus plan behind.

00:38:50.000 Apparently there was a detailed Obama administration plan for how to deal with the coronavirus breakout.

00:38:57.000 But what we don't know is would that plan have helped us have enough PPE?

00:39:04.000 No.

00:39:05.000 Would that plan have told us what to do about closing the airport?

00:39:09.000 Doubt it.

00:39:10.000 Did that plan have anything in it about risk management if you thought hydroxychloroquine worked but it wasn't proven?

00:39:17.000 No.

00:39:18.000 So I don't know what was in that detailed plan.

00:39:21.000 I think it was mostly about which organizations talked to who and who was in charge.

00:39:28.000 I think it was more of a framework for how the government organizes, if I'm right.

00:39:33.000 But did you hear any problems on that regard?

00:39:37.000 We've heard tons of problems of, you know, hey, where's our ventilators?

00:39:42.000 Where's our PPE?

00:39:43.000 We, you know, tons of problems about outcomes.

00:39:47.000 But have we heard one complaint?

00:39:50.000 And I'm not saying it didn't happen.

00:39:52.000 I'm just saying it's weird that we haven't heard about it.

00:39:54.000 Have we heard one complaint that the real problem was that the government didn't get self-organized efficiently?

00:40:02.000 Or that they didn't know who to talk to, didn't know who was in charge.

00:40:06.000 You know, I'm sure on the ground there was plenty of that complaining because there always is.

00:40:11.000 Hey, who's in charge?

00:40:12.000 Who's doing this?

00:40:13.000 But in terms of, you know, you're the country and you're looking at your government, how'd they do?

00:40:20.000 Was there anything in the Obama coronavirus plan that made any difference?

00:40:27.000 Because don't you think everybody knew what the CDC's role was?

00:40:31.000 Probably.

00:40:32.000 Don't you think everybody knew the president was in charge?

00:40:35.000 I think so.

00:40:36.000 Don't you think that all of the different organizations that knew immediately, uh-oh, I have a role in this?

00:40:43.000 Don't you think that as soon as they read the news and said, oh, I'm a virus department or I'm a medical this or, you know, I'm FEMA or whatever.

00:40:52.000 Don't you think every one of those organizations said immediately, oh, this is where I jump in.

00:40:58.000 And the way I connect to the process is the way I always connect.

00:41:02.000 So I'll call the CDC, make sure they know who our main contact is.

00:41:06.000 I'll hit the president's office, make sure he knows we're up and running.

00:41:10.000 I've got a feeling that the Obama plan that said how you organized for the pandemic probably just happened spontaneously.

00:41:18.000 Because every organization already knows who they are.

00:41:22.000 If you know your organization has a certain role and the time comes for that role to come into play, probably there wasn't that much of a problem figuring out who does what.

00:41:32.000 You know, just sort of normal business stuff.

00:41:34.000 Just my guess.

00:41:36.000 According to Scott Gottlieb, MD, who is a great follow, by the way, on Twitter,

00:41:44.000 he says the national data is showing that the number of coronavirus deaths is plateauing or going down a little bit.

00:41:52.000 But I don't know.

00:41:53.000 Do we still have some kind of a time lag problem?

00:41:56.000 I'm not sure I'm going to believe anything yet.

00:42:03.000 And so what is CNN talking about today?

00:42:06.000 They've got this whistleblower, Rick Bright.

00:42:09.000 So he's the ousted director of, I guess it was a vaccine agency.

00:42:14.000 And he's complaining now, among other things, that the N95 masks that we bought were not effective.

00:42:24.000 Now, here's the thing.

00:42:26.000 You know, I like to be a good whistleblower.

00:42:29.000 You know, whistleblowers are important.

00:42:32.000 I like a good whistleblower now and then.

00:42:34.000 But if your whistleblower is complaining that the masks we bought from Asia were not effective,

00:42:39.000 I just don't know that that's on us.

00:42:42.000 Right?

00:42:43.000 Is that on the government that products they bought were poorly made?

00:42:50.000 I mean, obviously we wish they had known to check or they'd done some testing or something.

00:42:57.000 But it seems to me that in an emergency situation, everybody just bought everything that they could buy

00:43:05.000 because the alternative was worse.

00:43:07.000 Wouldn't it be way better to have a mask that was half effective than not being able to get a mask?

00:43:14.000 So I think everybody did what they could do, which is just buy every frickin' thing you could get and live with the consequences,

00:43:21.000 which was, unfortunately, the best risk management thing they could have done.

00:43:25.000 But CNN's turning it into a whistleblower story about how, I don't know, they did a bad job at buying masks.

00:43:33.000 Also, according to CNN, the hydroxychloroquine story is dead.

00:43:39.000 It's a done deal, it doesn't work.

00:43:41.000 Were you aware of that?

00:43:43.000 Were you aware that in the other movie, it's already a fact that hydroxychloroquine doesn't work and might just be bad for you?

00:43:51.000 Did you know that?

00:43:53.000 Because that's not the story on Fox News.

00:43:56.000 I mean, I don't know if Fox News has talked about it recently.

00:43:58.000 But CNN's evidence is two studies, one that said it had no harm and no benefit,

00:44:05.000 and another one that said it had no benefit, but it did have harm in terms of strokes or something.

00:44:11.000 But given that we know that this drug has been around forever, that's not really credible?

00:44:17.000 That suddenly this is the only case that those drugs cause problems?

00:44:21.000 Oh yeah, the one and only time that these drugs that have been around forever, the one time they cause problems is this time.

00:44:28.000 Eh, maybe.

00:44:30.000 But the other study didn't show anything like that.

00:44:33.000 So, you know where I had been.

00:44:36.000 I had been at a 40% chance that hydroxychloroquine would make some kind of a big difference.

00:44:43.000 You know, I had started down higher, but I had lowered it.

00:44:46.000 And the reason was that I hadn't heard good things about it.

00:44:51.000 But isn't it still true that doctors are using it?

00:44:55.000 Let me ask you this.

00:44:57.000 So you've got CNN saying, yeah, the studies are in, it's useless.

00:45:02.000 Isn't it also true that the doctors are still prescribing it?

00:45:06.000 Okay?

00:45:07.000 So why would the doctors, whose job it is to prescribe it, still doing it in a widespread fashion,

00:45:16.000 when CNN says, oh yeah, the studies are in, it's over.

00:45:19.000 What's wrong?

00:45:21.000 What's going on here?

00:45:23.000 Hey.

00:45:24.000 Now, it could be that my information is behind the times.

00:45:28.000 It could be that, let's say a week ago, doctors all over the country just stopped using hydroxychloroquine.

00:45:35.000 Maybe they saw the news too. 0.99

00:45:37.000 Maybe they read CNN and said, oh, darn. 0.94

00:45:40.000 You know, it was promising, but I guess there's no reason to try it now. 0.97

00:45:44.000 I don't know.

00:45:45.000 Where's the reporting on that?

00:45:47.000 That's a pretty big story.

00:45:48.000 Are doctors still prescribing it?

00:45:51.000 All right.

00:45:53.000 Let's see, what else we got here?

00:45:56.000 Oh.

00:45:58.000 So, a user on LinkedIn sent me a long description about the monetary situation.

00:46:07.000 You know, I was asking, can we just print money?

00:46:11.000 Can we just print money?

00:46:13.000 Because I thought to myself, there's something about this unique crisis situation that we've never seen before that might be the one and only time that you could just print money.

00:46:25.000 And any other time it would cause, you know, you'd have inflation or if you borrowed you'd cause debt, etc.

00:46:32.000 But I was thinking, I don't know, there's something about this.

00:46:36.000 Everything seems to have lined up where we can just print money.

00:46:40.000 And haven't you been waiting for somebody to tell you you can't do that?

00:46:44.000 Right?

00:46:45.000 Aren't you waiting for an expert to come on TV and say, um, you could print a little bit of money.

00:46:51.000 I mean, maybe you could print half a trillion.

00:46:54.000 And you could live with that.

00:46:57.000 But you can't just print four or five trillion dollars.

00:47:02.000 You can't just print the entire GDP of your country and just hand it out and say, hey, here's some money.

00:47:08.000 Spend it.

00:47:09.000 There has to be some kind of cost down the road.

00:47:13.000 Have you seen one economic expert say that there would be?

00:47:18.000 Where is that?

00:47:20.000 Don't we usually have two sides to everything?

00:47:25.000 Where's the other side that says, I got to tell you this five, whatever it's going to end up.

00:47:31.000 I'm guessing five trillion, but fact check me on that.

00:47:35.000 Wherever it ends up, where's the person going on TV?

00:47:38.000 An expert, an economist who says, look, look, look, you're all dreaming.

00:47:44.000 If you print five trillion dollars, even under these unique situations, you're dead.

00:47:50.000 There's no way you can recover from that.

00:47:52.000 You've just ruined your economy.

00:47:53.000 Where's that guy?

00:47:55.000 Or woman? 0.96

00:47:56.000 Where's that person?

00:47:58.000 Right?

00:47:59.000 Right?

00:48:00.000 It's conspicuously missing.

00:48:02.000 How could everybody be on the same side that we can print five trillion dollars?

00:48:11.000 What in this universe am I missing that is so big that I don't understand why we can not just invent five trillion dollars?

00:48:22.000 So I wanted to read to you, if you don't mind, can I read to you a little bit of a lengthy explanation of this?

00:48:30.000 Because I'm not sure I understand it all, but maybe some of you will.

00:48:35.000 This is from Paul Vallejo, and he gave it to me on LinkedIn.

00:48:38.000 I don't think he'd mind if I read it.

00:48:40.000 So on the question of money printing, point one, in normal circumstances, printing money creates bank reserves.

00:48:47.000 So some of you are already lost, but just stick with me.

00:48:50.000 This would throw the Fed Fund's interest rate off target, so normally you can't do that.

00:48:54.000 So the first point is, in a normal situation, you couldn't just print money.

00:48:58.000 So that's what I've been saying.

00:49:00.000 He goes, however, now that interest rates are at zero, and they might even be negative pretty soon, this does not matter.

00:49:07.000 The Fed could print and not alter the Fed Fund's rate.

00:49:11.000 And again, most of you are not going to be able to follow that.

00:49:16.000 If the Treasury does not issue bonds to mop up those reserves, the supply of bank reserves lowers the Fed Fund's rate.

00:49:23.000 And again, the only thing I want you to get into the technical part is that this is somebody who knows what they're talking about.

00:49:32.000 Now, I can't fact check it, because I don't know enough of the context to know if any of this is wrong,

00:49:39.000 but it sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

00:49:41.000 He's looking into it.

00:49:43.000 The buying and selling of bonds modulates the Fed Fund's rates to be on target.

00:49:47.000 Point two, neither China nor any other country has to buy our printed money.

00:49:53.000 So it's not a debt obligation.

00:49:55.000 We're not borrowing money from China, which you'll see on TV.

00:49:59.000 People say we are, but that's not what this is.

00:50:01.000 First, because it does not have to be issued in bonds.

00:50:05.000 Second, even if it was insisted that it be issued in bonds, the Fed could buy them.

00:50:12.000 So I guess the Fed can buy our own debt.

00:50:15.000 And he goes, the Bank of Japan owns most of the Japanese government bonds.

00:50:21.000 So your government can issue a debt and then just buy it.

00:50:24.000 So it could just basically be its own debt, I guess.

00:50:27.000 And the U.S. banking system could do it with regulators agreement.

00:50:31.000 All right.

00:50:32.000 So I guess you need some regulator agreement to do that.

00:50:34.000 Sounds doable.

00:50:35.000 All right.

00:50:36.000 So he says normally printing money creates inflation because it creates demand without supply.

00:50:41.000 This is an exception, which is what I've been saying.

00:50:45.000 We're in an exceptional period.

00:50:47.000 The exception is due to debt inflation.

00:50:50.000 Here we have to get into the paradox of thrift.

00:50:53.000 So it starts getting more complicated, blah, blah, blah.

00:50:55.000 Second brief, banks create money when they lend.

00:50:58.000 That answer.

00:50:59.000 Okay.

00:51:00.000 There's more.

00:51:01.000 I'll stick out of it.

00:51:02.000 I'll get out of the lower detail.

00:51:04.000 But the point of it all is that this is someone who does seem to understand all of the mechanisms of the system

00:51:11.000 and is agreeing with the one point, which is there might be something about this specific situation.

00:51:19.000 It might be the one time you can print $5 trillion.

00:51:25.000 Isn't that weird?

00:51:27.000 Now, who saw that coming?

00:51:30.000 Could anyone see coming that we could just print money?

00:51:37.000 Surprise me.

00:51:38.000 All right.

00:51:43.000 And that is mostly what I wanted to talk about.

00:51:47.000 I'd like to...

00:51:48.000 Just an update on...

00:51:50.000 Yesterday, I mentioned that the locals platform that I'm moving some of my other content to, extra content.

00:51:59.000 You'll still...

00:52:00.000 This will still keep going on, as always, the Periscopes.

00:52:03.000 But I'll be putting some extra stuff, including these, on locals.

00:52:07.000 But I sent so much traffic there, I crashed their server.

00:52:10.000 So if you tried to go there yesterday and it didn't load, that was my fault.

00:52:15.000 I sent a few hundred thousand people there all at once, and it crashed it for a few minutes.

00:52:20.000 So just give it a...

00:52:22.000 If you try it again today, it's probably fine, I'm sure.

00:52:29.000 Yeah, and the only people I see weighing in on the question of printing money are people saying,

00:52:34.000 Yeah, you can.

00:52:35.000 You absolutely can print money right now.

00:52:38.000 All right.

00:52:41.000 Snickers update.

00:52:42.000 She is resting comfortably.

00:52:44.000 My dog.

00:52:45.000 Yeah, she's on pain pills.

00:52:47.000 And the pain pills are masking the pain well enough that she doesn't seem to be in discomfort.

00:52:53.000 So she seems happy.

00:52:55.000 The hard part is keeping her non-active, which is not easy.

00:53:00.000 All right.

00:53:01.000 And thank you for subscribing today.

00:53:03.000 All right.

00:53:04.000 Let's all watch this Sorrento story.

00:53:07.000 Watch it for two things.

00:53:10.000 One, to see if it gets reported on CNN or anyplace else.

00:53:14.000 Because if it's on Fox News and then you never see it anywhere else, well, judge the credibility based on that.

00:53:22.000 All right.

00:53:23.000 Thanks so much for those of you who did go to the locals and I will talk to you tonight.

00:53:35.000 And yes, there's a link to the article on my Twitter.

00:53:38.000 I'm going to talk to you tonight.

00:53:39.000 I'm going to talk to you tonight about the news.

00:53:40.000 And I'll talk to you now.

00:53:41.000 You're going to talk to you before.

00:53:42.000 Thanks, Mom.

00:53:43.000 I'm going to talk to you later.

00:53:44.000 I'm going to talk to you later.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - May 15, 2020

Episode 976 Scott Adams： The COVID-19 Cure, Biden's Raisen-Brain, the ＂Worse Than Watergate＂ Guy

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript