Episode 226 Scott Adams: North Korea, Crooked’s Tweets, Hoaxes Versus Witch Hunts
Date: 2018-09-19 | Duration: 17:04
Topics
Positive news coming out of the Korea talks Hillary’s laundry list of vague complaints about President Trump
I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a "boss" somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I'm trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.
See all of my Periscope videos here…
https://www.pscp.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1nAKERDOwylGL
Find my WhenHub Interface app here…
https://interface.whenhub.com
## Transcript
## [The Simultaneous Sip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=6s)
My background is not in school, but on the plus side, my shirt is not inside out this time, so I think that's progress. Hey everybody, come on in. Jen, Mike, Jerry—get in here and grab your coffee because we know what happens when we reach a thousand viewers. That's when the simultaneous sip happens. I apologize for my bad Wi-Fi connection, but I think we can get it done. As Chris Cuomo says, "Let's get after it." He almost makes that work. Almost, I say.
All right, raise your globe here, raise your glass, your mug, your jack, your vessel, your cup, and drink.
## [Positive News in North Korea](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=75s)
Have you all seen the news about North Korea? Probably you haven't, because for some reason it doesn't seem to be getting a lot of press. Maybe it takes a while for people to wake up and start writing, but does it look like something really good happened in North Korea recently?
Let me tell you what the reports are. Of course, we always have to wait and see on any of this stuff, but the reports are that North Korea has agreed to have foreign inspectors watch as they dismantle their missile site. That's pretty good. And they have agreed to do some commerce with the South, and they have agreed to attempt to win the Olympics for 2032.
Do you remember I was telling you that it would be a good idea for them to make very long-term plans for reunification and do it one little step at a time? I was saying they're going to work together to get the Olympics in 2032. There's a nice long-term, "get each other a little bit pregnant," crawl-in-the-right-direction sort of a thing.
## [Fort Trump in Poland and Licensing Issues](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=141s)
I have allowed Nancy back. Nancy is back, everybody say hi to Nancy. We missed you, Nancy. We'll never make that mistake again.
Yes, Poland. They want a US military base in Poland. I can’t remember if it was the leader of Poland, but he suggested calling it "Fort Trump." I thought, okay, he's being very clever because he thinks Trump likes to have things named after him. But there's a problem with that because the Trump name is a licensed product. In other words, the Trump administration—or rather, the Trump organization—licenses the name to other operators.
I work in licensing, and I'll tell you that it would be a problem if you were trying to keep the value for your license high and a Polish military camp, even if it was a US camp, used your name. It would be problematic on the licensing end.
## [Trump’s "Hoax vs. Witch Hunt" Persuasion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=201s)
There's a tweet I retweeted this morning from John Solomon; it was actually last night. *The Hill* did an interview with Trump, and you can see this in my Twitter feed. A couple of things that Trump said were hilarious. One of them was he didn't know if the Russia thing was a "hoax" or a "witch hunt," because a hoax is worse than a witch hunt.
Remember, I always teach you about making people think past the sale. If you're trying to decide, "Is this a witch hunt or a hoax?" or "No, it's more of a hoax than a witch hunt, but it's got some elements of both," then he has you thinking that way. You’ve already accepted the point, which is that it’s a hoax.
## [Thinking Past the Sale: Crowning Achievement](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=262s)
The other thing he said was in the same technique. He wondered if exposing the "Russian hoax" could be the crowning achievement of his presidency. He said it might be taxes or regulations, but one of the crowning achievements might be exposing the Russian hoax.
Once again, he's making you think past the sale. The sale is: is it a crowning achievement or is it not? But if you're thinking about that, you've already accepted that it's a hoax. He did it twice in one interview. This is pretty outstanding in terms of persuasion.
## [Hillary Clinton’s Laundry List of Complaints](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=327s)
I tweeted about Hillary Clinton's word salad laundry list of problems. I've told you this before: if you have one complaint with somebody, it could be valid. If you have a whole laundry list of generic complaints, that's not so valid.
If I said, "What's the complaint with John Kerry?" you'd say, "The Iran deal." If you were going to criticize Hillary Clinton, you'd probably say "Crooked." You find that the people who really have a problem have one main thing that is a killing insult. There’s always Benghazi and some other things, but they're not as effective apparently in moving the public.
Then Hillary Clinton comes up with this tweet. I'll read it first, then I'll break it down: "Donald Trump refuses to be subject to the law... the legitimacy of our elections is in doubt... the president is waging war on the truth... the administration is undermining the national unity that makes democracy possible... and then there's the breathtaking corruption." She goes on for several tweets, but it's all the same kind of generic laundry list.
## [Analyzing Hillary’s Claims](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=389s)
Let's look at the first one: "Donald Trump refuses to be subject to the law." What would be an example of a law that the president has broken? I can't think of any. In what way is he refusing to be subject to the law? There's an actual FBI investigation going on—how much more subject to the law could you be? The Supreme Court overruled his initial plan for immigration bans; as soon as the Supreme Court ruled, he had to get to work with it. So it’s just crazy.
The next one was: "The legitimacy of our elections is in doubt." By whom? I know that Russia tried to fiddle with them, but there's no evidence they succeeded. The person who's putting the legitimacy of the election in doubt is Hillary. Hillary and her supporters are putting the election in doubt. Whether or not Russia did something, the entities that question the legitimacy is not Trump or Trump supporters; that all comes from her side.
## [Legitimacy of Elections and Waging War on Truth](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=453s)
Then the next one is: "The president is waging war on the truth." What's that mean? It's a fancy way to say that he's not passing the fact-checking. To which I say, how has that translated into real-world problems? How did it make the economy operate worse? It probably made the economy operate better because he told everybody the economy was great, and economies work on expectations.
I won't give you the full rant about accuracy and the truth, but let's say that no politician adheres to the truth. It just isn't a thing. To say that Trump in particular has a "war on the truth" just doesn't have much meaning. There's no bite to it.
## [National Unity and Corruption Accusations](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=578s)
"The administration is undermining the national unity that makes democracy possible." I'm pretty sure that's Hillary too. I'm not doing one of these "whataboutism" things, but it's striking because her claims so clearly describe the other side. There would be plenty of national unity if the winning side could get the losing side to agree to just play along and go with the process. The group that won and is trying to make America great again is not exactly the divisive one.
Everything that is blamed on the president for divisiveness is something that the people on Hillary’s team thought up. If they hadn't, we wouldn't be having the conversation.
And then there's the "breathtaking corruption." What would be the example? I understand there are other cabinet members who did some bad things and they had to be dealt with, but in terms of Trump himself, I don't believe there's any claim. She's doing the thing of accusing others of that which you are guilty.
## [Why Laundry Lists are a "Tell"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=706s)
We're looking at a day when the North Korea thing is going great. Apparently, Trump got Russia and Iran to not attack Idlib, which looked like it was a hot spot. They're going to cordon it off and make it some kind of a safe zone. Every time we turn around, it looks like Trump is doing the right stuff internationally, the economy is zooming, and he hasn't rounded up any people and put them in concentration camps.
It's a "tell" when you have that many complaints that you have to make a laundry list. That tells you that none of them are strong. If Trump actually did murder somebody on Fifth Avenue and it was on video, do you think they'd be talking about any of this other stuff? They wouldn't, because they'd finally have something real. When people do the laundry list of vague accusations, she is out of ammo.
## [Are the North Koreans Playing Us?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=771s)
There's always somebody who says "The North Koreans are playing America." I think that's the most simplistic analysis. There's nothing that we're observing that looks like what has happened before. If it's true that they let people in to take a look at their missile site being torn apart, I'm going to say that's pretty real.
By the way, you don't look for a war with a country that's looking to have economic cooperation and host the Olympics. Kim Jong Un would have no reason for nukes if they go ahead with reunification. There's just no reason anymore. That's something that Trump did that hadn't been done: he simply took their reason away.
## [Norm Macdonald and Q&A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=836s)
Project Veritas? I haven't seen it; it didn't get much news, or else I would have seen it. Yes, I did see Norm Macdonald's show. I enjoyed it. It's a weird little show, I can't even describe it, so you just have to watch it.
Where am I? I'm in Vegas right now. I did not see Trump's press conference this morning. What persuasion books do I recommend? You should Google the term "persuasion reading list" and you'll see my list.
## [Releasing the FISA Documents](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=903s)
It is also a good play that Trump is releasing all of these documents about the FISA because he doesn't know what's in them. You don't release documents if you're worried that it would be bad for you. It's actually a really strong play for him to release stuff, and it's going to keep the news busy for who knows how long.
## [The Kavanaugh Accusations and the Legal System](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD78JeYxLD0&t=966s)
The other tweet I retweeted this morning is somebody saying that if you think you're 100% sure that the Kavanaugh event happened, or if you think you're 100% sure that it didn't happen, those are the two irrational views.
If you have one of those views—you're totally sure some sexual assault happened or you're totally sure nothing happened—those are the two non-credible views. Given that we will never be able to know the truth, you have to default to the system. And the system says you're innocent until proven guilty.
Ford accused Gorsuch too? I doubt that's true. Do I recommend the book *How to Win Friends and Influence People*? I haven't read that book because I took the Dale Carnegie class and I got the same stuff from the class. All right, I don't have much else to say today, so I think I'm going to cut it short. Could I out-persuade Trump? I could not. All right, bye for now.