Episode 417 Scott Adams: Was Live

Date: 2019-02-15 | Duration: 50:21

Topics

Were McCabe’s actions, treasonous, desperate partisan politics? WhenHub Interface app now offering a DONATE button People were wishing there was a non-Patreon option We watched congress fail right in front of us on wall committee Proposed bill has at least 2 problems per Conservatives 1. Loophole allowing kids to grant adult open door 2. Local cities could block barriers in their vicinity Cartels are buying local officials…and they’ll have a voice on wall? Brandon Darby (border security expert) says it’s happening The cartels will decide if there should be local U.S. wall impeding them Could congress possibly be THAT stupid?

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

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:08]

hey everybody let's uh get in get on in here cuz you know what time it
is uh yeah it's time for coffee with Scott Adams I decided to give you a little fireplace view it's part of my long-term plan to show less of me and more of something else but you know one of the reasons you come here is so that you can enjoy the simultaneous zp and it's coming up grab your mug grab your thermos your Stein your your chalice your cup your glass fill it with your favorite liquid here it comes the Rope the simultaneous
sip ah that could have been better better had it been warmer all right back to me so we got all kinds of news happening

[1:09]

me so we got all kinds of news happening it's like news all over the place so let's uh let's run through it one at a time so I was waiting to hear uh Alan DT's opinion on uh I'm going to look at my Twitter feed to remind me of some specifics here um I was waiting for Alan dtz to weigh in on this question of McCabe reporting that they talked about using the 25th Amendment and
and uh Ted Lou Who is uh besides being the husband of Betty and a US Air Force veteran he's a member of
of Congress and uh I I'll tell you what uh Ellen DT said and then I'll tell you what Ted L said now what's funny about this is that uh dtz is probably the world's expert on

[2:13]

dtz is probably the world's expert on constitutional law Ted Lou is whatever is not that so Ted Lou is Constitution splaining to the best constitutional scholar in the world and the is funny so I'll just read it to you so uh president Trump actually was uh quoting alen dtz from the Tucker Carlson show and he said quote this is quoting alen dtz trying to use the 25th Amendment to try and circumvent the election is a Despicable Act of unconstitutional power grabbing which happens in third world countries you have to obey the law this is an attack on our system and Constitution so dtz is saying saying it's a Despicable Act of unconstitutional power now what he's talking about is mcab referencing the conversation about using the 25th Amendment which typically has well it's intended for people a president is

[3:14]

intended for people a president is incapacitated mentally or physically and then can be replaced which did not apply to president Trump's situation and so dtz is saying it was a unconstitutional power grab but tedl does some con Constitution splaining and he he addresses aler schwitz in this tweet and he says the 25th amendment is the law and a majority of the uh the vice president and a majority of the cabinet can invoke this amendment You can disagree with their use of it should they invoke it but you cannot say it should be unconstitutional you should read the US Constitution again alen dtz
I don't even know what to say to that you know can you imagine Ted Lou going into to the doctors for his appointment and the doctor says Ted we've we've checked you out and you've got uh high blood pressure and then Ted

[4:17]

got uh high blood pressure and then Ted explains to the doctor why he has completely misdiagnosed him um at what point is it embarrassing to explain an expert's job to an expert
um now I suppose you could WordThink this until the point where you'd say okay it's not illegal to use the 25th Amendment but I'd have to say it's pretty unconstitutional to use it when the president is not incapacitated to use it to change the result of an election that's pretty unconstitutional now I I think it would be fair to say it would never it would never get approved by enough people to be implemented and uh we wouldn't have to worry about it necessarily but the fact that it was even talked about was shocking now this the fact that it was talking about also uh made me question at what point Will trump

[5:18]

question at what point Will trump derangement syndrome be a legitimate legal defense and it's more interesting question than you think because the the entire legal system depends on the illusion of free will if we didn't imagine that people have free will it wouldn't make sense to punish them for their choices because if somebody doesn't have a choice for what they pick you know if it's just cause and effect and it was all it was all predetermined at the Big Bang then you have no legal system because you people just say well it's not like I could choose to do something differently I'm just a victim of of uh particles bouncing around so the legal system has always had to have this sort of thin fiction that people have free will and and make their own decisions and it certainly feels like that so we live in a world where it feels like you

[6:19]

live in a world where it feels like you make your own decisions uh but science keeps shipping away at that and I would say that it would be easy to get a an expert a psychologist a scientist a brain expert to confirm that people are being brainwashed by their choice of media now it's you know both sides are getting brainwashed but in different ways and I'm pretty sure that you could prove that let's say macabe and this is just you know hypothetical none of this is going to happen but I think you could give scientists to say that mcab was literally brainwashed to believe that there was a uh a crisis in the Constitution and that something had to be done immediately to save the country so but would that be a legal defense well at the at the moment it would not you know it might have some effect on

[7:20]

you know it might have some effect on sentencing but you couldn't legally get away with that defense it is however scientifically valid in other words you would have scientists come in and say yeah it's pretty obvious that this person was brainwashed and therefore not entirely in control of their own decisions I'm sure you could get experts to say that and probably all of them you know if you had enough evidence of of uh ridiculous political opinions you let's say there was a let's say you had a history of social media postings that were so biased that any jury would look at them and say yeah doesn't look like this person uses facts they seem to have been brainwashed by you know consuming uh their media somebody says BS science my ass good argument science your ass why didn't somebody say that earlier I could have saved a lot of time that

[8:21]

I could have saved a lot of time that was a a clever and incisive argument science my ass good one all right um I know you all want me to talk about the Jesse Smet situation and I've been waiting for uh you know more let's say factual basis but what we know so far is somewhat hilarious and I'm going to let me uh frame this by saying you shouldn't believe anything you hear about this story just literally nothing you shouldn't believe any of the the reports about what the police did or not did not see or do or talk to I wouldn't believe anything about who got picked up and I wouldn't believe anything about who's a suspect I wouldn't believe anything about what is or is not on a camera and I wouldn't believe anything that Jesse Smet says or does not say so basically you should have intense distrust for

[9:22]

you should have intense distrust for every part of this story that said where we are at the moment in terms of the Alle story is quite hilarious cuz fact check me on this but I believe that two people of Interest have been questioned by the police who seem to be the people who were on the video cameras who seem to be the people who attacked Jesse SMY Jesse Smet and apparently they uh Nigerians uh one of which worked on the show with Jesse
Smet now if it's true that two Nigerians were involved in this in some way then it is probably not true that somebody was yelling this is Mega country and it is probably not true that

[10:24]

country and it is probably not true that they were wearing Mega hats at the time uh so we don't know what the real story is and again don't believe anything you hear on this story absolutely everything is unreliable some of it is true but we have no way of knowing at this point it's just all unreliable from every angle but it is nonetheless hilarious that the current situation is that two Nigerian guys are being questioned so it doesn't get any funnier than that uh and in fact I would say that this story just SMS
uh now there was a piece by uh Chris saliza who is a notable anti-trumper and I want to I want to just read to you a little bit from him today if I can find it and I'm sure I

[11:27]

today if I can find it and I'm sure I can all I just took a little snipp it out right this is from Chris Eliza on the CNN website he talked about the news of what mcab said about the 25th Amendment and he said there are two ways to look at it one of one of those ways is that the that there's a deep State and they were literally talking about a coup using the 25th Amendment to replace the government so he says that's one way to look at it sort of the two movies on one screen idea in his own words so one way is that it was exactly what a lot of you think they were talking about a coup but here's the other way so this is Chris ciza anti-trumper telling you the other thing that this evidence could suggest he says this news from mcab is confirmation so this is if you're a trump opponent you might think this uh in his framing this news from aab is confirmation the senior officials within the J justice

[12:28]

officials within the J justice department were so worried about Trump's behavior in
in office his behavior in office he had just started that they broached the unthinkable colon removal by means of the Constitution the fact that such serious and professional people men and women charged with enforcing the laws of the country were driven to such Extreme Action or at least the contemplation of such Extreme Action proved just how abnormal and dangerous Trump really is both to the presidency and the country now this is sort of what I was explaining yesterday the idea that um in McCabe's mind he might have been a patriot but only in his mind you not in your mind obviously but in his mind he might have thought oh my God I'm the last defense against Russia running the country and so he had to act on that

[13:32]

the country and so he had to act on that um but the way Sala frames this is hilarious because it's framed as though there are two there are two possibilities there are two ways to describe what's happening one is that it was a deep State plot to overthrow the country or overthrow the government using um the 25th Amendment the second is uh the president was so sketchy and there were there's so many reasons to think there was something wrong that even if mcab was incorrect he was operating in good faith against these obvious indications that there was some gigantic problem potentially what did he leave out there's a there's a third possibility or at least the second possibility has not been fully described what's left out is the more obvious option the obvious option is is that CNN and the mainstream media has

[14:35]

CNN and the mainstream media has hypnotized and let's not use the word hypnotized let's say brainwashed because that actually is I could defend that word brainwashed that that the media has illegitimately brainwashed a huge segment of the country into something like Trump derangement syndrome now that to me is by far the most accurate description of what's probably Happening Here I think what's probably happening is that the media got mcabe and other people so whipped up into thinking that something dangerous was happening that ordinary evidence that would not normally climb to the level of discussing the 25th Amendment certainly seemed attenuated suddenly seemed attenuated in other words things that they might have ordinarily written off as coincidence or politics or or confirmation bias cuz remember these are

[15:37]

confirmation bias cuz remember these are professionals and all day long they have to deal with okay is that a coincidence or is that evidence is this confirmation bias or is this really true all right so these are professionals who work through this stuff all the time and yet they managed to look at this bunch of nothing and convince themselves it was a it was a danger to the Republic now keep in mind that um we have elections on a regular basis and parties change the government changes on a regular basis and it's not unusual that the people in the government the FBI the Department of Justice it would not be unusual for them to not like whoever got elected probably every other time that happens it's like oh I wish that person did not get elected but they do not act on that they do not consider the 25th Amendment because to them it's just somebody in power whose politics they don't

[16:37]

power whose politics they don't like that's not what was happening here here here mcabe and presumably others uh were so afraid that this particular new government was dangerous that they acted in a way that reasonable people are calling treason or a coup I'm not sure if it's treason if you're doing it for the benefit of the country it's I'm not sure the I'm not sure treason works if you imagine the person doing it was trying to preserve the Republic as opposed to destroy it so I'm not sure that word completely works but certainly there was a breach of uh Constitution or at least they discussed using the constitution in a way that it was not designed to be used so that's pretty bad um somebody's saying it's a sedition well before I agree or disagree

[17:38]

sedition well before I agree or disagree with that let me look up the definition stion to make sure I am speaking all right sedition is over conduct such as speech and organization that tends toward Insurrection Against The Establishment could be subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent yes
yes uh so it's against the established order but is the established order the specific president or is the established order the United States and the Constitution so so here's here's the thing I think the most likely explanation of events is that the media brainwashed half of the country and that some of those people in that half of the country were in important jobs such as macabe and that they acted the way other brainwashed people would have acted in the same situation thinking that there was an

[18:40]

situation thinking that there was an immediate end of the world problem and that they might have to bend some rules to save the world you to save the country so um that's my guess now and somebody's saying oh come on
on Scot well let's compare the Alternatives so one alternative is that maab consciously just said I don't like this President I want to put you know I want I want somebody else to be president so we'll try to take this guy out but keep in mind the 25th Amendment would have explicitly put the Vice President in charge all right so so check your theory against this one and this fact if your theory is that mcab wanted to um if mccabes if you're theories that mcab wanted to get rid of Republicans because

[19:41]

wanted to get rid of Republicans because he was supporter of Hillary Clinton it doesn't make sense that he would uh invoke the 25th all right so some of you lost the connection and I see the the comments but the connection is fine now and it should work in replay my experience is that when replay uh that the replay will be clean but you may have just lost the connection but anyway that it's working fine for other people that means you might have to refresh on on your end uh but what I was saying is compare these two theories one is that mcabe didn't like the political outcome of the election but that wouldn't make sense because the 25th Amendment would have removed Trump and put pence in charge and that's the opposite of what he wanted what he would have wanted for political reasons it would have worsened things in in a sense so the fact that they were talking about the 25th

[20:41]

they were talking about the 25th Amendment which would have maintained a republican uh government um I think that to me that suggests that uh that he was acting based on Trump derangement syndrome because you have to be pretty desperate to you have to be pretty desperate to want to replace Trump with Pence right if you're a Democrat that's a desperate act and you wouldn't act desperately under any normal conditions you wouldn't act desperately just because you didn't like the political outcome right that you just wouldn't do that you would act desperately if you really believe there was a a risk to The Republic so that so that one uh that fits the evidence better all right stop criticizing the FBI do you think that's what I just

[21:43]

FBI do you think that's what I just did
did um you have it completely backwards FBI concocted the Russian hoax and fed it to the media well I'm not really talking about that am I the it wasn't mcabe who concocted the FBI hoax and we're talking about him right I do believe that there was you know the dossier was a hoax I do believe that the whole investigation is closer to a Witch Hunt than anything else but when you're talking about mcab talking about the 25th uh amendment that doesn't feel like him trying to get a democrat in office that feels like desperation because Pence would have replaced him all
right Pence could would have been step two that's a big reach yeah I hear what you're saying that well then he would get rid of a pence next maybe I don't know then who's after

[22:45]

next maybe I don't know then who's after that wouldn't it have been um who who would have been so at the time who would have been president if Pence was removed somebody somebody do some fact checking here uh it would have been another Republican right so all right now here's something interesting um many of you complained about patreon because you said hey patreon is uh kicking off some um Republicans or at least kicking off some people for free speech reasons that you don't agree with now patreon is the platform where people can don't to uh artists and creators and so people said we are going to stop donating to you Scott so a lot of people who used to be donating to me on patreon maybe I don't know 25% of them or a third of them just

[23:45]

them or a third of them just disappeared so my plan of funding my uh let's say expansion of what I'm doing on Periscope by you know I have an assistant that I pay to put it on um to put it on on YouTube and to put it into podcast form and I was funding that through patreon but patreon got attacked for being let's say uh a little too aggressive in kicking people off their platform and so people said to me hey Scott you have an app that's used for something slightly different but why don't you put a donate button on there and
and so we put a donate button on there and let me show it to you so so I'll look at myself here I'll just do a search in the interface by whenhub um all right so here you have it so the app is primarily designed for experts to make a video call to people who need some expert advice and want to pay for

[24:46]

some expert advice and want to pay for it per per minute but we just added a donate button so if you wanted to donate to me or anybody else who signed up so any any Creator can just sign up here just take about 60 seconds to put in your profile and stick a picture in there and then you're available for donations so if you want to donate you just hit the Donate button pick an amount uh hit Apple pay and put your thumb on it and Bam you're done so um I won't claim that this is the first um I'm not going to say that this is the only the only uh alternative to patreon and I'm not going to leave patreon so I'm going to stay on there too but a lot of conservatives especially just didn't want to use patreon and ask me how else they could do it so we just added that to the app by the way uh none of this was planned I just talked to my CTO one day and said hey you know I'm hearing this complaint

[25:48]

hey you know I'm hearing this complaint about patreon and I knew that we had a payment platform and I knew that it was something that you know anybody could sign up for so I said how hard would it how hard would it be to just add a donate button and I just sort of brought it up as a brainstorming idea and uh the next time I checked they they had added it to the app so my my crack team of Technology experts uh just made it happen just because it was a good idea so it's called the interface by whenhub app it's free it's in the app stores and if you don't want to use patreon uh you have you have an option now we don't have yes somebody asked the right question so in phase one it is not a recurring model so you just pay once and then walk away so if you wanted to pay again you'd have to do it again um if if people use it we'll add a recurring function uh so that they have

[26:50]

recurring function uh so that they have the option of recurring or not I think it should be an option I don't think it should be the default um but we'll see if anybody cares if people use it we'll add that option should not be hard um the ways you can give me money thanks for asking is either patreon or the interface by one Hub app it's got a donate button just search for my name or you can do a super art here on Periscope so there should be an option at the bottom of your screen for something called a super heart which if you press it would give you options for donating but it's few extra steps [Music] um we we don't accept Bitcoin within the app as payment but uh thanks for asking uh are you going to leave patreon I'm not planning to but if if I get more donations on this I would yes so if if I

[27:52]

donations on this I would yes so if if I ended up getting something something even close to a replacement level on the interface by whenhub app then I would leave patreon but I'm not going to leave unless people prefer this
uh uh oh what percentage does interface take so we just matched patreon 5% so of the
the 5% uh roughly speaking half of that actually just goes to the banking the transaction just to pay pay the you know the the go between people and then uh something like 2% plus goes to uh goes to the company all right um yeah we still you can still pay for experts with the cryptocurrency that's integrated with the
the uh um it's integrated with the uh the

[28:56]

uh um it's integrated with the uh the app
app by the way for those of you who have purchased the when whn which is the cryptocurrency that is part of the interface by whenhub app in addition to credit card so the app works just with normal money and credit cards and US Dollars and stuff but we have a crypto option the the value of the crypto is tied to the value of the company so if it turned out that a lot of people wanted to use it as a patreon replacement and let's say that became that became a big thing uh which it could then the app would be more viable because it would have another source of income and the Ws that people have already uh purchased probably would go up in um probably would go up in value but nobody can guarantee that cuz it's not an investment but the the value of the wi is tied to the success of the app um so

[29:58]

is tied to the success of the app um so anything that makes the app more successful is likely to make the when go up in value but no guarantees all right um that's what we know and is there any other news that we haven't talked about let me just do a quick check on CNN and see if there's anything we forgot oh let's talk about we haven't even talked about the National Emergency all
all right so the National Emergency uh oh we could talk about on exit too so it seems to me that the president can uh either accept or veto the um the bill and still do his emergency uh thing and still build the thing because what's what's different today compared to just a few weeks ago is that we watched Congress fail in front of us when you see what Congress produced with bipartisan group working together I

[31:01]

bipartisan group working together I think I think we all have to say yeah that looks like a complete failure now is it um
um uh is it wrong for the commander-in-chief who has a valid homeland security issue is it valid for him to say look the Congress tried right in front of you and they failed miserably you can you can see what what they produced is not even a bill that I could sign because apparently and here's the part that I would say is a little bit of a wait and see I've been seeing the conservative complaints about the bill but I have not yet seen anybody defend those same objections in other words the things that the conservatives are complaining about and I'll mention those in a minute I have not heard anybody on the other side say oh they're actually good ideas you're not looking at it in context or you misunderstand so I'm

[32:01]

context or you misunderstand so I'm still waiting for that until I get that I don't want to throw in with a side but I'll tell you what the conservatives are saying two problems one is this if there's a if there's a child and the child has some kind of a uh sponsor then that person gets to stay and people are saying my God it's a giant loophole for every MS13 and cartel member to say oh this is my kid I guess I can stay in the country now I would wait to make sure that that interpretation of of the size of that loophole is accurate because it might be that there's more to the story than we know and that the Congress was not as stupid as it appears on the surface so it's possible that there's more to that story and I'm waiting to hear the other argument before I weigh in but what we know s sounds terrible right like if all you knew is they've opened up this giant

[33:03]

you knew is they've opened up this giant loophole that will increase child trafficking and and and be like an open door for the cartel well that would be bad and certainly the President should not sign that but I'd wait wait to see if there's a I I don't know what the argument would be but I would wait to see if there is one the second part um is uh something that uh let me read the exact tweet here because the other part is that um the local cities would get a say on the question of whether the fence would be in their area and as was pointed out uh let's see give me one moment by Brandon [Music] derby um the problem is that the local the local cities get to decide or at least they're part of the decision whether there's a barrier where they are

[34:04]

whether there's a barrier where they are the problem as Darby as Brandon Derby has pointed out is that the cartels are already buying those local officials so the people who would be making the decision about putting a fence or a barrier between them and the cartels would actually be owned by the cartel so the cartels in too many cases don't know how many already have corrupted those officials so we would effectively be and and this is this is insane but true as far as I can tell and again maybe it's still fog of War maybe we don't know exactly what this bill says or or how it would be implemented and I'll wait for a better explanation but on the surface it appears that we that the bill and and I I'm not even making this up but it appears that the bill delegates a decision about building a wall on the

[35:04]

decision about building a wall on the border to the cartel and that's not even an exaggeration that's not a joke that's literally what's happened the bill as it stands according to what we understand and it could be wrong but what we understand is that Congress got together and they were so incompetent that they came up with an idea for delegating the decision about building a border wall to the Mexican cartels literally I mean they didn't say it in those words but that's actually what's going to happen because the cartels in too many cases have influence over the American governments on the border now did you know that how's that change your opinion right
how doesn't that change your opinion now this is why you talk to The Experts all

[36:05]

this is why you talk to The Experts all right if you had not heard that from Brandon Derby that there are key parts of the Border where the American governments the American government you know the local city people are already bought by the cartels now is he guessing no CU in an article in in Breitbart that I linked to um he actually goes down the list of the people who have already been caught taking money from the cartel it's not a oneof it's not speculation it's not oh it happened that one time and I'm generalizing too much it's already widespread and it's confirmed nobody's guessing about this the cartels are actually starting to run the governments on the border and we just delegated the decision to build a wall to the cartels that actually happened now ask yourself if that's not

[37:07]

happened now ask yourself if that's not an
an emergency what is what is an emergency all right if it's not an emergency that Congress just delegated border security to the Mexican cartel and that was the best they can do if that's not an emergency I do not know what an emergency looks like so uh there you go now remember I said from the the start that unless um unless you see something coming out of this working committee about the border that looks like a here's what the experts said and then here's what we decided if you don't see that then they have not served you they have not done the job of a Congress their bill does not deserve any consideration right you should not even be talking about whether the bill should be signed or not signed you should be

[38:08]

be signed or not signed you should be saying that nothing got produced that should that is worthy of looking at because if they can't do that simple thing here's what the experts said here's what we funded now you can compare them now if it turned out that the experts said we want eight things and this is one report I heard we here's our eight priorities and then the committee said all right we can only fund the top three that's a defensible argument because they've communicated with the public they looked at the priorities they did not disagree with them they just added their expertise which is how much budget do we want to put on these priorities that would be something you could agree with or disagree with maybe you think it should be more funding but at least it would be a rational process it would be honest it would be transparent and the public could say h I'm okay with the top three priorities it's an 80/20 situation if it is I don't know if it is um but if you don't see

[39:10]

know if it is um but if you don't see even that here's what the experts said here's what we did compared to what they wanted you should not support anything that comes out of that committee even if it's good you know even if it's accidentally good you should not support it because the process is spitting in your voter face it disrespects the public in a way that's grotesque now can the president who has been saying from the start I'm going to sign that thing and then watching a super majority of the Congress agree with it right so even if the president um vetos it a super majority can argue it and still and still overcome his veto right I think he should still do it if under this condition if it's true that that this delegates the decision about the border to the cartels and I think the argument is pretty good that it does you know I haven't heard the car

[40:11]

it does you know I haven't heard the car counter argument and you need to wait for that but it looks like that if that's what this bill does and also opens up an easy channel for child abuse and everything else um then I think the president absolutely can just veto that piece of and declare an emergency and say the cartels have breached the Border they're already controlling the local governments the local governments are no longer the credible Defenders of this country they have joined the other side in too many cases certainly not the majority but in too many cases and the federal government has a responsibility to the to the people to declare this an emergency so that we can counteract the the the bought off officials that the cartel owns so uh I'm not going to predict that the that the president

[41:11]

predict that the that the president vetos this bill because he has said very clearly that he will and he did get both sides to agree to it with a super majority so that's kind of tough to to veto but here's and it's possible I can't say this enough times that I have not yet heard the positive argument for the bill for some reason you know nobody is making that argument so if you don't hear a positive argument for the the parts of the bill that are flawed letting the local governments be part of the decision having that you know kid sponsor thing that's just a open door if you don't hear the counterargument um I I'd say the president has really a responsibility to veto it but he might not we'll see now what might happen and I will just speculate all right so let let's let's just imagine the best case scenario so the best case

[42:12]

the best case scenario so the best case scenario is that the that sponsor part of it where if there's a kid in the United States I guess that we have to keep the sponsor as well it could be that what that does is prevents children in cages or it protects the children and it might it might be a trade-off that people willingly understood and took it could be that the defense of that is we are completely aware that it opens up um opportunity for abuse and we are completely aware that that abuse will happen but it solves a problem for so many kids and families that we're consciously going to make that tradeoff I would listen to that that that's a conversation I would listen to especially if the population affected is sort of a onetime thing and you know they can deal with it over time now I'm I'm just saying I would listen to the argument all right I'm not saying I'm

[43:12]

argument all right I'm not saying I'm making decision I'm just saying that if they knowingly made a tradeoff that's good for some kids but definitely bad for a smaller group of kids I'll at least listen to the argument and and in terms of the um the local community agreeing or disagreeing it could be and I'm not saying this is the case but if you were to look at the language and if you understood how things work with governments it could be that the government the federal government could never successfully build a border where the local government disagreed anyway now in terms of legal rights maybe they could in terms of a practical matter it might be impractical for the federal government to override you know a city that didn't want a wall you know even if legally they had all the the right to do it in the real world it just might be politically and

[44:13]

it just might be politically and practically impossible let me tell you how and again this is just speculation I'm not putting out this out here as anything that is fact but I'm I'm increasing your imagination about how what the possibilities are one possibility is that there will always be lots of cities on the list that that are candidat for a wall and it could be that no matter how much funding we get you're only you're only working at the top priorities so it could be that if a particular City says Hey federal government we absolutely resist the wall here then the federal government very much like amazon.com when they pull down of New York City they could say all right we're not legally um you know there's nothing that makes us uh impossible for us to still put Amazon's headquarters in New York but if you don't have a friendly local government it creates a friction that's not worth it likewise in the real world I could

[45:16]

it likewise in the real world I could easily imagine a situation where the local government even if they had to accept the federal uh authority to build a barrier the local government could make it hard they could just say sure we're going to you know we're going to cooperate with you but it's not our priority so it's you know we won't return phone calls when you ask us where the gas lines are we won't tell you you know these are bad examples but I'm just making the point that although the um the bill says that the local the local groups need to approve the wall it might be and this would be compatible with everything I understand about the world it might be that it's no real change all right it might be that unless the local government was on board it's just too hard and so priorities being what they are the federal government

[46:16]

what they are the federal government would say okay we're going to wait on that City because they're resistant we'll just build walls with our limited funding and our limited resources where where there's no no problem so I think that that our our simplistic idea that the cartel can buy a government and the government can stop border probably true seems to me that would be true but it might not be any different whether or not this this bill says the government can stop it or not because maybe the government could sort of stop it just by being difficult to work with if exactly the same way that AOC stopped Amazon from coming into New York City Amazon is not legally stopped there there's nothing that would prevent them from going to New York City it was just too much friction just wasn't worth dealing with the friction and the federal government probably always had that

[47:17]

government probably always had that situation with the local governments too so I don't know how different it is wait so wait for the experts to weigh in on that all right uh
also could generate Envy of cities with the wall good point yeah if you build if you build several walls and then um those cities are happy with their walls and crime goes down the cting next to you that did not build the wall is first of all going to get all the extra crime because people are you know can't cross in one place so they're going to go to the place with no wall so the place with no wall should see an increase in crime and then the voters voters have some decisions to make so it just might not make any difference that some of the some of the Cities oppose the wall as long as you can build it in other places and then convince the the other cities by example [Music]

[48:21]

[Music] um uh I saw that b b or orc was asked if walls are such a bad idea would he be in favor of tearing down the existing wall in El Paso and he said yes so bo oror uh actually said he would tear down the existing wall I don't know if there's anybody who has less chance of becoming president than that guy but uh I think he just went from a Joe he went from a joke to a a bigger joke yeah that is pretty crazy you know even if you didn't like the wall it would make more sense to put a a gate there than it would to tear down the wall um somebody says is he bought by the cartels well now there's a good question if we know that the local governments are bought by the

[49:21]

governments are bought by the cartels and you can't think of any other reason somebody would tear down the entire wall what assumption do you have to make about bet or orc now I'm not I'm not going to say you know that the fact he wants to tear it in the wall necessarily means that the cartel already owns him not necessarily but I can tell you for sure that if you don't at least suspect it you're not you're not acting like Andrew MCC that's for sure cuz Andrew mcabe would suspect there was something going on there and he would he would do something non-constitutional about it I think all right
uh all right I'm just looking at your comments and I think we've said enough and I'm going to go do some other things and I will talk to you later