Episode 531 Scott Adams: AOC’s Abortion Tweet, Immigration Framing, Trump Financials

Date: 2019-05-16 | Duration: 41:28

Topics

Annual Presidential Financial Disclosure coming soon: CNN notes his finances might be good, because he’s a criminal CNN notes his finances might be bad, because he’s a loser New books being published about President Trump They’ve run out of all the “good” complaints about Trump Authors are resorting to allegedly non-fiction books Lots of anonymous sources…or fiction FOX FAKE NEWS story: AOC thinks Alabama women get punished AOC Alabama abortion law tweet is being misinterpreted She knows law applies to the provider…not the woman Iran unspecified danger, major military assets being moved to area Why are we preparing for war? Shouldn’t we know? Semi-Effective Immigration Framing… Immigration is bringing in crime Increasing crime only influences conservatives Powerful Immigration Framing… People in other countries are determining our immigration policies Cartels are controlling our immigration, NOT Congress People in other countries, deciding to come here… …that’s our current immigration policy Congress isn’t deciding who, when and how many… …the cartels are deciding who, when and how many Media Matters goes after Dave Rubin for Mike Cernovich interview Judging people by opinions they no longer hold Is that the world Media Matters really wants to live in? President Trump looks 20 years younger than his competition …Per Joe Scarborough Do we age in the ways we IMAGINE we should age? Do we IMAGINE ourselves into some of our aging issues? Are their ways for average people to have the vitality of Mick Jagger at 75 after heart surgery?

Please donate to support my YouTube channel:
https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays
I also 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

[0:07]

bum bum bum bum ba ba ba ba ba papa hey everybody come on in here Andrew good to see you always good to see you in Andy and Tyler and Kim and Missy it's good to see you all come on in we got some fun stuff to talk about and it's time for coffee with Scott Adams and this I will tell you set if you'd like to join me grab your cup your mug your glass your chalice your stein your tankard your thermos your flask fill it with your favorite liquid well I cost me and join me now for this simultaneous enter so apparently it's time for the new annual disclosure from the president about his financials now this is not as I understand it not in his tax returns although maybe this man I don't think it's his tax returns but the president will be updating on his financials and I was looking at CNN to

[1:11]

financials and I was looking at CNN to see how they would report on this and CNN is setting it up this way there are two possibilities either the president's financials are good in which case he's obviously a criminal because it means he's capitalizing on his office or his financials are not good in which case he's a giant fraud and everything he said about being good at business is a lie so seeing as CNN has actually fairly boldly created a frame where the president is a loser if he made a lot of money well actually he'd be a criminal in their mind if he made a lot of money because then he'd be capitalizing on his presidency but if he lost money or didn't do well well then he's just a big ol liar because he should be good at business why is he losing money so yeah it's weird to see this

[2:13]

it's weird to see this same article set it up as it's bad either way and they're very clear about it it's bad either way doesn't matter what it is does it sorry my cat has just jumped up here so yes the camera is moving around that's because of it's because of this cat she got away all right so that's enough of that that's that's the fun thing to watch is that it'll just be bad no matter what it is apparently there are a few new books about Trump wolf who's written a sequel about Trump and some of the guy on Don Lemon were saying we've had some he has had such bad things about the president that are such ridiculous things I'm not even gonna repeat him but I love the fact that that that the news the anti-trump news is so run out of good

[3:15]

anti-trump news is so run out of good things to say in terms of criticizing the president they've just run out of material Russia thing didn't work out border border became a crisis after all the Trump was right Isis seems to be pretty well stomp down everybody agrees we should be tough with the Chinese even Schumer agrees that negotiating with the Chinese makes sense he's kind of winning on everything the economy is screaming so they're looking to fiction as their criticism and I'm not even making that up it's actually writers who are writing these allegedly non-fiction books but we've seen enough of them to know that they're actually just fiction it's going to be anonymous person in the White House says that President Trump suggested straggling puppies and then nobody will come forward who was the person who said that it'll just they'll

[4:15]

person who said that it'll just they'll just sit there in a book and of course CNN will report it according to this author and an anonymous source so this is the president recommended strangling puppies but luckily his advisors talked him out of it some of them had to had to threaten to quit if if they hadn't threatened to quit the president would have implemented his policy of strangling all puppies so you know that's coming so I can't think of a more positive sign for the country then we've run out of factual criticisms of the president and now we're literally counting on authors to write books in which they make stuff up just so there's something to talk about on CNN it's all they have left all right speaking of a news as you know if you watch this I often criticize the anti-trump press for their obvious fake news and I of

[5:18]

for their obvious fake news and I of course spend way too much time talking about the fine people hoaxes in which the president has just misinterpreted they use the misinterpretation answer criticism well just to show you that I play fair Fox News on their website has one of the worst bits of fake news you're ever going to see and it's kind of a perfect analogy to the fine people hoax so in the interest of fairness and I know you don't like this I'm going to defend a osz here's the story if that's what is this was just terrible I mean this is really bad fake news and it's obvious fake news that I'm not gonna I will not introduce any new information I'm just gonna tell you what the facts are as reported by the news and watch how fake news is is so you know that Alabama passes law about abortion so aoc

[6:22]

Alabama passes law about abortion so aoc makes the following tweet which I which I acknowledge is a little ambiguous the way she wrote it but here's what she said her exact words alibi Alabama lawmakers are making all abortions a felony punishable with jail time , the comma is important including women victimized by rape and incest of course no added punishments for rapists blah blah blah so here's the sentence that was misinterpreted all right here's the sentence she says Alabama lawmakers are making all abortions of felony punishing punishable with jail time comma including women victimized by rape and incest so the way the critics have mistakenly interpreted this is that a or C doesn't understand the law and she

[7:24]

C doesn't understand the law and she believes that the women who have been victimized by rape and incest would be punished should they get an abortion which of course is not what the law says the law says that only the the medical provider is subject to the Punnett the penalties the woman who has the abortion even in the illegal abortion is not subject to penalties even under the Alabama law so people say aoc you are so stupid you you don't know you know you don't know the law and of course here's how and so Michael Knowles over at the Daily wire said this is a lie and he he clarifies that the woman will not be punished and then calleb Hall I don't know who he's with but he says everything about this tweet by ABC is false women will not face jail time all

[8:26]

false women will not face jail time all right so now the critics have interpreted what she said has to mean that a woman who was subject to a rape could actually go to jail if she got an abortion so that's how they interpreted her tweet and they're saying it's wrong and then this sentence on Fox News says after after the quotes about the people who say that she got the facts wrong they say Acacio Cortez didn't admit her error and instead went on to blame social media platform for having limited space that my friends is disgusting fake news I love my Fox News Network and you know I've said this often my favorite my favorite shows on television are on Fox News the five for example but this report really needs to be just taken off the site this is embarrassing fake news here's what she meant and of

[9:28]

fake news here's what she meant and of course she clarified that she was she was being misinterpreted but she didn't do a good job of clarifying other now that you know that she understood read the quote again listen to the quote again but this time imagine that Jo C does know the law because she knows the law she knows that the woman is not subject to the penalty okay so you have to start with the assumption that she's not an idiot and now listen to the court again okay assuming she's not an idiot assuming she does know that the law does not punish women under any condition listen to her exact sentence again Ella boy lawmakers are making all abortions a felony okay so that part is true nobody's disagreeing punishable with jail time that part everybody agrees comma including women victimized by rape and incest the including women victimized by rape and incest clearly refers to the

[10:32]

rape and incest clearly refers to the fact that even under those circumstances there would be illegal that's just true it is true that even under rape and incest the Alabama law would say it's illegal there's nowhere in your sentence that says the woman will be Penant will be punished it's just not there you have to imagine first that she doesn't understand the most basic stuff about abortion and the law if you uh if you believe that then you can see that the the sentence is unclear but if you start with the assumption that she knows what she's talking about because she does all right because she does and again I'm not defending her opinion on abortion right there's nothing that I'm saying in this periscope which should be construed as my opinion on abortion it's not here I'm only talking about words messages communication the meaning of those

[11:33]

communication the meaning of those messages that's all I'm talking about so she says I don't read it again they're making all abortions of felony punishable with jail time including women victimized by rape and incest the including women victimized by rape and incest refers to the all abortions part all abortions including women were in those situations and they're all illegal that is just exactly what the law is and Fox News reports it showing to pundits who misinterpreted something that really shouldn't have been misinterpreted and acted as I was just a fact you got it wrong and then Fox News reports it like it's a fact it's not a fact it's the opposite of a fact it's very clearly not what she's saying now what does this remind you of do you remember when a candidate Trump the first time he got in trouble well I don't know if it was the first time she got it he got in

[12:35]

was the first time she got it he got in trouble for a live interview question in which the president was asked if women should be punished for getting an abortion and his first instinct before he had been you know fully informed on how these things work his first instinct was yes of course if somebody breaks the law of course they're being punished he punished the doctor he punished the the mother so that was Trump's first reaction people you know the country blew up and even people on his team said oh that's not the law the law very intentionally does not criminalize the woman's act because the woman's you know according to the law and according to the people who who are in favor of the laws the way they are they would say that the woman is sort of a victim and it's really the doctor who should be punished because the woman's in a bad and what the argument is she's in a bad frame of mind or she's the victim to something along those lines

[13:37]

victim to something along those lines but whether or not that's a good law or not the point is that the president got that fact wrong as soon as somebody explained him the better context he immediately adjusted to which I actually gave him credit making a mistake no problem at all in my mind so my philosophy of human fallibility is that people making mistakes just normal people make mistakes people have blind spots people have you know limited ignorance on certain topics making mistakes is just part of the human experience but what you do about it once you realize it was a mistake it tells you a lot more about the person and what Trump did about it was he immediately revised his his public opinion and said no I don't mean the women this should apply to the to the medical provider so this is the same situation there well it's

[14:38]

is the same situation there well it's the same topic it's not the same situation AOC certainly knows and that there's nothing you could do to convince me otherwise she certainly knows that the law applies to the provider not to the woman and her quote clearly can be read two ways one of them is stupid and one of them is completely consistent with everything we know so I'm taking the I'm taking the opinion there why she said is completely consistent with everything she's ever said completely consistent with the laws completely consistent with the facts and she confirmed it by saying no you took that out of context and Fox News reported it as she she what was their exact turn buh-buh-buh-buh she didn't admit her error now here's the honest way to the

[15:39]

error now here's the honest way to the non fake news way to report that they don't know it was an error because to know it was an error would be to know her inner thoughts and that's not an evidence we don't know her inner thoughts the most you could say as news as opposed to opinion is that people read it as though she meant it a certain way and then she said I didn't mean it that way and then say what the law says that would be news news would be it's ambiguous people questioned it she said no you're misinterpreting me I am compatible with the law here's the law here's what I mean that would be news it's not news that it's a mistake that's an opinion and it's not an evidence and it's not the most likely explanation of what happened all right so rather than hammering that forever

[16:42]

so rather than hammering that forever let me just say that I spent much of yesterday listening to idiots on Twitter tell me that what I have to do Dale for this this was a half of my day for the last couple days I spent half of my day addressing this well Scott you are very very quick to point out when the president has been misinterpreted but why did you ever say anything about the other side oh oh I get it because you're a right-wing Nazi or something right so you only talk about one side you only say when there's one side which of course is exactly what I don't do I do literally the opposite of that and all day long yesterday I had to deal with idiots who know this much about me and and they claim that I only take one side now do I mostly talk about

[17:43]

side now do I mostly talk about pro-trump things of course I do because that's that's a a niche which is underserved yeah there are plenty of people who are doing the fact-checking and I fully addressed that I wrote a whole book about it I fully acknowledge all of those things in the fact-checking I think 75% of them are actually correct fact-checking probably 25% of them are just opinions but I still acknowledge there are a lot of them I talk about them all the time I say that he is directionally accurate he uses hyperbole and it has a utility I don't I don't say that it what happened I talk about them all the time likewise I've talked about a number of hoaxes on both sides this is another one so I'm gonna call this one hoax and chalk it up to I don't know wishful thinking or something all right let's talk about Iran sue how many days now

[18:45]

talk about Iran sue how many days now has it been since we heard that there's some kind of unspecified Iranian danger and we're moving major military assets into the region and the public is saying okay I guess I guess today's the day that we find out why we're doing that and it happened again once you know once again we don't know why our nation may or may not be readying for war with a pretty major military power wouldn't you like to know that now I'm okay with the fact that there might be national security secrets there may be reasons that that the administration is doing it you know there may there might be reasons I'm willing to accept that there are but how long do we the public go without seeing the reasons Trump saw

[19:49]

without seeing the reasons Trump saw pictures of guns on Iranian ship or missiles or something well whatever it is I don't know why we can't told lessor some secret way we found out the stuff I guess but I'm certainly not in favor of any military action short of knowing why let's talk about immigration so the president's gonna unveil a Jared Kushner made immigration I think it will not have details but it's a framework for what the president wants and it has to do with a lottery instead of our current immigration process now here's here's the framing that I like to put on this that I haven't seen the administration use and I think it's the strongest one and let me let me compare this to the weaker of frames a weak way

[20:50]

this to the weaker of frames a weak way to sell immigration the president's plan this is say it's bringing in crime very effective for selling Republicans and conservatives so it's a it's a great way to sell conservatives they bring in more crime than we need you can't really sell it to the other side because they just say well they're human beings and you know crime comes with humans so really you're just being a racist because they're just human beings I'm simplifying nobody says it's just that way but the point is it's an unpersuasive argument to people who see that the human suffering as the primary thing that they care about then you see people saying it's bad for the economy but there's an argument in both ways and the public doesn't really know what to make of it some say it's bad for the economy some say they're adding I don't you know I I pay attention to the news

[21:51]

you know I I pay attention to the news and I don't know what's true some of you think you know if you saw that one story on one side but trust me there are convincing arguments on both sides if you've only seen the convincing argument on one side you probably think you know something but you don't you know I've got a degree in economics I've seen the arguments I can't tell can you tell you think you can tell if it's economically good or bad that we leave immigration in its current form I don't know clearly there are some expenses clearly there are some benefits I have no idea so here's how I would suggest talking about immigration in a way that you can get everybody to agree and it goes like this it goes like this who gets to decide what the immigration policy is in the United States at the

[22:54]

policy is in the United States at the moment Guatemalans are deciding along with the Mexican cartel that's not an exaggeration it is literally true that given our current state of immigration laws who comes to this country is decided entirely by Guatemalans and other Central Americans and other Mexicans and importantly by the Mexican cartel because they control the border and nobody gets through unless the cartels take their their piece of the action so we have actually delegated accidentally we've delegated control of our border from Congress to Guatemalans in Guatemala I'm not even talking about Guatemalans who have come to this country and are living as citizens but not legal citizens not even talking about the ones who are here I'm talking about people sitting in Guatemala sitting in I know El Salvador sitting in

[23:56]

sitting in I know El Salvador sitting in Mexico people in other countries they're sitting in their kitchen and they're deciding what our immigration policy is by their actions if they decide to stay where they are that's that's what our immigration is if they decide to walk a north well then they've decided that they can come to this country it's their decision the decision has been completely transferred out of the control of the Congress and into the control of the cartel and I don't think anybody would question the fact I just gave so I would say that the the the fake conversation that's happening right now is how generous we should be that's a fake conversation because the people on the Left are saying let's be you know generous and compassionate and you know just take care of people who are in bad situation they're coming in I have much empathy for that opinion the Conservatives would

[24:56]

for that opinion the Conservatives would tend to say something closer to we like compassion too but we'd like to focus it first on our nation as long as you are talking about those two possibilities be more generous or being a little bit more selfish meaning more for this nation less for people from other countries you never have a solution you cannot solve it with that frame you have to move it to the fact that we've taken the decision-making completely and of the United States we have offshored the decision Congress doesn't have anything to do with who's coming across the border now they have no say now what is the one thing that people on both sides of the aisle in Congress agree on there's one thing that every person in Congress agrees on they want more control not less there is not one person

[25:57]

control not less there is not one person in Congress who will say I would like Congress to have less control over the the important events in this country none nobody can make that argument once you have transferred control away from Guatemalans and el Salvadorians and Mexican citizens and the cartel once you've transferred the decision-making over to Congress and the only way you can do that is by securing the border so that they can they can make it as loose where as tight as they want but not until you control it so you got to get control first then Congress is in charge and then they can say you we'd like to let a lot of people in let's just you know open the gates a little bit you know let in greater numbers or lesser number of people whether we're feeling generous or feeling selfish but if you're dealing with the generous or selfish question you're on the wrong question because we

[26:58]

you're on the wrong question because we don't decide it doesn't matter what Congress decides if they're thinking generous or selfish it doesn't matter what they do because they don't have the decision it's completely in the hands of people walking in our direction it's not an American decision if you can't wrestle the decision back into Congress don't have a decision about how generous or unkind or or selfishness it's the wrong conversation you can't even get to that conversation because we're not in charge of the decision so that's the way I would frame it I'd put it in a 42-day a systems frame which is first you gotta fix the system and then decide what your goal is if you have a good system that system would work just as well for opening a door and it's closing a door it's a system that opens doors and closes doors but the control of that door is in Congress right now we don't

[28:01]

door is in Congress right now we don't have a door all the control is with people who don't even live here so that's it all right so we'll see what happens with all of that I'm sure it'll devolve into accusations of racism because everything did everything does somebody says that's what Trump's been saying all along no no that is not what Trump has been saying all along he may be thinking it he may be suggesting it it may be implied in all the things that he's saying and doing but it's never been said as clearly as I've expressed it and it's the clarity of the frame that makes it useful and unclear implied framed personally at anybody now and Mexico will pay for it you know I would not if I were a betting person yeah if you bet

[29:04]

I were a betting person yeah if you bet that Trump last two terms do you think that there's nothing that will happen in any kind of form or way but by the end of his second term that wouldn't make Mexico pay for at least a little bit of that wall I'm not I'm not predicting it'll happen but I think it would be somebody says I just shattered my a oversee argument I was just shaking my hand I sometimes I just sometimes I lose all faith in humanity cuz I don't even know what you mean but I know that when if I heard it it would make my give me a headache cuz I'm sure it's not a good point I may be wrong about that but it feels like whatever you're thinking is a bad point I know that's mind reading but justjust just telling you how it feels okay just

[30:10]

just telling you how it feels okay just look at your comments use el Chapo's money yeah I mean why couldn't we use the the cartels you know the other thing that I wondered is if you if you could turn the cartels against each other you know if you assume that everybody who works for a cartel is doing it from the money you know there's no I don't think there's anybody working for a cartel who has a larger ambition to you know infect the United States with drugs or any that I think people work for the cartels are doing it for the money or to stay alive you know that's a good reason but it makes me wonder to what extent we could bribe the cartels to turn against each other well let me put it another way do you think that we could bribe the cartels to prevent people from crossing the border well I suppose that would

[31:13]

the border well I suppose that would turn into a some kind of a Holocaust because the cartels might do it in ways that we don't like them to do it but I keep wondering couldn't you just turn the cartels against each other cuz it's just body couldn't you just say hey cartels all you have to do is give us you know give us the GPS coordinates of your leaders and suddenly you're gonna get some Bitcoin anybody want some Bitcoin you're gonna find yourself with a lot of Bitcoin if you just give us the GPS location know if your leader that's it
it nobody knows if you got Bitcoin there's there's no you know I mean I could suppose people could find out but if you're just some cartel guy with a smartphone nobody knows you got Bitcoin

[32:14]

all right somebody said Tom Clancy book says it can be done well maybe so
alright I don't have anything else to say so unless you have some questions I'm going to go do something else and turn Derek Prince loose on the cartels why not why not could we let me let me put it this way could could we hire a mercenary army to go after the cartels and keep their money just tell the cartel that tell the mercenary army look here's the deal you can keep whatever you get you know will give you Intel you know if you need a if you need a drone to come in anyway I'm sure all of those things are completely politically impossible because you can't go to war with Mexico as Mexico would see it so I I don't think you would actually work but have you seen my sort of edge

[33:23]

work but have you seen my sort of edge on Ruben I haven't yet but I'll watch that you saw that Media Matters was going after dave rubin for even having mike's image on the show and you know of course it's all things he did or said some time ago and it makes me wonder does Media Matters want to live in the world that they're trying to create does Media Matters want to live in a world where people will always be the opinion they used to have but they don't have anymore like what kind of world is that judging people by an opinion they used to hold but don't hold that anymore and that's maybe one of the worst standards you could ever you could ever have so Media Matters is a ridiculous cancer on society but I'm sure they think they're doing God's work

[34:25]

doing God's work yeah there's story about the Harvard firing the african-american professor because he was going to defend Harvey Weinstein and it is distressing to know that even people smart enough to go to Harvard are still so dumb that they don't understand what lawyers are how do you how do you get into the Harvard and not understand that lawyers can work for both sides and and the system is better for it yeah how does such a basic concept elude people who go to Harvard I do not really understand that all right yeah so Joe Scarborough said that trumps looks 20 years younger than the Democrats I can scatter isn't it Trump just doesn't register as

[35:27]

isn't it Trump just doesn't register as his age oh speaking of age you have to see a video you have to see this just google it a little pop right up so Mick Jagger who is 75 years old recently had a heart valve surgery and he's recovered now and I guess they delayed a tour and now he's you may be trying to get back in shape for it and there's a video of him dancing in some kind of little dance studio and I don't know if he was preparing for the tour or not but you have to see 75 year old Mick Jagger dancing like he's 14 years old I'm he moves he moves like he's 14 well you know you don't see any age I mean you could tell by his face of course but he's kept his weight down you stayed in shape evidently somebody said they thought it was an old video no this is after her heart surgery 75 years old and

[36:30]

after her heart surgery 75 years old and I'll tell you it totally made my day it totally made my day and there is this I'm turning him 62 and about a month and you know when you get a certain age you start thinking how many how much time do I have left that's good time you know at the moment I'm peak of health everything's great my life is perfect better than it's ever been but I keep asking myself how much time do I have left you know in five years am I still gonna be as healthy as I am and then I then I see Mick Jagger 75 dancing like a kid and I say to myself it really is assuming you've got at least a good you know genetic base you know you're you're now sick in some genetic way apparently lifestyle makes a big difference so

[37:34]

three years tops [Laughter]
how about that hand pass in the hockey game last night didn't see it alright I was gonna do another shirtless selfie when I turned 62 only only because it makes the the internet so angry the last time I did a shirtless selfie and by the way for context I wrote a book which include as a major part of the book fitness and health advice I feel very strongly that if you give people information in this case I was describing systems it wasn't advice per se but I feel very strongly that if you are publicly talking about fitness and health in your mail okay you're kind of obliged to take off your shirt because

[38:34]

obliged to take off your shirt because you gotta show that you're that you can live the thing you're talking about now I'm completely aware that nobody wants to see anybody over 60 take off their shirt I get it I get it again you know and I would not present it as aesthetic value it's not art you know it's not it's not so that you can have a fantasy it is simply to show that at age 62 you can look pretty tight and I think that would be tremendously valuable because I think I think we allow ourselves to age into whatever way we think is the way we're supposed to age I really think there's a mental component to aging in the sense that if if you if you imagine that you're supposed to be unhealthy and your sixties you you sort of lead yourself into it if you imagine that you could be Mick Jagger when

[39:36]

that you could be Mick Jagger when you're 75 I think you do different things I think you say I guess exercise does make a difference I guess maybe I should have the protein shake instead the bread so I'm still trying to decide whether I want to do that selfie part of the reason is that when I did the first one I was emphasizing weight so the first selfie I had good muscle definition but I was really going for a love weight Kristina asked me to put on weight so she actually said totally prefer you to be a little heavier you know even if it means you know looking not as let's say aesthetically you know ideal she would prefer me just to be a little bigger weight wise so I tried to bulk up primarily with exercise yeah you know I did need more just to get my

[40:37]

know I did need more just to get my weight up a few pounds so the my current look is more muscular and less felt and I thought that was worth showing because it's you know two looks at the same age and both of them are possible without a lot of work so neither of them required much work no I've never I've now used any steroids or other supplements I don't use any kind of don't use any kind of supplements or illegal or legal anything that just use a protein yeah eating a lot of protein is pretty much the whole thing so anyway I haven't decided if I want to do that but I might do that in June and we'll see anyway I will talk to you all later