Episode 548 Scott Adams: Mueller, Impeachment, Trump, and my Amazing Prediction
Date: 2019-05-30 | Duration: 59:58
Topics
If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays
Rough Transcript
This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.
Transcript
[0:12]
hello everybody hustle on in here what a news pact entertaining world we live in we’re gonna talk about all that stuff Becca Becca says she’s here for the dopamine I promised and I got plenty for you you it’s dopamine time and you know how it starts it starts with a simultaneous up be it in a mug or a cup or a glass could be a tanker to Stein or talents might be a thermos could be a flask filling with your favorite like what I like coffee and join me now for the simultaneous sip mmm well I’m expecting a big crowd this morning because why wouldn’t I why wouldn’t I so let’s get to the smaller stories while people are streaming in before we get to the big story which is color of course is Muller first of all I told you about my concept of blocking
[1:13]
told you about my concept of blocking old trolls between now and the election maybe forever on the first offense so rather than interacting with trolls I’m just blocking I have to tell you that my first full day of doing that I feel a lot better I didn’t think I would actually feel it you know I didn’t think that it would make such an immediate obvious difference in my my outlook on life but it really did so if you haven’t tried this I recommend it at the very first sign of unpleasantness and you don’t have to wait for much could be a bad attitude could be a disrespectful way that they’re saying something could be a little sarcasm in the saddle place blog you have no reason to talk to unpleasant people alright so the what the news is all the fake news today I don’t know if you noticed it’s almost entirely fake news I don’t think there’s
[2:13]
entirely fake news I don’t think there’s any news today in this real news this might be some kind of a record and you know it was going here because it started with most you know years ago it was mostly real news and a little bit of fake news would slip in there and you know through the election it was probably I don’t know twenty percent of fake news but that was all the interesting stuff so it seemed like more I’m not sure but I think today is all fake news I might be exaggerating but I’m not sure I think maybe every story today is fake news I’ll give you some sample so there’s a big story about the White House staff allegedly trying to remove the USS McCain the naval ship from the vicinity of where Trump was going to be in Japan now there’s no reporting this as the Trump was aware of any of this and the implication that from the fake news industry is that the
[3:15]
from the fake news industry is that the White House staff figured that Trump would freak out he’d flip out if he saw this McCain named and somehow associated with them so that’s why it’s being reported that of course is blatantly fake news number one they did not cover up the name on the ship as was reported so the the military the Navy has now confirmed that that never happened there was a some kind of a tarp over it on the day that the president wasn’t there but what he was there everything was uncovered but it also seems to be true because there’s some memo that the White House staff did consider getting you know getting that boat and that name and with the picture now is that the story you think it is I’ll tell you if I’m gonna hire assistance yeah if I if I’m gonna hire a White House staff I want the way how staff who was alert enough to understand that the president standing
[4:17]
understand that the president standing in front of a ship that says McCain on it is going to be clickbait for the the media it would be a reason for the media to talk about pleasantness about McCain and Trump’s relationship when McCain was alive if your job is to protect the president that certainly was not about the president’s mood you’ve got or you know I’m not I’m not reading minds here I’m just gonna say that that would be the least plausible explanation the most plausible explanation is that the White House staff is very smart did you see that did you see that interpretation in the news oh well the obvious interpretation is that the White House staff is very smart because if they get a picture of Trump next to McCain any kind of suggestion of McCain that’s where the stories give it go and why would you want that when he’s having a good trip in Japan there’d be no reason to put him in that position where the
[5:17]
to put him in that position where the media would have a free punch so compliments to whoever it was on the White House staff who was alert enough to know that putting the McCain name and Trump in the same photograph would have been a mistake so I say if there’s somebody who’s a specific person who had that that will say that insight that person needs to get promoted because that’s the smartest person on your staff everybody on the staff who didn’t know that that that was a bad idea anybody who would have let the president stand in front of McCain his name on a ship that person’s not your strongest player but whoever said don’t do that that’s probably your that’s that’s your best staff member right there so that’s the first thing then we’ve got Trump did a poorly worded tweet and here’s an example people often
[6:19]
tweet and here’s an example people often attack me and they say you you are not credible because you’d never say the president makes a mistake everything you say is an apology for the president you just support him well here’s an example where I clearly will not so here’s the president’s tweet which got it in trouble and this is just an own-goal this is just an unforced error all right so you’re listening to me talking about President Trump making an unfair stare in in the realm of persuasion so just just remember that so here’s his unforced error in this tweet he said Russia Russia Russia that’s all you heard at the beginning of the witch-hunt hoax I like that he’s going into witch-hunt hoax that’s new and now Russia has disappeared because I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected and then there’s some more but it doesn’t matter so here’s the the offending sentence and now Russia has disappeared because I had nothing to do with Russia helping me to get elected so
[7:19]
with Russia helping me to get elected so it was interpreted as an admission that he believes Russia helped him get elected so that was just an error apparently he later clarified that he got elected on his own it wasn’t Russia but certainly that’s a poorly worded sentence I think what he meant was that he had nothing to do with it you know and then the question of whether they were effective or not is a separate question but it doesn’t say that so this is just a mistake all right but it exists as fake news because of his poor wording it was reported that he intended to admit that Russia got him elected that didn’t happen that definitely didn’t happen it was a poorly worded tweet that’s all it was speaking of news this fake news there’s a a certain senator whose name I don’t want to say because I will get
[8:20]
don’t want to say because I will get banned on social media do you all know what senator that is let’s say this first name is Steve and he would be a person who would be married to a queen so who what would be the title of somebody married to a queen that’s who I’m talking about Steve married to a queen and I don’t mean you know I mean a royalty Queen not not the other meaning he has made I think the same dumb mistake leaves three times and I can’t defend how poorly he’s presenting himself he’s he’s really digging himself in a hole that he dug for himself and he just keeps digging but here’s but he’s mostly a victim of fake news because was what Steve keeps saying I’m sorry is not a senator is representative representative Steve married to a queen yes not a
[9:22]
Steve married to a queen yes not a senator so he keeps saying that there’s something special about western or United States culture now when he says some cultures are better than others he clarifies and he says by culture I mean for example people who have the Constitution of the United States and have a similar feeling about how the country should run I’m paraphrasing that’s the sense of it it’s sort of patterned around the Constitution or maybe the Magna Carter before that that’s what he means by culture now he also very clearly says that he’s talking about all Americans people of all ethnicities genders be vague a be they straight be they belong to be they read yet he very clearly says no no I’m not talking about ethnicities and people I’m talking about the set of rules that the
[10:22]
talking about the set of rules that the big melting pot of America lives by is a pretty good set of rules he calls it a culture of course the news says well there he goes being a racist again and then he says wait a minute I didn’t mention race I specifically excluded race I was talking about a common set of rules that we call a culture and some sets of rules or cultures are better than others that’s all I’m saying and we shouldn’t assume that they’re all the same that makes sense right one set of rules about how to act is not going to be exactly equal to another set of rules about how to act doesn’t matter what people you put in either system some systems are better than other systems most interesting anybody could ever say and of course the need see it end reports that as well there he goes being a racist again exactly what wasn’t happening specifically what wasn’t happening clearly specifically stated in the
[11:25]
clearly specifically stated in the clearest words that’s not what I’m saying and then reported as well that’s obviously what he’s saying so that’s that’s the quality of your news today did you see the news that there was a man who set himself on fire near the White House yesterday literally a man set himself on fire near the White House that man’s name was Bob Muller I’ll just let that sink in for a while so let’s talk about let’s talk about Bob Muller so Muller goes on TV and he gives his little statement about essentially exactly what was in his report how did the news report it the news both on Fox News and CNN largely said the same thing at first you know the real news people not not the opinion people but the news people you know the bread bears you know the news not the opinions they reported
[12:27]
the news not the opinions they reported that Muller completely contradicted or were said something in opposition to Barr if you watched it live and you were watching the coverage that was the news universally Muller is saying something completely different than bar and this is big big news everybody sent it right both sides I made a prediction at I checked the time at 11:00 a.m. my time I made the following tweeted prediction I said prediction : when we see Muller’s and Bars comments side by side in writing not verbally they will start to morph in our minds from totally opposites to completely compatible now how many people agreed with me when I said that well a few a few people said yeah I can kind of see that but mostly
[13:28]
yeah I can kind of see that but mostly people said scoff scoff scoff these are opposites nothing could be more opposite you heard it with your own ears Scott you heard it with your own ears I heard it don’t tell me it’s the same I heard it with my own ears that’s what most people said few hours later Attorney General bars office and the special counsel clarified on the issue of the OLC which is the rule that says you don’t indict a sitting president and that’s where people thought that the difference was they said that there was no discrepancy so both bars organization and Muller’s organization immediately reported that there was no discrepancy and that they actually were completely compatible nobody in the world but me predicted that within the first hour - I was first
[14:31]
that within the first hour - I was first a number of the obviously now a number of people have have come to that position which was exactly the prediction the prediction was we would start here and it would be wait for it and illusion that’s my specialty my specialty is identifying hoaxes and illusions I believe and I’ve been telling you this for years that I have a learned skill set that gives me an advantage in doing that and I try to prove it by making public predictions this one I felt was kind of obvious cuz you see I went out on a limb I put my skin in the game if you see if you make a prediction that specific in public on Twitter you’re putting some skin in the game all right now I would I would say that I’m not special in the skill set or a talent stack as I call it mic Serna Mitch would be another one he has a similar talent stack and and can
[15:32]
has a similar talent stack and and can see hoaxes faster than other people and you should look for that because he has the same skill set alright let’s talk a little bit about what Muller did first of all let’s talk about why why did bomb Muller go out there and use language that seemed to be a different emphasis from what Barra used when bar first summarized the report I remember that Muller agreed that bar was being faithful to the report but the way you describe things can bias the listener in different ways by what things you emphasize what things you do emphasize the exact words you use Barr used words that leaned toward not guilty slash exoneration without ever using exoneration the president took that I would say generous interpretation and used a little hyperbole and said
[16:33]
used a little hyperbole and said exonerate it it’s all over nothing found now imagine if your Muller you just worked for years on a piece of work that you’re really proud of you put in your heart and soul you took all the heat you took all the arrows and when you were done you watched the president misinterpret it put yourself in Muller’s head he did all this work all this money was spent all this attention all the abuse he got he couldn’t say anything because you know he’s sort of a straight arrow and he doesn’t like to know he’s not about the public stuff he’s not about the persuasion he’s about the facts and he had to sit there after years of working on this product listening to the president misrepresent it because it did not say exonerated you know it didn’t say that so here’s my best guess and again I’m gonna use clear words this is
[17:35]
again I’m gonna use clear words this is this is a gas at speculation we can’t read his mind but wouldn’t you agree with the general base statement the Muller had to really really hate the way the President and Republicans were interpreting you know he hated that because you can’t imagine anybody in that situation who would not have hated hearing that interpretation so if you were to ask me what is the most reasonable explanation of why Muller spudding in the opposite direction it’s because he was responding to bars spin in other words he was showing that you could use I mean this is my interpretation but he was presenting it in a way that completed the picture the picture the bar gave was there’s no reason to think a crime committed this is um I’m interpreting that’s not what Barr said so the bars spin was no reason to think a crime happened that was half of the story
[18:36]
happened that was half of the story because the other half was no reason to think it didn’t meaning that it’s not that clear Muller if you want to give him the most generous interpretation it would be that he completed the picture because now the public can see there were two versions that use the same set of facts one version leans a little bit hmm I think there’s something here and the other doesn’t bark to you that’s the molar version and the other is barn well there’s not enough here let’s let’s move on so it does seem to me that if you if you could make the generous interpretation that Muller is a straight arrow he simply wanted his work to be cooked to be presented in the clearest possible light that bars spin was a little bit too much of a spin but not not incorrect it was simply a way of communicating then left people with the wrong impression perhaps so he spun it
[19:37]
wrong impression perhaps so he spun it the other way so you could see both movies at the same time now let’s talk about let’s talk about what the actual potential evidence of a crime was because because Muller used language that basically said I’m not not saying he’s innocent or no he’s not not guilty basically the I heard Dan bunch you know say that first I’m sure other people have said it but now that the country said what heck there’s no such thing as not not guilty people are innocent until proven guilty but what’s different about this is that by the time Muller talked his report was already public you know most of it anyway the parts that mattered and so we had already passed the point where and a person who was not going to be charged was already embarrassed by all the information now in a perfect world if if a decision is made not to charge
[20:37]
a decision is made not to charge somebody at the same time you don’t show any information that everybody agrees that that’s the fair way to do it but since this was a special case where the information was made public and in fact the president made a public you know he’ll he didn’t resist that so in that special case where we already saw all the bad information putting his spin on it was not the same crime as if he had decided to give us information we didn’t have there was no new information and and just showing the information I would argue is the bad part but as much as you watch this can you figure out yet what is this evidence that he might have been guilty have you taken the time to google the the ten incidents that that Muller talked about that were the the sort of the sketchy activities with which he said you can’t conclude that no crime happened right you can’t say you
[21:39]
crime happened right you can’t say you you can say he’s not not guilty you just don’t know there’s stuff so I took the time to look at that that list today oh my god his week so the total list of all the things that he did they fall to these categories and by the way this what I’m going to say next is actually from Muller’s own words in the report there and I’m paraphrasing yet but the the point of making comes from the molar report but not the exact words so here were the categories that those ten incidents that are questionable fall into number one there are things that are done as part of Trump’s job is there any way that you could imagine the Trump would be prosecuted by twelve jurors for doing something that would be well within his job description such as firing Comey I can’t really imagine a
[22:40]
firing Comey I can’t really imagine a Kenya and this is the Dershowitz point that if a president is doing his job the normal things that a president does hiring and firing and certainly there were reasons to fire call me Comey gave him completely legitimate reasons not to be trusted so if anything fell into that category of things he was just doing his job could the best lawyer in the world determined that that was a crime they can’t the best lawyers in the world could look at the same set of facts and go oh no might be a crime might not be now compare that to a crime such as murder or you know burglary if we’re talking about a common crime and you knew all the facts there were no facts and questions like well here’s a video of the guy going in the house we’ve got his DNA he admitted it we know all the facts person went in your house took some things and left you wouldn’t have
[23:41]
some things and left you wouldn’t have to ask about their state of mind lawyers would not be arguing about whether a crime had been committed the facts would be crystal clear that’s not the case here the smartest lawyers in the world could look at these same facts and say [Music] no maybe could be you can make an argument for it but probably it’d be hard to convince the jury here’s another things he did in public so there are things that the president said in public things we tweeted said things he said such as calling on whatever he did I guess one of them was he he in public he failed to rule out pardoning Manafort is that a crime is it a crime to fail to limit your own options is it ever a crime to say I’m not going to limit all my options what lawyer is gonna take that to court
[24:43]
what lawyer is gonna take that to court alright here’s another one another category and again it’s not one thing it’s these are categories according to mo the other category is things that could easily have had other intentions I don’t know if this was one of the examples but I’ll use it as my example if the president paid stormy Daniels to protect his marriage but it also had obvious benefits for his election process it’s not illegal according to Dershowitz if I’m correctly interpreting so if you’re wondering about somebody’s intentions and there’s another reason that they could have done something could you get a conviction no because we don’t send people to jail based on mind-reading we can’t read people’s intentions and say okay the things you did we’re all legal except for we know what you were thinking and that makes it illegal that’s pretty hard to prove all right so when Muller says I can’t say he
[25:46]
right so when Muller says I can’t say he didn’t do anything oh and then there’s a summary and and this is an exact quote I believe from the Muller reports at least the article that I read suggested this game from the Moller report exact quote toward the end of their discussion about the many events that they thought he was guilty of was this sentence at the end judgments about the nature of the president’s and motives during each phase and those are the phases I was talking about the three phases or no the phases would be doesn’t matter but so forget about what phases mean because there’s no special meaning here judgments about the nature of the president’s motives during each phase would be informed by the totality of the evidence so in other words Muller is saying the only way you could deduce the president’s intentions is not by any one thing or one event but rather you would have to see them as a tapestry what do
[26:48]
have to see them as a tapestry what do you call it when there’s no hard evidence of a crime but there are all these pieces of evidence that only makes sense if you were to look at them all at once confirmation bias yeah it’s the laundry list persuasion now do you think that you could get a jury of 12 people to agree that they could read the president’s freaking mind and find his intentions by although you know by by pouring through his you know picking through his scat you know what exactly should they look at his horoscope to you know how deep should they go to look at all of the evidence that would tell you what he’s thinking in his intentions it’s not something that can be done so let’s get back to Muller’s interpretation Muller said he I can’t I can’t determine that no crime happened I just described the you know summary of
[27:50]
just described the you know summary of the the 10 things I can’t determine that there’s a crime in there I’m looking at him too I can’t tell can you can you look at the 10 things that are described and know for sure that the president didn’t have two purposes can we know that it wasn’t part of his job and he had a reason to do it could we know the things he did in public right in front of everybody intentionally in public was meant to be like some kind of obstruction of justice could you get a jury to believe that the that the things he says in public or instruction of justice even if they’re just normal things to say for example refusing to rule out for Manafort who’s gonna argue that that’s obstruction of justice a president always keeps his options open if you smart so doesn’t seem reasonable that Muller
[28:51]
so doesn’t seem reasonable that Muller would say I can’t rule out that this could be a crime because you know what you can’t rule it out even I can’t rule it out I cannot rule out that somebody had secret thoughts that I don’t know about do you know what else I can’t rule out that you have secret thoughts that I don’t know about you can’t rule out that I have secret thoughts you don’t know about but the legal system doesn’t really treat those as much so a bar looked at it you looked at the totality of it and said quite reasonably I think if this were anybody else nope no prosecution would happen don’t you agree if you had this week a body of evidence if you could even call that would anyone else who is not president Trump be taken to court with what we just described crimes of we think you’re thinking this just doing his job no there’s not even the slightest chance so Barr did what he should do he made a
[29:55]
so Barr did what he should do he made a decision and he biased toward innocence because innocence is the natural state of a citizen in the United States and there was no information that could change that but at the same time it’s also true that Muller and you and I are on the same page we can’t tell if a crime was committed the only way we would know if a crime was committed is literally to read the president’s mind and nobody can do that so I would say that Muller and Barr their comments are completely compatible there’s stuff but unless you’re a mind reader that stuff doesn’t have meaning Barr says their stuff and unless you’re a mind reader you can’t put meaning on it and my job is to make a decision on Bob Barr I’m the Attorney General so I’m going to make a decision if this were anybody else there’s no way this would go forward so that’s what you
[30:55]
this would go forward so that’s what you got got I was watching tucker carlson last night which was you know i gotta say sometimes tucker carlson show is the only place i learned anything and and last night you show was again it was a masterpiece frankly i mean it was just it was just a beautiful thing and I mean that in terms of the way that he framed and explained things that the guests and he had on the way they explained things it was really really good better better than anything I saw yesterday and one of the guests was asked to describe about all this known persistent Russian interference in the election and I’ve had the same question which is why do we keep hearing there was all this interference from the Russians and the election and it was persistent and it was it was a big deal but why don’t I know what that is what is it how come I why is it that I watch the news all the time and it’s the
[31:57]
watch the news all the time and it’s the biggest story in the country for a year and yet I don’t know what they did now I know a few things I did but they couldn’t possibly fall into the category of a big deal one is they had this amateurish little troll farm that they spend forty six thousand dollars the guest sack I’ve heard a hundred thousand but it’s a tiny number whatever it is on some ads that look like they were made by high school students if you’ve seen the ads you know that they had no no effect on the election he could they could have spent a billion dollars on those particular ads those ads that would have made a difference you could just look at him they’re a completely harmless useless PAP they look like they were just done by trolls on Twitter which they were so I thought is it just that is that the evidence but there’s also the part about the Russian hacking and and the the gr is it the the you know the spook intelligence organization is alleged to have hacked servers in the United States
[32:58]
have hacked servers in the United States and passed that information and the Democratic servers have passed that to WikiLeaks I got that right and so doctor asked what is the evidence for that and the guests explained wait for it there is a vetti there isn’t any now when I say Oh GRU sorry the GRU is the russian intelligence organization now when I say there isn’t any evidence that Russia hacked the Democratic server and gave the information to WikiLeaks what I mean by that is the molar report doesn’t tell us how they know and actually you use words and that’s the first I heard it it’s the first Tucker heard it too because he stopped his guests short and said wait a minute am i hearing this right how did I miss that if you read the molar report he uses some word like evidently or probably or you know or apparently and it doesn’t give you any explanation of how we you
[34:01]
give you any explanation of how we you know the details of how we wouldn’t know what was happened now of course you’re saying to yourself Scott Scott SOT these are all secret ways we know things maybe we bugged Putin some way we don’t want to give it up we don’t want to give it up so we’re you know trust us the security you know where where are the intelligence people of the United States we have your best interests in mind yeah I think the word was appears it appears that the Russians did it now keep in mind this is Muller he didn’t say the Russians did it he said it appears they did it does that look the same to you up here say that it because appears they did it maybe it suggests that we have secret ways of knowing it and he didn’t want to give that up maybe possible can’t rule down but here’s the fun part and Tuckers guest I wish I remembered his name because he was he was he was phenomenal as a guest he should come back so his
[35:05]
as a guest he should come back so his guest explains that I’m reading your comments Harry I lost my train of thought for a minute so here’s the part so the guest explained in how I think I maybe heard this but I heard it in a different context before and when he put it together like my eyes just went boying apparently Bob Muller when he was head of the FBI testified that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction did you know that did you know that when Bob Muller was head of the FBI he testified that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction the other people who were testifying or at least should have known or part of that was clapper and bread and I think in in their older jobs now given that we know our own intelligence services are unreliable and let’s let’s just say what it is our own intelligence
[36:08]
just say what it is our own intelligence services in the United States are unreliable that’s just a statement of fact wouldn’t you say likewise Bob Muller we know is unreliable on this very sort of question he’s not unreliable on other things and you know I’m saying well he you know he maybe he cheated on his taxes so I think he’s lying about that nothing like that and by the way I don’t think he cheated on his taxes I’m saying that Bob Muller is unreliable on this exact question of whether intelligence is real or we have interpreted too much into it but if he used the word you know apparently or anything like that it’s pretty much an acknowledgment that either were not sure or maybe the best interpretation is he doesn’t want to give away the fact that we are sure because we got secretive means to find out those stuff I just
[37:11]
means to find out those stuff I just don’t think the central claim of the whole hoax is even a little bit credible at this point the primary claim that Russia hacked and that they made some kind of a big difference with this troll farm I believe are the only pieces of that are at least the important ones and they’re not even slightly credible based on what Muller himself says so I’m not I’m not making up facts I’m looking at we got them we have a non credible person who doesn’t even claim it’s true he claims it looks like it’s true if a non credible person who has a history of being wrong about something and almost destroyed our country and did destroy other countries says something well it looks like it’s true I can’t be sure what do you do with that we certainly shouldn’t trust it you know you definitely shouldn’t trust it all right
[38:14]
definitely shouldn’t trust it all right how perfect is it that Bob Barr is on vacation I swear if you were gonna write this simulation this is this is just the way you do it you would write it so the Bob Barr was on vacation so that the media could just be wrestling with this Muller thing without Bob Barr coming inside oh yeah what mother said that’s basically what I said he just used different words the whole thing would have gone away if Muller was here if Muller had been not and a touch and on vacation he’s in Alaska or something I think if he had been around people who said Bob are his didn’t all her represent this right and bar would have said yeah I would use different words but yeah that’s basically compatible the whole thing would have going away so it’s just perfect that he was on vacation alan dershowitz has turned on Muller he was a Muller supporter until recently and when Muller did his you know possibly guilty explanation about Trump Alan Dershowitz quite correctly
[39:16]
Trump Alan Dershowitz quite correctly says we don’t live in the country where you do that sort of thing now I think Alan Dershowitz maybe is not putting enough weight on the fact that the the information and the Muller report was already public that probably was you know you could argue that was the bigger problem but it also had an overriding public interest so it was a special case once the public once all that information was out there what Muller said was essentially the same thing he said report so I think alan dershowitz in this case maybe be having a how would i say this i think he’s having a citizen reaction as opposed to a lawyer reaction as a citizen you should be plenty angry about somebody being accused of a crime without evidence in public especially when your government is doing it so I think Ellender she would sense of justice is what’s being you know certainly is what’s being offended here
[40:16]
certainly is what’s being offended here but given this strange case where we already had the facts and all Mahler did was restate what was in the facts we already had I don’t know that his statements in public made things worse I don’t yeah he had already done whatever he was going to do all right look at my other notes here let’s talk about impeachment now some people are saying that this is a you know an outline for impeachment that basically it was a gift to the Democrats that they can use for fundraising and everything else this is Pietschmann question is really interesting because it’s it’s common knowledge although it might not be true in this case but it only matters that everybody thinks it’s true so both the left and the right would agree on the following statement impeachment process would guarantee Trump gets reelected would you agree all the experts the
[41:18]
would you agree all the experts the pundits they might be wrong but it’s notable that both the left and the right and say that with a sense of certainty now it’s based on history and you have to be really careful because Trump violates all history there’s nothing about the Trump experience that you can say well look at the history and now we know how this is gonna go cuz that just doesn’t work with him he’s he’s too much of an outlier but let’s say people believe it they believe in Pietschmann is the worst possible thing what do you make of the fact that the Democrats running for president except for Biden are all coming out in favor of impeachment while holding the fort is Pelosi it apparently Biden what do you make of it well what I make of it is that the Democrats know that Pelosi won’t let the impeachment happen so my interpretation can’t read minds but if you were to look at this just strategically what would be the smart thing to do so and maybe I’m being generous that the Democrats are
[42:18]
being generous that the Democrats are acting smart but the smartest thing to do is if you’re a Democrat running for for president you should say yes there it is I’m in favor of impeachment let’s push that impeachment because you’re safe because it’s not going to happen as long as Pelosi is willing to hold the line and as long as Biden is on her side it’s not going to happen so they get a free pass that the Democrats can call for it because that’s popular and their voters will like it but they don’t have to worry about getting what they want so the Democrats are literally calling for something they don’t want to happen right in front of you now if Pelosi changes her mind unless this officially go forward I’m gonna be real surprised because she’s the key to making this scam work the scam is that they’re calling for impeachment and they don’t want it because it’s bad for them but as long as she’s holding the line they could do that so don’t expect Pelosi to throw the
[43:21]
that so don’t expect Pelosi to throw the entire Democratic field under the bus unless she decides that Biden is her man or a candidate let’s say less sexist listen if she decides that Biden is her candidate you know that’s good enough reason to throw everybody else under the bus and not do a Pietschmann Oh either way she’s throwing everybody under the bus let’s talk about Biden so could you agree that I’m the first person to notice that he was hiding and he was intentionally staying out of the headlines we certainly found out why when finally some video emerged of him you know giving a shoulder rub or not shoulder rub but he was he was touching and getting chummy with we’re all in public now I I’m on the camp that says that there’s no indication that Joe Biden has any kind of pedophile no kind of sexual intentions there’s no evidence of it
[44:24]
intentions there’s no evidence of it right and we have you know these suspicions and things look sketchy and it looks creepy and that’s all true but he’s lived a long time to have nobody accuse him of an actual sexual act you don’t get that old and have no accusations that are like serious ones unless you’re really just creepy uncle who is a little handsy but not over the line so that’s my opinion my opinion could change the effects change I’ll change my opinion but I think he’s probably feels it’s innocent and can’t tell the difference it’s just that who he is that’s my guess but he did go on video and say that he wouldn’t do this anymore and then he went on video in public and it’s not the first time there’s some earlier videos in which he was handsy with adult women but that didn’t have the same visceral impact on us as when we saw him you know holding hands with this little girl and parading around and holding her shoulders and getting close to her head
[45:24]
shoulders and getting close to her head and stuff and your creepy meter just goes off you go ahh so the problem is that Biden is completely unlike t’l let me put it to you in historical terms but again you have to be careful about history when Trump is involved when was the last time that you saw a a first term president lose the election for the second term when these two when these two factors were in play number one the economy was great and number two the Challenger had far less charisma than the incumbent because the times that you can affirm you you get a one-term president when you’ve got a Ronald Reagan charisma against a Jimmy Carter and the economy is not good you get a one-term president if you have a Bill Clinton gigantic charisma all the talent in the world and and you’re running against a weak economy and a low charisma incumbent Bush those
[46:28]
and a low charisma incumbent Bush those are the conditions that get you a one-term president we have exactly the opposite like a incredible economy and the most charismatic president we’ve ever had running against somebody who looks like pocket-lint when I look at Joe Biden I actually think of Pocket lint in terms of his charisma like it’s just it’s so absent it’s painful now I wouldn’t have said that before President Trump set the standard of what charisma looks like you know I would have said Biden had charisma you know if you’d asked me 10 years ago but at the moment he looks like a doddering old the handsy guy with all of the charisma of pocket-lint and he doesn’t have a chance what do you make of the fact that he’s the he’s leading in the polls at the same time he doesn’t have a chance here’s what I say I believe that the Democrats at least the the strategic
[47:31]
Democrats at least the the strategic ones you know not all the voters but the strategic ones have decided that they can’t win this next election given the current conditions now they’ll probably still try they might introduce a few new hoaxes they might try to manipulate social media but probably probably they don’t think he has a chance now if you knew that your team was going to lose the next next contest the next election what would be the smartest strategic thing to do if you knew you were going to lose just think about that for a moment and then I’ll give you the answer what would be the smartest thing you could do if you knew you were going to lose the next election because I think they know that the smartest thing you could do is to throw the most disposable politician against it somebody who won’t hurt you too much but also is not ruined for the election after so Biden is
[48:31]
for the election after so Biden is basically a sack of special candidate there’s no chance he can win and there’s no chance you would want to run again here’s the key there’s no chance that Biden would run again four years later because he’d be he would age out of it he’s really aged out of it already but by then it would be you know unambiguous so all of the candidates who are not Joe Biden are essentially in sort of a American Idol type competition to see who can develop some charisma who can get a little distance you know who can look like a credible person for 2024 so it seems to me that the Democrats are playing for 2024 because they have a candidate who couldn’t possibly win and let me give you a put some meat on that if you look at the the most effective plays against candidate Trump when he was running for election yeah one of the biggest things that was that people said about him
[49:32]
that was that people said about him mostly in Hillary Clinton and then all the Democrats they said he was a sexist and they would give you know this example that example that example but that’s completely taken away with Joe Biden one of the strongest attacks against as president doesn’t work if your candidate is Joe Biden because he’s a little too handsy right and even if he’s not done anything illegal and I think he is not I would not accuse him of that there’s no evidence of that he’s he’s not 2019 material if you don’t I mean he doesn’t have the 2019 sensibility about how men and women act the racism claims are not not nearly as effective in the second term because the president has back to prison reform the president has great unemployment numbers and nothing happened in those years that looks like obvious you know some kind of Hitler racism thing so before you can
[50:33]
Hitler racism thing so before you can imagine that maybe those things would happen because people were all worked up with her Trump derangement syndrome and they were imagining the worst but now you don’t have to imagine what a president Trump looks like you know you have no one you have no unknowns about the president in terms of who he is you know what he’s likely to do you know the details of course you have a question but the general vibe is pretty well known and you but Biden because he has not been president and he’s kind of old he is a bit of a risk there’s one thing that people don’t like it’s risk when things are going well voters don’t like to introduce risk into the system when things are going well and thanks for going well Trump is a big part of why things are going well if you put in somebody else would they also do well maybe maybe the other person will do
[51:35]
maybe maybe the other person will do even better but it’s a risk you don’t introduce risk when things are going this well Trump introduced risk when things were not going that well when when there was a legitimate list of things they were pretty big problems but they’re sort of not big problems they’ll likewise Trump is had made progress on free market impact on health care you know he’s done some things such as they’ve they sped up the approval of generics which really lowers prices that makes a big difference he’s introduced transparency in pricing this should make a big difference and selling across state lines or insurance across state lines banding together that should make a big difference there are a whole bunch of other things that they’ve done to introduce market forces two years from now will the president be able to say I stopped the growth of health care expenses probably yes think about that
[52:37]
expenses probably yes think about that by 2020 he’s probably gonna be able to say prices were going up like this until I get elected I did all these things to introduce competition and then it leveled off it might still be up but it’s gonna go from this to more like this that’s a pretty good story it’s not a great story you know I’ve said often on left to Bernie and until everybody has good healthcare coverage in some way whether it’s you know ideally through insurance I’m not happy so that wouldn’t be good enough for me or even close but it’s certainly a good story for getting reelected here’s something interesting I don’t remember anybody saying this before I did so I’m gonna claim credit for it as a prediction I’ll say for sure that I did hear from somebody else before I said it but I won’t claim that nobody else said it before I did because I don’t know what everybody in the world is saying all that way early in this
[53:37]
is saying all that way early in this Russia collusion stuff way before the Muller report came out way early I said yeah so there might be a backpack covering a back pad coming up I said this looks everything like British interference in our election how is this not British interference there are way too many British connections in the story from of course Christopher Steele who they call an X and X buy for a Britain as if there’s such a thing if you bought that that there’s such a thing as an ex-spy if you believe that you’ll believe anything all right I don’t think there’s any such he might not be on the payroll there’s no such thing as an ex-spy you’re either a spy for life or you never were one all right in my opinion I’m exaggerating a little bit not much so now Trump has weaponized the justice
[54:38]
so now Trump has weaponized the justice system to look for the cause of the steel dossier and to find out how all this started at the same time Teresa may step down connect the dots if there was British interference was and Benny was somebody needs to fact-check be honest because I’m just spitballing here but wasn’t Theresa May in charge during the time that if there were actual British interference and obviously it was because Christopher Steele’s British wouldn’t wouldn’t that be cruel you know Teresa Mays administration and maybe she’s leaving at the right time somebody says that seems thin Scott yeah her stated reason is because it brexit and that would be plenty of reason enough but it’s mighty convenient mighty convenient so don’t be
[55:41]
convenient mighty convenient so don’t be surprised if a year from now common knowledge is that Great Britain interfered with our election and aren’t you glad that that Teresa may step down because she wouldn’t a blasted she would have been run that involves assuming that you know the investigation finds that she was aware of some kind of interference in the election she certainly had the motive all right make sure that I kid everything that and yeah I’ll remind you again that this can be seen in replay in an hour or so one or two hours usually over on YouTube you would google the phrase real coffee with Scott Adams and it will pop up and that is one of the ways that I monetize this and allows you to see this without any commercials but if you want to see it later with a different format you can see it on YouTube but you can also see here replay depending on which
[56:41]
here replay depending on which experience you like best I use whatever money I make from this to improve the improves the message basically improves the technology make sure you can see it on different platforms so should you either donate through the interface by win hub app which is my startups app somebody says Scott Adams try adderall I would love to try a how to roll that’s another that’s a story for another day I will tell you that in college I had a few experiences with whatever the adderall precursor was you know the earlier version of that and it does turn you into a super human if you don’t need a phrase ADHD is just speed now you should not get hooked on drugs there’s nothing good about that I don’t recommend it but I can see why people liked it all right I think that’s all I think this order so please go try
[57:48]
all I think this order so please go try blocking all of you are trolls block and block and block them and you will reduce their signal let me put this in start their terms if you’re worried that the social media platforms will put their finger on the scale I hate using that analogy but yeah there’s not another one that works as well if you’re worried that the social media platforms will bias the election you can bias the election - you can bias it by following people who agree with you and boosting their signal you can you can influence it by blocking the trolls and the people were just unpleasant I would not block credible people who just have a different opinion no reason to block them in fact it would help you it’s good to see different opinions but if they’re just unpleasant blocking on the first try never never interact with them and you will reduce their signal because there are interactions with you or part of their signal and part of it frankly is just to discourage you from
[58:49]
frankly is just to discourage you from using social media I I wonder sometimes what is the real point of the trolls you know the alleged media matters trolls etc who come after me every once awhile I wonder what is it they’re exactly trying to accomplish because they don’t say things that are really different information so much sometimes they do but mostly mostly they’re just coming over to be abusive and the best I can imagine is that they’re trying to discourage you from using social media they’re trying to essentially be so awful that you just don’t want to sign on anymore which would reduce your signal so don’t let them reduce it your signal don’t let their unpleasant in this do anything but get you a little dopamine hit for blocking them you we’ll learn that you’ll get a little bit of good feeling for blocking them because you know they don’t want that it’s the last thing they want is to get blocked so give them the last thing they want a block without an interaction and
[59:53]
want a block without an interaction and that’s all I have for you today go forth and have a good day