Episode 574 Scott Adams: Tucker Carlson Prevents War With Iran, Mayor Pete Imploding, DR Hysteria

Date: 2019-06-22 | Duration: 1:00:44

Topics

President Trump retweets another great Carpe Donktum meme “President Trump 4EVA” meme Famous people and FALSE claims of encounters with them Dominican Republic mysterious deaths…real or mass hysteria? Governmental lying to the public about military stuff Pete Buttigieg’s interaction with BLM Looking Presidential while wearing a “Fish Fry” event tee shirt Did Tucker Carlson’s significant influence…cancel the Iran strike? Erin Burnett questions the timing of the President Trump’s decision AMA session with listeners

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

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

## Transcript

[0:05]

I'm pumpin pumpin pumpin done pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom Poko hello miss boo hat miss boo boo hat and the rest of you who were streaming in here so many of you oh my god hundreds thousands here they come yes bitcoin is soaring bitcoin is soaring who told you that bitcoin would go up Eric Finland did he's got a very aggressive call on Bitcoin and it looks like the so called Finland effect is happening which is that Eric Finland makes a call on a crypto and it moves we've seen it over and over again alright but before we get to that let us do why you came here you know why you came here it's for a little thing called this simultaneous it and the way you do this is you grab a cup or a glass or a mug a Steiner a chalice or

[1:07]

a glass or a mug a Steiner a chalice or at Eckerd possibly a thermos maybe a flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and get ready for the dopamine hit to the day the part that gets you going the part that makes you just love the rest of your day here it comes the simultaneous app oh I hope you're making that noise at home ah so one update correction many of you know I did a little test to see if I could determine what the YouTube algorithm is for limiting or throttling things and it seemed to me that every time I mentioned the fine people hoax my my monetization dropped off a shelf and it seemed to be throttled but I did an illegitimate test which people have pointed out I did a small video on one

[2:09]

pointed out I did a small video on one topic just about the fine people hoax and I wanted to see if that would get D monetized and sure enough it was deeply throttled but here's your two interesting things as some smart people told me on Twitter it wasn't a good test because that video was short and the algorithm favors long videos because YouTube wants to keep you watching so just the fact that there was a short video and most of my videos are longer that should have produced an inappropriate analysis and perhaps it did so let us assume that we do not know what happened with the algorithm because that test was not very good but one interesting thing did happen before I started complaining about my videos being demonetised I noticed that the graph instead of going up like almost every other video was flat it was flat

[3:10]

every other video was flat it was flat for a day or so like nobody watched it and then after I complained not only did the curve go up but here's the interesting part the part that had been flat before disappeared so in other words the history of the traffic on that that particular video the history disappeared it was rewritten by a different history so after I called out that it was flatlined and that was impossible the flatline went away now am I mistaken possibly I could totally be mistaken I may be confusing this video with another one I may have seen something that was just a glitch I may have seen something that makes complete sense because of the way they count things and the timing of things possibly but the problem is once again I can't tell if I have free speech think about that do you have freedom of speech if you

[4:12]

do you have freedom of speech if you can't tell because I can't tell it's it's such a you know non transparent process of whose videos get attention who the algorithm slows down if you don't know you don't really know how free your speech is now I know I know freedom of speech has to do with the government it does not have to do with private companies does not have to do with social media but I think most of you are at least smart enough to know that free speech without the the tools of free speech isn't really free speech let me give you an example does a prisoner who is in prison in solitary confinement have freedom of speech well yes they can talk all they want inside their little cell but they don't have access in terms of tools or capability to actually take advantage of the freedom of speech so if a person is

[5:16]

the freedom of speech so if a person is shanab and it's sort of like being put in solitary confinement that person from a legal constitutional perspective has complete freedom of speech but nobody can hear it so you have to ask yourself is that the freedom of speech that the founders anticipated you know did they say yeah we want to we want you to have freedom of speech but we're going to take away all the capability and tools for anybody else to hear what you're saying I think if the founders understood the internet and and wrote a constitution in the days of social media they would have actually included some language to handle that I think they would have had to because they would have said to themselves well sure you have freedom of speech but nobody could hear you wait a minute that doesn't mean anything that is meaningless if you can't control the tools of communication if they're not

[6:18]

tools of communication if they're not open to people nobody has freedom of speech they have the freedom to talk to themselves the freedom to talk to yourself I don't know how much that's worth let's talk about something else most of you seen that President Trump tweeted carpe dong Tom's a meme that showed a fake Time magazine with you know Trump 2020 and then it went to Trump 2024 or Trump you know and it went through the years until it looked like Trump was going to stay in office forever it was brilliantly funny because it mocked one of the biggest criticisms of the president is that he literally intends to stay in office after the ends of you know whenever his terms are over now one way to deal with that would be to treat it seriously and say no do not be worried citizens I do not plan to try

[7:20]

be worried citizens I do not plan to try to become a dictator first of all it's impossible you know you couldn't get the military or anybody else to be in favor of it impossible second of all it wouldn't be to his best interest because retiring as a successful president is a really good deal trying to become a dictator and having everybody in your family killed in the first 10 minutes would be a bad deal I think the president can tell the difference between these two deals successful respected ex-president versus everyone in your family is murdered in an hour no they're not really close cuz yeah you know I mean seriously ask Don junior if he would expect to be alive I mean some McCobb it's a mob topic but somebody asked Don jr. John judor if you're president if your father tried to become a dictator what would you imagine would be your life expectancy I think

[8:21]

would be your life expectancy I think he'd say well first of all that's stupid that's never gonna happen and he'd be right that's stupid isn't never gonna happen but hypothetically my life expectancy would be about 25 minutes that's how long I can hide in the closet before the crowds rip me apart there's no there's no chance in the world I mean just none that the president is thinking in those terms of staying in office after his term so the best way to handle a ridiculous belief like that is to not treat it too seriously and by tweeting this meme he just he just put the joke to it and I haven't seen anybody complaining about this yet since the meme have you since the president tweeted this meme mocking people for thinking he was going to try to stay in office it perpetually as anybody talked about him not staying in office or staying in office I think he made the whole thing go away because it made it

[9:23]

whole thing go away because it made it look so ridiculous and he was willing to treat it as ridiculous even from the office of the president which I thought was great so congratulations carpe Noctem another home run piece of work there you all are aware of the newest accusation against the president in on the personal realm I'm not even going to mention it because well I'll tell you why first of all I employ the 20 year year rule the 20 year rule says this it says that if you did something more than 20 years ago or even if you just accused of something more than 20 years ago because it's hard to check I don't care I don't care it's 20 years ago and by the way I do apply this to all Democrats I applied it to Hillary Clinton when she was running and people were talking about things that may or may not have happened 20 years ago I said yeah don't tell me 20 year rule if

[10:26]

said yeah don't tell me 20 year rule if she hasn't done any of this stuff in 20 years I'm just not going to account for it but I must say something about this latest accusations I and I'm gonna make a distinction between things that are true and things that are credible because those could be different something could be not credible because the way the information is transmitted to you but still be true so whether something is true or not is not available to me but I will say that the latest accusation doesn't smell true it doesn't really look credible and some people are saying such as Alyssa Milano hey if there are 20 accusations about a thing why don't you take that seriously to which I say I'm pretty sure there are

[11:27]

to which I say I'm pretty sure there are 20 accusations they Hillary Clinton had people killed am I wrong about that aren't there something like I don't know what the number is but some some laughably large number of people that Hillary Clinton is supposed to have had killed over her career does the fact that that number is a big number mean that well maybe they're not all true but certainly she killed three or four people you know I mean I don't believe she killed 65 people but certainly three or four no it doesn't really mean that we don't live in a world where 65 accusations or 20 accusations actually means as much as you think it honor let me ask you this how many women in the United States have had a sex dream about president Trump I'm gonna wait for your comments how many do you believe I've had a dream about some kind of sexual interaction with President Trump

[12:38]

I'm gonna guess 30 million probably 30 million people have had a dream and the reason is that probably 30 million people had a sex dream about the last president and probably that many people had a sex dream about the president before that you got a lot of it's the most common I think it's the most common sex dream is sex with the president you don't correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's like one of the ones that just you just have all the time not me personally but a lot of people and so you've got that and then I also have the celebrity experience of how many times I've been accused of doing things to people that I've never met I've told you my story about my my crazy stalker in Canada who every few years she goes off her meds and calls people I work with you know business people and tells me how I've drew how I Drive up to Canada but now and then rifle through her apartment

[13:38]

and then rifle through her apartment hacker computer and and and do terrible things now have never met her but she tells a very credible story because the people who asked me about it they say oh we got this phone call and I say was it from a crazy Canadian woman that I've never met and they go well as a matter of fact yes so famous people and especially presidents have a lot of people imagining the things happen literally imagining the things happened if you've got 30 million people having dreams about you and hearing stories about things you may or may not have done to other people and some amount of those 30 million are literally mentally mentally troubled you would expect I would expect no fewer then let's say and if you know 300 some million citizens say you know 150

[14:41]

million citizens say you know 150 million adults let's say 75 million women thinking about the President and thinking about accusations about them under yeah I'm just giving rough numbers but if you have 75 million people who are primed to think about the President and Prime to think about these other accusations against them and of 75 million how many would you imagine believe that would happen believed it happened to them so if he started with 75 million women what would you predict would be the number of them who would have accusations about any president doesn't matter who it is and of 75 million I would guess one hundred hundred two hundred it may be a hundred thousand somebody said a hundred thousand I don't think that many but I I would expect no fewer than several hundred would legitimately come to believe that they had had a sexual

[15:42]

believe that they had had a sexual experience with the president I would think and a 75 million because that is 75 million you've got at least 10 million who were you know under professional care professional mental care and by the way I'm not saying anything about the latest accuser so this has nothing to do with her personally I'm just talking generally so anyway you should expect that any president should have literally hundreds of people who actually believed that they had an account an encounter with that president if we had a female president you should you should believe that there will be hundreds of American men who believe they had some kind of encounter with that person who didn't dude how many people believe they've had personal interactions with me who I've never met a lot and and I know that because people say things such as just the other day somebody said yeah my friend was talking about how you you did this with that and you know when you went to school with

[16:42]

you know when you went to school with them and I'll say where'd your friend go to school and they'll say I don't Montana or whatever and I'll say nope didn't go to school in Montana they're there I even in my case I've probably heard I think this is fair to say I think I've heard hundreds of stories hundreds this is just me I've heard hundreds of stories about people who claim they had an encounter with me in a bar and some City I've never been to in school that I didn't go to in a college I didn't go to hundreds and that's just about me and they actually have told their friends these stories about encounters they had with me so for example especially in the 90s when Dilbert was really hot there was I have a an imposter who would say say he was me and go to bars and you know at least at least one woman emailed me to tell me about it and thought that she'd had an

[17:44]

about it and thought that she'd had an encounter with me and I said where this happened and she was like well it was some place I'd never been and obviously I would have remembered the encounter but it didn't happen so very very common anyway let's talk about something else Dominican Republic I was waiting a little while on this story because first of all I don't usually care too much about the knots nothing I don't care I don't I don't use it as material for the periscopes of tragedies and deaths and car accidents and fires and stuff like that it's it's not what I can add much value to but the Dominican Republic thing has now entered my domain mass hysteria so I've made the claim that because I'm a trained persuader I've studied hypnosis I'm a hypnotist and I've studied persuasion all my life that I have a little bit better insight to identify a mass hysteria now I identified and so far I think I'm right that the so

[18:45]

so far I think I'm right that the so called sonic weapon used on our embassies in Cuba and somewhere else Canada maybe I said that was mass hysteria there might actually be some damage to people from something but the idea that there was a sonic weapon I said was mass hysteria and I predicted we would never you know get solid evidence of such a weapon and sure enough much time is going by and there's no solid evidence of such a weapon so I think I could claim success without 100% confidence but probable success on that prediction the Dominican Republic appears very much to be mass hysteria what we know is that the politicians in the Dominican Republic are saying hey there's no story here all of those deaths had a cause there and I think they're claiming that they're not necessarily unusual because there are a lot of people who visit and some people are gonna die and some people are gonna

[19:47]

are gonna die and some people are gonna die young some people you know etc so here's my best I'm gonna give you my best prediction about Dominican Republic my guess is that some people died of some kind of environmental poisoning and environmental in this case could be some alcohol they had that was bad could be something they were exposed to otherwise etc so I think the odds that some people had some kind of legitimate accident bad booze bad something pretty high the odds that there's some kind of widespread problem is pretty low so I separate the sexes the yeah apparently people are saying that the shooter of David Ortiz was a mistaken identity and people are saying that can't be how would anybody have a mistaken identity of somebody so well known well first of

[20:48]

of somebody so well known well first of all if you saw the video of the shooting there's actually a surveillance video of the shooting he was shot in the back so I don't know how easy it is to recognize somebody from behind you know I can't imagine that that's that would be something you couldn't make a mistake at yeah so I would say it's at least it's at least seriously possible that it was accident that it was mistaken identity I wouldn't say that's confirmed by any means and you know it's probably slightly more chance that that was the case but I wouldn't take anybody's word for it so that's my ruling there may be a few real deaths and it would be good to know exactly what happened but probably it's some combination of coincidence and mass hysteria driving the Dominican Republic stuff so here's a prediction so remember I told you you could ignore people who predict the past that's not a thing and you

[21:50]

the past that's not a thing and you should ignore anybody who gives you opinions that can't form some kind of a prediction so here's my prediction we will not discover with any amount of research and any amount of time that goes by we will not discover a large let's say a conspiracy to kill lots of people we will not discover that any person or group was behind it and that we might discover that there were some tainted specific poisonings that happened but that other people were more coincidental probably more coincidental deaths all right let's talk about something else Iran if you saw my initial periscope on this here's some things I said that should make you think that that I'm spooky so what I said was you should not assume that that drone

[22:51]

you should not assume that that drone that was shot down was in international airspace and a lot of people say well we know exactly where the drone was because even a hobby drone will draw a map for you of exactly where it was so obviously this high-tech drone we do know exactly where it was but what I said was maybe in this and for some reason this possibility had not been discussed by anybody had seen yet I said maybe both Iran and the United States are a little bit right meaning that maybe it was over Iran's airspace for a short time and maybe by the time they got around to shooting it down it left their airspace so I said that's the possibility and now it turns out that at least some reporting for The New York Times unconfirmed suggests that maybe we weren't so sure where our drone was we

[23:51]

weren't so sure where our drone was we were so sure where it was what so what now
so that should scare you because I'm sure we do know where it was so that suggests that maybe somebody was either not telling the president the full story or that the administration has decided to let's say lie to the publics now let me tell you about something about lying to the public about military action it's acceptable let me say that again if your government lies to you about military assets you know where we were and why we were and what we did in a military sense that is acceptable verax the responsibility of the government is not to tell me the truth about military stuff I don't want to know their secrets I don't want to know

[24:52]

know their secrets I don't want to know their plans I don't know I don't want to know what they tried that didn't work I don't want to know those and if it helps our cause militarily I want them to lie to me are we all in the same page if the choice is telling the citizens the truth and I'm talking about the short term in the long term the truth comes out and I think that's good you know it's good that we eventually find out what happened that part I'm very I'm very sure I want to eventually know what happened but in the short term where its strategic the things our president tells us you know is forming public opinion that public opinion is being monitored by Iran Iran cares what the public of the United States thinks because that that determines what the president can do and get away with so it's all part of the military option so when your president tells you something like the you know the drone was over this

[25:53]

you know the drone was over this airspace or the reason I did or did not attack is this or that reason what you should say to yourself is sure okay and then you should not take you seriously because it's not meant to convey to you accurate information you're not you are not part of a process in which well-meaning people are trying to give you the most accurate information they have nobody's trying to do that and if they did try to do that you should fire them immediately because their primary obligation this keeps the country safe if the way to do that is to shade some information then please shade some information right it's not it's not an accident that we have a CIA etc whose job it is to conceal and lie and etc the reason we do that is because it works or the other thing that I suggested was

[26:53]

the other thing that I suggested was that there might have been more than one aircraft you didn't hear anybody else say that right I think I was the first person who said what if there were two aircraft what if they what if they maybe we're aiming at one or confused it with the other one something like that and then it turns out that Iran is claiming and maybe there's some confirmation of this but at least they're claiming that there was a manned aircraft that may have violated their international territory now could it be that they confused the aircraft yeah probably not but could it be that they thought about shooting the one that was manned over their territory and said you know it would be better is to shoot the unmanned one that's you know was close to our territory or was in our territory for a little while or isn't in our territory but we can complain about the one that was while we're shooting down the one that wasn't now I don't know we'll

[27:54]

that wasn't now I don't know we'll probably never know the truth of where these aircraft were maybe someday we will but not in the short term and so my speculation that we should not be sure where our aircraft was because we should not expect nor shall we ask our government to be honest with us on these details on military things in the short term in the long term I do want to know I think that's important all right so I'm gonna claim credit for being the first person who's speculated that we don't necessarily know where that drone was and it might have been part of the story and that there might have been more than one aircraft who were part of the same story and both seem to be the case all right let's talk about have you all seen the video of Pete Buddha jej trying to talk to some black lives matter people who are complaining about I guess there was a african-american man killed by a white police officer and there's some anger over that I don't

[28:56]

there's some anger over that I don't know the details but you really have to see that you have to see that to know that Peabody jej will not be your president it is trizzie week because first of all I don't I don't understand this part because Budaj edge is an interesting person he knows how to operate in public and and be interesting and he's standing there in front of a bunch of african-american protesters on this topic and he's reading a prepared statement like he doesn't want to be there he's really like and you know feel bad about and blah blah blah and and I thought what is going on here he looks like he doesn't want to be here he looks like he doesn't care he looks like he's lost all his energy and then it got worse because they were asking him you know you know

[29:58]

they were asking him you know you know does he care about black lives do you think they matter and of course he said yes but then one of the protesters shouted at him and said you know what something like why do you expect our vote and booed a judge for reasons I don't quite understand said to her I'm not asking for your vote now I think he meant something clever like I think that whatever he was thinking he was communicating was not whatever came out of his mouth because if you're running for president and there's an African American citizen standing in front of you saying that you're not doing something to get her vote and you say did that person on camera while everybody's watching I didn't ask for your vote or I'm not asking for your vote well maybe that meant something maybe he meant that specific person he wasn't asking for a vote I mean whatever he meant it didn't come out right

[30:59]

he meant it didn't come out right now I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt right because um we all know his academic qualifications so you know let me say if he and I did an IQ test I'm pretty sure he would you know beat me on that IQ test pretty badly but it looked dumb and it certainly was avoidable and I think it completely ended any chance he has that clip makes it impossible to imagine him negotiating with Putin or any strong leader it makes it impossible to see him as a president really I think it ended his campaign or at least you know the the replaying of it would end his campaign if he ever rose enough in the polls for people to even care about it all right so I think he's out so I'm gonna count Buddha jej his odds of being president

[31:59]

president I just went 2-0 completely zero he should he should drop out now he has no chance did you see the video of the Democrats I guess 21 of them showed up at this fish fry event and they all had these terrible t-shirts on with who was the name of the Democrat leader who's who organized it so here's Clyburn is it is a name was on the shirt and somebody on Twitter said if you're running for president president Clyburn if you're running for president never wear a t-shirt now when you first hear that you say to yourself oh why not yeah everybody wears a t-shirt wouldn't that make you like a you know just like the people wouldn't that be good and then you see the picture of these 21 Democrats on stage posing for the

[33:01]

Democrats on stage posing for the cameras wearing these t-shirts and I gotta say if you're running for president never wear a t-shirt okay so they all look bad in t-shirts none of them look serious none of them look presidential a lot of the t-shirts didn't fit so some of them had you know too large too small all of the t-shirts that had the name of the other kin of the other person on it Clyburn i think that's some smaller you know some kind of message that you couldn't see but
it was a terrible visual and burning got the worst of it because people were so focused on Bernie because he when you when you see him on stage it was all the younger more photogenic Democrats he just doesn't look good he looks too old too angry just he just just doesn't look like he could be your president ever so I think Bernie I would say Bernie's odds

[34:03]

I think Bernie I would say Bernie's odds of being president are close to zero he's down in the 5% range I would say
here's the best story of the day CNN's Erin Burnett was speculating wondering if one of the reasons that President Trump did not attack Iran even though it seems that at least the reporting says I don't know if this is true but the reporting says that Bouldin and Pompeyo were in favor of the strike striking Iran but then the president didn't do it and Erin Burnett was speculating she wonders if the reason was because Fox News the Fox News is Tucker Carlson were so against it what do you think most of you probably saw Tucker Carlson show and

[35:05]

you probably saw Tucker Carlson show and shows because he's been talking about it for a few days in which he is absolutely solidly against starting a war with Iran do you think that Tucker Carlson's absolute solid you know disagreement with a with a killing war with Iran do you think that that made a difference well here's my opinion we don't know if it made a difference because what we don't know is if the President had reasons enough to not do the attack and if a hundred people 150 people were gonna die that is reason enough it was a good reason if the president found out there was some question about where the drone was well that would be a good reason to if the president thought let's scare them but I don't really intend to attack I'm just gonna make it really look like I am because this helps me to negotiate later well then dr. Carlson

[36:07]

negotiate later well then dr. Carlson would not be important to the decision because in that scenario the president already decided and we just found out later but I don't believe the president could have attacked Iran so let let's say hypothetically those other reasons weren't good enough and he still wanted to do it I actually don't think the president could have attacked Iran without Tucker Carlson's approval well I say approval and I don't mean that in the sense that the president needs approval from anybody on television but the president does require public support for a military action that's killing people in other places Tucker I think made it impossible for the president to get some kind of strong enough military support so the weirdest thing about our democracy slash Republic

[37:08]

thing about our democracy slash Republic slash social media is actually running things is that Tucker being unambiguously against war and make it clear making it clear yeah you know he didn't say this directly but I don't think he needed to say it directly I think Tucker made it clear then if the president attacked Iran he would take out the president now when I say take out the president what I mean is he has such a prominent voice on the most important Network for the people who are the supporters of the president if he decided to hammer the president every day before starting war there's no way there's no way president Trump could get reelected if if Tucker Carlson turned on him for such a good reason so first of all let's acknowledge it's not just about Tucker Carlson's personal opinion Tucker Carlson represents by you know accidentally by

[38:09]

represents by you know accidentally by he represents a very large opinion in the conservative world if he had been part of let's say hey I love the president and everything he does so even if I don't like this action against Iran I'm gonna support it anyway because you know I'm on the team if he had done something like that it would give the president cover to do whatever he thought he needed to do militarily because he came down so strongly against it and it didn't look like there was ever going to be any reason good enough it wouldn't have mattered I think to Tucker and this is just my own speculation I don't think it would have mattered to him if the administration had to offer some BS reason why we had to do it because he seemed to stake out a territory which is it doesn't work ever this attacking other countries never works so I don't care about your reason because it it wasn't what's the point of

[39:13]

because it it wasn't what's the point of having a reason to do something that never works how could it ever it make sense to say well I know it never works but we're going to do it because we have a good reason that would be completely nonsense so you don't even need to listen to the administration's reason because there is no reason to do something that never works there's no reason for that so you have this weird situation where I don't believe that Tucker stopped the attack because I think there are probably other reasons that were good enough but I do believe that he presents a very valuable public service and I don't think you can minimize that that that Tucker Carlson is legitimately and somewhat you know it's an accident of of history that he's in the position he has you know that yes the provenance he has the eight o'clock spot you know the most prominent spot I don't think it's just

[40:17]

prominent spot I don't think it's just an amazing thing that he's in a position where he can probably stop an optional war now I don't think Tucker could stop a war if the homeland were attacked right and you know I don't have any reason to think he would try to so if we had to attack you know we had a real reason it was defensive whatever you know that's a different story but for Oh an optional war and I ran at this point anyway is certainly in the optional category we don't have to we just think we have reasons or some people think they have reasons Tucker is actually in a position to stop that war think about that I mean just think about that that's amazing and you'd have to say that as a patriot and I'm sure he would call himself a patriot I think I've heard him say that and most of us would damned he did some

[41:17]

and most of us would damned he did some good work this week like what did you do this week how was your week what did you do this week that protected the entire world I didn't do much I don't think I did anything to protect the world this week talk to Carlson Ted tucker carlson protected the whole world this week and and it sounds funny when i say it because you know it's hard to it's hard to imagine that you know one strong voice would have that kind of effect but if you've got the eight o'clock spot on Fox and president Trump is your president he doesn't really have the option of doing an optional war without the main voices on on Fox and again Hannity would be the same situation right if Hannity wanted to stop an optional war pretty sure he could do it I don't know if there's anybody else on Fox who could do that the other shows the other

[42:22]

could do that the other shows the other shows on Fox are either you know straight news or they are you know more entertainment opinions you know if you look at the five for example it's very influential but it's it's more entertainment splash you know and it's entertainment opinion and has a little less weight I think than a Hannity or or Tucker Carlson anyway one of the things that Erin Burnett was questioning is the timeline of the Iranian story so at one point the president said that he stopped the attack ten minutes before it happened and in another story he said they came to me thirty minutes before the attack and gave me some information about you know casualties and then I stopped the attack so Erin is pointing out Erin Burnett that there's a discrepancy in the story all right was

[43:22]

discrepancy in the story all right was it ten minutes before the attack or was it thirty minutes before the attack to which I say are you kidding me first of all there's not really a difference between thirty minutes and ten minutes in the telling of this particular story ooh right because first of all the plains were not in the air and the president is not making that claim it was 30 minutes or 10 minutes before the decision was supposed to be made doesn't matter if it was 10 minutes before the decision was made or 30 minutes before the decision was to made to be made if you're the if he's the commander in chief does that deadline mean much to you not really because he could have said give me another half hour right and they would have said okay you know we can't wait forever but I'll give you another half hour so that 10 minutes for 30 minutes doesn't make any difference but first but more importantly there was no discrepancy because what he said was they came to me 30 minutes before and

[44:24]

they came to me 30 minutes before and then I asked about some questions they answered some questions and then separately he said he called it off 10 minutes before the attack those are the same story they came to you 30 minutes early you talked and then 10 minutes before the attack you called it off that gives you 20 minutes to talk about it that's the same story as that they came to me 30 minutes before we talked about it and when it was 10 minutes left which means the 20 minutes of talking happened I called it off that's a discrepancy doesn't sound like all right I put on my headphones because I'm gonna invite some people to ask me some questions once you ask me some questions partly because the news is so darn quiet lately okay a lot of quiet news so once you ask you

[45:25]

of quiet news so once you ask you questions for the benefit of the the other people who are listening to this they probably don't want to hear a long background so if you can kind of get to this get to the question part quickly people would like that and I know you might want to say some nice things about anything I've done but look just keep it to the question we'll keep it tight all right let me see you we're gonna bring on here let's bring on mark mark are you there I can hear you do you have a question for me yeah on the issue of persuasion for the next mega thing what would you think about let America flourish and then you've got a humor hashtag of LAF oh let America flourish because LAF is a good acronym well first of all I would not make a decision based

[46:25]

of all I would not make a decision based on the acronym because in my in my opinion mega was the worst act of an acronym ever because it sounds like a maggot and and of course you know the the critics made that case and yet the worst acronym ever but it's still the best slogan of all time so so you could certainly have a bad actor Tim in a gray slogan because mega was exactly that I would not have yeah somebody said flourish is too flowery correct you would not use the word flourish in any kind of a campaign slogan because it sounds it sounds you know I don't have to tell you it just sounds like sounds like you don't have the common touch thank you thank you for that all right all right let's take another question let's go to Debra Debra are you there I can what's your question Debra a few

[47:29]

I can what's your question Debra a few days ago you talked about how companies in the United States really couldn't go to China anymore and companies are pulling out of China and so that means they've got to go other places now there's one country that is pretty much uncharted territory and if the conditions were right what would you think about there being economic development in North Korea well I'm all in favor of that you know the president is wisely one of the things he wisely does is he says you know I will do terrible things to you but if you play well with us I will do great things for you for your economy so that's the proposition to North Korea so anything that we could do that would be good for potential North Korean development should they play well with the nuclear situation is good but I don't see any way that businesses could easily pull enough china and go to North Korea North Korea wouldn't have the

[48:29]

Korea North Korea wouldn't have the infrastructure of this stability etc so I don't see I don't see Apple moving its its resources or production to North Korea just be too dangerous but thanks for the questions all right let's take another question by the way I always think what a mullah would be the the obvious place for that let's go to Scott Scott who disappeared all right Scott disappeared as soon as I selected him let's go to James James coming to assume James can you hear me yes James you have a question oh you know how DC works but but the thing is people say about America you know this one Afghanistan you rock right right the thing is it's um asymmetrical warfare is America

[49:31]

um asymmetrical warfare is America doomed to lose every war from now since they fight as you know you could say the good guy they don't fight like it one or two used to fire blind civilians and all that is any good Western country doomed to lose Wars now yes yes we will the United States will in some sense probably lose every war from now on in the same sense that every large country will probably lose every war from now on and the reason is that it's too easy to get weapons to insurgents and there's always some insurgent who wants to use those weapons especially as drones come online so between IAD and drones that are basically flying IEDs it will it will never pay to start a war so when I say will never win another war certainly we can crush a government we can crush their standing army we can take it down from a big army to a small army we might be able to

[50:32]

to a small army we might be able to destroy their nuclear capabilities so there are lots of things we can destroy but we will hurt ourselves so much that it will never be worth it the Iraq example being a perfect one so I think that the days of just winning a war and then you know it's like the end of World War two where Japan and Germany say okay okay we give up let's make this a clean clean surrender we'll get everybody on board if you'll help us rebuild our country we can all be friends again I don't know if that will ever see that again so I think the days of winning wars in other people's territory are coming to a close and something that navall said on Twitter the other day I think it put it in the perfect perspective which is imagine there's something like Moore's law which applied to you know microchip processing power this says that you know doubles every

[51:32]

this says that you know doubles every whatever years imagine that applied to drones we are very close to the point where any enemy who can get drones can pretty much attack back anybody so just the whole concept of wars where you're killing people are just going to become just not worth doing anymore there may be countries that you have to leave there may be countries we have to bomb some assets there may be countries where you just have to do a change of leadership for some reason but you're not going to like conquer that country and fix it I don't think that I think those days are over but thanks for the question good question Kerry much let's take another one do do let's do Kevin Kevin looks like he has a good question Kevin come to us looks like a little process Oh Kevin are you there good morning you have a question premise

[52:36]

good morning you have a question premise that warming is back I accept the premise that that is a stupid question now I'm not calling you stupid I'm calling the question stupid because it's the most common question on the topic so the question if you if you didn't hear it is do I accept the premise that warming is bad depends are you sunbathing or are you a lobster if your Lobster warming is very bad because you just got boiled to death if your tanning in the Sun well isn't a good that it's warm I would hate to be sunbathing on a cold day so warm is not something that's good or bad warm as some level is amazing warm as some level will fry you to death so if we're asking probably the I like to call out the worst opinions on climate change the worst opinions on climate change probably the top one is that warming is good that's probably the top dumbest opinion about climate change because

[53:37]

opinion about climate change because some warming is of course bad now the question is what would we get to that level where of course is bad and to get there would we pass through a level where it's actually better you know in order to get to the point where the whole the whole let's say that the climate and the ecosystem falls apart do you only get there by going through a period where hey it's really nice weather because right now I could tell you the weather in California where I live in June has never been better in my entire adult life that I've lived here this is the best perfect weather it's like 70s and 80s I mean it's amazing and maybe we pass through the warmer and better before we get to warmer and dad so I'm not saying that warmer and all dead is going to happen I'm saying that the question is not the right question because some warming of course is too bad some warming probably good probably helps all right thanks for the

[54:37]

probably helps all right thanks for the question you're welcome
all right let's go to I want to pick a woman just to keep things fair here all right Jill I can hear you you notice that are you Jill okay that's right Mike my question was related to climate change again it's can a country actually be a wealthy country if they don't burn fossil fuels or they don't consume energy can the country be wealthy if they don't use fossil fuels well there may be a time when that's true I well what about France its power with nuclear at the moment they do burn a lot of energy so there's well they're trying to get away with it but 50 percent of their electrical production is there the highest country in the world in terms of nuclear power so suppose they went from 50 to a

[55:38]

so suppose they went from 50 to a hundred percent wouldn't you say that there's a wouldn't you say that that's that's the situation in which that's true I've recently ran a correlation was on energy used through all the CIA Factbook data and it turns out that the correlation between fossil fuel use and energy use is 98.7 percent which I thought was really funny I ran that through all the list of countries and it turned out that they were all up there if you're a wealthy country you have to burn fossil fuels in terms of the periscopes I would say in our current world world that's true in the world that we're creating that will not be true because it would be easy to imagine for example let's take a small country you know I don't know Monaco or some some small country like let you decide where all they need is one or two nuclear plants and they basically have

[56:39]

nuclear plants and they basically have the cheapest electricity of any country and I can imagine looks like we've got some issues going on all right I fixed that technical issue so I think we can get to the point where yes you could you could have a successful economy without burning carbon if you had nuclear and if you had green energy we're not there but we could definitely get there all right thank you
all right let's see if I I prefer oh we got somebody running for Congress here let's see if this works James Rawdon office James caller can you hear me okay and long clear yeah yes I can are you running for Congress yes I am sir and where are you running for Congress Adams we're currently in the 4-3 against

[57:40]

Adams we're currently in the 4-3 against a Harley Ruda but I'm about to make a big announcement first wicked lot i that will probably be good news for you so stand by okay which kind of leads into my next question could you give me your opinion of Congressman and my opinion of Adams chef well he's obviously a you know team player you know the people who are team players and it doesn't matter which side you're off the team players can't be taken seriously meaning that they're there they're playing for the win they're not playing for the country they're not they're not trying to be honest they're not trying to be straight with the public so apparently he's he's very effective because he's on TV all the time and he he pushed the you know the Russia collusion hoax better than anybody so he's he's certainly effective but it's

[58:41]

he's he's certainly effective but it's hard to respect him does that answer your question
maybe we lost you all right let's take another color about Angela Angela Angela are you there a little bit lighter this morning with your permission I would love for you to do your best in persuasion to get the president to live tweet during the candidate debate next week and if we can't get him and we get you by pleading well the president has already announced he's going to live tweet the debates I thought that's a done deal I did not think it was a done deal I couldn't but it was one of those floating the trial balloons oh well yeah

[59:42]

floating the trial balloons oh well yeah maybe but it's hard to imagine him resisting isn't it yeah absolutely because you know he's gonna be paying attention to it and so I can't in a million I mean it's impossible for me to imagine he would resist the opportunity to upstage them with his tweets because his tweets we could be way better than whatever the debate is so yeah I would say that persuasion would be unnecessary what was the second part of that question well I was hoping that we could also convince you to do the same oh sure yes I will commit to you that unless I have something going on socially that I will do some live tweeting the Democratic debates I'll commit commit to that unless something comes up all right that's fine just wanted to get us back in the left zone a little bit all right well I'll definitely help you there okay I'm gonna call call it a day and we'll talk to you tomorrow