Episode 576 Scott Adams: Middle East Peace, Project Veritas, Trump = JFK, Advice for Kamala Harris

Date: 2019-06-24 | Duration: 49:18

Topics

Senior Google Executive, Jen Gennai and Project Veritas Google is a Gatekeeper of our reality Should an algorithm ever be put on trial? The point where algorithms program themselves is almost here NBA will no longer call team owners…”owners” Bernie’s surprisingly strong plan to tax wall street for free everything It MIGHT actually work Top Saudi diplomat says the “age of war with Israel is over” Palestinians reject Jared Kushner peace plan They rejected $50 Billion…on principal? That’s just stupid Knitting site Ravelry, bans Trump discussions as white supremacy Joel Pollack’s article comparing JFK and President Trump Fixing Kamala’s biggest problem, her unconfident laugh and smile it’s subordinate, submissive, NOT Presidential

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]

bump bump bump hey Dale come on in here xeno keen good to see you where are the rest of you hey where is everybody come on come on hurry up we've gotta have some coffee there's so many things to talk about get in here come on gather round do you have your beverage because you know what time it is it's time for coffee with Scott Adams Sean be nice be nice all right if you've got a cup or a glass or a mug maybe a Steiner a chalice or tankard if you have some kind of a thermos or a flask possibly a vessel of any kind and you filled it with your favorite liquid then you're ready for that intense pleasure that I call the simultaneous step sip sip I call it the simultaneous sip not step there's no such thing as a simultaneous step don't do that

[1:06]

simultaneous step don't do that do the simultaneous sip it starts now Oh
shudder so good so good to see all of you you make my morning better all the time
no no scaredy-cat USA that's a funny name all right let's talk about all the funny stories of the day number one my video was it yesterday my video for June 22nd was instantly demonetized I think was the 22nd so you've been watching me for a while would you agree as far as I know I've never so I've got 500 some videos right so I've got over 500 videos those of you who've watched pretty much every one of them would you agree that I've never

[2:07]

them would you agree that I've never said anything not even close that would be in sort of a term servus problem a banning situation would you agree that I've never said anything that was close to the line right and I'm demonetised consistently so here's the thing I was looking at my YouTube analytics and it's got little messages of encouragement one of your videos do well it says so really let me say this the YouTube interface and ecosystem is really well made you know from an engineering perspective it's it's just brilliant work and one of the things they do is they complement you if your video is doing well you know the Machine complements you so the machine is telling me that I'm doing great on my views subscriber interest is high I'm killing my numbers my I'm putting on

[3:10]

killing my numbers my I'm putting on subscribers like crazy my my watch time is up all my stats are up except for monetization which is down so interest is up I have violated no rules not even close because I'm literally literally running sort of the long term experiment to see if I stay way away from any lines that would be controversial if I still get D monetized and the answer is yes I get I get be monetized like crazy apparently because of topics which leads us into project Veritas video that came out today and what it shows is a Google employee who seems to be in the know talking about their algorithm and their AI etc with some troubling quotes

[4:10]

AI etc with some troubling quotes troubling quotes but here's the problem the troubling quotes are not quite as clear as you'd want them to be so for example the the Google employee I think she'd be an executive so I think she's in management somehow said that they want to quote prevent another Trump situation and they also talked about if they've done things differently in 2016 would she ask would the result of been different she also said let's see let's see if I can find that one find some actual quotes here that are damning so this is from jinan janae so her name is Google executive and her name is Jen

[5:11]

executive and her name is Jen janae and she says quote we all got screwed over in 2060 and again it wasn't just us it was the people got screwed over the news media got screwed over like everybody goes food overs were rapidly been like happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again prevent what prevent it from happening prevent what from happening again we're also training our algorithms like if 2016 happened again would we have with the outcome be different so the first thing she says is that everybody got screwed now is she saying that the people on the left got screwed or the people on the right guy screwed neither she's saying everybody got screwed so is it damning to say that everybody got a bad results meaning that there was something something that made everybody unhappy because if she was talking about

[6:14]

unhappy because if she was talking about the fact that they were you know that the social media had waited one way the other left or right half of the country would have been happy but she's talking about whatever she's talking about is something that would make she says everybody unhappy everybody got screwed the people got screw the news media Google does screwed so what is she talking about there would mean there everybody got screwed and the answer is I don't know I don't know what that means so is she saying there's something unbiased happened and they want to make it biased next time well she's now saying that so I would say if the way it's expressed here and the context is given makes you say whoa you know all my flags are up this is terrible why are you saying that and then I look at it and I say but I don't know exactly what she means and if I don't know what she means I'm gonna withhold my judgment but she says a lot

[7:15]

withhold my judgment but she says a lot more so this mics nerd up
she says elizabeth warren is saying we should break up Google and like I love her but she's very misguided like that will not make it better it'll make it worse because all of these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do meaning Google will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation it's like a small company cannot do that so she's saying that Google could prevent the next Trump situation but smaller companies perhaps could not and so all of you just said are you kidding she just admitted she wants to prevent another Trump from getting elected that's why you just thought right when I read that did you think wow she just said indirect terms she doesn't want Trump to get reelected again and they can change it with her AI is that why you heard it's not what she said it's not what she said that's what

[8:20]

said it's not what she said that's what the headlines say that's what Twitter says but it's not what she says she calls it a Trump situation what's that mean why is the Trump situation well I think the Trump situation could be Trump got elected and that's the way most people are interpreting it but that's not necessarily what it means it could be Russia ransom control ads and it took him too long to find them right if what she's talking about is finding foreign interference or finding trolls etc and that's the reason that she thinks maybe Trump was helped is that evil would it be evil to prevent a Trump situation which for the left seems to be a Trump situation is that Russia helps Trump get elected would it be inappropriate for Google to say we'd like to prevent that again that wouldn't be inappropriate in fact

[9:20]

that wouldn't be inappropriate in fact every every Republican would be in favor of that I'm watching I'm watching the rebellion in the comments so trust me I see what you're saying and you're resisting my interpretation right but I'm not giving you an interpretation I'm telling you that what you have could be interpreted two ways so I'm not telling you to interpret it the other way I'm telling the you that what we have has two movies and they're both supported by the facts says Scott Quinn it did you all right so here's the thing before you make up your mind on this you need to hear what Jen chieh says in response or Google says on her behalf I don't know if she'll be able to respond because Google lawyers would say you know let us respond perhaps but until you hear her version of what she meant you don't know

[10:22]

version of what she meant you don't know anything yet you don't know anything until you hear her version how many times have you watched your side whatever your side is you know the people on both sides here but how many times have you heard your side taken out of context in the past three years a lot right a lot in fact it's more common than being taken in context the most common thing in politics is to be taken out of context so all of these statements look when they're taken out of context is very very damning and I hear you I hear you if somebody said we've got to fix this Trump situation BAM
BAM red flag red flag red flag rich like rich like sets off all of your alarms even shut it should set off all of your alarms these words are very scary words and and in other parts they're saying quite directly they're saying directly that they can control

[11:24]

saying directly that they can control what people are seeing but she does talk about fairness what's that mean well that's a problem because fairness is an opinion there's no such thing as fairness the the universe does not give you fairness fairness is perfect is only subjective completely subjective so if you have Google working on getting more fairness that's a problem because that's their opinion of fairness fairness is not a thing you could measure with any kind of reliability so I would say we've got a major problem and the major problem is that our primary will say gatekeeper to reality Google in this this case but also the other social media the gatekeepers to reality are not credible that's the problem the the

[12:27]

credible that's the problem the the problem that we can't determine is how unfair they are because partly that's an opinion and partly we don't have enough information so we can't see all the ins and outs so we can't see what they're doing do we have reason to think that this is a dangerous situation absolutely does it threaten the integrity of our entire Republic absolutely because it reduces credibility when I see this project Veritas stuff and I see that I see that Google can manipulate the results is talking about manipulating the results knows how to manipulate the results and says they want more fairness next time which is purely subjective is that a problem you can live with nope no you can't live with that right so here's the thing no matter what you think of Project Veritas whether this is a if you think this is a smoking gun

[13:30]

a if you think this is a smoking gun where they've admitted their that they're rigging the system or even if you think it's not a smoking gun it's exactly the same do you get that it doesn't matter how you interpreted this if you interpreted it as a clean admission that they're manipulating and trying to keep Trump from being elected well that's bad but it's just as bad if none of that's true it's just as bad because if all they're doing is saying yes we can change the election results we're going to change the election results by how we change the algorithm and we're going for what we consider fair that's the end of the story that's all you need to know because those facts alone without the smoking gun of admission of what they've done or plans to do without that it's a hundred percent bad because it takes all credibility under the system and it

[14:31]

credibility under the system and it shows you that your vote is either programmed by the system or doesn't matter so I push again that the government needs to take some steps to get a handle on this for the benefit of the people short of telling us what the algorithms are I don't think the public should see the algorithms because then we would game them you know we try to try to figure out we used to you know manipulate the system so I think there does need to be some kind of proprietary element to the algorithm for practical reasons but I think maybe a special judge or a special social media court could be in charge let me give you a new framework for this is artificial intelligence a is artificial intelligence not the kind we have yet but the kind it's becoming you know because it'll get better in a better over time at what point would we need a court for

[15:31]

court for official intelligence just blew your mind because we have human courts to judge guilt for human beings we do not have a court to judge guilt for animals because animals are not intelligent they don't make decisions etc they don't they're not guilty per se but what about an AI and AI could actually commit a crime and know it was doing it it could know it was a crime and do it anyway should we have some day a court a human court to try algorithms should an algorithm ever be put on trial because the human creates the algorithm and so you'd say no no it's not the algorithm it's the human but aren't we approaching a point where the algorithm will program itself meaning that will create algorithms that can look at the environment and make its own decisions

[16:33]

environment and make its own decisions about how to change things and at some point will humans lose the ability to know where it will all end up because if humans don't even know where it's all going to end up that's sort of like the AI has free will at least as much as humans do and if that's the case if that's the case maybe we need a court special court but in the in the short run I think we need a special judge to look at the algorithms to protect the protect the country all right let's talk about Bernie Sanders oh Linda let's talk about the NBA so the NBA has decided that they will no longer call the people who own the team's owners so they don't want to call the NBA team owners owners anymore because most of their employees

[17:36]

anymore because most of their employees are black and so you don't want to have a company where most of the employees are black and the common name of the team owner is owner now your first impression of that is come on come on that's too much political correctness to which I say no it's not no it's not that's not too much political correctness I I'm completely in favor of that I I expect a hundred percent disagreement on this here's my standard there are things which are silly and there are things which are important what we call things is usually in the silly category right it doesn't matter what we call it that's not important but how would you like it how would you like to be a black athlete on the team where your boss is called your owner I
don't know I don't think it's completely unreasonable to suggest there might be a

[18:38]

unreasonable to suggest there might be a better word for it I don't think anybody should go to jail if they use the wrong word I don't think it should be a thing I don't think anybody should be ostracized if they say owner instead of they want to call them governors I guess but I've been favor of it I think that's that's a low cost you know it's it's well-intentioned well I'm ok with that but I acknowledge that most of you think it's silly all right Bernie Sanders has a plan to eliminate all student debt and make college and trade schools free and you do that by taxing Wall Street transactions so you'd get taxed if you sell a stock I guess or sell an asset and it is surprisingly a better idea that I expected now I've been saying forever that I'm left to birdie but

[19:40]

forever that I'm left to birdie but without the bad math because the math just doesn't work because normally you think of you an income tax to pay for all these things he wants but when he puts it in terms of a Wall Street tax it turns out to be such a small percentage of these gigantic transact that you and I would even notice it it's almost like free money because it's coming from the richest of the rich who are moving billions of dollars around and if his numbers are right it's a surprisingly strong plan because here's the thing let me let me give this some context when you tax if you were to tax the middle class to pay for other people's student loans well that's not gonna be very popular right because the middle class would have spent that money and that would have been good for the economy but now that money is taken away and they have to struggle and it just helps somebody else who might have been

[20:41]

helps somebody else who might have been a middle-class so it's you know taxing the middle class it just doesn't make a lot of sense economically but taxing the richest of the rich for financial transactions alone where they're just moving paper back and forth if that resulted in a better educated population at the low end and people who had more spending money because they didn't have to pay their loans who would that benefit the most who would make the most profit because people's student loans got cancelled it would be exactly the people who got taxed so in other words the richest of the rich do well whatever the country does well they do disproportionately well all right if the country goes if the country you know goes up 5% in say economy the richest of the rich might double because that they always have the better deals so when things are going up there they just gain more than other people gain so I have a real question about Bernie's plan and I

[21:43]

real question about Bernie's plan and I know you I know you don't want to hear this but I'd like to see what the economists say about it because this might actually work right I mean believe me if this had been an income tax plan where middle class and up we're paying income tax your more income tax to lower the cost of college I'd say no way you know that doesn't sound good but this tax on Wall Street assets ends up taxing the people who will actually benefit the most by a good workforce it's not bad it's not bad now I don't know if Bernie will be able to sell it as well as I just sold it I mean I could probably sell his plan better than he could sell it but but wait for this argument wait to see if Bernie closes the loop and says I'm going to tax the you know the rich Wall Street people because an educated population benefits them the most so for them it's actually an

[22:44]

most so for them it's actually an investment but it's a long-term investment somebody's saying good grief it won't so I'm putting this as a question mark so I'm not telling you that it would benefit them more than their costs I'm saying it's it's definitely worth a look because we don't know and I liked here with some economists say even if I don't believe them all right San Diego is building some tent cities for all of its poor so I guess they're putting in a lot of money into building some kind of tenta structures to take care of all the homeless and I have the following question you have all of these cities of municipalities who have lots of things to do you know they have they've got garbage to pickup and crime to fight and everything so cities are really busy but these cities on top of all that business they already had are having this the smallish issue of homelessness turned

[23:46]

smallish issue of homelessness turned into a gigantic issue are the cities qualified to take that on maybe not but what about this as some level of homelessness and we've probably achieved that would it make sense to build what I'll call poor City a city that didn't exist before let's say you find some someplace in the world where the land is cheap and the weather is reasonable all year long so it's probably a California sort of weather find a place and build a city there that's just for poor pee them ship the poor people from the various cities where there are homeless everywhere to one place where you can do it right because cities are not really qualified to handle this gigantic problem that that went from small to big fairly suddenly but if you had one place where everybody could say okay all we

[24:46]

where everybody could say okay all we need to do is organize a bus trip and all you homeless people who need a place we're going to bus you to poor city and you're gonna maybe learn some stuff maybe maybe you know maybe lab better services but at the very least I would think the economics of centralizing your homelessness situation would be extraordinary and am I wrong from a purely economic standpoint wouldn't it be better to have one poor city so that all let's say all of the California cities could ship their poor to that one place for the maximum qualified economical way to handle it instead of every city trying to reproduce the things with limited space and time and resources so I just put that out there I think we may be seeing the development of whole new cities that and and then the second part would be if you had all this labor that is in these homeless places could you also deal with

[25:49]

homeless places could you also deal with their you know drug addiction their mental illness in a more effective way because of economies of scale and and here's here's another problem that nobody talks about and let me say this is not my original idea I don't think the person who gave it to me maybe wants to take credit for it so I'm hold off on that for now but if you look at the difficulty in finding a home in let's say as a Southern California City Los Angeles for example part of that is because there are so many people who have come in through immigration we're just filling up those places so one of the things that's happening with the homeless is that they're not just people who can't afford for homes but the secondary problem is immigrants who can afford homes because if you bring in lots of people who can afford homes at the low-end then the people who used to be able to afford

[26:50]

the people who used to be able to afford them don't have as many homes so there's a great deal of competition at the low-end creating more homeland homelessness not just of the people coming in but the people they replace by taking up the homes that people were already here could have used we don't need anybody talk about that all right I think maybe this will end up being some kind of a solution for urban blight maybe a will get us closer to birth to building homes somebody says concentration camp yeah I mean anytime you concentrate people in one place it's the concentration camp according to the according to some people alright let's talk about the new Iran sanctions why is that there are always more sanctions we can put on does it seem to you that we we we should run out of things to sanction after a while but I guess the pressure is going to be on Iran some more at the same time that

[27:51]

on Iran some more at the same time that a top 70 diplomat is reported to have said and I'm a little wary of this because the duplicate diplomat is not named but a top Saudi diplomat says it's time for the Arab world to realize that the quote age of war with Israel is over so there's a top Saudi diplomat probably talking you know with with the blessing of the boss so Saudi Arabia's position seems to be if you can if you believe the unnamed so deed [Laughter] that's over it's time to working now why is that important well the obvious reasons but here but here's let me read it again to you and see if you can pick out the key word in the statement it's time for the Arab world to realize that the age of war with Israel is over keyword arab so the saudi is saying it's

[28:54]

keyword arab so the saudi is saying it's time for the arab world to realize that the age of war with Israel is over do you know who's not in the Arab world a ramp because Iranians are not Arab so Iran seems to be the one that's going to be on the outs with both the entire Arab world and or at least most of it and if not almost all of it as well as Israel as well as the United States and Sarah so it's more isolation for Iran and that's a big deal now let's talk about Jared Kushner's peace plan for the Middle East let's look at it you know obviously I think it's obvious that if the Trump administration had a Middle East peace plan that we'd all be talking about it would be that at the top of the news so let me go to Fox News and I'll read from just this is the top page of Fox News and I want to read about the Middle East peace plan he's offering

[29:57]

Middle East peace plan he's offering them the deal of the century okay I was just gonna make a plan that I now revised I was gonna make a point that I'm revising which is I couldn't figure out why there wasn't enough talk about it and so I guess I'll need to read this story but the 15 billion in grants and 25 billion in low-interest loans and 11 billion in private equity I don't see where it's coming from though they said the white house money would be invested over ten years lead to investments in other places all right so this is all brand new so I haven't seen the the details but of course the Palestinians leadership and other people rejected it out of hand what they said was you can't buy you know you can't buy our dig to the or something along those lines you can't buy our rights you can't buy our dignity

[30:59]

buy our rights you can't buy our dignity and so the Palestinians took a stand on principle they they want to reject of 50 billion dollars on principle now I don't want to be unkind but for years I've been hearing something that made me just laugh because people would say the reason that there's not peace in the Middle East is because the Palestinians are stupid and I always said okay stop being a racist the Palestinians are not like extra stupid that's not a thing they just have their interests that are different than yours there's religion there's you know there's lots of things going on it's complicated it's not stupid like that's not happening that's just being racist but I have to revise that opinion let me give you some advice if somebody says to you Bob let's say your name is Bob they say to you Bob you

[32:01]

your name is Bob they say to you Bob you have 10 problems but one of those problems is money so I'm going to give you 50 billion dollars to handle one of your problems still got nine problems I think the 50 billion might help indirectly with the other stuff but I'm gonna give you 50 billion dollars what is the smart answer the smart answer is well hell yeah I want your 50 billion why wouldn't I why wouldn't I take free money and then I'll take your 50 billion but we're also gonna talk about the other than I and things right is that right if I say yeah yeah of course we're going to talk about all the things but I'm gonna give you fifty billion dollars you just have to say yes the Palestinians have decided to say no that's just stupid I'm sorry that's just stupid now let me be careful I'm gonna be as specific as I can I'm talking about the

[33:02]

specific as I can I'm talking about the leadership and the people who you know make pronouncements I'm not talking about the citizens I'm sure the citizens are you know lovely intelligent people like most of the world but the Palestinian leadership has proven themselves to be stupid at a level I didn't think I could ever see have you ever seen anything that dumb if somebody offers you 50 billion let me let me teach you how to answer this okay we'll do a little roleplay I'm gonna ask you you have ten problems one of them is money I plan to give you fifty billion dollars and then talk about the others what is your answer in the comments give me a yes or no how many of you take fifty billion dollars that's offered for free yes because every single freakin person on this periscope is smarter clearly I mean obviously smarter than

[34:03]

clearly I mean obviously smarter than every single person who is apparently in charge of the Palestinian situation every one of you is smarter than them every one of you it's mind-boggling right now so we had no I suppose it could be some kind of a negotiation thing but it doesn't look like it it really alright somebody in the comment centrum something very funny but I'm not going to repeat it but yes but but to the funny comment in the comments exactly that is the correct answer to do you want 50 billion dollars the only correct answer is yes and then let's talk about the other stuff all right I've said that to death now what I love about the 50-billion is that it's a shake the box at a new

[35:04]

is that it's a shake the box at a new variable really big can't ignore it and it should completely split the Palestinians meaning that for I I have this imagination of you know some Palestinian leaders going on on on TV and saying we reject this this is an insult to our dignity it ignores our rights to right of return it's bad in all of these intellectual psychological ways and then when the camera is off and and you know the the leaders friend says to them but you're still going to take the 50 50 billion right and the guy says no no no I mean it we this this is far too insulting and his friend just says no seriously they just offered us fifty billion dollars you're you're actually gonna say no to this right yes it's an insult no seriously dude fifty billion

[36:06]

insult no seriously dude fifty billion dollars you just have to say yes that's it you just have to say yes no no that was an arrow hitting the Palestinian leader that arrow being sent by somebody is in his own family I would think this would cause a lot of infighting because for every leader who says no no this would be bad for our egos and our honor and our our rights and whatever else they say and by the way those are all important things but none of it is changed by accepting some money so this would have to split the Palestinians right in half I would think for every person who says this is an insult there's going to be somebody who says I'd like to eat eating is good too don't forget eating we like to eat

[37:07]

don't forget eating we like to eat so the the beauty of this offer is that if the Palestinians ultimately reject it think ahead right there are there are two things that happen when you have a peace plan they accept it yeah everybody wins they accepted it unlikely right and the other thing is they reject it who wins if they reject fifty billion dollars Israel right am i right if the Palestinians reject 250 billion dollars because it doesn't solve all of their problems Israel has a free pass to treat them any way they want now not literally but you know what I get the point right if they turn down an offer that at least on paper is so enormous nobody can ever take them seriously again you can't take

[38:08]

take them seriously again you can't take their leaders seriously and the entire world is going to say look now it's just on you see apparently the according to the Saudi diplomat the Arab world has already decided hey Palestinians you know we can help you but you got to do a little bit to help yourself all right if you're not going to do a little bit to help yourself we're out so it looks like the Saudis and maybe some of the rest of the Arab world is out and that would further isolate Iran so whether or not Jarrod's plan is accepted it's brilliant it is brilliant if it's accepted and it is brilliant and if it is rejected he found two ways to win and no way to lose have you ever seen this before have I been talking about this for three years that Trump consistently finds two ways to win and no way to lose this plan

[39:10]

ways to win and no way to lose this plan wins both ways it wins if they take it it and Israel wins if they reject it because then Israel has way less pressure to make a deal because then it's obvious that no deal could be made likewise it would allow more pressure on Iran because it's clear that we're trying to do it the right way and if the right way it doesn't work all that leaves you is the wrong way and that the wrong way is dangerous Iran has apparently threatened that they could shoot down more of our drones now I don't know what threatened means maybe because that doesn't sound like a threat you know if somebody says if you do that again I'm gonna punch you in the nose that's a threat if if somebody says you do that again I'm gonna kick your bicycle well it's still sort of a threat but are you worried are you worried I

[40:13]

but are you worried are you worried I would maybe change my behavior to avoid a punch in the nose well I don't know if I change my behavior too much to avoid somebody kicking my bicycle I mean I don't want anybody to kick my bicycle what if they threaten it you know it's not the biggest problem all right there's a online company called Ravelry Ravelry that is for knitting and crocheting enthusiasts and they have decided that they're going to ban Trump discussions because they don't want to support white supremacy so this knitting and crocheting site believes that discussions of Trump are the same as white supremacy and so they banned it now I would say this company should stick to their knitting because if they don't everything a little unravel to

[41:13]

don't everything a little unravel to which I say so so what let's say they missed a stitch well anyway I'm just only in this for the puns I don't really care too much about it hey wait what else we got going on today Oh
so Jordan Peterson that has a new some kind of a social media site coming I don't know the details because hasn't been announced but it will be called think spot one word think spot and he's tweeted about it and don't know when it will come or what it will look like but I think we'll all take a look at that what happens here's the fun have you noticed how similar Trump and JFK are lately joel wrote an article in Breitbart pointing out that the you know the Cuban Missile Crisis and the way Trump is handling Iran they you know

[42:15]

Trump is handling Iran they you know they have some comparisons and brinksmanship but JFK's personal life looks a lot like the the president's as well and and when you look at the crowds that come to Trump's rallies it feels a lot like he's a Republican JFK doesn't it I mean if you just if you ignore the fact he's in a different party his personal life looks very similar to JFK's and the way he handles geopolitical stuff looks kind of similar and JFK presided over a good economy did he not pretty similar so we're having this weird similarity with JFK that's fun and just worth noting as other people have noted Peter Budaj edge appears to have no chance of getting elected because the way he's handling this police shooting in his city is not

[43:19]

this police shooting in his city is not making anybody happy and he's just not looking like a leader he's looking like a why just doesn't look like a leader so I think the the Pete Budaj edge campaign has no place to go so one or two fix Kamala Harris his biggest problem for you right here don't know if she'll ever see this but I want to show you're her biggest problem and I'm gonna have to change the lighting on my phone before I hold it up so that you can see it clearly can you see this picture yeah shows up pretty well so look at her expression look at her smile and her eyes this is her biggest problem and let me explain it she has what I would call an unconfident smile and laugh she has a very unconfident smile have you noticed that

[44:21]

unconfident smile have you noticed that the President President Trump never laughs at his own jokes right and when he sees something that's funny you know let's say somebody in his rally crowd says something funny he gives a smirk and then he gives a smile and then he sort of turns away you would and he turns away that's how you you register humor in a confident leader Lee way he registers humor like he's on top of it humor is something that he controls his reaction to it shows he's having a very controlled reaction to it when you see kumla harris laughs she has a nervous laugh and she has a nervous smile which projects what does it project not just lack of confidence yes it does project a lack of confidence but it projects us something else weakness

[45:22]

something else weakness almost almost so somebody said weakness uneasy lack of confidence in sincerity yeah all of those things something worse something way worse weakness is close but it's not what I'm getting it there it is there it is subordinate it is a subordinate laughs she laughs like she's laughing at her boss's joke watch forth so it is an unconfident submissive
facial expression and laugh submissive is what I was looking for but subordinate gets to the same thing it is a subordinates laugh and it projects subordinates aborting it you know personality you can't be the President of the United States if your face and your your nervous laugh are

[46:22]

face and your your nervous laugh are projecting that you're the lowest ranking person at the meeting right when you laugh you want to laugh like a boss think about think about the leaders you know alright you've seen Bill Clinton laugh you've seen Ronald Reagan laugh you've seen Obama laugh you've seen Trump laugh you've seen let's you've probably seen Margaret Thatcher you've probably seen Elizabeth Warren laugh you've probably seen Hillary Clinton laugh well Hillary Hillary's was not a submissive laugh she just had sort of a weird cattle but it was not submissive whatsoever wouldn't you say would you say the Hillary Clinton had a submissive laugh I would say no right I mean she had a personality that was hard to love some people are calling it evil yeah her laugh was more evil when Hillary Clinton Clinton laughed about killing Qaddafi

[47:22]

Clinton laughed about killing Qaddafi did any of that sound submissive it did not it sounded the opposite of submissive she laughed about killing somebody and it was a it was a leader laugh so say what you will about Hillary but she did not project weakness Hillary Clinton projected leaderly qualities now she had her flaws but the way she projected the way she handles herself the way she carries herself the way she smiles the laughs what she reacts to very much in the lead early mode kumla and now that I've talked it out a little bit look at it again and see if you can see it you see it right that's that's a low confidence submissive approach this says I'm not the strong person in the room I'd better make you happy so you don't hurt me that's what that face says now I believe that she

[48:22]

that face says now I believe that she probably could control that in other words what if somebody goes to a funeral they can control laughing right people can control their responses if they're doing it intentionally I believe that she could fix that and if she does fix it she's gonna pop up in the polls I think it's their biggest problem right now is that her facial personality she's tried I think she probably went too far in trying to see him like a real person as a person of the people and she could have a laugh with you and she can have a beer with you so I think I think she went a little too far in that direction all right and that is all I had to talk about today and so I think I'm going to close it off here and I'm going to talk to you later