Episode 633 Scott Adams: The Golden Age of no Real News
Date: 2019-08-19 | Duration: 43:29
Topics
NYT caught plotting to MAKE UP the news and start a race war? John Harwood, Maggie Haberman say…nothing happened? The 4 categories of “news” in today’s world President Trump TOLD us he would be “politically incorrect” Hong Kong is using American imagery in their struggle President Trump’s respect and compliment to President Xi China culture doesn’t believe in “win-win” deals? Juan Williams gets the President Trump treatment The topics where I’m “left of Bernie” Where is Ghislaine Maxwell, what happened at In & Out Burger?
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
[0:08]
but um pom-pom pop up on everybody come on in here at Monday it's time for coffee with Scott Adams I'm a little bit late cuz I got things going on this morning all kinds of things yeah window washers who are gonna show up any moment now peek it in my windows that's always upsetting alright if you'd like to join me for the unparalleled pleasure of the simultaneous sip you know what you need you do you need a cup or a mug a classes tiny chalice a tanker two thermos a flask akin to the vessel of any kind selling with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for that dopamine hit that makes the rest of the day better the simultaneous said go so I was reading yesterday that there's a company in China called one Chang why you am CH Eng one Jiang one Shang probably not
[1:12]
Eng one Jiang one Shang probably not pronouncing that correctly but apparently they're the primary source of all these fentanyl ingredients sold to this country and then to Mexico which then turns it into fentanyl and sensei here and I'm reading this story in my jaw my jaw is just dropping it's like are you telling me we know exactly the name of the company we know their corporate address we know the names of all their officers and they're killing what forty fifty thousand Americans a year by sending fentanyl precursors here really and we're okay with that apparently because we just say hey how about a trade deal I am absolutely opposed to a trade deal with China period any trade deal I don't care what it is do not care what it is if they're allowing this to happen they are with us they are an enemy and we should treat him as such and it's probably
[2:13]
treat him as such and it's probably illegal to call for assassinations is there anything illegal about that what if hypothetically hypothetically if somebody went on periscope and called for the assassination of somebody in another country would that would that be illegal I don't know but I'll just put it this way rather than calling for the assassination of the officers of this company I would just say we should not do any business with China until they take care of it China can take care of it they're a big country they got lots of capability they know how to execute their citizens so if they do that then we should have a productive conversation with them and see if we get any further if they don't do that no interest in doing business with them under any conditions I'm watching in amazement another topic here as as Ted Cruz is
[3:16]
another topic here as as Ted Cruz is trying to inform the country through Twitter primarily that the New York Times got caught with that secret recording with the top editor talking to the to the proud to the assembled reporters and telling them that the the Russia collusion thing that they had organized around for a couple of years didn't work out so they were going to reorganize around the topic of racism in America and so Ted Cruz put the same interpretation on that that I did which is wow this is the first time at least the first time I know of where a major press organization was caught red-handed creating the story a year before the news so whatever the news is they've created this structure that they can sort of slot in well because of racism well the economy is doing well because
[4:17]
well the economy is doing well because of racism well this happened because of racism and that of course is a narrative it's not the news now it's pretty hard to do the new straight without accidentally putting some opinion into it so I realize it's never easy but you've never seen it so carefully laid-out yeah and but the amazing thing is the response to it imagine if you will that the most probably the most important news organization in the world may be you know certainly in this country the New York Times gets caught plotting to make up the news essentially creating a narrative and then slotting the news stories into it and I thought to myself well that's gigantic that's bigger than Watergate I mean actually bigger than Watergate no joking way bigger Watergate was about covering up a break-in that other people did to something that didn't make that much difference but starting a you know a race war in the
[5:19]
starting a you know a race war in the United States way worse it's not even close and so I thought what how does the left handle this bit of knowledge if you're on the left and you find out that your new sources are not even trying to be legitimate what do you do do you say oh darn it I've been using these new sources for years and now I realize in retrospect that it's not news they've been programming me do they do that nah yeah but what they do is even more head-shaking so John Harwood I guess NBC guy he this was his response now remember the Ted Cruz linked to the actual transcript of the New York Times editor talking to the staff it's all there to read and here's John Harvard's response to it no that's not what the
[6:20]
response to it no that's not what the editor said what so no that's not what he said and then I think Maggie Haberman had a similar comment that was now that didn't happen and I thought to myself my god the people on the right Tim Poole was tweeting around a graph that showed that the people who lean right see most of the news on the left as well as their own resources people on the Left only see their own news sources they don't see anything anything from the right it's just nothing so if the people on the left say it's not a story nothing happened what do the people who consume that media think they actually think nothing happened it's the it's the biggest story I don't biggest story of the year what do you think what's the bigger story than that
[7:20]
than that there's so many things happening that that it may be you know I may have be forgiving bigger stories but I think that's the biggest story of the year and the people on the Left just told their audience yeah nothing happened amazing like I don't even know how to process that no nothing to happen happen no nothing to say nothing happened amazing amazing amazing so it seems to me that the news as sort of devolved into four categories there used to be a time when the news was something like hey some events happened let us tell you about those events and then we called that news but now we have fake news stuff that didn't happen stuff taken out in the context in this case simply denying that an event happened just saying it didn't happen and as you know
[8:22]
saying it didn't happen and as you know we're on hoax number five from the New York Times if you count up you know all the there was the fine people hoax and the you know all the other hoaxes but this so this is hoax number five they're up to and I'm not even counting all not going this wallet hoax the the mocking the disabled reporter hoax there's just so many hoaxes my counting walls but you're in the category so you get your fake news which is usually just stuff taken in the context then you've got your hypothetical news so that I suppose that's always existed but it seems more prominent hypothetical news goes like this if there's a recession Trump might not get reelected if a meteor hits the earth or not prepared so we've got a hypothetical news now because we ran out of actual news than the other category somebody's added me here in the comments is the mind-reading news based on what
[9:23]
is the mind-reading news based on what we imagine literally imagine other people are thinking now that goes well with the taking things out of context and then putting your your assumption about what people are thinking into there and then there's the reframing history news where you don't introduce any new news but you go back and you talk about history to change how we look at the history so that you look at the present differently now the New York Times is engaged in this in their 1619 project 1619 refers to the year the first year of slavery from African sources before that there was a lot of slavery but in terms of African slaves coming over I guess the first ones were 1619 and so I was reading I read the first the first article on that and so here's my first statement about that real good history so in terms of
[10:24]
real good history so in terms of Education in terms of understanding you know what the nature of the the colonies and the early the birth of the country was really good stuff I'd recommended that book American nations for the same reason because it talks about how different things were than the way you learned them in the in the textbooks but here's the thing while I love it as
as and I absolutely love that you know the the countries get a little more informed about who we really are where we came from etc all that stuff's good but the problem is that the intention of it is to make us think differently in the present and I don't know how to interpret that except that we should be thinking differently about Trump because it turns out of everything everything ends up connecting to that right because it's the thing that the news cares about so having an entire history lesson of
[11:26]
so having an entire history lesson of hundreds of years ago if happens to make you hate a guy who was not part of that time it's not legitimate news it's great history and I recommend it it's good reading so well done in the terms of writing historically good for the nation probably probably lots of good reasons to read it but you have to question their intentions for doing it now the way they're doing it here's a couple of things that you don't hear because the news is all about narrative and not facts here are two things that the president promised us that I don't think get enough attention one is he said he was going to be politically incorrect he said that indirect words that at the very first debate he said he doesn't care for political correctness and he's not going to adhere to it now when you hear I'm not going to be politically
[12:27]
hear I'm not going to be politically correct what are you here well what I hear and I suppose it's open for interpretation but what I hear is I'm telling you right now I'm going to speak plainly without worrying about offending people so far I think you'd all agree right that he's going to speak however he wants to speak to get his message across and he's not going to care whether or defense people and the reason that there is word there is a phrase called political correctness the context of that is that when you do that you will be accused of being racist and then sexist and a xenophobe and a bigot so he told us I'm going to speak you know in a plain way that people will find offensive and they will use that as an excuse to accuse me of being a racist in the xenophobe and they get to this access to cetera and then he delivered that he delivered that he gave
[13:27]
delivered that he delivered that he gave us exactly what he said he would give us if he were elected I don't think he gets enough credit for that because he actually said in what I take as a very clear language when I get elected they're gonna go crazy accusing me of every ism but I'm not going to care and that's what we got that's exactly what we got now if you see it through that filter obviously I had a narrative to it so I didn't just report the facts I added by a little spin to it but is that's been the illegitimate is an illegitimate to say he told us in clear language and what he was going to do he told us in clear language because of the term politically incorrect the way it's the way it's commonly used is that I'm going to be falsely accused right if you say I'm going to be politically incorrect you're also saying and I'm going to be falsely accused because of
[14:28]
going to be falsely accused because of the types of language I use you nailed it that's where we are he's exactly where he said we would be if we elected him the other thing he's not getting enough attention for is this is something like 21,000 Mexican National Guard troops are guarding the border to keep people from crossing their southern border and getting to the northern border and crossing here isn't that kind of expensive what does it cost to put 21 or 20 whatever thousand soldiers on a border that feels really expensive can we really say Mexico isn't paying for the wall because it looks exactly like making Mexico pay for at least border security now you could say well that's not a wall but that's you know it's a substitute border security with a whole army feels a lot like a human wall that somebody says something in the cabinets I think you have to stretch to
[15:33]
cabinets I think you have to stretch to say that he failed to make Mexico pay for the wall that looks exactly like making making Mexico pay for the wall if you allow that the wall means border security now you could be you know is it pedantic and say no no no he said the wall the wall wala no it has to be concrete or else it doesn't count well okay I hear what you're saying but getting nice to go to pay for a border security in a way that's very expensive and apparently effective is an awful lot like doing something that other politicians didn't look like they were gonna do all right so what do we do about all this so it's another day where there's no real news I look at I always do the same thing I look at social media Twitter I look at cnn.com I look at Fox
[16:33]
Twitter I look at cnn.com I look at Fox News and I say what's the news and there are days like this what are there just no news and that's actually not unusual for for August because people are on vacation Hong Kong let's talk about Hong Kong which largely fell off the front page so it's interesting the Hong Kong is using some American imagery they're using some of American flags and I guess there was the American national anthem but here's my take on which I said before in the long run China will win because they can wait they can put as much pressure as they want now you might see something like you might see China appear to pull back so they might for example say okay we hear you people on the street so we're
[17:34]
hear you people on the street so we're not gonna do the thing we said we were going to do which is essentially assert some judicial control over the countries so they could try people in Chinese courts they might say that we'll pull back on that but if they do pull back they're not going to give up on it they're just gonna start moving other variables until it's easier to get it next time so maybe they start bribing some people you know influencing some people you know so I don't think China is gonna lose in the long run because I'm con does not have a military force in Taiwan has a military force so they're not really directly comparable so what the president has done I thought was kind of perfect so the president's responses to this and for those of you who do do i do criticize the president when when he does things I don't like yeah I don't think he's I don't think
[18:35]
yeah I don't think he's I don't think he's killing it on health care or immigration or race relations for example so I got plenty of stuff I could criticize but his response about the Hong Kong thing was just about as good as you could do in a non-politician way so what he said was that he believes that his great friend President Xi who has many talents if he wanted to even though he knows it's not his thing he could be with the protesters and he could solve this thing without any violence fairly quickly well yeah he could under the condition that the Hong Kong protesters just give up but President Xi is not going to call a meeting with the Hong Kong protesters and then give them what they're asking for so the beauty of what President Trump suggested is that it's completely impractical that's what's beautiful there isn't the slightest chance the President Xi is going to personally meet
[19:36]
President Xi is going to personally meet with the heads of the protesters and then give them some of the stuff that they want the it's not going to happen but the president puts it out there as a compliment so he frames it as a compliment to president shade he shows his respect very very well done in terms of threading that needle because the president says I believe President Xi could pull this off because he's so awesome and he can ignore as the yes the I guess he has the freedom to ignore that it couldn't possibly work in a way that's good for Hong Kong and the onk-onk would agree but as a way to say something in public it's great because he's clearly on the side of Hong Kong while complementing Xi and saying President Xi you could handle this in ten minutes I know you could you're awesome I love you we've got a great relationship it's kind of perfect but then the president continues and
[20:38]
but then the president continues and says that if there's violence in Hong Kong he's you know I'm paraphrasing but the president would would have a difficult time getting a deal done which is also perfect cover for not getting a deal done if I were having trouble getting a deal done I would certainly want this Hong Kong thing to pop up so I could I could lay it on that say well you know in Hong Kong we would love to do a deal but I don't know China things you're doing to Hong Kong makes you the kind of the kind of trading partner we don't know if we could trust you know we did we don't know if we could be on your side we can't support that so the president picked the perfect place to be on this because you can't really pressure China for something like this there's no way to pressure them in a way that works well we can simply say that we would head the way the president put it is that politically he would have trouble getting a deal done even if he
[21:39]
trouble getting a deal done even if he wanted to so he sort of took it out of his hands and said I don't know the mood I'm paraphrasing again but the mood would be if you did something bad would be such that it would be hard for me to get a deal down here in America so excellent excellent job of depersonalized in the situation keeping the respect on setting the boundaries giving himself an out if the negotiations which I that don't turn out to be fruitful he's got one more reason to say well we can't really deal with some country that was so bad to Hong Kong if that happens I would have to say this so far there has been more restraint from China that I might have expected and asked a lot to do with that just the number of people in Hong Kong that are that are motivated so watching that as fun but I will I will say again that I don't think a trade deal with
[22:40]
that I don't think a trade deal with China will ever be in our interest unless China changes their philosophy on deals apparently their philosophy on deals is to only make deals that are good for them and bad for the other team now I can't confirm that that's true but that's what's more people are telling me that China doesn't doesn't have let's say the philosophy that deals should be win-win deals there there's just power and that's sort of the end of the story so we probably are going to need to walk away from China as an active market or just forever do deals with them where we tariff each other if they want to live with that but I that in the long run China will just not be philosophically compatible with our economic system and I don't know that they need to be I don't think it's the end of the world necessarily I will somewhat simultaneously set to that the other
[23:42]
simultaneously set to that the other thing we never really know is how close to the edge China is you know from the outside I don't know if we can tell you from the inside I don't know if they can tell the the distance between doing great and having a major recession I don't know if anybody can see it coming before it happens
now yeah and it does make me wonder if we should be closer to to Russia in terms of trade somebody somebody raised the possibility and I will not name names that cryptocurrencies would someday be used for assassinations have you ever heard that idea the idea that you could maybe put out a hit you know a request to have somebody whacked and then you know in some untraceable cryptocurrency way you could you could just pay for the hit you'd have to have evidence that happened and it makes me
[24:45]
evidence that happened and it makes me wonder if you could start seeing hits in other countries from people who just say you know I'll just put some Bitcoin toward this and we'll see what happens I don't know that that really could work because I've got a feeling that you can trace more things than there you I think everything's traceable I don't believe in untraceable stuff check out the dark web
web just as a dark web I have assassination markets I don't think that's the thing
Big Brother won't allow untraceable currency only socialists believe Chinese socialists to justify their BS okay so
[25:45]
socialists to justify their BS okay so China's not buying our soy beans I would like to see China buy all of our soy beans we should give China all the soy they want for free we should just ship them all the sand and Russia too we should give both Russia and China free soy just as much as they can eat we could just soy them right to death I don't think Ross Ulbricht is it is serving time for creating an assassination vehicle he's serving time for the Silk Road which allowed a number of things have I heard of Craig Wright creator of Bitcoin well that doesn't sound right unless his name is Satoshi so I don't know that story I have now heard it
[26:49]
Scott please see Ian Fletcher economist who wants to talk okay I don't know what that's all about I'm just reading your comments here because honestly I like spending time with you guys but there's not much to talk about except soy in China but what a world huh so the president and one of the things I love what he does is he goes on in his public statements he'll call out heroes and villains and the media and they they say that you know you don't want to normalize this behavior but I'm so glad it is normalized so the president went after a Juan Williams on Fox News but he praised some other people greg gutfeld as one of them and he was talking about how he doesn't like it when Fox News does things that are not complementary to it and I gotta say that if we were not in a world where the New York Times had just revealed that that there a
[27:50]
had just revealed that that there a narrative organization and not a news organization at least in terms of politics it would be a lot more bothersome that the president talks about Fox News is sort of a wholly owned subsidiary of of his administration but I think in the real world you can see that news news networks do seem to have political preferences can you invite a public liberal to talk you know I would love to to have somebody on here who disagrees with me but I don't know if I can count one I don't know if I could get I I will tell you that I didn't invite a prominent liberal somebody whose name you've heard to be on the show and let's say he booked he booked and I let it go I don't know that there are any liberals who would take the
[28:51]
are any liberals who would take the chance will we buy a green land it sounds like we won't just because green land doesn't want to sell oh they went after Fox for hiring Donna Brazile yet the president did talk to yang I tried yang because his people didn't get back to me and then I lost interest frankly if I've done more interested I probably would have followed it invite Bill Maher mm-hmm I doubt Bill Maher would go on my podcast but he would be interesting Oh Rob Reiner Wow Michael Moore I would love to talk to Michael Moore but again I don't think any of those people would come on my show get the mooch you know I don't know what's happening with caribou Qi exactly I mean other than the obvious
[29:53]
Qi exactly I mean other than the obvious we're all watching it and it's all kind of obvious what's happening but I just don't know that that news in my mind the scaramouche scaramouche e news doesn't really go beyond him him and the president and some people in the news won't talk about it it doesn't seem to affect America will I sell Scott sipping mugs probably not how can he in Fletcher contact me you say in all capital letters easiest way to get my attention is on so if you get a LinkedIn I just send over an invitation I accept everybody on LinkedIn but because there's far less traffic on LinkedIn I'm far more likely to notice a message john cusack I don't think he'll talk to me share punching engineer oh I love the fact that De Niro
[30:58]
engineer oh I love the fact that De Niro is now called punchy punchy denier all right the mooch likes to periscope - well I've spoken to scare emoji so we we did once have a brief conversation so I could and we've we've crossed we've not crossed messages we've exchanged the messages on Twitter so I could invite him on but I think he I know what he's gonna say so could it all be a setup with scare emoji I doubt it
somebody says you say you're a left of birdie on what abortion on left to Bernie so some of these people often ask me why do I say I'm left to Bernie and let me give you some examples I'm left to Bernie on abortion for one example
[32:01]
to Bernie on abortion for one example the conservatives are more likely to be opposed to all abortions liberals are more likely to be in favor of abortion under certain conditions and I'm left to that which is men such as Bernie and B should be followers on this issue not leaders meaning that women have more skin in the game and their collective decisions I'm willing to support there's a longer description there to why that why I have that position but that's the short version the short version is I'm left to him because I think he and I shouldn't even be talking about it whatever women collectively want about abortion it's life and death women have skin in the game men don't and while I'm not saying we should give up or vote I'm not saying men should to give up any decision-making about money but the moral the moral exact center for that
[33:02]
moral the moral exact center for that issue I think I would rather follow the the lead of women because in this area they have the most skin in the game now what I say the same thing for let's say the military because they're more men who go off and get killed in the military and the answer is yes I would I I think that men probably should have a little more say in that because they're a little more skin in the game depending on the situation all right another one
Bernie likes a little bit of you know Second Amendment thinks you should be able to keep your rifle I believe but I believe that no one should have a weapon except me so I'm far left to Bernie he thinks people should have you know at least rifles for hunting you know what not but
[34:02]
rifles for hunting you know what not but I think nobody should have a gun except me and then you don't have to worry about the government taking over because there would only be one god and not have it so I'd kind of run the whole country now the thing with guns is that guns are really a a difference in risk profile the people who want guns either don't have any risk or they don't have much risk of their existence and they they want to use them and they might think that in their case it would keep them safer in their home there are other people for whom lots of guns make them unambiguously less safe so as the people who who know they will be less safe don't want guns and the people who know that they will be more safe do want guns it's not really a political conversation it's just people trying to get what's best for their risk profiles anyway so here's another one I think this is true servants generally would keep would keep Confederate of statues generally
[35:04]
Confederate of statues generally liberals would be far more likely of course there's not universal agreement anywhere here but the Liberals far more likely would want to get rid of civil war-era statues for being offensive and I think Bernie's probably in that category I'm somebody has to fact-check me but I'm left to that when the president says what are we gonna do take down references to George Washington to which I say absolutely yeah yes you should absolutely stop worshiping a slave owner I know it's hard I know we've all been raised most of us anyway raised to worship Washington and Jefferson and those guys and I'm willing to say that they had some excellent qualities Jefferson was a good inventor he was excellent with words he was also a giant racist slave owner should we be
[36:05]
a giant racist slave owner should we be putting giant racist slave owners on their money and then asking should we put slave owners on our money and then ask African Americans to like be on the same team say hey why can't you be a team player just because we put slave owners on money that shouldn't offend you to which I say absolutely it should offend you put yourself in that situation so if if you don't agree with that then you are a good candidate to read either the book American Nations which which tells you just how evil the early slave owners were and by the way there were early slave owners they had white slaves it wasn't just racist now the the situation with the African slaves the ones that came from Africa was much worse but the rich people were
[37:07]
was much worse but the rich people were abusing and murdering and and whipping white people too you know they just had to be poor somebody says you just lost me but again you didn't give a reason all right so who sold the slaves doesn't matter to this point totally irrelevant if you want to win points it's like hobo who sold the slaves if it was black people who sold the slain irrelevant Iran if one of those black people in Africa who sold the slaves had their picture on the currency of the United States I'd say maybe get that off of there right the fact that happened to be Washington it was a slave owner and keep in mind the Revolution was not fought the revolution was not fought to free the slaves the Revolution was fought to keep the slavery a big part of the reason that these the Revolutionary War happened at all is because people wanted to keep
[38:09]
all is because people wanted to keep slaves and England was moving away from it so the Revolution was kind of a pro-slavery thing in addition to you know the political part scott adams for destroying pyramids now i think i think anything that's historical can be maintained if you put the proper context around it so i don't have any problem with the pyramids and i wouldn't have any problem with somebody keeping a Confederate statue if they put a plaque up that said you know we're not praising slave owners we're just telling you the history for example yeah that would be fine I'll be ok with that or just move the statue to a museum that'd be fine so I don't think you have to destroy history but you don't have to put slave owners on your currency I'm
[39:11]
put slave owners on your currency I'm seriously so there are a lot of positions we run left to Bernie and then there are a lot of them were he's either impractical or or we're sort of similar all right take Bernie's position on dealing with China he says be tough take Bernie's position on offshoring jobs to other countries same as Trump's take Bernie's position on well whatever all right somebody says so it wasn't about taxes so you mean I've been lied to
to correct you haven't lied to it was a little bit about taxes it was a little bit about taxes but no that wasn't the that wasn't the whole reason is there a huge story to be had oh let's talk about Epstein's assistant there Alain Maxwell
[40:14]
Epstein's assistant there Alain Maxwell so there was this picture taken of her if people are asking questions such as why are there two drinks there and why did she take her glasses off of the picture how do you read a book without glasses on and and wasn't it easy to find her and all that stuff and I have to say if we don't find her fairly soon meaning the legal system or the press I'm going to say that that was probably a setup if I were trying to hide I would go somewhere have somebody take a picture with a professional camera and then I would make sure that I was never anywhere around that place again so that everybody would be looking looking to wherever that picture was taken so the ghilane Maxwell thing could be she just went for a burger and they caught her it could be could be exactly what it looks like but I think it's just as likely that she she wanted the
[41:16]
as likely that she she wanted the picture taken for her own purposes just as likely somebody says we know you are really conservative at heart and support Trump well supporting Trump is about supporting systems over goals you hear me talk about that the system is all the stuff you do to make sure that you have good incomes and a goal is just something you want it doesn't tell you how to get it so I want income equality but I don't know how to get there the best we have is a capitalist system and the president supports capitalism so the president tends support systems and I generally like that
if ghilane was nearsighted she would take off her glasses to read that is correct I often take off my glasses to read by the way and you know these
[42:16]
read by the way and you know these glasses go both ways but I often take them off to read you can't read one book and no American history did I tell you I read one book that sound wall behind you makes you look like a little kid in a big chair okay I'm just looking at your comments now because I got nothing else to say well I think I'll end it and get on to some other work and I will talk to you tomorrow maybe there'll be somebody's asking about income equality I would like poor people to have more stuff I don't care if rich people have to get more stuff so in my perfect world poor people would get more stuff rich people don't really need any more stuff and so in you'd get closer to equality
[43:17]
and so in you'd get closer to equality but I don't like it as a goal I like it as something that happens because you're doing everything right not as an objective alright that's all for now I'll talk to you later