Episode 789 Scott Adams: Shampeachment Theater, Liz and Bernie, Lev Parnas, China Deal

Date: 2020-01-16 | Duration: 1:00:21

Topics

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Young people still believe “The News” is legitimate Emotional impeachment Robert Hyde and Ukraine Ambassador surveillance Nice try Rachel Maddow CNN didn’t report the MAJOR China deal yesterday? No pretense of being a news organization CNN’s common opinion piece TRICK Musical artist Akon building his own city in Senegal

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

[0:15]

but I hope you can hear me when I plug in my microphone after I've already started sorry I'm a little late I'm late because there's so much news there's news all over the place and it's good it's fun and it's the good kind it's the funny kind it's the best kind and all you need to enjoy the news today is a cup or a mug or a glass a tanker chelators time to canteen juggler flask FSL of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine says a the thing makes everything better than you simultaneous sip go I know 3 minutes late why good reasons good reasons when you see the quality of today's periscope you're gonna say to yourself I'm glad I waited the extra three minutes Wow it's blowing

[1:15]

the extra three minutes Wow it's blowing me away it's so good
first of all I'd like to start with the tip if you saw today's Dilbert comic you know it's about the topic of people who repeat themselves have you ever been in a debate with somebody who keeps repeating the same point and you say to yourself and you say to them no I understand your point but here's what I'm saying and then they'll just say that same point again as if you had not addressed it here's what you do after about the third or fourth time that the person you're talking with says exactly the same point say hold on a second let me write this down and you take a little note and a paper you say alright I will stipulate and you write down the sentence Bob says that it involved Burns or whatever it is doesn't matter you put it on a little piece paper and you put it on the table between the two of you face up so it can

[2:18]

between the two of you face up so it can be read and then you start your conversation again and at that point when the person starts repeating themselves this is what you do you just reach over to the piece of paper and you just slowly move it a few inches in their direction and it's gonna make a mat then wait until they repeat it again because they will and then again reach over and take the little note that says exactly what they just said and just move it a little bit closer to them eventually the person will get really angry at you and storm out of the room victory all right let's talk about the Democrats or let's say the left is incomplete self emulation mode they've they've turned on each other it's a wonderful sight to see and you're seeing it all over did you see did you see the story about Wendy Williams mocking Joaquin Phoenix for a let's say I don't

[3:22]

Joaquin Phoenix for a let's say I don't even want to say I'm not even gonna say but it let's say is something physical it was one of the worst things I've ever seen on television when I when I saw it I thought seriously you that's what you're mocking you're mocking this guy for that in public well she had to apologize and it's not up to anybody except Joaquin Phoenix to accept it or not but the trouble that she got into is one more example of the left eating itself but my favorite is Michael Moore who is quite distressed that Warren and Bernie Sanders are at each other and he says they both appeared in my films I love them both why Elizabeth chose to stick a knife in Bernie's back is beyond me well it's not really beyond me so let me explain this to Michael Moore

[4:25]

me explain this to Michael Moore there's this thing called the presidential election that's coming up and there's this thing called the primary there are people in the primaries who want to win and then they do things like that because that's how you win did it work totally now a lot of you said Oh Elizabeth Warren it sounds like you're you're causing trouble you said you wouldn't you're stabbing Bernie that seems bad you know sort of a bad look and all that but a day later totally worked I would say that operation stabbed Bernie in the back was a complete success if you saw the panel that well actually most of the pundits said well the big moment from the debate was when Elizabeth Warren said that the only people on the stage who had ever won and the elections were the women actually the others had won elections but they had also lost I think ten

[5:28]

but they had also lost I think ten elections but the women had won every election tremendously good political point so from a from a point of controlling the conversation moving people's attention where you wanted to move it I'm going to say Elizabeth Warren a plus plus plus she totally changed the conversation made it about the sort of highlight of the fact that it's a bunch of you know white people on the stage which is bad enough but at least there are some women right because the day before that we were all talking about ha ha Democrats of the party of inclusivity and they just got rid of all of their people of color on the stage wasn't that the story two days ago two days ago that was a story not anymore what's the story today thanks to Elizabeth Warren the story today is hey

[6:30]

Elizabeth Warren the story today is hey there's still two women on the stage and are we ignoring the fact that they've won all of their elections and that the men honest ten lost elections collectively it's really good point in turn just in terms of politics I'm not saying it's a good point and you know the world or that it's a good point logically or rationally or anything else but politically Wow so I'm gonna say Warren has the play of the week political play of the week very successful I think she actually changed how people are thinking about this good job now the real question is who's lying is Bernie lying when he says I never said a woman can't win or is whereas Elizabeth Warren lying when she says they he did say that I have the answer to that in my opinion all right so I can't read minds but if you of course

[7:32]

can't read minds but if you of course you've all seen him by now the clip of Elizabeth Warren not shaking hands was Bernie and CNN CNN magically found a separate audio file that they matched up with the video so you could hear what she was saying and Elizabeth Warren walks directly over to Bernie and says you accused me of lying on television I think did you say on television or in public now what have I taught you about detecting liars Liars say things such as what evidence do you have or you know well why would you make that accusation based on what you know that's what a liar says here's what an honest person says they get right in your face and they say you're a liar now keep in mind that it's not clear that Warren knew that this would be picked up on audio some are suggesting she's smart enough

[8:32]

some are suggesting she's smart enough to know that there's probably was an audio some have suggested she was colluding with CNN and that you know she knew there would be an audio I'm not gonna say it was that clever it looked like an honest moment to me so my impression is that she actually believed Burnie lied I believe that that Elizabeth Warren believes her own story I also believe because of everything that Bernie has said and done and his entire career he's so credible to me and to many of you but to me he's completely credible so you have two versions that both believe their stories I believe so my opinion is that they both absolutely do believe their versions of the story how unusual is that not it's two movies on one screen two people were in a room and when they left the room they had two different

[9:34]

left the room they had two different impressions of what happened in the room how unusual is that zero unusual ality of it see I made up a word unusual 'ti you can use it yeah one of the things about being a professional writer is that if I start using word it it could enter a common usage so the unusual 'ti or maybe it's already a word but I doubt it so let me give you another example of exactly this situation which is also in the news so there's a story about let's see a gentleman Peter Lucido who's a michigan state senator now he is apologized after a female reporter said he was so a young 20-something reporter was spending some time with this michigan state senator and i guess he said that they were he was going to be meeting with some high school boys later

[10:34]

meeting with some high school boys later and and said that she should hang around because it'd be a lot of fun according to him so his version is hey you should hang around it's gonna be a lot of fun hanging out with these these guys from this high school hang around a little bit she says that the some version of it was that you'll have a lot of fun with those boys and they'll have a lot of fun with you if you know what I mean or some version of that so her version of a private conversation between two people she left the room and I think she actually believes that he said something with a inappropriate sexual tone to it if you watched his response he looks really credible what he says that didn't happen I just said it would be fun has nothing to do with any kind of sexual anything now it's possible that one of them is just lying right but I don't think so I think they're both telling the truth

[11:35]

the truth because exactly like Warren and Bernie I think two people had the same experience but watched two different movies and when they left they both believed their movie how many times do you need to see people experiencing two different movies in the same place before you understand it's the most normal thing in our experience it's not the exception because if you imagine it's the exception you say okay one of them is lying you know it's not that's not one of those weird cases where somebody saw two different movies in the same place that would be weird it's not that's that's the operating system of human beings were subjectively creating our own little environments and worlds all the time it's the basic way we operate once you understand that everything starts making a little more sense so that's my preliminary maybe it's my final conclusion Warren telling the

[12:37]

final conclusion Warren telling the truth as she sought Bernie telling the truth as he sought to people who were being honest although Warren may be a little opportunistic by by bringing that up at exactly the right time seriously that was just a great great political play ethical not so much but still within the realm of what we expect in our political process so it's not that far out we're going to talk about impeachment in a moment here here's an example of why it's better to be a boomer than a Doomer now boomers people like me my age we have a lot of experience we've seen a bunch of things does it help well let me give you an example today I saw message came in to me from social media platform and it was a writer asking me if I would be interviewed for an article he wants to

[13:38]

interviewed for an article he wants to write on the topic of love and persuasion and because I talk about persuasion he thought oh I'll ask this cartoonist guy if you will give me some quotes for my article on love and persuasion what did I say because I'm a boomer and it's not my first day on earth I said nope nope not again anywhere near it because can you imagine how many ways that would go wrong as soon as you throw persuasion and love and the same conversation nothing can go right from that point on whatever I would be quoted as saying would look terrible out of context because it would be his context whatever his article was going to be it wouldn't be my context I might be able to do it but probably not I mean I don't need to think I could do it if I did everything I could to put it in the right context it would just seem creepy

[14:39]

right context it would just seem creepy all right so that's one of the advantages of just being around a while if I were 25 and I got that same request you know what I would have said oh free attention I'm all over it so and by the way okay do myrrh with a with a D as in dog as a response to okay boomer works really well because it does seem that the younger people feel like everything is doomed do you know why young people think everything is doomed climate science is going to kill us president Trump's going to blow up the world do you know why because young people still believe that the news is legitimate imagine a lot of you are let's say probably half of you are over 40 I'm guessing roughly I saw my statistics recently that's about right it's about half of you or over 40

[15:47]

haven't you seen the doom and then just kidding process just repeat itself we're all doomed now I guess it's okay oh no we're gonna die mmm thank it's not oh we're all we're running out of oil yeah not so much yeah it's gonna be a nuclear war well it didn't happen if you see it enough you become skeptical of everything else so the dimers which is a perfect name for them because they've been sold this story of doom are walking around in this weird doom bubble that I do not envy now when I was a child I was I grew up in the era in which we thought Russia was going to nuke us at any moment we actually had a nuclear bomb shelter in my house now it wasn't very effective because it was just a basement but my father wasn't exactly a radiation expert let's say so he builds a little bomb shelter in the basement and I I actually

[16:48]

shelter in the basement and I I actually didn't think I would grow up to adulthood I actually believe the odds were very good that I would be killed in a nuclear war and that was my childhood and a childhood where you actually expected that it was a high likelihood you'd die in a nuclear fireball all right let's talk about let's talk about impeachment because I know you want to do that so I've been calling this an emotional impeachment and I I don't think I've ever branded anything better because once you consider that even the Democrats think there's no real chance that the president will be removed from his office that what was the point isn't the point of impeachment you're trying to remove him but if you know that's not going to work why are you doing it well of course there's the political part and Pelosi said it directly she said

[17:50]

and Pelosi said it directly she said that the president would always have this this stain of impeachment would be dogging him forever she used her own words but she basically put it in terms of haha I gotcha that's that ha ha i stain you that's why they did it because it feels just personal and emotional and completely irrational now I get that they think it's going to work maybe for elections but that would be dumb because I think they should have been able to predict that it would help his fundraising it would galvanize his base exactly what happened it's the same thing that happened to Bernie Sanders his fundraising went through the roof when Sanders wouldn't Warren attacked him so was Pelosi not wise enough to know that this would work in the president's favor when there's a pretty good track record to suggest especially with Bill Clinton to suggest it probably would so if it

[18:50]

to suggest it probably would so if it wasn't to remove him from office and it wasn't even to hurt him in the election really unless you make the case that it's all about getting Democratic senators elected the next time they have a chance to do that it just looks like it was emotional it looked like it was an emotional impeachment so I've joked that so far the impeachment trial looks like a combination of three movies did you see the little impeachment parade okay I watched the impeachment parade live because I thought it would be hilarious it was a little funnier than I had hoped because they were all trying to act serious and somber after they'd all been yucking it up when with Nancy handing out the twenty ceremonial pens that they're trying not to look like they're happy about the day so they're doing the somber March mm-hmm we are sombering it is a solemn day

[19:51]

sombering it is a solemn day let us solemnly march with our little black suits and Nancy's pink but we're wearing our little black suits and it looked like there were three movies that had been put together as a trilogy the first movie if you've ever seen march of the Penguins it looked like a bunch of penguins right you know yet Nadler there the monarch penguin but they all sort of had these black suits and they all were like walking down not talking so you got march of the Penguins then of course the trial is just going to be dumb and Dumberer I don't know how it could go any other way it's going to be dumb and Dumberer you know you don't have to wait for the details that's what it's going to be and in the end we know how it ends Titanic it's a three movie trilogy march of the Penguins Dumb and Dumber and Titanic that's the whole impeachment trial boo do you want to know how the impeachment should go well let me tell

[20:55]

impeachment should go well let me tell you I tweeted this out and you know people keep accusing me of course of always supporting the president and his team and everything but I've said over and over that I think the Republicans have totally botched their defense of the president in terms of the sole Ukrainian thing and the quid pro quo and all that here's why it's botched and they and the Senate has as a chance to make good on this so here's here's what I tweeted in terms of how the Senate should handle the impeachment trial two steps step number one ask both the Democrats they're their top lawyer which lawyer wasn't Feldman one of the one of the Democrats lawyers admitted in the last round of impeachment hearings he admitted that there was a legitimate

[21:56]

admitted that there was a legitimate reason to look into buries MA and the Biden's so question number one you asked you asked a Democrat lawyer and then you asked a Republican lawyer doesn't matter who thoroughly could be you know Dershowitz and you say based on what we know was there a legitimate US national interest in understanding what was going on with Purisima and the Biden's now the answer is going to be yes because both the Democrats are the Republic the Republic ins are going to say yeah kind of had to look into that step to vote just vote because that's the only thing that matters the the Democrats have correctly completely bamboozled and owned the Republicans by making them talk about the topic of whether it was for the president's own self-interest it's not relevant it's not and in this in every

[23:00]

relevant it's not and in this in every moment that the Republicans argued that it you know argued the case of was it a quid pro quo any of those details about who said what who wrote what who was in the meeting as soon as the Republicans engage in any of that they've lost because most of the trick from the Democrats is to get them to engage in all the details because the more you're thinking about the details the more you're thinking about impeachment and the more it's bad for the president it just gets you in that my god there's all this stuff why are we talking about it it must be important because we're talking about complete mistake total mistake even the house should have done the same thing we've got one question was it legitimate for the United States to look into this verismo Biden situation the answer is yes Democrats will say yes Republicans will say yes that's the end it doesn't matter if it's

[24:00]

that's the end it doesn't matter if it's also good for the president's re-election it doesn't matter completely irrelevant the Senate should say this is a big complicated thing but it comes down to one question was there a u.s. legitimate interest yes say Democrats yes say Republicans bipartisan let's vote if they have witnesses well the only the only reason to have witnesses is if they already know what Bolton and anybody else is going to say and that it doesn't add anything to it and what they'd really love is to bring hunter Biden in now the Democrats are arguing that bringing hunter Biden in doesn't make sense because he's not a fact witness meaning he's not a direct witness to any of the conversations between Ukraine and the president and the president and his staff he's outside of that circle so therefore he's irrelevant wrong completely wrong why because there's

[25:01]

completely wrong why because there's only one question the one question that matters did the United States have a legitimate reason to look into buries and the Biden's how do you know the answer to that question without talking to hunter Biden and saying we got a few questions for you you know might not answer all of our questions but we'll at least find out if there's something that was sketchy enough that the president had a legitimate reason to look into it could be there's nothing there I mean nothing beyond the the obvious sois penis that we see so that's the way should go there's this other sub story about Giuliani telling love love as was I guess some loose associate who was helping over in Ukraine and apparently there's a distinction that the Democrats are trying to make between Giuliani working for the government you know

[26:01]

working for the government you know doing the doing what's good for the United States versus was doing what's good only for Trump's reelection in other words only something that's personally good for him and Giuliani apparently was telling people including Lev Parnassus that he represented to be very clear that he represents the the president not the government so he's the president's personal attorney not the government how should you interpret that well one way to interpret is oh that's proof it's proof it wasn't for the country it's proof it was just for Trump's own good reelection no that's only one way to interpret it here's the other way to interpret it Giuliani did not have official government let's say portfolio he was not appointed he was not elected he had not registered as some kind of a lobbyist I'm sure from a legal perspective if you're a lawyer wouldn't

[27:02]

perspective if you're a lawyer wouldn't you like to make you clear to everybody that you're not officially working for the US government probably it probably has some specific legal importance that he needed to say no I'm not an official emissary from the government because I would imagine that would put him under some different legal constraints but here's the thing if Giuliani says I represent Trump can you separate that from Trump's job and the answer is you can't I've had lawyers lots of lawyers in fact I fired one of my lawyers last week I got lots of lawyers for different phases of my business you know there's the contract lawyers there's other kinds of lawyers and here's the thing do my lawyers no matter what field they're working in do my lawyers make a distinction between me personally and me

[28:04]

distinction between me personally and me the creator of Dilbert has a job and a public figure the answer is no no they don't because if they did I'd fire him because I am a complete person who is me personally and me my profession yes separate that so what does it mean to say that Giuliani is the president's personal lawyer it doesn't mean he's not concerned with the job of being president of course he is because otherwise you couldn't serve the the client which is the person so I don't know that that means anything the Giuliani said he's personally representing the president because you can't really separate out the profession from that it's not a thing
now here's the funniest part so yesterday i hear i heard this story that i didn't even understand and it didn't make any sense i'm noticing my numbers are way down today must be because the

[29:04]

are way down today must be because the impeachment sun or people watching the impeachment live right now so this guy love part as well we we got from the documents that were produced that this guy Robert Hyde who is a prominent Trump donor so some rich Trump donor was making in some messages the left part as was suggesting that he had the Ukraine ambassador Jovanovic under some kind of surveillance and I saw this messages and I thought what because when I read it I have something on my lip when I read it I did not get that out of it so a lot of people were reading those messages and they seem to be getting some kind of a point out of it that I wasn't getting when I read it and it took me a day to figure out what even what they were seeing and what they were seeing is that

[30:04]

seeing and what they were seeing is that it seemed to indicate that this rich Trump donor robber hide somehow was involved in direct monitoring or investigating or like stalking this ambassador in Ukraine when I read it I just thought well that just sounds like crazy talk so my impression was it looks like crazy talk I didn't think anything of it and I didn't even know what other people were seeing so he was asked by and this is just this is just so funny this is my favorite part of the day so he gets interviewed by Rachel Maddow and if he says no that text message you saw was just this robbery this hide guy uses drunk now Maddow cleverly because she's very smart and whether you like Rachel Maddow not we'd all agree she's super smart so

[31:06]

not we'd all agree she's super smart so she sees the flawed mess and she says that hides texts which were sort of up the same similar topic went on for several days so the explanation that he was drunk doesn't really fit with the evidence and here's just the best thing part ass quickly noted he's drunk the whole time Parnassus responded he wakes up at his drunk he starts at six I'd never seen him not drunk that's the star witness the best evidence they've ever had against this president is somebody who'd starts drinking at 6:00 in the morning oh can it be better than that it can't be better than that I mean it really can't be better than that so so not only is Rachel Maddow interviewing the person

[32:06]

is Rachel Maddow interviewing the person this left part ass who based on just a little bit I've heard I thought was the least credible person on the planet Earth and I thought to myself you know your whole case is built around this left part ask I am from what I can tell I mean I don't know him personally but it feels like he might be the least credible person I've ever heard in my life but he's not the least credible person you've ever heard of in your life is the guy who was texting him drunk at 6:00 in the morning that guy was a little less credible so if you look back at the messages and you say to yourself okay now let's put the drunk filter on it do those look like drunk messages yeah yeah they do they look pretty drunk to me so there's that devyn newness getting a little heat

[33:06]

devyn newness getting a little heat because I guess he had said that he didn't know who left burn as was but we have now learned that there was I think one phone call that newness took which he says he did not remember now if you're Democrats how do you react to that I uh liar he's a liar because he said he didn't know who this let live porn ask I was but now we have proof that he had a phone call with him liar well that's what inexperienced people say here's what experienced people say they say exactly what Devon noonas said he said I'm in Congress I'm paraphrasing do you know how many people we meet and talk to in an average day a lot how many of them would he remember their names

[34:08]

of them would he remember their names and and have some lasting memory of 10 percent 20 percent of all the people he meets how many does he actually remember their names a year later no more than 10 percent so if you're an inexperienced person or let's say an artist you might say to yourself well if he talked to the guy he obviously knows them if you've done anything in your life that involves meeting lots of people and this is my life as well do you know how many people I meet do you know how many people send me a message and I communicate with him today before I got on here I communicated with maybe 12 people whose names I'd never seen before that I actually directly had a communication with now most of them we're on LinkedIn people were messaging me and I was just saying hey responding to queries and questions and stuff so

[35:09]

to queries and questions and stuff so now there are 12 people just this morning just today in my life I'm just a cartoonist but in my life twelve new people entered my life every one of them will remember that they communicated with me because I'm the Dilbert guy how many of them will I remember their name if I saw it again and they say hey do you remember we talked none probably none I write I might remember the topic but I'm not going in my brain in one of their names so what are the odds that Devin newness is telling the truth that it was just one of many phone calls and he doesn't remember it I'd say close to 100% right he can't read minds you never know he could be wrong but that's completely credible completely credible so the people who say that he should have remembered or just an experienced they're not they're not just wrong they're probably just an experienced huh

[36:12]

they're probably just an experienced huh all right so let's see what else we got here hilariously on Jeopardy I think it was yesterday one of the questions was about Adam Schiff so Adam Schiff was the answer to a Jeopardy question and none of the contestants knew who he was so if you ever wondered hey this is the rest of the country paying attention like we are there's most of you are probably political junkies if you're if you're watching this periscope and it's easy to forget the rest of the country isn't paying attention to any of this none of it three very smart people on Jeopardy didn't even know who this guy was when they saw a picture of them now it's extra funny to me because I've been a Jeopardy answer maybe three or four times and they always get it right so so when the Jeopardy question / answer is

[37:15]

when the Jeopardy question / answer is about me personally I think at least one of the contestants has gotten it right every time you know sometimes it's about the Dilbert comic sometimes it's about me so I think I'm three to one advantage over Adam Schiff on the on the all-important Jeopardy's jeopardy scale so there was gigantic news yesterday I mean really big news about Trump signing phase one of the China trade deal I mean that's big big news so I want to read about it on the CNN website but it didn't have anything it's the biggest news and I looked at the CNN you know website and I'm like all right let's see what CNN says about the China trade deal crickets there was one tiny little article over on the the non emphasized part of the page about something bizarre

[38:15]

part of the page about something bizarre that happened during the signing there was something weird happened and I think it was just because Trump talked about impeachment or something whatever it was that's it that's like one of the biggest stories of all time and it didn't even make the front pages see you then
Gordon Chang who I quote lots less time so he's an expert on all things in terms of China and North Korea and other stuff and basically oh oh this was CNN's headline the the little squid they had Trump strut China trade deal signing takes us a real turn that's a there was something surreal about the signing itself alright so Gordon Chang basically said the deal is inadequate so fake deal because China is not going to do anything they say and that the part about protecting intellectual property

[39:16]

about protecting intellectual property is a totally fake because they still have the ability to monitor and steal anything in the country so anything that has an electronic communication to it they're going to pick up in the country so it's easy for China to say oh yeah we won't force you to turn over your technology to us they don't need to they'll just steal so they can actually agree to it because they're not giving anything up that will just steal it anyway so Gordon Chang says it's a fake deal basically I'm I don't want to I shouldn't put words in his mouth but certainly there's a deal with some substantial holes in it do I think that's true yes yes I do do you know what's missing and they haven't talked about fentanyl fentanyl is missing so I'm not a fan of the China deal because if fentanyl is not the first thing that you deal you're not dealing with the country you should be doing any business with it all so we

[40:18]

doing any business with it all so we just made a business deal with the country that's knowingly killing tens of thousands of Americans every year I would call that a gigantic failure all right so I'll put that in my in my portfolio of criticisms of Trump so when everybody says hey you keep agreeing with them all the time put that in there too
too phase one trade deal I would call a gigantic failure because they shouldn't even be able to negotiate until they've shut down the fentanyl dealers that should be that should be a ticket to the negotiations if that's in Phase two really phase two you're gonna wait for that or it's not even part of the deal
somebody said Trump did Trump talked about it he mentioned two rests well until the major I'll wait to see an

[41:18]

until the major I'll wait to see an article on that oh so I'm being corrected in the comments that he did mention it but but I don't see it in the news anywhere so I'll have to dig a little deeper it's not in the headlines yeah we mentioned it the ceremony but it doesn't mean that they've actually done it so here's the thing and I'll say this a million times until this this message is all you can think about unfenced '''l there's one guy in China who's the guy he's the main fentanyl dealer there's probably slesin ones but there's one who the who our government we have his picture we have his name and 60 minutes actually found him and talked to him he's not even hard to find he's a public figure we know his name we know his picture and we told China this is a guy if you don't hear that guy's in jail or or executed they're not trying so anything else they do is just BS all right so let me call me a giant

[42:23]

BS all right so let me call me a giant skeptic on the China deal I say decouple let's decoupled all right see what else we've got going on here
yeah so somebody's saying that in the comments that number one guy needs to be dealt with I had one critic today on Twitter which is strange usually they're more and he tweeted back to me that I'm a dishonest clown I'm a dishonest clown so I tweeted back to him how long have you been involved in the arts if you're new to this you know that I mocked people for being artists because artists do not have a good view of the world had he been an economist probably would have given me some reasons for disagree so I said to him Michael Grant who

[43:26]

so I said to him Michael Grant who called me a dishonest clown I said how long have you been involved in the arts and he responded back he's written a hundred and fifty books over 40 years and so I said good for you very productive I no longer want to get into debates with artists I'm just going to note they're artists and then move on if you haven't tried this you really need to because somebody says you're an artist let me give some context thank you for asking first of all I'm not much of an artist but it is true that I write and I draw for a living in my book loser think which I'm sure all of you have ordered by now if you haven't already read it I talked about how having exposure to multiple fields gives you more windows into every topic so I'm an artist but I'm also I've got a degree in economics I've got an MBA in business and I've worked in corporate

[44:28]

business and I've worked in corporate areas and everything from marketing to strategy to you name it so in my particular case art is my job but my actual experience is much broader than that yes that is what I wrote it in my book it's called loser think I'll put it back here so you can't you can't help but look at it all right what else we got here we got so do you know the the musical what do you call a musical artist Akon akom those of you who are not up on your music he's one of the most successful artists in the world and I think he came from Senegal or that's that's where his family roots are I can't remember in Africa but he's building his own city there so Akon decided to build his own city in Senegal

[45:30]

decided to build his own city in Senegal and he's they're gonna have their own cryptocurrency and I love this I absolutely love this now I don't I'm not going to say that Akon is going to build the best city what I love is that he's trying and he even says the same thing what's the point of having a billion dollars if you're not going to go fix stuff I'm a big fan all right I mean I was a fan of his music but when you see an artist of this stature say what's the point of having a billion dollars if you're not you know trying to fix the world and then he goes out and he tries to build a city in Senegal I don't even care if it works I love what this guy is doing for for the world for the way we think you know the way we I just love that he's a/b testing you know I'm sure he wants this to be the thing that works but whether it works or not we're gonna learn something and maybe the the city after that or in the city after that is

[46:30]

after that or in the city after that is a good one but good going hey God I like to think that in some ways I would be surprised if Kanye is not somehow an influence on this directly or indirectly because you know Kanye's trying also separately to design and build lower-cost structures for people to live in which is good stuff all right I told you one of the tricks that CNN uses with its opinion pieces is that they will they'll make a claim about usually Trump how bad he is and then you know then you have to read way way way down the article to see why they say it so what you know why are you saying that and there was just this best example one of their usual pundits who just writes an anti Trump piece every day for their website this is this is how he starts it

[47:32]

website this is this is how he starts it sorry this is on cnn.com President Trump is not waiting to be acquitted of impeachable crimes so first of all he says that the crimes are impeachable that's not true so the very first sentence tries to get you to uncritically accept that these are impeachable crimes well he wasn't peached but they are not really impeachable crimes because we're gonna find out that the Senate is gonna throw it out so I suppose maybe technically it's true but they're not crimes there's no crimes involved or even alleged so a CNN in news site the very first sentence accuses Donald Trump of having impeachable crimes and yet their own reporting has never suggested a crime at least in terms of what's impeachable and what's what's on the the impeachable list and then it goes on to

[48:34]

impeachable list and then it goes on to show that no one can stop him doing what he wants to do what that's what Trump is doing he's trying to show the world that no one can stop him I don't is that mind reading where do you get that what factual basis do you have the Trump is quote try to show that no one can stop him doing what he wants to do that's not an evidence there's no evidence of that at all and he doesn't even offer an argument he just says it like it's a fact then he says no Constitution Democratic House code of accepted presidential behavior for an Islamic rule of the baba baba baba is going to rein him in so basically saying nothing's gonna rein him in so the the tenor of this is that he's going to become a dictator because he's going to get away with this impeachable stuff that doesn't exist and then weigh down

[49:36]

that doesn't exist and then weigh down the article I'm waiting for the actual reasons because so far it's just a bunch of insults and accusations that don't match the facts but way down I'm waiting for well there must be some reasons so let's get to the reasons so after an entire page of insults and you know libelous claims such as crimes he hears his reason a week after a showdown with Iran I'm nearly erupted into a new war the administration is still defying congressional demands for more information about the rationale for killing Tehran Tehran's top General now this entire story is based on CNN and other people miss quoting the president so when you finally get to a reason it's not even a real one it's based on the misquote because what the president said was that he believes for embassies would

[50:39]

was that he believes for embassies would have been targeted they changed that into he saw hehe he claimed he saw you know Intel therefore specific embassies were being targeted never said that he stated his belief that for embassies would be targeted he's right he's wrong it doesn't matter it was a belief CNN turned it into a statement of fact that fact checked it turned it into a statement that he was lying and then turned it into more of an argument that nothing will stop him and he's going to only do undemocratic things things before he becomes a second term dictator this is so far from reasonable discourse in Rolling Stone had an article by Matt Taibbi who what did he call I want to say exactly what he called CNN I forgot

[51:42]

say exactly what he called CNN I forgot to write down this quote but the so Matt Taibbi just went after CNN especially for that part where Abby Phillip treated the difference the the disagreement between Warren and Bernie as being Warren Warren is true because it must be true what Warren is saying because a CNN has reported as fact now as smart people have pointed out a number of them you've seen a bunch of people say this the reason that CNN reported it as a fact well it had to be one of two people told them because there were only two people in the room Bernie or Elizabeth Warren and then she said and then and then I think it was Abby Phillips said that Elizabeth Warren confirmed was CNN reported know obviously Elizabeth Warren or her people

[52:43]

obviously Elizabeth Warren or her people are the people who told CNN in the first place if if Warren confirmed it there's no confirmation it's still the same source it's one source said something that the other source says didn't happen that's it so for seeing them to treat it like it's a fact because they got it from Warren and then Warren said it was true so was confirmed they turned one fact into two facts right in front of you there is they're not even trying to hide it so as Tucker Carlson pointed out and Matt Taibbi pointed out in rolling stones stone cNN has just stopped they've stopped any pretense of not being a political player any any thought of being a news organization this is sort of out the out the door and it's amazing to watch because as I said before the do MERS still think it's news

[53:45]

before the do MERS still think it's news the do MERS watch MSNBC and they watch CNN and they actually think they're watching the news they're not it's not the news anymore that's that's what it used to be I would like to close by saying have you ever tried to mail a letter recently I so yesterday you know I had these w-2s they come to me and they come in these envelopes this size and I needed to mail them out to my a couple assistants and I thought to myself how do you mail things it's been so long since I put a stamp on an envelope and mailed it that I was having a little trouble remembering how to do it so the first thing I needed to do is get these things called stamps and I thought I had some in a drawer you know there's a little junk drawer in my kitchen and I was sure I saw some stamps

[54:48]

kitchen and I was sure I saw some stamps in there some time ago so I looked through the drawer and I looked again because I knew there were stamps and I couldn't find him so I looked again and then I really looked I took each item out and really looked and the stamps were not in the drawer now all of the men watching this know what happened next I don't even have to say the next part do I so finally after several times of looking through this one drawer I didn't look at anything anywhere else because I do it was in the drawer looked and looked couldn't find it I went to Christina and I said can you help me find the stamps I think they're in this drawer but I can't find them so she said sure but I think we said it wouldn't I was in the car and we didn't write it down to remind ourselves and forgot and I thought about it again but she was busy I thought about it again but she was out of the house I thought about it again but I was busy it took me one week to find a time when Christine and I were

[55:48]

find a time when Christine and I were both available at the same time and in my kitchen so that she could open the drawer and do this here you go here are your stamps that are right here here you go now you already knew that's what was gonna happen right it's a basic male female difference when I look in the drawer I just see noise and it's really hard for me to pick out an item when she looks in the drawer she sees all the items like I don't know how it's just some kind of male female difference I guess she sees them all so she says oh here's your stamps I spent probably 30 minutes total on different occasions looking through that drawer without finding those stamps so now I've got my stamps and I thought to myself how do you know how many stamps to put it on a letter because it's it's not a regular sized letter so I've got to go to the website for the USPS comm and I'm

[56:49]

website for the USPS comm and I'm looking for the information on like how much postage to put on it and luckily I've got a postal scale behind me so I take out my postal scale I go to the website and there's no example of this envelope you know you have to sort of guess well it might be sort of this thing or that thing but not really a direct answer so I'm sort of guessing so then I use my scale and the battery's dead so now I've got to go find a battery to put in my scale so I can weigh my envelope so I can look on the website to figure out what the postage is get my stamps put it on the letter okay now I finally figure out roughly what the postage would be but I figure I'll because I don't wanted to go light so I take my stamps and there are these forever stamps and I look at them and I go what's a forever stamp I mean I think

[57:51]

go what's a forever stamp I mean I think I know but I'm not positive I know there's a forever stamp work for any kind of humble is it a specific value or does it say that anything that this kind of envelope will always be this so after google what's a forever stamp but I don't have enough forever stamps I've got some other stamps with a value on them so I'm looking at these I'm like I just put too much on it so I just over postage that and now I've got to take them somewhere and I'm like well I could put them in the mailbox and put the thing up but sometimes they don't take it so I ended up driving to the UPS Store because I had another package I had to drop off anyway and I think altogether I spend a half a day trying to put stamps on an envelope and mail it and I thought to myself no I did not lick the stamps they were they were self licking stamps man we got to get rid of

[58:56]

licking stamps man we got to get rid of the post office let me ask you this if listen let's say if amazon.com offer to buy the post office and privatize it would you be ok with that I would because that post office should be taking the mail that I get scanning it and emailing it to me period I should never get a piece of mail let me tell you my other mail problem so several years ago I created a rule where no US mail can enter my house it can only enter the garage because the garbage is out there so I always sort my mail in the garage because if it gets in the house it becomes a big pile of garbage in your house and almost all of the u.s. mail is garbage almost all of it
it so I sorted in my garage so that it can't get in my house but my mailman keeps Thornton because he'll if he has a package he'll bring it to my door and then to do me a

[59:57]

bring it to my door and then to do me a favor he brings the mail also to the door and like mailman I love my mailman he's a great guy but I don't like mail in my house can you bring it to my garage there should never be mail in my house all right that's nothing that I will talk to you all later