Episode 1139 Scott Adams: Debate Preview, I Explain Trump Taxes to Artists, Ballot Harvesting

Date: 2020-09-29 | Duration: 47:31

Topics

Find my “extra” content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com

Rough Transcript

This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

Transcript

---

• Money morons

• Why haven’t MSNBC and CNN interviewed a tax expert?

• Name the tax codes you think should be changed

• Brit Hume describes Joe Biden as…“plainly senile”

• Watch for the Biden over-smile in tonight’s debate

• llhan Omar ballot harvesting story, media black hole?

If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
[0:02]

oaky california i'd love to tell you that that's fog but it's not it's uh the forest fires are encroaching again these are not too close to where i live in this case but uh the wine country is in trouble how
how however that's not our concern right now because at this moment in time everything is perfect sure people are having trouble everywhere but are you right now no you're watching coffee with scott adams possibly the best part of your day no probably the best part of your day and everything's starting to go really well for you anyway too bad about other people but you're doing great and the only way that you could do better is with a simultaneous sip and all it takes is a gopro mug or a glass of tiger chelsea steiner canteen choker flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee

[1:03]

coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes everything better except my air quality it's called the simultaneous up and it happens now go
yeah yeah yeah yeah that's good here's the coolest thing that happened yesterday i saw an advertisement for uh an electric bicycle for the water that's my own description of it it's a they call it a hydrofoil and it's the manta 5 and you ride it like a little bicycle and you pedal it and there's a little propeller underneath you and it's just a bicycle kind of a frame except that it has some kind of floating device underneath it and it has an electric bicycle kind of assist and i looked at the video of people just zipping around on that thing and i thought you know when i the first

[2:05]

and i thought you know when i the first time i rode an electric bike and i told you about this i realized that this is really the future you spend 10 seconds on an e-bike and you wouldn't want to do any other kind of transportation it's just a cool feeling and i've got a feeling that the electric assist human pedaled vehicles are going to be way way bigger than they are now all right so that's coming other big news the government task force announced there's now a 15-minute test for covent and they're going to make 100 million of them and hand them out now the trouble is apparently it still requires some kind of a health care professional to administer it why don't know because apparently it's not a deep nasal swab it's you know it's toward the the front of your nose it's not the kind that some of you have had where they stick it up to your brain so all you do is go ramp rat in your

[3:05]

all you do is go ramp rat in your nostril stick it in a little uh liquid no machines involved and wait 15 minutes and you definitely need a nurse to do that right what yeah somebody's saying it's because of liability well whatever it is it could obviously be changed i would say that if there's some kind of law
law i don't know law regulation rule or something that requires a healthcare professional for that let's change that today is there any reason that by the end of today that should not already be changed because there's no reason for it right can we all agree that whatever dumbass reason there is that you need a health care professional to go right in your nose that's it i'm pretty sure that we can we could get rid of whatever obstacle that is and make more of them now it's not quite where we need it to be where you where

[4:06]

where we need it to be where you where you've got like a one dollar test that everybody can do at home three times a day that would be that that would be the end of coronavirus if we had that but we're getting close getting pretty close i don't think it's good enough for contact tracing either necessarily but uh you know there are a whole bunch of things collectively that are all that are all working in the right direction so that's the good news
as you know you've probably heard this trump has now been nominated a third time for the nobel peace prize three separate nominations and what's interesting is each nomination is different in other words he's not being nominated three times for exactly the same reasons three separate reasons you know they're related of course but he's done enough now that you could have three legitimate nominations for the nobel peace prize you know at the same time how would you

[5:09]

you know at the same time how would you like to be debating against a guy who just got three separate nobel peace prize nominations now will he win any i i don't know you know would i say eddie will he win one i don't know but three nominations for three completely defendable defensible reasons is pretty strong um the portal and police are getting more aggressive and one of the things that they're doing is trying to take the shields away from the protesters i guess they found a they found a big stockpile of shields and they went in and they took them away so i was reading about this on twitter and
and my first impression of that was oh that's good because the shields are obviously being used as offensive weapons and makes the protesters more bold and it's probably bad news right you don't really need a shield to peacefully protest

[6:09]

need a shield to peacefully protest do you explain to me why you would need a shield
to peacefully protest and so when i read the comments i thought well those comments are going to agree with me why wouldn't they given that i'm so darn clever and right all the time so i look at the comments and i'm waiting for the part where they say yeah that's a good strategy take the shields away i think that could make a difference maybe maybe everything would be better if we do that but the comments did not say that the comment said well it's obvious that they planned violence because they took the shields away meaning that it's obvious that the police were planning violence because why else would they take the shields away and i thought okay the first time i read that i thought okay well there's always there's always some idiot right there's always somebody who has a weird opinion about anything and then i read the next one it's basically the same opinion hey those those fascist cops

[7:09]

hey those those fascist cops taking our only protection away they're gonna kill us with rubber bullets in the head now and i thought okay well two crazy people and then i kept reading and they're pretty much uniformly against police removing shields which are basically weapons the way they're being used they're used in a offensive way not a defensive way uh different worlds what can i say
but it does seem like a good strategy um so i was chatting with my smartest democrat friend uh i mentioned him often because he's very smart legitimately very smart and very well informed but disagrees with me on everything trump related which makes it fascinating because when you're disagreeing with somebody stupid or uninformed well that's the whole story there's nothing interesting about that right yeah the reason you're disagreeing is that you know some stuff and they

[8:11]

is that you know some stuff and they don't know anything so of course you disagree but when you run into somebody who is actually smart and well informed and really paying attention and they disagree and you pay attention too
too and you think you're pretty smart well there's something to learn here so yesterday i guess i mentioned something about the shy trump supporters not showing up in the polls and my smartest friend who actually knows quite a bit about this field said that's not true it's debunked it was debunked in 2016 and when people looked into it they found that there was no such thing as shy trump supporters in actuality there were problems with the polling but it didn't have to do with people lying to pollsters
and i thought to myself that's weird because the news that i've read was exactly the opposite that it was confirmed and that they found it and i sent him an article that showed it was confirmed it was in

[9:12]

that showed it was confirmed it was in you know some major publication and and he said no no that was initially initially they thought they existed but when the deep dive was done it was confirmed it was debunked no such thing as these uh these uh shy trump supporters the very next morning i i i see an article that joel pollock was tweeting around from pres stevens in the new york times in which he interviewed a shy trump supporter someone who wouldn't tell anybody she worked with that she was a trump supporter and gave her reasons and she it's important for the story it's not important in any other way but because every time we tell a story about politics you have to throw in their their demographic information someday we won't have to do that you know i i think i agree with martin luther king you know someday we won't have to throw

[10:14]

you know someday we won't have to throw in somebody's gender and sexual preference and ethnicity just to tell a freaking story right i mean nothing really bothers me as much as that in terms of you know the way we talk about things that you have to do that but you have to do that and so this was a story in the new york times about a woman who was a described as a 50 year old lesbian who wouldn't want her co-workers and friends to know she was a trump supporter and when she was asked about some details of what she liked or didn't like there was only one thing that she didn't like about trump she was she was an ex-bernie supporter and she liked trump's economics and she liked a lot about him but there was one thing there was one thing she she did have a problem with it was the fine people hoax which she didn't know was a hoax she only had one problem with trump and it was the thing that never happened the fine people oaks now as

[11:14]

the fine people oaks now as brett stevens uh asks in the article essentially i wonder if there's anybody else like that is there anybody else out there who just just pretending to not be a trump supporter but really is
is so i ran my highly unscientific twitter poll to see if i could stir up some people and here's the question i asked i said have you lied to pollsters about your trump support now the way i worded it was i didn't say would you lie because that's that's sketchy because people might say they'd lie but maybe they're lying to me and when they're actually asked they might just automatically say the the truth so i so instead of saying you know would you lie i said have you lied have you actually literally physically no kidding have you actually lied to a pollster about your trump support uh

[12:15]

about your trump support uh 18 of the people who answered said yes which in just the the few minutes that the poll ran you know the numbers are clicking up like crazy but just in the first few minutes i think maybe two minutes or so that that came to over 630 people who followed me on twitter who happened to see that tweet who happened to answer it
it which is you know a very shrinking group of people 630 of them have actually lied to pollsters now it's a twitter poll so can i can i be sure that these numbers are reliable in any way no no it's an unscientific poll but do you think that 630 people within two minutes or so would have lied to me but would not lie to a pollster maybe right i mean possibly possibly there were 630 people who said i think i'm going to lie to this

[13:16]

i think i'm going to lie to this cartoonist why what what reason would you have to lie
lie on my twitter poll you know if it if it had been an hour later i would say oh maybe trolls have have spotted it and a bunch of democrats are coming in to mess up the poll or something like that but it happened in two minutes in two minutes it just lit up with people who said they lied literally already have lied to real pollsters do you think that's fake it could be right it could be the the whole point of it being unscientific is you just can't say for sure it's true it could be 630 liars just sprang up just like that maybe what do you think i don't know my belief is that uh however many of the 630 lied there's still probably plenty left over to suggest there's a big number there now let me ask you this in 2016 if you were

[14:16]

in 2016 if you were going to vote for trump had he not won or even if he did win did you think there was a big risk to the rest of your life maybe you thought a little bit but probably not that much i don't remember being terribly concerned uh that my reputation would be destroyed forever in 2016. but 2020 in 2020 you could actually get killed for being identified as a trump supporter let me say that again you could actually get killed and at least one person has as far as i can tell for being a trump supporter if if i were to let's say go to some business or personal thing in berkeley california down the road and i was just i just happened to be there for my own personal reasons and i happened to walk out the door and accidentally i didn't know it was going to happen but i came into the middle of a

[15:16]

i came into the middle of a blm protest suppose i would suppose somebody recognized me think about this if i just walked down the door and didn't know there was a protest outside and just walked into the middle of it and somebody recognized me would i be safe no no i would actually be in mortal danger my life would be in danger just by walking outdoors if somebody recognized me now if if if i go where there's more normal people than in berkeley i don't feel afraid but i can't believe that 2020 is going to be like 2016 because the the level of literal physical economic danger in saying you support trump is through the roof compared to 2016. all right here's a little dog not barking situation for you watch cnn and msnbc as long as they're talking about trump's taxes and here's what you want to look for

[16:17]

and here's what you want to look for look for somebody talking about his taxes on one of those two networks who actually knows taxes
i haven't seen it yet now i would guess it's probably happened you know i would think at least once they would have had somebody on who understands taxes but i don't think so have you seen it yet have you seen anybody on either of those networks who could explain why the tax code is why it is what it is and why trump's taxes are the way they are i don't think so and when i pointed that out on twitter uh
uh someone helpfully pointed me to a cbs interview in which they did try to bring on
on a tax expert how do you think that went when the tax expert was asked about all these sketchy looking trump deductions and why didn't pay taxes did the tax expert someone who actually understands taxes say my god that's a travesty

[17:19]

say my god that's a travesty how can he get it how could he do that some some law must have been violated or at the very least something ethical and unethical and immoral happened do you think that happened nope the tax expert said yeah that's those are just standard deductions it's just the way basically this is the way you do it this this deduction was available so he took it one of the things i learned by watching that and i've been waiting to hear about this because i hadn't heard about it all is there the the point of the audit is that the and he is being audited trump is is there was a 72 million dollar tax rebate i guess you'd call it in other words the government paid him 72 million that he had previously paid in taxes they gave it back and i didn't know what the situation was but apparently it was this uh obama and the obama era they passed the law that said you could

[18:20]

they passed the law that said you could you could take into account losses for earlier prior years than before so the only thing that happened is that trump uh initially did not have any way to write off that 72 million he'd already paid it was just gone it was just money that was gone but obama changed the law specifically for companies like his where they had a they had a loss and they hadn't they didn't get the benefit of it because it was too far away so all trump did apparently his lawyer said hey there's a new law it totally applies to us so we're going to apply for this 72 million apparently they filled out the paperwork apparently the government looked at it apparently the government said yeah that looks good and they mailed them 72 million dollars so if you think that whatever happened there was some sketchy thing i doubt it i mean i'm not even sure why it's being audited

[19:20]

it's being audited because it sounds like it was pretty straight forward but that's not that's not the way you heard it from the new york times is it yeah did you hear that in the first 24 hours or so did anybody explain to you that all trump did his is his accountants did was they applied for a rebate that obama made available that's it that's all that happened that whole part of that story now there may be more to it which would be the subject of the audit but it's not evidence as far as i know all right uh here are some other things that people who don't understand how finance and taxes work have been thinking the first thing is i think that a lot of people believe that when they hear that trump owes 400 million dollars or whatever the number is i think that people who don't understand how money works when they hear that trump owes 400
million they think that he's 400 million dollars

[20:22]

they think that he's 400 million dollars in the whole meaning that if he paid back all that 400 million he would have less than zero money left over
you know he would use up all of his money to pay off the 400 million that's not the case he's just a guy who has
has some debt and apparently according to him
him it's not much debt compared to his assets so like anybody who's got let's say a good income but they also have a home mortgage the home mortgage doesn't mean that they owe more than they have it means there's a little bit of debt in a larger picture so that's the first thing that the the money morons don't understand is that that debt isn't necessarily a big deal the other thing that uh i see them jabbering about today is there's some indication that ivanka was paid a 26 million uh consulting fee now we don't know if this is true yet right but this is the way it's being reported

[21:23]

it's being reported and it's being reported like that's some kind of an illegitimate write-off that that he's he's figured out how to save taxes by paying his own daughter a salary not a salary but a consulting fee
fee of 26 million and that's pretty tricky right you save some taxes there yeah all all the uh all the people in the news are pretty sure that looks a little sketchy because you know normal people can't do that right well here's the part they're leaving out
the amount that trump saved in taxes for his company by paying ivanka is exactly identical to the amount that ivanka paid in taxes because she made an extra 26 million dollars there's no difference the government got exactly as much taxes as far as we know unless there was something weird going on with their taxes that year but as long as they're both in the top

[22:24]

but as long as they're both in the top tax range which they would be the taxes just paid a different way but it doesn't change it so it's basically a mechanism for let's say
say it's an estate planning mechanism but how about this do you think ivanka was worth 26 million dollars in one year
i do i do yeah if if you look at what ivanka adds to the the whole operation you know both in the white house and then and then you look at presumably what she added to the whole operation when she was you know in private business if you tell me that that wasn't worth 26 million dollars whatever it was you know i don't know the details but i would say that's in the range that doesn't even seem that doesn't even seem high but here's the cool part if trump could pay ivanka 26 million which i think we'd agree was completely

[23:24]

which i think we'd agree was completely optional right optional in the sense that if he was bleeding cash and couldn't pay his bills would he have paid ivanka 26 million i don't think so so it sounds to me like he had enough cash flow that paying off his debt wasn't going to be a big problem because if you can't pay off your debt i don't know that you would necessarily move 26 million dollars to your kid as part of your estate planning i think you'd keep it and pay your debts because it would be better to keep the big operation afloat than it would be to temporarily just to hide some money there and hope that that worked out in the long run so that's the next thing we learn is that probably at least before coronavirus which hurt everybody he probably had enough money to pay off his debt now here's the other thing the the accusation against trump is that if his debt is really big uh that he's at risk of blackmail because he'll need those russians or

[24:25]

because he'll need those russians or whoever to pay off his debt to which i say okay the amount of money that would have to be paid off for trump let's say 400 million let's just pick a number for a conversation let's say that the democrats are concerned that russians will pay off 400 million dollars for trump and therefore he would do whatever they wanted to get them to pay that off that's i don't think that's the case but just say that you're a democrat and you believe that here's the thing is there some other politician is there some non-billionaire politician a senator a president is there somebody you can imagine who would not be influenced by 400 million dollars because paying off somebody's debt is only one of many ways you could give somebody a lot of money if you were inclined to do that it's fairly easy to do legally you just you just make sure that there's some investment in something that their

[25:25]

investment in something that their brother-in-law is investing in you know you just make sure that somebody in their circle got a lot of money and it's sort of untraceable so if russia wanted to put a shitload of money into bribing a an american politician they don't need to depend on them having debt that's sort of an irrelevant detail if you said to um bill clinton hey bill clinton um i think i can arrange to give you 400 million dollars and let's say bill clinton was clever and he said oh don't give don't write me a check that would be obvious but you know what you could do you could donate to the clinton foundation and they give me a pretty big salary and they pay for my jets and stuff so that would be legal ish so why don't you do that my point is if you're talking about gigantic amounts of money which is the only thing you're talking about if you're talking about paying off trump bank loans it has to be a big

[26:26]

trump bank loans it has to be a big amount of money the same big amount of money would be just as influential for anybody they don't have to be in financial trouble nobody says no to 400 million dollars if they can obtain it legally right so the risk of blackmail is just sort of the same everywhere if you're talking about millions of dollars everybody has the risk i would argue that trump probably has less risk of being bribed because i just don't think he would need the trouble you know there's not enough upside all right um the uh oh and it turns out that the 72 million that trump could apply to for based on his past losses was because the casino abandonment so when he got out of the casino business that was the loss so we know exactly what the loss was we know it was a real loss we know that the casino thing didn't work out that was real and we know he applied for it with an obama regulation

[27:26]

obama regulation it all looks pretty good to me i mean i don't know ann coulter who i consider one of the smartest people who comment on stuff also an attorney right very very smart but i don't know how much he knows about finance and tax law which would put her in
in good company with 99.9 percent of the public but she tweeted today that as an example of how the law allows real estate billionaires to get away with murder how about fixing the utterly corrupt tax code so in other words even ann coulter is agreeing that trump and other billionaires are getting away with something because they're not paying taxes like little people and she she noted that she paid 50 a year uh as do i and here's the thing i'm not sure she quite understands what exactly would you change how would

[28:27]

what exactly would you change how would you change that to make it better would you for example say that if you're a billionaire you can't write off expenses or you can't write off all of your expenses what would be the justification for saying that billionaires uniquely can't write off expenses and what would happen if you did suppose you said all right here's the law everybody else small business you can write off your expenses but if you're a billionaire you can't or you can't write them off all what would that do it would probably change their behavior there would be certain expenses because they can't write them off that they wouldn't incur they would avoid and the reason that the tax law exists the way it does is to encourage business and encourage the greater good even though there's some you know minor inequities that happen because of it it's for the greater good so how exactly would you change it would you change the capital gains laws because if you do that disrupts a lot

[29:29]

because if you do that disrupts a lot you know there's a lot that depends on that so you could collapse you know the real estate business by changing a law like that you could just collapse the entire business is that why you want um how about somebody says a fair tax there's no such thing as a fair tax that's not a thing you can't design a tax system that's fair if you think that that can be done you need to look into it there are only tax systems that can burden some group more than others that's it but you can't do something fair that's not one of the possibilities because no in the end people always think that whatever their taxes is are unfair and subjective that's why you can't get there so if anybody can come up with some specific thing that could be changed that wouldn't collapse the economy or destroy an industry that's vital to the united states or something like that i'm all ears but i think there's some kind of the people who don't know tax laws i think they imagine

[30:30]

think they imagine there's some obvious fix here it's like well it's obvious it's sort of obvious this is all wrong but if you tweak this things will be fair and will the economy will be great it doesn't really work that way doesn't work that way at all
um yeah the the flat tax uh is a talking point but it's not there's a reason that it's never gotten anywhere it's because as soon as you start digging into the details it all falls apart you know i mean if if it could work that'd be great but it's i think that ship has sailed um there's also the accusation that trump wrote off his haircuts and on twitter that is being seen as an obvious unethical thing that's no fair and it shouldn't be allowed to which i say well there's somebody who doesn't understand how taxes work because is anybody suggesting that the seventy thousand dollars he wrote off

[31:31]

seventy thousand dollars he wrote off for haircuts is anybody suggesting that the irs has disallowed that they haven't disallowed it if it's not disallowed it's allowed all right if if you're if your accountant is not putting in deductions that get accepted you need to get a better accountant but this is an example of a deduction that was accepted now why would his haircuts be allowed and yours would not why is it that you can't write off your haircut well let me give you a possibility is it possible that there was a contract employee who was part of the cast of i guess the apprentice because the haircuts were related to his work on the apprentice and did that person get paid an actual you know fee for being on call to play with his hair and to cut it and probably also you know to make sure it's in good shape for the for the camera that's an employee

[32:33]

for the camera that's an employee that's an employee who probably he paid as opposed to the production company paying if you pay an employee it doesn't matter what they do it doesn't matter that they cut your hair or if you pay a contract person so it probably was a perfectly reasonable deduction in the context of being on a tv show and in the specific context that trump's hair is is part of his brand you can't compare that to anything else
and there's lots of questions about family members acting as as project managers and acting as consultants and chris the liz is writing about this as if there's something wrong with it almost certainly not you can hire your family members there's nothing wrong with that you can overpay your family members you're allowed you can overpay your family members and in this case because so much money

[33:35]

and in this case because so much money is involved it just transfers who pays the taxes so you know if uh if eric trump is paying more taxes and donald trump is paying less it's the same amount it's just moved to a different pocket um in case you didn't know over at locals for those who don't know uh there's a subscription service that i'm part of also an investor by the way full disclosure i have a small investment in and that's where i do
do some of my uh well all of the stuff that i don't put on twitter that's worth saying so the provocative stuff and i'm putting a lot of micro lessons there on success and persuasion etc things you don't see on twitter but greg gaufeld has joined locals so if you want to see the stuff that you're now saying elsewhere from greg go to locals.com and look for greg gutfeld and you'll be glad you did so look for that um so the big debate is tonight of

[34:37]

um so the big debate is tonight of course i'll be i'll be tweeting and i was watching a brit hume uh interview and i hadn't seen brit hume use these words before and he was talking about biden and he and he described biden as quote plainly senile plainly senile do you remember it wasn't long ago we were saying things like well he may have lost the step or we're saying things like well you know he uh he doesn't have the same mental acuity but day before the debate or day of brit hume says he's plainly senile now the reason this is important is that if you if you don't follow fox news if you were to rank you know the the opinion people to the news people in terms of credibility you know the the more opinion and the opinion they are you would say they have less credibility in terms of the factual part

[35:37]

in terms of the factual part and the more news oriented they are the more credible they are so on the on the most credible end you'd have bray you all right you know bret bear brahim you know these guys are considered even by independent people as fair and you know pretty much down the middle kinds of players and even he's willing to go on national tv and say plainly see now it's that plainly world word that that got me because plainly says you don't have to talk about it we're beyond the point where this is a conversation of whether or not it happened we're we're completely at a point where it's plain you know i see it you see it we all see you senile and i can't believe he used that word just put it out there so trump's strategy tonight um i don't know if he has a strategy per se but i would guess that he's going to try to get uh biden uh worked up

[36:38]

uh biden uh worked up don't you think it seems to me that the most obvious thing that trump would do is try to figure out how to get under his skin and make him mad now biden knows that because everybody will be telling him he's going to try to make you mad don't get mad don't get mad so i think you're going to see the biden over smile do you know what i mean by the biden over smile it's where he has to listen to trump say bad things about him and bad things about hunter but he wants to act like he's not phased by it so he does the over smile let me do the over smile for you it looks like this
yeah if you're listening to this on the podcast it's not very interesting so he squints his eyes really high and just there's this really fake looking smile that doesn't match the eyes that's how you know it's fake so look for the biden fake smile uh and of course trump is going to go

[37:40]

uh and of course trump is going to go after hunter right because that's the most obvious thing that would get um biden worked up so if if trump is playing it right he should probably not introduce any new ideas that would be headlines of themselves because i think he wants to not make news except for whatever news biden generates by being you know by being tweaked by i would love to see um trump make a full-throated play for the black vote which he might wouldn't like to see trump just say look what have you done for the black population of this country now look what i've done and already planned to do look at my portfolio of what i'm doing for black america compare it to everything you you've done and and give me a freaking break these are not even close we're not even in the same zip code of what i've done compared to

[38:43]

zip code of what i've done compared to what you did in 47 years which amounted to
to what putting black people in jail that's what you did so i think trump could tell a story that would just kneecap the black vote quite quite factually he wouldn't have to add any hyperbole at all you could just lay it out there because at this point it's just factual and i don't know what biden does with that except go for the fine people hoax and here's the thing i know is not going to happen but i would love for trump to debunk the fine people hoax explicitly now if joe biden brings it up which there's a very high likelihood he will what will trump do if the fine people hoax is brought up how do you deal with it here's how i do it given that they have a time constraint and so trump would not have time to go through the whole well it's a fake news that they edited

[39:45]

well it's a fake news that they edited this part out etc if you wanted to get to like the most clean quotable part i would say here's what i said that day i said that the white nationalists and the neo-nazis should be condemned totally that's my exact quote if you look at the tapes that you think i said fine people you'll see that they cut that out to make it look like i was talking about a different group so it's fake news i said this sentence exactly without prompting that they should be condemned totally isn't that right chris wallace now chris wallace he's not going to do fact checking but maybe he could help out with the question if you know what i mean all right
so there's a it looks like the grand jury stuff is going to be released on the brianna taylor situation so we're going

[40:47]

brianna taylor situation so we're going to get to hear the public is the exact deliberations in the grand jury i don't know how often that happens but i think that's a good idea transparency will probably help
the elon omar situation with the ballot harvesting is getting interesting but i'm worried that it's going to go into the into the the news black hole what would be a bigger story than undercover film of elon omar's campaign people seem to be paid by the campaign allegedly collecting all these mail-in ballots and doing sketchy things with them what would be you know what would possibly be a bigger story than that and it's sort of disappearing isn't it i i think the cnn is largely just ignoring it
it msnbc largely ignoring it

[41:50]

msnbc largely ignoring it they may have done a mention of it and then just moved on so it's the the ability of the news industry to make something go away is the scariest thing that you'll ever see it's one thing that they tell a story that's not true i mean that's that's annoying and vexing and it shouldn't happen but you sort of are used to that but making a story go away that is actually a true story just making it go away that's dangerous that's really dangerous i saw a suggestion that one way to promote trump is to change all your hot spots to trump 2020. so that anybody who's looking for a hot spot uh they're going to run into trump 2020. so they're going to see a lot more trump supporters but they'd be a little bit underground because all you'd see is the hot spot you wouldn't necessarily know where it came from i thought that was pretty funny so if

[42:50]

i thought that was pretty funny so if you know how to change your hot spot change it to trump 2020 i'm not sure if that would conflict with other people or not um
is there any reason why by next election is there any reason that we won't solve this voting problem because you know i get that the coronavirus caught us off guard and you know so we're not ready to do the the mail-in ballots as as well as we would like to be prepared but by next election and maybe even by midterm doesn't it seem to you that we should have this completely solved and the way to completely solve it and i can only think of one is with facial recognition there has to be a way both for home your mailing votes but also for in person there has to be a way to use facial recognition to guarantee you're getting the right person voting

[43:50]

person voting now the the company clearview is i think the leader in that area right now
now and they seem to be they do i think the best job of uh of dark faces you know sometimes you get the false false identifications with some of the the lesser technologies i think clearview is the leader in that in terms of getting actually accurate facial recognition so in two years there's just no excuse for not having facial recognition as at least an option or at least something you're testing um
all right do you believe that the polls are
are uh with biden winning by lot does that sound right to you because it seems that the average of the polls have biden up by well i don't know six nationally nine percent in pennsylvania something like that does that sound right to you that doesn't even sound close to right to me

[45:04]

all right um that's all i got for now so i'm going to be uh watching the debates with christina tonight i will be uh tweeting as i as i see things develop um you know there there are predictions that this will be the most watched presidential debate of all time and when i heard that i thought to myself yeah you know i think that's true i think this will be the most watched presidential debate but you know what else it could be i'm not going to say that this is a prediction but it is not impossible it will be the most watched televised event of all time i'm not going to predict that that's the case but it's possible because of the the specific dynamic of it being trump being 2020 uh the stakes seemed so high and the fact that um the real fun here is watching biden try to keep it together and watching trump the world's greatest trash talker try to

[46:04]

the world's greatest trash talker try to set
set this guy off his game on national tv now if you can tell me there's anything you've looked forward to watching more than that i'm not sure i believe you it if you if you told me every sport you know that literally there's no sporting event i would want to watch more than this there's also no comedy i would be willing to watch more than this there is no first run movie that i would want to watch more than this this is literally the most anticipated thing on television that i could even remember i mean i don't remember anything that i've anticipated this much i mean i've enjoyed watching a super bowl now and then but you know those were just sort of routine i wasn't really you know i wasn't really loving it uh i just sort of did it because it was a party time

[47:05]

party time this might be just maybe the biggest televised event of all time because there's nothing to compete with it right tv is awful what else are you gonna do why wouldn't you watch this alright that's all i got for now and i will talk to you maybe tonight