Episode 1352 Scott Adams - Chauvin Verdict and What it Means About America

all right it's time come on in come on in it's time for coffee with scott adams and can you make a guess what we'll be talking about today i think you can i think you can and if you'd like to enjoy it i mean really really enjoy it like better than you've ever enjoyed coffee with scott adams well all you need is a cupboard mugger glass a tanker jealous dinah canteen jugger flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee you might like racism but don't drink that no never drink a delicious beverage beverage a beverage instead and i'd like you to join me now for the simultaneous sip go oh that was a simultaneous gulp yeah a little bit extra a little bit extra well uh everything in the world is backwards and upside down today have you noticed that nothing seems to be right today everything's just a little bit off and and you don't notice it until you see all the examples but i'll give you something as we go uh so i'd like to give a start out with a big damn you damn you to uh andres backhouse who i talk about often because he's great on data analysis for any of the stuff of the news but uh he made me retweet aaron rupar's tweet and i can't forgive him for that but it's the first time i've unironically retweeted him i think but if you don't know who uh aaron rupar is he's uh he's a character who is let's say interesting we'll just keep it at that but uh normally i would not agree with his uh his tweets but here he was he was responding to nancy pelosi's speech after the chauvin floyd verdict and nancy pelosi managed to reach into this big basket of things that you could say and managed to pull out the only thing that was wrong you could have gone in a hundred different directions and not messed this up as badly as you did to the point where aaron rupar is retweeting you with condemnation she said thank you george floyd for giving your life for i'm not even going to finish it but let's just say in the in the history of of politicians saying that dumb this was this was notable like even her own side had to well we're out if if you're nancy pelosi and aaron rupar is listening to you and the first thing he says i'm out i'm out i don't want any part of this you've really gone off you've gone too far uh in other news the uh there's a norfolk uh police lieutenant who was fired because it was leaked that he donated some money to kyle rittenhouse's defense and gave him some words of encouragement he got fired for that he got fired for an opinion that was backed by the video for a person who is presumed innocent until proven guilty and he got fired for it so that's the norfolk uh police department for you that's that's pretty pathetic now here's the good news if you are let's say a police union and uh your contracts come up i'm assuming the union does the negotiating for the police contracts what would you ask for in terms of a raise this coming round i feel like 30 would be the right number right that doesn't mean they'll be able to get it because there are lots of forces pushing back but i would say that the police unions have a rock solid argument that the environment of risk has changed so substantially that the risk reward of their job can't be looked at the same anymore and that on top of the physical violence risk which was always extreme which is why we have so much respect for the police they're doing stuff you and i don't want to do for the most part uh but i would say that given the now the the legal and social risk on top of the the violence risk it looks different now i would say i would back the cops for a 30 raise minimum and that's just based on how society has changed the risk that we're willing to put on the police now i would say that before you could argue but wait we should put this risk on the police that's not even the argument so so whether you think that the floyd trial went just the way it should have or you don't irrelevant it doesn't matter any of that to my point that the police are in a new new situation of risk whether they should be there or not is a separate question but they are there and it's different and it's more risk reward risk reward suggests that police should get i would say a minimum of 30 raise because i don't know how you could retain them otherwise yeah the the thing they signed up for just doesn't exist because the thing they signed up for is if it was a gray area they were probably going to get away with it right when i say get away with it i don't mean that they necessarily do something wrong i just mean that if it's a gray area and they were trying to do their job they probably would have gotten away with it in the past and i guess i'm biasing the biasing by say getting away with it because maybe there was nothing to get away with but 30 pay raise for police i think that is called for so i would over fund the police based on this new situation so whoever wanted to defund the police probably this moved in the wrong direction and by the way there's no economist who would disagree with me right it's the same job except way extra risk you have to pay extra for that that's how it works so if so if defunding the police is what anybody wanted i'm pretty sure this should work the other way if economics works the way it's supposed to the next door app i hear has a new feature that'll tell you if you're being racist before you send your message what do you think of that what do you think of the next door app before you send out a little message to the neighbors apparently it's got some artificial intelligence built in that's just looking for key words such as blue lives matter it'll flag that that's actually one of the examples it'll flag it to say you know some people would take blue lives matter as a racist statement are you sure you want to send it it'll still let you send it uh or all lives matter if you type all lives matter into the app it'll stop you and say woo you know what's going on here right it's gonna look a little racist think twice what do you think about that are you up for that are you down for that i have i have mixed opinions i usually violate the common thinking whenever information is presented that's useful so in my opinion next door is presenting actually useful information because there might be people who literally don't know that they're about to ruin their own life by saying something that they think is supporting you know all life and equality but other people are going to think you're a racist i don't know i think it's i think it's worth trying maybe see how people think about it give it a whirl if they were actually blocking you for saying it then that's another question but if it's just information and it's information that can save your life literally it's worth a try they can always reverse it if the if the users don't like it but anytime you can try something cheaply and it's got a good purpose behind it yeah why not give it a try it's a little creepy but it's a test you know everything's a test if you can reverse it easily all right let's talk about uh this show of an outcome if you didn't hear me last night i did a live stream last night but let me recap my opinion number one i am satisfied with the jury's work on this i thank the jur the jurors um i do not think that the jury's job is to decide the law so this is where i might differ with some of you i don't believe that the jury's duty and i use this word you know intentionally i don't think that the jury's duty was to attend to the letter of the law as instructed by the judge that was their job description right it's not their duty their duty under the law is to follow the law just you know as best they can so certainly if the only duty you were talking about is what their their legal required description of their responsibility is then it was their duty to follow the letter of the law but what is a higher l what's what's the higher law than the legal law the one that's written down is there any higher law of course there is of course there is there's the greater good if you ever ran into a situation where following the letter of the law was clearly bad for the greater good what would be the duty of the jury i'm going to give you an artificial example where the jury knows that following the letter of the law would just be a wrong what's their duty is their duty to follow that law that they know is wrong no never their duty is to be humans their duty is to be americans their duty is to their fellow citizens for whom they have taken some sacrifice to serve on this jury now before we before we discuss the question of whether they handled it right separately can we agree that their duty is to do the best they can for the greater good they might not get it right but their duty is not to follow the law if the greater good is in a different direction does anybody disagree with that i want to see if there are those who would say that they should follow the law even if they knew the law wasn't evil right i'm not saying that's the case in the shelving case just as a as a principle a lot of people here a lot a lot of people disagree i will take your i will take your disagreement with respect meaning that i res i respect that i respect that point of view completely i have complete respect for the opposite view of mine which is if you think that following the law is just always going to be better even if there's some evil in a specific case i can see that that's not a terrible argument by the way because there's an assumption built in that following the letter of the law gets you to a you know the in the long run you've got a better situation right yeah that's that's fairly good um but i disagree i disagree the human law is always higher than the uh the real law you know the written law in my opinion and the problem is whether you are wise enough to know when to make this critical exception and that's a problem right because maybe humans are not wise enough to make these exceptions but there is a reason that we have jury trials and it's because we're all more comfortable with a system in which some capable people who mean well do the best they can right that's as good as you can get it's a pretty good system and i would say the system worked in that sense and i do think that the jurors took into account their own safety which i support i think they took into account what would happen to society which i would support them doing that and just in this specific case i think they took into account potential riots i think they took into account how the police would be viewed i think they took into account racial animosity i think they took into account how it feels should they well most of you think no but they did because you can't not you nobody has the ability to turn that off it's all part of the forces so here's what i like about the outcome i do believe that it was a close call in terms of whether he was guilty of anything versus not guilty i think that the jury heard all of the evidence and i didn't that's important the jury heard all of the evidence i didn't most of you almost 100 of you also didn't hear all of the evidence you didn't live through it so if the people who lived through it and saw all of it have a different feeling about it than i got from my little keyhole i'm not going to say they're wrong because the you know the the assumption is if all 12 of them voted the same way it's more likely that i would have voted that way too if i'd seen what they saw experienced what they experienced but i didn't right so i'm not going to second-guess people who did the work when i didn't do it and when i watched anybody online who also didn't do the work didn't watch every minute of the trial i don't value their opinion as much as i value the the jurors right and there was nothing in the jury description which i found actually helpful even though it has the bad effect of probably doxxing them but but actually reading about the backgrounds and the way they answered the questions i actually have a lot of confidence in that group and it was mostly white people in in the jury who convicted a white guy which also helps a little bit for the credibility now did they make a wise decision well let's look at some of the outcomes so we don't know if it's wise but i do feel like they were credible and tried and here's one of the outcomes according to axios reporting senior democrat and republican aides so both democrats and republicans this is important to the story the aides say they would have never let their bosses say it on the record but privately they told axios that a guilty verdict in the chauvin trial has lessened pressure to act on police reform so one of the outcomes of this verdict is less likely there will be police reform because it looks like you know this was police reform right it made sure that people police know not to do this might have made a big difference but it may not turn into legislation and we don't know what the net of that is so there's that we also didn't have much in the way of riots last night i think portland had a little action there was a police officer who was assaulted some windows got broken but basically there were no riots right i mean i think portland was just going to be portland no matter what but is that fair to say or is it just not being reported i'm looking at your comments to see if i missed it well i would say that is mostly peaceful so does that mean that the uh the outcome was right well as i've told you it's it feels like we can't confirm this maybe someday we can it feels like the jury sent a message to the world which is there's something wrong with this police officer we're going to sacrifice him and we're going to we're going to send you a message by making him guilty on all counts which even the experts didn't really think was going to happen did they so i think the jury is sending a message that they're making a let's say not according to the letter of the law decision i feel like that's the message could be wrong it could be could easily be misinterpreting it but it feels like it to me so i'm just telling you what i i'm receiving i'm not telling you what they sent um and it feels like well let me tell you why i'm not um disappointed in any way about the uh outcome even though with what i knew uh it would have gone the other way if they'd use the letter of the law but that's just based on what i do incomplete all right so it seems to me that there was something wrong with derek shelvin and did anybody else get that no matter whether you thought he was technically guilty you know beyond a reasonable doubt no matter what you thought about that there was something wrong with him wasn't there you know how humans this has been proven humans can actually detect if somebody is physically ill by looking at their face i think people could probably detect if people are um i've heard this tell me if i'm wrong you can detect if somebody is likely to be gay by their face not every time of course but better than you know the chance would suggest so there are a lot of things about us that just sort of come out you know that people can recognize and i was trying to think yesterday what is it about derek shovin that bothered me and maybe someone maybe everybody else so much because it wasn't exactly what he was doing right because what he was doing there was enough of an argument that it was part of the policy and hadn't heard people before and you know maybe he didn't know how bad he was doing it you know it was part of the argument but beyond the argument there was something wrong with his attitude or he seemed a little bit too happy did anybody get that like was anybody feeling somebody says it's called prejudice yeah of course um so we're not talking about science here i'm talking about how you you felt about him did you have a bad feeling about him i'm looking at your comments now to see if anybody had that i'm seeing some yeses some no's some people signing off because of that are you trying to persuade fear yet fear no there was um i'll tell you what what it looked like to me there was a lack of empathy that has gone all the way through the trial what should there not have been some point in which we heard a statement from derek shelvin and maybe we did if if he made the statement let me know should derek chovin have not said at some point you know once he knew he was going to be tried for it couldn't he make a statement that says my god i certainly didn't intend this uh i feel sorry for the family um i never would have done this you know had i been aware that the danger was so much uh you know something like that no somebody says no don't do that because it would imply guilt but you don't have to have guilt over a death do you you could feel bad about the death without admitting guilt indeed you could say i feel terrible for the family i feel you know awful about what happened uh i hope that the the jury will show that i wasn't a participant in in that and because that's what i felt at the time would that be incriminating to simply have uh to simply have empathy or remorse is the wrong word because remorse would suggest that he did know he did something wrong so you'd have to be careful there but you could have empathy right and i feel that he didn't show it in a way people were expecting which doesn't mean anything he just didn't show it the way people expected at the moment you know that and i think this changed a lot of minds apparently there was a moment when he knew there was no heartbeat and he didn't change his behavior if you were on top of somebody holding them down and you knew that their heart stopped beating how does that not immediately change your behavior and i don't think it changed his behavior so somebody says asperger's well that would be interesting certainly that wasn't that would be really interesting if if that were even a little bit true that would be certainly part of the defense or part of the part of the sentencing but i doubt it was true we would have heard about it anyway so i think this jury looked at a person who had no empathy and he was close enough to doing something that looked like murder that when they looked at all of the variables including their own safety what it would do to society just what feels right i feel like the jury made the right decision now is that the same as saying that the that the uh that the uh the trial was fair i don't think it was even close to fair not even close but i think the jury could have a a right decision without the trial being even close to fair and that would be okay in my mind i could hold both of those as true but i've heard you earlier that you couldn't and that's that's a legitimate opinion yeah i think it was a human sacrifice and here's something that i think that uh the black population of this country doesn't fully understand and i'm gonna i'm gonna illustrate it by playing two parts i will now give you a skit in which i play a representative group of black americans not any specific person and a representative person representing white people not any one white person and black people say hey you white people let's see if you can now punish a white person for doing something that you know maybe there's a little argument about how bad it was let's see if you can do that hey white people do you think you can punish a white person and then the white people say sure watch this then the black people say i know but can you punish an actual white person when the crime there's some disagreement about the nature of the crime do you think you can do that and the white people say we just said yes i don't even know why you're asking of course we can of course we can we do it every day punishing other white people is like breathing if you're a white person do you know how many white people i've punished who had it coming lots of them every day punishing other white people is the easiest thing we do let me give you a story that a lot of people didn't believe when i i've been telling this story for years it's completely true but when i tell it there's a certain percentage of you who will swear i'm lying trust me i've been saying it for i don't know 25 years since i've been able to tell the story and there there would be literally thousands of witnesses still alive who would be refuting me because i tell this story all the time plenty of people could refute it if it were not true and it goes like this when i worked for a big bank it was crocker national bank years ago beginning of my career my career was going well and it looked like i'd be sort of a management type person and my boss called me into my office a white woman and she said i don't know how to tell you this but then the word has come down from management that we can't promote you now or for any time in the future that we can see because you're white and because you're a man and they said the reason is that the company was getting some heat because there was not enough diversity in senior management so now you may have heard me tell the story but here's the twist on it who was it who screwed me who did that was it was it black people no no it was old white men threw me under the bus in a heartbeat to protect themselves because they could keep their job as as a senior management so long as they screwed enough white people in lower levels to let people of color you know sort of leave problem and get up to see management now independent of whether you think that was a good idea to have this reverse discrimination um not legally but the way companies implemented it was like that so independent whether you think that's a good or bad idea the only point i'm going to make today is that when i when when white men were asked to destroy my life for their convenience they didn't hesitate they didn't hesitate for a second so let me tell you black americans if you're ever wondering will white people punish other white people to protect themselves yeah like really quickly so the the punchline is that i moved from that bank i i quit it almost immediately quit the bank moved to the phone company where i got on the management fast track and i was going to be senior management in the phone company and my boss called me in and said i don't know how to tell you this but the word just came down we can't promote white people anymore not white men anyway women maybe but we can't promote any white men because we got caught it's only white people at senior management so second company how long did it take the white people to throw me under the bus one second no hesitation if you want to kill white people ask white people to do it because they're really willing no hesitation so i think that's largely an invisible thing if you're imagine being a black person in america some of you are you don't have to imagine it at all imagine what that would be like if the news just kept you showing you george floyd's situations uh black people being abused black people being confused and it's greater than the percentages in the public so it's a real thing like a real issue but if you don't see all the times that white people are are stomping on the heads of other white people for their own benefit you're kind of missing some context it feels like white people are oppressing black people and the part you miss is that successful white people are just screwing everybody they're just screwing everybody because that's what's good for them to keep things just the way they are anyway that's useful context for you right there um do you think that the there's no rioting because of the chauvin verdict i feel like that's the smartest thing they did is to make it guilty on everything because at least that had a chance of averting the riots and it looks like it worked looks like it worked you know i said yesterday that um i've said this a lot that i don't believe there's any such thing as bad presidents and good presidents because by the time you get elected president you do have a certain minimum amount of you know talent so they all have the minimum talent but what makes you good or bad is just luck is your specific set of talents and your personality is it suited for the exact problems that come up while you're president now covet was exactly the wrong problem for president trump and i'm not even sure his supporters would disagree with that too much right it just wasn't the right match because optimism which was the trump thing optimism and the pandemic they just didn't fit together but optimism and the economy great you know trump and the economy i love that combination optimism economics works great i feel as if biden was exactly the right president for this doesn't make him the right president for other things but for this i feel like he was exactly the right guy because he's boring he didn't make it about you know him even though he put pressure on you know in some ways you could argue that the politicians put pressure on the jury but there wasn't going to be a fair trial anyway so i think biden might have been maybe exactly the right person because he took all the he took all the energy out of it if there's one thing that biden can do it sucked the energy out of a topic and what did you need this topic to have less energy right when i talk about uh trump being an energy monster it's usually in a positive sense he can take energy and turn it into stuff biden's like an energy sink he can just suck the energy on the stuff this is a topic where sucking the energy out of it was the right play and he pulled it off you know by doing nothing basically um here's an opinion worth noting mike cernovich i was waiting to see what he said about this i'll just read you his uh his tweet because i he always has good stuff to say about this kind of thing he said on the facts and law the chauvin case was always a close one i'd agree with that he could have been properly convicted so might have gone exactly this way no matter what but he did not get a fair trial as everyone from rioters to a member of congress to the potus tampered with the outcome i'd agree with that today is one of national disgrace a true insurrection so his opinion is that this is a bad outcome because it was an unfair trial i agree on the facts there's no way it could have been a fair trial here's where i would disagree on the opinion there wasn't a chance for a fair trial that i i would completely agree with the opinion if it had been an option to have a fair trial but that option never existed it can't exist the story was simply too big and people's ability to communicate simply too good there wasn't really an option for a fair trial so given that there was no option for a fair trial and chauvin didn't really have the option really of anything like justice according to you know the details of the law and reasonable doubt and none of those things really applied in my opinion to the case i think it was emotional social peer pressure i think it was all those things but again i would say that the juror the jurors had the hardest job in the world they had to figure out what was the greater good in all of this mess because there were no good solutions there was nothing that the jury could do that would solve all the problems they could only choose which problems to keep and which problems to try to reduce and that's only trying there were no good outcomes in in the sense of everybody gets justice or anything like that never was possible and so these jurors again i i can't tell you how much respect i have for this group of jurors they reached into the hardest situation in the world the whole country was watching and really in a way the whole world because where america goes you know affects everybody i think they did a tremendous job and if they didn't follow the letter of the law i respect it because i think they would they may have been looking at a higher law and that would be okay with me now we may find out later that the that my interpretation of the juror the jurors is way too way too nice and if we find that out later i will modify my opinion but i'm not going to make the assumption that this group of patriotic americans was anything but well-meaning well-intentioned and did a good job in the face of the impossible that's my current position happy to modify it if we find out later that something's different um all right let's see what else we got going on um as i say once or twice a week if you're not following glenn greenwald on twitter you really have to just stop what you're doing and just give him a follow because watching him spank cnn and msnbc and the other media for being essentially propaganda organs is just really good entertainment and useful like you really need to see how often it happens to fully feel what's going on and nobody does a better job than greenwald in in spanking them so today's example was uh the officer sicknick story he's the officer who was killed well i'm sorry back up back up back up erase everything i just said he's the officer who died soon after the capital uh insurrection or riots or what it protests whatever you want to call and cnn had been reporting that he'd been killed with a fire extinguisher you know hit in the head with it and then they reported that the bear spray might have killed him somehow and now we know that he died of natural causes it was just sadly you know linked to that date and how did uh cnn handle the fact that they had been misreporting i mean it was seriously misreporting this story for a long time the they kind of just glossed over it a little bit and greenwald is busting their balls on it so that's fun to see all right you want some real fun here's some fun rasmussen is going to be reporting in a little bit uh it's not out yet for the rest of you but i gotta get a sneak preview and they they were asking a question about the uh opinions about coca-cola you know co you know the coca-cola weighed in and complained about georgia's voting law changes and got involved in politics and as you might imagine liberals and democrats went different directions on their feelings about coca-cola but here's the funniest you've ever seen in your life all right here's the here's the rest and pull results to this question uh does the georgia voting laws and coca-cola's response make you more likely or less likely to drink coca-cola products the gop was 52 less likely to purchase coca-cola products that's a pretty big deal isn't it yeah over half of of uh conservatives or yeah basically conservatives say they're less likely to drink the product that's kind of devastating is it you notice that you did notice that coca-cola seemed to pull back a little bit and i asked i wonder if there's anything happening with their sales well if over half of republicans decided they're going to drink less of these products coca-cola probably noticed but here's the good part are you ready for the good part here's the money shot i don't think anything's made me laugh more than this lately liberals are 37 percent more likely to consume coca-cola products they're more likely now if coke were let's say a healthy product this story would look really good healthy in terms of improved your health i'm not making any claims about health and products because i would get sued i have no evidence no evidence that this product is bad for you but i think i can say it is not intended to be a a medicine and i would imagine that dietitians would have something to say about the value of uh drinking coke or diet coke they have lots of other products of course but those are the ones you think of so i wonder if the gop should come out in favor of quitting cigarettes to see how many liberals would start smoking because i think uh you know the republicans are always worried that immigration is at least the way the democrats want to do it is really a clever way to get more democrat voters through immigration oh that's your real reason isn't it but now republicans have their own play like that they can just come out against anything that's bad for you democrats will immediately do more of the things that are bad for them and will kill them and then there will be fewer democrats i'm just saying it's a strategy that would work it's working right now because they apparently they convinced they convinced democrats to drink more sugar water i mean seriously is that not funny okay somebody said that's so bad i'm going to repeat it somebody else said this this is not my idea i'm just looking at it in the comments somebody said that republicans are already doing that with abortion by being opposed to abortion it's making democrats support them abort their own babies that's not funny except it kind of is here's how the ap is reporting a story that you probably heard about so this is their tweet their exact words police shot and killed a teenage black girl in columbus ohio just as the verdict was being announced in the trial for the killing of george floyd oh my god police are terrible aren't they i mean just listen to this police shot and killed a teenage girl just as the verdict was announced in the floyd tribe it's just going from bad to worse the police just killing this teenage girl oh there's more to it body cam footage appeared to show the girl attempting to stab two people with a knife while she was in the act oh feels like that could have been the the lead sentence here's another way this headline could have run instead of police shot and killed a teenage black girl another way i could have gone is police saved the life of a black girl by quick action just as the verdict for the george floyd thing was being read both of those are true if you see the body cam by the way who knows how what a jury will say but the body cam shows a police officer doing some of the best police work i've ever seen because if you didn't see the video it was uh one young woman getting with a knife in the act getting ready to stab another woman who was you know defensively trying to protect herself and as the knife was coming down a police officer with a pistol you know not not a rifle with a sight from a fairly good distance took out the took out the knife woman without hurting the potential victim that was really good police work wasn't it yeah like i'd hate to see that i hate to say there's anything called a good shooting but that was as good as shooting as you can get it saved the life in real time and it was really tight and he acted quickly took let me let me put this in another perspective especially what kind of risk did that police officer take for himself huge huge that was somebody who in a moment with no time to think took a gigantic risk of his whole life that police officer you know because we know the george floyd thing is changing how people sing things he took the risk of his own life to save a young black woman who is in at any moment was going to be stabbed to death he took he took that chance his own chance that's what happened and but it's reported as police shot and killed a teenage black girl just as the floyd verdict was being read propaganda people it's propaganda uh here's a provocative thought you've seen on facebook and other places that it's pretty easy now technologically to replace the face of anybody on a video right you've all seen it right you've all seen the examples it's no big deal to replace somebody's face suppose you could you got to the point where you could replace it so well and i think we're kind of there where you couldn't tell that that a face had been replaced by another face and then imagine that you use that technology to reverse the ethnicities on any video crime so that if you see the police attacking or you know or in a conflict with somebody it just automatically reverses their ethnicities but everything else stays the same and then you you play for the jury the reversed ethnicities and you never show them the original would you get the same verdict of course you wouldn't not every time sometimes you would if the if the facts are clear but no it would change things for sure and what if you did that face swap let's say you wait 10 years until there's some college students who have never heard of george floyd i don't know if that's possible but you wait 10 years and you run the entire trial by this bunch of students by just reversing the ethnicities with the and by then maybe the the culture is different things are different and just see if you get the same verdict somebody says they already race swapped george zimmerman i'm not sure what you mean by that but think about the fact that this is now a technology that actually works uh that would be interesting so fox news is interesting uh about the verdict on the floyd chauvin case uh so apparently hannity is backing the jury and says it was a good result not too far from my own opinion although i'm not sure the facts of the case exactly supported it but i like the outcomes whereas tucker carlson is talking about the the trial being unfair i think i think i i like the fact that these opinions are different i just like that fact you know independent of whether i agree with them it's just healthy that they're not in the same page remember i told you i think i told you that i'm waiting for the j j vaccine that's the one i want it's the only one banned at least in the united states or maybe there's another one bad but they're looking into the these rare blood clots and that's why the j j vaccine the only one that is one shot and one of the ones that uses existing technology instead of the mrna stuff and here's what a blood clotting expert says about this so here are the actual odds and by the way compliments to cnn compliments to cnn weird huh cnn actually did an opinion piece in which they showed the math and they did a cost-benefit analysis what what how often have you ever seen that when was last time you saw cnn report a story with like a proper cost benefit analysis so you can see both sides it's really rare so when it happened good job cnn in fact this should have been on fox news so cnn i'm going to give you an a plus for what i'm going to read right now for the just the way they handled this story so this is a blood clotting expert talking about the j j vaccine that says quote the chances of you being um oh wait back up the chances of getting what we are calling vaccine induced immune thrombotic i think i pronounced that correctly or vitt is one in a million all right so let's just call it blood clots so the chance of getting a blood clot from this vaccine is one in a million hold that number in your head the chances of being hospitalized with covid is roughly one in 100 for the adult population and the chances of having a blood clot once you are hospitalized is probably one in five or one in six and a little more it's like one in three if you're in the icu so put those benefits to put those numbers together uh a one in a million chance that the vaccine gives you a blood clot but there's a 1 in 100 chance that if you get the covet you're going to be that you've got a 1 in 6 chance of getting it now the math is too much to do the you know direct direct but i think you can see just from the magnitude that we're not talking about more risk from the vaccine we're talking about lower risk if this is the only way to get the vaccine now to be fair the real comparison should have been getting this vaccine versus the other vaccine so uh if i'm being fair i think i have to knock their a plus down to a maybe a c plus as i'm thinking about it because they did the wrong comparison so if you had enough vaccines so everybody could get one why not get rid of this one risk that doesn't seem to be the case with the other vaccines but do you really know the risk with the other vaccines because they're the new technology maybe they're a risk later and you don't know so that's got to be in there and what about the risk that you don't get the coven at all so this risk of 1 in 100 being hospitalized that's only if they get it but you have to multiply that by you know or you have to factor in what are the odds of getting it in the first place which is not in here so i'll at least give them credit for waving their arms at the magnitudes and i think they got the magnitudes right the risk is really low and especially since i'm male and it seems that the risk is more for females for this j j i'm really waiting for this one to come available because this is the one i would run to like i at the moment i'm i'm sort of waiting for the availability to get better i just talked to somebody who got the shot in my area how long do you think somebody had to wait in their car to get a vaccination in my area take a guess how long do somebody just wait in northern california to get the vaccination five hours five hours in a car waiting for the vaccination i'm not gonna wait five hours in my car for a vaccination you're gonna have to get a little better than that so if this j vaccine becomes uh back uh back in availability i'm hoping that one will have a shorter line if you know what i mean so i'm going to be all over that one i hope that that one comes through um let me give you an update on the dilbert nft if you know what they are they're it's digital art that's tied to the blockchain and so the blockchain tells you that you have the one and only original and so there's dilbert nft two of them one with clean clean punchline and one with the f word and the punch line and i just wanted to give you the the current number is the one with the f word is selling for or at least the auction number so far is 10 times as much as the clean one so in terms of collectibility the naughty one is ten times more valuable the real bidding won't happen until the last day of the auction so you can't really tell what it'll go for now but if i think it's may 1st is the last day of the auction but the naughty ones up to 12 000 and uh there's not really a strong reason for anybody to bid until it gets close to the last day so we'll see see where that goes um somebody was accusing me of being a grifter for being in this nft market let me talk about the definition of a grifter if you're doing something where you're trying to fool somebody into believing something that's not true you might be a grifter if you tell them exactly what you're doing and show your work with full transparency that could never be grifting right so i'm saying in the comments you're saying tulips for sale grifter all right does anybody argue with the point that as long as you're fully transparent you couldn't be grifting because there's nothing hidden right nor is there anything especially persuasive it's not there's not even anything manipulative to it so the cartoon itself the one that is the nft literally says the nfts don't have any value that's the topic of the cartoon and when i talk about it i tell you there's no reason to own one but people collect things for whatever reason so i'm not going to stop them i'm making it available yeah so so look at the names that people are calling me huckster tulips now you have to examine yourself don't you because what it feels like i can't read your mind but what it feels like is people being angry that i could make money on this doesn't it feel like that's the that's all that's going on because remember we're a free country i've completely shown my work i've told you there's no reason to buy it i told you there's no reason to buy it i don't think i can be more transparent than that right but still people have that feeling that you don't like other people to succeed there is a theory that what makes democrats and republicans different is how happy you are for somebody else's success let's test that when i see that people uh are successful i i can definitely feel like pangs of jealousy if they did something i didn't do or if somebody's a billionaire and i'm not a billionaire i can feel it a little bit of i wish i had that but i'm always happy for them i mean you could be jealous and happy at the same time so uh how do you feel when people are successful around you so that's my question in the comments tell me how you feel when you hear that somebody else has succeeded in a big way do you feel happy or does it bother you a little bit and you feel like uh i don't think the way they did it is good or i think they must have stolen something or there must be something wrong or something somebody says inspired here's a so brock just nick says he would feel inspired by somebody else successful that my friends is a winning attitude if you're feeling about other people's success is wow maybe i can do that too then you are in good shape if you're feeling about somebody else's successes they probably stole it they didn't deserve it they're grifting they're they're hucksters you're gonna fail you're gonna fail it's almost you could almost predict it in fact if you were doing job interviews and you gave me a choice of just throwing away people's resumes so i don't even know what their experience is but they could just answer a few questions how do you feel about this um you couldn't get an honest answer but imagine you could get an honest answer i feel the way they would answer a few questions about other people's success and about their own ability to be successful you know that they have agency and the ability to be successful i feel like that would tell me everything i needed because if somebody comes in and says um i believe that my success is entirely up to me what do you think they've done up to that point they probably worked really hard to build a set of talents go to school stay out of jail because you know that's their philosophy of course they were following it if you believe that's their philosophy so i feel like you could you could boil down somebody's entire uh economic value you know within capitalism their entire economic value could be predicted almost entirely by that attitude whether they think that their hard work is what makes them successful or is mostly about race and luck and who who you were born to and who you know and all that some stuff jay says sometimes scott really is truly a boomer all right jay i'm gonna uh i'm gonna uh i'm gonna erase you because probably the most uh bankrupt opinion the most empty opinion that you could ever say is somebody's acting like a boomer you're acting like a boomer now sometimes that's funny like there's a context when it's funny because you recognize oh yeah that is a boomer thing and i think those are funny too because i i do recognize how many how often i fall into you know the the stereotype but here's the thing you're just being useless right just throwing me into a group it's just the most useless thing you could do and you need to go examine your life because if you thought that was a good comment and one that the society needed or somehow helping you or entertained you there's just something wrong with you right just something wrong with you yeah if if tying me into a category is somehow important to you if that was a priority like that's what you thought oh this will be important let me let me tie him to a category why the really what good was that here here here's another idiot i'm gonna call out just the idiots today or rustic says in all caps scott has thin skin question mark has anybody paid attention to anything i've done for the last five years if there's anything i don't have it's thin skin you don't do this job if you have thin skin you i couldn't possibly wake up in the morning and do what i do day after day with just withering uh you should see my you should see the messages i get every day every day i get more criticism than you will ever get in your whole worthless life and i don't think i've ever gone to sleep feeling bad about it not once now if you can't tell the difference between thick skin and thin skin you are so far from understanding anything about your world and i feel sorry for you some of this is genetic i think i think maybe so a lot of it is practiced but it's hard to sort out how much is practice and you know a skill to be thick-skinned and how much is natural then why are you angry now do i seem angry you haven't seen me angry maybe half but um i try really hard to not be angry because you don't want to see me angry that that that's a level that i'm pretty sure you've never seen on video but you don't want to see that and this isn't that this is a condemnation let's say i'm condemning you because i think it's good for life there should be less of you it's good for the world it's good for the world if people like you are slapped down the the people who are just bad bad for the world and don't have anything useful to say they should be slapped down uh yeah i one of the reasons um somebody was asking me yesterday if i've ever been in a fight like a physical fight and i've been in physical altercations but usually i was just beating somebody up not usually that the only times it's happened i was just beating the hell out of somebody now in both of those cases they were bullies who had been my bully and i just reached a level where i needed to just beat the out of them in front of other people to make the problem go away and which works wonderfully by the way i don't recommend it in 2021 you'll just go to jail if you beat somebody up but back when i was a kid if you just beat the out of somebody in front of witnesses it would solve your bully problem pretty well but i've noticed that neither the bullies fought back they just took it and i've noticed that not once in my entire life has anybody like been in a physical confrontation with me that turned into a fight and i've always wondered about that because in the comments by the way those of you who are male how many fights have you been in it's not zero is it it's not zero but i would say i've been in zero fights where the other person is fighting back i think zero yeah look at the numbers that that's what it's like to be a man a man in america or anybody any place i guess look at the number of fights they've been in fifteen fifty two one three zero i don't know how you did that but okay uh and i've always wondered if that's because i look scary to other people because i've always thought the scariest the scariest thing you could encounter is somebody who's not afraid of you that's the scariest thing because if you get in the fight with somebody who's who's not going to ever quit and is not going to run away and is going to finish you off you don't want to be in that fight right and it doesn't even matter if like physically you have more skills or whatever you just don't want to get in a fight with anybody who's not going to ever quit and my view is there are only two kinds of fights that are worth having you know one is the one you know you're going to win that's worth having and if it looks like you're going to lose you should run away and then come back and kill the person when they're not looking if it was worth fighting in the first place so i would never get in a fight unless it was worth killing somebody which is probably why i've never been in the proper fight if it's not worth killing somebody i'm not even going to get involved and if it is worth killing them and they start winning i'm going to run away and then come back and kill them when they're not looking that's my philosophy if somebody's worth killing it's worth waiting it's worth waiting so if there's anybody out there who's done anything to me that they think is worthy of me killing them just know that if it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't i'm willing to wait as long as it takes you can't tell if i'm kidding and that's good if we've learned anything from president trump it was that unpredictability is a natural advantage so as long as you don't know that's to my benefit getting closer to being cancelled are you uh are you tall no i'm not tall which is a good question because if you're big people don't want to get in a fight with you somebody says what he says aspergers is a talent stack creator we have to learn more than others to fit in well woody uh that's true that's true yeah the the one of the national assets we have in this country is all the asperger's types because it's it's the strangest condition if you will which is it's very difficult for the persons who have it like it creates extra challenges socially etc but they're sort of national assets like you know who is it that's inventing all the technology who's you know there's just stuff that the asperger's people are doing for america and for the world that's just insanely valuable only losers hate when other people make money how many of you are uh by the way i i know from history that i attract a lot of asperger types for my content how many of you are on the spectrum this will be interesting so take a take a second for the comments to come in how many of you watching this right now are on the spectrum now wait wait do you see this you're going to be surprised uh here it comes i am yup nope yes not me my wife says i am yes my son is not officially maybe my kid is my husband barely on it yes yes nope me me me me open up nope uh crikey maybe i think my husband could be could be i suspect i am never diagnosed but i think i am yeppers are you impressed there's probably no group that i attract to my content more reliably than than the asperger's folks look at these comments this is blowing your way isn't it because think about the percentage and the population in general and then look at my comments yeah it's filled with them now part of it is somebody asked me the question in the comments if i'm aspergers or if i'm on the spectrum and the answer is i don't quite know i don't quite know because it's it's not exactly well defined is it my personal opinion is maybe not but if i am i'd be sort of on the i don't know at one end of the scale a little bit maybe i don't know i feel not but i feel like i'm close enough that i you know i i feel like i'm within breathing distance of it meaning that i'm so compatible with it it would be hard to imagine i'm not on the spectrum is that a thing being compatible with the spectrum without being on it i don't know if that's even a thing identify oh somebody says my conversation is too good yeah you know there's all kinds of difference different functionality uh but i would imagine i'm not but i don't know um gates here all right so that's all for now and i will talk to you all tomorrow and um yeah it is interesting isn't it it is interesting that'll give you something to think about think about why there are so many people on the spectrum who follow my content and when you figure that out um it's going to be interesting i'll give you my hypothesis well a couple hypothesis one of course is that i make the dilbert comic and you can imagine easily that dilbert's on the spectrum and i draw i make it that way so you know i've got that natural compatibility but also i try to remove the the emotion from decisions which i believe is quite compatible if you're on the spectrum because you'll you like to see the emotions stripped out so you can see what's left and then i could add it back in and then people can see the whole structure so i think that's what's going on but i don't know so that's all i got for now i'll talk to you tomorrow

all right

it's time come on in come on in

it's time for coffee with scott adams

and can you make a guess what we'll be

talking about today

i think you can i think you can and if

you'd like to

enjoy it i mean really really enjoy it

like better than you've ever enjoyed

coffee with scott adams well all you

need is a cupboard mugger glass a tanker

jealous dinah canteen jugger flask a

vessel

of any kind fill it with your favorite

liquid i like

coffee you might like racism

but don't drink that no never drink a

delicious beverage

beverage a beverage instead

and i'd like you to join me now for the

simultaneous sip go

oh that was a simultaneous gulp

yeah a little bit extra a little bit

extra

well uh everything in the world is

backwards and upside down today

have you noticed that nothing seems to

be

right today everything's just a little

bit off

and and you don't notice it until you

see all the examples but i'll give you

something as we go

uh so i'd like to give a start out with

a big damn you damn you

to uh andres backhouse

who i talk about often because he's

great on

data analysis for any of the stuff of

the news

but uh he made me retweet aaron rupar's

tweet and i can't forgive him for that

but it's the first time i've

unironically

retweeted him i think but if you don't

know who

uh aaron rupar is he's uh

he's a character who is let's say

interesting we'll just keep it at that

but uh normally i would not agree with

his uh his tweets

but here he was he was responding to

nancy pelosi's

speech after the chauvin floyd verdict

and

[Laughter]

nancy pelosi managed to reach into this

big basket

of things that you could say and managed

to pull out

the only thing that was wrong you could

have gone in

a hundred different directions and not

messed this up as badly as you did

to the point where aaron rupar is

retweeting you with condemnation

she said

thank you george floyd for giving your

life for

i'm not even going to finish it but

let's just say

in the in the history of

of politicians saying that dumb

this was this was notable like even her

own side had to well we're out

if if you're nancy pelosi

and aaron rupar is listening to you and

the first thing he says i'm out

i'm out i don't want any part of this

you've really gone off you've gone too

far

uh in other news the uh

there's a norfolk uh police lieutenant

who was fired

because it was leaked that he donated

some money to kyle rittenhouse's defense

and gave him some words of encouragement

he got fired for that

he got fired for an opinion

that was backed by the video

for a person who is presumed innocent

until proven guilty

and he got fired for it

so that's the norfolk uh police

department for you that's that's pretty

pathetic now here's the good news

if you are let's say a police union

and uh your contracts come up i'm

assuming the union does the negotiating

for the police contracts

what would you ask for in terms of a

raise

this coming round i feel like

30 would be the right number

right that doesn't mean they'll be able

to get it because there are lots of

forces pushing back

but i would say that the police unions

have a rock solid argument

that the environment of risk has changed

so substantially

that the risk reward of their job can't

be looked at the same anymore

and that on top of the physical violence

risk which was always

extreme which is why we have so much

respect for the police

they're doing stuff you and i don't want

to do for the most part

uh but i would say that given the

now the the legal and social risk on top

of the

the violence risk it looks different now

i would say i would back the cops for a

30

raise minimum and that's just based on

how society has changed the risk that

we're willing to put on the police

now i would say that before you could

argue but wait we should put this

risk on the police that's not even the

argument

so so whether you think that the floyd

trial

went just the way it should have or you

don't irrelevant

it doesn't matter any of that to my

point that the police are in a new

new situation of risk whether they

should be there or not is a separate

question

but they are there and it's different

and it's more

risk reward risk reward suggests that

police

should get i would say a minimum of 30

raise because i don't know how you could

retain them otherwise

yeah the the thing they signed up for

just doesn't exist

because the thing they signed up for is

if it was a gray area

they were probably going to get away

with it right

when i say get away with it i don't mean

that they necessarily do something wrong

i just mean that if it's a gray area and

they were trying to do their job

they probably would have gotten away

with it in the past and i guess i'm

biasing the biasing by say getting away

with it

because maybe there was nothing to get

away with

but 30 pay raise for police i think that

is called for

so i would over fund the police based on

this new situation

so whoever wanted to defund the police

probably this moved in the wrong

direction

and by the way there's no economist who

would disagree with me

right it's the same job except

way extra risk you have to pay extra for

that

that's how it works so if so if

defunding the police is what anybody

wanted

i'm pretty sure this should work the

other way if economics works the way

it's supposed to

the next door app i hear has a new

feature that'll tell you if you're being

racist

before you send your message

what do you think of that what do you

think of the next door app

before you send out a little message to

the neighbors apparently it's got some

artificial intelligence built in

that's just looking for key words such

as

blue lives matter it'll flag that that's

actually one of the examples

it'll flag it to say you know some

people would take blue lives matter as a

racist statement

are you sure you want to send it it'll

still let you send it

uh or all lives matter if you type all

lives matter into the app

it'll stop you and say woo you know

what's going on here right

it's gonna look a little racist think

twice what do you think about that

are you up for that are you down for

that

i have i have mixed opinions

i usually violate the common thinking

whenever information is presented that's

useful

so in my opinion next door is presenting

actually useful information

because there might be people who

literally don't know

that they're about to ruin their own

life by saying something that they think

is supporting you know all life and

equality

but other people are going to think

you're a racist

i don't know i think it's i think it's

worth trying

maybe see how people think about it give

it a whirl

if they were actually blocking you for

saying it then that's

another question but if it's just

information

and it's information that can save your

life literally

it's worth a try they can always reverse

it if the if the users don't like it

but anytime you can try something

cheaply

and it's got a good purpose behind it

yeah why not

give it a try it's a little creepy but

it's a test

you know everything's a test if you can

reverse it easily

all right let's talk about uh

this show of an outcome

if you didn't hear me last night i did a

live stream last night but let me recap

my opinion number one i am satisfied

with the jury's work on this

i thank the jur the jurors um

i do not think that the jury's job

is to decide the law so this is where i

might

differ with some of you i don't believe

that the jury's

duty and i use this word you know

intentionally i don't think that the

jury's duty

was to attend to the letter of the law

as instructed by the judge

that was their job description right

it's not their duty their duty under the

law

is to follow the law just you know as

best they can

so certainly if the only duty you were

talking about is what their

their legal required description of

their responsibility is

then it was their duty to follow the

letter of the law but

what is a higher l what's what's the

higher law than

the legal law the one that's written

down is there any higher law

of course there is of course there is

there's the greater good if you ever ran

into a situation where following the

letter

of the law was clearly bad for the

greater good

what would be the duty of the jury

i'm going to give you an artificial

example where the jury knows

that following the letter of the law

would just be a wrong

what's their duty is their duty to

follow that law that they know is wrong

no never their duty is to be humans

their duty is to be americans their duty

is to their fellow citizens for whom

they have taken some sacrifice

to serve on this jury now before we

before we discuss the question of

whether they handled it right

separately can we agree that their duty

is to do the best they can for the

greater good they might not get it right

but their duty is not to follow the law

if the greater good is in a different

direction

does anybody disagree with that i want

to see if there are those who would say

that they should follow the law

even if they knew the law wasn't evil

right i'm not saying that's the case in

the shelving case just as a

as a principle

a lot of people here a lot a lot of

people disagree

i will take your i will take your

disagreement

with respect meaning that

i res i respect that i respect that

point of view completely

i have complete respect for the opposite

view of mine

which is if you think that following the

law is just always going to be

better even if there's some evil in a

specific case

i can see that that's not a terrible

argument by the way because there's an

assumption built in

that following the letter of the law

gets you to a you know the

in the long run you've got a better

situation right

yeah that's that's fairly good um but i

disagree

i disagree the human law is always

higher than the

uh the real law you know the written law

in my opinion

and the problem is whether you are wise

enough to know

when to make this critical exception

and that's a problem right because maybe

humans are not wise enough to make these

exceptions

but there is a reason that we have jury

trials and it's because we're all more

comfortable with a system

in which some capable people who mean

well do the best they can

right that's as good as you can get it's

a pretty good system

and i would say the system worked in

that sense

and i do think that the jurors took into

account

their own safety which i support

i think they took into account what

would happen to

society which i would support them doing

that

and just in this specific case i think

they took into account

potential riots i think they took into

account how the police would be viewed i

think they took into account

racial animosity i think they took into

account how it

feels should they well

most of you think no but they did

because you can't not you nobody has the

ability to turn that off

it's all part of the forces so

here's what i like about the outcome i

do believe

that it was a close call in terms of

whether he was guilty of anything

versus not guilty i think that the jury

heard all of the evidence

and i didn't that's important

the jury heard all of the evidence i

didn't

most of you almost 100 of you also

didn't hear all of the evidence you

didn't live through it

so if the people who lived through it

and saw all of it

have a different feeling about it than i

got

from my little keyhole i'm not going to

say they're wrong

because the you know the the assumption

is if all 12 of them

voted the same way it's more likely that

i would have voted that way too

if i'd seen what they saw experienced

what they experienced but i didn't

right so i'm not going to second-guess

people who did the work when i didn't do

it

and when i watched anybody online who

also didn't do the work

didn't watch every minute of the trial i

don't value their opinion as much as i

value the

the jurors right and there was nothing

in the jury description which i found

actually helpful

even though it has the bad effect of

probably doxxing them

but but actually reading about the

backgrounds and the way they answered

the questions

i actually have a lot of confidence in

that group and it was

mostly white people in in the jury

who convicted a white guy which also

helps a little bit for the credibility

now did they make a wise decision well

let's look at some of the outcomes so we

don't know if it's wise

but i do feel like they were credible

and tried and here's one of the outcomes

according to axios reporting senior

democrat and republican aides

so both democrats and republicans this

is important to the story

the aides say they would have never let

their bosses say it on the record

but privately they told axios that a

guilty verdict in the chauvin trial

has lessened pressure to act on police

reform

so one of the outcomes of this verdict

is

less likely there will be police reform

because it looks like you know this was

police reform

right it made sure that people police

know not to do this

might have made a big difference but it

may not turn into legislation and we

don't know what the net of that is

so there's that we also didn't have

much in the way of riots last night i

think portland had a little action there

was a police officer who was assaulted

some windows got broken but basically

there were no riots right i mean i think

portland was just going to be portland

no matter what

but is that fair to say or

is it just not being reported i'm

looking at your comments to see if i

missed it

well i would say that is mostly peaceful

so does that mean that the uh the

outcome

was right well as i've told you it's

it feels like we can't confirm this

maybe someday we can

it feels like the jury sent a message to

the world

which is there's something wrong with

this police officer

we're going to sacrifice him

and we're going to we're going to send

you a message by making him guilty on

all counts

which even the experts didn't really

think was going to happen did they

so i think the jury is sending a message

that they're making a

let's say not according to the letter of

the law decision

i feel like that's the message could be

wrong

it could be could easily be

misinterpreting it but it feels like it

to me

so i'm just telling you what i i'm

receiving i'm not telling you what they

sent

um and it feels like

well let me tell you why i'm not um

disappointed in any way about the uh

outcome even though

with what i knew uh it would have gone

the other way

if they'd use the letter of the law but

that's just based on what i do

incomplete all right

so it seems to me that there was

something

wrong with derek shelvin

and did anybody else get that

no matter whether you thought he was

technically guilty

you know beyond a reasonable doubt no

matter

what you thought about that there was

something wrong with him wasn't there

you know how humans this has been proven

humans can actually detect if somebody

is physically ill

by looking at their face i think people

could probably detect

if people are um

i've heard this tell me if i'm wrong

you can detect if somebody is likely to

be gay

by their face not every time of course

but

better than you know the chance would

suggest

so there are a lot of things about us

that just sort of come out

you know that people can recognize

and i was trying to think yesterday what

is it about

derek shovin that bothered me and maybe

someone maybe everybody else

so much because it wasn't exactly what

he was doing

right because what he was doing there

was enough of an argument that it was

part of the policy and hadn't heard

people before and

you know maybe he didn't know how bad he

was doing it you know it was part of the

argument

but beyond the argument there was

something wrong with his

attitude or he seemed a little bit too

happy did anybody get that

like was anybody feeling somebody says

it's called prejudice

yeah of course um so we're not talking

about science here i'm talking about how

you

you felt about him did you have a bad

feeling about him i'm looking at your

comments now to see if anybody had that

i'm seeing some yeses some no's some

people signing off

because of that are you trying to

persuade

fear yet fear no

there was um i'll tell you what

what it looked like to me there was a

lack of

empathy that has gone

all the way through the trial

what should there not have been some

point

in which we heard a statement from derek

shelvin and maybe we did if

if he made the statement let me know

should derek chovin have not said at

some point

you know once he knew he was going to be

tried for it

couldn't he make a statement that says

my god i certainly didn't intend this

uh i feel sorry for the family um

i never would have done this you know

had i

been aware that the danger was so much

uh

you know something like that

no somebody says no don't do that

because it would imply guilt

but you don't have to have guilt over a

death

do you you could feel bad about the

death

without admitting guilt indeed you could

say

i feel terrible for the family i feel

you know awful about what happened

uh i hope that the the jury will show

that i wasn't a participant in

in that and because that's what i felt

at the time

would that be incriminating to simply

have

uh to simply have empathy or

remorse is the wrong word because

remorse would suggest that he did know

he did something wrong so you'd have to

be careful there

but you could have empathy right

and i feel that he didn't show it in a

way people were expecting which doesn't

mean anything he just

didn't show it the way people expected

at the moment

you know that and i think this changed a

lot of minds

apparently there was a moment when he

knew there was no heartbeat

and he didn't change his behavior if you

were on

top of somebody holding them down and

you knew that their

heart stopped beating how does that not

immediately change your behavior and i

don't think it changed his behavior

so somebody says asperger's well that

would be interesting

certainly that wasn't that would be

really interesting

if if that were even a little bit true

that would be certainly part of the

defense or part of the

part of the sentencing but i doubt it

was true we would have heard about it

anyway so i think this jury looked at a

person who had no empathy

and he was close enough to doing

something that looked like

murder that when they looked at all of

the variables

including their own safety what it would

do to society

just what feels right

i feel like the jury made the right

decision

now is that the same as saying that the

that the uh that the uh

the trial was fair i don't think it was

even close to fair

not even close but i think the jury

could have a

a right decision without the trial being

even close to fair

and that would be okay in my mind i

could hold both of those as true

but i've heard you earlier that you

couldn't and that's that's a legitimate

opinion

yeah i think it was a human sacrifice

and here's something that i think that

uh the black population of this country

doesn't fully understand and i'm gonna

i'm gonna illustrate it

by playing two parts i will now give you

a skit

in which i play a representative group

of black americans

not any specific person and a

representative person

representing white people not any one

white person

and black people say

hey you white people let's see if you

can now punish a white person

for doing something that you know maybe

there's a little argument about how bad

it was let's see if you can do that

hey white people do you think you can

punish a white person

and then the white people say sure watch

this

then the black people say i know but can

you

punish an actual white person

when the crime there's some disagreement

about the nature of the crime

do you think you can do that and the

white people say

we just said yes i don't even know why

you're asking

of course we can of course we can

we do it every day punishing other white

people

is like breathing if you're a white

person do you know how many white people

i've punished

who had it coming lots of them

every day punishing other white people

is the easiest thing we do

let me give you a story that a lot of

people didn't believe when i

i've been telling this story for years

it's completely true

but when i tell it there's a certain

percentage of you who will swear i'm

lying

trust me i've been saying it for i don't

know 25 years

since i've been able to tell the story

and

there there would be literally thousands

of witnesses

still alive who would be refuting me

because i tell this story all the time

plenty of people could refute it if it

were not true and it goes like this

when i worked for a big bank it was

crocker national bank years ago

beginning of my career my career was

going well and it looked like i'd be

sort of a management type person and my

boss called me into my office

a white woman and she said i don't know

how to tell you this

but then the word has come down from

management

that we can't promote you now or for any

time in the future that we can see

because you're white and because you're

a man

and they said the reason is that the

company was getting some heat

because there was not enough diversity

in senior management

so now you may have heard me tell the

story but here's the twist on it

who was it who screwed me

who did that was it was it black people

no no it was old white men

threw me under the bus in a heartbeat

to protect themselves because they could

keep their job

as as a senior management so long as

they screwed enough white people in

lower levels

to let people of color you know sort of

leave problem and get up to see

management now independent of whether

you think that was a good idea to have

this

reverse discrimination um not legally

but the way companies implemented it was

like that

so independent whether you think that's

a good or bad idea the only point i'm

going to make today

is that when i when when white men

were asked to destroy my life

for their convenience they didn't

hesitate

they didn't hesitate for a

second

so let me tell you black americans

if you're ever wondering will white

people

punish other white people to protect

themselves

yeah like really quickly

so the the punchline is that i moved

from that bank i i quit it almost

immediately

quit the bank moved to the phone company

where i got on the management fast track

and i was going to be

senior management in the phone company

and my boss called me in and said

i don't know how to tell you this but

the word just came down we

can't promote white people anymore

not white men anyway women maybe but we

can't promote any white men

because we got caught it's only white

people at senior management

so second company how long did it take

the white people to throw me under the

bus

one second no hesitation

if you want to kill white people ask

white people to do it

because they're really willing no

hesitation

so i think that's largely an invisible

thing

if you're imagine being a black

person in america some of you are you

don't have to imagine it at all

imagine what that would be like if the

news just kept you showing you

george floyd's situations uh black

people being abused black people being

confused

and it's greater than the percentages in

the public so

it's a real thing like a real issue

but if you don't see all the times that

white people are

are stomping on the heads of other white

people for their own benefit

you're kind of missing some context it

feels like white people are oppressing

black people

and the part you miss is that successful

white people

are just screwing everybody they're just

screwing everybody

because that's what's good for them to

keep things just the way they are

anyway that's useful context for you

right there um

do you think that the there's no rioting

because of the chauvin

verdict i feel like that's the smartest

thing they did

is to make it guilty on everything

because at least that had a chance of

averting the riots and it looks like it

worked

looks like it worked you know i said

yesterday that

um i've said this a lot that i don't

believe there's any such thing as bad

presidents and good presidents

because by the time you get elected

president you do have a certain minimum

amount of

you know talent so they all have the

minimum talent

but what makes you good or bad is just

luck

is your specific set of talents and your

personality is it

suited for the exact problems that come

up while you're president

now covet was exactly the wrong

problem for president trump

and i'm not even sure his supporters

would disagree with that

too much right it just wasn't the right

match

because optimism which was the trump

thing

optimism and the pandemic they just

didn't fit together

but optimism and the economy great

you know trump and the economy i love

that combination

optimism economics works great i feel as

if biden was exactly the right president

for this doesn't make him the right

president for other things

but for this i feel like he was exactly

the right guy

because he's boring he didn't make it

about

you know him even though he put

pressure on you know in some ways you

could argue that the politicians put

pressure on the jury

but there wasn't going to be a fair

trial anyway

so i think biden might have been

maybe exactly the right person because

he took all the

he took all the energy out of it if

there's one thing that biden can do it

sucked the energy out of a topic

and what did you need this topic to have

less energy right when i talk about

uh trump being an energy monster it's

usually in a positive sense he can take

energy and turn it into stuff

biden's like an energy sink he can just

suck the energy on the stuff

this is a topic where sucking the energy

out of it

was the right play and he pulled it off

you know by doing nothing basically um

here's an opinion worth noting mike

cernovich i was waiting to see what

he said about this i'll just read you

his uh his tweet because i

he always has good stuff to say about

this kind of thing

he said on the facts and law the chauvin

case was always a close one

i'd agree with that he could have been

properly convicted

so might have gone exactly this way no

matter what

but he did not get a fair trial as

everyone from rioters to a member of

congress to the potus

tampered with the outcome i'd agree with

that today is

one of national disgrace a true

insurrection

so his opinion is that this is a bad

outcome

because it was an unfair trial i agree

on the facts

there's no way it could have been a fair

trial here's where i would disagree on

the opinion

there wasn't a chance for a fair trial

that i i would completely agree with the

opinion

if it had been an option to have a fair

trial but that option never existed

it can't exist the story was simply too

big

and people's ability to communicate

simply too good

there wasn't really an option for a fair

trial

so given that there was no option for a

fair trial

and chauvin didn't really have the

option really

of anything like justice according to

you know the details of the law and

reasonable doubt and none of those

things really applied in my opinion

to the case i think it was emotional

social

peer pressure i think it was all those

things

but again i would say that the juror the

jurors had the hardest job in the world

they had to figure out what was the

greater good in all of this mess

because there were no good solutions

there was nothing that the jury could do

that would solve all the problems they

could only choose which problems to

keep and which problems to try to reduce

and that's only trying there were no

good

outcomes in in the sense of everybody

gets justice or anything like that

never was possible and so these jurors

again i i can't tell you how much

respect i have for this group of jurors

they reached into the hardest situation

in the world

the whole country was watching and

really in a way the whole world

because where america goes you know

affects everybody

i think they did a tremendous job and

if they didn't follow the letter of the

law i respect it because

i think they would they may have been

looking at a higher law

and that would be okay with me now we

may find out later that the

that my interpretation of the juror the

jurors is way too

way too nice and if we find that out

later i will modify my opinion

but i'm not going to make the assumption

that this group of patriotic americans

was anything but well-meaning

well-intentioned and did a good job in

the face of the impossible

that's my current position happy to

modify it if we find out later that

something's different um

all right let's see what else we got

going on

um as i say once or twice a week if

you're not following

glenn greenwald on twitter you really

have to

just stop what you're doing and just

give him a follow because watching him

spank

cnn and msnbc and the other media

for being essentially propaganda organs

is just really good entertainment and

useful

like you really need to see how often it

happens to

fully feel what's going on and nobody

does a better job than

greenwald in in spanking them so today's

example was uh

the officer sicknick story he's the

officer who was killed

well i'm sorry back up back

up back up erase everything i just said

he's

the officer who died soon after the

capital uh

insurrection or riots or what it

protests whatever you want to call

and cnn had been reporting that he'd

been killed with a fire extinguisher

you know hit in the head with it and

then they reported that the bear spray

might have killed him somehow and now we

know that

he died of natural causes it was just

sadly you know linked to that date

and how did uh cnn handle the fact that

they had been misreporting i mean it was

seriously misreporting

this story for a long time

the they kind of just glossed over it a

little bit

and greenwald is busting their balls on

it

so that's fun to see all right you want

some real fun

here's some fun rasmussen is going to be

reporting in a little bit

uh it's not out yet for the rest of you

but i gotta

get a sneak preview and they they were

asking a question about the uh

opinions about coca-cola you know co you

know the coca-cola weighed in

and complained about georgia's voting

law changes and got involved in politics

and

as you might imagine liberals and

democrats went

different directions on their feelings

about coca-cola but here's the funniest

you've ever seen in your life all

right here's the

here's the rest and pull results to this

question

uh does the georgia voting laws and

coca-cola's response

make you more likely or less likely to

drink

coca-cola products

the gop was 52 less likely to

purchase coca-cola products that's a

pretty big deal isn't it

yeah over half of of uh

conservatives or yeah basically

conservatives

say they're less likely to drink the

product that's kind of devastating is it

you notice that you did notice

that coca-cola seemed to pull back a

little bit

and i asked i wonder if there's anything

happening with their sales

well if over half of republicans decided

they're going to drink less of these

products

coca-cola probably noticed

but here's the good part are you ready

for the good part

here's the money shot i don't think

anything's made me laugh

more than this lately

liberals are 37 percent more likely

to consume coca-cola products

they're more likely now

if coke were let's say a healthy product

this story would look really good

healthy in terms of

improved your health i'm not making any

claims about

health and products because i would get

sued

i have no evidence no evidence

that this product is bad for you but i

think i can say

it is not intended to be a a medicine

and i would imagine that dietitians

would have something to say

about the value of uh drinking coke

or diet coke they have lots of other

products of course

but those are the ones you think of

so i wonder if the gop should come out

in favor of quitting cigarettes to see

how many liberals would start smoking

because i think uh you know the

republicans are always worried

that immigration is at least the way the

democrats want to do it

is really a clever way to get more

democrat voters through immigration

oh that's your real reason isn't it but

now republicans have their own

play like that they can just come out

against anything that's bad for you

democrats will immediately do more of

the things that are bad for them and

will kill them

and then there will be fewer democrats

i'm just saying it's a strategy that

would work it's working right now

because they apparently they convinced

they convinced democrats

to drink more sugar water

i mean seriously is that not funny

okay

somebody said

[Laughter]

that's so bad i'm going to repeat it

somebody else said this

this is not my idea i'm just looking at

it in the comments somebody said that

republicans are already doing that with

abortion

by being opposed to abortion it's making

democrats support them

abort their own babies

that's not funny except it kind of is

here's how the ap is reporting a story

that you probably heard about

so this is their tweet their exact words

police

shot and killed a teenage black girl in

columbus ohio

just as the verdict was being announced

in the trial for the killing of george

floyd

oh my god police are terrible

aren't they i mean just listen to this

police shot and killed a teenage girl

just as the verdict was announced in the

floyd tribe it's just going from bad to

worse

the police just killing this teenage

girl

oh there's more to it body cam footage

appeared to show the girl attempting to

stab two people with a knife while she

was in the act

oh feels like that could have been the

the lead sentence

here's another way this headline could

have run instead of police shot and

killed a teenage black girl

another way i could have gone is police

saved the life

of a black girl by quick action

just as the verdict for the george floyd

thing was being read

both of those are true if you see the

body cam by the way

who knows how what a jury will say but

the body cam shows a police officer

doing some of the best police work i've

ever seen

because if you didn't see the video it

was uh

one young woman getting with a knife

in the act getting ready to stab another

woman who was you know defensively

trying to protect herself and as the

knife was coming down

a police officer with a pistol you know

not

not a rifle with a sight from a fairly

good distance

took out the took out the knife woman

without hurting the potential victim

that was really good police work wasn't

it

yeah like i'd hate to see that i hate to

say there's anything

called a good shooting but that was as

good as shooting as you can

get it saved the life in real time and

it was really tight

and he acted quickly took let me let me

put this in another perspective

especially

what kind of risk did that police

officer take

for himself huge

huge that was somebody who in a moment

with no time to think took a gigantic

risk

of his whole life that police officer

you know because we know the george

floyd thing is changing how people sing

things

he took the risk of his own life to save

a young black woman who is in at any

moment was going to be stabbed to death

he took he took that chance his own

chance

that's what happened and but it's

reported as

police shot and killed a teenage black

girl just as the floyd

verdict was being read propaganda people

it's

propaganda uh here's a provocative

thought

you've seen on facebook and other places

that it's pretty easy now

technologically to replace the face

of anybody on a video right you've all

seen it right you've all seen the

examples

it's no big deal to replace somebody's

face suppose

you could you got to the point where you

could replace it so well and i think

we're kind of there

where you couldn't tell that that a face

had been replaced by another face

and then imagine that you use that

technology to reverse

the ethnicities on any video crime

so that if you see the police attacking

or you know

or in a conflict with somebody it just

automatically reverses their ethnicities

but everything else stays the same

and then you you play for the jury

the reversed ethnicities and you never

show them the original

would you get the same verdict of course

you wouldn't

not every time sometimes you would if

the if the facts are clear

but no it would change things for sure

and

what if you did that face swap let's say

you wait 10 years until there's

some college students who have never

heard of george floyd

i don't know if that's possible but you

wait 10 years and you run the entire

trial

by this bunch of students by just

reversing the ethnicities with the

and by then maybe the the culture is

different things are different

and just see if you get the same verdict

somebody says they already race swapped

george zimmerman

i'm not sure what you mean by that

but think about the fact that this is

now a technology that actually works

uh that would be interesting so

fox news is interesting uh about the

verdict on the

floyd chauvin case uh so apparently

hannity

is backing the jury and says it was a

good result

not too far from my own opinion although

i'm not sure the facts of the case

exactly supported it but i like the

outcomes

whereas tucker carlson is talking about

the

the trial being unfair i think i think

i i like the fact that these opinions

are different

i just like that fact you know

independent of whether i agree with them

it's just healthy that they're not in

the same page

remember i told you i think i told you

that

i'm waiting for the j j vaccine that's

the one i want

it's the only one banned at least in the

united states or maybe there's another

one bad

but they're looking into the these rare

blood clots

and that's why the j j vaccine the only

one that is one shot

and one of the ones that uses existing

technology instead of the mrna stuff

and here's what a blood clotting expert

says about this

so here are the actual odds and by the

way

compliments to cnn

compliments to cnn weird huh

cnn actually did an opinion piece

in which they showed the math

and they did a cost-benefit analysis

what what

how often have you ever seen that when

was last time you saw cnn report a story

with like a proper

cost benefit analysis so you can see

both sides

it's really rare so when it happened

good job cnn in fact this should have

been on fox news

so cnn i'm going to give you an a plus

for what i'm going to read right now

for the just the way they handled this

story so this is a blood clotting expert

talking about the j j vaccine that says

quote

the chances of you being um oh wait back

up

the chances of getting what we are

calling

vaccine induced immune thrombotic

i think i pronounced that correctly or

vitt is one in a million all right so

let's just call it blood clots

so the chance of getting a blood clot

from this vaccine is one in a million

hold that number in your head

the chances of being hospitalized with

covid

is roughly one in 100 for the adult

population

and the chances of having a blood clot

once you are hospitalized

is probably one in five or one in six

and a little more it's like one in three

if you're in the icu

so put those benefits to put those

numbers together

uh a one in a million chance that the

vaccine

gives you a blood clot but there's a 1

in 100 chance

that if you get the covet you're going

to be

that you've got a 1 in 6 chance of

getting it

now the math is too much to do the you

know direct direct

but i think you can see just from the

magnitude

that we're not talking about more risk

from the vaccine

we're talking about lower risk if this

is the only way to get the vaccine

now to be fair the real comparison

should have been getting this vaccine

versus the other vaccine so

uh if i'm being fair i think i have to

knock their a plus down to a maybe a c

plus as i'm thinking about it because

they did the wrong comparison so if you

had enough

vaccines so everybody could get one

why not get rid of this one risk that

doesn't seem to be the case

with the other vaccines but

do you really know the risk with the

other vaccines because they're the new

technology

maybe they're a risk later and you don't

know

so that's got to be in there and what

about the risk that you

don't get the coven at all so this risk

of 1 in 100 being hospitalized that's

only if they get it

but you have to multiply that by you

know or you have to factor in what are

the odds of getting it in the first

place which is not in here

so i'll at least give them credit for

waving their arms at the magnitudes

and i think they got the magnitudes

right the risk

is really low and especially since i'm

male

and it seems that the risk is more for

females for this j

j i'm really waiting for this one to

come available

because this is the one i would run to

like i

at the moment i'm i'm sort of waiting

for the

availability to get better i just talked

to somebody who got the shot in my area

how long do you think somebody had to

wait in their car

to get a vaccination in my area take a

guess

how long do somebody just wait in

northern california

to get the vaccination five hours

five hours in a car

waiting for the vaccination i'm not

gonna wait five hours in my car for a

vaccination

you're gonna have to get a little better

than that so if this j vaccine

becomes uh back uh back in availability

i'm hoping that one will have a shorter

line if you know what i mean

so i'm going to be all over that one i

hope that that one

comes through um

let me give you an update on the dilbert

nft if you know what they are they're

it's digital art

that's tied to the blockchain and so the

blockchain tells you that you have the

one and only original

and so there's dilbert nft two of them

one with clean

clean punchline and one with the f word

and the punch line

and i just wanted to give you the the

current number is

the one with the f word is selling for

or at least the auction number so far

is 10 times as much as the clean one so

in terms of collectibility

the naughty one is ten times more

valuable the real

bidding won't happen until the last day

of the auction so you can't really tell

what it'll go for

now but if i think it's may 1st is the

last day of the auction

but the naughty ones up to 12 000

and uh there's not really a strong

reason for anybody to bid until it gets

close to the last day

so we'll see see where that goes um

somebody was accusing me of being a

grifter

for being in this nft market

let me talk about the definition of a

grifter

if you're doing something where you're

trying to fool somebody into believing

something that's not true

you might be a grifter if you tell them

exactly what you're doing

and show your work with full

transparency

that could never be grifting right

so i'm saying in the comments you're

saying tulips for sale

grifter all right does anybody argue

with the point

that as long as you're fully transparent

you couldn't be grifting because there's

nothing hidden

right nor is there anything especially

persuasive

it's not there's not even anything

manipulative to it so

the cartoon itself the one that is the

nft

literally says the nfts don't have any

value

that's the topic of the cartoon and when

i talk about it i tell you there's no

reason to own one

but people collect things for whatever

reason so i'm not going to stop them

i'm making it available yeah so

so look at the names that people are

calling me huckster

tulips now

you have to examine yourself don't you

because what it feels like

i can't read your mind but what it feels

like is people being

angry that i could make money on this

doesn't it feel like that's the that's

all that's going on

because remember we're a free country

i've completely shown my work

i've told you there's no reason to buy

it i told you

there's no reason to buy it i don't

think i can be

more transparent than that

right but still people have that feeling

that

you don't like other people to succeed

there is a theory that what makes

democrats and

republicans different is how happy you

are for somebody else's success

let's test that when i see that people

uh are successful i i can definitely

feel

like pangs of jealousy if they did

something i didn't do

or if somebody's a billionaire and i'm

not a billionaire

i can feel it a little bit of i wish i

had that

but i'm always happy for them i mean you

could be jealous and happy at the same

time

so uh how do you feel

when people are successful around you so

that's my question

in the comments tell me how you feel

when you hear that somebody else has

succeeded in a big way

do you feel happy or does it bother you

a little bit

and you feel like uh i don't think the

way they did it

is good or i think they must have stolen

something or there must be something

wrong or

something somebody says inspired

here's a so brock

just nick says he would feel inspired by

somebody else successful

that my friends is a winning attitude

if you're feeling about other people's

success is

wow maybe i can do that too

then you are in good shape if you're

feeling about somebody else's successes

they probably stole it they didn't

deserve it

they're grifting they're they're

hucksters

you're gonna fail you're gonna fail it's

almost

you could almost predict it in fact if

you were doing job interviews

and you gave me a choice of just

throwing away people's resumes so i

don't even know what their experience is

but they could just answer a few

questions how do you feel about this

um you couldn't get an honest answer but

imagine you could get an honest answer

i feel the way they would answer a few

questions about other people's success

and about their own ability to be

successful you know that they have

agency

and the ability to be successful i feel

like that would tell me everything i

needed

because if somebody comes in and says um

i believe that my success is entirely up

to me

what do you think they've done up to

that point they probably worked really

hard

to build a set of talents go to school

stay out of jail

because you know that's their philosophy

of course they were following it if you

believe that's their philosophy

so i feel like you could you could boil

down

somebody's entire uh economic value

you know within capitalism their entire

economic value could be predicted almost

entirely

by that attitude whether they think that

their hard work is what makes them

successful

or is mostly about race and luck and who

who you were born to

and who you know and all that some stuff

jay says sometimes scott really is truly

a boomer

all right jay i'm gonna uh i'm gonna

uh i'm gonna erase you

because probably the most uh

bankrupt opinion the most empty opinion

that you could ever say is somebody's

acting like a boomer

you're acting like a boomer now

sometimes that's funny

like there's a context when it's funny

because you recognize oh yeah that is a

boomer thing

and i think those are funny too because

i i do recognize how many how often i

fall into you know the the stereotype

but here's the thing

you're just being useless right

just throwing me into a group it's just

the most useless thing you could do

and you need to go examine your life

because if you thought that was a good

comment and one that the

society needed or somehow helping you or

entertained you there's just something

wrong with you

right just something wrong with you

yeah if if tying me into a category

is somehow important to you if that was

a priority

like that's what you thought oh this

will be important let me let me tie him

to a category

why the really what good was that

here here here's another idiot i'm gonna

call out just the idiots today

or rustic says in all caps

scott has thin skin question mark

has anybody paid attention to anything

i've done for the last five years

if there's anything i don't have it's

thin skin

you don't do this job if you have thin

skin

you i couldn't possibly wake up in the

morning and do what i do

day after day with just withering

uh you should see my you should see the

messages i get every day

every day i get more criticism than you

will ever get

in your whole worthless life

and i don't think i've ever gone to

sleep feeling bad about it not once

now if you can't tell the difference

between

thick skin and thin skin you are so far

from understanding

anything about your world

and i feel sorry for you some of this is

genetic

i think i think maybe so a lot of it is

practiced

but it's hard to sort out how much is

practice and

you know a skill to be thick-skinned

and how much is natural then why are you

angry now

do i seem angry

you haven't seen me angry maybe half

but um i try really hard to

not be angry because you don't want to

see me angry

that that that's a level that i'm pretty

sure you've never seen on video

but you don't want to see that and this

isn't that

this is a condemnation let's say

i'm condemning you because i think it's

good for life

there should be less of you

it's good for the world it's good for

the world if people like you are slapped

down

the the people who are just bad bad for

the world

and don't have anything useful to say

they should be slapped down

uh

yeah i one of the reasons um somebody

was asking me yesterday if i've ever

been in a fight

like a physical fight and i've been in

physical altercations but usually i was

just beating somebody up

not usually that the only times it's

happened i was just beating the hell out

of somebody

now in both of those cases they were

bullies who had been my bully

and i just reached a level where i

needed to just beat the out of them

in front of other people to make the

problem go away and

which works wonderfully by the way i

don't recommend it

in 2021 you'll just go to jail if you

beat somebody up

but back when i was a kid if you just

beat the out of somebody

in front of witnesses it would solve

your bully problem

pretty well but i've noticed that

neither the bullies fought back

they just took it and i've noticed that

not once in my entire life

has anybody like been in a physical

confrontation with me that turned into a

fight

and i've always wondered about that

because

in the comments by the way those of you

who are male

how many fights have you been in it's

not zero

is it it's not zero but i would say i've

been in zero

fights where the other person is

fighting back

i think zero yeah look at the numbers

that that's what it's like to be a man

a man in america or anybody any place i

guess look at the number of fights

they've been in

fifteen fifty two one

three zero

i don't know how you did that but okay

uh

and i've always wondered if that's

because i look scary to other people

because i've always thought the scariest

the scariest thing you could encounter

is somebody who's not afraid of you

that's the scariest thing because if you

get in the fight with somebody

who's who's not going to ever quit

and is not going to run away and is

going to finish you off

you don't want to be in that fight right

and it doesn't even matter if like

physically you have more

skills or whatever you just don't want

to get in a fight with anybody

who's not going to ever quit and

my view is there are only two kinds of

fights that are worth having

you know one is the one you know you're

going to win

that's worth having and if it looks like

you're going to lose you should run away

and then come back and kill the person

when they're not looking

if it was worth fighting in the first

place so i would never get in a fight

unless it was worth killing somebody

which is probably why i've never been in

the

proper fight if it's not worth killing

somebody i'm not even going to get

involved

and if it is worth killing them and they

start winning

i'm going to run away and then come back

and kill them when they're not looking

that's my philosophy if somebody's worth

killing

it's worth waiting it's worth waiting

so if there's anybody out there who's

done anything to me that

they think is worthy of me killing them

just know that if it hasn't happened yet

doesn't mean it won't i'm willing to

wait

as long as it takes

you can't tell if i'm kidding and that's

good

if we've learned anything from president

trump it was that

unpredictability is a natural advantage

so as long as you don't know that's to

my benefit

getting closer to being cancelled are

you

uh are you tall no i'm not tall

which is a good question because if

you're big people don't want to get in a

fight with you

somebody says what he says aspergers is

a talent stack

creator we have to learn more than

others to fit in

well woody uh that's true

that's true yeah

the the one of the national

assets we have in this country is all

the asperger's types

because it's it's the strangest

condition if you will which is it's very

difficult for the persons who have it

like it creates extra challenges

socially etc

but they're sort of national assets like

you know who is it that's inventing all

the technology who's

you know there's just stuff that the

asperger's people are doing for america

and for the world

that's just insanely valuable

only losers hate when other people make

money

how many of you are uh by the way i i

know from history that i attract a lot

of asperger types

for my content how many of you are on

the spectrum

this will be interesting so take a take

a second for the comments to come in

how many of you watching this right now

are on the spectrum

now wait wait do you see this you're

going to be surprised

uh here it comes i am yup

nope yes not me my wife says i am

yes my son is not officially maybe

my kid is my husband barely on it yes

yes

nope me me me me open up nope

uh crikey maybe i think my husband could

be

could be i suspect i am never diagnosed

but i think i am

yeppers

are you impressed there's

probably no group that i attract to my

content

more reliably than than the asperger's

folks

look at these comments this is blowing

your way isn't it

because think about the percentage and

the population in general and then look

at my comments

yeah it's filled with them now part of

it is

somebody asked me the question in the

comments if i'm aspergers or if i'm on

the spectrum and the answer is i don't

quite know

i don't quite know because it's it's not

exactly well defined is it

my personal opinion is maybe not

but if i am i'd be sort of on the i

don't know at one end of the scale

a little bit maybe i don't know i feel

not

but i feel like i'm close enough that i

you know i i feel like i'm within

breathing distance of it

meaning that i'm so compatible with it

it would be hard to imagine i'm not

on the spectrum is that a thing

being compatible with the spectrum

without being on it

i don't know if that's even a thing

identify oh somebody says my

conversation is too good yeah you know

there's all kinds of difference

different functionality

uh but i would imagine i'm not but i

don't know

um

gates here all right

so that's all for now and i will talk to

you all

tomorrow and

um yeah it is interesting isn't it

it is interesting that'll give you

something to think about

think about why there are so many

people on the spectrum who follow my

content

and when you figure that out um

it's going to be interesting i'll give

you my hypothesis

well a couple hypothesis one of course

is that i make the dilbert comic and you

can imagine easily that dilbert's on the

spectrum

and i draw i make it that way so you

know i've got that natural

compatibility but also i try to remove

the

the emotion from decisions which i

believe

is quite compatible if you're on the

spectrum

because you'll you like to see the

emotions stripped out so you can see

what's left

and then i could add it back in and then

people can see the whole structure

so i think that's what's going on but i

don't know

so that's all i got for now i'll talk to

you tomorrow