Episode 682 Scott Adams - Trump Campaign Ads, Chinese Tainted Pork, Citizen Participation

pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom hey I just noticed that people are coming online to watch me grab a seat gather round there's still room still ruling the internet so what a fun day I love it when the news is all funny I think well in this country anyway there's a tragedy in France but the news of this country seems to be all the funny kind kind I like and we can enjoy it together with a little thing called the simultaneous it's coming at you it's coming at you fast and all you need is a cup of market for glasses tiny cellist a tanker a thermos of Alaska Cantina Grail a goblet or vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I'm partial to coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine here the day the thing that makes everything better oh it's gonna be a good one this time simultaneous hip go I hope you could all enjoy the full simultaneity of that it was sublime well of course I know you want me to talk about Trump's - video campaign video ads he just came out with he meaning his team two of the strongest best campaign ads you're ever gonna see and look look what time it is I mean we've got a lot of time between now and the election apparently they they're smelling blood in the water and they just unloaded the just unloaded the magazine into Joe Biden so the if you didn't see them they're just classics and here's here's something that we can now say with a certain degree of confidence is probably going to be a theme for a future Trump ads and the theme will be funny because funny works funny works every time and these lays two ads I'll talk about in a moment were both funny without a punchline they're just hilarious just because of what they express just the the ideas themselves are actually laughs you'll fall down hilariously funny so what the most famous one that he did yesterday or was released yesterday was showing Joe Biden saying they never had a discussion with hunter Biden his son about his overseas business with Ukraine and then then it cuts immediately from Biden saying that to Nickelback the band and I guess there's a video you know a music video in which they hold up a photograph and in place of whatever photograph was there in the original song was the golf photograph of Joe Biden his son and the Ukrainian board member who was golfing in their foursome and some other random guy so it's hilarious because of the way they juxtaposed it and the way they throw in the Nickelback cuz when you see Nickelback you laugh anyway you just automatically Nickelback cuz Nickelback is the only band well are they there might be another one but I can't think of another band where when you just say the name of the band you're star laughing Nickelback because so many people have you know a feeling about Nickelback now of course I'm no music expert and they've been hugely successful so I'm not the one who says that art is subjective I would just note that the way the public receives this band is sort of with a little bit of a priming to laughs because they're used as a punchline so often so it was sort of the perfect video because when you see him saying that and you see the picture it's really devastatingly hilarious because it's so effective and because it's Nickelback so it's sort of ridiculous at the same time it's sort of perfect I mean you couldn't you couldn't make a better ad than that now if I'm being objective I don't believe that the photograph disc brews what Biden sent because he was kind of specific about what he said said I haven't discussed it with my son that's not the same as saying I never met a guy you work with I've golfed a lot and I've never talked business during golf well I haven't golf that much but you know I've gulped and I don't really talk business it just doesn't happen so well I don't think it's innocent when somebody golf's with the vice president a sitting vice president you know it's sort of always business I think it might be technically true that he didn't have anything like a substantive conversation about hunter Biden's overseas activity but the campaign that is just as effective either way because it looks like if the answer to the question that makes by to look like a liar so the people people will receive it the way it was intended they probably won't lawyer it up like I just did the other one was just as good because it showed a whole bunch of older clips of trumps impeachment nemec's all saying that impeachment is taking away the will of the voters of course they were talking about Clinton I think so is everything from Maxine Waters to Nancy Pelosi to what's-his-name the penguin a care of members named Nadler it shows all of them saying in the clearest passionate language the impeachment to simply change the result of an election is wrong it's devastating I mean it was really effective so I would say that the Trump whoever's doing their digital stuff man I got some good people there so I don't know who's in charge of that is that Brad parse Cal whoever it is they're killing it sorry that was a lot of fun and predictably it looks like Nickelback probably complained it looks like there was some kind of a takedown notice for it but of course as soon as was taken down somebody else reposts it so it's hard for Twitter to stay ahead of it and I'm sure I'll say this with complete certainty the the team that made this knew that it would be taken down they knew that right they knew that if they put something up with some some famous rock bands song on it a political contact she knew it was going to be there was going to be a complaint you knew it was gonna be taken down but isn't that part of the fun you know that's part of the fun because the taking it down is not is not a bug that's a feature what is the only way to get this two bumps of publicity one is when it goes out and it's funny too when it gets taken down that's your second bumper pull it Bob listening and then people want to see it even more and they're gonna go looking for it hey where can I see that forbidden video it's sort of perfect I don't know if there's any kind of an Emmy that you can get for making these campaign videos that's like two Emmy worthy videos on one day and it's like months ahead of the election I mean how much how much better can they get between now on that it's pretty pretty impressive let's talk about something else our I guess our border patrol discovered 1 million pounds of infected Chinese pork headed our way and they lied about I guess whoever was shipping it lied about the contents now you might not know that pig Ebola which is the thing that may have killed 220 million pigs half the population of pigs in China that's how big a deal is half and they just sent us knowingly knowingly in other words they falsified what the contents they knowingly sent us 1 million pounds of infected Chinese pork now somebody said well I don't think that pork can get into our pigs unless you know there's some weird situation where our our pigs were eating the other pigs so I don't know if that's true is that like mad cow where a cow has to eat the other carro to get mad cow I don't know I don't know how that works but here's what I do know if another country sends you 1 million pounds of infected pork and they lie about the contents that country is not your friend that's not a country you could do a deal with you can't do a deal with that country not even a little bit so yet more evidence that now yeah and the other thing if you get Chinese pork do you ever wonder how much of that is actually prisoners like I'm just going to take their word for that most of it comes from pigs but does any of that meat come from dissidents would you know the difference just gonna put that out there oh my oh my what a day there's a bill in Congress I may have mentioned this before but it's worth mentioning again it's bipartisan now why this is important is that with this impeachment stuff going on it seems as though nothing can get done even if both sides agree so let's watch this one there's a bipartisan bill to add more transparency to the pharmaceutical pricing apparently there's this middleman situation I think dr.

Shiva explained this once one of my my calls but if I tweeted it so you can see the details but there's a middleman that controls the pricing and that's all a that's all opaque to us we can't see what's going on we can't see how much the middleman entity is charging the pharmacies and therefore we don't know why the prices are so high in the United States versus other places there's there's just something missing so the bill the proposed bill that's bipartisan would have would make them show you the prices so that you'd know how much overpriced they were and that would of course for some to lower prices because it'd be embarrassing I guess so think about the fact that there's a bipartisan bill that is just dead simple hey you guys who aren't showing us the prices and your costs you have to do that now show us the prices in the costs dead simple Republicans agree Democrats agree who do you think's holding it up right it's not the president the president isn't holding it up it's the government was wasting their time they're literally wasting you money every time you go to the pharmacy you can thank Nancy Pelosi that you paid 20% more than you needed to because apparently the solution is here they just have to pass that bill both sides like it just have to do the damn job that's all just do your job safe and save you 20% of the pharmacy or something all right North Korea is says they're optimistic about their upcoming working-level talks about denuclearization now here's something I don't know about this process if you have a working-level meeting about denuclearization does that indicate that the bosses have already decided in principle or is it reverse is it the working-level meeting that will try to produce something that the bosses meeting Trump and Kim jong-un can see so they can say yes or no which one of those do you think it is do you think the bosses said that has said yes and abroad abroad way and now they're working out the details or is it opposite the bosses haven't said anything because they're waiting for some details to percolate up it could go either way right could go either way here's some speculation I'm not sure I'll make this a prediction but here's a speculation the key sticking point seems to be from the start North Korea getting the security guarantees now that that's the language they use in whatever translated form they talk about North Korea getting some kind of security guarantee from the you know surrounding countries as well as meaning China South Korea and the United States being the important ones in the region so they could get some andrush I suppose they've got a little bit of a border with North Korea so here's the thing do you think that president Trump would ever offer that he could under the right conditions meaning that the nuclear program was you know more transparent do you think the president could ever give security guarantees in other words saying not only do we formally end the war with the Korean War but we'll guarantee that will - will will help you with any of these other countries want to attack we've all agreed there will not do that or some version of that right do you think President Trump could ever offer security guarantees under the condition that we get what we need and that this verifiable and it's like a real deal not a not a PS deal I think he could I think he could I do believe that this president could say to Kim jong-un and here's the key their personal relationship was a necessary building block of being able to say I think we can give you security guarantees and have Kim jong-un believe it do you know what do you know what Qaddafi did not have the advantage of a personal relationship with the President of the United States think about how who Qaddafi was to us he was just sort of this you know nameless villain not nameless but use this villain we don't know personally and then think of what Kim jong-un is to president Trump they have actually a legitimate personal connection do you think that President Trump would be okay with killing Kim jong-un as long as things were moving in the right direction at whatever pace I mean it could be slowly but at whatever pace we're at least moving in the right direction do you think President Trump could ever approve of a situation where Kim jong-un is taken out no because it's not an hour it's not in our interest it wouldn't be consistent with their personal relationship again just assuming everything's moving in the right direction and it looks like it is so Kim jong-un Trump seemed to have solved for Qaddafi number one you get rid of Bolton because Bolton is the the guy who brought up the the Libyan model in the first place right so you got to get rid of Bolton step one complete and then the other steps with ad in a personal relationship and they need they both need to show that something positive is happening so they can show their their their team that it's a productive relationship it's not an adversarial but has been transformed into some kind of mutually productive forward-looking arrangement I believe President Trump and Kim jong-un have pulled that off and it could be that this working-level meeting is actually a details meeting it could be that the big guys have said in principle we're not promising this yet but in principle if you could come up with some way we could really keep an eye on this nuclear program and feel safe about that there's a deal to be had I feel like maybe the big guys have agreed but we'll see could it be the other way too all right so we still don't know who the whistleblower is in this Ukrainian situation now I don't want to start a new rumor about who the whistleblower might be but I'm just gonna point out a fact again you can connect these facts any way you want I'm just gonna point out the fact Justin Trudeau has a lot of disguises that's all I'm saying we don't know who the whistleblower is but Justin Trudeau has a lot of disguises that's all I'm saying connect the dots any way you want all right one of the things I love about the Trump administration is that it seems to be a two-way communication street there's a two-way communication that's always open between the presidency and the citizens in a way we've never seen before I was watching for example I was watching the miniseries about Roger Ailes and in that and who knows how accurate this is but in that you saw that the who was it one of the guys working for the President Bush called Roger Ailes and asked him for his help essentially managing the news to be consistent with what the White House wanted and I thought I'll bet I'll bet before the Trump administration the best way you could describe the relationship between the government and the people is that the government would make decisions with their experts and with their advisers and with their lobbyists and everything else so the government would make decisions and then they would try to sell it to the people I feel like that that was a model up until Trump Trump has a superior model of dealing with the public now it may be someday in the future when historians look at it and go hey we didn't know it at the time but that superior model let me give you an example the president is often mocked for having his TV on during the day quite a bit watching Fox News but also we know he watches CNN at least he's probably watched a little MSNBC so we know the president is sampling the news from the both sides whereas we imagine that the Bill Clinton or President Obama were reading The Wall Street Journal in The New York Times and Tony upscale magazines and things that would be a higher intellectual plane than mere television which of those two models gives you a better idea where the country is at which of those two models rapidly a be tests messages so you can see what's working in real time see how people react to it TV is the pulse of the country this president is doing the smart thing he's watching the pulse he can see in real time somebody tries a message whether it's on you know fox or CNN and he can tell how it comes across you can tell how he feels about it you can ask the people in the room - usually people in the room a few president you can ask them what they think about it have that go over did that work maybe I'll try that so the president has created this this interactive real-time relationship with the press but it's better than that because the press often reacts to social media and vice versa right there's a symbiote symbiotic relationship social media and news government and the president the president this president has made those three things almost one unit of a machine whereas it used to be sort of a top-down Hey we're gonna try to make you guys do what we want do you not see examples where there are individuals on social media who come up with a good message a good approach a good meme for example carpe Noctem creates you know great memes and next thing you know the president's tweeting it so what we're seeing is something we've never seen before which is that and in individual voter just a citizen can have a good idea put it on social media or it could be just a good message or a good way of expressing something puts it on social media guess a bunch of likes gets a bunch of retweets it bubbles up somebody with a blue check notices it they retweet it maybe another blue check and then suddenly the Office of the President notices that there's a good message that's getting a lot of traction and then he uses it it's it's amazing the entire system of government has been completely rewritten by this president and it's one of those things you're gonna see in hindsight much clearer because when you're in it that you don't really have the same vision to be able to see it well while you're in it but I've never seen a more interactive approach let me give you an example here's a concrete example I mentioned the other day that there's something called the office of nuclear energy which you can follow a tactic of nuclear so the our government has a department that's promoting nuclear energy and has lots of information about the newest stuff and the newest test facilities and what's coming online now etc so apparently it's a newish Twitter account and I called attention to it because my attention was was drawn to it through March nighter are our resident nuclear advocate expert and so he called my attention to it and then I tweeted it their number of followers was just a couple thousand I forget the exact number but two or three thousand something like that followers in total that was the total attention they were getting today they have five thousand so two thousand people who were citizens who were interested in nuclear and and can be sort of weaponized as advocates because they they're people who had enough interest to follow this account and and I mention again which will again boost there it boosts their attention so you can see a concrete example where I tweeted them and their exposure roughly doubled I mean it was a small number but it doubled so you can see the effect that the public is boosting parts of the government that are productive and then that government does something for the people so it's it's this continual two-way virtuous cycle that I just don't know existed before it feels like it's really taken on a life of its own here's another example so earlier I was just talking about how there's a bipartisan bill to lower pharmaceutical costs well don't you think that knowing that because I just told a bunch of you don't you think that knowing that increases the chance that maybe it could happen right so there are lots of things that we the citizens on social media especially the blue check people who have a lot of followers we can boost the signal of anything worth worth boosting you know we can do it with a campaign ad I can do it with the the app to gov nuclear site I can do it with a bill I can do it with China I can do it with fentanyl so you can see that individuals are now sort of testing messages we know that the White House is watching they are watching at least the blue checks and you see you see the president's actually retweeted people were not even you know highly visible just people who had a good idea that is just hugely inspirational to me because it feels like I don't want to take this you know too far into into optimism because you won't you won't be able to follow me there but it feels like almost a rebirth of the Republic too but too much is that too much it feels like a rebirth a reboot of the Republic because it seems to me that our founders built a pretty pretty darn good system you know given with what they to work with etc but is sort of evolved into things happening behind closed doors and you know the the lobbyists and the power brokers are the only the only people who have any power after a while doesn't it feel like that it feels now that under the age of Trump and who notice if this will last or not it feels like the public is completely empowered now completely who saw that coming not me I didn't see that coming it seems to me that an average citizen can today have as much power as an average citizen could have in the beginning of the Republic when things were so small that you probably knew where he you know you knew the other people in government you know you would know your governor you might know him personally because the world was so small there just weren't many people there during the the formation of the Republic but it feels like Trump gave well Trump and Jack Dorsey and you know Zuckerberg in a sense the the social media platforms in conjunction with this weird unusual president has created a situation that has empowered individuals in a way I've never seen it well let me give you an example if an individual came up with a terrific idea for gun control let's say would that individual be able to get that terrific idea to bubble up all the way to the White House absolutely I you I never would have said that and the other time would you just just fact-check me on this based on your observation you know this is more opinion than fact but based on what you've watched about the process based on the number of times you've seen an individual tweet bubble all the way up to the White House what a great idea from just a person make it all the way the White House absolutely absolutely that doesn't mean they'll use it because you know they get a lot of ideas and they know more than we do about you know the variables that are involved but absolutely a good idea from an individual we'll go right into the president's hands that's amazing that's amazing and and it can happen in 24 hours it's like it's a whole new world so I could not be more optimistic about the Republic because I think the Republic went stale and instead of having to get refreshed with the blood of patriots because you know that the the founders the founders assumed that every now and then you got a what's the saying you got a you got a refresh the tree of freedom with the blood of patriots or something as luck would have it we've taken that warfare to the internet so there's blood of patriots but it's in the form of people getting ratio denied and losing their jobs because of social media so that stuff's still pretty bloody you know in a figurative sense but it looks like Patriots are weighing and and they're putting tons of energy people are putting their necks on the line I am you've watched me put my neck on the line repeatedly I take risks that you shouldn't take because I can afford it right made enough money that if I lost my job tomorrow I'd be fine so you get to watch me take some risks that I'm happy to take on your behalf because I can afford it and you can't so I'm happy to do that as a patriot and your support to me makes that meaningful right the fact that you support me in this collectively is what makes it doable so your individual sort of you know I would say love and support that you give to me that neither of those words are are too much I think allows me to to boost my voice and boost other people like the ones I mentioned so it's it's a good system as long as we have this president I hope president is as flexible because I'd hate to lose this it's pretty important all right the Washington Post has a hilarious article which i retweeted in which they're mocking the followers of President Trump for assuming that everything he does everything I say everything he does is genius as opposed to accidental flailing now they gave two examples of this I apparently there are some people who think the president cleverly wants to be impeached because it'll be good for his reelection now I'm not in that camp I'm pretty sure if the president had had a choice of being impeached or not being impeached he would choose not impeached I'm pretty sure that so if there's anybody out there who thinks it's the president and cleverly goading them into impeachment as in Azzam actually literally impeaching him I don't think that's his plan what I would say and and if you think that was his plan I think you're you're overthinking what I would say is that he's good at improvising in other words he's good at turning a bad situation into a good one you want to see an example what did everybody say about it Trump's a phone call to Ukraine they said hey you shouldn't have done that because you've offered an implied quid pro quo so how often did you hear quid pro quo about President Trump hey that phone call was a quid pro quo and now let me ask you this what's the new nickname for Joe Biden quid pro Joe this is actually a new nickname quid pro Joe so this president certainly did not have some long term plan where he would get accused of making a bad phone call and cleverly turned the complaint into a nickname for his biggest competitor but he did it that's what happened so I don't think there's any chance he saw it coming you know set a trap you know intentionally said things to get people calling using the phrase quid pro quo so he could turn it into a quid pro Joe but it happened so he took a situation and he capitalized on as we've seen them do over and over and over again grifter Joe oh I love you whoever just said grifter Joe my god I love that if ever if ever the word grifter could be used in a more perfect context grifter Joe now let's talk about oh and then the other example they said is people are saying that he does misspellings intentionally and I have to confess I'm probably the one I probably have to take responsibility for the fact that people think that he misspells intentionally I've personally I don't know if I've ever said he's misspelled intentionally maybe there was one time yeah there might be one time I suspected it but in general I would say the misspellings or nothing but misspellings they're typos misspellings autocorrect whatever here's what I think is the case he doesn't care he doesn't care and you know what that makes me care about well not his typos but the fact that he doesn't care and you know he doesn't care because he doesn't take the tweet back and correct it it would be easy just to take the tweet back correct reissue it it'd be easy he doesn't do it I frickin love that it went from oh you know it's kind of a it's not an optimal look I mean in the early days you see a typo or something a grammar error and say huh you know maybe maybe it would have been better if somebody looked at that before he sent that out but we've gotten to the point where it just seems genuine am i right when you see his typos what do you know for sure he sent it with his own fingers like he actually he probably almost certainly typed it with his own thumbs you're seeing the actual President of the United States the most important person in the world I think you could argue and you're seeing a message that you know damn well came from him and his two little thumbs and is what came right out of his brain I kind of love that I'm I don't think I could like that any more than I do so typos I'm all for them because they're little markers for authenticity that originally struck me as it'd be better without these but now that it's sort of just worked into a was somewhat of an expectation that he'll have a misspelled word or something now and then I just look at them as authentic now it just looks like yeah I know where this came from it didn't didn't go through a committee that's for damn sure this came from the guy that you voted for it didn't come from his advisers didn't come from handlers came from the person you voted for I can't not love that really I can't and the other thing it does is that humanizes them in a way you can relate how many of you have sent out a tweet with a misspelling I did it twice yesterday I think one for sure but if I'm not mistaken I may have said how to misspelled tweets yesterday I may have be complete conflating with some in my mind but at least one so when I see the president to it I think it's authentic and I kind of bind I bond with him a little bit because I go I did that - I did same damn thing yesterday literally yesterday but I love the fact that the Washington Post wrote a story in which are trying to debunk the notion that the president is playing chess while others are playing checkers if you don't know I'm probably the author of that idea that he's playing 3d chess that was me back in 2015 saying that and people mocking me until he became president and now they're still mocking me indirectly but I think it's funny that they feel they need to complain about that because it feels like they're sensing there's too much truth in it maybe am I reading too much in there am i doing a little too much mind-reading that they wouldn't do an article about it if it wasn't getting to them in other words there's something about this situation that matters to them they need to know they need you to know he's not playing chess but if he's not playing chess could you explain that - quid pro Joe because he probably thinks they are Oh quid pro Joe that's the best and by the way I think quid pro Joe is another example that bubbled up from just a Twitter user I don't know who it was but I think some Twitter user or somebody said it first and it was good so a bubble up that's your new republic right there it's amazing Chris ELISA has the funniest article that wasn't trying to be funny today Cristal is a-- as you know CNN I guess pundits slash analysts may be political guy so he's one of the top anti Trump errs I'm using anti Trumper to the core and he's I don't know if I'll ever stop laughing about this this is so funny so here's the article he was talking I tweeted this if you want to see it you just talk about there's a new Monmouth University poll in which they're asking people about the Ukraine transcript yeah the president's phone call with the president of Ukraine and has said that according to the modern southern Monmouth University poll just four and ten Republicans believe that the transcript even mentions Biden's name sixty percent of Republicans don't think Biden's names even in the transcript now of course it is it's there twice as there clearly and unambiguously and it comes from the president's office himself so there's no there's no question on the facts the facts are as objective as any fact could be every single person who participated in the call in any way notice that Biden's name was mentioned and still six out of ten Republicans say that Trump never mentioned Biden whose call was less key now it could be that the poll was worded in a way that people didn't know that's what they were answering exactly because there could have been something like without seeing the question it could have been do you think there was some quid pro quo with Biden or something so it's possible that I'm not seeing the full context of this but it is still hilarious and I'll tell you why that crystal is a-- is complaining they're six and ten people can't look in a transcript and see what's right before their eyes you know i that's funny because crystal is is one of the biggest pushers of the fine people hoax what would it take to debunk the fine people hoax the idea that the you know the conspiracy theory rumor that's not true the president Trump called the neo-nazis in Charlottesville find people what would it take to debunk that just read the transcript that's it just read it right there they he said the opposite if you read half the transcript you could be confused and that's what most people see but if you read the full transcript there's no ambiguity whatsoever he clearly said I'm not talking about those people he said it directly I'm not talking about that and nobody even asked him to explain it he explained just to be clear I'm now talking about them all you have to do is read the transcript so one of the biggest pushers of the fake transcript in other words the idea that he did call then neo-nazis find people is CNN and Chris ELISA and so the tide is turned karma has come to visit and karma comes to visit and says well I don't even think Trump mentioned Biden fo girl all right so here's it gets even better this and this is crystallises comment to his own observation that six out of ten Republicans don't even see the name Biden in the transcript he goes with periods are period you period kidding period me period and then this Elizabeth goes on to say this listen to this he says this poll finding doesn't seem so unbelievable the primary work of Trump's candidacy and his presidency has been to erode the idea that a that objective truth exists so chrysalis of CNN says the president Trump has been working to erode the erode the idea that objective truth exists that's exactly what he's doing he's a roading the idea that objective truth exists is that bad well would depend wouldn't it would depend if objective truth exists if it doesn't exist well then it would be good that he's the president Trump is teaching us that objective truth doesn't exist if it does exist well then that would prep maybe be bad because that would be untrue right but in a real sense and this is something I told you back in 2015 I predicted the Trump would change more than politics I said it directly publicly and multiple time I said that what he would change is your understanding of reality and you see it happening so Liz's understanding of reality is changing because he's lit he's saying how can it be that people could look at the transcripts and just not see the name Biden it's right there well how could you Christel is a-- think that the president called neo-nazis fine people when the transcript says clearly I'm not talking about them I said the opposite Chris ELISA has been introduced to subjective reality while working at a news news organization that's got to be that's got to be a mindfuck that's got to be that's got to be hard to process I work for an organization that puts out the objective truth which doesn't exist how do you process that i I don't work for a news organization so I can I can live comfortably in a world where objective truth isn't really a thing well how do you work for a news organization and believe objective truth doesn't exist what would that do to your mental health that's kind of be hard to process seriously now let me clarify I know there are a lot of science pedantic people out there who are gonna say Scott Scott Scott there is a base reality just because some people are fooled and can't see it that doesn't make the objective reality go away it's still there well I'll give you two answers to that doesn't matter because we don't use any objective reality to make our decisions so when I say it doesn't matter I'm talking about the realm of political decision-making objective reality doesn't seem to be much of a factor in anything you can see it on every topic people are all over the place on what they're seeing and they're looking at the same stuff there is no evidence of objective reality in terms of how we make decisions and how we process things but is there you ask still outside the realm of our ability to perceive it accurate all the time is there an actual objective reality maybe and maybe that R objective reality can affect your life if you walk in front of the truck whether or not you see the truck probably doesn't affect the fact that it will kill you so yes there's an objective reality in terms of there there might be a truck if you walk into it and it's gonna kill you even if you don't see it so that so in that sense yes but if you're trying to decide who what do I think about this Ukraine situation what did I think about Russia collusion what do I think about health care for everybody any any of these big political topics you're not using objective truth nobody else we're all just using our subjectivity and arguing that it's based on the objectivity but suppose were a simulation suppose our reality is a simulation under the simulation worldview is there an objective reality well yes there is but the objective reality is our programmers reality not ours our reality would be completely subjective it would act as though it's subjective in many cases again if you walk in front of the truck it could be a simulated truck but your simulated self is going to get killed by the simulated truck so yeah in some sense there's an objective reality but in terms of our filters on the world we can't really see it in any reliable way so that was the understanding reality that I said would change we see this happening in stark in real time in a very stark way where you see that people can literally look at the same document a document no longer than this they can look at it and some of them won't even see names that are on it they won't even be able to see sentences they actually their ability to see objective reality is so weak that they're inventing it on the fly all right this is something else that Sa.

LuSa claims he says so this is a CNN claim okay there are zero evidence that the whistleblower in the Ukraine story is a partisan do you agree with that because I think your news sources most of you is telling you that that's just the fact that we know that the whistleblower is a partisan have you seen evidence of that what's the evidence of that do you believe that it's a fact that the whistleblower is a partisan I believe is possible I also believe that I have never seen evidence of it have you have you ever seen evidence that the whistleblower was a partisan I've heard people say there is evidence but I haven't seen it does that blow your mind because I'll bet you've watched news reports to say oh yeah it's he's a partisan well he might be if I had to put my own money on it I'd bet it on it right if he had to bet you'd bet he was a partisan but where's the evidence the IC IG report stated he was a partisan but where's the evidence now so I'm not going to say that the CNN report is true but when somebody says where's the evidence and I say to myself a lot I don't know I haven't seen it either I've only heard it reported that he is now I would say if the IC IG report says he's a partisan it's very likely he is but I would still want to see the evidence wouldn't you I'd want to see the evidence so I wouldn't say there's zero evidence I would say you know I I could use a little more support on that point yeah let's say the other thing that oh the other thing that solicit says there's no evidence for he says specifically independent fact checkers don't give credence to the idea that Joe Biden called for the firing of Ukraine's top prosecutor to avoid an investigation into a son so CNN is reporting that there's no evidence that the reason Joe Biden called for that firing of the Ukraine prosecutor is to avoid an investigation into a son have you seen evidence to the contrary I haven't I haven't where is the evidence that that's why he did it I'm not saying he didn't do it for that reason I'm just saying okay I haven't seen the evidence either is it evidence that he went golfing with a board member and that really it's not really evidence of anything there's an evidence that I don't III would agree with this fact that I would agree with the statement that the fact checkers are not buying into Joe Biden doing it you know to get the investigator off his son but I don't think that matters to the story too much somebody says the video the video is not evidence the visit the video is not evidence that he did it because of his son the video is evidence they did it well we don't have his evidence of why all right but I don't think any of that matters because the hunter Biden was taking a lot of money from a Ukrainian entity well as well as dad was vice president doesn't really matter what Joe Biden did okay it kind of doesn't matter what Joe Biden did or did not do with the prosecutor it's sort of irrelevant because you have all the badness you would ever need just the fact this son was taking all this money from the Ukrainian entity while the vice president's portfolio including Ukraine and then there was also the issue of hunter Biden went with his dad to some China event and met with a banker and gossip got a deal with some bankers in China wall on a trip with his father was a sitting vice president come on the so what the president said if you saw this part which was really good by the way did you see the president look in the camera I think it was yesterday and he said as strongly as you've ever heard him say anything he looked directly in the camera and he said Joe Biden is a stone-cold crook there's stone-cold crooked you know it and I know it did you see him say that that was really good in terms of persuasion because it looked different from other things that people say about politics when somebody says blah blahs a racist your brain automatically says maybe yes maybe no just sounds like something that people say in politics if somebody says somebody's crooked like Hillary maybe - maybe false sounds like something you say in politics somebody says somebody's incompetent somebody's crazy somebody's impulsive somebody's dumb all of those things you automatically put your your political filter on don't you you just say yeah maybe maybe that's something said by a political opponent so you filter it but when President Trump looked at the camera and said Joe Biden is stone-cold crooked you know it and I know it that didn't sound like politics did it that felt like he has broken the fourth wall or something you know that's not quite it but that looked like that looked like reality peeking through the politics it looked like he believed that to be stone-cold true and and he was selling it pretty well now again I'm not saying it's true but I'm saying that the way he said it was I don't know that that's a 10 out of 10 for sound incredible even if it isn't true it really sounded like he believed it and he knows you believe it and here's what I believe every one of us sees Hunter Biden taking that money every one of us thinks it's crooked even the Democrats right even the media there's nobody in the media was defending hunter Biden is her so when Trump looked at the camera and said he's stone-cold crooked that's an amazing turn of words I mean I don't know if that was spontaneous or he thought about it a little bit but those are those are daggered words that's like stab stab stab stone cold crooked and your debt and then we said you know it and I know it that's like the next level of persuasion because one of the the main strongest parts of persuasion is when you say was somebody else's thinking as they're thinking it if you can ever do that it really gives you like a super power for a persuasion so he said if he had said I believe it and the public believes that that's politics that's weak but when you look at the Cameron you say you know it and I know it that's persuasion all right when you when you tell somebody what they know that's a gold-plated a plus persuasion if it's true or you have to actually has something they actually know to be true or it doesn't work anyway so I got some I have some questions about you know what is the the truth of all the Joe Biden stuff but we don't have to wonder about the hundred Biden stuff that that part looks crooked on just on the surface you don't have to dig into any details to know that that's there's something wrong going on there all right as I've said before it looks to me oh and then you're something that somebody on Twitter asked when I tweeted that around somebody said is there evidence Ukraine didn't know the funds were delayed that's interesting right because how can it be a quid pro quo phone call the president's phone call with Ukraine if as it's being reported the Ukrainians didn't know that their funding was being held up they weren't even aware of it so if you're not even aware of the threat part even existing how could you possibly receive the phone call is quid pro quo and I thought good point so I'm not sure any of the facts really matter because we'll make our decisions without them less that's what's going on all right Biden has a history blah blah blah Biden son is not crooked but not good optics either well it depends on your definition of crooked if crooked means illegal then I would agree the hunter Biden has not done anything that I've heard of that's illegal besides yeah besides of his personal life perhaps that's another story but but wouldn't you call it crooked I mean I would call it crooked on premise is is this a legal term I heard something lawyer say it was it I forget who said it but prime of prima facie prime of a promise from a facial or something the oddest surface is obviously crooked you don't really need to dig any deeper you just look at and say okay well that's crooked seems that way to me but legal probably perfectly legal but still crooked there's it was an article in a reason reason calm talking about nor cam I think it's called there's a drug that you can take if you if somebody has a fentanyl overdose and apparently it works really well so if some of the overdoses on fentanyl or in there during the process of overdosing and they're gonna die if you give them this Norcom drug apparently it revives them and works really well and there are lots of success stories that people have done that and I guess it's not available over except by asking the the pharmacist so you have to ask for it at the counter now imagine just here's the situation there are drug addicts or likely to have a problem with fentanyl remember they're drug addicts and in order to get the thing that could save their life they have to talk to the pharmacist and their town probably do you want to do that if you're a drug addict do you want to talk to the pharmacist about your drug addiction maybe not maybe not so the idea is that maybe this narcan could be available from vending machines and some method that would allow you to avoid human contact to get it because if you're a drug addict you want might want to keep that to yourself right and I thought to myself that is so common sensical and apparently there's some law that prevents that from happening yeah cops have it for example they carry it with them I think in many cases but not every case but many cases they have it with them it seems to me that's another simple tweak like why in the world if you can simply ask for it and a pharmacist can give it to you you know it's that safe it's not a regulated thing apparently why not get it from a vending machine you know why not get it from Amazon of course in that case your name would be on the record you might not want that but a vending machine is perfectly anonymous right assuming you can use cash in it I guess all right so there are plenty of good ideas out there to fixing the world remember I told you that the Golden Age which we are entering will be defined by simply having to design better systems what's a better system for pharmaceuticals transparency and we've got a bipartisan bill to give us that that would be a better system what's the better system for the Republic the president gets ideas as they bubble up from the public a that's happening now our our system has evolved on its own nobody did it intentionally but we evolved to a fairly good system where the public and their president are quite quite connected and they communicate every day so there are a lot of good systems and I would say nuclear energy is another one of those I just I tweeted round I think I tweeted it maybe I just liked it an article by Steven Pinker talking about what needs to be done to store nuclear waste in at a Safeway now that skipping the details the bottom line is we know how to do it we know how to store nuclear waste and we're developing even better ways and we could use it for fuel if we develop the right kind of reactors etc so that again is a design problem we simply have to design all right I'm gonna have to get this so I'm gonna talk to you later but think about design bye for now

pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom

pom pom hey I just noticed that people

are coming online to watch me grab a

seat

gather round there's still room still

ruling the internet so what a fun day I

love it when the news is all funny I

think well in this country anyway

there's a tragedy in France but the news

of this country seems to be all the

funny kind kind I like and we can enjoy

it together with a little thing called

the simultaneous it's coming at you it's

coming at you fast and all you need is a

cup of market for glasses tiny cellist a

tanker a thermos of Alaska Cantina Grail

a goblet or vessel of any kind fill it

with your favorite liquid I'm partial to

coffee and join me now for the

unparalleled pleasure the dopamine here

the day the thing that makes everything

better

oh it's gonna be a good one this time

simultaneous hip go I hope you could all

enjoy the full simultaneity of that it

was sublime well of course I know you

want me to talk about Trump's - video

campaign video ads he just came out with

he meaning his team two of the strongest

best campaign ads you're ever gonna see

and look look what time it is I mean

we've got a lot of time between now and

the election

apparently they they're smelling blood

in the water

and they just unloaded the just unloaded

the magazine into Joe Biden so the if

you didn't see them they're just

classics and here's here's something

that we can now say with a certain

degree of

confidence is probably going to be a

theme for a future Trump ads and the

theme will be funny because funny works

funny works every time

and these lays two ads I'll talk about

in a moment were both funny without a

punchline

they're just hilarious just because of

what they express just the the ideas

themselves are actually laughs you'll

fall down hilariously funny so what the

most famous one that he did yesterday or

was released yesterday was showing Joe

Biden saying they never had a discussion

with hunter Biden his son about his

overseas business with Ukraine and then

then it cuts immediately from Biden

saying that to Nickelback the band and I

guess there's a video you know a music

video in which they hold up a photograph

and in place of whatever photograph was

there in the original song was the golf

photograph of Joe Biden his son and the

Ukrainian board member who was golfing

in their foursome and some other random

guy so it's hilarious because of the way

they juxtaposed it and the way they

throw in the Nickelback cuz when you see

Nickelback you laugh anyway you just

automatically Nickelback cuz Nickelback

is the only band well are they there

might be another one but I can't think

of another band where when you just say

the name of the band

you're star laughing Nickelback because

so many people have you know a feeling

about Nickelback

now of course I'm no music expert and

they've been hugely successful so I'm

not the one who says that art is

subjective I would just note that the

way the public receives this band is

sort of with a little bit of a priming

to laughs because they're used as a

punchline so often so it was sort of the

perfect video because when you see him

saying that and

you see the picture it's really

devastatingly hilarious because it's so

effective and because it's Nickelback so

it's sort of ridiculous at the same time

it's sort of perfect I mean you couldn't

you couldn't make a better ad than that

now if I'm being objective I don't

believe that the photograph disc brews

what Biden sent because he was kind of

specific about what he said said I

haven't discussed it with my son that's

not the same as saying I never met a guy

you work with

I've golfed a lot and I've never talked

business during golf well I haven't golf

that much but you know I've gulped and I

don't really talk business it just

doesn't happen

so well I don't think it's innocent when

somebody golf's with the vice president

a sitting vice president you know it's

sort of always business I think it might

be technically true that he didn't have

anything like a substantive conversation

about hunter Biden's overseas activity

but the campaign that is just as

effective either way because it looks

like if the answer to the question that

makes by to look like a liar so the

people people will receive it the way it

was intended they probably won't lawyer

it up like I just did the other one was

just as good because it showed a whole

bunch of older clips of trumps

impeachment nemec's all saying that

impeachment is taking away the will of

the voters of course they were talking

about Clinton I think so is everything

from Maxine Waters to Nancy Pelosi to

what's-his-name the penguin a care of

members named Nadler it shows all of

them saying in the clearest passionate

language the impeachment to simply

change the result of an election is

wrong it's devastating

I mean it was really effective so I

would say that the Trump

whoever's doing their digital stuff man

I got some good people there so I don't

know who's in charge of that is that

Brad parse Cal whoever it is they're

killing it

sorry that was a lot of fun and

predictably it looks like Nickelback

probably complained it looks like there

was some kind of a takedown notice for

it but of course as soon as was taken

down somebody else reposts it so it's

hard for Twitter to stay ahead of it and

I'm sure I'll say this with complete

certainty the the team that made this

knew that it would be taken down

they knew that right they knew that if

they put something up with some some

famous rock bands song on it a political

contact she knew it was going to be

there was going to be a complaint you

knew it was gonna be taken down but

isn't that part of the fun you know

that's part of the fun because the

taking it down is not is not a bug

that's a feature what is the only way to

get this two bumps of publicity one is

when it goes out and it's funny too when

it gets taken down that's your second

bumper pull it Bob listening and then

people want to see it even more and

they're gonna go looking for it hey

where can I see that forbidden video

it's sort of perfect I don't know if

there's any kind of an Emmy that you can

get for making these campaign videos

that's like two Emmy worthy videos on

one day and it's like months ahead of

the election I mean how much how much

better can they get between now on that

it's pretty pretty impressive let's talk

about something else

our I guess our border patrol discovered

1 million pounds of infected Chinese

pork headed our way and they lied about

I guess whoever was shipping it lied

about the contents now you might not

know that pig Ebola which is the thing

that may have killed 220 million pigs

half the population of pigs in China

that's how big a deal is half and they

just sent us knowingly knowingly in

other words they falsified what the

contents they knowingly sent us 1

million pounds of infected Chinese pork

now somebody said well I don't think

that pork can get into our pigs unless

you know there's some weird situation

where our our pigs were eating the other

pigs so I don't know if that's true

is that like mad cow where a cow has to

eat the other carro to get mad cow I

don't know I don't know how that works

but here's what I do know if another

country sends you 1 million pounds of

infected pork and they lie about the

contents that country is not your friend

that's not a country you could do a deal

with you can't do a deal with that

country not even a little bit so yet

more evidence that now yeah and the

other thing if you get Chinese pork do

you ever wonder how much of that is

actually prisoners like I'm just going

to take their word for that most of it

comes from pigs but does any of that

meat come from dissidents would you know

the difference just gonna put that out

there oh my oh my what a day there's a

bill in Congress I may have mentioned

this before but it's worth mentioning

again it's bipartisan now why this is

important is that with this impeachment

stuff going on it seems as though

nothing can get done even if both sides

agree so let's watch this one there's a

bipartisan bill to add more transparency

to the pharmaceutical pricing apparently

there's this middleman situation I think

dr. Shiva explained this once

one of my my calls but if I tweeted it

so you can see the details but there's a

middleman that controls the pricing and

that's all a that's all opaque to

us we can't see what's going on we can't

see how much the middleman entity is

charging the pharmacies and therefore we

don't know why the prices are so high in

the United States versus other places

there's there's just something missing

so the bill the proposed bill that's

bipartisan would have would make them

show you the prices so that you'd know

how much overpriced they were and that

would of course for some to lower prices

because it'd be embarrassing I guess so

think about the fact that there's a

bipartisan bill that is just dead simple

hey you guys who aren't showing us the

prices and your costs you have to do

that now show us the prices in the costs

dead simple Republicans agree Democrats

agree who do you think's holding it up

right it's not the president the

president isn't holding it up it's the

government was wasting their time

they're literally wasting you money

every time you go to the pharmacy you

can thank Nancy Pelosi that you paid 20%

more than you needed to because

apparently the solution is here they

just have to pass that bill both sides

like it just have to do the damn job

that's all just do your job

safe and save you 20% of the pharmacy or

something all right

North Korea is says they're optimistic

about their upcoming working-level talks

about denuclearization now here's

something I don't know about this

process if you have a working-level

meeting about denuclearization does that

indicate that the bosses have already

decided in principle or is it reverse is

it the working-level meeting that will

try to produce something that the bosses

meeting Trump and Kim jong-un can see so

they can say yes or no which one of

those do you think it is do you think

the bosses said that has said yes and

abroad abroad way and now they're

working out the details or is it

opposite the bosses haven't said

anything because they're waiting for

some details to percolate up it could go

either way right could go either way

here's some speculation I'm not sure

I'll make this a prediction but here's a

speculation the key sticking point seems

to be from the start

North Korea getting the security

guarantees now that that's the language

they use in whatever translated form

they talk about North Korea getting some

kind of security guarantee from the you

know surrounding countries as well as

meaning China South Korea and the United

States being the important ones in the

region so they could get some andrush I

suppose they've got a little bit of a

border with North Korea so here's the

thing do you think that president Trump

would ever offer that he could under the

right conditions meaning that the

nuclear program was you know more

transparent do you think the president

could ever give security guarantees in

other words saying not only do we

formally end the war with the Korean War

but we'll guarantee that will - will

will help you with any of these other

countries want to attack we've all

agreed there will not do that or some

version of that right do you think

President Trump could ever offer

security guarantees under the condition

that we get what we need and that this

verifiable and it's like a real deal not

a not a PS deal I think he could I think

he could I do believe that this

president could say to Kim jong-un and

here's the key their personal

relationship was a necessary building

block of being able to say I think we

can give you security guarantees and

have Kim jong-un believe it do you know

what

do you know what Qaddafi did not have

the advantage of a personal relationship

with the President of the United States

think about how who Qaddafi was to us he

was just sort of this you know nameless

villain not nameless but use this

villain we don't know personally and

then think of what Kim jong-un is to

president Trump they have actually a

legitimate personal connection do you

think that President Trump would be okay

with killing Kim jong-un as long as

things were moving in the right

direction at whatever pace I mean it

could be slowly but at whatever pace

we're at least moving in the right

direction do you think President Trump

could ever approve of a situation where

Kim jong-un is taken out no because it's

not an hour it's not in our interest

it wouldn't be consistent with their

personal relationship again just

assuming everything's moving in the

right direction and it looks like it is

so Kim jong-un Trump seemed to have

solved for Qaddafi number one you get

rid of Bolton because Bolton is the the

guy who brought up the the Libyan model

in the first place right so you got to

get rid of Bolton step one complete and

then the other steps with ad in a

personal relationship and they need they

both need to show that something

positive is happening so they can show

their their their team that it's a

productive relationship it's not an

adversarial but has been transformed

into some kind of mutually productive

forward-looking arrangement I believe

President Trump and Kim jong-un have

pulled that off

and it could be that this working-level

meeting is actually a details meeting it

could be that the big guys have said in

principle we're not promising this yet

but in principle if you could come up

with some way we could really keep an

eye on this nuclear program and feel

safe about that there's a deal to be had

I feel like maybe the big guys have

agreed but we'll see

could it be the other way too all right

so we still don't know who the

whistleblower is in this Ukrainian

situation now I don't want to start a

new rumor about who the whistleblower

might be but I'm just gonna point out a

fact again you can connect these facts

any way you want I'm just gonna point

out the fact Justin Trudeau has a lot of

disguises that's all I'm saying we don't

know who the whistleblower is but Justin

Trudeau has a lot of disguises that's

all I'm saying

connect the dots any way you want all

right one of the things I love about the

Trump administration is that it seems to

be a two-way communication street

there's a two-way communication that's

always open between the presidency and

the citizens in a way we've never seen

before I was watching for example I was

watching the miniseries about Roger

Ailes

and in that and who knows how accurate

this is but in that you saw that the who

was it one of the guys working for the

President Bush called Roger Ailes and

asked him for his help

essentially managing the news to be

consistent with what the White House

wanted and I thought I'll bet I'll bet

before the Trump administration the best

way you could describe the relationship

between the government and the people is

that the government would make decisions

with their experts and with their

advisers and with their lobbyists and

everything else so the government would

make decisions and then they would try

to sell it to the people I feel like

that that was a model up until Trump

Trump has a superior model of dealing

with the public now it may be someday in

the future when historians look at it

and go hey we didn't know it at the time

but that

superior model let me give you an

example the president is often mocked

for having his TV on during the day

quite a bit watching Fox News but also

we know he watches CNN at least he's

probably watched a little MSNBC so we

know the president is sampling the news

from the both sides whereas we imagine

that the Bill Clinton or President Obama

were reading The Wall Street Journal in

The New York Times and Tony upscale

magazines and things that would be a

higher intellectual plane than mere

television which of those two models

gives you a better idea where the

country is at which of those two models

rapidly a be tests messages so you can

see what's working in real time see how

people react to it

TV is the pulse of the country this

president is doing the smart thing he's

watching the pulse he can see in real

time somebody tries a message whether

it's on you know fox or CNN and he can

tell how it comes across you can tell

how he feels about it you can ask the

people in the room - usually people in

the room a few president you can ask

them what they think about it have that

go over did that work maybe I'll try

that so the president has created this

this interactive real-time relationship

with the press but it's better than that

because the press often reacts to social

media and vice versa right there's a

symbiote

symbiotic relationship social media and

news government and the president the

president this president has made those

three things almost one unit of a

machine whereas it used to be sort of a

top-down Hey we're gonna try to make you

guys do what we want do you not see

examples where there are individuals on

social media who come up with a good

message a good approach a good meme for

example carpe Noctem

creates you know great memes and next

thing you know the president's tweeting

it so what we're seeing is something

we've never seen before which is that

and in

individual voter just a citizen can have

a good idea put it on social media or it

could be just a good message or a good

way of expressing something puts it on

social media guess a bunch of likes gets

a bunch of retweets it bubbles up

somebody with a blue check notices it

they retweet it

maybe another blue check and then

suddenly the Office of the President

notices that there's a good message

that's getting a lot of traction and

then he uses it it's it's amazing

the entire system of government has been

completely rewritten by this president

and it's one of those things you're

gonna see in hindsight much clearer

because when you're in it that you don't

really have the same vision to be able

to see it well while you're in it but

I've never seen a more interactive

approach let me give you an example

here's a concrete example I mentioned

the other day that there's something

called the office of nuclear energy

which you can follow a tactic of nuclear

so the our government has a department

that's promoting nuclear energy and has

lots of information about the newest

stuff and the newest test facilities and

what's coming online now etc so

apparently it's a newish Twitter account

and I called attention to it because my

attention was was drawn to it through

March nighter are our resident nuclear

advocate expert and so he called my

attention to it

and then I tweeted it their number of

followers was just a couple thousand I

forget the exact number but two or three

thousand something like that followers

in total that was the total attention

they were getting today they have five

thousand so two thousand people who were

citizens who were interested in nuclear

and and can be sort of weaponized as

advocates because they they're people

who had enough interest to follow this

account and and I mention again which

will again boost

there it boosts their attention so you

can see a concrete example where I

tweeted them and their exposure roughly

doubled I mean it was a small number but

it doubled so you can see the effect

that the public is boosting parts of the

government that are productive and then

that government does something for the

people so it's it's this continual

two-way virtuous cycle that I just don't

know existed before it feels like it's

really taken on a life of its own

here's another example so earlier I was

just talking about how there's a

bipartisan bill to lower pharmaceutical

costs well don't you think that knowing

that because I just told a bunch of you

don't you think that knowing that

increases the chance that maybe it could

happen right so there are lots of things

that we the citizens on social media

especially the blue check people who

have a lot of followers we can boost the

signal of anything worth worth boosting

you know we can do it with a campaign ad

I can do it with the the app to gov

nuclear site I can do it with a bill I

can do it with China I can do it with

fentanyl so you can see that individuals

are now sort of testing messages we know

that the White House is watching they

are watching at least the blue checks

and you see you see the president's

actually retweeted people were not even

you know highly visible just people who

had a good idea that is just hugely

inspirational to me because it feels

like I don't want to take this you know

too far into into optimism because you

won't you won't be able to follow me

there but it feels like almost a rebirth

of the Republic too but too much is that

too much it feels like a rebirth a

reboot of the Republic because it seems

to me that our founders built a pretty

pretty darn good system you know given

with what they

to work with etc but is sort of evolved

into things happening behind closed

doors and you know the the lobbyists and

the power brokers are the only the only

people who have any power after a while

doesn't it feel like that it feels now

that under the age of Trump and who

notice if this will last or not it feels

like the public is completely empowered

now completely who saw that coming not

me I didn't see that coming

it seems to me that an average citizen

can today have as much power as an

average citizen could have in the

beginning of the Republic when things

were so small that you probably knew

where he you know you knew the other

people in government you know you would

know your governor you might know him

personally because the world was so

small there just weren't many people

there during the the formation of the

Republic but it feels like Trump gave

well Trump and Jack Dorsey and you know

Zuckerberg in a sense the the social

media platforms in conjunction with this

weird unusual president has created a

situation that has empowered individuals

in a way I've never seen it well let me

give you an example if an individual

came up with a terrific idea for gun

control let's say would that individual

be able to get that terrific idea to

bubble up all the way to the White House

absolutely I you I never would have said

that and the other time would you just

just fact-check me on this based on your

observation you know this is more

opinion than fact

but based on what you've watched about

the process based on the number of times

you've seen an individual tweet bubble

all the way up to the White House what a

great idea from just a person make it

all the way the White House

absolutely absolutely that doesn't mean

they'll use it because you know they get

a lot of ideas and they know more than

we do about you know the variables that

are involved but absolutely

a good idea from an individual we'll go

right into the president's hands that's

amazing that's amazing and and it can

happen in 24 hours it's like it's a

whole new world so I could not be more

optimistic about the Republic because I

think the Republic went stale and

instead of having to get refreshed with

the blood of patriots because you know

that the the founders the founders

assumed that every now and then you got

a what's the saying you got a you got a

refresh the tree of freedom with the

blood of patriots or something as luck

would have it we've taken that warfare

to the internet so there's blood of

patriots but it's in the form of people

getting ratio denied and losing their

jobs because of social media so that

stuff's still pretty bloody you know in

a figurative sense but it looks like

Patriots are weighing and and they're

putting tons of energy people are

putting their necks on the line I am

you've watched me put my neck on the

line repeatedly I take risks that you

shouldn't take because I can afford it

right made enough money that if I lost

my job tomorrow I'd be fine so you get

to watch me take some risks that I'm

happy to take on your behalf because I

can afford it and you can't so I'm happy

to do that as a patriot and your support

to me makes that meaningful right the

fact that you support me in this

collectively is what makes it doable

so your individual sort of you know I

would say love and support that you give

to me that neither of those words are

are too much I think allows me to to

boost my voice and boost other people

like the ones I mentioned so it's it's a

good system as long as we have this

president I hope

president is as flexible because I'd

hate to lose this it's pretty important

all right the Washington Post has a

hilarious article which i retweeted in

which they're mocking the followers of

President Trump for assuming that

everything he does everything I say

everything he does is genius as opposed

to accidental flailing now they gave two

examples of this I apparently there are

some people who think the president

cleverly wants to be impeached because

it'll be good for his reelection now I'm

not in that camp I'm pretty sure if the

president had had a choice of being

impeached or not being impeached he

would choose not impeached I'm pretty

sure that so if there's anybody out

there who thinks it's the president and

cleverly goading them into impeachment

as in Azzam actually literally

impeaching him I don't think that's his

plan what I would say and and if you

think that was his plan I think you're

you're overthinking what I would say is

that he's good at improvising in other

words he's good at turning a bad

situation into a good one you want to

see an example what did everybody say

about it Trump's a phone call to Ukraine

they said hey you shouldn't have done

that because you've offered an implied

quid pro quo so how often did you hear

quid pro quo about President Trump hey

that phone call was a quid pro quo and

now let me ask you this what's the new

nickname for Joe Biden

quid pro Joe

this is actually a new nickname quid pro

Joe

so this president certainly did not have

some long term plan where he would get

accused of making a bad phone call and

cleverly turned the complaint into a

nickname for his biggest competitor but

he did it that's what happened so I

don't think there's any chance he saw it

coming you know set a trap

you know intentionally said things to

get people calling using the phrase quid

pro quo so he could turn it into a quid

pro Joe but it happened so he took a

situation and he capitalized on as we've

seen them do over and over and over

again grifter Joe oh I love you

whoever just said grifter Joe my god I

love that if ever if ever the word

grifter could be used in a more perfect

context grifter Joe now let's talk about

oh and then the other example they said

is people are saying that he does

misspellings intentionally and I have to

confess I'm probably the one I probably

have to take responsibility for the fact

that people think that he misspells

intentionally I've personally I don't

know if I've ever said he's misspelled

intentionally maybe there was one time

yeah there might be one time I suspected

it but in general I would say the

misspellings or nothing but misspellings

they're typos misspellings autocorrect

whatever here's what I think is the case

he doesn't care he doesn't care and you

know what that makes me care about

well not his typos but the fact that he

doesn't care and you know he doesn't

care because he doesn't take the tweet

back and correct it it would be easy

just to take the tweet back correct

reissue it it'd be easy he doesn't do it

I frickin love that it went from oh you

know it's kind of a it's not an optimal

look I mean in the early days you see a

typo or something

a grammar error and say huh you know

maybe maybe it would have been better if

somebody looked at that before he sent

that out but we've gotten to the point

where it just seems genuine am i right

when you see his typos what do you know

for sure he sent it with his own fingers

like he actually he probably almost

certainly typed it with his own thumbs

you're seeing the actual President of

the United States the most important

person in the world I think you could

argue and you're seeing a message that

you know damn well came from him and his

two little thumbs and is what came right

out of his brain I kind of love that I'm

I don't think I could like that any more

than I do

so typos I'm all for them because

they're little markers for authenticity

that originally struck me as it'd be

better without these but now that it's

sort of just worked into a was somewhat

of an expectation that he'll have a

misspelled word or something now and

then I just look at them as authentic

now it just looks like yeah I know where

this came from

it didn't didn't go through a committee

that's for damn sure this came from the

guy that you voted for it didn't come

from his advisers didn't come from

handlers came from the person you voted

for I can't not love that really I can't

and the other thing it does is that

humanizes them in a way you can relate

how many of you have sent out a tweet

with a misspelling I did it twice

yesterday I think one for sure but if

I'm not mistaken I may have said how to

misspelled tweets yesterday I may have

be complete conflating with some in my

mind but at least one so when I see the

president

to it I think it's authentic and I kind

of bind I bond with him a little bit

because I go I did that - I did same

damn thing yesterday literally yesterday

but I love the fact that the Washington

Post wrote a story in which are trying

to debunk the notion that the president

is playing chess while others are

playing checkers if you don't know I'm

probably the author of that idea that

he's playing 3d chess that was me back

in 2015 saying that and people mocking

me until he became president and now

they're still mocking me indirectly

but I think it's funny that they feel

they need to complain about that because

it feels like they're sensing there's

too much truth in it maybe am I reading

too much in there am i doing a little

too much mind-reading that they wouldn't

do an article about it if it wasn't

getting to them in other words there's

something about this situation that

matters to them they need to know they

need you to know he's not playing chess

but if he's not playing chess could you

explain that - quid pro Joe because he

probably thinks they are Oh quid pro Joe

that's the best and by the way I think

quid pro Joe is another example that

bubbled up from just a Twitter user I

don't know who it was but I think some

Twitter user or somebody said it first

and it was good so a bubble up that's

your new republic right there it's

amazing Chris ELISA has the funniest

article that wasn't trying to be funny

today

Cristal is a-- as you know CNN I guess

pundits slash analysts may be political

guy so he's one of the top anti Trump

errs I'm using anti Trumper to the core

and he's I don't know if I'll ever stop

laughing about this this is so funny so

here's the article he was talking I

tweeted this if you want to see it you

just talk about there's a new

Monmouth University poll in which

they're asking people about the Ukraine

transcript

yeah the president's phone call with the

president of Ukraine and has said that

according to the modern southern

Monmouth University poll just four and

ten Republicans believe that the

transcript even mentions Biden's name

sixty percent of Republicans don't think

Biden's names even in the transcript now

of course it is it's there twice as

there clearly and unambiguously

and it comes from the president's office

himself so there's no there's no

question on the facts the facts are as

objective as any fact could be every

single person who participated in the

call in any way notice that Biden's name

was mentioned and still six out of ten

Republicans say that Trump never

mentioned Biden whose call was less key

now it could be that the poll was worded

in a way that people didn't know that's

what they were answering exactly because

there could have been something like

without seeing the question it could

have been do you think there was some

quid pro quo with Biden or something so

it's possible that I'm not seeing the

full context of this but it is still

hilarious and I'll tell you why that

crystal is a-- is complaining they're

six and ten people can't look in a

transcript and see what's right before

their eyes you know i that's funny

because crystal is is one of the biggest

pushers of the fine people hoax what

would it take to debunk the fine people

hoax the idea that the you know the

conspiracy theory rumor that's not true

the president Trump called the neo-nazis

in Charlottesville find people what

would it take to debunk that just read

the transcript that's it

just read it right there they he said

the opposite if you read half the

transcript you could be confused and

that's what most people see but if you

read the full transcript there's no

ambiguity whatsoever he clearly said I'm

not talking about those people he said

it directly I'm not talking about that

and nobody even asked him to explain it

he explained

just to be clear I'm now talking about

them all you have to do is read the

transcript so one of the biggest pushers

of the fake transcript in other words

the idea that he did call then neo-nazis

find people is CNN and Chris ELISA and

so the tide is turned karma has come to

visit and karma comes to visit and says

well I don't even think Trump mentioned

Biden fo girl all right so here's it

gets even better this and this is

crystallises comment to his own

observation that six out of ten

Republicans don't even see the name

Biden in the transcript he goes with

periods are period you period kidding

period me period and then this Elizabeth

goes on to say this listen to this he

says this poll finding doesn't seem so

unbelievable the primary work of Trump's

candidacy and his presidency has been to

erode the idea that a that objective

truth exists so chrysalis of CNN says

the president Trump has been working to

erode the erode the idea that objective

truth exists that's exactly what he's

doing

he's a roading the idea that objective

truth exists is that bad well would

depend wouldn't it would depend if

objective truth exists if it doesn't

exist well then it would be good that

he's the president Trump is teaching us

that objective truth doesn't exist if it

does exist well then that would prep

maybe be bad because that would be

untrue right but in a real sense and

this is something I told you back in

2015 I predicted the Trump would change

more than politics I said it directly

publicly and multiple time

I said that what he would change is your

understanding of reality and you see it

happening so Liz's understanding of

reality is changing because he's lit

he's saying how can it be that people

could look at the transcripts and just

not see the name Biden it's right there

well how could you Christel is a-- think

that the president called neo-nazis fine

people when the transcript says clearly

I'm not talking about them I said the

opposite

Chris ELISA has been introduced to

subjective reality while working at a

news news organization that's got to be

that's got to be a mindfuck that's got

to be that's got to be hard to process I

work for an organization that puts out

the objective truth which doesn't exist

how do you process that i I don't work

for a news organization so I can I can

live comfortably in a world where

objective truth isn't really a thing

well how do you work for a news

organization and believe objective truth

doesn't exist what would that do to your

mental health that's kind of be hard to

process seriously now let me clarify I

know there are a lot of science pedantic

people out there who are gonna say Scott

Scott Scott there is a base reality just

because some people are fooled and can't

see it that doesn't make the objective

reality go away it's still there well

I'll give you two answers to that

doesn't matter because we don't use any

objective reality to make our decisions

so when I say it doesn't matter I'm

talking about the realm of political

decision-making objective reality

doesn't seem to be much of a factor in

anything you can see it on every topic

people are all over the place on what

they're seeing and they're looking at

the same stuff there is no evidence of

objective reality in terms of how we

make decisions and how we process things

but is there you ask still outside the

realm of our ability to perceive it

accurate

all the time is there an actual

objective reality maybe and maybe that R

objective reality can affect your life

if you walk in front of the truck

whether or not you see the truck

probably doesn't affect the fact that it

will kill you

so yes there's an objective reality in

terms of there there might be a truck if

you walk into it and it's gonna kill you

even if you don't see it so that so in

that sense yes but if you're trying to

decide who what do I think about this

Ukraine situation what did I think about

Russia collusion what do I think about

health care for everybody any any of

these big political topics you're not

using objective truth nobody else we're

all just using our subjectivity and

arguing that it's based on the

objectivity but suppose were a

simulation suppose our reality is a

simulation under the simulation

worldview is there an objective reality

well yes there is but the objective

reality is our programmers reality not

ours our reality would be completely

subjective it would act as though it's

subjective in many cases again if you

walk in front of the truck it could be a

simulated truck but your simulated self

is going to get killed by the simulated

truck so yeah in some sense there's an

objective reality but in terms of our

filters on the world we can't really see

it in any reliable way so that was the

understanding reality that I said would

change we see this happening in stark in

real time in a very stark way where you

see that people can literally look at

the same document a document no longer

than this they can look at it and some

of them won't even see names that are on

it they won't even be able to see

sentences they actually their ability to

see objective reality is so weak that

they're inventing it on the fly all

right this is something else that SaLuSa

claims he says so this is a CNN claim

okay

there are zero evidence that the

whistleblower in the Ukraine story

is a partisan do you agree with that

because I think your news sources most

of you is telling you that that's just

the fact that we know that the

whistleblower is a partisan have you

seen evidence of that what's the

evidence of that do you believe that

it's a fact that the whistleblower is a

partisan I believe is possible I also

believe that I have never seen evidence

of it have you have you ever seen

evidence that the whistleblower was a

partisan I've heard people say there is

evidence but I haven't seen it does that

blow your mind

because I'll bet you've watched news

reports to say oh yeah it's he's a

partisan well he might be if I had to

put my own money on it I'd bet it on it

right if he had to bet you'd bet he was

a partisan but where's the evidence the

IC IG report stated he was a partisan

but where's the evidence now so I'm not

going to say that the CNN report is true

but when somebody says where's the

evidence and I say to myself a lot I

don't know I haven't seen it either I've

only heard it reported that he is now I

would say if the IC IG report says he's

a partisan it's very likely he is but I

would still want to see the evidence

wouldn't you I'd want to see the

evidence so I wouldn't say there's zero

evidence I would say you know I I could

use a little more support on that point

[Music]

yeah let's say the other thing that oh

the other thing that solicit says

there's no evidence for he says

specifically independent fact checkers

don't give credence to the idea that Joe

Biden called for the firing of Ukraine's

top prosecutor to avoid an investigation

into a son so CNN is reporting that

there's no evidence that the reason Joe

Biden called for that

firing of the Ukraine prosecutor is to

avoid an investigation into a son

have you seen evidence to the contrary I

haven't I haven't where is the evidence

that that's why he did it

I'm not saying he didn't do it for that

reason

I'm just saying okay I haven't seen the

evidence either is it evidence that he

went golfing with a board member and

that really it's not really evidence of

anything there's an evidence that I

don't

III would agree with this fact that I

would agree with the statement that the

fact checkers are not buying into Joe

Biden doing it you know to get the

investigator off his son but I don't

think that matters to the story too much

somebody says the video the video is not

evidence the visit the video is not

evidence that he did it because of his

son

the video is evidence they did it well

we don't have his evidence of why all

right but I don't think any of that

matters because the hunter Biden was

taking a lot of money from a Ukrainian

entity well as well as dad was vice

president doesn't really matter what Joe

Biden did okay it kind of doesn't matter

what Joe Biden did or did not do with

the prosecutor it's sort of irrelevant

because you have all the badness you

would ever need just the fact this son

was taking all this money from the

Ukrainian entity while the vice

president's portfolio including Ukraine

and then there was also the issue of

hunter Biden went with his dad to some

China event and met with a banker and

gossip got a deal with some bankers in

China wall on a trip with his father was

a sitting vice president come on the so

what the president said if you saw this

part which was really good by the way

did you see the president look in the

camera I think it was yesterday and he

said as strongly as you've ever heard

him say anything he looked directly in

the camera and he said Joe Biden is a

stone-cold crook

there's stone-cold crooked

you know it and I know it did you see

him say that that was really good in

terms of persuasion because it looked

different from other things that people

say about politics when somebody says

blah blahs a racist your brain

automatically says maybe yes maybe no

just sounds like something that people

say in politics if somebody says

somebody's crooked like Hillary maybe -

maybe false sounds like something you

say in politics

somebody says somebody's incompetent

somebody's crazy somebody's impulsive

somebody's dumb all of those things you

automatically put your your political

filter on don't you you just say yeah

maybe maybe that's something said by a

political opponent so you filter it but

when President Trump looked at the

camera and said Joe Biden is stone-cold

crooked you know it and I know it that

didn't sound like politics did it that

felt like he has broken the fourth wall

or something you know that's not quite

it but that looked like that looked like

reality peeking through the politics it

looked like he believed that to be

stone-cold true and and he was selling

it pretty well now again I'm not saying

it's true

but I'm saying that the way he said it

was I don't know that that's a 10 out of

10 for sound incredible even if it isn't

true it really sounded like he believed

it and he knows you believe it and

here's what I believe every one of us

sees Hunter Biden taking that money

every one of us thinks it's crooked even

the Democrats right even the media

there's nobody in the media was

defending hunter Biden is her

so when Trump looked at the camera and

said he's stone-cold crooked

that's an amazing turn of words I mean I

don't know if that was spontaneous or he

thought about it a little bit but those

are

those are daggered words that's like

stab stab stab

stone cold crooked and your debt and

then we said you know it and I know it

that's like the next level of persuasion

because one of the the main strongest

parts of persuasion is when you say was

somebody else's thinking as they're

thinking it if you can ever do that it

really gives you like a super power for

a persuasion so he said if he had said I

believe it and the public believes that

that's politics that's weak but when you

look at the Cameron you say you know it

and I know it

that's persuasion all right when you

when you tell somebody what they know

that's a gold-plated a plus persuasion

if it's true or you have to actually has

something they actually know to be true

or it doesn't work anyway so I got some

I have some questions about you know

what is the the truth of all the Joe

Biden stuff but we don't have to wonder

about the hundred Biden stuff that that

part looks crooked on just on the

surface you don't have to dig into any

details to know that that's there's

something wrong going on there all right

as I've said before it looks to me oh

and then you're something that somebody

on Twitter asked when I tweeted that

around somebody said is there evidence

Ukraine didn't know the funds were

delayed that's interesting right because

how can it be a quid pro quo phone call

the president's phone call with Ukraine

if as it's being reported the Ukrainians

didn't know that their funding was being

held up they weren't even aware of it so

if you're not even aware of the threat

part even existing how could you

possibly receive the phone call is quid

pro quo and I thought good point so I'm

not sure any of the facts really matter

because we'll make our decisions without

them less

that's what's going on all right

Biden has a history blah blah blah Biden

son is not crooked but not good optics

either well it depends on your

definition of crooked

if crooked means illegal then I would

agree the hunter Biden has not done

anything that I've heard of that's

illegal

besides yeah besides of his personal

life perhaps that's another story but

but wouldn't you call it crooked I mean

I would call it crooked on premise is is

this a legal term I heard something

lawyer say it was it I forget who said

it but prime of prima facie prime of a

promise from a facial or something the

oddest surface is obviously crooked you

don't really need to dig any deeper you

just look at and say okay well that's

crooked seems that way to me but legal

probably perfectly legal but still

crooked there's it was an article in a

reason reason calm talking about nor cam

I think it's called

there's a drug that you can take if you

if somebody has a fentanyl overdose and

apparently it works really well so if

some of the overdoses on fentanyl or in

there during the process of overdosing

and they're gonna die if you give them

this Norcom drug apparently it revives

them and works really well and there are

lots of success stories that people have

done that and I guess it's not available

over except by asking the the pharmacist

so you have to ask for it at the counter

now imagine just here's the situation

there are drug addicts or likely to have

a problem with fentanyl remember they're

drug addicts and in order to get the

thing that could save their life they

have to talk to

the pharmacist and their town probably

do you want to do that if you're a drug

addict do you want to talk to the

pharmacist about your drug addiction

maybe not maybe not so the idea is that

maybe this narcan could be available

from vending machines and some method

that would allow you to avoid human

contact to get it because if you're a

drug addict you want might want to keep

that to yourself

right and I thought to myself that is so

common sensical and apparently there's

some law that prevents that from

happening

yeah cops have it for example they carry

it with them I think in many cases but

not every case but many cases they have

it with them it seems to me that's

another simple tweak like why in the

world if you can simply ask for it and a

pharmacist can give it to you you know

it's that safe it's not a regulated

thing apparently why not get it from a

vending machine

you know why not get it from Amazon of

course in that case your name would be

on the record you might not want that

but a vending machine is perfectly

anonymous right assuming you can use

cash in it I guess

all right so there are plenty of good

ideas out there to fixing the world

remember I told you that the Golden Age

which we are entering will be defined by

simply having to design better systems

what's a better system for

pharmaceuticals transparency and we've

got a bipartisan bill to give us that

that would be a better system what's the

better system for the Republic the

president gets ideas as they bubble up

from the public a that's happening now

our our system has evolved on its own

nobody did it intentionally but we

evolved to a fairly good system where

the public and their president are quite

quite connected and they communicate

every day so there are a lot of good

systems and I would say nuclear energy

is another one of those I just I tweeted

round I think I tweeted it maybe I just

liked it an article by Steven Pinker

talking about what needs to be done to

store nuclear

waste in at a Safeway now that skipping

the details the bottom line is we know

how to do it we know how to store

nuclear waste and we're developing even

better ways and we could use it for fuel

if we develop the right kind of reactors

etc so that again is a design problem we

simply have to design all right I'm

gonna have to get this so I'm gonna talk

to you later but think about design bye

for now

[Music]