Episode 2898 CWSA 07/15/25 — Scott Adams Philosophy

Episodes › Episode #2898 › Segments

NewsReaction Politics as Persuasion

Back to episode — Episode 2898 CWSA 07/15/25

Context —

, stuff that's super hard but also super light, stuff that can conduct electricity better than other stuff. The upside potential of just materials sounds like a boring thing, but it's really a lot. There was a story that I decided not to talk about until just this moment. There's some teenage kid who allegedly invented an electric motor that doesn't require these magnets that are rare earth. And…

← Previous segment →

nd because he's an appealing messenger, he's actually overcoming being a communist. So if you wondered how much power you can get from having the right message and being the right kind of messenger, well, there's a guy called Trump who had the right message at the right time and he was the right messenger and now he's the most influential person in the world. That's how important it is.

And if you might ask yourself, how in the world did voters get comfortable with the fact that Trump is accused of all manner of things I won't even mention? And the answer is he had the right policy. He had the right message and he was charismatic and he could deliver that message and deliver results. So yeah, you could be a communist or you could be accused of absolutely anything. But if you get those two things right, the right message and you're the right charismatic messenger, people will say, you know what, that's kind of rare. So we're going to overlook all those other things that otherwise might bother us.

In other news, the Supreme Court has ruled once again that Trump can do what he wanted to do, which was fire hundreds of employees at the education department, which he would like to get rid of. And I guess that had been blocked, you know, once again by some district judge. And once again, Trump wins when it goes to the Supreme Court, which you could argue proves that the judges are corrupt, the judges that block it in the first place, because they probably know it's going to the Supreme Court, and they probably know they're going to lose, and that the Supreme Court will give Trump the power to do what the president should be able to do, which is hire and fire people in the executive branch.

But doesn't it feel to you like you're just hearing the same story over and over again? How many times have you read or heard the story? Well, a local judge blocked Trump from doing whatever and then it went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court sided with Trump. So now he can do it. I mean, literally, how many times have we heard that now? I don't know the answer to my own question, but is it a dozen times, or am I just remembering it weird? Is it five times? How many times has the Supreme Court slapped down the lower court judges? It's a lot, right? I don't even know the number.

You want to stop talking about Epstein, but we can't. We can't quit it. It's just something new every day. So yesterday was Monday and we were all waiting to see if Dan Bongino showed up for work or if he quit. As far as I know, and of course things can change quickly, he did not quit. And there were meetings in the White House in which all three Bondi and Patel and Bongino apparently all visited the White House. There's some reports that JD Vance might have been trying to talk people off a ledge. There was talk that Bongino had threatened to quit if Pam Bondi didn't get fired or leave or if she didn't change her approach to what was being released.

So the first thing I would say about that reporting is I don't trust any of it. This is exactly the kind of reporting that never really captures the whole thing behind the curtain. I mean, some of it might be true, but it'd be out of context and you'd be missing parts and you wouldn't know who said what and you wouldn't know their internal feelings. When somebody else

Context —

says they're really mad, you don't know if they really are or they're pretending. So whenever I hear these stories about who said I'll quit or if you don't do this I'll do that, I don't fully believe them to be literally true. I treat them more like well this is what people are saying. You know you don't know what's really happening behind the scenes there. But we would know if Bongino quit. We wo…

Next segment → →

← ← Previous segment

Next segment → →

Wisdom from this episode

"If you wondered how much power you can get from having the right message and being the right kind of messenger, well, there's a guy called Trump who had the right message at the right time and he was the right messenger and now he's the most influential person in the world. That's how important it is."

The right message delivered by the right messenger is extraordinarily powerful—enough to elevate someone to the most influential person in the world.

"You could be a communist or you could be accused of absolutely anything. But if you get those two things right, the right message and you're the right charismatic messenger, people will say, you know what, that's kind of rare. So we're going to overlook all those other things that otherwise might bother us."

People will overlook serious accusations, ideological extremes, or personal flaws if you combine the right message with charismatic delivery, because that combination is rare and valuable.

"This is exactly the kind of reporting that never really captures the whole thing behind the curtain. Some of it might be true, but it'd be out of context and you'd be missing parts and you wouldn't know who said what and you wouldn't know their internal feelings."

Reporting on internal political conflicts and drama rarely captures the full picture, as it lacks complete context, omits key details, and can't convey people's true intentions or emotions.