Episode 226 Scott Adams: North Korea, Crooked’s Tweets, Hoaxes Versus Witch Hunts

My background is not as cool, but on the plus side, my shirt is not inside out this time. So I think that's progress. Progress. Hey, everybody, come on in. Hey, Ron, Jen, Mike, Jerry, get in here and grab your coffee, because you know what happens when we reach a thousand viewers? Oh, we do. We do know what happens. That's when the simultaneous sip happens. I apologize for my bad WI FI connection, but I think we can get it done. As Chris Cuomo says, let's get after it. He almost makes that work. Almost, I say. All right, raise your glove, your. Raise your glass, your mug, your ajack, your vessel, your cup and drink. Now, have you all seen the news about North Korea? Probably you haven't, because for some reason, it doesn't seem to be getting a lot of press. Maybe it takes a while for people to wake up and start writing, but doesn't it look like something really good happened in North Korea recently? Let me tell you what the reports are. Of course, we always have to wait and see on any of this stuff, but the reports are that North Korea has agreed to have foreign inspectors watch as they dismantle their missile site. That's pretty good. And they have agreed to do some commerce with the south, and they have agreed to attempt to win the Olympics for 2032. Now, do you remember I was telling you that it would be a good idea for them to make very long term plans for reunification? And you do it in one little step at a time. And so saying that they're going to work together to get The Olympics in 2032 is a nice long term, getting each other a little bit pregnant, crawl in the right direction sort of a thing. Yes. I've allowed Nancy back. Nancy is back. Everybody say hi to Nancy. We missed you, Nancy. We'll never make that mistake again. Hmm. Yeah. So Poland, they want a military base, US Military base in Poland. And the. Who's the leader of Poland? I can't remember. But he suggested calling it Fort Trump. And I thought, okay, he's being very clever because he thinks Trump likes to have things named after him. But there's a problem with that because the Trump name is a name that is a licensed product. In other words, the hotels that he doesn't operate, the Trump administration just licenses the name to other operators. Now, I work in licensing, and I'll tell you that it would be a problem if you were trying to keep the value of your license high. And a Polish military camp, even if it was a US Camp, used your name. So it would be problematic on the Licensing end. Anyway, let's talk about. There's a tweet I retweeted this morning from John Sullivan. It was actually last night. So the Hill did an interview with Trump, and you can see this in my Twitter feed, and a couple of things that Trump said were hilarious. One of them was he didn't know if the Russia thing was a hoax or a witch hunt, because a hoax is worse than a witch hunt. Now, remember, I always teach you about making people think past the sale. If you're trying to decide, is this a witch hunt or a hoax? No, it's more of a hoax than a witch hunt. But it's got a little. Some elements of hoax and witch hunt. So sort of a witch hunt hoax, which is it? If he has you thinking anything like that, then you've already accepted the point, which is that it's a hoaxy witch hunt. The other thing he said was in the same technique, he said he wondered if exposing the Russian hoax could be the crowning achievement of his presidency. Now, he said, well, it might be taxes or regulations, but one of the crowning achievements might be, might be exposing the Russian hoax. Now, of course, once again, he's making you think past the sale. The sale, is it a crowning achievement or is it not? But if you're thinking about that, you've already accepted that it's a hoax. So he did it twice in one interview. It was pretty outstanding in terms of persuasion. All right. Then I tweeted about Hillary Clinton's word salad laundry list of problems. I've told you this before. If you have one complaint with somebody, it could be valid. If you have a whole laundry list of generic complaints, that's not so valid. Let me give you an example. If I said, what's a complaint with John Kerry? You'd say, well, the Iran deal, sort of. You could come up with other things. But if you were going to criticize John Kerry, you'd say, the Iran deal. If you were going to criticize Hillary Clinton, you'd probably say crooked. And you can go down the line and you find that the people that really have a problem have one main thing that you can talk about that's really a killing insult. Yeah, there's always Benghazi and some other things, but they're not as effective, apparently, in moving the public. But then Hillary Clinton comes up with this tweet. She says, I'll read it first, then I'll break it down. Donald Trump refuses to be subject to the law. The legitimacy of our elections isn't Out. The president is waging war on the truth. The administration is undermining the national unity that makes democracy possible. And then there's the breathtaking corruption. Now, she goes on. For several tweets, but it's all the same kind of generic laundry list. Let's look at the first one. Donald Trump refuses to be subject to the law. He does. He does. What would be an example of a law that the president has broken? I can't think of any. In what way is he refusing to be subject to the law? There's an actual FBI investigation going on. How much more subject to the law could you be? The Supreme Court overruled his initial plan for immigration bans. How much more subject to the law can you be? As soon as the Supreme Court ruled, he had to work with it. So it's just crazy. The next one is the legitimacy of our elections is in doubt. By whom? The legitimacy of our elections is in doubt. Well, I know that Russia tried to fiddle with them, but there's no evidence they succeeded. The person who's putting the legitimacy of the election in doubt is Hillary. Hillary and her supporters are putting the election in doubt. So whether or not Russia did or did not do something, the entities that put it in doubt, the ones who question the legitimacy, is not Trump. It's not Trump supporters. That all comes from her side. Then the next one is the administration is undermining. No, let's see. The president is waging war on the truth. Well, what's that mean? I mean, it's a fancy way to say that he's not passing the fact checking, to which I say, as I've said before, and. And that has translated into the real world in the following problems. How did it make the economy operate worse? No, it probably made the economy operate better because he told everybody the economy was great and economies work on expectations. I won't give you the full rant about accuracy and the truth, but let's say that no politician adheres to the truth. It just isn't a thing, you know? So to say that Trump in particular has a war on the truth just doesn't have much meaning. There's no bite to it. The administration is undermining the national unity that makes democracy possible. I'm pretty sure that's Hillary, too, and I'm not doing one of these, you know, what about ism things. It's striking because her claims are so much, so clearly describing the other side. There would be plenty of national unity if the winning side could get the losing side to agree to just play along and go with the process that worked the way the process is supposed to go. The group that won and then operated as though they won and is trying to make America great again, that's not exactly divisive. So it seems to me that everything that is blamed on the president for divisiveness is something that the people on Hillary's team thought up. And if they hadn't, and if they'd just been more productive, we wouldn't be having the conversation. And then there's the breathtaking corruption. What would be the example of that? I understand that there are, you know, there are cabinet members who did some bad things and they had to be dealt with, but in terms of Trump himself, I don't believe there's any claim. So, yeah, so she's doing the thing of accusing others of that, which you are guilty. I never thought that was a thing, but sure looks like a year then. See if. And then, of course, we're looking at a day when the North Korea thing is going great. Apparently, Trump got Russia and Iran to not attack Idlib, which looked like it was a hot spot in the problem. So they're going to. They're going to cordon it off and make it some kind of a safe zone or something. So every time we turn around, it looks like Trump is doing the right stuff internationally and the economy zooming, and he hasn't rounded up any people and put them in concentration camps. So it's a tell when you have that many complaints that you have to make a laundry list because that tells you that none of them are strong. You know, if Trump actually did murder somebody on Fifth Avenue and it was on video, do you think they'd be talking about any of this other stuff? They wouldn't, because they'd finally have something that was real. So when people do the laundry list of vague accusations of being sort of Ana ammo. She's out of ammo, people. The North Koreans are playing America. There's always somebody who says that. I always think that's the most simplistic analysis of North Korea, is that they're playing us like they always have before. There's nothing that we're observing that looks like what has happened before. And if it's true that they let people in to take a look at. Take a look at their missile site being torn apart, I'm going to say that's pretty real. That looks pretty real. And by the way, you don't look for war with a country that's looking to have economic cooperation. And host the Olympics, you would have no reason for nukes. Kim Jong Un would have no reason for nukes if they do go ahead with reunification. So there's just no reason anymore. And that's something that Trump did that hadn't been done. He simply took their reason away. Project Veritas, I haven't seen it. Didn't get much news, whatever it was, or else I would have seen it. And I'm just looking at your. Yes, I did see Norm MacDonald's show. I enjoyed it. It's a weird little show. I can't even describe it. So you just have to watch it to. Where are you? I'm in Vegas right now. I did not see Trump's press conference this morning. What persuasion books do I recommend? You should Google the term persuasion reading list and you'll see my list. Oh, so it's also a good play that Trump is releasing all of these emails about the or all the documents about the FISA because he doesn't know what's in them. You don't release documents if you're worried that it will be bad for you. So it's actually a really strong play for him to release stuff and it's going to keep the news busy for who knows how long. There's another person saying Ford is lying. Nobody could know that. It's unknowable. The other tweet I retweeted this morning is somebody saying that if you think you're 100% sure that the Kavanaugh event happened, or if you think you're 100% sure that it didn't happen, those are the two irrational views. So if you have one of those views, you're totally sure some sexual assault happened or you're totally sure nothing happened. Those are the two non credible views. And given that we will never be able to know the truth, you have to default to the system. And the system says you're innocent until proven guilty. All right. Ford accused Gorsuch too. Is that true? I doubt that's true. Would I recommend the book how to Win Friends? You know, I haven't read that book because I took the Dale Carnegie class and I got the same stuff from the class. All right. I don't have much else to say today, and so I think I'm gonna. I'm gonna cut it short. Could you out persuade Trump? I could not. All right, bye for now.