Episode 1077 Scott Adams: Dismantling Teachers Unions, Epstein Files Via Cernovich, Pandemic Scorecards
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
President Trump always keeps his options open
Skepticism about COVID19 results
Epstein documents unsealed
Teacher unions: an extinction risk for America
Nuclear energy: imperative that America leads
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
I hope you all brought your beverages, because it's going to be one of the best days ever.
Yeah, today is shaping up to look really good.
Let's check the stock market.
See what's going on there.
Anything happening in the stock market?
What? Looks like Apple and Amazon are doing pretty darn good.
Pretty darn good.
So I know that many of you here are here for the laughs, the excitement, the camaraderie, the news, the information, the Emotional and intellectual titillation, but many of you are here for the simultaneous sip, and all you need, if you would like to participate, is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better, including the pandemic Economics, stock market, unemployment, everything.
It's called the simultaneous SIP. And it happens now.
Go. Sublime.
Somebody says that surgery changed you.
Let me address that.
Because since many of you watch me every day, I should address the fact that there's certainly some kind of chemical change going on here.
So part of it is the surgery on my sinuses, which should change my vocal quality a bit.
Don't know if it's permanent yet.
But I'm also still on prednisone.
So the prednisone changes both my personality, makes me more aggressive, and a little more energetic, I think.
But also because I had sinus surgery, This will be the first time you've ever seen me when I'm not using marijuana every day.
So for a while I have to keep that in my system.
So I was awake for, I don't know, 36 hours straight or something.
If you don't count anesthesia, I was awake for 36 hours.
Because my brain's just going crazy, just adjusting to the new chemical composition.
It's such a difference from normal.
So, we don't know how this is going to turn out.
I'm actually on an experiment.
Kanye tweeted just now.
Well, I don't know what that is.
But we'll find out.
Together, I guess. Let's talk about the news.
Here's a question. So I guess in the first NBA game, all of the players and coaches knelt.
Now, the total amount that I care about this issue...
Zero. Zero.
I don't really care who kneels before a sporting event.
Is there anything less important?
I don't think so.
It's probably the least important thing happening in the world, and yet it's headline news.
But here's my provocative question.
If China did not want the NBA players to kneel, could they have done it?
I'm just trying to cause trouble.
Just think about it. If China had some real problem, I don't know why they would, but let's say they did.
Let's say, for example, that kneeling was an insult in China.
It isn't, I don't think.
But imagine it was.
Could the NBA players have all knelt?
And I think the answer is no.
Which is just a funny thought.
Not funny for them.
I think NBA is going to have some problems.
Obviously. Now, the big story yesterday was the president tweeted about maybe we should delay the elections just so we'll have the votes counted, because if they're voting by mail, there might be some delays.
And of course, that causes everybody to say, you fascist, you fascist, you.
But It was the president being the president.
I don't know how anybody can take this stuff as completely literal anymore and then comment on it in public and act as if we don't all know that President Trump is President Trump.
He has a certain style of communicating.
He'll use a little hyperbole.
He'll bluff. He'll take a high offer.
He'll shake the box.
So when you see something like, maybe we should delay the elections, what kind of filter should you put on that?
Well, I'll tell you the one you shouldn't put on it.
There's one that's definitely wrong, that he's decided to become a dictator and take over the country.
That's the most wrong one.
That one's pretty ridiculous.
Now, does he mean it?
Does it matter? What's the context?
Probably doesn't matter at all.
Here's my take, and this is from Jason.
I tweeted him, a trained hypnotist who had this take on it on Twitter, that by President Trump putting out the thought that the election could be delayed, he has actually trapped the Democrats.
Do you see it? It's not exactly obvious.
I had to play with it in my mind a little bit to see if this made sense.
And I don't know if it's intentional or it's just the way it turns out.
But imagine that the Democrats spend the next two months arguing that the election result must be determined on election day.
Or some period around then if there's some adjustments.
But certainly not past January 20th and inaugurations.
If they spend their whole time arguing that the election should be accepted on whatever day they think it should be done, Election Day, let's say, they're also going to be priming themselves to accept whatever the result is.
So if they commit themselves publicly to saying that whatever we see on Election Day is the result, they have also bound themselves to accept it.
And they might not want to.
Now, what President Trump has done And I just shake my head when I see him do this, because there are some times when he's the only smart person in the country, it seems, at least in public.
So when he was asked if he would accept the outcome of the election, both the last one and this upcoming one, he said some version of, we'll have to see.
That's exactly the right answer.
Every other answer is just dumb.
Because if you say, I will accept it, you're just limiting your options.
Why would you do that?
Who would limit their own options before they're forced to do it?
And you see this consistently.
Trump will always say, how about I'll keep all of my options open?
No, no, no. Tell us what you're going to do.
No. How about I keep all of my options open?
Do you think you'll use nuclear weapons?
I've got an idea. Why don't I keep all of my options open?
Do you think you'll do this or that with China?
I've got an idea.
Why don't I keep all of my options open?
He does it all the time. So when he does it with the election, is it because he's a fascist dictator who's going to take over?
Well, that's what the left says.
But it's also exactly what he does all the time and everything.
He always keeps his options open.
Now, could you guarantee That the result of our election will look fair and credible and it will be a real election?
Can you guarantee that?
Because I can't guarantee that.
I think it'll happen.
I'm optimistic.
But I don't know.
And if you don't know, keep your options open.
I don't think we're going to have any kind of a coup or violent insurrection or anything, so I'm not too worried about it.
But let me ask you this.
Suppose your results were in the...
Let's say you're within 1 or 2% in the final outcome.
So let's say the final presidential race, no matter which side wins, is real close, like they usually are.
How many influences are we going to look at after the fact to say what changed the election?
We're going to look at the Russians doing some lame thing that a second grader could do.
We're going to look at all of China's influence.
We're going to look at the news, how they handle things.
And almost all of it, I don't know, maybe none of it will matter because I've got a feeling that the voters have made up their minds.
All right. I recommended on Twitter this morning That you all follow this account by Andreas Backhaus at Andreas Shrugged.
You can see my tweet if you want to follow him.
The reason you should follow him is he lives in Germany.
He's a German citizen, speaks perfect English, PhD in economics, and he's my go-to for looking at all the pundits and experts' claims to see if they're consistent, the data is right, They've looked at it right.
I've told you in my book, LoserThink, that people who have the right talent stack are much better suited for explaining the world.
A PhD in economics is a really good place to start if you're going to look at other people's data and see how they've compared things.
So if you want to know if somebody has compared things correctly, You want a PhD in economics, and Andreas is the best I've seen.
So on almost all of the issues in America, he weighs in on the big Twitter debates, and consistently has probably the best takes I've seen on almost all of the topics.
Today, he humorously corrected Chris Cuomo.
So this is why it's so much fun.
So I guess Chris Cuomo was saying on CNN last night, That Germany was doing much better with its economy than the United States.
So that Germany had handled the pandemic, and they'd also done better than us in terms of not losing as much economically as maybe they could have.
But it turns out that he just looked at the wrong numbers.
That Chris Cuomo, whose background in training, his talent stack, is he's an attorney.
That's good. But that's not really quite the right...
You know, field for this conversation.
And Chris Guam is very smart.
You may disagree, but I think it's objectively true that he's smart.
And he's a journalist and does his job.
So his talent stack is pretty strong, but he does have maybe a blind spot for the economics, which would not be unusual.
That would be the common situation.
But what he did, apparently he just confused some GDP and growth rates comparing the United States.
So he basically compared an apple to an orange.
As Andres pointed out, if you compare the apple to the apple, the United States did a little better.
So it actually completely reversed the story from Germany is kicking our butts to actually we were a little bit better.
A little bit better. And so I provocatively...
We put this challenge out on Twitter.
If you plan to criticize President Trump later, and you know you do, and I'm talking about the left and the right, right?
The one thing we can guarantee is that both the left and the right will criticize President Trump when it's all over, and now too, right?
Everybody's got their complaints.
I would ask you this, and I like to keep reminding people, if you're evaluating President Trump's performance with the pandemic and with the economy, you can't do it in a vacuum.
It's got to be compared to something that's relevant.
Otherwise, you don't know if it's better or worse than some standard.
And I would just challenge people, if they plan to criticize the president later, and you know you do, so this is most of you, pick your champions now.
Pick the other countries and the other leaders and state them in public and say, I'm going to compare President Trump in the future to Germany.
I think that would be one comparison.
Maybe Canada. Maybe you pick a couple of European countries.
Whatever you think is fair.
But just name your champion.
Once you have your...
Somebody, helpfully, is putting Andres Backhaus' name, the spelling, in the comments, so you can see there.
So pick your champion. And the reason I say this is, if you can't pick your champion now, I'm not sure you can tell who's doing a better job later, because you get to cherry-pick your comparison after the fact.
I would say, let's put him up against the countries that are as comparable as you can get, maybe as a group.
That might even be better.
But I have this prediction, and it goes like this.
Some countries will be better than the United States at handling the pandemic.
That's guaranteed.
Some countries will do better than the United States, maybe, at handling the economy in their own country.
Maybe. But I don't think many countries are going to do better at both.
And that's going to be interesting.
Because the economy and the virus are almost exchangeable.
They're almost like a currency that one can pay for the other.
In other words, if the virus goes up, it's bad for the economy, and people die from the virus, but they also die from the economy.
So they're sort of linked together.
And I don't think you're going to find a situation when this is all done where there are many countries that beat the United States on both measures.
Handling the pandemic and deaths and also keeping the economy alive, which also keeps people alive.
So let's wait for that.
That's my challenge to the world.
If you're going to criticize him later, tell us now who you're going to measure him against.
That's fair. Alright.
It turns out that we're getting some reports that I don't yet trust about countries completely getting on top of the virus, maybe to the point of being past it, which seems over-optimistic to me.
So here are a few of the stories.
Jake Novak reports, or tweeted today, that Israel says that it may have beat it.
So Israel is looking like it got on top of the virus, wiped it out.
It may be a non-problem very soon in Israel.
Now, I don't know that that can last, because it depends how much you can control your borders and stuff, because there's got to be new virus coming in.
I don't know how that could not be the case.
So I would say that I am...
Appropriately skeptical of any country that claims that they've beaten it or they're near beating it because I don't know that that is a thing yet.
So Israel is reported.
I'm seeing reports.
Again, everything I say here should be considered not credible because we live in a world in which 100% of our information is untrustworthy.
Well, I don't know if you can say that about information.
I would say that the data Cannot be trusted for basically anything right now.
Some of it has to do with the pandemic, some of it has to do with the fact that data is never good.
We just think it is sometimes, but we're getting smarter now.
So the more we get red-pilled about the real way that the world works, the less you should believe any data.
Any. Because all data is just politics, ultimately.
If you see any public data that has some kind of public purpose, you should just see it as almost an opinion because somebody made that data.
Somebody collected it.
And if it didn't agree with their point of view, you probably never would have seen it.
So there isn't much difference in 2020 between hard data, we're going to use our hard data to make decisions, and I think I'll just use my opinion.
You think there's a difference.
You want there to be a difference.
Maybe there used to be a difference.
But there's definitely not a difference now.
Now data is just opinion packaged up with numbers.
It's all fraudulent.
People will pick whatever starting points and ending points make their case.
They'll measure what they want to measure.
They'll ignore what they don't want to include.
So I would say we're in a world where all data should be considered wrong.
That should be your first Your first judgment is that it should be almost certainly wrong.
Sometimes it will be right, but so rarely that you should almost count it like it's not a thing.
That would be my advice.
So I'm seeing reports on Twitter, which means no credibility at all, that Sweden has basically beaten the virus.
That they got to something like herd immunity, didn't completely close their economy, although their economy did take a hit just because people did socially distance voluntarily.
Is that true? Because I don't know that that's true.
And again, Sweden might flare up again, but somebody's saying it.
So another tweet that Haiti, which was being used as an example because they have the worst healthcare situation, So the question is, what would happen to a country that basically just didn't have good health care and just got ravaged by the coronavirus?
What would happen? If Haiti is that example, and if the data is right, which again, what are the odds, it would show that Haiti just basically built up herd immunity and they're already past it without too much death.
Now, I don't know if that's true, but you're going to hear lots of stories about this country or that country, got past it, got herd immunity.
I would say you should be very cautious about believing any of that.
But here's what I would like to see.
Given how hard it is to actually know anything for sure, there are only these little opportunities where you might be able to pick out some data that you could actually trust, and it might tell you something.
It's rare. But I would suggest this, and I would be open to comments whether this is dumb or brilliant, but it goes like this.
I'd like to see a list of the countries where hydroxychloroquine is available over-the-counter without a prescription and has been for the last several months.
So I don't care what happened before the pandemic, but during the pandemic, which countries had hydroxychloroquine over-the-counter?
Now here's the beauty of what I'm going to suggest.
If you look at any one country, I don't believe those numbers at all.
I completely don't believe any numbers from any one country, United States or anywhere else.
But if you were to sum together, let's say there were two dozen countries that you could find that definitely had over-the-counter hydroxychloroquine.
And if that total group on average was way better than It might be, but it also might not be, because there could be other correlations.
It could be something about temperature or something about density, for example.
Do you have as much density in the Warmer areas where there's also malaria, where they also had hydroxychloroquine.
So you've got the temperature, environment, season, density.
You might have some kind of genetic thing that mixes things up.
Somebody says, don't forget the zinc.
Well, yes, let's not forget the zinc.
But the point is...
The zinc question is important, so put a pin in that.
But if you found that the over-the-counter hydroxychloroquine people were all doing better, even without zinc, because probably people would be smart enough to pick up a little zinc.
I don't know. Is that hard?
Can you get it over-the-counter too?
I mean, I know you can buy zinc over-the-counter, obviously.
Duh. But is it the medical-grade zinc That is meant to be working in concert with hydroxychloroquine.
Is there any difference? If I just buy some Walmart zinc, is it just as good?
I don't know, because I have some.
The first thing I did was go out and buy some zinc.
So, I mean, I have some in my cabinet.
Alright, so, would it tell us anything if those groups are different?
Because, you know, the frontline doctors that have been in the news lately have been talking about making hydroxychloroquine over-the-counter in the United States.
And I'd like to know if anybody had a good result with that.
If the average of them didn't get any good results, well, I'd be less inclined to think that's the most important thing we should do.
But maybe. Who knows?
Here's an interesting thing.
I didn't know this when it happened, but President Trump tweeted this.
He was talking about how we're going to be building back This was on the 27th, so a few days ago, and I only saw it yesterday.
He's talking about if sleepy Joe Biden, the puppet of the left, ever won, markets would crash and cities would burn.
Which I think is actually literally true.
That markets would crash and cities would burn.
It's funny, you just automatically think that's hyperbole.
But, I don't know.
I mean, it could. This is definitely in the realm of completely believable future scenarios that cities would burn.
You know, because Biden is on the side that wants to defund the police, so it doesn't take many dots to be connected for a city to be on fire.
But then his tweet goes on.
He goes, our country would suffer like never before.
And then Trump says, we will beat the virus soon and go on to the golden age, better than ever before.
Hashtag golden age.
Now, I'm the one who I said hashtag golden age.
That's not in the tweet.
But I'm liking a lot the president's view because I am 100% on board with it.
Have you noticed that, and let me not minimize how bad things are right now, there are people dying, there are people out of work, there's a big hunger problem that's growing in the United States that might be our, not might be, it should be our top priority.
It's the hunger problem. So we've got really serious problems.
But, as the President indicates, there is something about this virus and the pandemic that is renewing.
You can feel that, right?
I'm not the only one, I don't think.
There are so many things that got changed and our perspective on just every part of life changed so substantially that I think it opens up a whole bunch of possibilities that weren't there before.
Education definitely going to change.
Commuting will change. Our relationship with China will change.
We'll bring in our supply chains.
We've learned a ton about virology.
We're probably safer from future pandemics.
I mean, right down to just the most basic things.
Let me give you the smallest example.
I still had somebody in my business life, my book publisher, who was still mailing me a physical check.
Now, I don't know about you, but do you get mad when somebody gives you a physical check?
Well, I get mad.
Every time I get one, or I'm even madder if I have to write one, because I feel like, what is this, the 1600s?
I'm writing on a piece of paper with a feather quill or something to exchange monetary value.
And because of the pandemic, my publisher said, well, we can't do these physical checks anymore, so we'll do direct deposit, just fill out this form.
To which I said, thank you!
Thank you! You just saved one of my problems.
Now, this is the smallest problem in the world.
But multiply it by 7 billion people, you know, changing and correcting all the ways they're doing everything.
And it's like a million things that are small improvements.
Somebody said in the comments, say, handshakes.
Handshakes might go away.
I kind of doubt it.
But they might.
Would that be an improvement?
It could be. Just getting rid of handshakes could lower healthcare costs 5% or something.
I don't know, not 5% probably.
So let's talk about...
So the golden age might be coming.
There might be really good stuff ahead.
And the online stuff, the delivery stuff, it's just going to be incredible.
But we have to get past this bad patch.
Biggest story, maybe today, is the Epstein files being unsealed.
Credit to Mike Cernovich, who made that happen.
So everything you see in the news for the next however long, About these new Epstein files that come out, you should think to yourself, that would not have happened without Mike Cernovich.
And I've got to say this, I mention him almost too much, but he makes such a perfect example of things that I like to talk about that it just has to be mentioned.
And it goes like this.
Those of you who follow Mike Cernovich on Twitter, you know that Most of the time, he's hanging out with his two young daughters, taking care of them, tweeting and stuff.
But he's built a talent stack that includes legal, investigative, social media.
It just keeps growing.
And his power, just watching his ability to influence the entire frickin' planet from his house with his phone, is like the coolest thing.
If you've been watching it the whole time.
So he went from, you know, a guy who was trying to get a mindset book going, and sort of a fringy character, and there was the Pizzagate thing, and people had their opinions about that.
And then Hoaxed came out as probably, I would say, one of the best documentaries I've ever seen.
I'm a little bit biased because I'm in it.
But I do think it was one of the best produced pieces of quality work in the last several years.
But then he got kind of ignored.
Amazon pulled it and didn't get much attention.
But his power just keeps growing.
Every day it's just a little bit more, a little bit more.
And today you put on the news, and the news is basically the news he created.
He actually created the news.
So Epstein is trending.
Cernovich made it happen. And it's just glorious watching it.
But what is interesting about this story are several things.
One of them is how the news is covering it.
I recommended that you all follow a news startup called Ground News.
So ground, like the ground that you stand on, news.
And what they do is they monitor all the left and right and center news sources, and they give you a graph that shows you who's covering what stories.
And you'll see that on a story like this, most of the news entities that are right-leaning have covered it because Bill Clinton is named in the Epstein files.
So the right completely covered it.
And then you see the graph that I tweeted.
You can look at it yourself. The left is just empty.
It's empty. It's a big story that's embarrassing to Bill Clinton and the entire left media bubble ignored it.
It's completely empty.
And when you see it so stark You understand the bubble situation.
There's nobody that I know on the left who will even really be aware of this, maybe.
They just sort of won't even know it exists.
So, what do we make of the new information we have?
Well, there'll be more stuff dripping out, but here are some of the highlights.
Number one, apparently the FBI And I haven't dug into the details, but I'm just reading Twitter summaries of this.
Apparently the FBI was aware of more victims of Epstein and did not interview them all before they made whatever deal they were making with him.
Which indicates that the FBI maybe did not want to prosecute him so much.
Which, no matter what you thought about the FBI before, as in Are they trying to overthrow the United States and get rid of the legally elected president with their Russia collusion hoaxes?
No matter what you thought about them before, this is maybe a little worse.
Because it does look like the FBI. And again, you can't make a definitive claim about anybody at the FBI doing anything specific.
But the way it looks...
Is that the FBI was complicit in allowing a serial pedophile to operate.
Or at least give him an easier way out.
And they got a lot of explaining to do.
That's a lot of explaining.
I don't know where that's going to go.
Keep an eye on that. Now the big shockers are the names of people that one of the One of the young women who was in the Epstein circle there was naming.
So she was naming famous people who had visited the island.
Her names included Bill Clinton, who she says was on the island, which he claims he was never on the island.
So that's a big, big claim, to say that he was on the island.
That would directly contradict everything he's ever said, if true.
And it said that there were two young women there also, as well as Ghislaine and Epstein.
Now, there's no reporting on any of those two young girls or women.
I don't know how old they were. There's no reporting that they had specific any kind of contact with any of those other people, just that they were there at the same time.
That's the report. The report also says that Tipper and Al Gore were on the island.
And here's the funniest one.
Matt Groening, the creator of The Simpsons.
Now, here's what you need to know.
Dershowitz, who also has been dragged into these allegations at various times, is tweeting today that he wants to make sure that even more stuff is unredacted.
Because his claim is this.
That the woman or girl who is making the claims about who was on the island, the famous people, that she has already been proven to be a liar.
And I believe that one of the examples is That there's some proof that Al and Tipra Gore were never on the island.
Now that's a very specific claim she's made, that Al Gore and his wife were on the island.
I believe, and I need a fact check on this, but I believe that Dershowitz's claim is that that can be definitively ruled out as untrue.
Now if that's true, that it's untrue, That also means that anything else this witness says about who was on the island has no credibility at all.
If you can take somebody as important as Al Gore, claim they were on the island, and then prove it didn't happen, it kind of makes all the rest of them go away, or at least in a legal sense it would, if not a common sense way.
So, Dershowitz, he looks pretty confident that And I think there are other documents that have already proven that the Gores were not there.
So he's pretty confident that if it's fully disclosed, you're going to find out that that wasn't true.
Now, if it's not true that the Gores were on the island, would you believe that Bill Clinton was on the island?
You shouldn't.
Now, let me give a full disclosure.
I've never liked Hillary Clinton, and I didn't think she would be good for the country.
But I've always kind of liked Bill Clinton.
And while I will never excuse anything he's done in his, let's say, semi-private life, I also don't tend to judge my leaders by that standard, because I see them as employees.
And if my employee gets my job done, His personal problems are between him and the legal system and anybody else.
I just don't like to make everybody's problems all of my problems.
If you can get the economy up and things are going.
So I applied the same standard to Bill Clinton when he was being impeached that I did with Trump.
Which is, I'm not supporting any of that.
Whatever you're saying he did, that's between you and him and your conscience and the law.
I'm just out. That's just not my deal.
So I'm not anti-Bill Clinton.
So that's just full disclosure so you know where I'm coming from.
I would say that the odds are that there is not a credible information that Bill Clinton was on the island.
Because the only person claiming it Appears to have no credibility at all, based on the Al Gore thing being wrong, if it's wrong.
Now, her other claim is that Matt Groening, the creator of The Simpsons, was on the island.
Now, if Al Gore was not on the island, there's a pretty good chance that the Matt Groening part is completely made up, too.
We don't know yet. We'll wait and find out.
Could be. Never know.
I was imagining Matt Groening's day.
Imagine if it were true, and I think it's sketchy to think that this is true, but imagine if Matt Groening knew all along that he had been to the island and he was just waiting for somebody to find out.
Oh my god.
Oh, let me give a clarification.
There is confirmation that Bill Clinton was on Epstein's plane.
So that part nobody's arguing about.
So the flights are definite.
The only question was, was he ever physically on the island, which he claims specifically he never was, and I think he claims he was never at any of the Epstein properties.
Just to clarify, thank you.
But I was imagining Matt Groening waking up this morning.
It's like, oh, get my coffee.
Let's see how today is.
Looks kind of sunny out today.
Good day. Coffee's good.
I'll check the news. Uh-oh.
That's how Matt Groening's day probably went today.
So, I don't know Matt Groening personally.
He did send me once a nice note when the Dilbert TV show was on.
He sent my producer a nice note, complimenting it.
And so I have a good feeling about Matt Groening, and I hope that none of this is true.
And I hope he does well.
But it's hard not to imagine that scene of him waking up to the news.
Like, well, what's going on?
I've been allegedly on Epstein's island.
Row! Okay.
So lots more on that.
Congratulations, Mike Cernovich, for all of that.
Are you seeing more and more pushback to the teachers' unions, or is that my imagination?
I don't think it's my imagination.
So, I've declared war on the teachers' unions, and here's the logic to it.
The most important thing in the country is national defense.
Would you agree? I mean, assuming that we can eat, national defense is probably number one.
Because you've got to get that right before you can get anything else right.
Now, national defense is somewhat interchangeable With economics, meaning that if you have enough money, you don't even need an army if you have enough money.
You can bribe people, you can make deals with them, you can make them happier to do business with you than to conquer you.
So money and economics and the military are kind of substitutes.
And you need lots of money to have a really strong military.
So if you say, well, we'll concentrate on the military but not the economy, well, you're doing it wrong.
Because that's not a thing.
You have to have a strong economy.
They're connected.
The other thing that's connected is our education system.
There's no such thing as a strong economy With a weak education system.
That's not a thing. It can't be a thing.
So if you don't have your education system right, you don't have your economy right, and then you can't have national security right.
So I would argue that we should strongly consider using some kind of national security executive order or national security imperative to overrule some powers that the teachers' unions have, because apparently They're one of the biggest obstacles to really everything.
Because at the moment they're the biggest obstacle to reopening the schools, which is a challenge to the economy, which is a challenge to national security.
Our entire standing in the world is now at risk to some radicals and teachers unions who are demanding things like defunding the police Before they go back to teach?
This is crazy stuff.
But beyond that, it's much, much deeper.
Because the teachers' unions are the force that keep schools from having as much competition as they could from firing bad teachers to get better ones in there.
Really, all forms of change are limited by the teachers' unions.
And that is a critical problem for the country.
The teachers' unions are an extinction system.
Risk to the United States.
It's that bad.
That's not hyperbole. The teachers' unions are an extinction risk to the Republic.
The physical land will still be here, but the Republic can't stand as long as the teachers' unions remain in their current form.
It just can't happen. And so we have to start being smarter and tougher About what we think about protecting the country.
If you want to protect the country, you're going to have to defeat the teachers' unions.
And you're going to need to do it quickly.
I think it needs to happen before the end of the year.
So before the end of the year, if we haven't dismantled the teachers' unions, we're not getting off to a good start.
And China's going to have a big advantage there.
So... I'd like to see some kind of executive order to, I don't know exactly what it would take, either to limit their power.
There's at least one movement that I don't know too much about, but I'm going to look into it.
There's some legal precedence that would allow union members to stop paying dues, but to still be in the union.
Have you heard of that? So apparently that's a thing, but I don't know the details yet.
There are some teachers' unions in which the teachers themselves are organizing to discontinue paying dues but still remain in the union.
Because if you take the money out of the union, then the union leaders don't really have a reason to be there.
They don't have a reason to do whatever they're doing.
If you strip the money out of them, it's going to reduce their power.
So that effort is ongoing.
You'll see grassroots movements To defund the teachers' unions, but I think we need something from the top.
Because, to me, this is a commander-in-chief decision.
Literally a commander-in-chief decision.
There are two areas where I think the commander-in-chief decision has to be central.
One is this, because if you're looking at national defense, you can't look at it as a one to five-year situation.
If you're looking at national defense, you have to look at it as a hundred-year plan.
Right? I mean, if you don't have a 100-year plan for your country, you're not doing it right.
You should be looking at all the things you need to get going to be as safe as possible in the future.
So the school system has got to be number one.
Right? Maybe not.
Actually, the other one might be number one.
The second one is nuclear energy.
And the argument is not just about powering current stuff on Earth.
The argument is that nuclear power is what will What will power space exploration, space ships, space colonies?
Whoever owns space will own the Earth.
So if we're not building a robust, best-in-class nuclear energy industry in this country to handle all of the nuclear energy issues, both domestic, military, and space, which is also military in part, If we're not doing all of that, and we're not the number one country in that, whoever is will own space.
And whoever owns space owns it all.
Because the high ground is going to be incredibly important for any military.
And also resources.
Because apparently the rare resources from asteroids, etc.
are just insanely valuable.
So Commander-in-chief needs to work against school unions and education in general, just to make that as powerful as possible.
I think the entire education system needs to be rethought from the ground up to make it something that works in the modern world.
Because I don't think anybody would disagree that the things that are taught in school are not the things that a modern student needs to learn.
Some are, but a lot of it is...
You would probably change 40%.
of what the kids learn to get to where it needs to be for the modern world.
Alright, so that's it.
Teachers unions gotta go.
There's a decision in this Michael Brown death from six years ago in Ferguson, and the officer Darren Wilson will not be prosecuted because the more they looked into it, and I guess they've been looking into it for a long time, and I think it's worth noting that the prosecutor who is dropping the case is black, because that's the world we live in where you have to mention that, because that's part of the story.
And they can't find evidence sufficient that would say that this was a crime as opposed to a tragic incident.
Now, if you don't know this already, the same thing is going to happen with George Floyd.
So the longer that case goes, the better we are as a country.
The George Floyd thing, if we could stretch that out four or five years, that would help a lot.
Because if tomorrow we find that the police were arrested in his death, if we find out tomorrow that that case gets dropped, Oh my God, the whole country is going to burn.
And I think it will.
So we're in this weird situation where these police officers who, I'm not going to say they did the best job they could do, because I don't know.
I just don't have the skills to evaluate it, and I don't think I have enough information about really what was happening on the ground.
But if it's true, as I've heard in one One report that George Floyd had in him three times the amount of fatal fentanyl that you would basically three times more than an overdose amount.
The claim, not confirmed, but the claim is that George Floyd was a dead man walking before the police even touched him.
In other words, there was nothing they could have done to save his life and nothing they did That changed whether he lived or died.
Because he was a dead man, and he was going to die in the next few minutes from the fentanyl in his body.
I'm a bit of an expert on this.
My stepson died the same way.
And if that's true, he had some other stuff in there too, but if that's true, I just can't see any scenario in which the police officers are charged with the worst of the crimes.
They might be charged with, I don't know, You know, not doing enough to save them or something.
But I don't think there's any chance that they're going to be charged with killing them.
So you should get ready for that.
Sorry. Might be a little more blood coming out of my nose for a day or two.
Molly Hemingway had this comment about the Washington Post on Twitter.
She said that, fascinating that the Washington Post Fretts that the truth coming out about the Russia collusion hoax against Trump would impact an election.
When, as she points out, the Russia collusion hoax that the Washington Post perpetuated dramatically helped Democrats in the 2018 midterm election.
Now, I don't know if you can directly say that one issue caused the 2018 midterm result, but it was a big one.
It was maybe the biggest one.
So it's just funny that the Washington Post, having completely been involved in basically a coup against the United States, in effect, having completely been involved in basically a coup against the United States, in effect, because their reporting supported a hoax that was a coup
in my opinion, And now they're complaining that the truth coming out about the hoax, if it comes out before the election, might affect the election.
And I'm thinking to myself, I think I'd want it to affect the election.
Isn't that the whole point?
The whole point of knowledge and information and data and finding out what's real and what isn't, isn't the whole point of that to affect the election?
I mean, even if that's not the intention, you hope that it does.
Alright. That is, I think, what I wanted to talk about today.
Knowledge is power. You were right.
Alright. Somebody else is reporting that hydroxychloroquine is effective.
Well, we shall find out.
I was watching that one of the doctors, the front-line doctors, the woman who was not the Nigerian doctor, She got fired for appearing and talking about hydroxychloroquine.
So, that's not good.
But I did listen to her arguments, and I've got to say, I'm still 50-50.
I'm still 50% on whether hydroxychloroquine is a game-changer or not.
I'm seeing another tweet that Kanye is dropping some good tweets, so I'll go change that.
Yes, Simone Gold.
Dr. Simone Gold is her name.
Alright. Please stream on YouTube too, somebody says.
Well, I post on YouTube an hour later.
So you can see it there an hour later.
But YouTube demonetizes me.
So I'm not pro-YouTube.
So YouTube monetizes two different ways.
One is subscription people.
People pay a subscription to not see ads.
So I'll get a small percentage of that based on how many people watch the views.
But they usually demonetize me for advertising, which would be tempting to blame YouTube for that, but their business model is that advertisers themselves specify who they want to be associated with.
And if they don't want to be associated with a certain kind of content, It's really not up to YouTube.
They kind of have to serve their customer.
I'm not going to comment on Herman Cain or John Lewis.
In part because I didn't know much about either one of them.
And I have nothing bad or good to say of any value.
So it's something that happened.
It's just not my beat.
Somebody says, get on Locals.
I am on Locals.
I think you may be talking to the person who asked the question, though.
So my content also goes on the Locals platform, subscription service.
Any of you who want to support what I do and see more of it, that would be the place to go.
And so Locals is what allows me to say the things in public that you wish you could say, but you can't.
So this is the way to look at it.
The reason that I'm on these free public services, so you can get this content for free, but I'm also on a subscription service.
Who would pay for things they could get for free?
Well, for one thing, I have maybe twice as much content on Locals.
You don't get to see half of it.
So if it's more provocative, I'll keep it there.
Some things are a little more personal in some cases, but Basically, it's everything you see publicly plus some good stuff.
But the real reason that anybody should be a subscriber to that is because that allows me to say in the non-subscription services anything I want that is reasonable and not trying to be harmful.
So my freedom of speech is entirely dependent on On the fact that I have a safe space to go to, locals, that if I get completely cancelled off the main platforms, I'm still going to be okay.
I've got a little bit of a fallback there.
So that gives me the freedom to push it as far to the line of cancellation as I can.
Always trying to be good intentions.
Always trying to be good intentions.
If you're new to me, let me tell you that the part of my life where I was just selfish and trying to get what was good for me...
And I think every young person should think that way.
They should be building their own wealth and family and taking care of their personal business.
But when you reach a certain age, and if you've had some good luck in life, there's sort of a natural...
Transformation to being more outwardly focused.
After I got divorced from my first wife, I felt myself sort of disconnected from my personal life, really.
And I made a promise.
So this was years ago.
And I promised that from that day on, that I belonged to the world.
So when you're married, you belong to your Your little family situation.
Now, Christina is an extraordinary woman, and being married to her is wonderful, first of all.
So if you didn't know, I just got married.
And so with her, I can maintain a full marriage, but also be externally focused, because she came to me when I already was.
So she knows exactly who I am.
So she's not trying to change me.
When she met me, I was already completely externally focused.
So my mission from now until my organic body leaves this earth, and maybe after, who knows, is to make the world better, specifically the United States.
And I think that helps the world.
And I'm involved in a whole bunch of different ways to do that.
I look for areas in which my special blend of skills can make a difference.
But I don't have any bad intentions.
If I tell you I want to decouple from China, it's not because I hate China, even though I do.
It's because it's good for us, and it's going to be good for the world in the long term.
So, if you're wondering what I mean, what's my secret intention, what's my game, what's my scam, what's my grift, it's all the same.
