Episode 1736 Scott Adams: All The Disinformation, Including The Disinformation Board
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
My personal Disinformation Board
Tesla self-driving car safety
3D printed manufacturing, big trouble for China
Diversion narratives
Hunter Biden's art sales, not suspicious?
Nina Jankowicz's disinformation
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Good morning, everybody. Wow, don't you look good today?
Did you do something like work out or start eating right?
Amazing! Well, I do talk to a lot of people who tell me their life has been benefited by this live stream.
I hope you're one of them.
And if you'd like to take it up a notch, and wouldn't you?
Wouldn't you? Yeah, you would.
All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass or a tank or a chalice or a canteen or a glass or a vessel of any kind.
Wow. I'm seeing messages of people losing a lot of weight.
Good for you. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.
It's the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
Everything. And it's called the simultaneous sip, and have a snap.
Go. Ah.
That is so good.
Well, I've added some members to my Personal disinformation board.
I told you yesterday that I've created my own disinformation board.
These are the people you should look to to find out what's true and what isn't.
Now, importantly, in order to be a member of my disinformation board, you don't have to apply, and you can't turn it down.
Because you're on the board if I say you're on the board, and that's the end of the story.
So the people I put on the board are not the people I agree with, That's not the point.
So you're going to see some people on this that you'll say, what?
Why is that person on the disinformation board when I don't agree with anything they ever say?
And the answer is this.
There are people who can violate the narrative and have a track record of doing it.
So I'm going to give you my list of people who are already on there, and I'll tell you how I added today, based on user comments and just thinking about it more.
So Glenn Greenwald, Jeff Pilkington, Bill Maher, Andres Shrugged, Anatoly Lubarsky, Mike Sernovich, Matt Taibbi, Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Omar.
We'll talk about that one.
Alan Dershowitz, Michael Schellenberger, And the ones I added today were Ian Bremmer, Brett Weinstein, Eric Weinstein, Dave Rubin, and Dr.
Drew. Dr.
Drew, I meant to have on the original list.
I just forgot a name.
So, correcting the list as we go.
And I think this is a pretty strong list.
Because everybody on this list has a very clear background of violating their own narrative, meaning the narrative on their team.
So let's talk about Ilhan Omar.
Glenn Greenwald is the first one that pointed this out to me.
I wasn't aware of this. But on several notable occasions, she's gone against the Democrat narrative.
I think free speech was one of them.
And while there are plenty of things she's going to say that I don't agree with, She's one of the people you want to look to because any time somebody violates the narrative, that's more useful.
Did I not add Jonathan Turley?
What the hell is wrong with me?
I've had his name here to add about five times.
Yeah, Jonathan Turley. I'll add him for the next time.
Thank you. Great suggestion.
So remember, this is not about agreeing with them.
It's only people who can violate the narrative and have demonstrated quality thinking.
That's it. So I'm not saying that these will tell you the truth.
You get that, right?
So the purpose of the disinformation board, my personal one, is not that they're always right and they're not fact-checkers.
They're like a red flag if there's some bullshit happening.
If there's not a single person on this list who questions a story in the news, a specific story, it's probably true.
If you see three or four people on this list, and that's not many out of the whole list, if three or four people on the list say, uh, no, you're forgetting this, or you're leaving out this, or you got it wrong, I would take that really seriously.
Because this is the list of people who, if they tell you a fact is wrong, I'm going to listen to that.
Now, the people who are silent on it, Might just not have enough information about it.
So I wouldn't look at the percentage of people.
I'd just see who is saying it's fake and are they violating the narrative.
All right. I'm loving the fact that there seems to be some kind of organic movement to improve the fake news situation.
So I'm doing it.
Right now. So this disinformation board for myself, I'm really just trying something.
I'm just throwing out an idea.
It didn't cost anything.
Just some tweets. If it helps you because you start following these people and it makes you better informed, then that's great.
It's just a small little thing that I can do for my position.
And I feel like lots of people are trying to do the same thing.
There's a whole bunch of people who are thinking, well, what could I do?
What do I do? Let me answer this question I'm seeing on the Locals platform.
Somebody's asking why I didn't add Naval Ravikant to my list.
He would be the most quality thinker, maybe that I know, period.
But he also doesn't get into politics.
So he's very consistent about staying out of politics.
You know, he'll talk about free speech, but that's barely political.
So I wanted people who actually deal with the stuff that is the subject of fake news most often.
All right. So lots of people doing stuff.
Let me give you some more examples.
Bill Maher, of course.
I would like to wake up someday on a Saturday...
And see that Bill Maher is not trending, which has nothing to do with Bill Maher.
It's just that the reason he trends is that he's calling out bullshit on his own team.
And until he runs out of material to insult his own team...
And by the way, he insults both teams, so he's not firing only at his own team.
And that's why he's on my list, because he goes after both sides.
But you see that Bill Maher essentially...
Using his position to try to make things better.
And I would say he is.
To me, it looks like he's succeeding wildly and in a way that I think is really impressive, actually.
Because he's staying on it.
He's got the audience. He's got the access.
And he can tell them that their narrative is a little messed up.
It's probably the best example of what we're seeing.
Now, a number of people are saying, what can we do about this fake news and disinformation?
And... There is a book you can read that teaches you how to be more immune from disinformation.
It turns out I wrote it.
It's called Loser Think.
I think it's behind me.
Yeah, it's behind me. It's that one in the middle.
Now, Loser Think is written specifically for this problem.
And it turns out that the situation or the times caught up to me.
I mean, obviously fake news has been a problem for a number of years, but it's reached some kind of a peak now that the book is out.
Somebody says, nice shill.
Look, asshole, it's not a shill when you're talking about your own book.
It happens to be exactly aimed at the biggest problem in the world.
So there's always some troll who will find the worst way to spin everything.
Nice shill. Let me tell you some more about the book.
I've already been paid.
I got an advance.
Most of my books don't sell past the advance, which means you're asking for the right advance.
I'm not even going to make money from this.
I won't make a fucking penny if you buy my book.
Do you understand that, Shil?
Do you understand that?
My personal income won't change a bit if you buy that book, because I'm already paid.
And I don't even have any requirement to market it at this point.
I mean, in the beginning you do.
But not at this point.
Literally the only reason I'm recommending it is this is exactly the book that's written for exactly this problem.
So try to deal with that, okay?
All right.
So I tweeted that out.
If anybody hasn't read LoserThink, It is exactly on target for our current situation.
Well, I told you that after publishing my comic in which I introduced the new character, Dave, who is a black engineer in the Dilbert group, got a lot of newspapers who wouldn't run that.
Their reasoning was, who knows?
I think some of them just didn't think it was worth the provocation or something.
So I'm not sure that there's anybody who pushed back on it.
I haven't heard anybody...
Yeah, let me say this definitively.
Although a number of newspapers decided not to run that series, so they just put repeats in there or left a blank, nobody complained.
Let me say that again. So I have many client newspapers who run Dilbert.
Thousands of them. Thousands.
A few thousand. Not a single one of them said this is offensive.
Not one. But a number of them didn't run it.
Do you know why? It wasn't worth the hassle.
That's it. It just wasn't worth the hassle.
Or something. I think in some cases, different entities within the newspaper made the decision.
So it's not even clear that the decision is some kind of coordinated decision.
I think just somebody said, eh, we don't need this trouble.
Something like that. Now, immediately after that, I've got a Sunday comic that my editor called me and said, you know, maybe you'd want to wait a week or so for this one.
Now, my own editor is very unlikely to edit me for content.
I don't know the last time that happened, actually, if ever.
I think it's maybe never happened that I can think of.
So I've been edited for lots of other reasons, but not for being too provocative.
So, let me give a shout-out to, you know, Andrews MacNeil and Universal Press, part of the same company, for being very pro-speech, very pro-creator, very pro-free speech, and have always been on the side of the creator completely, unambiguously on the side of the creators.
Now, having said that, they're also a business.
And so when my editor said, you know, this Sunday that you submitted, I feel like we need to wait at least a week.
Because things are a little too hot.
And really that's just managing the clients, which is not really censorship.
Because it'll run. It'll just run a week later when some of the energy is siphoned off.
So wait for that one.
It's so hot that it couldn't be published immediately.
Now, of course, I do it partly for attention.
That's how my business model works, right?
But if you're a creator, you have to do some things sometimes that are just about attracting attention.
It's part of the model. Everybody understands that, right?
The reason I put Ilan Omar on my list of disinformation board is partly because I think she believes there, belongs there, but partly because I knew it would make your hair catch on fire.
So let me be fully transparent.
I am in the kind of business where sometimes, quite overtly, and I hope it's transparent, I do things just to get attention.
You get that, right? I think everybody's okay with that, aren't you?
As long as I'm doing it completely in front of you.
Trump does the same thing.
When Trump does something to get attention, You understand it as technique and part of the process.
All right. So I asked a question yesterday about...
I just asked the Twitter public if I were to sell Dilbert as an intellectual property without my involvement.
So if I were to walk away and just say, okay, you can have the...
The artwork and the idea, you can create new content, you can make movies and TVs, you can make calendars, you can put words in their mouth, you can redraw them.
You can do anything you want. I just sell the IP. And I asked the public, what did they think someone would pay for it?
Now, the reason I did that is not because I don't know how to put a deal together.
This is the amazing thing about Twitter.
Just hold this in your head for a second that this happened yesterday.
I just think...
I'm taking a walk, and I think, oh, wouldn't it be interesting to know what the wisdom of the crowd was, sort of the average opinion?
Because the average opinion of the crowd, in a weird, magical way, will be very similar to what an expert would say it's worth.
Do you know why? Because what something is worth is what somebody is willing to pay for it.
That's it. If somebody pays it, I guess that's what it was worth to at least one person.
So if you ask a bunch of people who don't know anything about the topic and then you average their answers, you end up being just about where an expert is.
And it's not a coincidence.
It's because the expert is sort of imagining what anybody else would think in the same situation.
Sort of a common way of thinking of a thing.
And if the public thinks of a thing a certain way, there's a really good chance that an expert will think of it that way too, if the average of the public.
So it's just one of these weird connections you don't think should make sense.
You think the expert should be completely different from the average of people who don't know anything.
But it's just a weird experiment.
You find out that they're very similar.
And the reason is because we all have a psychologically common base for understanding what things are worth, essentially.
So I ask that question partly to put the idea in the public that it's for sale in case anybody thought of buying it.
But the interesting part about it is That I get a response from an investment banker, successful investment banker, Carol Roth, who offered to give me some deal composition concepts.
Now, where else in the world do you just ask a question while you're taking a walk and one of the most qualified people there could be, somebody who literally was an investment banker successfully and retired from that, And you get immediate, useful advice.
At the same time, this was kind of blowing my mind a little bit, one of the people who responded to my question was Thomas Massey.
So he's an MIT graduate, congressperson.
So I'm getting advice from a sitting member of Congress with an MIT education.
If you don't know what that means, you don't get into MIT if you're an average student, if you know what I mean.
They don't take average students.
How amazing is Twitter that not only is it going to be, I think, our biggest bulwark against fake news eventually, but that you can just ask a question like that and get such qualified responses?
It's just ridiculous. It's ridiculous.
Likewise, have you noticed how many times Elon Musk has responded to average Twitter users in the last few weeks?
It's mind-blowing every time I see it.
Because a lot of the people he's responding to are people I know, either from Twitter or real life, or both.
And to see how often he responds to a valid question that catches his interest, it just makes the world seem so small.
But also, it makes the world look like it's working.
That the person who has the best information on stuff can answer the question.
I'll give you an example. There was somebody on Twitter talking about, he was testing, I guess, Tesla's current version of their self-driving car software, and said something like, I guess it was a study that says it was eight times safer than human driving.
Eight times safer than human driving.
And Elon Musk saw that, and he tweets, this trend will be well over ten times safer with the update that they're working on right now, the software update.
So think about that.
The self-driving cars already...
I don't know if you can really measure this, because there's no way to know what self-driving cars would do as scale.
That's got to be different than onesies and twosies.
But there is a study, if you want to believe studies...
It says that it's eight times safer than human-driven cars in terms of accidents.
Now, why did Elon Musk feel he needed to weigh in on that point and to modify it from it will be eight times as successful to ten times?
Because that's not much of a difference, is it?
If somebody told you something was eight times safer than the alternative, you wouldn't say, whoa, I'm not going near that until it's ten times safer, would you?
Literally, in terms of your decision-making, there is no difference between eight times safer and ten times safer.
Two times safer would be enough.
That's all you needed. Your decision would be a no-brainer at two times better.
But eight times better, there's no conversation.
At ten times better, you wonder why you even had to update it.
Well, why do we even care?
It's eight times better. Well, here's why.
Have I mentioned that Elon Musk understands persuasion better than just about anybody?
I mean, he gets it right all the time.
All the time, he gets it right.
Here's another example.
Ten times is way better than eight times.
Not because it's numerically better.
I mean, it is. That's a pretty big difference.
That would be 25% bigger, right?
So that's a big difference.
But that's not the important part.
The important part is our brains are tuned to big round numbers.
No reason. It's just what we've been listening to, we're used to it.
And so ten times is...
that's the number you can sell.
Right? Eight times better is technical data.
Ten times better and you can make the sale.
And the sale is we need to change the laws so self-driving cars are here because they're ten times safer.
I mean, just think of that. Ten times safer, that's a marketing number.
And there's a reason that Tesla doesn't have a marketing department and that Elon Musk literally runs the marketing for Tesla while he's tweeting on the toilet.
I mean, not every time, but enough of the times that it's impressive.
And here it is again.
Simply by emphasizing the ten times versus the eight times, he's done what his marketing department couldn't have done for him.
And it comes from him, so it gets more attention.
So basically, he is very competently replacing marketing with just tweeting.
And he actually is doing that.
It just doesn't seem like it's possible, but he's doing it right in front of you.
All right. Speaking of technology...
There is an amazing, amazing story that I believe no one else has discussed, and so I will discuss it now.
Because we're right in the middle of a story that is going to have an interesting end point.
But when you're in the middle of a story, sometimes you don't know you're in the story.
And here's the story. I take you back in the way-back machine to when the United States said, you know, if we started manufacturing things in China, it would be a lot cheaper.
Not only would it be a lot cheaper, but we can move the stuff over there that's dangerous.
The EPA would not let us do it in the United States.
Like, you know, there's going to be some industrial waste, but we can't do that here.
But how about China?
We've got lower standards.
So I believe that some of the manufacturing...
You know, move to China was because we couldn't do it here.
Some of it was because it was cheaper, and I think the cheaper part became the important part over time.
Then, what happened next?
Well, the United States suffered, did they not, by the lack of manufacturing jobs.
And we did the best we could to adjust.
People took service jobs that aren't as good.
You know, that's a problem.
But at the moment, we're at 3.6 unemployment.
We're fully employed.
3.6 is what economists would call ish, you know, in that range.
Economists would call that full employment.
Because you wouldn't want it any better.
If it were better, it would be worse.
Because that would mean you couldn't hire anybody unless you took them from another job.
That would be the worst case scenario.
You can't hire anybody unless you ruin another company by taking an employee that's necessary.
You don't want that.
You need a little bit of slop.
3.6% unemployment is just enough people who are floating around that you could hire somebody who doesn't already have a job sometimes.
And that seems to be pretty important to keep everything moving.
Here we are. We gave up all of our manufacturing and yet, still the biggest economy.
Here's the interesting part.
What happens next?
Because you saw that Biden is pushing 3D printing.
3D printing of products, especially metal products, they could make a rotor for a helicopter with a 3D printer.
Slap it on the helicopter and it flies.
Now, what would be the cost of building a factory to make...
There can't be many helicopter rotors.
You're not making millions of them.
You might make hundreds of them.
And you don't have any shipping.
You don't have any foreign language stuff or taxes or all the difficulty of dealing with another culture or nation.
You just turn on the printer, feed it the software, and it builds you a helicopter rotor.
We are at the precipice...
Of destroying China, because we turned them into a manufacturing company with manual labor, and then we're going to obsolete it.
But not until we'd already had an alternative.
Our employment is on track, so we can replace the entire supply chain concept with 3D printing, robots, and AI. Those three technologies, AI, 3D printing, and robots, Completely will take manufacturing out of the mix.
China is in big trouble because one of the things I was thinking about yesterday is every time there's something that the United States is especially good at, let's say air power, developing aircraft and owning the sky, something the United States is uniquely amazing at, they tend to be the most important things.
Have you noticed that?
Like, owning aviation, well, that's like the most important thing.
How about space? We seem to be, you know, thanks to SpaceX and other things, we seem to be leading in space.
That's going to be really, really important.
Military? Really, really important, and we lead in that.
So, the United States seems to be really good at leading at technologies and things that matter a lot.
China looks like it's going to be really good at controlling their population and, I don't know, manufacturing, which will be obsolete.
The size of China's problem is immense.
It's immense. I don't know how they get past it.
Meanwhile, we've got problems with baby formula and fertilizer and water shortages in the West and all kinds of food-related things.
How worried am I about all of those things?
Pretty worried. Pretty worried.
But they all fall into an interesting category.
Of things that humans are good at working out if they have to.
They're all in that category.
Are you as surprised as I am that we still have food?
Because I don't know how that happened.
How did we go through the pandemic and we still fed ourselves?
Like, I don't know how.
How did things just sort of kind of work?
Now, the baby formula looks like it could be a serious problem.
But I'll bet we'll just, you know, we'll nurse more, and we'll find substitutes, and there'll be do-it-yourself formulas for making your own formula at home, and there'll be, you know, some industries that pop up, and somebody else will make it.
So as long as we have time, we can solve all of this stuff.
I feel as if we'll be okay.
I feel as if we'll be okay.
It does make sense to worry about it, and if I were you, I would...
Make sure I had enough food and toilet paper to get through three months.
Something like that. I saw a photo of all the ships that are docked off of China's coast.
And it's just like a solid color of dots.
And it looks like the whole system is falling apart, if you look at that picture.
But what the picture is lacking is how many days would it take...
For all of that, all those ships to be served.
If it's a four-day delay, I'll just pick a random number, it's not really a problem.
You can wait four days for anything, basically.
But if it's a year, I don't know what happens.
All the stuff goes bad on the ship.
I don't know. It seems like pretty bad.
And it does seem like we must be working on fixing even the...
The port situation and the supply chain problem.
There must be tons of people putting lots of energy into that.
But let me go back to the 3D printing leapfrog technology.
Here's a little business Tip that everybody experienced in business understands, but those of you who are not experienced in business might be hearing this like a novel concept for the first time.
If you make a product and it's a big hit, you're a private company, and everybody loves your product and they're buying it like crazy.
Let's say it's technology, because that's a better example.
It's a technology product, doesn't matter what it is.
What's the first thing you should do if you have a really successful product and people love it?
The first thing you should do if you were that company is you should try to put yourself out of business as fast as possible.
And by that I mean making a new product that's so good nobody would ever buy that old product again.
It wouldn't make sense.
Because you have to do that or else somebody else is going to build that product.
You have to cannibalize your own product...
In order to move ahead.
And everybody who's experienced...
Yeah, Apple's a perfect example.
Everybody who's experienced in business knows this to be true.
You have to cannibalize your own product so somebody else doesn't do it for you.
It's the only way you can stay ahead.
Yeah, Amazon does that.
Basically, everybody successful does that.
Now, look at this situation where we moved our manufacturing to China.
That looked exactly like this.
I don't know that it was planned in any way, but it's going to work out that way.
It's going to work out that we cannibalized our own manufacturing in this country and that that was important for us to get to the new kind of manufacturing, 3D printing, robots, AI. And we're going to be experts at those three things and more while other countries are trying to figure out what do you do when all these manufacturing jobs go away.
So we did the play of the century.
With bringing manufacturing to China and then becoming the experts at obsoleting that technology?
We won everything.
We won everything.
We just don't know it yet.
We won everything.
This is as hard as you could win.
We obsoleted our own industry after we gave it to China and made them dependent on it.
You can't win harder than that, honestly.
That's as hard as you can win.
Now, we'll say it depends on us actually being able to do this 3D printing and changing the supply chain, but I think that's within our ability.
One of the things I learned yesterday is that our 3D printing capability is way beyond what the public understands.
We keep seeing things like, oh, there's this 3D-printed house, but it's just this big machine that puts down concrete on the walls.
And it's kind of cool the first time you see it.
You go, oh, okay.
It's an automatic concrete machine, but you're calling it a 3D printer.
Okay. But I'm not really that impressed by an automatic concrete machine.
Do you know what impresses me?
Let me say it again.
They 3D-printed a helicopter rotor Are we done here?
They 3D printed a helicopter rotor, metal, and slapped it on and it works.
Wait, I'm not done.
It didn't just work.
It was lighter, better, and faster and cheaper.
Lighter, better, faster, cheaper.
That's what kills China.
Because China can make stuff that's maybe just as good as 3D printing.
No, they can't.
They can't make stuff as good as 3D printing.
The regular manufacturing process would not be close to being able to get the specific engineering.
And I guess I learned this yesterday.
This is what's different about 3D printing, is that the software has improved.
Not just the hardware to print anything you want, But the software now knows how to print it.
That's the big change. So, for example, it would know that a component is going to have pressure on one end of it.
Let's say there's going to be more, you know, physical physics pressure on one end of it.
You can just put that into the machine.
Say, okay, this side will have more pressure.
And it will just build it to be more solid on one side.
That's just one example.
Yeah, stronger because you could do a lattice situation with less material.
Now, I think that's the correct answer.
I'm being told that it would be all these things, and I was just sort of filling in from common sense, which might be wrong.
Let's say if you're doing an ordinary metal anything, it would probably just be a solid metal piece, right?
Because that's just the easiest thing to do.
You put it in a mold, you take it out, it's just solid metal.
But if you were 3D printing it at really fine detail, couldn't you do the walls of your device, let's say a metal device, couldn't you do it with a little lattice work, a little tiny lattice work, that would use 10% of the material while being stronger?
Are there enough engineers here?
I'm seeing yeses and true.
I think I see people agreeing with me.
You can make it lighter, stronger, cheaper, right?
You can do all of it, I believe.
I believe you can do all of that.
All right. That's why it's a big deal.
What is happening in California?
I saw this Michael Schellenberger tweet...
And boy, would I hate to be running for governor against Michael Schellenberger.
So he's running as an independent in California.
But what, as I've told you many times, what he does differently than anybody else, a politician, is he's written books and done deep research on the exact problems That affect a lot of people, but California especially.
Everything from the addiction and homelessness to energy to water, like all those things he became an expert on.
So who wants to run against that?
I mean, that's the strongest candidate I've ever seen.
Let me say it again. Schellenberger is the strongest political candidate I've ever seen.
Now, will he get enough attention as an independent in California?
That's a tough road.
But I'll tell you, there's nobody ever did it better so far.
It's just ridiculous how good it is.
And one of the things he pointed out is that my state, California, is being ravaged by drought.
And Schellenberger says that California, under Governor Newsom, has failed to build a single water storage, water recycling, or desalinization project.
And I thought, what?
What? It's literally the biggest problem in the state, that we're going to run out of water.
Are you telling me that in his entire term, he hasn't done a single thing that would be useful?
Now, I realize it takes years to build these things, but at least we should be looking at something that started.
We should be talking about the dam that's almost done or nothing.
And I thought, well, what about the other stuff?
Well, at least he's working on the homeless and the drug problem, except he's doing all the wrong things.
He's giving them homes and drugs.
That's exactly the wrong thing you want to do.
You want to take them and, unfortunately, force them into some kind of treatment.
Because it's a medical problem, it's not a housing problem.
That's what Schellenberger teaches us.
And it does look to me that on all the big problems, Newsom has either done nothing or what he did was literally the opposite of what one should do, according to anybody who knows anything about the topics.
Yeah, they've had plenty of time to do this stuff.
That is correct. Let's talk about the disinformation board that Biden has...
There was something that was bothering me about the person that they chose for the head of it, whose name I can't remember.
So there's a woman who was chosen to be the head of the disinformation board, and we're seeing a bunch of her videos and stuff, and I was trying to figure out what is the word...
That is capturing how I'm feeling about it.
And it wasn't until I saw a Glenn Greenwald tweet, it said, did they intentionally pick the most ridiculous person for the job?
Is it just a troll?
And I thought, there it is.
That was the word.
Ridiculous. Ridiculous was the word.
And that it's so ridiculous, it doesn't look serious.
To that point, I saw a tweet from Dean Skorako, I believe he's in Canada, and he says, I don't really follow American politics.
When I first saw this, meaning the video of that head of the disinformation board, when I first saw this, I thought it was an online prank slash hoax thing.
Not kidding. No, I know he's not kidding.
It looks like a prank.
It isn't, as far as I know.
But doesn't it look exactly like one?
If you do something serious, especially something important like this, and it looks like a prank to somebody who wasn't paying attention, well, you did it wrong.
I think you did it wrong.
All right. Speaking of disinformation, there are two kinds, roughly speaking.
One is the kind that's just wrong information, and But the other is diversion.
Diversion is what keeps us from seeing the truth sometimes.
There are lots of things that keep us from doing that.
But we often get diverted like a magician.
Makes you look over here, all the real tricks over here.
So here are some of the diversions that are happening right now.
Racism narratives are a diversion from understanding that it's really always about rich versus poor.
But if the poor knew that that was what was going on, that it's just rich versus poor, they could easily organize under our system, because they have free social media, everybody can vote.
They could just vote themselves a bunch of benefits.
But they don't, because they think the problem is racism.
If the poor people said, oh, the problem is rich versus poor, let's go vote ourselves some benefits.
But it'll never happen, because they're diverted by racism.
Now we see the disinformation boards and the fact checkers and the fake news and everything.
And I feel like what that's diverting us from is understanding that our own team is lying to us also.
You know the other team, whoever you think the other team is.
It doesn't matter left or right.
Whoever you think the other team is, you're sure they're lying.
You see lots of examples.
But you're not so sure about your team, are you?
But... Your team's lying, too.
And I think that when you're talking about fake news and disinformation boards, both sides are then encouraged to think that their side is right and the other side is lying.
That's a diversion. It's a diversion from the fact that both sides are lying all the time.
Doesn't mean they're wrong all the time.
I mean, somebody's going to be right if they're two different sides.
But the purpose of the teams is to lie and persuade.
That was a weird sound. There are turkeys gobbling right outside my door.
We have lots of wild turkeys here.
I hope it's a turkey.
So then here's another diversion.
The abortion narrative is diverting us from the Democrat approval levels on the Democrat record, the Biden administration record.
Everything is diversion.
I get it.
See, the turkeys are gobbling at me because I forgot to put Jonathan Turley on my disinformation board and their turkeys.
So they're using the simulation to remind turkey, turkey, turley.
Okay, got it. Put him on the information board.
Disinformation board. Got it.
All right. I don't know how many turkeys there are out there, but I think they're...
I think they're massing for an attack.
That is a lot of turkey noise.
I might take the locals people over to look at them after we're done here.
All right. This...
All right, let's talk about some new disinformation.
Did you see the news on social media that apparently is fake news that Pfizer documents show that the vaccines were never safe for pregnancy, people were pregnant, or breastfeeding?
Did any of you see that on social media?
Some kind of a document that purported to be a Pfizer document, now it's fake news, but it would act like the drug was not tested or wasn't safe for pregnancy and breastfeeding.
How many of you saw that?
Did you know that that Pfizer document wasn't from a Pfizer document?
So all of you who believed you saw a Pfizer document that says they know that vaccines were not safe during pregnancy or breastfeeding, that was not even a Pfizer document.
That was from another entity altogether.
It was fake news.
And the other entity apparently has updated their opinion of it, so there's actually nothing there.
There is no information...
About it being safe or unsafe during pregnancy and breastfeeding.
I added the unsafe part just because I'm unaware of anything.
So pretty much all of the ivermectin stories, pretty much all of the vaccine, oh, did you know about this data story, they're pretty much all fake.
You should believe anything about vaccines, any study about vaccines, and any study about ivermectin, just assume it's not real.
Just assume it's not true.
That should be your starting assumption.
If somebody can convince you it is true, well, good for them.
But you shouldn't start that way.
You should start with fake.
And then if somebody can convince you, well, let's see if they can do it.
I saw...
This is amazing.
The head of Media Matters was on C-SPAN and was asked by a caller about the suspicious nature of Hunter Biden getting half a million dollars for his paintings.
And the caller asked, how can we be sure that Hunter Biden is not selling influence as opposed to selling artwork?
And the head of Media Matters, Angelo Carusone, I guess, said, quote, that there's no reasonable suspicion behind it.
In other words, there's no reasonable suspicion that Hunter Biden is selling paintings for what seems to be outrageously high prices because the people buying the paintings are just in the influence-buying game.
There is no reasonable suspicion behind it.
Really? Really?
Because to me this is the definition of reasonable suspicion.
Not proof.
Nobody's claiming any proof.
Has anybody said there's proof?
Nobody. Nobody said there's proof.
Everybody. Everybody thinks it's something you ought to look at.
A little suspicious. But here's what this made me think.
I wondered about the Biden family reunions.
When you know that every single thing that Hunter Biden does is going to be a problem for the rest of the family.
And then Hunter Biden says, you know, I went to rehab and I'm getting off the drugs.
And you can imagine his family and Joe Biden and Jill and everybody saying, oh, that is great.
That is the best news.
So, you know, we're used to you doing only the worst possible thing to embarrass us, but thank goodness...
Thank goodness you're getting off the drugs.
And then he would say, and, and, I'm not going to do any more deals in China.
And then the rest of the Biden family goes, oh, God, I thought you were going to keep doing that because that is so embarrassing to the rest of us.
Thank goodness you're not going to be doing the drugs anymore and you're not going to be dealing deals with China.
And then Hunter says, and no more deals with Ukraine.
I mean, wouldn't be practical at this point, but no more deals with Ukraine.
And then the Biden family says, whew, thank you.
Thank you. Finally.
And then they say, so what are you going to do with your free time?
And then Hunter Biden, the black sheep of the family, says, oh, artwork.
I'm going to go into the art business.
And the family says, oh, finally.
Finally something that will not embarrass us.
And then Hunter says, yeah, I think I could get quite a bit for these paintings.
And then the Hunter family says, that's great.
Well, you know, we're really happy for you.
And you're a pretty good painter, so this looks like this could be pretty good.
And then he says, yeah, I'm going to price them at half a million dollars a piece, or at least one of them.
And then the Biden family says, what?
For a minute there, we thought you said you were going to price one painting for half a million dollars.
And they said, yeah, I'm going to price each painting for several hundred thousand dollars.
And then the Biden family says, okay, we didn't think we heard you right there.
It almost sounded like, it almost sounded like you're going to paint a picture and try to sell for half a million dollars.
You didn't really say that, did you?
And they said, yeah.
And then the entire Biden says, are you serious?
You can't do anything That doesn't look like a scheme.
Of all the things you could do in the whole world, of all the sports you could do, of all the businesses you could be in, all the things you could invest in, the classes you could take, the skills you could learn, all the things in the world you could do, you have to find the one thing that would embarrass us.
And he does. I feel as if Joe Biden is living in a simulation, and his theme is that Hunter won't stop embarrassing him in public, and there's just nothing he can do about it.
It'll just go from one thing to another thing to another thing.
It looks almost intentional, doesn't it?
I mean, it's hard to imagine that one person could do thing after thing after thing that just makes his father look bad.
Who even does that?
Like, most people can make their parents look bad if they try.
Let's say you get, you know, drunk driving arrest.
Well, that makes your parents look bad, indirectly, sort of, a little bit.
But we also do other things.
Most of us. Like, I've probably done some things that would have made my parents embarrassed.
Okay, I can think of one in particular.
I'll give you an example.
When I was very new to media, and I had not been media trained, I was asked by Bon Appetit magazine, a magazine about food, to do a little special thing in the back where they'd have some celebrity talking about their favorite restaurant or something.
So I agreed to do it, and then they interviewed me, and I made this joke.
I said that my mother was the second worst cook in the world, after her mother.
Now... That's something that we kind of said in the family.
It was like a family joke.
It was also true.
It was true. My mother is the inspiration for Dilbert's mother, who had a cooking show called Cooking with Salt.
It was just salt.
Basically, would you like it seasoned?
How about salt?
That'll work. Yeah, salt was great.
I love salt. But I made this comment to the author of Bon Appetit magazine, and I said to myself, my mother's never going to read Bon Appetit magazine.
Am I right? The one thing I don't have to worry about is I knew for sure that my mother, living in a little country mountain place, she definitely was not reading Bon Appetit magazine, and certainly not reading it cover to cover to get to the last page.
That's how stupid I was.
If you can even imagine that level of media stupidity.
Yep, yep. It took approximately 10 seconds from the publication of that article for one of my mother's fucking friends to mail it to her and say, I hope you've seen this.
That's right. That's what friends are for.
That's what friends are for.
So, have I ever embarrassed my parents?
Oh, yeah. Yes, I have.
Yes, I have, as a matter of fact.
But the difference between me and Hunter Biden is that I still sometimes do things that don't embarrass people.
Sometimes. I mean, not all the time.
But I sometimes go into a business enterprise that, if it worked, it would just make everybody happy.
It wouldn't make anybody embarrassed.
Like, how is it that Hunter can't find anything?
Anything in that domain of don't embarrass your parents?
Nothing. There's not a single thing he can do that doesn't embarrass his parents.
What's up with that? Was your dad a piece of...
Both of my parents are deceased.
Have you read Hunter's autobiography?
I haven't. All right, so there's no reasonable suspicion there's anything going on there.
All right, I believe we've talked about it all, except that this Minister of Truth started out with some fake news, I think.
So this Minister of Truth woman, the head of it, said that it's not just conservatives who are being silenced on social media, as the conservatives believe, but that there are many studies, many studies.
I'm not going to mention them, because there are many of them.
Oh, you want a link to the study?
I'm not going to give you a link to the study.
There are many studies, many, many, many studies.
And these studies show that some liberals are also being censored.
So the idea that censorship is sort of working against conservatives has been debunked and debunked by the many, many studies of which I will not link and will not mention.
Many, many of them. And those studies show that liberals are censored too.
Now, did you catch the trick?
Did you catch the trick that she used?
And then I used it as well.
Tell me if these two things are opposites.
Most of the media suppression is against conservatives, but there have been studies that show that liberals also have been censored.
Are those opposites?
Does one debunk the other?
No. But she presented them like they do.
In other words, she literally...
And I don't think this is delving into personal opinion.
I don't think this is a subjective statement.
The head of disinformation tried to tell us that these studies would show that there was the same amount.
No, she didn't say it.
This was the clever part. She simply said that the studies show that liberals also get banned.
I'll bet that's true.
I'll bet there's at least one case of that.
Two would be plenty. If there were ever two people in the history of banning, and they were liberal, and they got banned, then her statement is right.
The studies have shown that people on the left also get banned.
It would just take one or two.
Does she mention how many?
No. Does she compare the rate of conservatives being banned or suppressed to the rate of the other side?
No. And wasn't that the only question?
That was the only question.
The only question was how much conservative versus liberal.
And she answered it with an absolute instead of a how much.
Oh, they both have a little problem there.
That is intellectually fucking dishonest.
It is disinformation by design.
That is clearly designed as disinformation.
Her statement could not have been more clear to mislead.
It was intended to mislead, and it did.
Now, when Greenwald asked did they intentionally pick the most ridiculous person for the job, it's not just the way she looks.
Because she has a theatrical mannerism, which would probably work great in a lot of contexts.
But not this one.
Not this one. This is the only job.
You don't want somebody exactly like that.
If you put her in lots of different jobs, I mean, you could come up with a dozen right off the top of your head where her personality would be perfect.
Like, you know, big personality, she's not shy of the camera.
You could think of all kinds of jobs she'd be perfect for, but not this one.
You don't want somebody who looks like she's acting to be your disinformation czar.
That's the opposite of what you want.
All right. That, ladies and gentlemen, is everything I wanted to talk about.
I believe I have helped you all to a better life.
If you haven't read Loser Think, my book, right up there, you really should because it is the answer to disinformation, or at least it's one of them.
So if you were to read that book, it would tell you how to spot fake news with very practical, specific things to look for.
And once you have that toolbox, you say, oh, it's one of those.
And then you can spot it easily.
I'll give you one example.
If you see news that's too incredible to believe, it's because it's almost certainly not true.
The news that makes our hair catch on fire and go, oh, I can't believe that happened.
It didn't happen. 95% of the time.
Sometimes, yes. Weird things do happen.
That's a real thing. But when you see the news that...
Let's say the news that the Russians were paying bounty for American dead in Afghanistan or something like that.
Like, that would be such a shocking story.
That is probably not true.
And sure enough, there's no confirmation.
Be a turkey volume-guessing man.
Six. Six.
Like the Supreme Court made abortion illegal, yeah.
So did you know that most abortions are performed with just a pill?
How many of you knew that?
That's something I learned from Dr.
Drew. And I think Dr.
Drew had an interview with Bill Maher And then immediately after Dr.
Drew met with Bill Maher, Bill Maher said he learned a lot about abortion.
And one of the things he learned is literally the same thing that Dr.
Drew told me when I was on Dr.
Drew's show just the other day.
He told me that the vast majority of abortions are just a pill.
I didn't know that.
Did you know that? Um...
Well, I guess there's a technical definition of what an abortion is.
So if there was anything that was going to take hold, to use non-scientific terms, if anything was in the process of becoming a life and it stopped it from happening, I'm going to call that an abortion.
You can wordplay it all you want.
Yeah, we talked about the horse dewormer thing.
That's just such a big simulation coincidence.
All right. And then 2,000 mules I haven't seen yet, but I plan to as soon as I find it somewhere.
If anybody has a link to somewhere I can actually see the actual video, 2,000 mules, will you send it to me on Twitter?
Because people keep telling me where it is, but I can't find it.
Or I can't find it in a way that plays.
I found it on Rumble and it didn't play.
I don't know why. Oh, have you mentioned ultra-mega?
Yeah, thank you.
I should have mentioned that. So as you know now, Biden is going with this ultra-mega extremist messaging.
So once again, when they don't have an argument, they have to go for a personality.
That's what they're doing. So it's just another...
It's just a typical Democrat approach to attack the people in the United States.
Like, entire categories of people.
And just dismissing them.
But I don't think it's working.
That ultra-mega thing doesn't seem to be working.
And they're also bringing back dark.
It's dark. It's dark.
So the Democrats have...
Not essentially. They have given up.
I was going to say this seems subjective, but I think we can say it objectively, can't we?
Would it be fair to say, just objectively, if you take your bias out of it for a second to the degree we can do that, doesn't it look like the Democrats gave up?
And they're only struggling to win based on personality problems and fake news.
It doesn't look like they're trying to win on content.
The Republicans are still definitely trying to win on content because they have the strongest case in the world.
Well, this worked when Trump was president.
Such as the border. Just do that again.
Do whatever he was doing.
It must have been working. So they have a pretty strong argument of practical solutions.
Hire more cops.
How about that? You got too much crime?
Stop letting people out of jail.
How about that? So they're very practical solutions, even if you prefer them not to be the solution.
But the Democrats have just given up.
They're not asking for anything that's real at this point.
It feels like it's just personality and fear and all that stuff.
All right.
Yeah, ultra-dark, mega-mega.
The ultra-dark mega.
All right. Virtual premiere for what?
Oh, the virtual premiere...
Not from the movie. Have you considered that they made the disinformation position look ridiculous on purpose so that people won't see it as a legitimate threat to their freedom?
I don't think so.
That goes into the too-clever category.
Like, I will certainly suspect people of all kinds of bad behavior...
But when it gets to be that clever, I think, hmm, that's a little too clever.
All right. Banned Adopt Video Scott.
What's that mean? All right.
Did I watch Amber Turd's performance yesterday?
I watched only some clips.
She obviously seemed to be acting.
It didn't look real at all.
So I can't wait to see what happens with that.
My pick for the Kentucky Derby?
I think it's going to be some kind of a horse.
Probably wins that. Thoughts on the managerial class?
That's what the entire Dilbert comic is about.
He's waiting for the cross-examination.
Okay. Why was Roe v.
Wade never codified into law?
There weren't enough votes. That's why.
That's why. See, one of the reasons why you don't want Congress to codify into law is because you want the states to do it.
Don't you? Like, why would you piss off half of the states when all the states can have what the states want by a majority?
If you can give every state what they want by a majority within their state, why would you make a national law that would thwart 50% of the states?
That's the opposite of our system.
Our system is that you want the states to have as much control over the things that make sense for them to control.
And you want the states to have no control over things that doesn't make sense for them to control, such as national defense.
You don't want them controlling that.
But when it comes down to what happens to an individual making a really tough life-and-death decision, you want to boil that down right as close to the individual as you can get it, down to the doctor and the person.
If the state's as close as you can get, then I'll take it.
But the people who want the federal government to do it want to thwart the will of the people in the state that they don't live in, in many cases.
That doesn't seem right.
Oh, I can see it on the local site.
So Dinesh has a site on locals, and if you're a subscriber, you can see it there.
I don't know if he's got a subscription locked or not.
You can unlock things on Locals.
Can somebody tell me is it locked or unlocked on Locals?
The 2,000 mules.
Somebody will tell me in a second.
Locked or unlocked? Yeah, it's hard to Google.
Try Googling it. It's locked, okay.
So you'd have to be a subscriber. Somebody says it's free, but other people say it's locked.
Oh, you can't access it until 8pm tonight.
Okay. So there's a little ambiguity of it.
But I'll tell you, Dinesh is doing a great job of marketing.
Could not be a better time and a better content.
He's got just the right amount of censorship to give him some audience.
Dinesh is locked down on Twitter still, somebody says.
