Episode 2222 Scott Adams: Free Speech Was Nice While It Lasted. Bring Coffee
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Jill Biden COVID, NBC News Spin, Anderson Cooper, Freedom of Speech, Vivek Ramaswamy, Misinformation Trolls, DeSantis Trolls, Mental Disorder Icons, Elon Musk, Anti-Semitism, ADL Defamation, Alexander Vindman, Harassment Targeting, Non-Organic Groups, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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've got an error condition on Twitter, which I call X, but it doesn't seem to be affecting the live stream, so we're going to go with it.
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
Hello.
After a long three day weekend here in America, we're ready to go.
Ready to go.
I don't know if you know this, but all all work happens between September and first part of November.
And then January to late March.
You knew that, right?
All the rest of the year is kind of just waiting for those periods.
Everything else is waiting for somebody to come back from vacation.
But if you'd like to take your experience up to levels that nobody's ever dreamed were possible, all you need is a cup or mug or a glass of Teicher Chelsea 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 of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called Simultaneous Sip.
It happens now.
Go.
Yep, it's time to get serious.
The kids are back in school, the weather's not as good as it was before, although I like it better.
Yeah, time to get serious.
Speaking of serious, do you remember the Canadian shop teacher who had the enormous prosthetic breasts?
Well, apparently said teacher is going back to school and presenting No longer presenting female, but is presenting a male look.
You know what the funniest part about the story is?
There was a story in the Toronto Sun showing the teacher In the full prosthetics that we were used to seeing, and then showing the same teacher dressed as an unambiguous male presentation.
I'm not talking about what's in the mind, but in terms of the outside.
And through the entire article, wait for it, the entire article is about this individual clearly presenting now as male, As the teacher did prior to the event.
And through the entire article, the teacher was referred to as she.
That's right.
Now that the prank, I assume it was a prank, right?
I think he was just making a political point.
Even after having made the point, I think I think they still can't get off.
They're still so stuck in the prank that they don't know that it's time to change the pronoun.
Now, I love the fact that he didn't make the rules.
If he sticks with it and continues to dress the way he apparently currently is, which is a male presentation, and insists on being called a woman, I'm just going to love him twice as much.
Or her.
Or her.
I don't want to get that wrong.
It would be the best.
But that might be coming.
We don't know what said Canadian shop teacher is thinking.
But I sure hope she is thinking that.
To just go on with his life being called a her.
And just let it ride.
It would be wonderful.
Well, Jill Biden has COVID.
I saw Tim Poole ask if this is sort of the beginning of the hint of the cats on the roof of the... Well, you know, Joe Biden's fine.
Don't worry.
Joe Biden's fantastic.
He's fine.
But the person who spends a lot of time with him has this COVID thing.
You know, a man that age, a little bit of COVID.
Who's to say he wouldn't come down with some long COVID?
I mean, if you were to get COVID, he might be one of the statistics, you know what I mean?
One of the people who gets that long COVID and doesn't know how long it's going to last, but it might be unfair to run for president under those conditions.
Nothing's real.
Literally nothing is real.
You know, the most shocking thing that I say is that there's no such thing as real news about public figures.
When people first hear that, they're like, well, that can't be true.
Like, obviously, sometimes it's wrong.
But you're telling me that every time it's a public figure, the news is wrong?
Yes.
Yes, every time.
It's at the very least, you're leaving out a key piece of information, which could have the effect of making it wrong.
So yes, even if the thing they report really happened, the news is still fake, because they leave out the explanatory stuff.
Do you remember when I got cancelled?
I'm sure you remember that.
And they reported what I said.
How many people in the press asked me why I said it, or what the intention was, or why I would say something so obviously out of place?
Of the entire press.
It was a national headline for days and days and days.
Weeks, actually.
It was trending for weeks.
How many of them asked me why I said it?
None.
Not a single one.
Not even one.
Isn't that the most obvious question?
If that were news, you don't think they would ask me why I said it?
Like, what's up with that?
Why does this not match anything you've ever done in the past?
Nobody asked.
I mean, just settle on that one thing.
A national trending story.
I'm a public figure.
I'm literally the easiest person in the world to find.
You could find me a hundred different ways.
Nobody asked.
Nobody.
Not a single part of the media.
No.
Now, Chris Cuomo asked, but that was in the context of, you know, content for the show.
Right.
But nobody asked as a news story.
If you're actually on a show, of course they're going to ask.
But if you're not a guest on the show, nobody cared.
All right.
NBC News had a story today.
And it doesn't matter what the story is, but here's one sentence really quickly.
Remember, this is NBC.
You all know that NBC is not real news, right?
If you listen to Glenn Greenwald, he'll tell you directly, they're just a CIA organ.
Or I would say a Democrat organ at this point.
They're not really trying to do the news.
But they have this statement, quote, even though House Republicans have not produced evidence of wrongdoing by Biden, there's no evidence of wrongdoing.
Now, let me be as clear as possible.
Had they said there's no direct evidence of a crime, I would say, yeah, I think you're right about that.
There's plenty of circumstantial evidence, but I'm not even sure the circumstantial evidence indicates a crime that Biden himself did.
I don't know.
I'm no lawyer, but if they'd said something more clear like that, I would say, well, yeah, technically, I guess you're right.
I guess you're right.
But no.
They have not produced evidence of wrongdoing.
Now wouldn't wrongdoing include taking money for things you're not providing as a service?
As in, if they're really not giving anything for these contacts.
Is that right?
Is it right to take money for a product you're not delivering?
I don't know.
That would be wrong in a different way.
What about lying about it the whole time?
Is there any wrongdoing about lying that he had no knowledge of his kid's business?
Never met with any of those people?
How about lying?
Yeah, I don't know if there was technically a law broken, but I've never seen more evidence of wrongdoing in my life.
Have you ever seen more evidence?
Now remember, evidence is not proof.
But I've never seen more evidence.
I mean, the evidence seems kind of overwhelming.
But no, NBC News, nope.
No evidence of wrongdoing.
And if you thought that NBC News was real news, and you read this, wouldn't you adopt that opinion?
Oh, well, NBC says there's no evidence of wrongdoing, so I guess we're done here.
Yeah, if you don't know that the news stopped being real a long time ago, that would be confusing.
If it was ever real.
I mean, there's a good argument it ever was real.
Here's a good rule for you about science.
We all love our science, right?
Science being the probably the single best way to know what's real and true and at least repeatable.
That's the closest you can get to reality, is what is predictable and repeatable.
But I think you need to make a big distinction Between science that is the subject of headlines and science that's happening in a lab and nobody knows about it.
Now I would like to make a clear demarcation.
Science that nobody hears about, because somebody let's say they're testing a specific hypothesis, it's not part of a product, it's not related to the headlines, has nothing to do with climate change, has nothing to do with race, has nothing to do with anything that we debate about every day.
I've got a feeling that's pretty good.
Probably pretty good.
Meaning that they probably are real scientists who are doing something real and getting real results.
Sometimes wrong, sometimes right, but they crawl towards the truth over time.
But is it my imagination, if any science is in the headlines, such as climate change, it's always fake.
Isn't it?
Isn't science just another way to launder opinions?
It is.
Yeah.
Science is just a way to launder opinion.
And I saw the funniest quote.
I'm going to skip out here.
I wasn't planning it.
But speaking of that.
So Anderson Cooper was talking about the new The new ownership of CNN and how Chris liked or licked or whatever he was, I guess he's gone now.
But Anderson Cooper was saying that he didn't understand the whole thing that management wanted them to do.
Because Anderson Cooper said he's an anchor, he's not an opinion guy.
He's a news guy, not an opinion guy.
Anderson Cooper.
Anderson Cooper said that.
Like, that's a real thing that came out of his mouth.
He thinks he's a news guy, not an opinion guy.
That's everything that's wrong with CNN, is that he actually thinks he's a news guy.
So when he gives you his opinions, he thinks he's telling you the news, because he must think they're facts.
I mean, I'm just guessing.
I can't read his mind.
But the logical implication of that Is that he thinks the things he's saying are true.
And factual.
And news.
Does he really think that?
Don't you wonder if he actually really thinks that?
Or is that just something he said?
Because, you know, people say things they don't believe.
But could he actually believe that?
That he's a news guy and not an opinion guy?
Now this is one of the reasons I've always had more respect for Fox News.
If you ask Hannity, Are you an opinion guy or a news guy?
I'm pretty sure he'd say opinion guy.
Right?
Tucker?
Do you think Tucker would say he's a hard news guy or an opinion guy?
I think he'd say opinion.
Right?
You could pretty much go down the line.
You get to Bret Baier, and you'd say, are you an opinion guy or a news guy?
He'd say, I'm a news guy.
And then you'd say, yeah?
Oh, yeah?
Well, I'm going to check.
And then you'd find out he's a news guy.
Pretty much sticks to the news.
So it's just amazing.
I can't really tell when people are having a mental problem or when they're just lying.
Do you think that Anderson Cooper is unaware that other people see him as only an opinion guy?
Really?
Do you think he knows?
Because I actually don't know.
Here's one of the The dangerous things about perception, I guess?
Humans are pretty good at determining if somebody is mentally diswrought.
Wouldn't you say?
Humans are pretty good at, you know, in person.
You can't tell online too much, but in person you can kind of tell if somebody's got a mental disorder.
You know, if it's one of the kind that is going to affect their immediate behavior.
So, To me, he always looked like he had a mental disorder.
But, you know, I'm not a doctor, and if I were, you'd be telling me, you don't diagnose somebody you don't know.
I'm just saying that when I look at his face, when he talks about Trump-related stuff, he looks like he's in actual mental distress.
In other words, he projects it.
I can't say I know what he's thinking.
That would be unfair.
I'm saying that as an observer of behavior, he presents as a person with a mental disorder.
Now, I have the same feeling about Bill Maher, but only when he talks about some Trump stuff.
He seems to be completely mentally healthy in every other domain, but when he hit that one domain, there's something that happens.
I don't know if it's just a personal problem, but it presents itself as a mental disorder.
TDS, specifically.
It does look like a mental disorder.
And I wonder if there's something like that on the right, or even something like that that I do, where I look like I'm rational most of the time, but there'll be something I talk about that you'll say, I think you've got a mental disorder there, Scott.
Yeah?
No, you're going to throw out some examples of where you disagree with me on policy.
That's not what we're talking about.
I'm talking about just being batshit crazy.
Yeah, everybody has blind spots.
Everybody has bias.
We're not talking about that.
I'm talking about batshit crazy.
All right.
So...
Yeah, so any news that's in the headlines is fake, most of the time.
Do you think that that's a fair statement?
That science you don't hear about is probably pretty valid, you know, over time, not every experiment is going to work.
But that if it's in the headlines, there's almost not, there's really not much chance it's real.
You know, even the pro and the con are not really trying to be real.
I think Vivek is the first politician Who has made a legitimate attempt to be honest about the science.
And pulling it off.
You know, maybe other people had it in their minds that they were trying to do that, but they didn't.
You know, didn't come off that way.
He's the only one who seems to be literally looking at the science as we understand it, and then, you know, doing a good job of interpreting it.
No, I feel like everybody else was just, Climate change is real.
Uh-uh.
It snowed today.
And he's just dismantling them through a much better process.
All right.
But he's only dismantling the agenda.
Just the agenda.
All right.
I saw a tweet today, because I was complaining about free speech, as I often do.
We'll talk about more of that But Frank, on Twitter, Frank Joppy, I think, he said that free speech leans on the Second Amendment.
No one is aware of it, but the USA is the Second Amendment.
It's the knot that keeps it all together.
To which I said, no it doesn't.
Are you kidding me?
The Second Amendment probably does protect you from the worst kind of dictator taking over.
I think that's true.
And anybody who makes the stupid argument that guns don't work against nuclear weapons and helicopters doesn't really understand how the guns would be used.
Because they wouldn't be used against the military.
Duh.
Right?
That's not how they would be used.
They would just make it impossible for anybody in charge to ever go outside again.
And people in charge probably want to go outside sometime for the rest of their lives.
No, it would just be impossible to show your face anywhere in America if you were a dictator, because we're just too strapped.
Somebody would take you out.
Yeah, the Second Amendment is really good as one of the things that maybe helps us prevent the dictator takeover.
But when it comes to freedom of speech, you lost that a long time ago.
Who has freedom of speech?
Let me give you the dumb argument before I give you the smart argument.
Dale?
Dale, can you explain, in your own words, Why we have total freedom of speech in America.
Because you can go to your closet and say anything you want.
Well, that's true.
I could go in my closet all by myself and say anything I wanted.
But does that really seem to you like that's freedom of speech?
Nobody says you get to go on a social media platform.
I don't believe the Constitution mentioned your freedom of using the X platform.
Yeah, we all get that.
We all get that.
100% of us understand that.
But in a practical sense, if you don't have access to, actually, the tools of communicating, you don't really have freedom in the way that other people do, in a practical sense.
But not a technical sense.
Not a technical sense.
Because you can go into your closet, and you can say anything you want, in the privacy of your own closet.
Yeah, but you know, That's not really the free speech that anybody cared about.
The only kind people cared about was the public stuff.
Well, you can say anything you want on Twitter.
Apparently they're anti-Semites and racist and everybody.
So what are you complaining about?
You can say anything you want on there.
Well, yes, but then the ADL will ban you.
Whether you say anything bad or not, if they just don't like it politically, because they're essentially a tool of the Democrats, and they're destroying free speech wherever they go, by destroying the economic model of the people trying to enjoy the free speech.
They're not in your closet, Scott.
You can say anything you want in there.
I feel like you're just avoiding my argument as opposed to responding to it.
Do you see the fact that while technically free speech exists, that in a practical sense it does not?
Do you get that?
It was January 6th, people had all the free speech they wanted.
Yes, you fucking piece of shit.
They have all the free speech they want, you cocksucker, while they're in jail, rotting for basically free speech crimes, you fucking asshole.
Well, you don't have to get so personal about it.
Freedom of speech?
Fancy.
So, yeah, we don't have freedom of speech.
Are you kidding me?
Does anybody think that we have freedom of speech in a practical sense?
You know, don't go all Dale on me.
Oh, technically it doesn't mean... No, I know that.
I know it technically doesn't involve Twitter or X or whatever.
Yeah.
All right.
Well, you know what I mean.
All right.
So now the Second Amendment won't protect your freedom of speech, because that's already largely gone.
What you have is the freedom to run into a buzzsaw of economic destruction, should you say something that is not compatible with the malign powers such as the ADL and the SPLC, blah blah blah, and those people.
All right.
Glenn Greenwald.
He tweeted today, the top two priorities of the CIA and the US security state is number one, infinitely prolong the war in Ukraine to weaken Russia, and two, control online political speech to banish dissent.
He says the liberal left overwhelmingly support both.
And the few that don't are demonized.
Now, does that feel like an accurate statement of where we're at?
Does that seem like hyperbole?
It actually doesn't to me.
That doesn't feel like hyperbole.
That feels like an objective description of the current situation.
But I wonder to what extent Glenn Greenwald is being targeted by the entities that don't like he's calling them out.
I think their trust is that the only people that see Glenn Greenwald are people who agree with him already.
You know what I mean?
If you don't agree with him, you probably never saw this.
So who's he talking to?
That's all they need to control you.
I think I mentioned this, but Vivek was tweeting about it.
So DeSantis has this $100 million monster PAC, Political Action Committee.
And apparently they've taken credit for creating an army of trolls to create misinformation about Vivek.
Now isn't that exactly what it seemed like?
Didn't it seem like there was this weird army of trolls who were all pushing the same set of misinformation?
And now a number of you, I don't want to name names, but a number of you believed the trolls and decided he was a WEF guy or a Soros guy.
And these are all ridiculous things.
Ridiculous.
But did the, did, how many of the trolls convinced you that any of those things were true?
Is there anybody who was fooled by the trolls to think that he was a globalist?
Anybody?
Was anybody fooled by it?
Because I got a lot of people who came at me that I think are my regulars who were completely fooled by that.
So here's one right now.
Probably DeSantis troll.
This is in all caps.
Bass Squirrel 1213, which is totally a real person.
Bass Squirrel 1213.
All in caps.
Scott wants to swallow Vivek's Tikka Roll.
So I think DeSantis is sending his best.
So it's a good job.
You did a good job representing your candidate.
So Ron DeSantis is going to be quite proud of you.
All capitals, mixing your racism with your food ideas, all in one tweet.
Pretty good.
Pretty good.
Are there any more DeSantis trolls here?
You're funny.
You know what I've started doing?
It turns out that people who have mental disorders will label themselves on X if you look for it.
Am I right?
They'll actually put an icon to label their own mental disorder, and you can even tell which one it is.
Like, oh, it's one of those mental disorders.
If you see a Ukraine flag in a bio, what do you know about the person?
You know they're not legitimate and sane.
Now they might be sane and, you know, just playing a role.
Or they might be insane and not know it.
But you should not respond to anybody with a Ukraine flag as if you're in a conversation with somebody who has a political difference.
Nothing like that's happening.
Just look at their responses.
They will be completely unhinged.
Same with the little ocean thing.
Same with the masks.
Same with the pronouns.
If you see any of that, you're dealing with a mental disorder.
And it has nothing to do with whether they disagree with you on policy.
Yeah, the syringe.
The syringe, the blue wave.
They are so predictive.
But the one I use all the time is the artist.
When the artists come after me, they usually have artists in their bio, and they'll come after me the hardest.
That's not exactly a mental disorder.
That's people in my profession who didn't do as well.
They're all hella mad.
It's like, can you imagine, well, let's have some sympathy for them, can we?
Imagine being an actual artist, and then looking at what made me famous.
You don't think that would bother you?
I'm literally the least talented artist in the entire world of art, who is not named Kathy Geiswhite because she left the business.
But of people who are actually still working, I'm by far the least talented in an art sense.
Can you imagine how much that bothers artists?
How about my writing?
I don't exactly write like Shakespeare, who I mock.
How would you like to be a writer who can make really good English college course writing sentences?
And then you look at my little sentences, and they all look like they're fourth to sixth grade level comprehension.
They're like, oh my god, look at this idiot.
He can't write long sentences.
He can't draw.
And how did he get famous?
And I'm such a good artist.
And I'm going nowhere.
So those are not exactly mental disorder.
That's, you know, just small people.
But the ones with mental disorders really stand out.
They do like to label themselves.
Well, Elon Musk is suing the ADL, the Anti-Discrimination League.
Anti-Discrimination, no, Anti-Defamation League.
Anti-Defamation.
Here's a little rule for you.
Anybody who has anti or diss in front of their names is doing the thing that they're anti-ing or dissing.
Antifa.
Antifa.
Are they really anti-fascist?
Are they?
Are they?
How about anti-defamation?
Has the ADL defamed anybody?
Well, the head of the ADL called me a A Holocaust denier in public.
That's the head of the ADL.
The head of the ADL.
Called me personally just a few weeks ago.
Anti-Semitic and a Holocaust denier.
What about the various entities that try to be the people who stop disinformation?
Do you think the people who are stopping disinformation are stopping only the disinformation?
They might stop some of that as well.
But I've got a feeling that they're in the disinformation business, if you know what I mean.
How about the fact checkers?
Are the fact checkers there to make sure your facts are right?
Nope.
They're there to make sure you don't know the facts, because they're politically oriented.
If you have on your cynical hat, anytime somebody is anti-something, or dis-something, or checking something, it's the opposite.
It's just, literally, it's the opposite.
And once you understand that, everything starts making sense.
It's like, oh, it's the anti-discrimination of people.
Oh, they're going to discriminate against people.
I got it.
And then they will.
You can watch it.
Most Holocaust deniers deny being a Holocaust denier.
Well, do you still beat your husband?
Yeah, because a lot of people are going to say no to that.
All right.
So Musk is suing them, and his claim is that the ADL primarily, because he talked to advertisers and they named them, the ADL pressured advertisers That there would be problems if they did not stop advertising on X, which made Musk's $22 billion investment worth maybe nothing.
So he's speculated on the platform that even if they were only responsible for, let's say, 10% of his loss, it could be a couple billion dollars.
Now, I saw one lawyer who seemed to be self-labeling, if you know what I mean.
If you know what I mean, he was self-labeling himself as not credible.
He had a hashtag BLM in his bio.
He's a lawyer, and today, in 2023, he has a hashtag BLM in his bio.
Yeah, you know, you immediately have to discount anything that comes out of that account.
Because it's self-labeling.
Is there somebody who doesn't know that BLM was a fake organization?
Is he the last one?
Nobody told him?
Nobody mentioned that.
All right.
Well, um, I am so glad that Elon Musk exists because once you see the, the total evil of the ADL, uh, they're just destroying lives of people because they get points.
And it's basically a Democrat organization that, you know, does some good things and they just go after anybody who's not on board with their Democrat agenda, and they just turn you into a racist and try to cancel you.
So that's sort of their process.
Now, let me ask you this.
If you were going to hire ghost hunters, let's say somebody advertised, I can find out if there's a ghost in your house.
Do you think there's a good chance they're going to find one?
Because they get paid to find ghosts.
Yeah.
Something tells me they might find one.
Right.
Yeah.
What do you think would happen?
If your literal job is to find racists, do you think you'd find any?
And do you think you would get paid more, or your prestige would be more, the more of them you found?
Uh-huh, uh-huh.
And what would any normal human being do in a situation in which they would make more money by lying and exaggerating than playing it straight?
What happens in 100% of those cases over time?
100% of the time they're corrupt.
Not sometimes.
Not once in a while.
Not it happened a few times and I can name them.
No, 100% of the time.
You put any human being in a situation where lying makes them rich and telling the truth just makes them have a job, they'll all lie.
Some might get to it sooner.
But everybody in that situation is going to lie.
Have you ever worked for a big corporation?
They're all liars.
Every department, every manager, they're all lying all the time.
All the time.
It never turns off.
Do you know why?
They make more money by lying.
That's the whole story.
Yeah, a corporate incentive structure is whoever does the best work and people notice, the noticing is the important part, they get the most money in the promotions.
So it's a system which bias design guarantees that all the participants will be liars.
You get that, right?
By design, By design.
You're paid for who thinks you did the best job, not who did the best job.
And so people are lying to get the big promotions.
Everybody, all the time.
Have you ever seen anybody's, like, list of accomplishments in a company?
Oh, here are my monthly accomplishments.
And you'd be like, okay, that's a pretty long list of accomplishments.
You know, I do notice that, the one at the top there, that that actually was, that was last quarter.
And you know, I asked you about your accomplishments this quarter, so I won't count that one because that was last quarter.
But you know, there's still a lot of them on here.
Let's see, you participated.
Well, you just participated.
Yeah, I'm not sure you were responsible for this.
You were just sort of attending some meetings.
But you've got this as an accomplishment.
Okay.
And then let's see, your other accomplishments are, oh, it looks like you lowered expenses.
That's great.
But hold on, let me read this more carefully.
You lowered expenses, oh, from what they could have been, not what they were.
So things could have been worse.
So you're taking what could have been worse as your benefit.
I'm not sure that counts.
And by the time you're done, there are no accomplishments.
Like all corporate people know how to make nothing into something.
And you all have to do it, even at the employee level.
So now, look at the ADL.
Does the ADL find some really bad people and call them out?
Of course.
Yeah, they've got to staff, they've got to do some work.
If they run out of really bad people, are they done?
Do you think they ever have a meeting and say, wow, it looks like we got everybody.
And the few new ones, we're getting them as they come.
I mean, we're just getting them all.
So everybody, you can lower your efforts.
We got everything covered.
We found all the anti-Semitism.
We've called it all out.
We've done what we can.
No.
By design, entities are designed to grow.
Growth is the default for any entity.
It always wants to grow.
Because when you're shrinking, you're unhappy.
When you're growing, you're happy.
Oh, I'm in the right place.
I'm definitely in the right place.
This thing's taken off.
So, if you create an organization to find discrimination, they will first find all of the real discrimination, because that's the low-hanging fruit, and then they will go after fake things, because that's where their money is.
Steve Jacobs.
You know, he's talking to somebody, Jay is.
He says, if you listen to Scott at any speed, he sounds like an arrogant narcissist.
Now let me ask you, who is it that calls people narcissists?
Narcissists.
It is literally built into the name.
If you go online and say, what is the main, like, main characteristic of a narcissist, they'll blame you for being a narcissist.
It's like their main go-to.
It's like what they're famous for.
Bet you didn't know that, did you?
All right.
So if Musk sues the ADL out of business, that would be one of the best things for the country.
And I do wonder if they know that they are an existential threat to America itself.
Would you agree that free speech is fundamentally important for the ongoing health of the country?
You would, right?
And would you agree that they're getting rid of free speech as quickly as they can?
Making it a sort of a one-party speech is okay?
Yeah.
They're getting rid of the most important part of the country.
They're doing it publicly, vigorously, and transparently.
You can all watch it yourself.
You don't even have to wonder.
Yeah.
So they get rid of some bad speech, but even Even Greenblatt, is that his name?
In 2016, there's a video of him saying that they're not trying to ban anybody's speech.
They're only trying to replace bad speech with good speech because that's how you battle bad speech.
And then they went after the advertisers on X. Exactly the opposite of what they say they would do.
Tried to actually just stop it and make it economically impossible.
Ruin reputations.
defame people like me.
All right.
So Trump, or Musk, Musk said that he would release all the ADL files and documentations.
So we should be able to see The contacts that ADL made with old Twitter so we can see what they were trying to ban and why.
Do you think I'll be on the list?
It depends when the list was put together, I guess.
They came for the turds, and I did not speak out because I was not a turd. - That's funny.
So yeah, the ADL is a existential threat to the country.
And you know what they would say about that?
I must be a racist.
Guess what?
That's what they say to that.
All right.
Alexander Vindman, the least credible person in America, he said that He said that companies that, he said this today, or yesterday maybe, companies that continue to advertise on X are sponsoring anti-Semitism.
It is apparent to me that Elon Musk tweeting against the ADL and Jay Greenblatt is targeting them for harassment.
Now, is that the narcissism thing?
The ADL is a entity that targets people for harassment.
That's sort of their entire job.
And he's saying that if you complain about them targeting you for harassment, you've targeted them for harassment.
Do you see how all this works?
If they attack you and you complain about it, then you're twice as bad as you were before they even attacked you.
Because you've complained about it too.
Yes, I've called Trump a grandiose narcissist, and I've called myself.
If you'd like to argue about narcissism, you should go study up, but don't just shout stupid things in the comments.
So learn that there's two types, learn the difference, and then come back.
But don't just yell things with narcissist in the sentence that you don't know anything about.
Get a little more depth in your understanding, And then you can come back.
All right.
Sounds more like circular logic.
Hmm.
What is Vindman's deal?
Well, I don't know, but he doesn't act like he's on the side of America.
I mean, sometimes you say, oh, it's a different opinion.
But he doesn't act like it's just a different opinion.
He acts like there's something going on that we don't understand.
All right.
Are you loving the story about the 15 well-dressed Nazis in Florida who Rolling Stone reported they were DeSantis followers because they mocked DeSantis and said F DeSantis.
And so the Rolling Stone says they must be DeSantis supporters because they say they hate him.
So that's the state of your news.
But let me ask you this.
If you think that the Nazis, those 15 well-dressed ones who have some kind of name I don't care about, if you think that it's not organic, who do you think's behind it?
Go.
Who do you think would be behind it if it's not organic?
You say the CIA?
Why would they do that?
No, it's not the ADL.
I doubt it's the ADL.
FBI, you think?
There's one entity that you have not considered.
Isn't there one obvious entity that you've not considered?
How are you not getting this?
This is weird.
Your suggestions are all completely... There's like a blind spot here that's fascinating.
You really don't see it.
Some of you are saying Trump.
And I would say more generally Republicans.
Here's what we know about them.
They prefer Biden over Republicans.
And they're putting on a public event which reminds you of... What's it remind you of?
Do they remind you of anything?
They're well-dressed.
They've got really nice flags.
Charlottesville.
Yeah.
It reminds you of Charlottesville, doesn't it?
Except isn't it weird that they're like opposite of Charlottesville?
Isn't it funny that there would be neo-Nazis who would be marching like really the opposite of Charlottesville because they're pro-Biden?
And Biden actually ran for office on the Fine People hoax, because Democrats don't know that that's a hoax.
They think it's real.
And then now there's this other thing that looks very suspicious, that looks like it's almost like mocking the Charlottesville event.
It's, to me, it's so like mirror, mirror copy, except this one's pro-Biden.
Interesting.
I'm just going to say that I don't think there's any chance it's organic in the sense that I doubt they don't have any outside influence.
I don't know the degree of influence or exactly who it is, but it would be very unusual if they did all this and didn't have some kind of outside influence.
Do you think they all bought their own shirts and flags?
I doubt it.
Do you think any of them are getting any kind of compensation?
I don't know.
I don't know.
But given that they seem to be anti-Biden, or no, they seem to be pro-Biden, which in the dirty tricks world would be an anti-Biden thing.
Right?
You get that?
If they say they like Biden, but they're Nazis, that may be the trick.
No.
I just wouldn't make any assumptions about who they really are or what they're really up to.
But I will say this.
If it's a Republican dirty trick, it looks like one.
It's really clever.
It's really clever.
Because very few of you thought of it as your first take.
Now, I don't have any inside information, so I don't know.
But I will tell you it has all the tells of a very suspicious thing.
So you have to look at who would benefit from it.
Yeah, that's your answer.
The skiff boats, yeah.
I heard they said they backed DeSantis.
That was fake news in the Rolling Stones, right?
They actually said the opposite.
But the Rolling Stones did a rupar, because they were sarcastic.
They said, yeah, we support DeSantis.
And then they laughed and said, fuck DeSantis.
So Rolling Stone reported their sarcasm as their actual opinion.
Even though the rest of the quote was immediately in the next sentence.
Do you think the Rolling Stone didn't know the next sentence?
Do you think they didn't know that they called out very clearly that they were being sarcastic?
Of course they did.
They just chose not to write it that way.
Of course they knew.
Yeah, of course.
Qui bono?
Yeah.
Yes.
Cui Bono means who benefited, right?
For the non-lawyers?
Wouldn't you hear somebody in the comments say Cui Bono?
It's sort of like follow the money, right?
Sort of a follow the money, even if it's not money situation.
All right.
Who profits, exactly?
What's a Rupar?
A Rupar is a edited video or audio, or in this case a quote, which reverses the meaning of what somebody said in a way that you could never imagine it could be reversed.
For example, if you read that the Nazi guy, if you read that his real words were, we support DeSantis, Could you ever in your mind imagine that there was anything that was edited out of that that would reverse it to the opposite of we support dissenters?
No, your brain can't do it.
So if your brain says, OK, maybe it's not the exact quote, but it's not the reverse of the quote, you would never guess it's the opposite.
Your brain just doesn't go there.
So that's why it works.
Because there are actually a lot of things you can turn to their opposite if you choose correctly.
That's what the fine people hoax was, etc.
Yeah, we're the RuPaul repair team.
RuPaul repairs.
There's a deepfake of DeSantis dropping out.
Sonny Bono.
You kick yourself when I laugh at your jokes.
Okay.
Alright, what else is going on?
That's all I got for now.
So, YouTube, I'm gonna say bye.
It's gonna be a weird, small week this week.
Probably not a lot of news.
Oh, here's the other thing about the Nazis.
Did you notice that they were suspiciously timed for a known slow news period?
Anybody notice that?
Sort of the dog not barking situation.
That when kids go back to school and around now, especially a three-day weekend, pretty much the news stops.
So what are the odds that the Nazis knew that that was a slow news period?
Do you remember when the Charlottesville March happened?
Do you remember when that happened?
It was in the summer.
Do you know what happens in the summer?
No news.
So when you see an op like that, that somehow knows when there's not going to be any other news competing with it, Is that a coincidence?
Is that something the Nazis figured out on their own?
Do you think the Nazis were thinking, all right, given the news cycle, if we get it near the Labor Day, there's not going to be a lot of news, so then we'll have more exposure.
Or is it just a coincidence that they chose so well that they hit that low news period just perfectly?
