Episode 731 Scott Adams - #Shampeachment, Gas Attack on American Soil, China's (3) Holocausts

pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom a everybody get in here are you watching the Sham Pietschmann interviews going on right now they're quite exciting what whoa wake me up it's time for a coffee with Scott Adams where we'll be talking about that and much more much more oh my god so much more but first we must enjoy the celebration it brings us all together it's called the simultaneous hip and all you need is a cup or Margaret glass snifter stai Angelus tanker thermos flask and team grail goblet vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid and get ready for the dopamine hit it gets everything going it makes your whole day better go ah so good so good alright well so if you've been watching vind mins testimony today here's what he said now remember of enmund is sort of one of the most key witnesses and he had he had reported that the Ukrainian phone call was quote inappropriate inappropriate and why was it inappropriate while he explained that thing he said that a bipartisan or having a having any kind of a partisan investigation by Ukraine in other words it would look partisan if they were looking into Trump's opponent in the election he said that that would put them at risk for not being supported by Congress and if Congress doesn't support Ukraine and Ukraine is a bulwark against Russia that could be bad so which part of that is impeachable none of it none of it he he's sort of their key witness and it just turns out that inappropriate is a difference on policy and a different song priority now let me ask you this if your job is to make sure that Ukraine policy gets done right if your job is to make sure that Ukraine stays a good ball work against Russia and by the way if you were born in Ukraine gentleman who was I believe he was born in Ukraine so they were it was during the Soviet Union and his father left the Soviet Union with him but so he's got a real he's got a real dog in the fight here he's sort of anti Russia so here's the thing how often in your experience has a subordinate of said that the boss doesn't have his priorities right because the boss's priorities are not the same as the employees priorities how often does that happen probably if any of you are at work it's happening within ten feet of you probably every one of you has complained about your boss having his priorities wrong and and the nature of those complaints they're always along the lines of you know I think the boss should put more priority on my project because if the boss puts more priority on somebody else's project well that's inappropriate because mine is the good one now the thing the Vinland well and let me say that all of this suggests the fitment as good as his job all right so if it sounds like I'm throwing venneman under the bus I'm doing exactly the opposite the vindens a guy you want on your staff he's fighting for his project he's saying you know let's make my project a priority you know I know you got some questions about Ukraine but let's keep my project the priority because it's the important one good employ I would keep that guy uh-uh wouldn't you I remember I'm gonna tell you a story true story one day in my corporate career my boss's boss who was like vice president I guess who needed to go to a budget meeting in which all the different departments were arguing about who should get to how much budget and of course the nature of the budget budget conversation was that you were each fighting to get as much of the budget as you could because it was a limited pool you just wanted to get your chunk so the boss's boss couldn't make it so he sent me so he sent me to argue on his behalf for the importance of the budget for his department they got in the meeting and whoever was running the meeting said well you've asked for this amount of money how important is this and I'm sitting there and somebody asked me about this big budget item that I'm supposed to be defending and they say how important is this compared to these other things we're doing and I sat there and I thought it's not it's just not sorry I'm here to defend it but I wouldn't you compare it to these other things they look more important to me how happy was my boss's boss when I left that meeting and he learned that I had given away his money because the thing he was asking for was less important objectively speaking than what the other departments said they needed the money for well let's just say it wasn't the happiest day of my career so here's the thing vindens job is to fight for the priorities that he believes are true and they're in there about his project and he did i I think ven-ven's an A+ employee venden never said the president should be impeached Vanneman never said the president didn't do his job never said that he basically complained about the priorities and the policy now the president apologist 101 that's a that's a block word so I block people who use that because it's it's it's just such a low level of comment you're an apologist you're an apologist so here's the here's the thing so the president thinks or thought that Ukraine's involvement in the election 2016 and maybe a future involvement and Biden's connection over there were worth looking into now that's a different priority than Whitman's venneman was think he had a few moves who was right who was right was vinden right then it was a risk we shouldn't think because they could affect bipartisanship bipartisan support in this country for Ukraine was he right or was the president right that we should put it's okay to put a little bit of risk of that bipartisan stuff a little bit because we need to find out what's going on over there with the corruption with the election with Biden etc whose right doesn't matter does not matter number one it already happened so arguing about what was right after the fact doesn't make much difference now was vinden right because the president asked Ukraine to look into this I think Ukraine kind of said they might has Ukraine lost bipartisan support I don't think so right was vinden right that Ukraine would lose bipartisan support because the president asked Ukraine to look into it now they didn't really look into it as far as I know and they didn't announce it but was vinden right well he he was not right about how it turned out because there seems to be no difference in support but he didn't say it's definitely gonna go wrong he talked about it in terms of risk so has written been right that it introduced some risk well I would say some I think that's fair and I always advise people you know don't think in terms of you're definitely right or you're definitely wrong with a lot of this stuff it's all about risk and risk management vindens risk management said protect your project protect your priorities protect your job protect the country you know even been legitimately was talking about a priority that is important to the country so again I'm probe indignant so far it looks like just a guy who was protecting his turf doing his job and legitimately thought that Ukraine was an important priority for the country all good no problem with that at all but it kind of comes down to who gets to decide where the country puts its risk and his priorities for international stuff and as it turns out it's the president so it doesn't really matter that vinden had a different opinion about which way to play this in terms of risk management probably lots of people disagree with their boss on risk management decisions so I would say the vinden has basically ended the conversation because if the conversation from the main sort of the main guy who said it was inappropriate if the main guy says they were sort of a policy difference a risk management decision the president gets to make that decision and so he did and we don't know we don't know how it would have gone if it'd gone the other way etc all right so there's that now here's here's a question I've been struggling with and maybe some of you can fill in some blanks I tell you in my book loser thing which I don't have with me that you should decide what is true in the political realm by looking at the reporting of both sides so if the reporting on the left says something's true and the reporting on the right says something's true it's probably true but if only one of them says something's true it doesn't matter which one and the other one says now there's nothing here probably nothing better just a good general rule of thumb doesn't be just right every time but a good general rule of thumb if that brings us to Ukraine's involvement in 2016 it seems that reporting on the right let's say Fox News etc has concentrated on the work of John Solomon and I'll tell you my impressions I would watch John Solomon giving his exclusive reports on stuff and I always have the same thought which is why is he the only one getting these scoops well what's the what's the what secret sauce does John Solomon have that he keeps getting all this good stuff and other people are not and so I said to myself I'm gonna put a little asterisk next to this and tell myself to make sure the reporting is the same on the other side is it it's not if you go if you go to CNN they they report on John Solomon's reporting as nothing but conspiracy theories that got him fired from the hill is that true I don't know but that's a pretty big difference Fox News says these are scoops and maybe there's something there or at least they have said that in the past and and then apparently the hill agreed to let him go or he moved on but apparently there's some indication that the hill was not happy because they moved his reporting from reporting to opinion they started labeling his reports on Ukraine his opinion that was his own publication so I'm seeing the comments just so you know that I've seen them I'm seeing that you're saying that there are other people reporting stuff Sarah Carter strand and I think you mentioned somebody else I'm not seeing any events so I watch I continuously watch the news and I'm not aware of one credible sounding thing about Ukraine why is that why is it that I can watch the news all day long and I'm not personally aware of any credible story about Ukraine doing anything why is that well it's not being reported on the left as even being credible so here's a good test for you George Webb somebody saying stossel somebody says since Fox ever lied to you well here's the rule if you see the stuff reported on the by the news people on Fox you should treat it differently than if you see it reported on the opinion shows right so you know is Bret Baier reporting on the Ukraine stuff as true or is it only being is it only on the entity those are the questions you must ask yourself so I'm going to give you my tentative opinion that this is reported as true on the opinion side of one side it looks like now I'm open to that being revised by the way somebody's saying Tim Poole the blaze okay why don't I know what those things are let me ask you this you're all aware of some kind of reporting which obviously some of you believe is credible what in in the comments tell me because I think you haven't enough room in the comments tell me a true fact about Ukraine that you believes is an important fact that's been reported by multiple sources that somehow it matters go in the comments tell me the fact give me any fact about Ukraine and 2016 because I can't even tell you what the rumor is somebody says you're relying on MSM nope I'm not and I'm gonna block you for that because I just said the opposite of that I literally sent the opposite of that I said that I don't rely on either side I look for when they agree to say that's true and when they don't be I reserve judgment all right so whoever just came in here and said you're relying on the mainstream know you get blocked for that cuz that's literally the opposite of what I just said somebody says you've always lived in your bubble and resisted other news sources you get a block because I just said the opposite of that I just said I wrote a book telling you to do the opposite of that so when you say I'm living in my bubble I just asked you to tell me what I'm missing it's the opposite of that you create help Clinton no detail so the linskey reported no crime chalupa helped the DNC get money corruption nobody has you don't want anything via chalupa tried to get dirt so wasn't there chalupa lied to Solomon about something that's the story right source for the dossier now so so look at the comments how many of you are convinced DNC employee Alexandre chalupa TSA worked with Ukrainian government for dirt on Trump and and what found nothing conviction for meddling I don't think any of you know anything well I shouldn't say that I'm only looking at your comments I don't know what you know I could only read the comments all right the hundred dollar buying the stuff we already know about that's that's not what Trump was asking about with Crowd.

Strike etc all right so can we agree so everybody's saying it's chalupa it's chalupa that's it so there was there was one guy who made up some stuff that's that's the Ukraine involvement have you watched the Glenn Beck whiteboard I did I watched a little bit of it I would worry about something that's so complicated it can't be explained and so I but I want you to watch what just happened so there were many people following this who said oh yeah there's there's a verified lots of reporting on this Ukraine situation and I asked you what it is just a simple statement what is the Ukraine thing and it was just it was just word salad in the comments there's not one of you who has anything except some guy named chalupa talked to somebody that's it somebody named chalupa talked to somebody that's that's the Ukraine stuff somebody says I saw the audacity a guy going there's no reporting on that Politico wrote an article Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump a backfire and what are the facts nobody has a fact did somebody actually do something all right so let me leave it here there are enough of you who are saying there's something there and referring to articles there I'm gonna guess there's there's more to this than what I know all right you happy are you happy if I admit that I need to find out more about it so you don't have to yell at me because I've been building I need to find out more about it but the fact that you're all pretty sure something's there and yet you can't you can't state it in a simple sentence and if it's a really really strong tell that there's nothing there doesn't mean there's nothing there but when you see this many people are sure of something that they can't explained in the sentence somebody says you cannot reduce this to one sentence you can't if it's true here's how you could reduce it to one sentence somebody blyat bribed somebody somebody planted a story in the press somebody put some money someplace that wasn't supposed to go it's easy if there's something real there it can be to explain it in one sentence the fact that you need Glenn Beck's whiteboard to explain it might mean that there's something swampy there and everybody's connected but but I don't know if you can't if you can't if you can't make it make the point briefly it's probably not real that's a good lesson too now let me say with complete clarity I'm open to learning that there's something really there I'm open to that why haven't I heard it yet you gotta ask yourself how much news do I have to watch before I can hear anything about her - one thing on all right that's enough on that I know what you want to talk about representative Eric's wahwah if you're not familiar with the story Eric's wawel appeared on hardball with Chris Matthews and there was a loud noise that most observers said was Eric's well well emitting shall we say now I've listened to it and my first reaction was that's not real that's not really that was exactly like it and it looks exactly like it but my first tank was man it's not real now the official explanation is that Chris Matthews back in the studio dragged his his hardball bug against across the desk and it made a sound like that's was poorly timed with Erics Wawa's comments and so I just looked like it or sounded like it but I think that's another case of hashtag Gaslight I guess yeah I said that gaslighting I also noted that Eric's wawel has more experience with gas than hunter Biden yeah I said that somebody else said that this is a case of jumping the shark I thought that was clever I didn't say that one and then I also tweeted that you know your interview on hardball went badly when scientists have to revise their climate models afterwards yeah I said that I said that so it's not the biggest story of the day but it's the funniest so let me say again I don't think that was an actual an actual for national television I think it was just a weird coincidence that sounds like it all right there is questions about Trump's health because apparently he went to the some medical facility which was unplanned and apparently his schedule has been light recently and so I said to myself well if there's something wrong with President Trump and first of all if it's if it's something minor let's say he has the flu or something like that I I would understand why you wouldn't want to share it you know just sort of lay low until he feels better so I wouldn't be surprised if it's just some ordinary thing he just doesn't doesn't need the public to know about that would be my guess but I went over to his Twitter feed with the following question I wanted to see if he's been tweeting in his own voice lately you can kind of tell the tweets that are have gone through staff because they tend to be you know just retweets of things with maybe one sentence can apply yes rate the really edgy provocative stuff the stuff with misspellings especially you can tell this directly from Trump so I went over to his Twitter feed to see if there's any direct stuff or does it all look like staff and it kind of all looks like staff tweets today so david pakman quite quite fairly asked the following question he said where were all the people you know getting on Hillary Clinton for her health where are they now you know talking about presidential well nobody talked about Hillary's health more than I did and Here I am so David Pakman and for all of those who say to me Scott Scott Scott why are you so partisan here you go I think I think there's probably a health issue with the president I think his tweeting with his lack of tweeting suggestion is lack of appearance suggests it I have no reason to think it's a serious problem and certainly we didn't see any signs of it in his public appearances in my opinion but it's a question it's a fair question and I hopefully get an answer to it and I hope he's I hope he's fine of course but it's more likely something minor than something major we would have seen signs of it or we would have heard something all right here in in messages from the other movie here are some things on the CNN website I love reading their commentary especially the opinion pieces because they're just so different than what you see on the right it just feels like you've entered a new world it's almost like going to another country or something so here the sort of things it doesn't even matter who's that there they're all of their opinion people are the same person at least in how they sound and they were talking about the president's visit to the health to the doctor I guess and this opinion person says any human being would suffer seriously under such stress and because and becomes subject to all kinds of symptoms panic attacks stomach woes headaches anxiety does that sound like Trump you know I told you when I met with him in person and in the Oval Office last year one of my takeaways was he was the most relaxed person I've ever seen in any job he didn't look like he had a problem in the world I've never seen anybody less stressed than Trump in the Oval Office he just seemed like he was taking everything in stride and he said before he can likes the fight so while I don't disagree that he probably yells and stuff behind closed doors I think he kind of likes the job I just don't think he's worrying himself to death about any of this but then the CNN opinion priest goes on and said last week was one of the worst of his presidency and and they're talking about the impeachment stuff and I thought to myself really I thought last last week nothing happened the worst of his presidency he couldn't possibly be worried that this impeachment things is ever gonna reach any kind of completion and actually remove him from office he couldn't possibly be worried about that could he I suppose if it's you you'd be worried about it right if you were the president it's hard to be objective if you're in the job but was it really one of the worst weeks of his presidency last week I don't think it was even close I don't think anything happened last week let's talk about so I saw Newt Gingrich talk about the she impeachment as the theater and you know I've been saying that for a long time it really is theater and if you see it that way it's kind of fun if you see it as some kind of a serious political something something well then it's it's alarming if you took any of it seriously it would be alarming I don't I don't take any of it seriously let's talk about China I just tweeted something that is mind-blowing have you ever heard of the epic times let me just I want to go back to my home page here and look at it yeah so the epic times they they're a publication in the United States and in Hong Kong as well and they publish lots of stuff that China doesn't like so I don't want to say it's an anti China publication but that those are its roots so its roots are in sort of anti Chinese leadership just the leadership's are against and they actually have video camera of the Chinese obviously Chinese military or police coming in and masks into their facility in Hong Kong while the employees are there and setting it on fire let me say that again it's pictures of mast obviously Chinese government people coming into the actual printing facility of the epic times in North Korea while the employees are there throwing flammable stuff on the floor and lighting it on fire and setting the whole place ablaze and let me say again while the employees are there they're all in the video the employees are like what's going on boom the whole place goes up in flames and the massive people run out the door now apparently the employees must be the bravest employees in the world because they put the fire out it was a big fire and it was a serious fire and somehow they got it out and looks like they might be able to get back in business but that's freedom of the press Chinese style Posada interview just yesterday with ash Carter former US defense secretary who was talking about decoupling essentially and how China's internet will probably just be a another Internet and that they in the end we won't be able to connect to China for any technological reason whatsoever because we can't trust them think about that we can't connect to China and then the technological way because they'll steal our stuff what kind of country is that where you can't even connect to them on the Internet seriously that's bad so I've been saying that China is doing a triple Holocaust it was happening right now Holocaust one the floon gone folks who were apparently being harvested for organs there are 10 to 70 million of them there's less people so that that's gonna be a big number next there's the we Gers who have been rounded up and put in prison camps that's your second Holocaust that's happening right now this is not a historical to Holocaust in progress right now and then the third one is is the fentanyl that they're shipping to this country I listened to the Joe Rogan interview with I forget his name the reporter would actually went to China and visited he offended the lab tried to undercover etc and one of the things I heard that I didn't know about is that China actually has tax incentives for fentanyl precursor drugs so in other words the government is paying the drug dealers in effect with a tax rebate for making and I supporting fentanyl precursors the chemicals that you easily turn into offense at all and that about the same time this according to what I saw in the Joe Rogan podcast and about the same time that the president was getting President Xi to agree to crack down a fentanyl at the same time China improved their tax rebate they made it more attractive to ship the fentanyl stuff so if you have any question about whether China is serious about stopping their fentanyl trade they are not they are not serious and that is Holocaust three-three Holocaust by China and I'm not even counting hug huh there they're burning buildings with people in it they literally just did that with the app of times they're working on their fourth Holocaust right now and we're talking about doing a trade deal with them not a chance in the world we're not going to do a trade deal with China if you need to I'm sorry yes was bad Westhoff was the the reporter who was on Joe Rogan talking about the fentanyl thank you for that so they're there at three and a half Holocaust right now and we're actually we're negotiating with them are you freaking kidding me you don't negotiate with somebody who's got three and a half Holocaust going on right now and you happen to be the victim of one of them all right we're the victim of one of those Holocaust so there's no chance we're gonna have a comprehensive deal with China there's no chance we might have some smaller smaller tariffs you things but there's no chance that we'll ever have a comprehensive trade deal decoupling is going to happen all right that's enough of that repeating myself too much in the last 10 minutes as anything happened in the champagne theater somebody says Americans choose to use fentanyl well that's that's one of the things I point out in looser think so whoever just made that comment I'm gonna make an example of you sorry one of the worst forms of loser think is to pair the problem with the solution so if with the fentanyl the situation people say hey the problem is that people were taken that's the problem if they would stop taking it we wouldn't have a problem well that's true if people stop taking fentanyl it wouldn't matter what China does but it's loser think because addicts don't stop taking drugs that means some do but it's not realistic it's not practical one should not expect that the users will just stop taking fentanyl stop taking drugs it's ridiculous to even make the comment that the problem is the individuals yes true it's true that the problem is to people taking the drugs but that's not where the solution is the solution is going to be maybe something with treatment something with legalization something with cutting down on the demand now personally the reason that I want to crack down on China and their their dealers is not because it will stop fentanyl in this country I don't think it will it's because they're mass murderers if you thought that bin Laden wasn't going to kill anybody else would you say well he's not gonna kill anybody else let's just let it go let's let him live I think he's done killing he is sort of done with that we'll just let that go of course not if somebody's a mass murderer and and the fentanyl dealers have killed tens of thousands of this country and continue to kill tens of thousands every year you don't say well oh they I guess I guess they're done down because China decided that they're not going to do that anymore oh you killed him anyway you still got to kill him because the mass murderers I'm a very let's say I'm very what's the right word very interested in the idea of complete drug legalization in this country if we legalize drugs we would get rid of the Chinese fentanyl problem but and the cartel problems all at the same time now you say to yourself wait wait Scott legalizing marijuana is one thing but Lisl legalizing everything from meth to heroin to fentanyl well that's just plain crazy Scott but that's why you can test things yeah people are mentioning Portugal apparently has success with with that but I always warn you that what works in another country doesn't mean it will work here because there are enough variables that are different you still need to test it how hard would it be to get one state or even one city to test it can we not find one city or state there wants to test complete legalization combined with your medical treatment etc not one there's nobody in the United States who's stepping up and saying dear federal government if you let us if you let us we'll test this for you nobody nobody seriously one of the biggest problems in the country its fentanyl is killing more people than guns and there's no there's no state that's willing to say I will test it for you well we'll just do a limited test we'll see if that works if you're not testing it you're not doing you're not working on it you don't care you're doing nothing people ask me hey Scott stop being such an apologist for the Trump administration etc well let me let me crush you here for a moment and say the Trump administration is not offering to do not offering in any way they're not proposing to have a drug legalization test a little trial if they're not doing that they're not doing the minimum thing for to demonstrate competence in that area is that clear enough the minimum requirement to demonstrate competence not even not even being great but just minimum competence would be to be floating the idea of let's let's be able to test somewhere to see if this legalization thing makes any difference see what it does if you're not even looking at a test I'm sorry that is incompetent there's no other way to there's no good spin you can put on there that's just that is absolutely incompetent likewise you're seeing the Democrats coming out and saying hey let's legalize marijuana the Trump administration is just sort of quiet on that that too is incompetence there's no other way to spend that the Trump administration just has to say let the states deal with it we're gonna take that off the federal dockets it's not going to be illegal federally we'll just get out of that business leave it to the states easy politically socially criminally in every way that would be the smart thing to do and a hundred percent of the people watching no it's the smart thing to do you wouldn't even get I don't think anybody would complain and yet you don't see the Trump administration doing it incompetent so I would say in the domains of health and drug policy the administration is incompetence and I'm starting to think that on the question of nuclear energy even though the Department of Energy is doing great stuff so at the at the non presidential level I would say that you know the Trump administration is really doing well promoting generation three and four nuclear stuff but it's not coming out of the president's mouth and that's a big difference so I would say that on energy and on climate change whether you think it's real or not nuclear energy is still the the solution you'd want to pursue so I'd say that the president is not competent on that topic because confidence would be for him to say on a regular basis let's push all of our energy sources because it doesn't matter what you think of the Paris Accords it doesn't matter what you think climate change we need a lot of energy and we need the clean kind and the only way we're going to get enough is if we push all of our sources nuclear is a big part of that if you see the president say that then I say oh okay that's a good job but short of that that's not competent all right have I lost all of my audience yet I think the audience went down by a third because I criticized the president all right let him do what he said he would yeah I'm just looking at your comments here there's an upcoming Richard Jewell movie that would be interesting when has Trump changed his position on something politically well he changed his position on punishing women who get illegal abortions in 24 hours he changed that opinion pretty quickly he changed his opinion on deporting 14 or however many million the immigrants who are not documented so I would say there you have a number of examples that he needs coal voters in West Virginia in Pennsylvania if we started today building nuclear power plants like crazy it would still take so long for us to have enough of them that most people would just finish out their career as coal miners and retire before before there was enough nuclear energy to make any difference that this criticism is good somebody says vaping yeah you know I have not commented on the vaping thing it is because I'm too biased I'm too biased and I'll tell you why I watched my stepson go through his problems with every drug you can imagine and he vaped like crazy and he would argue with us that the vaping was keeping him from smoking regular cigarettes except he was also smoking regular cigarettes so basically the vaping was just so we could do it inside as well I think that people and I don't know this so somebody you know maybe dr.

drew or somebody knows a lot more than I do about addiction can answer this but it seems to me that vaping is a drug and it makes people who were trying to get off drugs maybe that much harder I don't know but it seems to be that being a smoker and trying to get off drugs would be confusing because it is a drug now I'm not an expert on that and I I've heard plenty of I've had heard plenty of addicts say that they're glad they have cigarettes because you know at least they have that and it helps them stay off the other stuff maybe I'm no expert it could be it could work both ways it could be for some people having a little bit of ice even though they might get lung cancer is better than being an addict might be the first other people if you have a little bit of anything you know it's just a slippery slope but here's my opinion I hate vaping I hate it like deep in my bones I hate it and I have to admit when people do it around me I have a reaction that makes me need to leave the room it's just personal emotional hatred but it's because of my experience it's not because of the vaping so I don't have a scientific opinion I don't have a legal opinion or a policy opinion on it I hate it I don't want to be around it and if it got you know if it were if it became illegal I would listen to the griping about it I would understand that certainly there's an argument to be made that it helps you get off of regular cigarettes I think that's a fair argument I wouldn't criticize that at all but I can't help how I feel so trying to separate for you my opinion you know how I feel with what makes sense from what's logical logically logically I get the argument freedom is good logically I get the argument that could help you quit regular cigarettes logically I get the argument that the problems probably will be isolated and it's the secondary market stuff for the black market stuff I get all that that doesn't change the fact that I hate it so just being honest all right I believe that's all I got to say vapors are exhaling nicotine in me is that true I don't even know if that's true somebody's saying that the comments somebody says legalize drugs except vaping or remember yeah if vaping were illegal I suppose we'd be getting it from the cartels so yeah there's no point making and illegal is that loser think well I think if you know that that the science or the facts are on one side and yet you feel a different way as long as you're aware of that difference I think you've you're in reasonably good shape you can't change how you feel sometimes nicotine is higher in vapors yeah I just don't know if you can get a secondhand vaping from it all right that's all I got for now I'm gonna go watch watch the champion theater see if anybody says anything interesting but I counted out it kind of doubt it

pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom a

everybody get in here are you watching

the Sham Pietschmann interviews going on

right now they're quite exciting what

whoa wake me up it's time for a coffee

with Scott Adams where we'll be talking

about that and much more much more oh my

god so much more but first we must enjoy

the celebration it brings us all

together it's called the simultaneous

hip and all you need is a cup or

Margaret glass snifter stai Angelus

tanker thermos flask and team grail

goblet vessel of any kind fill it with

your favorite liquid and get ready for

the dopamine hit it gets everything

going it makes your whole day better go

ah so good so good alright well so if

you've been watching vind mins testimony

today here's what he said

now remember of enmund is sort of one of

the most key witnesses and he had he had

reported that the Ukrainian phone call

was quote inappropriate inappropriate

and why was it inappropriate while he

explained that thing he said that a

bipartisan or having a having any kind

of a partisan investigation by Ukraine

in other words it would look partisan if

they were looking into Trump's opponent

in the election he said that that would

put them at risk for not being supported

by Congress and if Congress doesn't

support Ukraine and Ukraine is a bulwark

against Russia that could be bad so

which part of that is impeachable

none of it none of it he he's sort of

their key witness and it just turns out

that inappropriate is a difference on

policy and a different song priority now

let me ask you this if your job is to

make sure that Ukraine policy gets done

right if your job is to make sure that

Ukraine stays a good ball work against

Russia and by the way if you were born

in Ukraine gentleman who was I believe

he was born in Ukraine so they were it

was during the Soviet Union and his

father left the Soviet Union with him

but so he's got a real he's got a real

dog in the fight here he's sort of anti

Russia so here's the thing how often in

your experience has a subordinate of

said that the boss doesn't have his

priorities right because the boss's

priorities are not the same as the

employees priorities how often does that

happen probably if any of you are at

work it's happening within ten feet of

you probably every one of you has

complained about your boss having his

priorities wrong and and the nature of

those complaints they're always along

the lines of you know I think the boss

should put more priority on my project

because if the boss puts more priority

on somebody else's project

well that's inappropriate because mine

is the good one now the thing the

Vinland well and let me say that all of

this suggests the fitment as good as his

job all right

so if it sounds like I'm throwing

venneman under the bus I'm doing exactly

the opposite the vindens a guy you want

on your staff he's fighting for his

project he's saying you know let's make

my project a priority you know I know

you got some questions about Ukraine but

let's keep my project the priority

because it's the important one good

employ

I would keep that guy uh-uh wouldn't you

I remember I'm gonna tell you a story

true story

one day in my corporate career my boss's

boss who was like vice president I guess

who needed to go to a budget meeting in

which all the different departments were

arguing about who should get to how much

budget and of course the nature of the

budget budget conversation was that you

were each fighting to get as much of the

budget as you could because it was a

limited pool you just wanted to get your

chunk so the boss's boss couldn't make

it so he sent me so he sent me to argue

on his behalf for the importance of the

budget for his department they got in

the meeting and whoever was running the

meeting said well you've asked for this

amount of money how important is this

and I'm sitting there and somebody asked

me about this big budget item that I'm

supposed to be defending and they say

how important is this compared to these

other things we're doing and I sat there

and I thought it's not it's just not

sorry I'm here to defend it but I

wouldn't you compare it to these other

things they look more important to me

how happy was my boss's boss when I left

that meeting and he learned that I had

given away his money because the thing

he was asking for was less important

objectively speaking than what the other

departments said they needed the money

for well let's just say it wasn't the

happiest day of my career so here's the

thing vindens job is to fight for the

priorities that he believes are true and

they're in there about his project and

he did i I think ven-ven's an A+

employee venden never said the president

should be impeached Vanneman never said

the president didn't do his job

never said that he basically complained

about the priorities and the policy now

the president apologist 101 that's a

that's a block word so I block people

who use that because it's it's it's just

such a low level of comment you're an

apologist you're an apologist so here's

the here's the thing so the president

thinks or thought that Ukraine's

involvement in the election 2016 and

maybe a future involvement and Biden's

connection over there were worth looking

into now that's a different priority

than Whitman's venneman was think he had

a few moves who was right who was right

was vinden right then it was a risk we

shouldn't think because they could

affect bipartisanship bipartisan support

in this country for Ukraine was he right

or was the president right that we

should put it's okay to put a little bit

of risk of that bipartisan stuff a

little bit because we need to find out

what's going on over there with the

corruption with the election with Biden

etc whose right doesn't matter

does not matter number one it already

happened so arguing about what was right

after the fact doesn't make much

difference now was vinden right because

the president asked Ukraine to look into

this I think Ukraine kind of said they

might has Ukraine lost bipartisan

support I don't think so right was

vinden right that Ukraine would lose

bipartisan support because the president

asked Ukraine to look into it now they

didn't really look into it as far as I

know and they didn't announce it but was

vinden right well he he was not right

about how it turned out because there

seems to be no difference in support but

he didn't say

it's definitely gonna go wrong he talked

about it in terms of risk so has written

been right that it introduced some risk

well I would say some I think that's

fair

and I always advise people you know

don't think in terms of you're

definitely right or you're definitely

wrong with a lot of this stuff it's all

about risk and risk management vindens

risk management said protect your

project protect your priorities protect

your job protect the country you know

even been legitimately was talking about

a priority that is important to the

country so again I'm probe indignant so

far it looks like just a guy who was

protecting his turf doing his job and

legitimately thought that Ukraine was an

important priority for the country all

good no problem with that at all but it

kind of comes down to who gets to decide

where the country puts its risk and his

priorities for international stuff and

as it turns out it's the president so it

doesn't really matter that vinden had a

different opinion about which way to

play this in terms of risk management

probably lots of people disagree with

their boss on risk management decisions

so I would say the vinden has basically

ended the conversation because if the

conversation from the main sort of the

main guy who said it was inappropriate

if the main guy says they were sort of a

policy difference a risk management

decision the president gets to make that

decision and so he did and we don't know

we don't know how it would have gone if

it'd gone the other way etc all right so

there's that now here's here's a

question I've been struggling with and

maybe some of you can fill in some

blanks I tell you in my book loser thing

which I don't have with me that you

should decide what is true in the

political realm by looking at the

reporting of both sides

so if the reporting on the left says

something's true and the reporting on

the right says something's true it's

probably true but if only one of them

says something's true it doesn't matter

which one and the other one says now

there's nothing here

probably nothing better just a good

general rule of thumb doesn't be just

right every time

but a good general rule of thumb if that

brings us to Ukraine's involvement in

2016

it seems that reporting on the right

let's say Fox News etc has concentrated

on the work of John Solomon and I'll

tell you my impressions I would watch

John Solomon giving his exclusive

reports on stuff and I always have the

same thought which is why is he the only

one getting these scoops well what's the

what's the what secret sauce does John

Solomon have that he keeps getting all

this good stuff and other people are not

and so I said to myself I'm gonna put a

little asterisk next to this and tell

myself to make sure the reporting is the

same on the other side is it it's not if

you go if you go to CNN they they report

on John Solomon's reporting as nothing

but conspiracy theories that got him

fired from the hill is that true I don't

know but that's a pretty big difference

Fox News says these are scoops and maybe

there's something there or at least they

have said that in the past and and then

apparently the hill agreed to let him go

or he moved on but apparently there's

some indication that the hill was not

happy because they moved his reporting

from reporting to opinion they started

labeling his reports on Ukraine his

opinion that was his own publication

so I'm seeing the comments just so you

know that I've seen them I'm seeing that

you're saying that there are other

people reporting stuff Sarah Carter

strand and I think you mentioned

somebody else I'm not seeing any events

so I watch I continuously watch the news

and I'm not aware of one credible

sounding thing about Ukraine why is that

why is it that I can watch the news all

day long

and I'm not personally aware of any

credible story about Ukraine doing

anything why is that well it's not being

reported on the left as even being

credible so here's a good test for you

George Webb somebody saying stossel

somebody says since Fox ever lied to you

well here's the rule if you see the

stuff reported on the by the news people

on Fox you should treat it differently

than if you see it reported on the

opinion shows right so you know is Bret

Baier reporting on the Ukraine stuff as

true or is it only being is it only on

the entity those are the questions you

must ask yourself so I'm going to give

you my tentative opinion that this is

reported as true on the opinion side of

one side it looks like now I'm open to

that being revised by the way somebody's

saying Tim Poole the blaze okay why

don't I know what those things are let

me ask you this you're all aware of some

kind of reporting which obviously some

of you believe is credible what in in

the comments tell me because I think you

haven't enough room in the comments tell

me a true fact about Ukraine that you

believes is an important fact

that's been reported by multiple sources

that somehow it matters go in the

comments tell me the fact give me any

fact about Ukraine and 2016 because I

can't even tell you what the rumor is

somebody says you're relying on MSM nope

I'm not and I'm gonna block you for that

because I just said the opposite of that

I literally sent the opposite of that I

said that I don't rely on either side I

look for when they agree to say that's

true and when they don't be I reserve

judgment all right so whoever just came

in here and said you're relying on the

mainstream know you get blocked for that

cuz that's literally the opposite of

what I just said

somebody says you've always lived in

your bubble and resisted other news

sources you get a block because I just

said the opposite of that I just said I

wrote a book telling you to do the

opposite of that so when you say I'm

living in my bubble I just asked you to

tell me what I'm missing it's the

opposite of that you create help Clinton

no detail so the linskey reported no

crime chalupa helped the DNC get money

corruption nobody has you don't want

anything via chalupa tried to get dirt

so wasn't there chalupa lied to Solomon

about something that's the story right

source for the dossier now so so look at

the comments how many of you are

convinced DNC employee Alexandre chalupa

TSA worked with Ukrainian government for

dirt on Trump

and and what found nothing conviction

for meddling I don't think any of you

know anything well I shouldn't say that

I'm only looking at your comments I

don't know what you know I could only

read the comments all right

the hundred dollar buying the stuff we

already know about that's that's not

what Trump was asking about with

CrowdStrike etc all right so can we

agree so everybody's saying it's chalupa

it's chalupa that's it so there was

there was one guy who made up some stuff

that's that's the Ukraine involvement

have you watched the Glenn Beck

whiteboard I did I watched a little bit

of it I would worry about something

that's so complicated it can't be

explained and so I but I want you to

watch what just happened so there were

many people following this who said oh

yeah there's there's a verified lots of

reporting on this Ukraine situation and

I asked you what it is just a simple

statement

what is the Ukraine thing and it was

just it was just word salad in the

comments there's not one of you who has

anything except some guy named chalupa

talked to somebody that's it somebody

named chalupa talked to somebody that's

that's the Ukraine stuff somebody says I

saw the audacity a guy going

there's no reporting on that Politico

wrote an article Ukrainian efforts to

sabotage Trump a backfire and what are

the facts nobody has a fact did somebody

actually do something all right so let

me leave it here there are enough of you

who are saying there's something there

and referring to articles there I'm

gonna guess

there's there's more to this than what I

know all right you happy are you happy

if I admit that I need to find out more

about it so you don't have to yell at me

because I've been building I need to

find out more about it but the fact that

you're all pretty sure something's there

and yet you can't you can't state it in

a simple sentence and if it's a really

really strong tell that there's nothing

there doesn't mean there's nothing there

but when you see this many people are

sure of something that they can't

explained in the sentence somebody says

you cannot reduce this to one sentence

you can't if it's true here's how you

could reduce it to one sentence somebody

blyat bribed somebody somebody planted a

story in the press somebody put some

money someplace that wasn't supposed to

go it's easy if there's something real

there it can be to explain it in one

sentence the fact that you need Glenn

Beck's whiteboard to explain it might

mean that there's something swampy there

and everybody's connected but but I

don't know if you can't if you can't if

you can't make it make the point briefly

it's probably not real that's a good

lesson too now let me say with complete

clarity I'm open to learning that

there's something really there I'm open

to that why haven't I heard it yet you

gotta ask yourself how much news do I

have to watch before I can hear anything

about her - one thing on all right

that's enough on that I know what you

want to talk about representative Eric's

wahwah if you're not familiar with the

story

Eric's wawel appeared on hardball with

Chris Matthews and there was a loud

noise that most observers said was

Eric's well well emitting shall we say

now I've listened to it and my first

reaction was that's not real that's not

really that was exactly like it and it

looks exactly like it but my first tank

was man it's not real now the official

explanation is that Chris Matthews back

in the studio dragged his his hardball

bug against across the desk and it made

a sound like that's was poorly timed

with Erics Wawa's comments and so I just

looked like it or sounded like it but I

think that's another case of hashtag

Gaslight I guess yeah I said that

gaslighting I also noted that Eric's

wawel has more experience with gas than

hunter Biden yeah I said that somebody

else said that this is a case of jumping

the shark I thought that was clever I

didn't say that one and then I also

tweeted that you know your interview on

hardball went badly when scientists have

to revise their climate models

afterwards yeah I said that I said that

so it's not the biggest story of the day

but it's the funniest so let me say

again I don't think that was an actual

an actual for national television I

think it was just a weird coincidence

that sounds like it all right there is

questions about Trump's health because

apparently he went to the some medical

facility which was unplanned and

apparently his schedule has been light

recently and so I said to myself well if

there's something wrong with President

Trump and first of all if it's if it's

something minor let's say he has the flu

or something like that I I would

understand why you wouldn't want to

share it you know just sort of lay low

until he feels better so I wouldn't be

surprised if it's just some ordinary

thing he just doesn't

doesn't need the public to know about

that would be my guess but I went over

to his Twitter feed with the following

question I wanted to see if he's been

tweeting in his own voice lately

you can kind of tell the tweets that are

have gone through staff because they

tend to be you know just retweets of

things with maybe one sentence can apply

yes rate the really edgy provocative

stuff the stuff with misspellings

especially you can tell this directly

from Trump so I went over to his Twitter

feed to see if there's any direct stuff

or does it all look like staff and it

kind of all looks like staff tweets

today so david pakman quite quite fairly

asked the following question he said

where were all the people you know

getting on Hillary Clinton for her

health where are they now you know

talking about presidential well nobody

talked about Hillary's health more than

I did and Here I am so David Pakman and

for all of those who say to me Scott

Scott Scott why are you so partisan here

you go I think I think there's probably

a health issue with the president I

think his tweeting with his lack of

tweeting suggestion is lack of

appearance suggests it I have no reason

to think it's a serious problem and

certainly we didn't see any signs of it

in his public appearances in my opinion

but it's a question it's a fair question

and I hopefully get an answer to it and

I hope he's I hope he's fine of course

but it's more likely something minor

than something major we would have seen

signs of it or we would have heard

something

all right here in in messages from the

other movie here are some things on the

CNN website

I love reading their commentary

especially the opinion pieces because

they're just so different

than what you see on the right it just

feels like you've entered a new world

it's almost like going to another

country or something

so here the sort of things it doesn't

even matter who's that there they're all

of their opinion people are the same

person at least in how they sound and

they were talking about the president's

visit to the health to the doctor I

guess and this opinion person says any

human being would suffer seriously under

such stress and because and becomes

subject to all kinds of symptoms panic

attacks stomach woes headaches anxiety

does that sound like Trump you know I

told you when I met with him in person

and in the Oval Office last year one of

my takeaways was he was the most relaxed

person I've ever seen in any job he

didn't look like he had a problem in the

world I've never seen anybody less

stressed than Trump in the Oval Office

he just seemed like he was taking

everything in stride and he said before

he can likes the fight so while I don't

disagree that he probably yells and

stuff behind closed doors I think he

kind of likes the job I just don't think

he's worrying himself to death about any

of this but then the CNN opinion priest

goes on and said last week was one of

the worst of his presidency and and

they're talking about the impeachment

stuff and I thought to myself really I

thought last last week nothing happened

the worst of his presidency he couldn't

possibly be worried that this

impeachment things is ever gonna reach

any kind of completion and actually

remove him from office he couldn't

possibly be worried about that could he

I suppose if it's you you'd be worried

about it right if you were the president

it's hard to be objective if you're in

the job but was it really one of the

worst weeks of his presidency last week

I don't think it was even close I don't

think anything happened last week

[Applause]

let's talk about so I saw Newt Gingrich

talk about the she impeachment as the

theater and you know I've been saying

that for a long time it really is

theater and if you see it that way it's

kind of fun if you see it as some kind

of a serious political something

something well then it's it's alarming

if you took any of it seriously it would

be alarming I don't I don't take any of

it seriously let's talk about China I

just tweeted something that is

mind-blowing have you ever heard of the

epic times let me just I want to go back

to my home page here and look at it yeah

so the epic times they they're a

publication in the United States and in

Hong Kong as well and they publish lots

of stuff that China doesn't like so I

don't want to say it's an anti China

publication but that those are its roots

so its roots are in sort of anti Chinese

leadership just the leadership's are

against and they actually have video

camera of the Chinese obviously Chinese

military or police coming in and masks

into their facility in Hong Kong while

the employees are there and setting it

on fire

let me say that again it's pictures of

mast obviously Chinese government people

coming into the actual printing facility

of the epic times in North Korea while

the employees are there throwing

flammable stuff on the floor and

lighting it on fire and setting the

whole place ablaze and let me say again

while the employees are there they're

all in the video the employees are like

what's going on

boom the whole place goes up in flames

and the massive people run out the door

now apparently the employees must be the

bravest employees in the world because

they put the fire out it was a big fire

and it was a serious fire and somehow

they got it out and looks like they

might be able to get back in business

but that's freedom of the press Chinese

style Posada interview just yesterday

with ash Carter former US defense

secretary who was talking about

decoupling essentially and how China's

internet will probably just be a another

Internet and that they in the end we

won't be able to connect to China for

any technological reason whatsoever

because we can't trust them think about

that we can't connect to China and then

the technological way because they'll

steal our stuff what kind of country is

that where you can't even connect to

them on the Internet

seriously that's bad so I've been saying

that China is doing a triple Holocaust

it was happening right now

Holocaust one the floon gone folks who

were apparently being harvested for

organs there are 10 to 70 million of

them there's less people so that that's

gonna be a big number next there's the

we Gers who have been rounded up and put

in prison camps that's your second

Holocaust that's happening right now

this is not a historical to Holocaust in

progress right now and then the third

one is is the fentanyl that they're

shipping to this country I listened to

the Joe Rogan interview with I forget

his name the reporter would actually

went to China and visited he offended

the lab tried to undercover etc and one

of the things I heard that I didn't know

about is that China actually has tax

incentives for fentanyl precursor drugs

so in other words the government is

paying the drug dealers in effect with a

tax rebate for making and I

supporting fentanyl precursors the

chemicals that you easily turn into

offense at all and that about the same

time this according to what I saw in the

Joe Rogan podcast and about the same

time that the president was getting

President Xi to agree to crack down a

fentanyl at the same time China improved

their tax rebate they made it more

attractive to ship the fentanyl stuff so

if you have any question about whether

China is serious about stopping their

fentanyl trade they are not they are not

serious and that is Holocaust

three-three Holocaust by China and I'm

not even counting hug huh there they're

burning buildings with people in it they

literally just did that with the app of

times they're working on their fourth

Holocaust right now and we're talking

about doing a trade deal with them not a

chance in the world we're not

going to do a trade deal with China if

you need to I'm sorry yes was bad

Westhoff was the the reporter who was on

Joe Rogan talking about the fentanyl

thank you for that so they're there at

three and a half Holocaust right now and

we're actually we're negotiating with

them are you freaking kidding me

you don't negotiate with somebody who's

got three and a half Holocaust going on

right now

and you happen to be the victim of one

of them all right we're the victim of

one of those Holocaust so there's no

chance we're gonna have a comprehensive

deal with China there's no chance we

might have some smaller smaller tariffs

you things but there's no chance that

we'll ever have a comprehensive trade

deal decoupling is going to happen all

right

that's enough of that repeating myself

too much in the last 10 minutes as

anything happened in the champagne

theater

somebody says Americans choose to use

fentanyl well that's that's one of the

things I point out in looser think so

whoever just made that comment I'm gonna

make an example of you sorry one of the

worst forms of loser think is to pair

the problem with the solution so if with

the fentanyl the situation people say

hey the problem is that people were

taken that's the problem if they would

stop taking it we wouldn't have a

problem well that's true if people stop

taking fentanyl it wouldn't matter what

China does but it's loser think because

addicts don't stop taking drugs that

means some do but it's not realistic

it's not practical one should not expect

that the users will just stop taking

fentanyl stop taking drugs it's

ridiculous to even make the comment that

the problem is the individuals yes true

it's true that the problem is to people

taking the drugs but that's not where

the solution is the solution is going to

be maybe something with treatment

something with legalization something

with cutting down on the demand now

personally the reason that I want to

crack down on China and their their

dealers is not because it will stop

fentanyl in this country I don't think

it will it's because they're mass

murderers if you thought that bin Laden

wasn't going to kill anybody else would

you say well he's not gonna kill anybody

else let's just let it go let's let him

live I think he's done killing he is

sort of done with that we'll just let

that go

of course not if somebody's a mass

murderer and and the fentanyl dealers

have killed tens of thousands of this

country and continue to kill tens of

thousands every year

you don't say well oh they I guess I

guess they're done down because China

decided that they're not going to do

that anymore

oh you killed him anyway you still got

to kill him because the mass murderers

I'm a very let's say I'm very what's the

right word very interested in the idea

of complete drug legalization in this

country if we legalize drugs we would

get rid of the Chinese fentanyl problem

but and the cartel problems all at the

same time now you say to yourself wait

wait Scott legalizing marijuana is one

thing but Lisl legalizing everything

from meth to heroin to fentanyl well

that's just plain crazy Scott but that's

why you can test things yeah people are

mentioning Portugal apparently has

success with with that but I always warn

you that what works in another country

doesn't mean it will work here because

there are enough variables that are

different you still need to test it how

hard would it be to get one state or

even one city to test it can we not find

one city or state there wants to test

complete legalization combined with your

medical treatment etc not one there's

nobody in the United States who's

stepping up and saying dear federal

government if you let us if you let us

we'll test this for you nobody nobody

seriously one of the biggest problems in

the country its fentanyl is killing more

people than guns and there's no there's

no state that's willing to say I will

test it for you

well we'll just do a limited test we'll

see if that works if you're not testing

it you're not doing you're not

working on it you don't care you're

doing nothing people ask me hey Scott

stop being such an apologist for the

Trump administration etc well let me let

me crush you here for a moment and say

the Trump administration is not offering

to do not offering in any way they're

not proposing to have a drug

legalization test a little trial if

they're not doing that they're not doing

the minimum thing for to demonstrate

competence in that area is that clear

enough the minimum requirement to

demonstrate competence not even not even

being great but just minimum competence

would be to be floating the idea of

let's let's be able to test somewhere to

see if this legalization thing makes any

difference see what it does if you're

not even looking at a test I'm sorry

that is incompetent there's no other way

to there's no good spin you can put on

there that's just that is absolutely

incompetent likewise you're seeing the

Democrats coming out and saying hey

let's legalize marijuana the Trump

administration is just sort of quiet on

that that too is incompetence there's no

other way to spend that the Trump

administration just has to say let the

states deal with it we're gonna take

that off the federal dockets it's not

going to be illegal federally we'll just

get out of that business leave it to the

states easy

politically socially criminally in every

way that would be the smart thing to do

and a hundred percent of the people

watching no it's the smart thing to do

you wouldn't even get I don't think

anybody would complain and yet you don't

see the Trump administration doing it

incompetent so I would say in the

domains of health

and drug policy the administration is

incompetence and I'm starting to think

that on the question of nuclear energy

even though the Department of Energy is

doing great stuff so at the at the non

presidential level I would say that you

know the Trump administration is really

doing well promoting generation three

and four nuclear stuff but it's not

coming out of the president's mouth and

that's a big difference so I would say

that on energy and on climate change

whether you think it's real or not

nuclear energy is still the the solution

you'd want to pursue so I'd say that the

president is not competent on that topic

because confidence would be for him to

say on a regular basis let's push all of

our energy sources because it doesn't

matter what you think of the Paris

Accords it doesn't matter what you think

climate change we need a lot of energy

and we need the clean kind and the only

way we're going to get enough is if we

push all of our sources nuclear is a big

part of that if you see the president

say that then I say oh okay that's a

good job but short of that that's not

competent all right have I lost all of

my audience yet I think the audience

went down by a third because I

criticized the president all right let

him do what he said he would yeah I'm

just looking at your comments here

there's an upcoming Richard Jewell movie

that would be interesting when has Trump

changed his position on something

politically well he changed his position

on punishing women who get illegal

abortions in 24 hours he changed that

opinion pretty quickly he

changed his opinion on deporting 14 or

however many million the immigrants who

are not documented so I would say there

you have a number of examples that he

needs coal voters in West Virginia in

Pennsylvania if we started today

building nuclear power plants like crazy

it would still take so long for us to

have enough of them

that most people would just finish out

their career as coal miners and retire

before before there was enough nuclear

energy to make any difference that this

criticism is good somebody says vaping

yeah you know I have not commented on

the vaping thing it is because I'm too

biased I'm too biased and I'll tell you

why I watched my stepson go through his

problems with every drug you can imagine

and he vaped like crazy and he would

argue with us that the vaping was

keeping him from smoking regular

cigarettes except he was also smoking

regular cigarettes so basically the

vaping was just so we could do it inside

as well I think that people and I don't

know this so somebody you know maybe dr.

drew or somebody knows a lot more than I

do about addiction can answer this but

it seems to me that vaping is a drug and

it makes people who were trying to get

off drugs maybe that much harder

I don't know but it seems to be that

being a smoker and trying to get off

drugs would be confusing because it is a

drug now I'm not an expert on that and I

I've heard plenty of I've had heard

plenty of addicts say that they're glad

they have cigarettes because you know at

least they have that and it helps them

stay off the other stuff maybe I'm no

expert it could be it could work both

ways it could be for some people having

a little bit of

ice even though they might get lung

cancer is better than being an addict

might be the first other people if you

have a little bit of anything you know

it's just a slippery slope but here's my

opinion

I hate vaping I hate it like deep in my

bones

I hate it and I have to admit when

people do it around me I have a reaction

that makes me need to leave the room

it's just personal emotional hatred but

it's because of my experience it's not

because of the vaping so I don't have a

scientific opinion I don't have a legal

opinion or a policy opinion on it I hate

it I don't want to be around it and if

it got you know if it were if it became

illegal I would listen to the griping

about it I would understand that

certainly there's an argument to be made

that it helps you get off of regular

cigarettes I think that's a fair

argument

I wouldn't criticize that at all but I

can't help how I feel

so trying to separate for you my opinion

you know how I feel with what makes

sense from what's logical logically

logically I get the argument freedom is

good logically I get the argument that

could help you quit regular cigarettes

logically I get the argument that the

problems probably will be isolated and

it's the secondary market stuff for the

black market stuff I get all that that

doesn't change the fact that I hate it

so just being honest

all right I believe that's all I got to

say vapors are exhaling nicotine in me

is that true I don't even know if that's

true somebody's saying that the comments

somebody says legalize drugs except

vaping or remember

[Music]

yeah if vaping were illegal I suppose

we'd be getting it from the cartels so

yeah there's no point making and illegal

is that loser think well I think if you

know that that the science or the facts

are on one side and yet you feel a

different way as long as you're aware of

that difference

I think you've you're in reasonably good

shape you can't change how you feel

sometimes nicotine is higher in vapors

yeah I just don't know if you can get a

secondhand vaping from it all right

that's all I got for now I'm gonna go

watch watch the champion theater

see if anybody says anything interesting

but I counted out it kind of doubt it