« Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 157 Scott Adams: Cohen, EU Trade, Shadow Banning

2018-07-26 | 🔗


  • CNN puzzles the obvious
  • Cohen tape…the explanation you haven’t heard yet 
  • Tariffs and kissing EU Juncker
  • Huge psychological pressure from EU deal on other countries
  • CNN might be showing signs of a news coverage policy shift
  • President Trump’s tweet about shadow ban of Conservatives
  • Scott Adams Proposal: Clarification Rule for politics


I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 157 Scott Adams: Cohen, EU Trade, Shadow Banning appeared first on Dilbert Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
but i'm bump bump bump bump bump bump or bone pop up all pop up up up up i'll pay a premium cracker come in here and reach a new names will you come in here we ve got the re they re and they mark everybody you know what time it is thank you do you wouldn't be here did not randomly show up here today will be a very fun coffee was got items if i do say so myself havre most new york you happen to be in upstate new york one of these three so the year that that's a nice place i can say that because i came from obtaining work all right everybody grab your mug your vessel you're container your cup issue
some kind of liquid in your favorite liquid minus coffee time for the simultaneous now if you ve been watching cnn lastly as i have been here now that there is a mystery that their reporting about mostly anderson cooper and here's the mystery and some cooper hearing the money the kohen tapes is try to figure out why president might have lied about extramarital affair spaces the lying about some payments involved but anderson cooper and cnn they seem genuinely puzzled about why would the president
lie about extramarital affair i don't understand now that's the only mystery their work on this mother stories coming up and these are other mysteries the cnn it is trying to figure out the answers in addition to why would somebody lie about extramarital affair there are other episodes coming up or why you hungry people eat we know the hungry people do it but what are they thinking what is our motivation or they are they is something gas leaving their hungry and then they just eat although this industry here we gotta figure this out the other one of working on is why do sleepy people take naps
we see them taking abso we observe their sleepy but we don't know what you're thinking why what are you thinking when you take it there one year sleepy it also were wire next topic citizens work on is why do dead people never dance we notice a dead people just mostly just lay there but what are they thinking what are they just get up and they spoke but i'm dead undead so these are some of the big ministries is here i was working on why does somebody lie about an extramarital affair i gotta admit i can't think of a reason can you can it can even if you think of a reason anybody would lie about an extra marital affair i mean what possible motivation would you have for such a thing
so in our universe is laurel world in our world in which there are two movies one screen sometimes sometimes there are three the two movies that everybody's watching about the micro cohen tapes are did the president say use cash or did the president say don't you it was gash now the way is being reported is it's hilarious frankly the fact that who's the president's lawyer new york mayor whose name of forgetting at the moment ex ante or their giuliani
so you say the tape very clearly says don't use cash do do any of you here that do many of you here they don't use cash we have here who actually here's anything like that on that recorded so what's funny about it this is such a bold ridiculously to say i've been watching the situation and i'm trying to figure out why what really is happening here because she kept the snow and so the conversation don't quite make sense do they
so no matter what your interpretation is of what was said or what was not said is still doesn't quite make sense there's something that doesn't all fit i want to offer you a third interpretation so the two interpretations we have is a charm said shall we use cash now lonnie what's his name the lawyer for cohen says that he's talking about like an actual physical dollar bills if you can imagine a hundred fifty thousand dollars worth just cash a big bhopal cash lonnie davis says well that's that's what he means he means cash like a big bundle of money and of course julie always i know he's saying don't use cash which is clearly well leave it to your journal but i m here that when i was out of date so i'm gonna give you a third interpretation and by the way here's my challenge to you when i give
the third interpretation i want you to see if you can even think the other two or possible anymore so going to erase from your mind maybe not all of you but for many of you when you the year the third interpretation you just go say oh why did you take so long for somebody to explain that the cap and here it is so we're going the way board so here are some words we heard on the tape we heard oh and say we need to finance this cup the company that will be used for their payments the pain to the ex playboy model and you heard trump say finance what i saw one coincides finance we
we also agree that trump had a question about the word finance finance what and then there was a clarification later there was a sec word cash and you heard again that there were some question the trump said something about cash and then there was some clarification and then there was a point were opponents who say no no no no but there's some ambiguity about what were you saying no about right let me call this all out for you here helen and you say we have to finance this new entity what do you mean we have to fund it in other words put money into it
if you are trump and you hear the word finance what's that mean what is financed mean to a developer doesn't mean fund means loan i shall now this will make sense right communists and hey we have to fund this entity but he used the ambiguous wording tromp trump says finance fires what because to somebody like me i've got a background in in finance economics when i hear finance here is the same as if somebody's gonna buy a car if you're going to buy a car they say are you going to find meaning get alone so that that was the first
point of ambiguity that use the language differently then came the word cash if you go and buy a car and they say how do you mean to pay for it are you going to finance it meaning get alone or are you going to pay cash for your car when the car dealers says do you mean to pay cash you mean a big pile of dollar bills it does not does not cash the way cohen i believe hearted that's just my probably meant currency like dollar bills or a mighty them might about immediate there's some ambiguity about what common thought about cash but don't think there's any ambiguity about what trump thought
cash is the opposite of finance so cash is really just write a check know what really happened you remember how it was actually funded i believe the play i don't think they did find it but the plan was going to be that oh would put the money in and then he would be reimbursed through normal lawyer payments or something like that which would be actively away to finance payment over time so when you get to the no no no i believe what happened is something like this this is justly third into rotation and by the way i wouldn't bet my life on us the point of it is to show you how many interpretations you can get out of the same set of facts current says finance trump says what do you mean by that cause he's thinking loan baconians just thinking we need to put money into it then the questioner
ash comes up trump ass the question because he still trying to determine did you mean really finance as in pay over time or just mean we need more money and which is cash which is also a check means the same thing in this context by the time cohen says no no no what is he talking about he's probably talking about they both got confused with their terms and he wants to make sure that trump doesn't think he's talking about a big pile of currency he might be just saying that we are not talking about like actual cash i just mean we have to put money in it now having heard this description that these people a lawyer and a person who gets loans for a living doesn't seem a little more likely what's going on is that they had some confusion over their use the terms now
until it again i've given you this this description and you can hear that their grappling with what do you mean by the terms what do you mean by the term cash is as different meaning so what do you mean by finance because these two people see the differently and by the time you get to know no no i think this is the point we're cohen is realising or colonies realising it might be using terms differently and he's just trying to clarify but it's so little unclear at that point so are the other people say they heard of their way to write have you seen this explanation in cnn or even fox news i haven't seen you one point i heard somebody you saying the white house was saying something about payment over time but i think they they abandon that export mission now why would the now here's here's the other confirmation
in the end giuliani said this everyone's while you hear something that you say my god right so lonnie davis has said hey when they're saying cash thus something that drug dealers or basically criminals do only criminals and drug dealers use cash do you know who else uses cash rich people but they call it writing a check so in lahti davis has only drug dealers use cash he is a huge liar so let me just say it is as is clearly i can so cohen's lawyer is a gigantic liar and he's lying to you because he's trying to make you think that the word ash as used and that could possibly mean as if either
tromp or cohen were actually talking about the big palette of currency of dollar bills ok so that's why davis trying to make you believe something this ridiculous and they did a pretty good job i have to say as as forget a wire is doing a good job totally lying to you in a way that is this is so transparent it's got a funny so that's my analysis or get cash does not mean hard currency that's what i'm saying it means both things but in this context obviously men right a check so have we have we totally subtle that question and pure here's my here's my real question to you have you seen this explanation before because i
expecting i'm going to see this look at the news i think oh somebody gonna do their second a slogan explain what cash means in this context let me explain why finance means in this context the little man that's a somebody saying i'm contorting myself what i we should agree that when people tell me that i'm contorting myself that i tell for cognitive dissonance nobody what why did i have to do this answer me says you're a businessman that that is correct so my background is business school and economics so less my educational background and then of course i worked in business for a long time and i worked on things like financed i literally worked in a department called the finest department so to me this is
a little more obviously would be if you don't work about world suck about a few more things north korea is set to return remains of fifty five fallen servicemen believes are all men and i've is real weird questions about i guess we're about five thousand island counted for service people from north korea american service people take the myself where are they i'm trying to say this in the most respectful way but does north korea actually know where they are and if they do where they are does it mean that their buried does it mean that they have already you were they already collected in one place and cape in case they needed to get them back i've got real questions about how is
that when we ask they can produce fifty five bodies like from where i don't know how they did that airline is more of a curiosity thing you saw that they represent from the eu did you see the picture of here literally putting a kiss president trumps neck and then the president tweeted that out and i saw it on instagram as well saying how much they loved each other that was just great now of course the two sides of the news the left and the right are going to report that story completely differently the right will report it fox news types
were reported as great progress and that the the of a deal the framework of a deal are largely agree to another have to put some meat on it but that's just ordinary business so that is a big breakthrough and that the tariff i would say the trade war slash negotiations were successful at least insofar as the eu where it looks like they will be and the left say while they have an agreed earlier so you can see two movies are ones green one saying nothing has really happened the same as they set about north korea while the right will say my god it's big breakthrough which it might be but so little bitterly we'll say now here's my prediction if you will the situation we we have been in which is
the president of the says we're says we put tariffs the body from canada china to you you name it we're gonna tariff tariff tariff and we're gonna start a trade war and everybody is on notice we're not gonna do any bad deal is anymore i so that's the situation we are in now in this situation what is the likely arc of how things are gonna go from that point so the set up is suppressed then said were terrifying everybody trade war with everybody from canada china all at once what's gonna happen well is very likely because the united states is the biggest buyer the biggest cuts there we have we have more leverage we have a strong economy we can withstand some yeah some pressure on the economy right now and we have the biggest biggest bank so to speak with most
so the chances are we were going to get at least one of those entities whether with care the eu china some country one of them was gonna agree to a deal first so somebody had to go first but nobody goes first until they have too so here was my prediction that for the first acts weeks or months or whatever would be nobody would want to go first because nobody wants to be seen as folding they don't want to be seen as one they buckled they buckled the first one already went nobody wants to go first but here is the part i wish i'd said earlier but i guess it's still still time to say that after the first one makes a deal
the pressure on the rest of them to make a deal goes way up why is that because everybody in their own country will say are you the eu just made a deal with why is my business suffering when the eu just solve their problems why can't my government solvents problem you just did the eu just did the psychological pressure this went up because the eu just agreed to something and i dont know if anybody you saying is an unfair deal that they ve arranged do i don't know the deal but i don't see anybody saying hey a deal with the eu and the united states the framework of a deal is gonna be unfair i now hear that so what you are saying is other countries who are going to have pressure internally to also make a deal because the first when did it also makes it safe
because everybody can watch the eu and they say what's gonna happen to the leaders of the eu are they gonna lose their jobs probably not probably not now why was it easier for the eu to make a deal than china or canada anybody anybody why was better for the eu to make a deal then china or canada see if you know this one why did in retrospect i didn't protectors in retrospect this was the way it was gonna go there appointed exactly the eu negotiator genetic what is his name not the elected leader of any country you get it that's why this that's why this work because he's not the elected leader i fear the leader of any of the countries in the eu who are part the deal
it wasn't you so so the individual leaders of the eu will not have to say i follow the door a deal or or nobody s lose face because they had this common person who did a deal for a bunch of people but now that the first ones done and in retrospect that was the one that makes them more sense to do first because that effect that is not the individual leaders that makes it safe for i'm just using canada has an example now kid i can say ok the eu made a deal let's make a deal too probably they'll be a little given take on both sides nobody's ever get to know if these deals are good or bad by the way that are all too complicated for we the public in the end even the press to know if the deal
good so that gives some cover for canada to say look i'll make a deal but yeah you gonna do this on cheese will do the sun maple syrup or whatever the hell so it's gonna look complicated trump will be able to claim that worked care will be able to say we did a good deal for our people does will be kit be complicated we won't know will say one of them is telling the truth and i believe i believe later this time probably china will be last my guess is that china would be among the last to make a deal there's no guaranteed any this things too many very but the normal course of things would be nobody so deal for as long as possible until the first one does and the first one being the eu made perfect sense because that's not a single leader of a single country is just more comfortable politically to do that so here's what i expect
i expect that the trade will go from oh my god worsening the world now that one has made a break it will be easier for the others to break the other dominoes will fall somebody said dominoes i was literally edward dominoes written here people next dammit you beat me to dominoes by us the domino theory i have seen this exact theory in a court case that i don't know if i can i can't tell you what it was about but there's somebody i know personally who is involved in a very large billion dollar court and it was against a number of entities now all of the entities these were big corporations so there are a number of corporations being sued by some or entity and all of them of course fort fought for like crazy nobody was gonna give an inch until one of them did
and the moment there one of them broke ranks all the rest of them gone line because that made it easy for the rest of them since in our aid that's always gotta go it's gonna look like this first one let's just get it over with will just do what they did so it's a domino theory you saw nicky healy gave a speech to some kind of student i forgive you they were in which she said don't try to quote open the lives and know that another don't try to make you just don't be decks basic you don t mean to the opposition and there was a real good message gala play you got a lot of attention
i remember i told you that i thought cnn has turned some kind of a corner and that sea then it looks like they ve made some kind of a decision could be this is preliminary and i could be completely yeah i could be
really off on this but it feels like cnn as decided to be a kinder gentler version of cnn i dont know that that's true yet but i'm seeing some signs of that a little bit will see if the summer of love is back on because if you imagine there is a really good chance that trade deals will start looking good the children in the cages will be reunited with their parents and the russia collusion thing will be more obviously a big nothing and we just saw that israel did a major strike in syria that apparently was either coordinated with or for the benefit at least partially for russia so are watching their the russian and an israeli military coordinating and syria how
like to be a ran right now and watching is russia and israel coordinate militarily now i'm sure they have already been doing that but or they do it the more has to be worrisome for iran's ran as is being further isolated how do you check your summer of wishful thinking well i'm wishing you than to existence with which is different from normal where wishful thinking when i do it causes i know shadow bearing yesterday a lot of you know there was an issue on twitter where if you put in a search for somebody if they were conservatives and prominent conserved is often they would not show up in the drop down box that auto populate that affected people like me it affected might serve its four eggs
oh yeah jim jordan mac representative maggots and president trump google or not googled he treated this morning about this issue now now what interesting is when tromp guess is his jaws on something he doesn't really let go so i think this issue is going to have to be dealt with of course twitters response was that i actually appreciated twitters response in the sense that to happen what jack dorsey responded was that obviously they need to do some work and i thought that's very disarming sexually exactly the right thing to say
which is you know that the recognising the complaint they're they're not denying the recognising it and then they're saying i guess we need to do more work to gain the public's trust and and so were so their work in and see if in the next few days if anything changes in terms of the drop down box i think it might have already changed i am not entirely sure but some people were reporting than mine started to auto phil i think the issue was if you follow somebody and auto filled fine but if you are looking for something you did not follow and they were conservative there was a good chance they wouldn't even show up in the in the auto phil thing
how do you do some work unexpressed censorship you look at your algorithm and make sure that it's not accidentally discriminating it's not easy but that's the basic idea i guess some looking at your comments are right i've got another suggestion to make the world a better place is called the clarification rule you know the rule where if you drop something on the ground people say all five second rule they pick it up and eat it now of course is no science to the five second rule but it does make life better right
cuz people don't want to think i drop something on the floor now it's ruined and carried it so a lot of people or just tell themselves as little story five second ruled in science as demand that it's the five seconds has nothing to do with anything but is it a ten second rule if you're really hungry and set ten second rule ninety five second rule somebody says resides do it but i believe i have seen so the there's not but in any case that's not that's not the point here is the rule i suggest for politics if someone says something provocative and maybe there's some ambiguity to it or maybe people think there's no ambiguity to it but it's very provocative and is very let's say of setting
here's the rule there when you ask them to clarify that you accept the clarification that your report the first thing as something puzzling any need more information and they report the clarification as the truth so if your politician says hey i'd like to kill baby he's and eat them and then the news as all my god he says he wants to kill babies are these them and then you ask him did you know in the subsequent clarification or another interview somebody says we we heard you say you wanted to kill babies and eat them can you clarify that and then the politicians as i didn't mean that i meant i wanna take care of babies and and you'll see them the rules should be that's the story the story is what they said with a clarification the story the first story should not be
they thinking you're was read their mind was figure out here what their dog whistle is all about this is forget although that concessions guessing wishes ask for the clarification there once has given them the news and then he report ok this politician says this the clarification not the original thing the original thing is just people being confused somebody says has hawk accepted papa johns seers clarification i didn't want clarification he made i think i think is clarification was he was talking about the word as opposed to using it about the onward then he was talking about it and not using it now as you know if you ve been in this world more than ten seconds that didn't count the rule is where you just
we use the word i know a lot of you say dammit i live in a free country and then i country i will use the words i want and i hear it's a free country but people are also free to treat you differently for the word they used now my taken at specifically the inward is that one word is just one word you do have a very special case going on here there was only one slavery situation and there's only one word that's all the band word here is that a big deal are you are you giving up your freedom because you you know that some of you would not have not all of you can use that word
to say that that is such a small thing to ask that i'm happy to give it and i would think i would think that anyone would be happy to be kind and consider it over this one tiny tiny issue and arguing that it's ok to use the word cause you're just talking about it instead of using it don't go there just just do not go there there's nothing the doktor there somebody says give an inch take a mile that's gonna add thank you i'm going to add to my list of bad thinking slippery slope i'm ready writing sharply now and i needed examples bad thinking the reason a slippery slope is bad
in this case it literally applies to everything there is nothing that you could not apply the slippery slope to hey i'm giving a periscope today might last forty five minutes ass a slippery slope what happens if i start giving periscopes for hours of ours and then i starve to death it could happen as soon as you started giving periscopes it's like first one's ten minutes that its twenty minutes what happens if i you giving them until i stop eating and i die slippery slope is not thinking it's just not thinking and so if you think oh i see a slippery slope here
made a decision based on the slippery slope you have not been engaged in any form of mental cognition of any importance if you give him moussa cookies that mouse will wanna for cake banning words regardless of context isn't thing either showed us here is the thinking is a very very small request by specifically the african american community who i remind you if your american especially are on your team thus import more they're your team members of your team have asked you for tiny
little piece of good manners is at a big deal put it in perspective from about well all there are lots of racial words you should use i agree somebody says you believe that i don't know what you're talking about but if you would like to ask you what it is that i believe sir i think somebody saying do you believe that you let them they in one word that they won't go instead banning more words of course they will of course they will will it matter now will will somebody traded suddenly somebody said watermelon what it would if they bad one
while depending on the context they use the word it could be offensive has good coffee should your team forgive you for using the word sure did is one of those words that are never interesting when people say somebody should do something that's that's either you it's either lazy language or lazy thinking maybe both but there there are things just things that are there if you do this you will get a good result if you do this get a bad result to say should be able to do this thing what does that mean
the reality is if you do that thing you gonna get a bad result and nothing will change that your use of the words should is it is useless talk that doesn't mean it i'm gonna give you a toward the end of the periscopes i'd like to get provocative starting to get provoking i'm gonna give you a little psychology test and i want you all play along i read a little test you can do this look i don't know how this will turn out by the way but i want you to know i'm going to ask you to picture a person who is a trump supporter and then a person who is an anti chopper and dont piquet don't pick a famous person so not a politician nobody you now i want you to conjure up in your mind your best picture of a trump supporter
we can put this person in any kind of clothing you want but it has to be do you in your mind somebody was not famous nobody has ever seen before but a generic i'm supporter and his hold it in your mind for a moment and remember what you're thinking give all got it now you're thinking of a generic term trump supporter give that person you know some appearance some clothing but get a picture not in the same picture a and anti tramper or it could be a hillary clinton sparrer but an anti jumper actually less make somebody on the left specifically not not an anti trumpery because i would include people right so ay somebody's on the left a democrat now picture them so picture this person's clothing picture look maybe maybe atta face you might put some
parliament's around there you know some glasses whatever if necessary now picture that person ok does everybody have their two pictures here's my question what was the gender though you imagined for the trumps supporter so this my first question everybody what gender did you imagine for your trump supporter give me your gender trumps supporter i'm seeing male male female male male male male female female o neil may all my all male female male male mail for both male male male mail for both snail mail male male or female mailman mail so obviously this is not going to test the you'd get all the same answer
but i think a skewed male now if you're when you imagine the female arms are leading the witness now did you imagine a female for the democrat how many of you imagined a female for the democrats there's a little delay in the comments was hard to tell its heart still above male for both so love you ok southern new answers come in so female football female for both sides a little hard to tell it could be that the democrat was either way
so here's the basic test obviously the euro individuals and you are all over the place some had mail for balsam and female feeble some so that all consequent combinations do you think it's true letters sort of a male bias for the true side which doesn't mean that only men like it etc nothing like that very verses a a female by us for the democrats and part of is the leadership choices right sir the democrats are very female centric in terms of actual and potential leaders somebody said they anticipate the question so your enemy it was a very non scientific question
yeah feels like is starting to feel like if you could projected into the future it makes you wonder if the and i think there is a male female difference our they write in terms of voting dont most most women vote democrat and most the majority of men voted republican not by a gigantic majority that's true right but i'm wondering if that trend will continue and accelerate until you have two parties the male party in the the female party i wonder and wonder if that could be a thing in the future ten years now that's just a speculative the others
by us in my audience probably i think that's true so we did not learn anything today scientifically i just want to try their test and to see how stark differences were they were not nearly a stark as the hypothesis would have suggested so maybe that's good so maybe that's good no controls and my experiment you right is very non scientific and you should not make any judgments based on it yes and obviously there are tens of millions of female trump supporters and tens of millions of males supporting the democrats that is without saying goes without saying a snuff for now i think i will talk to you later
Transcript generated on 2020-04-02.